Heartland Institute threatens 71-year-old veteran

75 thoughts on “Heartland Institute threatens 71-year-old veteran”

1. Congratulations Gary, well done on highlighting the bastardry and arrogance of the Heartland Institute.

   It seems that Mr Bast isn't much interested in an informed public judging by the propaganda his organisation produces under the guise of credible science.

   Keep up with the good work.
   Regards.

2. Thumbs up, Mr Wamsley. Bullies like that should not be indulged.

3. Wow, big story. Man sends vaguely aggressive letter to Bast, receives an obvious standard reply, and then complains because it only borderline applies to him?

   Give it a rest. You sent the man a very rude and entirely undeserved letter, and he was a little less rude in response. Are you sure you two are adults? I struggle to believe you're 71, or that you were ever in the military, since you behave more like a spoilt 7 year old. I certainly don't believe you ever made colonel with interpersonal skills like that.

1. "..An obvious standard reply",Dave? In which Mr Bast claims Mr Walmsley's letter is "threatening",despite no threat whatsoever being expressed? Despite the crackpot allegation that a small faction of the global climate community is controlling debate,attempting to ruin reputations and shut down discussion? "..only borderline applies to him". Did you even read the exchange,Dave? Seems not. It's a personal letter,buddy.

   More strength to Mr Walmsley's arm in pointing out Bast's utter hypocrisy. What a bully.

2. Dave, you seem entirely unaware of how low and morally bankrupt the Heartland Institute is.

   They have in their employ a serial liar before Congress — Patrick Michaels; a washed up physicist who can't publish his completely debunked work in any reputable journal — Fred Singer, who also by the way, worked for the tobacco companies in their decades long attempt to convince the American people that smoking is not bad for you; and other cranks too numerous to list here.

3. Bast is an ass. Col. Wamsley is correct in his opinion of Bast as far as I am concerned. I retired from the USAF as a MSgt after 20 years and share his opinion and would most likely have been less polite in expressing it. But then I was a rude and crude bomb loader for a long time.

4. Thank you for all that you do. These people promote contempt for climate science, something that amounts to sabotaging the future of world citizens.

   I ranted about them at http://heatland.org/

   Thanks

5. I like that this corporate lobbyist escrow fund/PR firm is ironically named "heartland" institute. As if it represents anything to do with middle America.

   I call on all companies of conscience to divest from this nefarious fund.

6. The only point I would disagree with here is that McArdle's analysis is well-reasoned. McArdle is an idiot, and one of her pieces of "evidence" is that the "faked" memo is too accurate. I don't know if the document is faked or not, I do know its contents that can be independently verified are consistent with the authentic documents that were released and with the statements of the people named therein. Furthermore, I would not rely of McArdle to provide convincing arguments for anything more complicated than "the sun rises in the east and sets in the west."

1. Like Doke said,
   Megan McArdle is the expert in twisted reasoning, sophistry and corporate shilling. Granted, she still has miles to go before being the equal of Amity Schlaes, but any sane human being would never consider this an honor.

   As for her piece, if you try to read with an open mind, your brain shall fall into an abyss of grade-AAA bullshit.

7. Gary. Col man, way to go.

   You have to luv this comment from Bast. Their 'forensics team'!!!

   Careful Gary, CSI is out to get you.

   More seriously, it is always good to see people getting everything the deserve.

8. Thanks for all you do!

   Did you notice the cc to William Cook?

   http://www.chicagobreakingbusiness.com/business/chibrkbus-william-j-cook-partner-mcguirewoods-20110518,0,4060828.photo

   Closing the barn door a little late, aren't they?

   You take care,

   Tenney

1. I had noted the four CCs but had not made any effort to see who they were. Obviously an attempt to intimidate me by invoking powerful forces who could grind me into the ground.

9. Gary,

   Thanks for standing up to Bast's utterly over-the-top demand for an apology for a PRIVATE letter. The man must be out of his mind. There was no threat, explicit or implicit, in your original letter: just an expression of disgust.

   Bast must be playing a very weak hand indeed, if he has to stoop to that level of implausibility to tell someone to go to hell. He would have done much better, as you pointed out, to simply refer you to an article about the very-likely-faked memo, than to bluster about unbelievable lawsuits and the FBI.

   HL's director of public relations must be on vacation: Otherwise, I cannot imagine such an intemperate shoving of the foot into the mouth ever escaping the confines of HL offices.

10. Good job Mr. Wamsley, as you correctly point out, Heartland's threats appear to confirm that indeed nothing that was leaked was faked.

11. Col. Wamsley — I do not think your email was threatening, but — in that you called Joe Bast a "traitor" and a person "destroying our nation as well as our planet," I think is clearly inflammatory, and would create an atmosphere in which others might commit the acts that Bast (erroneously)accuses you of threatening.

    Of course, even if that were the case, you could still be justified if what you said was true. I don't believe, however, there is a word of truth in it, and there is nothing in your email to support such charges.

    Heartland spells out its reasons for addressing climate change at http://heartland.org/ideas/global-warming-not-crisis
    I see no evidence that you have looked at that material. If you have, you need to explain why you not only reject it, but why you believe it is disingenuously presents. Otherwise, sir, you are just running off at the mouth.

1. @Heartland Supporter: So the charges are false? Care to find some spin to fit this org chart, Jim? http://ijish.livejournal.com/29235.html

   It shows how Heartland goes about its business. Funny the role the Development department has, inviting donors to Monday morning meetings and vetting topic and talking points. Almost as if they are soliciting clients for issues and strategies to serve said clients' interests… that is how a PR firm operates.

   You know what I think is inflammatory? Conducting a PR disinformation campaign and endangering the future of my children to prop up the profits of a handful of plutocrats.

   @Wiglaf: you may want to collect your 50 cents a post quickly; looks like daylight is coming for you and the rest of Heartland's sock puppet army….
   http://www.monbiot.com/2010/12/13/reclaim-the-cyber-commons/

   @Colonel Wamsley: Thank you for your service to your nation and humanity. Keep up the fight!

2. HS,it was a PRIVATE letter,so was not 'inflammatory',and it would have stayed private if Bast had not been so extremely disproportionate in his response.

1. No, the letter would have remained privet if Wamsly had not published it.

12. Mr Wamsley,

    What is obvious is that nothing in your original email was a) threatening b) dependent on the memo that is alleged to be fake. That Bast and the HI would threaten to get the FBI involved shows their desperation (and stupidity). They're really digging that hole deeper.

13. Great stuff! I love your helpful attitude to them. Poor things, they're so rattled that they don't know Arthur from Martha (so to speak).

    I just linked to this on the Heartland Facebook page.

14. This comment by Wamsley is priceless:
    "You are a traitor to your own country. I did not spend 30 years in the military to protect the likes of you."

    Why?

    Because foreign developing nations are licking their chops at the thought of the US signing onto a global climate treaty because they'll get enriched from the vast transfer of our wealth to their countries (via schemes like REDD, cap-and-trade, CDM, etc.), and our economy will then be controlled by natural resource management via the UN or some other global supra-national agency.

    The end goal here is to lower the standard of living of the US and to force us (and other developed Western style nations) to use less natural resources so that the rest of the world can use those resources to build up their economies so that at some point in the future, all nations have roughly the same standard of living and per-capita GDP. Unfortunately, in this future scenario should it occur, the US isn't going to have anywhere as near high as GDP as we do today because it would take the natural resources of over 5 Earth's to provide everybody on the Earth today with the resources needed to have the same standard of living as we have in the US. Our future US economy will be one of very little resource use and hence, a very basic and simple lifestyle.

15. Don't let the bastards grind you down, Colonel!
    Good Work!
    And thank you for your service.
    I will NOT be thanking the Heartless Institute for theirs!

16. Posted for Gail who was unable to get her comment posted:
    I'm delighted that the Heartland Institute is going out of their way to generate more controversy over the purloined documents. The more attention the divergence of climate science and climate denialism receives, the better, because the facts speak for themselves. The biggest ally the deniers have is the tendency for most people to feel they can ignore the danger of climate change, because you don't have to really think about it seriously for long before the implications become obvious. We are tinkering with the habitability of the only planet we've got, at our peril. Thanks so much for sending such a stern letter and generating the hysterical replies from Bast.

    Last summer, out of curiosity, I attended the Heartland's denialpalooza conference in DC, which I wrote about here:
    http://witsendnj.blogspot.com/2011/07/beware-banality-of-evil-heartless-at.html

    Briefly, I can attest that the Heartland Institute is funded and run by evil, ruthless, pathological criminals oblivious to the suffering of people in other places, who don't even care if their own grandchildren will starve to death, as long as they can continue their smug, comfortable lifestyle.

17. Let's see, first you accuse and slander someone based on false and unverified documents, then suggest that they be treated as traitors which as you know is punishable by death. In essence you're the one threatening the folks at Heartland via your rant that they be executed as traitors.

    Then when you got a response from those that you threatened with your death wish, you pretend that you feel intimidated by the response from those folks that you felt deserved to be killed. Am I missing something Mr. Wamsley? Were you ever in combat? If so, when you shot to kill did you expect those you shot at to blow you kisses? I respect your service to our country but you seem naive in this matter.

    Further you state that the HI response has further convinced you that the fake document is not a fake. Think about what you imply. Someone using identity theft scammed Heartland out of personal/private information which leads Heartland to call in the FBI and then Heartland then lies to the FBI by claiming that a crucial document (that you believe is authentic) is a fake. Do you honestly imagine that Heartland would do something so stupid?

    I'm sorry Mr. Wamsley, such a suggestion on your part is ludicrous. I feel sorry for you but as the old expression goes you made your own bed now lie in it. I doubt Heartland will do anything to harm you as you are, through your frivilous accusations and threats, providing a motive for many to contribute to Heartland.

1. Note: written items are libel, not slander. I was not intimidated. No, I did not believe they they would do anything. I indicate it was ludicrous,especially the part about the FBI, so why did they even do it. I did not say they should be treated as traitors, I said they were traitors. The word "traitor" can be used in many different setting and in this context it is not and cannot be construed to mean that I wish to have them executed. My use of the word is much different than your very limited interpretation.

   Note that Heartland used the stolen information from the East Anglica Climate Research Center and never suggested that hackers in that case had done anything wrong. Quite a duplicitous double standard on their part and yours.

   However, I have not been the only one threatened by the officers of the Heartland Institute.

   Visit http://climatecrocks.com/2012/02/20/heartland-panics-over-leak-71-year-old-vet-young-mom-fire-back-at-threats/ to see another.

1. @ "Note that Heartland used the stolen information from the East Anglica Climate Research Center and never suggested that hackers in that case had done anything wrong. Quite a duplicitous double standard on their part and yours."

   I never brought The UEA emails or Heartland's treatment of the UEA emails into my post, why did you? How can you accuse me of having a duplicitous double standard regarding the UEA emails when you never asked what I thought about them and you have no knowledge of what my thoughts are on the UEA emails and Heartland's treatment of those emails? You create what you think are facts in your own mind like a child would.

18. Wamsley, you send an email to someone you do not know calling that person a traitor and demonstrating your disgust without bothering to verify the accuracy of the information disseminated and you're upset that you were "threatened" with legal action? Seems to me you let your anger get the best of you and now you're even angrier because you don't like how Bast responded. You might want to check into some anger management program.

1. You sir miss the point. My complaint was about the proposed psudo-science curriculum. That had been independently verified and my opinion was not based on the "memo." Therefore, my information was accurate. The history of the Heartland Institute as the agent of the tobacco industry disinformation campaign reflects what they are doing now. They prolonged that debate and cost thousands of lives. Now the want to invade our schools and damage our children. Yes, that does make me irate and I make no apology for it. Wamsley

19. I can hardly wait until your attorney demands discovery.

    Stand tall, sir.

20. looks like heartland has sicced some trolls on you.

1. Well, at least you can't accuse me of being a conspiracy theorist without thus demonstrating hypocrisy. Thank you for that.

2. Trolls are not unexpected. I have a thick skin when people attack me. It is when they attack those not able to defend themselves that gets my dander up. I received some unexpected support when John P. Reisman of the OSS Foundation filed a complaint with the FBI about Heartland Institute's use, attempted use, of the FBI to threaten an American Citizen. The full text and the response are available at: http://www.berthoudrecorder.com/?p=28790

21. Well, the federal government is already invading our schools and damaging our children with their horrendous food standards (Pyramid, myplate, etc). That was also based on faulty science. The AGW hypothesis is based on even worse than faulty science; a politically motivated agenda. Whether it was funding for schools or studies or government control through taxes, each group has a similar agenda; more government money and more government control. Of course, they go hand in hand.

    Now, having the United Nations begin a world global tax and having our congress and president sign off on it would be traitorous and would go against everything America has stood for. Public schools and federal funding of the same are traitorous to the principles upon which our nation was founded. Our government making policy decisions based on the secret data of a previously unknown university in East Anglia is pure foolishness (think CFLs). If you want to get angry about something, then perhaps you should get angry about these things. But hey, if you want to believe Al Gore, that's your right. It's a free country…for now.

22. WSJ makes some good points regarding funding and size of various organizations. Kind of puts a bit of perspective on this issue.
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204909104577233191850812630.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

23. Me thinks wiglaf needs his tin hat adjusted… I'm off to pay my global United Nations destroy the earth tax.

24. Great post but I would advise caution in including your home address on here and would recommend that it be 'X'ed out.

25. @Wiglaf

    Citing the WSJ. Priceless.

1. Murdoch-a-mania

26. Re the traitors at Heartland Trying to divert our attention from global warming.

    Global Climate Change National Security Implications Edited by Dr. Carolyn Pumphrey. http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/display.cfm?PubID=862

    "Chapter 1 addresses the growing historical awareness of the threat and outlines the science of climate-change. Chapters 2 and 3 focus on how climate change might affect human societies and the degree to which it might cause or exacerbate violence and conflict. <b>Particular attention is paid to the implications for the security of the United States.</b> Chapters 4 and 5 consider a variety of potential solutions, ranging from international diplomacy to the development of efficient technologies. Chapters 6 and 7 focus on the role of the U.S. Armed Forces. What can they do and what should they do to mitigate climate change or prepare to meet the threat? Chapter 8 summarizes and concludes. <b>Contributors to this volume agree that climate change is a threat deserving of serious attention.</b>"

    Windy/Wiglaf may not know what threats, libel, or truth are, or be able to tell the difference between scientists and lying traitors, but the US military can.

1. Ahhh, Brian, so I take it you know what threats, libel, and truth are? Do you know what deception, lying, manipulation, and misrepesentation are? Do you justify Peter Gleick's actions? He doesn't.

   And Aaron, good job showing your hypocrisy.

27. New York Times: "Gleick has admitted to an act that leaves his reputation in ruins and threatens to undercut the cause he spent so much time pursuing"

    Peter H. Gleick, a water and climate analyst who has been studying aspects of global warming for more than two decades, in recent years became an aggressive critic of organizations and individuals casting doubt on the seriousness of greenhouse-driven climate change. He used blogs, congressional testimony, group letters and other means to make his case.
    Now, Gleick has admitted to an act that leaves his reputation in ruins and threatens to undercut the cause he spent so much time pursuing. His summary, just published on his blog at Huffington Post, speaks for itself. You can read his short statement below with a couple of thoughts from me … Another question, of course, is who wrote the climate strategy document that Gleick now says was mailed to him. His admitted acts of deception in acquiring the cache of authentic Heartland documents surely will sustain suspicion that he created the summary, which Heartland’s leadership insists is fake. One way or the other, Gleick’s use of deception in pursuit of his cause after years of calling out climate deception has destroyed his credibility and harmed others. http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/20/peter-gleick-admits-to-deception-in-obtaining-heartland-climate-files/

28. hy·poc·ri·sy   [hi-pok-ruh-see] noun, plural -sies.
    1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.

    I made 2 posts, one to comment about trolls and the other to comment about your stupidity. Where was I being hypocritical?

29. Carry on, Colonel. You're still living up to your oath. Thanks much.

30. This is from a 65 year old veteran of 30 years service. You sir remind me of the kids of my youth who started a fight then ran to Mama when they got whacked badly. You started this ruckus with your over the top email accusing Mr. Bast of being a traitor to his country. You cannot spin that away, because those are your exact words. He responded in the same fashion. I think he was over the top as well, but please don't cry and run home to Mama. You got what you gave. Get over it and act like a real man. Own up to what you do. I would have thought a retired USAF O6 would know how to do that. My sympathies are divided on the issue of global warming, but your actions do not confuse me at all. You are old enough to know you screwed up and got the same as you gave.

31. Well done Mr Wamsley and history will indeed be kind to one Peter Gleik for truth has no agenda no matter the manner in which it is sought. The revolting Heartland marketeers are a blight on this fragile planet. They do not flinch from an opportunity to scheme and plot, no matter how sordid. Take heed Mr Bast, the buzzards are circling.

32. There is no convincing zealots. Zealots reject science and latch onto any rationalization for believing. Heartland provides a rationalization, despite it's total lack of evidence, which zealots believe. No amount of actual science and actual evidence will convince the zealots otherwise. The evil of Heartland and their ilk is that, as opposed to the zealots, they know exactly what they're doing. That is why they are traitors bent upon destroying the US and the world. Keep smoking the cigarettes, the tobacco companies had lots of these institutes provide "studies" over the years that smoking didn't damage your health. The oil companies are just the new tobacco cos., ratio of carbon to oxygen going through the roof in the last 20 yrs.? Don't worry, be happy! Carbon's natural, after all!

33. "Gleick has admitted to an act that leaves his reputation in ruins…" Written by a wingnut identified as a willing stooge by Heartland itself.

34. Col. Wamsley,

    You are my new hero. "Traitor" is a word I often find myself using lately to describe the kind of inexcusable whoring that these zealots perform every day as a matter of course. These are people for whom money and business interests trump all else, including patriotism, our children's' future and our viability as a nation. They are shameless and love to hide behind obfuscation, mystification and the brutal misuse of the English language. These are people who literally don't care if the world burns, as long as their patrons have a few more dollars in their pockets to pay for air conditioning. We need many more people to speak out as you have – but your long service to our country gives you the extra credibility that makes this exchange so delightful. Thank you so much, sir.

35. Hmmm. "Bast" seems somehow incomplete. Maybe add an "ard". That's better.

36. Col Wamsley,
    Frankly your "You are a traitor to your own country" comment and Joseph Bast's response are both over the top. I too spent a few years on active duty, in part so you guys could say what you want. I followed your link from Huffpo to find you don't have much to offer in that department.

37. I love reading the climate deniers replies, which verifies they are complete loonies. Absolute wackos.

38. Col Wamsley

    You are in the right, sir; but that's not always enough in the arena of law.

    If the liars at Heartland threaten you further, it may be a good idea to contact the Chilling Effects Clearinghouse at http://www.chillingeffects.org/
    "A joint project of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Harvard, Stanford, Berkeley, University of San Francisco, University of Maine, George Washington School of Law, and Santa Clara University School of Law clinics."

    The EFF has long experience in explaining quite clearly, in words that even persons such as Mr. Bast can comprend, that the asserted claims are without merit, and that complainants should, in essence, consult the reply given in 1971 in the case Arkell v Pressdram.

    with respect and best regards

39. Well done!

40. Col Wamsley,

    Wingnuts here are accusing you of being over the top and starting the pissing contest, but they are wrong. The Heartland Institute started this.

    Heartland and Heartland-type disinformation agents are indeed trying to harm the USA by lying about genuine threats to our security. You were calling it as you (and I) happen to see it.

    They (and their defenders) are enemies, willfully disrupting the informed consent of our democracy in exchange for payments from wrongdoers.

    Pretty clear cut when you think about it.

41. I would expect that a 30 year veteran would know that those who serve defend all Americans while on active duty – even those with whom they disagree! Do not wrap yourself in the flag and dishonor veterans with your simian dolt diatribe!!! ALL VETERANS SERVED WITHOUT CHOICE OF WHO IS WORTHY OF DEFENSE!!!! YOU, SIR, DISHONOR YOUR OWN SERVICE AND THOSE WHO HAVE PAID THE ULTIMATE SACRIFICE BY CATAGORIZING OUR CITIZENS INTO WHO IS WOTHRY AND UNWORHTY OR DEFENSE!!! YOU ARE DISGUSTING.

42. You people must be living in a dreamland. The Col states someone is a traitor to this country, and mentions he was 30 years in the military. This means he feels he is judge and jury to determine what are enemies to this country, and also has experience with weapons. The obvious intent was threatening.

    The email Bast sent back to Col was a stock reply that is used to diffuse the crazies from making any more threats, Im sure he could not care less about sending an email to the FBI.

43. It's all just emotional froth at this stage. No content or rational argument whatsoever.

    Normally I have considerable respect for servicemen and women, but using your 30-year service record as a bludgeon? Oh you mean you only protect people you agree with? Nice! That's not what America is about and you should be ashamed for saying that.

    Climate "Deniers" loonies? I was just thinking the same about the "Warmists" (Don't you using over-emotional, cold-war style propaganda labels that stereotype and diminish at the same time?!)

    You think that emotional pseudo-scientists repeating the same things that didn't convince in the first place are going to win people over? Maybe the climate "deniers" (Oh I get it, like "holocaust denier", very clever!!) should just be ignored? The only people that matter are the ones that agree with me!

    You're all just crazy as a sack of weasels.

44. Mr. Bast – You are hereby invited to join the Flat Earth Society as your thoughts are so much in line with theirs. http://theflatearthsociety.org

45. Simple solution: leave the status quo as it is. Keep burning more and more fossil fuels, pollute more, cut down more rainforests, overpopulate, in fact carry on just as we are doing and deny everything. Economy over ecology – we must continue to grow and consume more and more!!

    IF it all turns sour in, say, 100 or 150 years time, and the earth becomes uninhabiatle to humans, none of us will be around to say "told you so". Getting to that stage, though, isn't something I'd like to be around to see, because it aint gonna be pretty!!

    So let's all bury our little heads in the sand, pretend it's nothing to do with us – it's just a natural phenomena and see what happens. Thanks be that I don't have children – and I'm too old now, anyhow!

46. Climate Change will cost lives.

    If it is being purposefully denied, despite scientific evidence to the contrary, for the sake of short term monetary gains it is criminal.

47. Col Wamsley

    Please keep up the good work. It is refreshing to see someone speaking out against the ignorance or out right fraudulence of the science deniers. America has gone from being the country that landed men on the moon and brought them back to a bunch of science denying morons. How and when this happened I can't remember. If we are to maintain our place as a global power we had better wake up and start educating our children to compete in the 21st Century and not steep them in nonsense. Thank you Col Wamsley for your bravery and courage on this matter.

48. Thank you for exposing this evil, sinister cult for what it is. The cult also worked to fabricate the pretense of doubt regarding tobacco smoke and cancer. The cult is anti-America and anti-reason.

49. See also the following links for items of interest:
    http://climatecrocks.com/2012/02/21/pot-meet-kettle/comment-page-2/#comment-7370
    and
    http://www.nwf.org/News-and-Magazines/Media-Center/News-by-Topic/Global-Warming/2012/02-21-12-NWF-Pledges-to-Fight-Heartland-Institute-Intimidation-Campaign.aspx

50. Hi Guys
    View from over the pond, but firstly a correction it's the University of East Anglia – not Anglica its not unknown in fact it has a world wide reputation (except in the USA and I suppose that is all that matters).
    To the substance of the debate Mr Bast needs to grow a pair and can hardly complain when the same tactics used by his organisation are used against him.Do unto others as you would have them do to you imho.
    As to those of you concerned citizens who see climate change as some sort of international conspiracy and a threat to the American way of life……get real guys you are right! Your current lifestyle based on the grossly inefficient use of finite global (Not USA)resources is totally unsustainable. However instead of seeing it as an opportunity to become a global leader in new and renewable energy and thus reclaim your position as the worlds leading economy you whinge and bleat about everybody ganging up on you.
    Instead of renewing your industrial base you cling to an outmoded way of business that protects an elite few who fund the likes of the Homeland Institute. If you continue in this way you will be proved right as the US becomes even more globally uncompetitive and even more in the grip of those parts of the world that own the resources your junkie lifestyle craves.
    Get real guys go cold turkey grow up and use your energy ambition and ability to help develop a new and sustainable world economy – we may even start to love you again

Comments are closed.