Why is that the BBC presents the decision as to whether we ruin our British coastline through the building of legions of on-shore wind farms as lying within the gift of the politically biased RSPB? The BBC ran an item this morning which suggested that so long as the developers of these monstrous wind-farms are “sensitive” to specific areas outlined by the RSPB, then they have the green light to go ahead. So that makes it OK then? There is substantial opposition to these on-shore wind-farms on just about every basis one could imagine – economic, scientific, political – and yet the BBC chooses to frame this within the context of what the RSPB considers acceptable. Not in my name, to borrow a phrase.
HOT AIR FROM THE BIRDS.
Bookmark the permalink.
They don’t really care who it is, it’s just an excuse to keep the drip, drip feed of global warming propaganda going.
the politically biased RSPB? 🙂
anti war, pro barn owls
The RSPB is offered funding as long as the RSPB toes the line, the funding has in effect bought political support.
The RSPB knows full well the damage caused by wind farms, its well doumented and well known by experts but when payoff money is offered the RSPB sell out their core principles.
The RSPB employing a climate change chief says it all really doesnt it?
The principle of buying off critics or infiltrating organisations that may be critical is a newlabour trait, plain and simple bribery to get round genuine concerns.
Windfarms are an expensive and useless eyesore, they are known to inflict various problems on those living close to them, yet the government continues its policy of splitting and disabling any oppostion to the monstrous erections!
The BBC would never give aritime to those who oppose windfarms would they?
To be fair (and i’m in a minority) but i’d rather the whole world flooded rather than kill Red Kites – nuts to the environment – protect the birds.
I resigned from the RSPB many years ago when it first started becoming just another political lobby group.
Dick 11:17 Quite agree with you about Red Kites. I saw several last weekend here in Bonnie Scotland. Fabulous bird !
Three comments –
There is a very strong construction lobby pushing the construction of wind farms and the funding they attract.
There are very few onshore sites where there is sufficient reliable wind to make them an efficient generator.
The rspb have some serious left / green nutters involved and are very adept at seperating tax payers money from nulab, in support for nulab projects. Consequently they have a very poor repution for competency and honesty outside of gullible townies.
Just turn off your televisions,save the electricity Same with computers,electronic games,ipod cell phones et al.
Abolishing the BBC would save more of save more birds and the environment than any other single act could accomplish.
The RSPB, like the BBC, is now funded by the government and the EU (see the excellent Fake Charities website for details), so it comes as no surprise that they both slavishly pedle the same pro-windfarm nonsense. What was doubly offensive about this morning’s AGW propaganda extravaganza was that the moron reporter said that opposition to these useless, expensive monstrosities was from NIMBYs – ie, in BBC shorthand, selfish idiots who are only concerned about their own back gardens. There was nothing about how ineffficient windfarms are, how much subsidy they sucking up, nor about that during the coldest winter for decades, they were generating virtually no power because there was no wind for weeks at a time.
DtP
You are saying what the RSPB was presumably established to say (although us non-fans of Bill Oddie and all his works might disagree with you and the RSPB). However, the RSPB has no standing – technical or political – in the wind-farm mock “debate”. It’s only pretence to receiving any attention at all at any time is purely as a representative of the avian interest.
Wind farms may or may not be good for birds but, essentially, it’s marginal. If anything, having great twirling bits of metal hundreds of feet above the ground cannot but be a danger to birds (even if the RSPB weasels in a caveat about “sensitive” areas): it certainly can’t be to their benefit. That the BBC selects wibble from a newly on-message observer both as an item of major news and as the subject of uncritical “analysis” on one of its flagship programmes is as certain evidence of bias as anything else flagged up on B-BBC. The kicking to those in opposition – the all-purpose “NIMBY” acronym was dragged out by Today for the occasion – was in the finest traditions of the BBC’s one-eyed “reporting” of anything connected with climate change.
It woulds seem the RSPB prefer their birds minced now,rather than wait a while to see if if the wheels fall right off the global roasting bandwagon in couple of years time,as they surely will.
I too scratched my head over this whole RSPB gives permission angle.
Bizarre.
*still it makes a change from St Jade coverage – even more bizarre*
off topic ( but it is beeb funded) but i have to bring you the catlin survey expedition update !
a classic !
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/explorers-break-free-from-harsh-weather-and-volatile-ice-1652969.html
“The Catlin Arctic Survey team are using modern radar technology and traditional drilling methods”
prince charles would be proud of the “err…traditional drilling thingammy”
read on….
“But they must still haul sledges weighing 110 kilos across a precarious surface of ice that cracks without warning under their feet”
aha.. more evidence of MMGW !
“negotiating peaks and pressure ridges sometimes as high as a double decker bus ”
surely a single decker by now due to global warming ?
Umbongo – spot on. They play with emotions.
Do you want to kill birds?
Do you want the world destroyed?
It’s a fake compromise – wind farms kill birds unless you put high visibility grills on them. We can’t hold back the sea but we can invest in flood defences and have sensible planning policy which prevents building on flood planes.
Political lobby group? I’ll say! But not for the birds, for the government. This is one well-connected organisation. Did you know that:
‘
The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds
Environment
Posted by Administrator (admin) on Jan 25 2009
Charities >> Environment
UK Charity Number: 207076
Website: http://www.rspb.org.uk/
Stated Aims
THE RSPB IS THE UK CHARITY WORKING TO SECURE A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT FOR BIRDS AND WILDLIFE, HELPING TO CREATE A BETTER WORLD FOR US ALL.
Summary
The RSPB is one of Britain’s oldest and most respected charities. It used to exist on voluntary donations. Not any more.
The RSPB formed Stop Climate Chaos in September 2006 and were amongst the first environmental groups to call for a 80% reduction in UK carbon emissions by 2050.
Details
In 2008, it received a staggering £19,731,000 in public money, including:
* Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs: £2,618,000
* Landfill Communities Fund: £1,560,000
* Scottish Natural Heritage: £1,091,000
* Natural England: £931,000
* Scottish Executive: £664,000
* National Assembly for Wales: £552,000
* Countryside Council for Wales: £337,000
* Environment Agency: £333,000
* Department for International Development: £255,000
* Department of Environment, Northern Ireland (NI): £249,000
* East of England Development Agency: £219,000
* Forestry Commission: £177,000
* Department of Agriculture & Rural Development, NI: £38,000
* European Union: £3,169,000
* National Lottery: Heritage Lottery Fund: £2,247,000
* Local councils & other: £5,291,000′
Source: http://fakecharities.org
This is a fake charity, corrupted by power.
We resigned from the RSPB some time ago because of their lunatic `climate change’ policies.
Why is a so called charity for birds `HELPING TO CREATE A BETTER WORLD FOR US ALL’?
Completely quackers!!
F Smith,
Truly sickening isnt it? Another once wonderful organisation perverted and corrupted by political interference and dirty money, a newlabour/EU trick it seems!
The political narrative demands that the RSPB betrays their founding principles and sell out the birds they used to care for, the RSPB duly takes the bribes and then peddles the demanded line regardless of the damage it will cause.
The RSPB take generous donations from people on false pretences, a public inquiry into the scandal of fake charities and how thay have been infiltrated and corrupted to serve a common political purpose is now a priority!
Civil society and its institutions being hijacked and perverted is a national scandal.
RSBP are a disgrace.
The so-called “third sector” is the source of much of todays mischief. NGO’s, charities and philanthropic foundations peddle more lies than you can shake a stick at, but because they are not providing goods and services in a marketplace to earn a living from customers (capitalists)or accountable elected public servants (government) they are free to peddle their lies to a lazy and gullible Fifth Column previously known as the Fourth Estate.
It’s time the “Charities Commission” was disbanded along with its phoney official sanction of lobby groups as “charities”.
I usually listen to “Farming Today”, but it goes off the rails too often with “related” subjects.
I heard this one today and was waiting for the farming message to come through – but it wasn’t there. It was just another “global warming” advertisement – and, of course, we all know that the RSPB is an upright, honourable and truthful organisation; don’t we??
I wonder how the Charities Commission can be considered as neutral now as the “chair” is one “Suzi” Leather, appointee of the Government, and lifelong Labour Party member – surely a disqualification in any right-thinking person’s mind?
Where I live every hill is infested with these wind turbines – every view spoilt, they seem to breed overnight.
So the BBC got the green light from the RSPB – but what they didn’t tell you is that its an EU directive, we (and the useless government) have no say in the matter.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-509654/Brussels-demands-thousands-wind-turbines-UK.html
So its no suprise that both the BBC and the RSPB are pushing it.
Andrew 8:05
I have no evidence, but I would imagine that the Charities Commission has also been corrupted.
Every single institution has been staffed with Labour cronies – so why not the Charity Commission?