CARBON PUFF

CARBON PUFF

>> MONDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 2010

What turns my stomach completely about BBC reporting of so-called climate change is that reporters systematically ignore the key issues such as that the rise in fuel prices demanded by eco freaks is causing massive hardship. Meanwhile Richard Black goes on reporting the frenzied but trivial outpourings of the world global warming industry scam - those thousands of "scientists" engaged in alarmist frenzy that are paid by governments, multi-nationals and tranzis to jack up hysteria and pump out lies. Today he is focusing on the fears of the Global Carbon Project that even thought we have had a recession, CO2 emissions have only gone down by "peanuts" (such is the eloquence of these brilliant minds). And as Cancun approaches, he naturally ramps up the solemn GCP prediction on that the "carbon" rise is about to start again (according to the models) condemining us all to certain and imminent blistering, heat exhaustion and, of course, death. Mr Black also blatantly misreports the main point of his story; India and China do not give a stuff about CO2 emissions (which rose by an average of a healthy 7% or so) and are getting on with their main tasks of generating wealth and economic expansion. The horror of Black's reporting is that he wilfully ignores the elephant in the room: the only way out of poverty is through cheap electricity and power. What the greenies want is the reverse.

THE TWO FACES OF MARR...

>> SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 2010

Interesting to contrast Andrew Marr's style of interviewing Ed Balls (Soft) and Michael Gove (harsh)on his programme this morning. Good for Gove for describing Marr's mindset as "North Korean!" Best moment of the morning! Gove is spot on, of course, if somewhat unfair to the Dear Leader.The BBC would not be out of place in North Korea with its totalitarian mindset. It IS an anachronism here in the UK.

BBC OFFENSIVE TO THOSE WHO SERVE....

I think it is all too evident that the BBC has an anti-military pro pacifist agenda which informs much of its output. Now read on...

The head of the British army has complained to the BBC about a drama showing bullying among troops in Afghanistan, calling it"deeply offensive to all those serving". Sir Peter Wall has written to BBC director general Mark Thompson about the programme, Accused, said the MoD. The episode features a corporal who bullies two friends who join the Army, one of whom goes on to commit suicide. The BBC said it was in no way an attempt to denigrate the Army.

Through the BBC prism, our Armed Forces are a great evil and so it is not in the least surprising that bias flows through such output as that highlighted by Sir Peter.

Give a Dog a Bad name

>> SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 2010

Most websites have a defined flavour, philosophy or political outlook, but categorising and compartmentalising things too readily leads to dismissing them out of hand, and B-BBC is lumbered with, and perhaps hampered by, a right-wing label or some other hackle-raising tag such as Zionist, which serves only to obstruct communication. I’m sure many B-BBCers scroll past my contributions. That is a pity, but abstention is preferable to ill-informed anti-Israel sniping. As it happens, I’m not a pro-Israel web-warrier. What motivates me is the injustice of the BBC’s one-sided presentation of matters related to Israel, and the harm this is doing, not only to Jews, but to society as a whole. Robin Shepherd draws our attention to a comment made by one of ‘British Jewry’s senior leaders’ who criticises Israel in exactly the same way, and for exactly the same perceived misdemeanors that any run of the mill BBC follower might come up with, but with the additional complaint that Israel is giving ‘him’ a bad name. For this unfortunate, but in some ways understandable situation, I blame such people’s inability to look beyond the BBC and the MSM. After all British Jews are the same as any other Brit - almost indistinguishable from the real thing. (That’s a joke) Why would they not be as gullible as the next man, the one permanently stuck on that wretched Clapham omnibus? The trouble is, anti-Israel campaigners use Jewish critics of Israel as aces in a pack choc-full of left-wing Israeli and Jewish human rights groups who are willing to hand over all the low-hanging fruit the vultures crave, on a plate, peeled, pitted and sliced. I’m leading to something else, however. The founder of Human Rights Watch is a person one would hope the BBC would sit up and take notice of. He’s even a strong supporter of Obama, and certainly no right-wing mouth frother. Robert L Bernstein. In 2009 he criticised his own organisation: “Human Rights Watch has lost critical perspective” he said. “Leaders of Human Rights Watch know that Hamas and Hezbollah chose to wage war from densely populated areas, deliberately transforming neighbourhoods into battlefields. They know that more and better arms are flowing into both Gaza and Lebanon and are poised to strike again. And they know that this militancy continues to deprive Palestinians of any chance for the peaceful and productive life they deserve. Yet Israel, the repeated victim of aggression, faces the brunt of Human Rights Watch’s criticism.” H/T Elder of Ziyon (again) On November 10th 2010, 88 year old Robert L Bernstein gave a lengthy and illuminating speech at the University of Nebraska at Omaha. He tackled everything, from his own reasons for founding Human Rights Watch, his resignation from the chair of HRW in 1998 at the age of 75, and the enormous subject of HRW and the Middle East. Of the UN Human Rights Commission: “so critical of Israel that any fair-minded person would disqualify them from participating in attempts to settle issues involving Israel, got the idea that they could get prominent Jews known for their anti-Israel views to head their investigations.” He covers Richard Goldstone, the flotilla incident, the nature of the enemyIsrael is facing, and how the Human Rights Watch board ignores factors that they are well aware of, but which don’t suit their anti-Israel agenda; and all this flying in the face of what HRW is meant to be about. I was intrigued by the excerpts I read on EOZ blog, so I printed off this speech, seven pages of it, to read properly away from the screen. I recommend it. If only the BBC personnel would have a look at it, and allow it to filter through the communication barrier which precludes pro-Israel sentiment from reaching their hearts and minds. While researching Robert Bernstein I came across this hate-filled rant from someone who has let his twisted imagination run away with him, named William C Carlotti. So for balance I’m including it in this post. For your information, if you haven’t scrolled past, I restrict my pro-Israel advocacy to this blog. Because, 1) I hope to catch the eye of the reader who would dismiss a wholly pro-Israel blog out of hand, and, 2) I am interested in the BBC’s role in a creating a climate where anti Israel feeling flourishes, and exists in abundance in an otherwise intelligent public, which includes Mick Davis and his ilk. If you have been, thanks for listening.