The BBC never knowingly allows a chance to attack Mrs Thatcher go by however unlikely:

Dr Daniel Conway, author of a paper on the politics of Margaret Thatcher’s clothing, and Tory MP Claire Perry, debate the what these suits reveal about the Iron Lady.

According to Conway Thatcher’s dresses were a physical manifestation of her politics…. which were all about ‘narrow, selfish class concerns.’

No they weren’t…if anything the complete opposite of that.

Conway clearly drinks too much coffee and doesn’t have a real job….a paper on the politics of Margaret Thatcher’s clothing?  Who in his university authorised funding for that research?  Never mind world beating technology and engineering design…let’s fund a course on ‘power dressing’.  Is Conway at a university or working for Cosmopolitan…or Private Eye?

Still I suppose it saves Labour having to go cap in hand to the Union Barons for more money if the BBC coninues to provide so much free anti-Tory propaganda.

Wake Up To Money

A classic example of the BBC proving that they play the man and not the ball…..or rather attack the Tories whatever policy they come up with.

How many times have you heard someone dragged onto the BBC to complain about banks not lending to them? How many times have you heard the answer to low growth is building more houses? How many times have you heard a BBC economic guru tell you that governments only go for policies that have short term benefits that can win a few votes in a coming election? (And isn’t China the model of government that we should follow…not having to bother with awkward democratic requirements like winning votes and the People’s consent, they can do as they like for as long as they like).

Apparently, now George Osborne has decided to cough up £40 billion for construction projects, relax planning laws and guarantee lending, and perhaps create a government business bank, all those concerns were rubbish…we want short term answers, we don’t want massive spending when we don’t know where the money comes from, we don’t want more building if projects aren’t financially credible..

If Osborne is shelling out money the BBC now tells us we’ve got to ask where’s the money coming from, is it going to make the deficit worse and isn’t this a long term project that helps no one immediately, and isn’t there a contradiction here…if to get a guarantee your project needs to be financially credible then presumably the banks not lending is because the project is not credible…and isn’t all this just to massage the economic figures for political benefit?

You know it’s a funny old world…those are the very questions you might have been asking about Balls’ ‘spending big for growth’ plans…..unfortunately the BBC generally wasn’t too concerned about asking such questions of Labour’s economic genius.

It looks as if whatever Osborne does, even if its pretty much as he’s been pressured into by the Media, he’s wrong…because he’s not a Labour Chancellor.

In a healthy economy you wouldn’t absolutely need growth…it is only because we were left enormous debts to pay off that we need growth to pay them off or even larger cuts in government spending. There’s nothing wrong with having no growth ….what is growth anyway (is it exports, or earnings or spending, or borrowing?)…and why do we need it?…the BBC never explains…to do so might undermine the ‘drive for growth’ that they have used as a weapon against Osborne.

Growth can only come from suddenly finding oil under this green and pleasant land or some such resource, or by training our people with skills they can sell abroad or use to make products that we can sell abroad, by people working longer or harder for the same money…and by exports. Growth does not come from governments borrowing money to build houses paid for by people borrowing more money for mortgages….and filling them with sofas and plasma TVs bought on the never never. If I borrow £100,000 and buy a Ferrari am I suddenly rich? The neighbours might think so…but they don’t see the debt, only the Ferrari on the drive. Your income hasn’t grown a penny…in fact it’s dropped ..because you are paying interest on the loan as well as capital.

Such ‘growth’ is illusory and purely a short term book exercise…much like Labour’s PFI spending.

It looks good for a while until the bills start rolling in…and then you’re back to square one or worse…..teetering on the edge with even bigger debts….and financial markets upping the interest rates on your loans making repayment even harder.

Still….if the BBC tells us that’s the answer who are we to doubt? After all Stephanie Flanders thought that the government should employ more public sector workers…because they would pay tax and the government revenues would go up. Clever girl that. Try that with your bank….say you will repay your loan if they will lend you another loan to pay off the first loan.

So it seems the BBC were all for ‘Stimulus’ when balls was trumpeting  its merits but aren’t quite so sure now Osborne has succumbed…and perhaps they are right to be sceptical…China isn’t looking so hot just now even with its own stimulus package…….

Has stimulus really helped China  or is it a short term mirage?

‘More determined stimulus measures could help the economy regain momentum and resuscitate the investment demand that is crucial to China’s growth model.

But they also could produce nasty side effects of the sort that followed a huge stimulus package in the wake of the financial crisis in late 2008. Combined with lower interest rates and a flood of bank lending, the spending package helped the economy bounce back quickly in 2009. However, it also led to high inflation, soaring property prices and an increase in loans that could ultimately go sour.’

And of course it was a property boom and soaring prices that got us here in the first place!  (Not ‘casino’ banks….but retail banks overlending mortgages that would never be repaid…….Vince Cable talks rot)

Did he walk or was he pushed?

Parting words from Richard Black:

Farewell and thanks for reading

This is my last entry for this page – I’m leaving the BBC to work, initially, on ocean conservation issues.

While this page will no longer be updated, it will stay here for reference.

I hope you’ve enjoyed reading my blog down the years – I’ve enjoyed writing it, and have appreciated your comments.

To keep up to date with news and views about the environment, I hope you’ll keep reading the science and environment pages of the BBC News website, and my science correspondent colleagues Jonathan Amos and David Shukman.

So, after Kofi Annan’s abysmal failure in Syria the UN throws up (I use the term advisedly) UN-Arab League envoy  Lakhdar Brahimi, and the BBC gives him a very sympathetic hearing as he declares a pre-emptive pessimistic view of the task ahead of him, as he takes up his new post. But I was wondering if THIS Lakhdar Brahimi is in any way related to this guy?

 Lakhdar Brahimi was pro-Saddam when he was Minister for Foreign Affairs of Algeria from 1991 to 1993 and Under-Secretary-General of the League of Arab States from 1984 to 1991.

Not only did Brahimi endorse Saddam Hussein and remained a close ally to him, he also denied that Saddam Hussein, the glory of Arab Leader as he described him, had ever used chemical weapons. Brahimi announced on French radio that “The great poison in the region is this Israeli policy of domination and the suffering imposed on the Palestinians” as well as the “equally unjust support of the United States for this policy.”

In an interview, regarding the thugs and criminals in Faluja fighting United States forces, Brahimi said, “In this situation, there is no military solution.” He added, “There is never any military solution to any problem.”

Naturally the BBC sanitise all of this in their portrayal of this “peace envoy”.

Just imagine. The Thatcher Government is in power, The Miners are striking and police open fire killing 34 of them.  BBC would be in meltdown.

In South Africa, with the blessed ANC in power, the Miners are striking and police open fire killing 34 of them. Then, in a surreal move, the ANC government charges the Miners with making the police kill them. BBC explains this is “an apartheid  era” law. Ah, I see. Blame on the Apartheid, blame it on the boogie but DON’T blame on the murderous ANC.

It’s Friday, the last one was Monday, and we’re heading into a long weekend.

There comes a time in every successful criminal’s ‘career’ when, after evading Plod with ease for a long time, they become complacent, arrogant, cocky….careless…of course not being caught means they stay in the shadows…they get no recogniton, fame or infamy.  For some this ‘fame’ is undoubtedly a draw, a factor in the game….so much so that they start to tease the police, tempting them to catch them…almost wishing to be caught.

Richard Black has reached this stage in his career….having given years of diligent service in the cause of promoting AGW to a sceptical world he gets ever more obvious and determined to push the pro-warming agenda seemingly regardless of any requirements for truth.  This of course is not a crime…no hang on….it might well be….the BBC is by law required to be accurate, fair, impartial and balanced in its reporting.

This is his latest tour de force…it’s a clever piece…obvious in its bias only if you know what Black’s intentions are and the background to his comments.

It is in essence merely a vehicle to support pro-global warming scientists whilst discrediting sceptics. 

The scientists..Muller and Hansen have been roundly discredited before…Muller’s BEST research even failed to get the backing of a scientist who worked on the project saying ‘that Prof Muller’s claim that he has proven global warming sceptics wrong was also a ‘huge mistake’, with no scientific basis.’…..whereas Black claims… ‘ it proves ‘sceptics’ were wrong about denying AGW’……. and the BBC later blatantly lied about Muller when he claimed he had once been a sceptic but had ‘seen the light’ and was now a fully converted believer in man made global warming….Muller was always a pro-warmer.

Black wants to talk about the role of formal scientific processes in climate science.

Muller released his ‘research’ without peer review…and so it is untested…..apparently this is the method used in String Theory science…..let’s have a look at what a scientist has to say about the inner workings of String Theory research:

‘In 2008 Physicist Lee Smolin’s book ‘The Trouble with Physics: The Rise of String Theory, The Fall of a Science and What Comes Next’ was published.

What he had to say about the way science worked and how ideas and theories were produced and then supported regardless of reality was a stinging rebuke to those people who jump on a bandwagon and base their career and funding on the ‘truth’ of that idea….if the idea is discredited so are they, and the funding dries up…..

Here is what he says about String Theory and its proponents….

‘….with a cry of joy, most of these scientists seized on string theory as the answer. But their enthusiasm was such that they came to think not that it might be the answer, but that it must be. They formed themselves into a cult. Dissenters and apostates were not just scorned, they were denied posts in universities. Einstein the thinker could not now get a job in any leading physics department. For any young physicist, it was easiest simply to suppress one‘s doubts and go with the stringies.‘

Does that remind you of any scientific environment now?   Any Consensus?

Black is supposedly using Muller and Hansen’s ‘research’ as examples of how such research is transmitted to the public and how it is perceived….the reality is that Black is purely trying to push their ideas forward yet again as ‘real science’ that is trustworthy and done by ‘real scientists’….unlike the sceptics who of course are totally unqualified….or mad…or maybe even Nazis.

Here are a couple of lines from Black which are somewhat out of place in a BBC news report…..just too ‘personal’……

‘Rarely if ever have I seen a published scientific paper that states the rationale for its existence so baldly in terms of public perception.’

‘The original BEST study particularly got up the nose of meteorologist turned sceptic blogger Anthony Watts.’

Note the ‘meteorologist turned sceptic blogger’ dismissive tone.

Black goes on to tell us some scientific journals have a ‘politicised slant’ on issues….but what does he choose?  A ‘sceptical’ journal and…..a ‘loony’ creationist journal…an obvious attempt to damn by association:

‘Peer review is far from perfect – especially in a politicised arena such as climate science where some journals exist with a specific, directed slant on the issue.

Energy and Environment, for example, proclaims itself “a forum for more sceptical analyses of ‘climate change'”.

Creationists have attempted to clothe themselves in scientific garb down the years by establishing publications designed to look and feel like scientific journals…..The Journal of Creation.’

Black saves the best slur, or is that BEST, till last…..

‘You can create a parallel world where it isn’t, if you really try.’

Ahhh…that’s it then…the sceptics live in a little world of their own, one they’ve made up?

The only person living in a world of their own is Black….a world that hasn’t ‘warmed’ for over a decade….as proven by ‘BEST’ itself…..

‘Like the scientists exposed then by leaked emails from East Anglia University’s Climatic Research Unit, her colleagues from the BEST project seem to be trying to ‘hide the decline’ in rates of global warming.
A report to be published today by the Global Warming Policy Foundation includes a graph of world average temperatures over the past ten years, drawn from the BEST project’s data and revealed on its website.

This graph shows that the trend of the last decade is absolutely flat, with no increase at all – though the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have carried on rising relentlessly.

‘This is nowhere near what the climate models were predicting,’ Prof Curry said. ‘Whatever it is that’s going on here, it doesn’t look like it’s being dominated by CO2.’

It is astonishing really that Black is still employed by the BBC.  He is so far from the requirements of a BBC journalist that somebody somewhere in the bowels of the BBC must have noticed he isn’t up to scratch.

Black clearly has not the slightest problem or qualm about twisting the truth nor  any conscience in trying to smear and blacken climate change sceptic’s characters and scientific qualifications.

He is engaged in propaganda against sceptics and for that reason he should be out on his backside looking for a job at the Guardian….or UFO’s Weekly.

‘

Did you see that Labour’s Diane Abbott should not have made so many appearances on This Week since becoming a shadow minister, according to a ruling by the BBC Trust’s standards committee? BBC tried to skirt around it by pretending This Week not political!!

Now we’ve had a comedy programme showing us the softer side of  Muslims perhaps the BBC will do the same for climate change sceptics who get a rough Press.

Perhaps they could just show this.

Black & Co have a history of trying to discredit climate change sceptics…claiming they are in the pay of big business or influenced by rightwing news papers, that they are nazis, or were abused in their childhood and have a  lack of human empathy.

A quote from one of Black’s efforts to malign sceptics:

“I’ve been debating the science with them for years, but recently I realised we shouldn’t be talking about the science but about something unpleasant that happened in their childhood”.

 Is this an orchestrated campaign?  You bet your ass it is. 

‘BBC insiders say the close links between the Corporation and the UEA’s two climate science departments, the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) and the Tyndall Centre for Climate Research, have had a significant impact on its coverage.

‘Following their lead has meant the whole thrust and tone of BBC reporting has been that the science is settled, and that there is no need for debate,’ one journalist said. ‘If you disagree, you’re branded a loony.’ ‘

 BBC have disinterred Alf Garnett  and made him Muslim for a laugh…’rubbing the Right’s nose in diversity’ no doubt!

Citizen Khan:

‘The first in this new family-based sitcom set in the capital of British Pakistan – Sparkhill, Birmingham.’

Citizen Khan seems to have stirred up a few things…possibly not how the BBC intended….‘Viewers say the programme ‘takes the mickey out of Islam’ and is guilty of ‘stereotypes about Asians’
　

It is possible that the goodly souls at the BBC, or at least the Muslim writer, intended to nudge such reactionary figures into the modern, multi-cultural world rather than live in a ‘British Pakistani’ ghetto even if it’s just in the mentality. (Though their reaction….see below…‘This is not Islam, this is war! ….may not be the desired on)

It is almost certain the main target was non-Muslims….‘Look, says the BBC, ‘here are a Muslim family having the same problems as you, living a similar life…and look…no one is being beheaded or stoned to death’

Muslims are not ‘aliens’, they’re just like you…do not be afraid.

Just to reinforce the point they have parachuted in a white convert as Mosque manager, ‘Dave’, in the programme (and played strangely enough as if he was a classic TV English vicar)…..using Kris Marshall (Nick from ‘My Family’) as the convert….a friendly, well known face to drive home the ‘friendliness’ of Islam?

Propaganda? Possibly….Muslim families are like everyone else…and Islam is so popular even white people like nice ‘Nick’ want to convert.

However a slight give away is that Dave/Nick/Kriss is given the line…‘We are all born Muslim’….regardless of whether you are actually Christian, Jewish or of any other faith.

This is classic Muslim fundamentalist propaganda…it is the line that Muslim extremists use….any radio phone-in or programme about these extremists and you will hear them refer to converts as ‘reverts’…i.e. they have always been Muslim but were ‘lost’ for a while.

Insulting and possibly dangerous stuff to be peddling on the BBC.

However the putting all that aside it is funny…and if it upsets fundamentalist Muslims all good.

Just remember…..

Jesus was English,  God is Church of England

This came from one of the comments….No link for the original forum or wherever it came from but looks genuine enough, so much for tolerance and diversity…the Religion of Peace, bless ’em:

 O Muslims! who witnessed the mockery of Islam on ‘Citizen Khan’ on BBC One Please put a complaint in to BBC now it’s our duty as Muslims to do so :

Follow the below steps.:

1) Go on t: http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/complain-online/
2) Click ‘Make a complaint’
3) Ye’
4) ‘Television
5) BBC One
6) Citizen Khan
7) 27/08/2012
8) When it was actually broadcast
9) 22.20
10) Offence
11) No
12) ‘Insults, ridicules Islam. Unfair portryal.
13) In regards to the new comedy series titled ‘Citizen Khan’ i would like to make a formal complaint. Myself and many other Muslims feel disrespected by the sayings and doings throughout the show.
We as Muslims witnessed the show is mocking our Holy Book ‘Quran’ and also the Place of worship ‘Mosque’. The whole show is constantly mocking either the pakistani culture or the religion Islam.
The images put into non-pakistanis or non-muslims about either us Pakistanis or muslims in all are the wrong images which upset us as proud pakistanis and muslims.

We feel though as if this show has crossed the line and we expected a comedy show but now we have witnessed a mocking show. We will not accept this to continue for much longer as it is utterly unacceptable.
We would like you to take what we have said in this letter on board and understand what it means to us British Muslims to have to watch a show that is continuously Mocking Muslims and Pakistanis. We would like to kindly request you that this Comedy Series is either stopped or taken back to the drawing board to fix all this mockery.

14) Yes
15) Fill in your contact details
16) Select where you live
17 UK users ONLY fill in half of postcode
18) Go to review & submint
19) SUBMINT YOUR COMPLAINT

If i was you i would stay away from BBC as much as possible, it is run by big zionists, mainly jews and indians work for em, and also the public should not even have to pay for TV Licence as it is a zionist scam = fraud which public is blind to loooooooooool

 

Obviously most modern media is controlled by the Jews.