Do a search on the article, the only place the word ‘arrest’ is in the title.
Its obvious the title was made up to draw pings.
“We have laws on the books to punish anyone whose lies contribute to people’s deaths. It’s time to punish the climate-change liars.”
What is the punishment for someone “whose lies contribute to people’s deaths”? Isn’t arrest implicit in the punishment process?
Do not help the libs deny the obvious conclusions, from which they try to hide, of their totalitarian views and statements.
I don’t think Hitler ever said “take them to camps and gas their a$$es” in public. But it is certain it was in his heart from the beginning.
Those denialists should face jail. They should face fines. They should face lawsuits from the classes of people whose lives and livelihoods are most threatened by denialist tactics. …Do you think Weinstein was talking about arresting these people, or summary punishment?
But First Amendment rights have never been absolute. You still can’t yell “fire” in a crowded theater. You shouldn’t be able to yell “balderdash” at 10,883 scientific journal articles a year, all saying the same thing …And why not? especially when it is balderdash? but these evil people like Weinstein treat it as religious doctrine, just as Aristotle’s geocentrism was back in Galileo’s day.