Surprise, surprise, the BBC has ignored our expose of Labour’s links to a child sex scandal. QUENTIN LETTS imagines its reaction if those involved were Tory
No surprise there really….but what else has the BBC ignored?
The BBC is very green and promotes everything so tinged…even hated Tory politicians with ‘vested interests’ that conflict with their duties but who promote the green agenda.
The BBC happily ignores or downplays any problems associated with renewable energy and related political policies….the massive failure of Germany’s green policies and the crippling costs involved barely merit a mention when they should be front and centre on the BBC as of enormous importance and relevance.
However the BBC doesn’t have to go to Germany for such reports of industry being crippled by green energy policies…they can look much closer to home:
UK factories shut down to avoid high power costs
Cripplingly high power costs are forcing some of Britain’s heavy manufacturers to shut down their entire operation at peak times, with furnaces cooling and workers shivering in cold, darkened offices.
Executives say this “third world” scenario is becoming more frequent, as companies try to avoid using energy at peak times, when costs can rise 300 fold under the unusual rules of Britain’s power market.
Mark Broxholme of Tata Steel said its specialist division, which makes alloys used in aircraft and cars, shut down between 4-6pm every day last week. When it accidentally operated during a half-hour peak time period, the cost was £1m.
“It costs us £27 to boil the kettle [during a triad]. We end up telling our workers to sit in the mess room together to keep warm because we can’t afford to keep going,” Mr Pedder said.
“It is a crazy system and it is getting worse. The government talks of keeping the lights on but they are already going out for heavy users.”
The BBC could look much closer to home but doesn’t.
A story about industry having to shut down due to Green taxes and the BBC ignores it.
Any possibility that the BBC’s news agenda is driven by its own politics?
This is pure Agenda 21.
Google Agenda 21 for dummies
De-industrialise.
No nations (EU)
One World Govt.
Reduce population by 13 out of 14 for”sustainability”
Google Georgia Guidestones
No private property.
No families
Basically, the Marxist Manifesto with a massive depopulation agenda thrown in.
Not “Sustainable”?
The middle Class: Maurice Strong.
Golf courses.
Dams.
Irrigation.
Chicken Little mad fear based on groundless terror of overpopulation, & the lust for power over others to which our human race is so suseptible.
Refs: http://www.thrivemovement.com
1st, The problem, a fairly lengthy essay.
Then, The Movie, with peaceful prevention proposals. 1 hr 23 mins. See John Anthony’s expose of Agenda 21.
ukcolumn.org
Real news, not BBC BS.
Youtube & type in Brian Gerrish The Secret Political Agenda
2 hrs 17 mins
http://www.wattsupwiththat.com
Real science, & proper polite scientific debate on climate & other issues.
9/11 hoax
The lengths these people are prepared to go to to achieve global hegemony via the mad US Empire.
Frankly I’m amazed my comments & links have remained posted. They would most certainly not have remained up on Facebook, which censors me hugely.
To expand a little:
2 airplanes crashed into the 2 World Trade Towers on 9/11 2001. 3 buildings came down that day in free fall speed. IE by controlled demolition. The BBC, British Bullshit Corporation, reported the “fall” of building 7, a full 23 mins BEFORE it happened. Tony Rooke won a court case refusing to pay his £145 licence fee, on the grounds that the BBC was complicit in a terrorist act, ( having (undisclosed foreknowledge of said act) & that he did not wish to place himself outside the law by funding a terrorist organisation. Unbelievable?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZBM-pkJPi0
or youtube & type in : Historic Court Case Win Against BBC TV Licensing 8 mins.
That’s how deep in the doo doo “Auntie Beeb” is, the traitors.
John, I see the link to the youtube vid has been removed. Typed in re court case, fascinating stuff. I’m onto the trail now. Cheers.
My link works fine
When it comes to 9/11 the debates have (sadly) been done to death. Everyone from true believers in the government’s version through the genuinely and reasonably sceptical to the out and out freakish conspiracy fruitcakes at the other extreme end of the spectrum have had their say.
All that it has produced is a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing, inside which the truth (whatever that may be) is still hidden to this day.
I have spent such a massive amount of time since 9/11/01 itself looking, reading watching researching the 9/11 attacks. On the day the pentagon was hit by an airliner (according to the official version of events) I felt it was wrong. I never have understood how a slow travelling airliner, can fly across the most highly defended airspace on the planet, for 80 minutes after the first plane deviated from its flightplan, and then still successfully hit the pentagon. That dog don’t hunt!
Since that day, I have read every book I can find, I have read so many reports, watched so many videos, I could write several books on the subject myself. I have read every sort of conspiracy theory on every aspect of the attacks, from the highly plausible to the down right ridiculous.
And what have I gleaned from all of it?
Nobody in the conspiracy community knows the truth of what happened that day. I do not know exactly who, what, why, where and when of everything that happened. There are conflicting versions, from conflicting witnesses and others who want to muddy the waters.
So what can we say with any confidence? The official 9/11 commission report has been disowned by it’s own committee. Several senior members of that committe stated categorically and on the record that “this report is NOT the truth of what happened that day”
There is much more to 9/11 than the mainstream media have ever had the balls to cover, but we will almost certainly never be told the full truth during our lifetimes.
Do I know what the truth of that day is? No, of course not. But neither do you, dear reader, and that is the real crime. That after all this time, and all those deaths and the wars in its name, that we still only have a manufactured and untrue fairy tale as an official version of events and none of the American officials responsible for keeping American airspace safe on that day were even disciplined for the biggest defense failure in the history of the USA. In fact the man in charge in NORAD that day was PROMOTED to joint chief of staff.
We should be allowed to know the truth, and we don’t!
http://www.themoneymasters.com
An essay.
See Bill Still’s 3 1/2 hr film also “The Money Masters”
Also his Wizard of OZ.
http://www.themoneymasters.com?the-money-masters/
is a short synopsis of the 3 1/2 hr film
Also,
Youtube & put in:
Whistleblower head of FBI tells all from NWO 1 hr 4 mins.
Ted L. Gunderson, Head of LA FBI, would not shut up about what he had learned, all documented. He was poisoned with arsenic.
Also:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnyA6AAbK5E 47 mins,
or type in (Dreadful Title ) Illuminati = Jesuits, Rothschilds & Black Nobility Murder
The Power Players.
Youtube & put in: Agenda 21’s Globalist Death Plan for Humanity
51 mins, Lord Christopher Monckton.
They plan to “do away with” 13 out of 14 of your kids, for “Sustainability”, actually, for controllability.
The Control Freak, Power Crazed, Chicken Little, We’re All Doomed Bastards.
Finally:
http://www.drtimball.com
Sanity re population numbers, & climate science, & One World Govt.
Enjoy, & Educate yourselves, & protect your kids.
Regards,
JD.
Thanks John, I will try to get to some of your links, but it will have to be over some time. But from your comments the BBC seems part of the problem.
The solution to the environmental problems is that all the green ecolunatics be persuaded do the decent thing in order to increase sustainability by launching themselves en masse from be Beachy Head .
The arrogance and cowardice from the ecoloons never fails to amaze me. It shouldn’t amaze me by now, but it still does.
They consider humanity to be a cancer or a virus on the earth and think that our population should be radically reduced, if not rendered extinct altogether, yet utterly refuse to do anything to help that situation by killing themselves. No, it’s always other people who need to die. Bloody hypocrites.
The astonishing thing about the self-styled ‘Greens’ is that they have staged a coup d’etat. Winning almost no elected offices, largely operating via nag-power applied through the media, without any evidence of popular support, they have more or less dictated policy across the political specturm.
In the UK, the BBC and its print version, the Guardian, have been the main providers of support and propaganda services.
When the trials begin, the BBC’s role in the hegemony of anti-human ‘Green’ politics will be high on the list of charges.
It’s a shame that this is paywalled in the FT because it’s astonishing that this is happening now. I thought this type of scenario was part of the green dream several years out. I also assume it’s reliable since it’s in the FT.
Have they got round to mentioning the Chris Moyles tax scam yet? The type of thing the BBC is usually keen to expose.
Almost like they don’t want to remind us that they pay people so much money for talking and playing records that the only way they can avoid paying more in tax than most of us will earn in a lifetime is by cheating.
They ran it yesterday. I assume you can use Google.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/26297943
Plus its pretty prominent on the Paper reviews on the front page.
So your comments show utter ignorance of a search engine and how to use it. But let’s not get the truth in the way of a rant!
And how’s your luck when Googling for BBC reporting of the Labour paedophile scandal?
‘And how’s your luck..’
Different filter at work.
‘pretty prominent on the Paper reviews’
Got to say, actually highlighting ‘pretty prominent’ paper reviews… brave.
I do believe that given his ‘ex-factor’, it was predicted earlier Mr. M may crop up somewhere (…and… you’ll miss it), and we’d be treated to an archivista’s latest triumph.
QED.
I always enjoy these BBC worshiping trolls. They breeze in, as ‘Blinkbox’ has just done, bristling with self-importance over some trivial matter where they feel they can score a point.
When they are challenged on an issue of real substance, however (in this case, the BBC’s lickspittle attitude to Labour) they vanish into thin air.
It takes a rare degree of moral degeneracy to behave that way.
His ‘arsehole’ setting was checked on Google Chrome.
I often wonder if people are now using green levies as an excuse to cover inefficient plants, bad labour relations, or poor management. ‘Accidentally’ operating machinery is not the sign of a well run plant.
What a smug comment. They’re operating a foundry with furnaces, etc that can’t be turned on and off like you do a light bulb.
They quote a cost of £27 to boil a kettle. That infers that the costs they are being charged are extremely high. Google ‘electricity triad’ and see what they’re dealing with now and what’s coming your way once even more bird mincers have been erected.
Only if you let them install a smart meter.
Please forgive my nitpicking – it’s a sort of disease and, although I strive to control it, I fail quite often, as in this case.
“That IMPLIES that the costs they are being charged . . .”!
Accidentally starting a process that costs a million pounds a sign of poor management as is having an electricity contract that means boiling a kettle costs £27.
It is as inane to blame everything on green taxes as it is to blame everything on global warming.
Just read the FT article. Alan assumes none of us are subscribers
In fact green taxes are not the issue but what are called the triad hours
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/cdf768e0-98b4-11e3-8503-00144feab7de.html#ixzz2u3y5slu5
The £100m turnover business, which supplies the nuclear and defence industries worldwide, expects to shut down about 30 times this winter.
This is the result of a peculiarity of the UK power market, known as the “triad system”, which determines how the biggest electricity users are charged for their use of the transmission network.
Triads are PEAK USAGE periods. nothing to do with green taxes. It’s down to the Electricity companies screwing business. But somehow Alan blames this on the BBC. Clearly logic is not his strong point. How on earth can an article in the FT pointing out problems in the electricity industry have any relationship with another article in the Mail bashing the labour party?
None of which feature on the BBC so it’s at fault for not running them!
Eh?
Is that the level of debate?
Triads have nothing to do with green taxes, but lots to do with demand management. The more renewable energy infrastructure that the UK puts in place (using green taxes / subsidies) the more aggressive the demand management will become. In the end it will impact you and me.
The BBC are heavily biased in favour of renewables, pro AGW and fail to examine the negative implications of what is being pursued in the name of ‘global warming’. There are serious implications for our economy and wealth as a country. Something that the Germans are waking up to, but of course you won’t hear that from the BBC.
Take a look at http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2014/2/8/behind-the-energy-industry-scenes.html
The true green believers behind this thinking are advocating a form of totalitarianism in which they know best and dictate what we can do. All in the name of saving the planet.
Also just for confirmation http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2014/2/14/so-greens-are-totalitarians-just-as-we-thought.html
And what would you know about debate, eh? Your hit and run trolling doesn’t seem to accommodate the notion of interaction.
How very BBC!
Listen Troll. Blinkbox.
In a sane world of true capitalist competition, huge electricity users would be courted by electricity suppliers, & would be paying minimum profit tariffs.
No way on earth should they be paying £27 to boil a kettle,
you nonsecase.
Nothing to do with “Green Taxes”, you liar, it’s ALL to do with GREEN TAXES, & proves, given a minutes thought, that we now live in a post capitalist, crony corporatist state, which is also post democratic. Here in the sense that the state (UK) is no longer either run by the will of the people, nor for the benefit of the people.
I call you Troll.
Watch BBC Parliament on Freeview channel 81 between 10.45pm and midnight tomorrow Sunday 23rd. You will see the most intelligent debate about Climate science since 2007, a rare appearance of an Atmospheric Physicist on the BBC, Professor Richard Lindzen, the first appearance on British television of Donna Laframboise, an investigative journalist of a quality vastly superior to any of the ignorant environmental cut and paste morons at the BBC, also a Brit called Nicholas Lewis, who I’ve heard, is an expert in the statistics side of the Climate debate.
Climate, and the BBC’s role in debating its influence, or suppressing it, crops up in the most intriguing places. In 2 and a half hours of love-in between a couple of Labour and Lib Dem MPs and a collection of witnesses all professing undying affection for the BBC (so nice and objective there), amongst deciding which way of funding the BBC in future the public will most adore (not at all, not an option) this little exchange took place around 30′ in:
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=14615
Chair: Let us get back to the mainstream debate.
Angie Bray: We are talking about whether or not there are subjects that the BBC might shy away from, for whatever reason. I wonder whether I could get a comment from you on the other issue, which I think the BBC has had a very set view on in recent years, which is climate change. We have all now read about the semi-secret gathering a few years ago, which Roger Harrabin was responsible for, when the BBC decided that there was a set science now, that there was no room for any further denial that there might be manmade climate change and that they agreed that this was going to influence the way they covered the issues. Does that—
Chair: Can we please do this briefly, since we are straying an awful long way from the subject, the future of the BBC?
Angie Bray: But that is another issue, which I think needs to be addressed in terms of how they—
Chair: Okay.
Angie Bray: This may be because there is a mindset there, which kicks—
Steve Hewlett: In the case of climate change, I am not sure that there is. Just a couple of points on this. I have not read in detail the BBC’s reasons for opposing the freedom of information request, which has ultimately exposed the existence of this briefing. I am guessing—and if you know better, please do not let me put my foot in it—they would say, “This is an editorial matter and therefore, quite properly and quite rightly, outside the scope of FOI”. Is it wrong for BBC journalists and editorial executives to acquaint themselves, as fully as they can, with views from all sides of the argument about these things, and possibly do that in private and in circumstances that are not widely reported? My own personal view is I would rather they were better informed than less informed, and so probably, yes.
I am not sure how strong the case is to say that the BBC is overwhelmingly one way or the other on climate change. I think it is a difficult issue because the balance of scientific argument and evidence must be taken account of. Balance can never simply mean on one hand or the other; otherwise we would still be arguing about the world being flat. It has to take some account of where the debate has gone and what the balance of opinion is. I am not sure that I see the fact that this meeting took place and that executives went to it and discussed it, as evidence of a broader conspiracy to report in a particular way.
Angie Bray: I think you just need to look at the list of the people that were there.
Chair: Let us get back to the future of the BBC.
I found this interesting for a few reasons.
Firstly, the chair does not seem by his handling of this to see the future of the BBC as having anything to do with what they do with the money they get, especially rigging policy, just so long as how they get the money is sorted out. If they are as bent as nine bob notes now, securing their £5Bpa via general taxation is hardly going to change their quaint little get-togethers on what the public needs to hear… and what it needs to be spared.
Secondly, Mr. Hewlett gets a heck of a lot of time to say that he doesn’t know anything about the matter, but then goes into some detail, albeit selectively, on how it was all entirely legitimate.
And the lady who asked the question he was allowed to stomp all over was shut up at the end of his homily, and allowed no opportunity to point out who was there and who was not, which would have put Mr. Hewlett’s smug testimony on seeking knowledge in a totally different light. It was not a gathering of experts; it was a one-sided briefing on how the public would be exposed to the AGW message across all BBC outlets.
Anyone familiar with 28Gate, the protagonists, the agenda and Hugs’ vast, money-wasting efforts to suppress who was there, what talked about and what decided, would see Mr. Hewlett’s glib dismissal as utterly dishonest and/or ill-informed. Yet no one was there who knew enough, or cared, to haul him up on it. Or maybe they knew full well and didn’t want to go there.
If this is the calibre of challenge the BBC is getting, stand ready to see your licence fee made compulsory on threat of doorstep execution simply for owning a toaster with a chip in it.
Depressing stuff.
Yet another whitewash – in the same league as the parliamentary ‘enquiry’ into Climategate.
The BBC is safe, and it knows it.
Yes, “Auntie Beeb”, & oh how the bent bitch likes to cultivate that image, is safe for now.
Chris Patten & all the other closet Marxists now infesting our pretend “Conservative” party, are seeing to that.
The wind changes swiftly, however, & I sniff a sea change.
We live in interesting times. 🙂
I had high hopes for the enquiry, but the chair acting like Dimbleby getting a nudge from Harman in such a way, is not encouraging. The whole thing seemed dominated by BBC supportive witnesses and BBC supportive committee questioners (actually on a few occasions flat out flag wavers making nothing more than statements). There are more to come, but if the witness selection and calibre of questioning and chair intervention (Ms. Bray’s point on who was actually at the meeting would have made nonsense of Mr. Hewlett’s suddenly informed guess it was a valuable objective briefing on the science, but was cut off) stays like this, whitewash it looks to be.
“Our Duty to Oppose the Warmist Inquisition”
By Peter Hitchens.
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2014/02/our-duty-to-oppose-the-warmist-inquisition.html
“…the very prominent BBC broadcaster on this subject who has said to me in conversation that the measures being taken to control carbon emissions are – if he is right – far too small and far too late to do any good…. But he was quite unflinching about this.”
—
One might wonder if he attended any secret, redacted, FoI-excluded meetings on the subject? And if so, and if questions were raised in supposed thorough inquiries on what the BBC was up to, maybe specially chosen ‘expert’ ex-BBC employees can say they don’t know much about it but they do know the BBC got it about right, and any challenge on this claim gets nipped in the bud by the chairman.
For BBC-NUJ to censor:-
“Hard at work in… Mexico: Miliband’s flood supremo basks in 29C on sun-kissed jolly as Britons count the cost of the deluge.
“Shadow Floods Minister Barry Gardiner flew out to Mexico last week.
“Red Ed’s ‘special envoy on climate change’ basked in the sun as thousands of British families faced the impact of the devastating floods.
“MP was guest of multi-millionaire pharmaceuticals boss, Labour supporter and friend of Mr Miliband, Bharat Shah.
“Mr Gardiner and his wife Caroline enjoyed a stay at the Cancun’s luxury Moon Palace Resort – and the bill came to £3,650.”
By SIMON WALTERS and CAROLINE GRAHAM and GLEN OWEN
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2565672/Hard-work-Mexico-Ed-Milibands-flood-supremo-basks-85C-sun-kissed-jolly-Britons-count-cost-deluge.html#ixzz2u8ZJirLV
From today’s Guardian:
“Do former health secretary Patricia Hewitt, Labour deputy Harriet Harman, and her husband, Labour home affairs spokesman Jack Dromey, regret certain episodes during the 1970s and 80s when they occupied posts at human rights organisation the National Council for Civil Liberties (NCCL – which later became Liberty)?
Would they like to explain further the circumstances, detailed last week in the Daily Mail, that led to a notorious group called the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) achieving formal affiliate status with the NCCL (arguing that PIE also had human rights). PIE’s influence was such that the NCCL lobbied for what was dubbed a “Lolita charter”, where the age of consent would be lowered to 10 (if the child “understood the nature of the act”); another proposal argued for incest to be legalised.
Where the NCCL’s dealings with PIE are concerned, the Mail has certainly done its research, making it clear that its information is garnered from official archives. What’s more, the post-Savile “Operation Fernbridge” is now investigating PIE, probing claims that the government of the time may have (unwittingly perhaps) helped finance the group.
Hewitt, general secretary of the NCCL between 1974-83, who’s reported to have described PIE as “a campaigning/counselling group for adults attracted to children”, has been silent. Dromey says that he was “implacably opposed” to PIE. A spokesperson for Harman (who was not working for NCCL at the time of the lobbying for lowering of the age of consent) has dismissed the allegations as “untrue and ridiculous”.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/23/harriet-harman-patricia-hewitt-pie-nccl-paedophile-claims?commentpage=1
this is such a serious issue involving harriet harman and her husband jack dromey that goes right to the heart of new labour when they was in goverment,did they order the police to turn a blind eye to the activitys of these muslim child grooming gangs grooming under age white girls for sex when they was in power,just asking,why are they so silent over there links to p.i.e.what are they hiding.are they playing the long game by being silent and hiding from the press hoping the media including the biased bbc gets tired of this story and puts it on the back burner,i hope not.why has ed miliband not commented on this story,very strange indeed,but here is the most worrying thing,harman and her husband dromey are not some ordinary backbench mps with little or no power,they are senior figures within the labour party who god help help us could be in power within a year and govern us.that sends a shiver up my spine,now harrier harman and her husband jack dromey are usually never off the media attacking this goverment,why have you gone in to hiding now,these 2 must be suspended or step down as labour mps until they come out in the media and explain there links to p.i.e.this is a scandal and must not be hid away and forgot about,the children of this country must be protected from the paedophiles and child groomers.,
maybe the reason why is they know things about the BBC and have told them to keep quiet or else.It looks like the BBC and liebore were joined at the hip on many things and the truth will come out but in very little bits.
I agree if it had been tory MP’s the radio and TV would be non stop bashing…But once again the liebore people can do no wrong in BBC land.
Can only imagine that the BBC hope that Labour will benefit from its consent to paedophiles at that time…in that that Muslim vote will be in the Labour bag if it can be shown that the Labour elite were “culturally accommodating” in regard of young love back then.
Can see all those postal votes already getting filled in up and down the childrens homes, the kebab shops and Booze Stops in this country…
And finally I have just heard the BBC finally carry this case on 5 live. Well Harman and Dromey’s response to it really.
They say they will let the ‘court of public opinion decide’ – which is simply sounds like code for ‘It’s all true but the Mail is a nasty Tory rag and out supporters won’t believe it, but if we sue everyone will know it’s true when we lose’.