Norway and the EU

Norway and the EU enjoy good and close relations, although Norway is not a member of the European Union. The Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA) is the mainstay of our cooperation, and it ensures that Norway takes part in the EU internal market. We are also part of the Schengen Agreement and cooperate with the EU on foreign and security policy issues.

Through the EEA Agreement, the three EFTA states Norway, Iceland and Liechten-stein are equal partners in the EU internal market, on the same terms as the EU member states. Moreover, the Agreement also covers cooperation in other important areas such as research and development, education, social policy, the environment, consumer protection, tourism and culture. It also enables the three EEA EFTA states to participate in various EU programmes.  Norway also participates in the activities of a number of EU agencies through provisions in the EEA Agreement or on the basis of bilateral agreements.

The BBC likes to come up with the alarmist scenario that on leaving the EU we will still be subject to their regulations on products if we want to export to them…..therefore we might as well stay in the EU….or on that logic we might as well be the 51st State……[never mind many rules and regulations are imposed due to world-wide trade or political agreements on subjects such as energy efficiency, climate and safety and will be imposed whether or not you are in the EU]

Want to export to the USA?  Here’s some regulations you have to obey to do so……

8.3 Regulations

You should make sure you know which US regulations apply to your products or services and follow packaging and labelling requirements.

Some of the main US federal agencies are:

• Food and Drug Administration – food, drugs, medicines and cosmetics
• Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau – alcohol and tobacco
• Consumer Product Safety Commission – consumer products
• Federal Trade Commission – business practices
• US Fish and Wildlife Service – animal products
• Environmental Protection Agency – human health and environment

The USA.gov website has a full list of US federal agencies.

Check the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to find out what standards apply. The NIST works with industry to develop and apply technology, measurements and standards.

Those damnable Yankees imposing rules and regulations upon businessmen who want to export to the good ole US of A…..listen to the BBC burbling on about the marvels of the EU and the dangers of being out of, or is that in, the EU and you’d never know that the US and all other countries impose stringent conditons upon those who want to export to their countries….if you listen to the BBC the only way to succeed in business is to join the EU for regulation free business….it is regulation free isn’t it?

The BBC’s message is very confused….the EU is great but it imposes regulations that are a nightmare.

Apparently if you are in the EU life for a businessman is a bed of roses…no regulations, no tariffs, no rules or nuffink…..great….oh hang on….if you’re a slinking curr on the outskirts of the great and fabulous EU, like Norway for instance, and you rather tentatively dip your toe into the EU’s waters then you will still be subject to a tsunami of regulations and rules that the EU imposes upon its own businesses….er…..er….what?  So at one moment the BBC tells us life will be fantastic for all businessmen if they are in the EU…..but if  you’re not fully committed you will still be subject to those fabulous regulations that EU businessmen so enjoy and which makes the EU such a good place to be a member of, however you will suffer under them.  That makes a lot of sense…to the BBC, in particular to one BBC journalist…Jonty Bloom, who tells us that if you’re not fully in the EU you’re living a nightmare…..

The business woke up to a nightmare….half of Osos products useless or unsellable.

I first caught Jonty’s jaunty little babble about the EU on FOOC and thought that it was such a one-sided, pro-Europe piece of propaganda I’d have to look further.  Apparently the FOOC piece was a mere taster for the full-on indigestible tripe that Bloom would try to force feed us later on.

It was indeed just a foretaster for a much longer programme, but one no more rounded or informative, on the subject of Norway and its relationship with the EU….unfortunately it seemed that Bloom’s aim was political, to persuade us that doing a ‘Norway’ and remaining out of the EU was a bad idea rather than a rounded and intelligent, and accurate, honest, look at not just the Norwegian option but all other options as to how the UK could shape the way it deals with the EU……such as Switzerland..

Switzerland is neither an EU nor EEA member but is part of the single market

Or, shock horror, perhaps just leave altogether.

Bloom has other ideas in this programme….

Norway’s European Vision

Norway isn’t a member of the European Union, but does business with the EU. Is it a model for other countries? Jonty Bloom speaks to people working in a range of businesses – including Norway’s vital fishing industry – and asks about the advantages and disadvantages of the arrangement.

Bloom also had a write up on the website…….

How does Norway’s relationship with the EU work?

There is not going to be a referendum on joining the European Union in Norway anytime soon, not least because the polls show that up to 85% would vote against joining.

Despite telling us that 85% would vote against joining the EU Bloom brings us the views of two supposedly pro-EU businessmen…..the first a fisherman….which is dishonest in itself as Norway is a member of the EEA, the rules of which do not govern fishing and agriculture and so don’t relate to, or rather negates, this narrative from Bloom that being part of the European Economic Area means you are subject to all of Europe’s rules.

Bloom then goes to a boiler manufacturer whose travails are solely, we are told, due to being suddenly subject to the EU rules on energy efficiency…again, funny how EU rules are a burden and yet the EU is a good thing when it suits.

OSO Hotwater is a maker of central heating boilers just outside Oslo, and a few years ago it woke up to a nightmare. Overnight it discovered that the EU was introducing new environmental and energy efficiency standards that favoured gas powered boilers over electric ones.

As OSO’s boss Sigurd Braathen told me he did the calculations and realised that half of Oso’s products would soon be useless: unsaleable.

Now, as Norway is not a member of the EU, it has no say over these or any other EU rules. It can lobby against them, but it does not sit round the table when they are proposed, discussed, amended, debated, or voted into law.

In theory it has a veto over any legislation but it has never used it, and the consequences of using the veto could be huge.

Curiously, or not, that wasn’t what Bloom wrote originally….this is what he told us on first draft..

It [Norway] most certainly does not have a veto over any legislation and yet the consequences can be huge.

Bloom was clearly ridiculed for that mistake, ignorant piece of reporting, complete lie, take your pick, by various commentators and he rewrote his piece…however it is still highly misleading.

Bloom then goes on to explain why being in the EEA means you are still subject to all EU rules and, his main point, that you have no say in how those rules are drawn up……

New machinery and robots that were needed to install better insulation onto the boilers — in all it has cost the company £5m of extra investment.

Now you may be wondering why, with a large domestic market, OSO did not just turn its back on the European Union and its new rules and ignore them. The answer is that it can’t.

This is a key factor of the Norwegian model; Norway is not in the EU, but it is in the European Economic Area (EEA), and technically it is as much a part of the single market as France, Germany or the UK.

As Sigurd told me: “The legislation came from the EU and it was implemented in Norway without any alterations to the way we would have liked it to be.

“It is implemented in Norway in exactly the same way as the rest of the EU and we can get no exceptions and no adaptations to Norwegian conditions. We have difficulties making alterations to any of the legislation we are getting.”

OSO and many other companies in Norway have to follow the rules of the single market even if they have never exported so much as a single widget to the European Union.

That is just one of the costs of Norway’s non-membership of the EU.

It does a higher percentage of its trade with the EU than we in the UK do, in fact more than the vast majority of EU members do.

But it pays hundreds of millions of pounds a year for the right to do that and has to accept all the rules and regulations without a say in how they are made.

 

So Norway has no influence on EU regulations and rules that effect it?

Influencing the EU – EEA Decision Shaping

Decision shaping is the phase of preparatory work undertaken by the European Commission to draw up new legislative proposals. The EEA Agreement contains provisions for input from the EEA EFTA side at various stages before new legislation is adopted.

Bloom wrote..[Norway] ‘can lobby against them, but it does not sit round the table when they are proposed, discussed, amended, debated, or voted into law.’

Not true at all…..Norway has little but not absolutely no say in the decision as to whether the regulations would actually be made law but it has a huge say in how they are drawn up…..

During the decision-making process on the EU side, the EEA EFTA States have little or no formal opportunity to influence the Council or the EP. This is very different from the pre-pipeline or preparatory stage, where the EEA EFTA States take an active part in the decision shaping of EEA legislation.

Once an EC act has gone through the EC procedures and been adopted, the desk officer in the EFTA Secretariat responsible for that area prepares a standard sheet concerning that particular act. The standard sheet is a form which records all references and vital information about the act in question. EFTA experts in the capitals must answer a number of questions, such as whether the act is EEA-relevant, whether it will require technical adaptations for implementation in the EEA EFTA States, and whether it is likely to have constitutional requirements

The contracting parties have not transferred any legislative powers to the EEA Joint Committee. It has therefore been necessary to regulate the situation in which, according to their constitutions, an EEA JCD can only be binding on one or the other contracting party after it has been approved by parliament or by referendum……an EEA JCD can only be binding on one or the other contracting party after it has been approved by parliament or by referendum.

Decisions that have budgetary implications for more than one year will in principle need parliamentary consent in Norway.

So any new laws have to be approved by the Norwegian parliament or by a referendum….so much for no veto and no say.

And what else tells us that Norway has a huge say in any new regulations?…..

The EEA institutions          
Substantive decisions relating to the EEA Agreement are a joint venture between the EEA EFTA states and the EU. Common bodies, such as the EEA Council and the EEA Joint Committee, have been established to administer the EEA Agreement.

Can the EEA Agreement be amended?

The EEA Agreement is dynamic in character. This means that it is continuously updated and amended to incorporate new internal market legislation in order to maintain common rules across the EEA.

 

Any other consultations?…..

Commission committees

In addition to the meetings with experts mentioned above, EEA EFTA State representatives have access to the following types of Commission committees in the policy-shaping phase: comitology committees (Article 100 EEA), programme committees (Article 81 EEA) and other committees in very specific areas (Article 101 EEA).

And on energy policy?….

The EU Energy Policy and the EEA

Underlines the importance of Norway as a major supplier of energy to the EU, resulting in more than half of the EU supplies being produced within the European Economic Area; highlights the importance of a regular energy dialogue between the EU and Norway

 

The Danish Energy Agency and the Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE) both provide input to the EU legislative processes for more eco-friendly design and the energy labelling of products. Since 2007, Viegand Maagøe has led and participated in an expert consortium that provides technical assistance in EU negotiations on future legal requirements for products.  We have worked to promote Danish and Norwegian interests in the EU and have contributed to promoting ambitious energy requirements for products.

And just how important is the EU market on the scale of things?…….

Agreements

Over the next ten to 15 years, 90% of world demand will be generated outside Europe. That is why it is a key priority for the EU to tap into this growth potential by opening up market opportunities for European businesses abroad. One way of ensuring this is through negotiating agreements with our key partners.

EU trade negotiations

The EU has successfully concluded a number of important trade agreements with trading partners and is in the process of negotiating agreements with many more.

Does Norway participate actively in policy debates with the EU?……yes of course….

Norway–EU cooperation at political level

Norway and the EU share the same fundamental values, and face many of the same challenges. Close cooperation at political level is essential to find joint solutions to these challenges.

How about the Norwegian ‘Mission to the EU’?  Does that have a reason for its existence?…..

Mission of Norway to the European Union

The Mission of Norway to the European Union plays an essential role in the development and implementation of Norway’s policy on Europe. The Mission is also an important centre of expertise on EU and EEA affairs for the Norwegian public administration.

Just how much influence might Norway have?…….quite a lot you’d think…..

Trade picture

• Norway is the EU’s 5th most important import partner for trade in goods, after China, Russia, USA and Switzerland and the 7th export market for the EU, after the USA, China, Switzerland, Russia, Turkey and Japan.
• Norway’s trade with the EU shows a surplus. Norway’s trade flows have traditionally been dominated by trade with the EU, and this trend is being enhanced after the latest EU enlargements.
• The EU remains the first major import and export partner for Norway, capturing 74.3% of the latter’s trade.

Interesting that non-aligned Switzerland is ahead of Norway.  Just how many cuckoo clocks does Europe need?

 Any sign of Norwegian diplomacy in action in the EU?……

Never before have so many Norwegian Government ministers visited Greece than during these last months.

For a country that’s not a member of the EU it seems they are allowed a great deal of say in how things are run….not the narrative Bloom and the BBC has been selling us at all.

It took no time at all to Google [tax free] Norway’s influence over policy and regulation making decisions….why did a BBC journalist with all those resources and time behind him not come up with the answers?

The only possibility is because he didn’t want to give us the truth and was solely intent on selling us a ‘nightmare scenario’, ironically, of still being subject to the EU but having no influence over it…a narrative that is demonstrably false.

So much for the BBC having trained its journalists to report in the EU and the referendum accurately and impartially….as others have noted…

The Truth, The BBC and the EEA

EU Referendum: BBC – the enemy without

Another pack of BBC lies

Can’t be any clearer about the BBC’s dishonesty can we?…oh hang on…Bloom’s in the clear….the BBC hasn’t decided what ‘impartial…accurate….honest…balanced‘ mean yet..they’re having a consultation about that…the result due in February….when the referendum could be held in June….

The BBC Trust is today [ 20.11.2015 ] launching an eight week consultation asking for views on a set of referendum guidelines and a set of election guidelines which will assist BBC journalists and content producers reporting on both the European Union membership referendum and on elections due to take place next May.

We anticipate that the final guidelines for the referendum and for the May 2016 elections will be published in February 2016.

Carry on regardless then Jonty.

The Telegraph tells us……

BBC charter review consultation hijacked by left-wing campaign group

The Culture Secretary has been forced to revisit the consultation on the future of the BBC

John Whittingdale, the culture secretary, is to launch a new study of public attitudes towards the BBC, after a consultation into the future of the corporation was hijacked by a left-wing campaigning group.

It has now emerged that 177,000 submissions – 92 per cent of all responses – were sent via 38 Degrees, a “campaigning community” that specialises in organising mass-emails to MPs. The group told its three million members that ministers planned to “rip out the heart of the BBC”, by forcing the corporation to take adverts and ending its independence from government –neither of which are proposed in the green paper.

Not only did 38 Degrees organise the massed response but damningly ‘guided’ the answers that people wrote to the review….which you might think completely undermined any appearance of credibility and honesty…..

The group told its members that it had “translated” the “gobbledegook” questions in the consultation into plain English, and gave them a crib sheet advising people how to respond. One question in the green paper asked, “How well is the BBC serving its audiences?”, which 38 Degrees told its members to answer as “Which parts of the BBC do you particularly love?”.

A question asking whether the corporation had a negative impact on any of its commercial rivals was described as: “If you value having independent news that comes without adverts, you could write about that here.”

Caught Nolan last night (11:34)…thankfully at tale end of a discussion on immigration.

Nolan then went on to Google and tax…..we had Edwina Currie putting up an excellent and reasoned defence and someone from Labour who didn’t have a clue about the corporate tax system in the UK but that didn’t stop her declaring emphatically that Google wasn’t paying its legal tax requirement….a classic claim from her was ‘I don’t know but I don’t think so.’

Nolan also seemed rather unversed in said tax system and declared, when Currie said Google were paying what was legally required and were based in Ireland, that this inconvenient legal fact was a ‘red herring’ and that Google weren’t paying what was morally right for them to pay.

Morally right?  Wasn’t that Labour’s mantra…ala Hodge the Dodge?  Always knew BBC journalists were the new priesthood…and scarily think of themselves in that way.

Salmond dreams of more Naughtieness

Jim Naughtie treated us to his syruppy pro-indendence tones this morning on the Today programme (08:42-ish) as he told us that there was ‘an enticing prospect’ of Scotland voting to stay in Europe…whilst England voted to leave.

Enticing for who exactly?

Naughtie also told us that Nicola Sturgeon was ‘exceptionally cautious’ about raising the prospect of another independence referendum, LOL… but…she may be ‘pushed’ into that position if the EU vote, in the UK, went against the Scot’s wishes.  Which is curious as the Today blurb, and indeed Sarah Montague in the trail for Naughtie’s piece, tells us she ‘has indicated she will push for a second independence referendum if Scotland votes to stay in the EU while the rest of the UK votes to come out.’

Sturgeon ‘Pushing’ for a second referendum doesn’t sound too much like ‘exceptionally cautious’ or being her being ‘pushed to’ ask for a referendum.

Hmmm, and he saw no contradiction in all this…Scotland voted to stay in the UK and therefore should abide by the result of a UK vote which is based upon a UK wide electorate not on a regional basis. Seems that Sturgeon, and Naughtie are just trying to slyly build a case to justify another referendum.  The polls ask the question ‘Should the UK stay in the EU?‘ not should Scotland stay?

Support among Scots for the UK remaining in the European Union is at its highest level yet, an STV poll has revealed.

Why did Naughtie play a clip of Scotland’s National Socialist blackshirts attacking Farage to illustrate how Scotland is so anti-EU?  One, I don’t think those National socialist bootboys are representative of Scotland and two, was their thuggishness in support of the EU or just racism against someone who is blatantly English?….after all Salmond has based his entire career upon anti-English rabble rousing, hate-mongering.

Liked the claim that tourists coming to Scotland were sent here by the benevolent EU commissars and that they paid for the pontoons that allowed the tourist to come ashore….well they paid for it with money sent to the EU by the UK….the EU takes its enormous cut which it generously gives in lavish quantities to its bureaucrats before handing what remains back to us whilst demanding we thank them for their charity.  Would it not be better we cut out the troughing middle-men and just send the money direct from the UK government?   I’m sure tourists would still come to Scotland whether or not shipped in by the EU en masse.

Naughtie tells us that the debate on the EU is ‘complicated’…a narrative that the BBC’s other pro-Europe lobbyist, Jonty Bloom (see later), likes to peddle.

Here’s what the BBC doesn’t want you to see following its misreporting in the case of the ten year old ‘terrorist’.….the BBC moved straight in and tried to use the case as evidence to prove the ineffectiveness of the anti-terrorism Prevent programme….something the Muslim ‘radicals’ are desperate to neutralise…..did the MCB feed the BBC the story of the schoolboy in the knowledge that the BBC is a willing accomplice when it comes to publishing stories about Muslims ‘under siege, alienated and marginalised’ and that it would be more than happy to help undermine the anti-terrorism programme?

This report is no longer available from the BBC…….

404 – Page not found

‘Terrorist house’ case raises doubts over Prevent strategy

By Dominic Casciani Home affairs correspondent

• 20 January 2016
• From the section UK

A police investigation into a 10-year-old Muslim schoolboy who wrote that he lived in a “terrorist house” when he meant “terraced house” is the latest in a series of incidents that have raised questions about schools’ obligations to prevent radicalisation.

The relatively new duty on public bodies to prevent people being drawn into terrorism sounds simple in theory, but critics say it’s already proving to be incredibly problematic.

The government’s view is simple: the duty is about protecting people from harm – and schools should come up with guidance that meets the reasonable expectations of the law, just as they must already do to combat sexual or physical abuse.

If a teacher comes across suspected evidence of radicalisation, they must refer it to a senior figure in the school responsible for pupil safety and wellbeing.

They, in turn, must decide whether the matter needs to be referred up to the local authority which chairs a multi-agency team looking at potential cases of extremism. That referral could lead to a visit from the police.

Little experience

Some schools are confident they have come up with plans to identify and confront radicalisation – but have they got the balance right?

One London family is already trying to bring legal action after their son was questioned about the Islamic State militant group. He had talked about “ecoterrorism” in a classroom debate about environmental activism.

The measures have also caused huge controversy in universities. Many of them fought fiercely against the proposals in Parliament, arguing that they would breach free speech and academic inquiry.

Months after the measures were implemented, Staffordshire University apologised to one of its own students, who is studying security and terrorism, after he was questioned about reading a related academic text.

So the advice on the “Prevent duty” – and how to implement it – is entirely new territory for many teachers, lecturers, social workers and educationalists who have little experience of radicalisation and terrorism.

Ministers believe that, given the right support and training, teachers and others can get it right.

But critics – and there are many – say that the “Prevent duty” being applied in education is already causing serious harm to individuals who are being viewed with suspicion.

 

A police spokesman added later “The BBC reporter had been given the context surrounding the incident by both Lancashire council and the police, as well as guidance to make sure that the story would not be “sensationalised or reported differently to how it was brought to us”.

 

I was going to write a post praising the BBC for their balanced reporting on the issue, if it is an issue, of the ten year old Muslim schoolboy who was waterboarded by the security services recently…according to Muslim pressure groups.

An exaggeration but only just…the MCB doesn’t hold back on its anti-Prevent rhetoric.

This morning on the Today programme (07:50) the BBC took a look at the case of the schoolboy who was allegedly mistaken for a potential extremist because of a spelling mistake.  [surprised the boy wasn’t carted off by the food police for admitting to a liking for pizza (answer 6…his favourite food is pizza)]

The programme was balanced and nuanced and gave Kalsoom Bashir, co-director of the anti-extremism charity Inspire and who works in connection with the Prevent programme, a fair hearing in which we heard the justification for Prevent and what actually happened in this case and what the real cause of concern was….that in a creative writing exercise the boy had written that his uncle beat him.

Now, I was going to praise the BBC for this report but it turns out that this was merely a bit of humble pie on their part (not much of that going on over Savile and the leaked new report so far!…BBC not to blame)…the BBC were the cheerleaders for this false story and indeed it was the BBC being quoted by other news organisations, the Guardian of course…, and the Telegraph ….which is unfortunate because the BBC got it  wrong.

Police called at his home in Accrington, Lancashire, the following day and examined the family laptop, according to the BBC.

Did the BBC get the story wrong because it had been fed to them by the extremist MCB which has, along with other extremist groups, worked insidiously to neutralise the Prevent programme?….what better way than to feed news organisations sensationalised stories of Muslims ‘under attack’.  They know full well the BBC will lap them up….and it worked.  Now why would a Muslim organisation want to nobble a programme designed to prevent Muslim terrorism?

The BBC fell for this narrative by the MCB hook, line and sinker…here’s a report they hurried out in the wake of this story…

‘Terrorist house’ case raises doubts over Prevent strategy

Interesting….try the link to that story and you get this…

404 – Page not found

Yep…enter the report title into Google and you get this in the search result…

In the news

‘Terrorist house’ case raises doubts over Prevent strategy – BBC News

BBC News‎ – 1 day ago

The relatively new duty on public bodies to prevent people being drawn into terrorism …

However the link does not work.

The BBC are backpeddling furiously on this…..they have been caught out by Muslim propagandists….the reason for that is because they are so willing for such stories to be true.  As I have said a few times here the BBC’s uncritical cheerleading of Muslim extremists, like Moazzam Begg, is a deadly game that almost certainly will have serious consequences.

Here is the original BBC story about the schoolboy.…and here is the corrected version…

Police and crime commissioner Clive Grunshaw criticised the BBC reporting of the issue and said it had not been treated as a terror incident.

Mr Grunshaw said that other worrying issues were raised in the boy’s school work – not just the “terrorist” house line – and these were “reported through the appropriate channels”.

“In the event there was no further action needed, but if the school and police had not acted then they would have been failing in their duty to respond to concerns.”

The Independent reveals all…

The Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) for Lancashire, Clive Grunshaw, issued a damning statement on the way the story had been reported and said he had “written to the BBC”, which later updated its original article online.

“A report wrongly claimed a family was interrogated as potential terrorists due to a spelling error in a boy’s homework,” he said.

“The facts are that a young person disclosed a worrying issue in his school work – not just that he lived in a “terrorist house” – and this was reported through the appropriate channels and subsequently a visit was undertaken by a neighbourhood police officer and a social worker.”

He added: “In the event there was no further action needed, but if the school and police had not acted then they would have been failing in their duty to respond to concerns.”

Mr Grunshaw later tweeted that the BBC had “set the record straight”.

Thanks to Gunner in the comments for this link and damning statement….

A police spokesman added later “The BBC reporter had been given the context surrounding the incident by both Lancashire council and the police, as well as guidance to make sure that the story would not be “sensationalised or reported differently to how it was brought to us”.

What is also of interest is the reaction of the family and the MCB….there seems to be little connection to reality on any of their statements…and the MCB’s are the usual Muslim political manoeuvring using the Islamophobia card.

The father rather surprisingly, despite having been in the UK at least 10 years, doesn’t speak English….as the Telegraph reveals….

Speaking exclusively to The Telegraph through one of his sons, who acted as translator, the boy’s father said: “He [the 10-year-old boy] came from school very sick. When he came back the police arrived and said that the school said the he had been involved in terrorist activity.

I’m sure something was lost in translation…as it appears that it was social workers, no doubt accompanied by police officers, who visited the family.

Makes you wonder about all those stories of Islamophobia that the MCB et al peddle so assiduously and so loudly.

Still, good to know(?) the BBC is still biased and the BBC’s balanced, nuanced and informative reporting was just an aberration due to having been caught redhanded…..we’ll still be here tomorrow.

“I would advise us all to prepare a plan B.”

The Guardian, the Mail and the Telegraph all report this story….

Germany must soon close borders to refugees, transport minister tells Merkel

Chancellor Angela Merkel’s transport minister has urged her to prepare to close Germany’s borders to keep out refugees, arguing that Berlin must act alone if it cannot reach a Europe-wide deal.

Alexander Dobrindt said Germany could no longer show the world a “friendly face” – a phrase used by Merkel as refugees began arriving in Germany six months ago – and that if the number of new arrivals did not drop soon, Germany should act alone.

“I urgently advise: we must prepare ourselves for not being able to avoid border closures,” Dobrindt, a member of the Bavarian Christian Social Union (CSU), told the Muenchner Merkur newspaper.

The BBC have so far refrained from commenting…however as usual the BBC is eager to hear and report the views of the mothers of terrorists [Just as they interviewed the mother of a Palestinian suicide bomber but not the Israeli parents of his victims]…

Belgium’s jihadi mothers share their anguish

You can’t help thinking that this is a BBC counter to Cameron’s plan to give language lessons to Muslim women in what is clearly an Islamophobic attack upon Muslims….the BBC is telling us Muslim mothers hate extremism and ‘radicalisation’ and don’t need patronising white, Eton educated, politicians to tell them how to control their kids.

But are these mothers really interested in challenging the ideas and narrative of the Jihadis…or just in preventing thier kids from fighting the good fight?…after all many a British mother, who no doubt support democracy and freedom, don’t want their kids joining the Army and heading off to war.  Often they are at the centre of it themselves propagating the mentality that ends up with their offspring heading to Syria.

A while back the BBC brought us a report on the ‘Jan Trust’ which operated a Muslim mother’s anti-radicalisation union…..except it didn’t…what the mothers actually said was that their lovely kids were right to be angry about Syria, or rather the West’s lack of action against…ISIS?…no, Assad…and of course right to be angry about Israel…however the kids must express their anger in other ways not by bombs and bullets.  The BBC on the radio reported the words of the women as they were shown images of the war in Iraq and Israeli actions in Gaza….their reaction was to say ‘well no wonder our kids are radicalised…we would be too’…the BBC on its web report isn’t so honest in reporting their reaction…

Part of the course involves exposing them to the violent language and imagery used by extremist websites, with shocking results for some of them.

Ms Mughal’s interpreter, Rafaat, a Muslim mother herself, told of the horrified reactions when they first saw such pictures: “When the photographs were shown there was silence and all of sudden I could hear… wow, what’s happening?”

So Muslim mothers are still peddling the anti-West, anti-Israel Jihadi narrative and telling their kids it’s right to be angry…just don’t use violence…amd yet the BBC thinks this is an anti-radicalisation programme.     Then again it’s the same narrative that the BBC has been peddling since 9/11.  It’s all the West’s fault, it’s blowback.

Funny what catches the BBC’s interest.  Mass sexual assaults across Europe by Muslim men and the BBC will report it ony when it can’t avoid doing so, and even then it does all it can to play down the significance of this…apparently rape, sexual assault, robbery and abuse are a lesser concern than the audience getting a completely false protrayal of what is happening to European societies in order that BBC journalists, like Hugh Sykes, can continue to peddle their pro-immigration, utopian twaddle with a clear conscience.

However…David Cameron says that Muslim women should learn to speak English and the BBC are all over it immediately, seemingly clearing the decks to make way for programmes about this.

Naturally we get the usual Muslim agitprop claiming this is an attack on Muslims, and what should be noted is how the so called ‘moderate’ Muslims also react.  The BBC wheeled in Mona Siddiqui on Thought for the Day.…she didn’t like the PM’s thoughts and believed that the real problem was that Muslims weren’t appreciated enough in this country which is the real reason they became radicalised.  So it’s ‘our’ fault as usual. Siddiqui’s answer was ‘more Islam’, more freedom to worship Islam in all its glory so that Muslims can ‘harbour a sense of mutual belonging’.  The difference between Siddiqui and ISIS?  Just the means and methods…the ends are the same…more Islam…Islam über alles….the same thing all these agitprop Muslims work towards as they swarm onto the media and relentlessly lobby politicians who all too easily cave in to the ‘blackmail’….Don’t think Cameron is genuinely looking to deal qwith any issues raised by Islam…how many speeches has he made on this sucject, and just how much concrete action has he taken?  I imagine this laatest wheeze is a coldly calculated gambit that says some Muslims will raise a hell of a stink, but that is good…non-Muslims will look on and think if Muslims are upset then Cameron must be doing something…more votes in that than in the Muslim community…it’s the same ploy he uses in Europe, generating a fake row with Europe in which, after a great deal of ‘outrage’, everybody suddenly comes to a deal and Cameron is presented as the hero….and we can all vote to stay in Europe.

‘Call You and Yours ‘ also gave airtime to the issue…

On Call You & Yours we are exploring how people and communities become better integrated in the UK. If your family came to Britain from overseas – what made a difference to you – what was it that made you stop feeling foreign and start feeling British?

The prime minister has promised new language lessons for migrant women in England who speak little or no English. The idea is to help people integrate better into the broader community and also to reduce extremism.

What does your experience tell you about the most important ways that people and communities become better integrated?

‘Womans’ Hour’, which completely ignored the rape and sexual abuse of German women, never mind those in Sweden and Norway over the years or even those immigrants in refugee centres also attacked by their menfolk, took an instant interest in what Cameron had to say…naturally their take was that he was ‘Islamophobic’…curious how Muslims attacking white women isn’t racist, or of interest, but Cameron helping Muslim women to better themselves is….

David Cameron has just announced that an extra £20 million should be available to teach English to Muslim women. Few people dispute the value of better access to English lessons, but David Cameron has angered many people by singling out the Muslim community and Muslim women in particular and suggesting that a lack of English might make you more susceptible to extremist viewpoints. We look at the situation of Muslim women without language skills in the UK today.

Still here’s at least one BBC employee, Nihal, who makes an attempt to question the narrative as a Muslim caller blames foreign policy for radicalisation and claims there was no terrorism before the war in Afghanistan…he also claims that ISIS was only created after the Iraq War started…where did he pick that idea up from?  The BBC probably, as it is one of their narratives that tries to pile the blame for the war in Syria onto the West.  Unfortunately ISIS, under a different name, came into existence years before the Iraq War and its leader was actually only interested in attacking Jordan.

ISIS/IS has its origins in an obscure militant group, Jamaat al-Tawhid wal-Jihad (JTJ), that was stood up in 2000 by a Jordanian one-time criminal-turned-Islamist named Abu Musab al-Zarqawi (AMZ).¹ His intent was to fight the Jordanian government, but he failed to gain traction.

The BBC’s own version of history misses out the inconvenient bit about Zarqawi being a terrorist before both the Afghanistan and Iraq War…this makes it sound like his creation of a terror group was in reaction to the Iraq War when it already existed….

IS can trace its roots back to the late Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian. In 2004, a year after the US-led invasion of Iraq, Zarqawi pledged allegiance to Osama Bin Laden and formed al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), which became a major force in the insurgency.

Here’s Nihal attempting to correct the Muslim narrative about radicalisation…he exclaims ‘We don’t have to believe them!’…….  if only all at the BBC would give it a go instead of pandering to the extremists and pushing their narrative…

Laugh, laugh out loud, laugh long and hard.

Iranian BBC journalist is stopped from flying to the US…along with all other dual-nationality Iranians and others from Muslim countries….

Measures to tighten the US visa waiver programme were passed through Congress last month as part of the omnibus spending bill. People from 38 countries including Britain and France could previously visit the US for up to 90 days without a visa. But thanks to a provision folded into the bill, those citizens must now obtain a visa if they are dual Iranian, Iraqi, Sudanese or Syrian citizens.

Hmmmm….is Trump El Presidente already?  I think not…this was under the sainted Obama’s regime.

Will there be massed outrage and petitions, will there be a debate in Parliament to ban Obama, will the BBC resort to smears and insults instead of analysis and journalism to attack Obama?

The BBC is obsessed with Trump, well not Trump the man, or Trump and his politics, just Trump the ‘fascist monster’…no analysis, no journalism, just a campaign to discredit and abuse him….he’s paranoid and a scaremonger…

Trump is not just a practitioner of the politics of paranoia and fear.

And let’s not forget that little joke at the start of the ‘report’…

There he is still, wearing his famed red baseball cap, headgear that not only proclaims his determination to “Make America Great Again” but also keeps his wayward hair – that lunatic fringe – in place.

‘Lunatic fringe’...get it?  It’s not about hair at all.

Here he is again…from yesterday….it’s just endless this Trump obsession…

Donald Trump and the Politics of Celebrity

I haven’t heard the programme but I hardly imagine that Guardianista Jonathan Freedland is going to be singing Trump’s praises.

Unfortunately we’re going to be getting more of this journalism nonsense next Monday….

America’s Politics of Paranoia: The Trump Phenomenon

In America, politicians very often campaign on fear. And when that fear is stoked to irrational levels, it has a clinical name – paranoia.

So there you go…the BBC has decided that Trump’s comments about Muslim immigration are unjustified and wrong and are a result of paranoia rather than a reasoned response to world events.

Bare in mind that the BBC’s programmes are broadcast in the US and so we can believe that the BBC is intent on interfering in American politics in the hope of influencing the outcome of the next election there.

The BBC is as corrupt and biased as any state controlled media organisation ever was.  There’s absolutely no reason to continue paying the licence fee when it continues to spread so many lies around the world and ultimately do so much harm.

Journalism can be terrorism.

There must be something about people called ‘Hodges’….are they entirely trustworthy?  Should they be banned from the UK until we know what is going on?

There’s Margaret and then there’s Dan….not to mention dodgy Hodges in Dad’s Army.  Some of our finest and upstanding citizens are named Hodges.

What are Dan’s latest thoughts on the world?

Dan Hodges: Donald Trump is an outright fascist

Ban him. Ban him now.

Blimey, that’s a bit strong….wonder why he thinks that?

It is hard to see what possible public good would be served by welcoming to the UK a man who has effectively called for a race war.

Oh Dan, you know Islam is not a race.  So disappointing that you peddle that old lie.

But surely Dan elaborates and explains his thinking (I think he thought…though little sign of it)…argh yes..here we go…

Think of what Trump has actually said. In his view members of the Muslim community are now so dangerous to non-Muslim members of the community that their presence can literally no longer be tolerated. Every man, every woman, every child who is a Muslim is so inherently dangerous they cannot be permitted to walk among us.

This is not a Hollywood script or a caricature dreamt up by the liberal Left. It is an actual policy position put forward by the man who is currently the presumptive Republican party nominee for president of the United States.

Oh yeah, tricky huh?  Trump thinks every Muslim is a walking time bomb…doesn’t he?  Well no actually…what he thinks is that some, many perhaps, who would seek to enter the US would do so with malign intent and would do so by smuggling themselves in amongst those with perfectly peaceable intentions.  Trump’s point was that perhaps Muslim immigration should be temporarily halted in order to allow the US to formulate some sort of policy to deal with this…he did not say every Muslim, man, woman and child, had a suicide belt strapped to their bodies.

Our boy Dan then asks what of Muslims already amongst us…does Trump wish to incarcerate them inside some sort of Guantanamo?

And what are the implications of that policy position – not its implementation, but its mere articulation – for those Muslims who can’t be shut out? Those Muslims who already walk among us?

A tricky problem no doubt…but then perhaps Trump could ask, hmmm, let me think, he could ask advice from one Dan Hodges who thinks Muslims are a problem and need to be dealt with…including those ‘fairweather supporters of  Islamic fundamentalist terrorism’….

There is a clear link between Islam and terrorism. It’s up to all of us to break it

 

Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists. That is far too many

Just because you wouldn’t personally go out and murder people, it doesn’t make you moderate. We cannot turn a blind eye to the fair-weather supporters of terrorism

Too many of Britain’s Muslims are failing to integrate. We need to find out why

I don’t know why we have a specific problem of Muslim integration. I’m not sure anyone does. But I suspect one of the reasons is no one has really taken the time or effort to formally try and find out. And now we have to take time.

Yes, time to find out what the problem is…..erm…isn’t that what Trump said?…..Dan and Trump…soul brothers….Ban them both!!!!

I thnk Hodges perfectly illustrates the mindset of  many in the BBC et al..he knows there is a problem but is unwilling to confront it in reality…he’ll make all the right noises when a bomb goes off but when someone, like Trump, starts to suggest actually putting measures into practise to deal with the problem the real Dan Hodges comes out….and of course such double talk is not limited to Hodges…it is endemic across the media and in politics where the unwillingness to confront the problem is rife….the usual formula is to waffle about Islamism and Islam being different…and not forgetting that old canard about the ‘religion of peace’…even Tariq Ramadan admits that the Koran preaches war.