Reason long departed - by Richard... Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Reason long departed - by Richard... Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Completely unable or unwilling to address the issues raised by Booker on the child-stealing epidemic, The Guardian instead focuses on attacking Booker, on the basis of criticism by Judge Bellamy.

The thrust of the argument is that Booker did not attend the court proceedings about which he has written, demonstrating that James Robinson, the media correspondent is clearly unable to grasp the issues – viz that reporting restrictions prevent any details of the court cases being published. Every time Booker has sought to obtain details with a view to publication, he has been blocked.

When he originally posted the story, Robinson was unaware even of Booker's rebuttal in last weekend's edition of The Sunday Failygraph, leaving his piece more than a little unbalanced. But then, we don't expect Guardian media correspondents actually to read the work of the journalists they are criticising. Only now that he has been advised of the content have we seen a substantial silent edit. Being in the MSM means, as always, never having to admit you are wrong.

Moonbat is also at it, with such boring, repetitive predictability that it simply re-affirms that the man has lost the plot, and that the newspaper for which he works has given up any attempt seriously at reporting news objectively (or at all, in many cases).

The controversy of the stolen children continues, however, on a legal blog, an entry in the comments pointing out that even when a journalist from the Failygraph actually attended a court, he was not allowed to report any detail, rather making Booker's point. Unfortunately, we are not in the real world here, and any attempt at address the real issues gets lost in the miasma of prejudice and woolly thinking.

There is no hope here – reason has long departed.

COMMENT THREAD

Share

Print ready

Cloud-cuckoo land - by Richard...

There has been much ado about the Fourth Carbon Budget, announced today by that vile creature Huhne. Under the Climate Change Act, this has to be set by the end of June 2011, although there is absolutely no legal impediment to changing this ridiculous law. That, however, would require the presence of grown-ups, which means there is no chance of an immediate change.

The "budget", though, is an exercise in fantasy – a prolonged sojourn in Cloud-cuckoo land – as it seeks to impose national limits on carbon dioxide emissions for the five year period from 2023 to 2027. And the idiot Huhne has decided that this nation of ours should produce no more than 1950 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent - a 50 percent reduction from 1990 levels.

This is from a minister who will be lucky to see the month out, in post, and who – with a bit of luck – will have fallen under a bus long before 2023. I would put any amount of money on a bet that he will no longer be in government by then. The further very high likelihood is that in those twelve years, we will have been through such financial turmoil that we will have emerged – or be emerging as – a very different country.

By then, the whole idea of the climate change scare will have been consigned to history, one of those many curiosities upon which some will remark upon during those long nights as we bank up the fires and look forward to yet another night without electricity, gas or even mains water.

Ironically though, whether it stands or not as a statutory target, with the collapse of the economy and the industry that will go with it, we will probably achieve the target. But we will never actually know. In the wreckage of the nation that will be left, there will be neither the capability nor sufficient interest to calculate the nation carbon dioxide footprint. Those left alive will be too busy trying to survive.

COMMENT THREAD