Firstly, my thanks to Alan for putting up the Start the Week thread, I’ve had wifi problems this past few days so wasn’t able to post until now. I had the misfortune to listen to the Today programme this morning. It was a leftist fest, as ever. The BBC were ecstatic that the Front National had been ‘crushed” in the 2nd round of the French elections. (Little time spent considering the fact that the FN vote held strong but tactical voting by the establishment parties had gerrymandered the result.It seems the wishes of 25% of the electorate can be dismisses when they hold the wrong views according to the BBC) Then they moved on to their new poster boy, Shakar Aamer, who is being hailed as a true blue Brit. We’ve seen the BBC do this before over Moazzam Beggs so they have form. There was an item on the WRETCHED failure of Social workers to stop child abuse. The BBC line was this was because they are not paid enough and that the tax payer must splash more cash their way if they are to consider stopping industrial scale sex abuse of young girls. And so it went. Grim, relentless, biased.

Guess David is still a bit Daeshed and confused after his Xmas bash so I’ll do the honours….a new open thread….

A teacher in France has been stabbed but survived the attack….the BBC’s report is for once open about the culprit…though the BBC is still being ‘PC’ in the title…….

Teacher in France stabbed by man ‘shouting Islamic State’

A teacher has been attacked in a preschool class in Aubervilliers, a suburb of the French capital, Paris, by a man citing so-called Islamic State.

The attacker shouted: “This is for Daesh [Islamic State]. It’s a warning”, stabbing the teacher with a box cutter or scissors before fleeing.

The life of the teacher, 45, who was alone in the room, is not in danger.

‘Daesh’ does indeed mean in essence ‘Islamic State’ but when Cameron and his cronies all decided to take up the Muslim lobbyists’ call to hide the fact that the ‘Islamic State’ were Islamic and instead call them Daesh the BBC insisted in calling them ‘Islamic State’…good for the BBC, and somewhat of a surprise….though still calling terrorists militants.

However the BBC’s reason for continuing to use ‘Islamic State’ said it all…it didn’t want to upset supporters of the Islamic State….

BBC rejects MPs’ calls to refer to Islamic State as Daesh

The head of the BBC rejected the demands, saying that using Daesh would not preserve the BBC’s impartiality as it risked giving an impression of support for the group’s opponents, the Times reports. He is said to claim that the term is used pejoratively by its enemies.

Instead, it is reported, Hall said the BBC would use terms such as the “Islamic State group” to distinguish it from a true state, and continue to use descriptions such as extremist or militant for its members.

Got to be confusing when the Islamic State uses Daesh itself.  What’s Cameron going to do?  What’s the BBC going  to do?

Guess that’s what happens when you try to manufacture perceptions and not just go with  the truth and deal with the real problems rather than pandering to Muslim lobbyists.

Update:  Fun and games daeshed.…..#youain’tnoknifemanbruv

The BBC reported this story straight, the victim said the attacker used the name Daesh …..should have known something was wrong….apparently the herbert managed to stab himself accidentally.  Shame all ISIS/Daesh wannabe martyrs don’t try the same thing instead of the cliched suicide vest.

No expert on statistics but looking at this I would say the 97% claimed stat for scientific consensus on global warming is a crock….

Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature

We analyze the evolution of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, examining 11 944 climate abstracts from 1991–2011 matching the topics ‘global climate change’ or ‘global warming’. We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.

So hang on……66.4% expressed no position on the causes of global warming…

but……32.6% endorsed the alarmist position.

And the 97%?

The 97% is 97% of that 32.6%, or least of ‘those who expressed a position’, which definitely counts out the 66.4% who expressed no position and is even more definitely not 97% of  ‘all scientists’…by my reading of that explanation.

So maybe around 33% of the literature openly supports the man-made climate change theory.

I’m sure someone will  put me right.

NB…Not as if the author of the study isn’t a climate change campaigner himself…

Why we need to talk about the scientific consensus on climate change

An interesting sequence of events followed the publication of a scientific paper I co-authored in May last year. The paper found a 97% consensus that humans were causing global warming in relevant scientific papers.  [Really?…see above]

So there is still much work to do. Several decades of casting doubt on the consensus has contributed to maintaining the consensus gap. This is why communication experts urge scientists to communicate the 97% consensus. This approach is based on a growing body of evidence underscoring the important role of perceived consensus and the necessity of consensus messaging.

Amusing to see this from our old mate Richard Black in 2007..

Of all the accusations made by the vociferous community of climate sceptics, surely the most damaging is that science itself is biased against them.

“The research itself is biased,” as one recent blog entry put it.

“Scientists are quick to find what they’re looking for when it means getting more funding out of the government.”

That particular posting gave no evidence to support its claim of bias. I have seen none that did, which made me wonder whether there was any evidence.

Naturally Black couldn’t find any convincing evidence of that….but the above surely is where “Scientists are quick to find what they’re looking for.”  97%?  That’ll do nicely.

We have already had a look at Roger Harrabin’s latest exercise in climate change promotion via the Open University and the below just confirms absolutely what the intention of that promotion is in a report from the same event in 2014…

Report on TippingPoint Oxford 2014: Stories of Change

Sustainability has a reasonable foothold in UK discourse. It features as part of Government policy with, for example, Government Departments being obliged to report on their sustainability achievements, for example.

It is much less clear, however, that it has a genuine and deep purchase on the national
psyche. Outside select groups in the research and NGO sector, and a general, casual and
relatively inconsequential popular acknowledgement of it, particularly among the urban
middle classes, it can reasonably be said that it has made rather little tangible impact on
the way people live their lives.

TippingPoint is one of a handful of small British organisations that have been championing the concept of artistic intervention in this field.
The rationale for this is best summed up in our strapline ‘energising the creative response
to climate change’. Our conviction is that without deep engagement in the subject by the
cultural sector we will not achieve the breakthroughs in public understanding that are
necessary.

We were extremely fortunate to form a partnership with the newly created, and substantial, Stories of Change project funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council. This project has aims that are almost exactly aligned with those of TippingPoint, and both felt that it was well worth combining forces – and budgets – to achieve a greater impact.

So the government sponsored climate alarmists who pay for Harrabin’s spiel, join forces with climate activists to contrive to produce climate propaganda via the Arts and Cultural sector...and their aims are exactly aligned.

Who can doubt this year’s Harrabin harangue isn’t also aligned with that aim.

The ‘People’ aren’t onboard with climate change so Harrabin and Co are out to make the case for climate alarmism.

A journalist or activist?

Not as if our Rog hasn’t been in the pay of the government before according to the Mail…

BBC’s six-year cover-up of secret ‘green propaganda’ training for top executives

Amused by the venomous BBC knifing of right-wing Tony Abbott…

Ex-Australia PM Tony Abbott says Islam must reform

Former Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott has sparked criticism by saying Islam has a “massive problem” and needs to reform.

Writing in Australian media, Mr Abbott said “not all cultures are equal” and the West should stop apologising for defending its values.

The BBC gives Abbott a couple of lines to hang himself (they hope) and then they set the kangaroo court in motion with the first 1/3 of the article devoted to slagging Abbott off.

Abbott is then allowed to expand on his statement before the last 1/3 is given over to Muslims to give him a kicking.

Note there are no voices brought on to support Abbott’s views, just critics.

Boo Hiss

Laughably the BBC resorts to low insults and contrived counterpoints that are designed to supposedly undermine Abbott’s criticism of a religion, well, supposed religion….

Mr Abbott was removed as prime minister by a party vote in September amid poor poll ratings and is now a backbench MP. Before his political career he had trained to be a Catholic priest.

His letter, published in News Corps tabloids, cautioned against “demonising” Muslims, but said the West “can’t remain in denial about the massive problem within Islam”.

So a mere ex-PM with low ratings who is now a lowly backbencher (and yet they still love Ed Miliband) …and oh yes, he was a trainee priest, a catholic one….so  not only must he be intrinsically inclined to hate Islam he’s probably a bit ‘suspect’.

And get this…the real clincher…not only was his letter in a Murdoch paper, but in a tabloid Murdoch paper….how revoltingly populist can you get.  ‘Tory’ scum.

Doesn’t say who wrote this stitch-up but I’m guessing it was Hamas’ representative in OZ, Jon Donnison.

Love his idea of what constitutes ‘superb’ journalism….

• Jon Donnison ‏@jondonnisonbbc Dec 8

  superb.

   

  

  0:10

  Monty Moncrieff @MontyMoncrieff

  Oh well done @CliveMyrieBBC “You can not be a dickhead & win Sports Personality of the Year” @Tyson_Fury #SPOTY

 

 

A film from over a decade ago…how soon we forget…conveniently.

Birmingham a no go zone…for Blacks?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUODVXIIKwQ

‘Think 20 years ahead…this’ll be Pakistan…they’re all shipping over..fake passports and that….’  A Paksitani youth

‘Somalis are vermin…dirty…it’s our job to clean up the dirt…they’re black but they’re not…they’re not like us.’  Black youth

‘The government should send them [Somalis] home…they’re animals’  Black woman

‘Is there a sense of threat from Islam?……There is an overpowering element to Islam..intimidating’ Darcus Howe

If a white person said anything approaching that…imagine the outrage.

In the previous post we had a quick thought that Shaker Aamer was gaming the non-Muslim population with a faux anti-extremism posture, a front in order to gain our confidence…entryism in other words.

What if a London Mayor candidate also plays such games and seeks to gain a position which he can use to silence critics of Islam?  Here Sadiq Khan positions himself as a humanitarian and equalities campaigner….

We must do more to challenge Islamophobia. As mayor of London, I’ll make tackling hate crimes – including Islamophobia, antisemitism and homophobia – a top priority for the Metropolitan police and ensure they get the resources they needs to make a real difference. I’ll work with the police and community organisations to improve the way we report and record Islamophobic crimes – so we have the best possible information to act on.

Nice that Labour’s Sadiq Khan thinks he can use the Met. Police as his own private police force to enforce an Islamic Inquisition….oh yes he’ll tackle anti-Semitism and homophobia (East London will be in lock down) but he had to say that didn’t he…just a bit too obvious what the agenda really might be if he hadn’t….though the title of his Guardian rant might just give the game away….

‘With Islamophobia on the rise I fear for my friends and family’

Craig at Is the BBC biased? (LOL) remarks on a very usual BBC discussion that peddles a defensive Muslim narrative in regard to a Times report that the man who shouted out #youain’tnomuslimbruv didn’t actually hear the Muslim terrorist shout that ‘this is for Syria and my Muslim brothers’.

What’s curious is that the BBC  (10 mins)don’t seem to have noticed that the man who shouted out ‘you ain’t no Muslim bruv’ was in fact not a Muslim himself…despite the big Times frontpage headline that the BBC actually read out…..perhaps that’s why the BBC are attacking him and his ‘prejudice’ that a terrorist might be Muslim despite him obviouly being a victim of successful BBC brainwashing on the subject of Islam (ROP)…..the Times reveals all….

THE man dubbed a “hero” and praised by David Cameron for shouting “You ain’t no Muslim, bruv” to a knife-wielding suspected terrorist at a London Tube station has told The Sunday Times he now fears retribution from Isis.

John, 39, who asked for his surname to be witheld, revealed that he is not a Muslim himself but is angry that terrorist organisations such as Isis claim to represent Islam.

“Isis should be wiped out, because they’re not Muslims, because Muslims don’t do that. It’s as simple as that. For people to be like that, they’ve obviously got stone hearts, they don’t care about society. They don’t care about anyone. They’re evil, pure evil,” he said.

So Muslims, who reaped enormous vicarious credit for this denouncement of a terrorist as it ‘resonated around the world’, got that by the BBC et al assuming the guy shouting out was a Muslim …so as the BBC says…

‘Why should be immediately jump to the conclusion that he was a Muslim?! Because that again raises other questions…

Martine Croxall: Yes, of course.

Mihir Bose: …about how we look at these things.

Yes…how do we look at Shaker Aamer…considered a terrorist by the US and there’s plenty of evidence to suggest that.…but the very anti-war Mail has shamefully decided to promote Aamer’s narrative and give him credibility and the BBC is lapping it up…and of course there is the obligatory cheap tilt at Trump (10 mins)...he is aiding the terrorists with his own narrative apparently.

Do we believe Aamer, who was a ringleader inside Guantanamo, or is he just creating a credible, anti-Jihadi persona in order to position himself where he can then speak with ‘authority’ having made people believe he is not a ‘radical’ Muslim…therefore when he then goes on to speak for Cage or some other Muslim agitprop group that demands more Islam in the UK he is listened to with respect when he is in fact pushing the Jihadi line?  Entryist?  Wait out.

Of course the Mail has a history of backing the wrong side….

There may or may not be ‘no go zones’ in the Uk but there are many who aim to set them up…..

“Muslims Against Crusades” (MAC), an Islamic group based in the United Kingdom,  plans to wage a propaganda campaign to make a portion of London accept Sharia law. They are calling it the “Islamic Emirates Project,” and it is designed to create beachheads for sharia across the UK.

According to CNS News, the MAC group has released its blueprint for the ‘emirates campaign’ to the public, including the following rules for Muslims to follow:

– reject democracy
– not have non-Muslim friends
– not celebrate non-Muslim festivals including Christmas and Easter
– not join the police or armed forces
– not vote for lawmakers, or stand for election
– demand the release of “all Muslim prisoners in the hands of the disbelievers”
– reject integration with non-Islamic society
– abide by shari’a and not any “man-made law”

Imposing Sharia law is just as much a hate crime as abusing someone for wearing a hijab…

Whilst the BBC et al fulminate against the likes of Pegida they are almost silent in comparison about Muslim supremacist groups...here the BBC maintains a strictly neutral tone when reporting German ‘Muslim patrols’….no alarmist  ‘warnings from history’ about the rise of the Islamists in the way that the BBC peddles for Right-wing organisations.

Of course there really are  no go zones all around Europe

Police Warn of No-Go Zones in Germany

“Every police commissioner and interior minister will deny it. But of course we know where we can go with the police car….[O]ur colleagues can no longer feel safe there in twos, and have to fear becoming the victim of a crime themselves. We know that these areas exist. Even worse: in these areas, crimes no longer result in charges. They are left to themselves. Only in the worst cases do we in the police learn anything about it. The power of the state is completely out of the picture.” — Bernhard Witthaut, Chief Police Commissioner of Germany.

According to a police investigator interviewed by Der Spiegel, the immigrant clans “view German society as one to be plundered; they see us as born losers.”

 

Spiraling levels of violent crime perpetrated by immigrants from the Middle East and the Balkans are turning parts of Duisburg, a key German industrial city, into “areas of lawlessness” — areas that are becoming de facto “no-go” zones for police, according to a confidential police report that was leaked to the German newsmagazine Der Spiegel.

The 751 No-Go Zones of France

They go by the euphemistic term Zones Urbaines Sensibles, or Sensitive Urban Zones, with the even more antiseptic acronym ZUS, and there are 751 of them as of last count. They are conveniently listed on one long webpage, complete with street demarcations and map delineations.

What are they? Those places in France that the French state does not fully control. They range from two zones in the medieval town of Carcassonne to twelve in the heavily Muslim city of Marseilles, with hardly a town in France lacking in its ZUS. The ZUS came into existence in late 1996 and according to a 2004 estimate, nearly 5 million people live in them.

Sweden…the police have ‘surrendered total control’…

Norway isn’t having such a good time either…

And in the UK?

Bishop warns of no-go zones for non-Muslims

Islamic extremists have created “no-go” areas across Britain where it is too dangerous for non-Muslims to enter, one of the Church of England’s most senior bishops warns today.

The Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, the Bishop of Rochester and the Church’s only Asian bishop, says that people of a different race or faith face physical attack if they live or work in communities dominated by a strict Muslim ideology.

Echoing Trevor Phillips, the chairman of the Commission for Equalities and Human Rights, who has said that the country is “sleepwalking into segregation”, the bishop argues that multiculturalism has led to deep divisions.

David Davis, the shadow home secretary, has accused Muslims of promoting a kind of “voluntary apartheid” by shutting themselves in closed societies and demanding immunity from criticism.

Murders and rapes going unreported in no-go zones for police as minority communities launch own justice systems

From The Times, no link…

Certain areas in Britain will still have to remain off-limits for servicemen and women in military gear, despite the Government’s desire for a nationwide uniform free-for-all, senior RAF sources acknowledged yesterday. … one senior air force source said that military commanders had to be aware of potential problems of personnel wearing combat and other military clothes in the street. “We’re aware of the sensitivities, for example, in some ethnic minority communities which is why we need to have a dialogue with local authorities and police if we don’t want to cause a problem.”

The BBC even fantasised about the possibility…

London Bridge

In the future, London is divided in two. North of the river is a virtual police state and the South is a lawless no-go area ruled by criminal gangs. When the body of young boy washes up on the banks of the Thames, a police detective crosses the dangerous divide in the search for his killers.

The BBC, and the police, even once believed as the Socialist Worker once complained….

Myths pushed by media and police

BBC RADIO 4’s Today programme last week reported that the mainly Asian area of Glodwick in Oldham, Lancashire, is now a “no-go” area for whites. Oldham police had released figures that said of the 572 racist attacks in the city last year, 60 percent were against whites, mainly by Asians. This led much of the media to claim that there are gangs of racist Asians in parts of Britain who are attacking white people.

Why do the police and the BBC try to silence voices like Trump who raise the obvious truth?…

The Independent reveals the thinking in this report about no go zones across the UK…as  usual it is in order not to upset the feelings of the communities involved…

OFFICIALLY, there is no such thing as a no-go area in Britain.

Today, no senior police officer, no local authority and no Government minister would or could admit that no-go districts existed in England, Scotland and Wales.

Yet the term can be used, and in dozens of places in or around many British cities.

Of course the police don’t admit to these no go zones…

‘There are no ‘no-go’ areas,’ he said, ‘but officers are more aware of the danger in some parts. In less violent areas, officers would just be listening out for jobs that were for them. But on beats where it’s very violent, each person wants to back the other up, even when the call is just to a domestic incident.’

The police don’t want to stigmatize certain areas…

Senior police officers, acutely aware of the potential political impact of their comments on such areas, refuse to identify problem estates.

And there is another factor. Lord Scarman, who presided over four major inquiries into civil disorders, most notably the Brixton riots of 1981, said last week while social deprivation and the architecture of problem estates was important, ‘ethnic differences are very important too. These are only general comments; if everyone was wealthy nobody would bother about the colour of people’s faces. But unfortunately not everyone is wealthy. Incoming immigrants create problems in poverty-stricken areas where there is already chronic unemployment and lack of money.’

IF OFFICIALS are reluctant to admit to the existence of no-go areas, let alone list them, it is not just because they would be accused of permitting a breakdown of law and order. Identifying them can actually make things worse.

Many areas with high ethnic minority populations which have had serious problems in the past now have false reputations.

Understandably, local authorities are keen their estates should not be tarred with too dirty a brush.

The BBC is happy to comply and airbrush out the real reason for the silencing…note what is missing from their report in comparison to the following ones from the Telegraph and Mirror…..

Met Police asked ‘not to wear Union badge’ after death of PC Phillips

Met Police have been asked “not to wear a Union badge” in tribute to fallen colleagues because it breaches uniform policy, the police federation said.

The Telegraph…

Union flag badge tribute ‘against regulations’

Senior officers are reportedly concerned that the badge in honour of fallen colleagues could provoke ill-feeling or cause offence in some communities

The Mirror….

Cops wearing Union Jack badge in tribute to dead PC ‘ordered to remove them in case they OFFEND’

Most European Muslims want sharia

by Ingrid Carlqvist
Dispatch International

A majority of the Muslims in Europe want sharia to have precedence over the secular laws of their European host countries. This according to a new study by WZB Berlin Social Science Center where Muslims in six countries interviewed, including Sweden. A study that should concern Western politicians, according to the researchers.

The study posed three questions to the immigrant Turks and Moroccans in Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Holland and Sweden:

• Do you think sharia is more important to you than the laws of the country you live? (66%)
• Do you mean that there is only one legitimate interpretation of the Koran that should apply to all Muslims? (75%)
• Are you saying that Muslims should return to their “Islamic roots”? (60%)

Those who answered Yes to all questions be referred to as “consistent fundamentalists” – and these represent 44 per cent of those questioned Muslims in Europe. The fundamentalist attitudes are as common among younger Muslims among the elderly.