More context for the UKIP debate…….

The most damaging (They hope) attacks on Nigel Farage were as a result of him being asked if he would like to have a house load of Romanian men move in next door to him…he said he wouldn’t appreciate that based on the evidence….this was leapt upon as proof of his racism when James O’Brien in his LBC interview with Farage raised this previous interview but added in his own little twist asking what would be the difference between a house load of Romanian men and one of German children?  Farge said ‘You know the difference’.

Indeed O’Brien did….but claimed he didn’t stating ‘I honestly don’t know.’

It was  clearly a nonsense comparison chosen because Farage’s wife is German and because Farage is unlikely to complain of children living next door…the difference between adult Romanian men and German children is stark and obvious.

What if Farage had said ‘students’?  Would that have been more acceptable….given their well known anti-social behaviour? Surely you can object to certain groups living nearby based on evidence?

O’Brien claims that Farage’s concerns are racist for picking on one nationality, however what about O’Brien’s own wife?

Has he questioned and pilloried her for her prejudices against men?

His wife is a feminist Guardian writer who wrote this:

Sometimes it seems hard to be a parent in the UK. Hard to get your kid into a decent state school; hard to be a working mum; hard to be a stay-at-home mum; and hard to protect your children against the paedophile who – according to newspaper headlines – is probably living next door but one. Sometimes it makes me start to panic.

Widely publicised cases involving British children such as the Soham murders or the death of James Bulger have helped us lose trust in one another. Although these incidences are as rare as they are shocking, they have surely influenced child-rearing in our country to a disproportionate degree.

So let’s be clear….Lucy, O’Brien’s wife, has an innate prejudice against male neighbours believing they could be paedophiles, the thought of which makes her panic.  She has lost trust in men because of crimes committed  by men on children and reported in the Media.

What is the difference between her position and Farage’s who bases his concerns on information supplied by the Metropolitan Police and Interpol as well as reports from places such a Sheffield where community tensions are high due to ‘neighbours from Hell’?

The latest from the Guardian:

Farage attacks backfire on Labour and Tories

Attacks have confirmed Ukip leader as anti-establishment candidate, according to telephone polling and focus groups

Labour and Conservative polling is showing that attacks claiming Nigel Farage is a racist have backfired since voters do not regard him as such and see the assaults as a sign members of the political establishment are ganging up to undermine him.

The apparent backlash is coming to both parties from telephone polling and focus groups, which say that the attacks have raised Farage’s profile and confirmed him as the anti-establishment candidate. It does not tally with published opinion polls that show the Ukip lead in the European elections narrowing slightly.

One source said: “Calling people names does not work. It confirms the old politics.”

Is the BBC biased’s Sue has spotted that the BBC has apologised to Peter Hitchens for misrepresenting his views on UKIP.

On Sunday Hitchens was in the Mail with this:

Here is the best reason for voting UKIP

I don’t like UKIP or its leader, Nigel Farage. They are the Dad’s Army of British politics, doddery, farcical  and very unclear about what they are actually for.

But they have Captain Mainwaring’s virtues too.  They are absolutely certain about what they are against, in this case an aloof political establishment that despises the concerns of normal  human beings.

They are also indomitable when under attack. And they need to be. I have taken a close interest in British politics since I was a schoolboy, and I have never seen a more disgraceful alliance between politicians and their media toadies than the one that has been secretly made to do down UKIP.

On one day last week, almost every unpopular newspaper carried a cartoon portraying Nigel Farage as ugly, stupid or embattled, or all three.

Last Wednesday, the insider magazine Private Eye also claimed that the Leftist  daily The Guardian had  made a secret deal with the Tory Party, which claims to  be conservative.

The Tories, it was alleged, had promised the favourite newspaper of the liberal elite a steady supply of damaging stories about UKIP candidates saying daft things (Tories, of course, never say daft things). In return, the newspaper had promised to avoid identifying the source.

Such stories are immediately picked up by BBC radio and TV news channels, which view The Guardian as sacred text. Asked about the allegation,  The Guardian drew itself up  to its full height and snapped: ‘The Guardian does not disclose its sources.’ (A  certain Sarah Tisdall, who went to prison 30 years ago after The Guardian handed over documents that disclosed her as its source, might disagree.)

Well, there you have it. The Tory Party and The Guardian (and the BBC) are all united against UKIP. That would seem the best possible reason to vote UKIP. It also tells you who and what the Conservative Party really is.

The BBC in its news brief on Sunday (5mins 15 secs) was highly slective in its quotes…..it quotes the Mirror on UKIP saying it  has uncovered ‘Racist, anti-Semitic and anti-gay rants’

They then select this quote from Hitchen’s piece: [Ukip are] ‘doddery, farcical  and very unclear about what they are actually for.’

And then quote the Sunday People calling UKIP ‘a bunch of racist loonies’

It the goes on to reveal that the Observer (The Guardian) wants you to know how the wonderful EU has brought us equal pay, improved human rights and parental rights at work.

Nice final touch…a bit of pro-EU propaganda.

Hitchens then complained about his views being misrepresented:

Is This Impartiality? The BBC, UKIP and Me

I invite readers to follow the link (below) to today’s news Briefing’. At about 5.40 a.m., it quotes from my column item about UKIP, which (as you can see from the blog posting immediately before this) concerned the ganging up of the Tories and the left-wing media to attack UKIP in an unprecedented fashion, and whose headline pretty much urges people to vote UKIP.

Now, please listen to the extract from my article which was broadcast, and ask yourselves if this is in any way an accurate reflection of what I wrote or (in the context of the other extracts from other newspapers broadcast alongside it) a proper exercise of the BBC’s absolute duty of impartiality (specifically required by the Royal Charter which establishes the BBC and allows it to levy the licence fee) in matters of current controversy, and especially in party political matters, and even more especially party political matters during the weeks immediately before an election. 

The BBC has now apologised:

The BBC Says Sorry

Tedious technical problems have prevented me from posting news of an extraordinary development in my latest tussle with the BBC.

They have, promptly and apparently without reservations, apologised for misrepresenting me in ‘News Briefing’ on Radio 4 on Sunday morning.

The apology runs thus :‘ We acknowledge that the quote used in the paper review did not accurately reflect the full nature of your article. We apologise, and would like to assure you that your concerns were raised with the relevant editorial staff at BBC News.’

Obviously, this can only be the start. The clear and swift admission of fault by the BBC only strengthens my desire to pursue the matter, since the action has much wider significance than my annoyance at being misrepresented.

How did this happen? How was it a) done and b) approved for transmission?

What about the context? Why were the articles selected for the press review all hostile to UKIP (except mine, which was made to seem so)?

 And what about the breach of due impartiality, enjoined on the BBC in its Charter and especially important in the days immediately before an election?

I have submitted a further complaint, pointing out that these matters have not been dealt with. I will let readers know what happens.

With the election just 4 days away at the time of the broadcast the BBC was clearly playing politics in this little broadcast.

But hey what’s new?

The BBC puts this on its frontpage:

Street clashes force Nigel Farage no-show

Nothing about this though, even on its Sheffield page:

Mass brawl erupts between rival groups of youths in area where former Home Secretary David Blunkett warned of rioting due to influx of Roma immigrants

Considering the furore over Farage’s claims about immigration you’d have thought this story might be of  great interest.

Another one to be quietly filed away under ‘Conceal in  the interests of community cohesion’.

Community cohesion?…lots of that on display.

Christianity and Capitalism…The Two Evils Of Our Time.

The Springwatch co-host and outspoken naturalist, Chris Packham, declared that economic growth is a ‘recipe for disaster’ and blamed Christianity for allowing humans to think that they can exploit the planet’s resources.

So pretty much the normal BBC view of the world then.

Gabby Logan admits tax avoidance but vows to pay it back

Gabby Logan is the latest household name to admit being part of the tax avoidance scheme used by Gary Barlow and Colin Jackson.

The sports presenter invested thousands into Icebreaker, a company which purported to support young musicians.

However, a recent court ruling said the firm was “understood by all concerned to be a tax avoidance scheme”.

Logan says she invested in the scheme in “good faith” and vowed “to pay any tax” she owes.

Icebreaker arranged to harness tax reliefs that the government had intended would support those in creative industries.

The tribunal found that shortly after money was put in to Larkdale LLP, it reported huge losses of more than £25m.

Those losses could then be offset against tax, reducing the men’s tax bills.

In total, around 50 partnerships with hundreds of members invested in Icebreaker, which claimed total losses of £336m.

The Submarine Service is often called the ‘Silent Service’ but perhaps that could be as well applied to the BBC whose silence on matters Miliband is remarkable and where all his inglorious episodes sink without trace having made hardly a ripple in the BBC news at all….despite the most recent inglorious escapade having actually happened in a local BBC radio station interview.

Two stories came out today that shed an unflattering light on the real Miliband who doesn’t know who the leader of Swindon’s Labour Party is despite going to campaign there on his behalf,  nor the cost of a week’s shopping despite campaigning on that very subject:

Miliband’s two car crash interviews in one day: Labour leader exposed on local radio for not even knowing who he was campaigning for in Swindon

Ed Miliband endured a nightmare day on the campaign trail today after following up a blundering TV interview with a car crash local radio appearance.

The Labour leader was this morning accused of being ‘out of touch with reality’ after appearing not to have any idea how much he spends on a weekly shop.

He was then left embarrassed on the BBC’s Radio Wiltshire when forced to admit he did not know the local Labour leader – even though he was supposed to be campaigning for him.

Mr Miliband was speaking to Swindon’s local radio ahead of the council elections on Thursday.

He was asked by radio host Ben Prater what he made of Jim Grant, the leader of Swindon’s Labour party.

Mr Miliband responded: ‘I beg your pardon?’

The radio presenter said: ‘Grant, do you think he has done a good job?’

The Labour leader replied: ‘I think that lots of Labour representatives are doing a good job right across the country.’

Mr Prater then asked whether he knew who Jim Grant was, but all Mr Miliband could say was: ‘You will enlighten me I am sure.’

The radio host then said: ‘Swindon Labour leader.’

A flustered Mr Miliband then claimed: ‘Yeah I think he is doing a good job.’

But Mr Prater asked how the Labour chief in Swindon could possibly feel supported if his national leader did not ‘even know his name’.

Mr Miliband replied: ‘Well he is doing a good job as leader of the council, Jim is, and I think that is the case.’

He added: ‘I know that Jim is doing a good job for Swindon and I think he is doing a good job as leader of the council.’

But the presenter was forced to intervene again to point out that Mr Grant is not the leader of the council – because it is a Conservative led council.

Mr Miliband said: ‘I think he is doing a good job for Labour on the council.’

To be fair of course everybody thinks ed Miliband is called David Miliband…wishful thinking perhaps from many.

Ah look…the BBC has reported Miliband’s little trouble, or at least one part of it….

Can you see the story?   It’s not on the Frontpage, nor the UK page, not even on the England page….you have to go to the West & South West page, then click on Wiltshire and you get this

Ed Miliband grilled over local knowledge in Swindon

So obvious really:

You will note that clicking on this takes you back to the Politics page…and you will think hang on I’ve checked that page and nothing….except you’d be wrong because hidden in plain sight is this:

See it yet?   No…well look at the ‘Watch/Listen’ box…still nothing?  Then click on the scroll button and finally you will find the story.

Not as if the BBC want to make it as difficult as possible to find a story that makes Miliband look a complete prat is it?

You can guarantee if Cameron had such an interview it would be headline news and the subject of ribald commentary from BBC presenters and comedians for days if not weeks after.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/england/

We had a look at some of the hypocrisy of the Press now attacking Farage for his ‘racist’ position on immigration and Romanians, now attention turns to James O’Brien who interviewed Farage in what is called a ‘car crash’ interview…but who was it a ‘car crash’ for?

We ask what motivates him,  are his thoughts based on intelligent rationale or innate, ill-informed prejudice and is he really in a position to place himself on the moral highground and stand in judgement on the likes of Nigel Farage?

O’Brien tells us that perhaps those such as he can’t really be judge and jury…though that didn’t stop him smearing Farage……

At the risk of redrawing the parameters of understatement, it is clear that most of the British press has rarely been worse placed to sit in moral judgment on anybody else.

As attention inexorably focuses on the methods, underhand and otherwise, that journalists employ in pursuit of stories, it is crucial that we are not persuaded by attempts to police what actually constitutes a story.  It is not for lawyers, or publicists, or celebrities to determine what is and what is not a viable story. Only facts can do that. The journalist’s job is to find them, to publish them and to fight like cats in a sack against anyone who tries to stop us doing so.

He claims that only ‘facts’ should be allowed to decide what is or is not a ‘story’…well we might look at some of James O’Brien’s ‘facts’ in the next post.

Just how intelligent is O’Brien?  Can he do the maths?

Immigration is still massive…the numbers are astounding:

532,000 people immigrated to the UK in the year ending September 2013, compared to 497,000 the previous year, whilst 320,000 people emigrated from the UK compared to 343,000 the previous year.

The net immigration including UK nationals was 212,000…but the real net immigration, excluding UK nationals was an inward migration to the UK of around 270,000 non-UK nationals.

270,000 new arrivals with different languages, customs, religions and values…all wanting jobs, houses, benefits, to use the NHS, to send their kids to our schools, use their cars on the roads, use water resources and energy supplies.

So the maths is important.

Just how good is O’Brien at maths?  LBC tells us itself:

James O’Brien’s seven-year-old daughter asked for help with her maths homework – and he realised he had no idea how to do it.

So can you do a maths question aimed at a seven-year-old? Try the problem below…
Faye is trying to crack the code to open this safe in the wall. She has been given the following clues:

The code has four digits.
The first and second digits add up to make a multiple of 6.
The third and fourth digits add up to make the same multiple as above.
There is a difference of 6 between the first and second digits.
The third and fourth digits are the same.
There are no zeros in the code.
The first digit is the smallest of the four.

Can you work out what the code is?
Could you do it?

James O’Brien couldn’t do that simple problem….no wonder he has no problem with mass immigration….he just can’t work out what the problem is.

 
Whilst O’Brien is more than happy to fling casual accusations of racism at Farage he’s not so keen to be accused of it himself:

Accusations of anti-semitism shouldn’t really be filed alongside most of the above. They should, given the history of persecution, be much more carefully and judiciously employed.  But they aren’t. Quite the opposite. To accuse someone of it is, whether the accuser realises it or not, to posit the notion that the accused is somehow sympathetic to the perpetrators of the holocaust, prone to judge a human’s worth according to their ethnicity or origins, prejudiced to the point of blind hatred.

How heart-breakingly bizarre, then, to hear two apparently intelligent women accuse me of it today

O’Brien’s interview with Farage wasn’t a fact finding opportunity, O’Brien had already made up his mind.  O’Brien is pro-immigration, and pro-Labour….

And so it begins…
Posted by James O’Brien on July 03, 2013 at 13:40PM
With foreigners and the unemployed being successfully but fraudulently portrayed as the root of all our country’s ills, it’s time for the Tories to turn their attention to why Labour, who seem to have surrendered to this toxic narrative, won’t be able to fix things.
If Miliband & co are to mount a meaningful defence against what looks like a looming portrayal of unions as the root of all that’s wrong with Labour they will have to provide a proper answer to this question. It will, moreover, involve doing what they have abjectly, shamefully, tragically failed to do with welfare and immigration. They are going to have to contradict the Tory line, loudly and confidently, explain the reality until it breaks through the barriers to understanding erected by an almost exclusively anti-union media. They are going to have to tell the truth and shame the Devil, who for the purposes of this challenge is probably Lynton Crosby.

O’Brien likes ‘real’ people…except of course when he actually meets one in the shape of Farage who represents the views of the majority of the people in this country, including many immigrants…..

I don’t like interviewing politicians. It’s not a party political position, I don’t like interviewing any of them.
They are so cossetted and insulated and briefed and adept at distraction and prone to waffle that, as a radio presenter ordinarily offered five or six minutes tops, it rarely seems worth my while to let them read their PR notes out loud, answer any questions but the ones I ask and glide glibly over any attempts to root the exchange in reality. And besides, I genuinely prefer talking to ‘real’ people.

Here is my adaption of one of O’Brien’s articles in the Mail, of all newspapers.  I think it is a fair representation of what might go on in his head regarding immigration:

 
The first line of attack on my part was to insist, full of bluster and slightly aggrieved, that we were simply not importing enough immigrants.
But I spent another few weeks with my head deep in the sand, ignoring the growing sense that something was wrong.
And then there was stress – one of the major obstacles to clear, intelligent thought. Just thinking about stopping immigration caused me untold stress. So, with impeccable male logic, I insisted that I shouldn’t think about it.
I can see now that all of these positions are ridiculous. Unsound, unfair and, in places, downright delusional.
At the time, though, I clung to them like a drowning man. Because, for media liberals, the prospect of not having a cheap Polish plumber or Latvian nanny is not really something you can talk to anyone about. It’s definitely not the sort of thing you can bring up with your mates.

An important lesson for O’Brien?:

As a radio phone-in host, I spend much of my working life arguing. The most important lesson you learn is to know when you have lost.

Finally what does Mumsnet think of O’Brien? 

Many thought him intelligent and witty….but others took a more realistic view of his interview technique….can’t say they are wrong having listened to his interview with Farage…you may think this is gratuitous abuse from them but listen to his interview with Farage and you’ll get the point:

James O’Brien LBC presenter a condescending twat

Am I the only one that finds LBC radio presenter James O’Brien infuriating. Whilst he has the face for radio he does not have the voice; but worse, I hate the way he patronises callers that are obviously less educated and less articulate than he is. He sounds like a patronising bully and it makes for uncomfortable listening. Unlike Nick Ferarri he has zero charisma.

It’s normally James O’Brien for me or radio 4 when he is not on.  [That one says it all]

I do like O’Brien. But he can be pretty obnoxious to callers who are concerned about certain areas. I am thinking about medical research (he was incredibly rude to a caller 2 weeks ago to the extent he had to issue an apology at the end of his show) or immigration issues.

He gets that dangerous and low tone when you can almost see him visibly puffing out his chest in righteous indignation. He just doesn’t listen or acknowledge. He just shuts them down.

I’m not talking about the racist twats and their twattery. But there is a growing tide of callers who can’t make their points without his moral compass getting all discombobulated.

ex pupil of mine did some work experience at LBC and said he wasn’t very friendly/jolly at all

Agree about James O’B, he is up his backside

I find him a patronising hypocritical bully:
He gets extremely aggressive- rather nasty actually – when anyone challenges him. He constantly belittles people who have an opinion contrary to his, in such an outrageous way I am amazed at his spitefulness !

I agree that JoB is up himself.

He does shut callers down if they successfully counter his point of view.

He does like showing off how well educated he is and he loves the sound of his own voice.

James O’Brien – certainly bright, but a real hypocrite, such a BULLY BOY to anyone who calls to put an contrary opinion to his . I am amazed how he seems to get away with it daily…

Htiler made a pact with Stalin…..it seems others are like-minded.

Peter Hitchens says:

Last Wednesday, the insider magazine Private Eye also claimed that the Leftist  daily The Guardian had  made a secret deal with the Tory Party, which claims to  be conservative.

The Tories, it was alleged, had promised the favourite newspaper of the liberal elite a steady supply of damaging stories about UKIP candidates saying daft things (Tories, of course, never say daft things). In return, the newspaper had promised to avoid identifying the source.

Such stories are immediately picked up by BBC radio and TV news channels, which view The Guardian as sacred text. Asked about the allegation,  The Guardian drew itself up  to its full height and snapped: ‘The Guardian does not disclose its sources.’ (A  certain Sarah Tisdall, who went to prison 30 years ago after The Guardian handed over documents that disclosed her as its source, might disagree.)

Well, there you have it. The Tory Party and The Guardian (and the BBC) are all united against UKIP. That would seem the best possible reason to vote UKIP. It also tells you who and what the Conservative Party really is.

In light of LBC’s James O’Brien’s hatchet job on Farage let’s have a warm up look at what other parties have been saying about immigration, race and our values before we fisk O’Brien and his smear:

‘We’re importing a crime wave from Romania and Bulgaria’: Tory MPs round on ministers as immigration curbs are lifted

Conservative MP Philip Hollobone: ‘We are importing a wave of crime from Romania and Bulgaria.’
He warned that crime among Romanians in England was ‘really quite startling’, adding: ‘Romanians are seven times more likely to be arrested in London than a British national.
‘Romanians account for more than 11 per cent of all foreign offenders, despite making up, at the moment, just a tiny proportion of residents.

From the Telegraph (Now so anti-Farage):

Up to one in three Romanians arrested, figures show
Up to one in three Romanian migrants have been arrested, figures have showed, as the country ranked second in a list of foreigners held over serious offences.
Some 27,725 Romanians were arrested for offences in London over the past five years, Scotland Yard said, including 10 for murder and more than 140 for rape.
The figures, published under the Freedom of Information Act, will fuel fears of a crime wave when restrictions on workers from Romania and Bulgaria are lifted in January next year.
Romanians came second only to Poles, who accounted for 34,905 arrests, including 84 for murder and almost 130 for rape.
However, there were some 587,000 migrants born in Poland living in the UK in 2011, estimates from the Office for National Statistics showed, compared with 87,000 Romanians.
Sir Andrew Green, chairman of the pressure group Migration Watch UK, said: “The extent of this Romanian criminality is a real concern for the ending of all immigration controls on Romanians and Bulgarians next year.”

Romanians top UK crime list

Police experts predicted a fresh “wave of crime” as the country already struggles with an influx of foreign crooks.
Shock figures reveal that the eastern Europeans already topped crime league tables before Britain opened its borders to millions from the two countries today.
Almost 1,000 Romanians were detained by police in just one county alone over the past three years.
Staffordshire Police and Crime Commissioner Matthew Ellis is demanding urgent talks with Home Secretary Theresa May.

Romanians ‘started crime spree’ 24 hours after arriving in West Bromwich

David Blunkett riot fear over Roma migrant tensions

Tensions between local people and Roma migrants could escalate into rioting unless action is taken to improve integration, David Blunkett has warned.
The former home secretary fears a repeat of race riots that hit northern cities in 2001.
His concerns centre on the Page Hall area of Sheffield, where Roma migrants from Slovakia have set up home.
But he also accused the government of “burying their head in the sand” over the scale of Roma settlement in the UK.
In an interview with BBC Radio Sheffield, he said the Roma community had to make more of an effort to fit in with British culture.
“We have got to change the behaviour and the culture of the incoming community, the Roma community, because there’s going to be an explosion otherwise. We all know that.”

Ed Miliband ‘won’t turn back on immigration concerns’

Labour leader Ed Miliband has said immigration will be a big issue at the general election in 2015.
Speaking on Radio 4’s World at One programme, Mr Miliband said he could understand why voters were concerned.
Mr Miliband also said his party would not turn its back on voters’ concerns – unlike the last Labour government.

Miliband said that immigration is undercutting wages for the poorest….one of the biggest issues this country faces…inequality….linked to immigration of cheap labour….not getting a fair shake, a fair chance.
Immigration is a class issue….and most of all….working class people saying ‘my wages are being under cut’.

Mr Straw, who is a Christian himself, said he did not accept this analysis.
“There has to be a clear understanding that this is the UK and there are a set of values, some of which I would say to the letter writers are indeed Christian-based, whether they like it or not, which permeate our sense of citizenship,” insisted the MP for Blackburn.

David Cameron: It’s time that we revived Christian values

In a speech to celebrate the 400th birthday of the King James Bible, he said the New Testament had helped give our country “a set of values and morals which make Britain what it is today”.
He said we should “actively stand up and defend” these Christian values.
Mr Cameron also criticised the notions that by “standing up for Christian values we somehow do down other faiths” or that it was offensive to pass judgment on other people’s behaviour. “I think these arguments are profoundly wrong,” he said.
“And being clear on this is absolutely fundamental to who we are as a people, what we stand for and the kind of society we want to build.
“We are a Christian country. And we should not be afraid to say so.”

David Cameron Christianity claim

Writing for the Church Times earlier this month, Mr Cameron said: “Crucially, the Christian values of responsibility, hard work, charity, compassion, humility, and love are shared by people of every faith and none – and we should be confident in standing up to defend them.”
This did not mean “doing down” other religions, he said.
The prime minister also spoke of his faith in his Easter message, saying he found “peace” in Christianity.
Stand up for our Christianity, David Cameron tells UK

So Blunkett is concerned about Roma neighbours, as is Cameron, and jack Straw, in a general sense that we must stand up against those who don’t have our values, and Miliband agrees immigrants are taking the jobs of British workers.

If Farage is racist…….what about that lot?  And isn’t Farage absolutely correct about the Romanian crime rate?

Monday morning arrives and with it comes this brand new Open Thread for your completion! The floor is yours….

Bishop Hill reports:

Simon Buckle of the Grantham Institute at Imperial has penned some nice thoughts about the Bengtsson affair:

‘Professor Lennart Bengtsson’s resignation from the GWPF Academic Advisory Council has received wide coverage and raises important issues.’

‘received wide coverage’?…..but not from one of the world’s biggest and best resourced news organisations.

And a matter that ‘raises important issues’…….so important that one of the world’s biggest and best resourced news organisations deliberately ignores them.

Proof positive that the BBC is engaged in a cover up and is manipulating climate coverage to hide ‘inconvenient truths’.

The climate lobby is intimidating and threatening other scientists to remain silent about their doubts on the ‘science’……threatening their careers and sometimes threatening the very lives of anyone who dares to raise a sceptical question.

It was the BBC’s very own Harrabin who wanted to punch the sceptical Christopher Booker for ‘spreading  lies and disinformation’….or good common sense, truth and reason to you and me.

No doubt who is helping to foster the atmosphere of bullying and threats then.

Buckle from the Grantham Institute went on:

It is regrettable that perceived political stances on the climate issue are apparently so affecting academic activity.  The Grantham Institute at Imperial has always opposed such behaviour, believing that scientific progress requires an open society.  We try to engage with a wide range of figures, some with radically different views on climate change.

Sorry but his boss, who stumps up the cash for these people says different.

Grantham’s aim is to silence the critics with a bombardment of propaganda:

The misinformation machine is brilliant. As a propagandist myself [he has previously described himself as GMO’s “chief of propaganda” in reference to his official title of “chief investment strategist”], I have nothing but admiration for their propaganda. [Laughs.] But the difference is that we have the facts behind our propaganda. They’re in the “screaming loudly” rather than the “fact based” part of the exercise, because they don’t have the facts. They are masters at manufacturing doubt. What I have noticed on the blogs and in the comments section under articles is that over several years, as the scientific evidence for climate change gets stronger, the tone of the sceptics is getting shriller and more vicious and nastier all the time.

The sceptics are getting angrier and more vicious every year despite the more storms we have, and the more mad crazy weather we have…
One of the problems is that typically you are not dealing with the facts. Putting in more facts makes the sceptics more angry. They have profound beliefs – as opposed to knowledge – that they are willing to protect by all manner of psychological tricks.

Ironically he says…….

If you’re saying something that people don’t want to hear or accept, a significant proportion of them will reply with hostility. Not because they know the facts, or because they have researched it themselves, but because they’re so psychologically involved in believing good news that they will oppose it with a reflex.

Could be talking of the climate fanatic’s response to any scepticism couldn’t he?

Grantham suggests the climate lobby is all sweetness and light despite the relentless, nasty attacks of the sceptics:

The equivalent on the other side is a weary resignation, sorrow and frustration and amazement that people on the other side can’t look at the facts.

We can try to bypass them on one level and we try to contest the political power of the sceptics. They are using money as well as propaganda to influence the politicians, particularly in America.

That from a man who coughs up £165 million to fund his climate propaganda.

So concerned is Grantham, 70, over this issue that he has set up the Grantham Foundation for the Protection of the Environment, endowed with £165m of his own money, to fund environmental research and campaigns. From it he is funding the LSE and Imperial donations, and other grants to American groups such as the Environmental Defense Fund.

Grantham is hoping the sceptics will all die off…the sooner the better:

Changing people’s minds is almost impossible, even among scientists. Max Planck said, to paraphrase, that science advances one funeral at a time. You could add that economics advances the same way. You have to wait to get rid of the people who have career investment in a topic before a new generation can see the light.

Where Grantham’s real loyalties lie…..

Our first responsibility is to make money for our clients….and nothing is more important than oil.