It's official!
The United Nations banned the news agency most critical of "man-made catastrophic climate" hysteria from coverage of the Copenhagen convention billed as a major leap forward for global governance.
That new agency is my own, of course – WND.
You might think the banning of a news agency, any news agency, would evoke some coverage from colleagues.
Yet, to date, not one story about the censorship has appeared on Fox News, CNN, the New York Times, the Associated Press, ABC, NBC, CBS or any other major news outlet.
I shouldn't be surprised.
With few exceptions, the major press has not yet covered to any measurable degree the biggest development since Al Gore invented "global warming." (By the way, unlike the Internet, he really did invent "global warming" – to his everlasting shame, except in Nobel Prize circles.)
I refer, of course, to what has come to be known as "Climategate" – e-mails from pseudo-scientists at East Anglia University that reveal an effort to spin and even change real temperature data to fit the theory and obscure the facts.
The e-mails were a new discovery, but the lying and manipulation of data is hardly a recent occurrence. It goes back 10 years.
Now, of course, the pseudo-scientists can't even hide the data. Since global temperatures have actually been falling for several years running, there is little talk about "global warming" any longer. Now the alarmists talk only of "climate change."
Well, here's a bulletin for the Copenhagen crowd: Climates do change. They have always changed. Climate change has nothing to do with man's activity on the planet. Climates have been changing for thousands of years – long before the Industrial Revolution, the internal combustion engine, the harnessing of electricity, oil-powered energy plants and before the invention of the "carbon footprint."
Last week I received a call from a top United Nations media officer who assured me there was no effort at denying media from the convention because of skepticism about climate change. He said some 5,000 news organizations were accredited for coverage. But when the excuses we got for denial of access are based on provably false allegations about our news organization's structure lifted verbatim from Wikipedia and mention loaded words like "advocacy," it's clear what's going on here.
WND was hindered from exercising its free-press rights by a powerful global political organization that is actively fanning the flames of "climate change" fear-mongering.
WND is not some obscure blog – a Johnny-come-lately to the "New Media." It was here at the birth some 13 years ago. It is the most trafficked independent Internet news source in the English-language – begun precisely because no one else was doing investigative reporting into waste, fraud, abuse and corruption of Big Government and other powerful institutions. That, of course, is the central role of a free press in a free society, though you would hardly know it these days as most news agencies devote more coverage to the Tiger Woods scandal than to the raw grab for power taking place in Copenhagen this week.
Not only did the United Nations obstruct the free press this week, it also deliberately threw a roadblock in my company's ability to compete on an even playing field with other news agencies. Maybe that explains the silence from my colleagues – who are losing readers and viewers and advertisers daily while WND continues to grow.
Am I taking this personally?
Yes, I am.
I take all abridgments of free-press rights personally – no matter who the victim is.
I guess that's more than anyone can say for my colleagues in the state-sponsored, state-approved media.
WND faced exactly the same kinds of obstacles when it attempted many years ago to obtain credentials to cover the U.S. Capitol. We fought, with no help from the rest of the media – some of whom actually attempted to block our access – and we prevailed.