This latest posting from Phil Mercer in the Australian economic suicide story shows a superficial semblance of balance. He reports that proposals for the tax have “split the nation”, and quotes opposition leader Tony Abbott claiming that the tax is “socialism masquerading as environmentalism”, with another MP weighing in that the tax will destroy what’s left of Oz manufacturing industry.

But as usual, the devil is in the detail. What Mr Mercer carefully doesn’t report is this (from Murdoch’s The Australian newspaper):

Labor’s primary vote fell three percentage points to a record low of 27 per cent, while the Coalition’s support rose three points to 49 per cent for its highest primary vote since the Howard government in October 2001.

What he also doesn’t mention is that the Australian top 25 companies lost £7bn in share prices a single day after the tax was announced and that the measures will stop global temperatures rising by only 1/14,000 C°.

Against that absence, Mr Mercer gives oodles of space to the usual greenie claptrap from prime minister Julia Gillard (without a scintilla of balance) that the measures are vital to save us from freezing, boiling, drowning, dying of thirst and choking to death. He also includes, of course, the usual eco-fanatic clarion call that no matter what Ms Gillard does, it’s not enough.

And above all, he perpetuates the myth with compulsory BBC zeal that CO2 is “pollution”, and those who create wealth are “worst polluters”. What utter, poisonous tosh.

Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to POISON TOSH

  1. Natsman says:

    Interesting interview here. Has the Australian government lost all its marbles? Or did it have none to begin with?



  2. cjhartnett says:

    Let`s hope that the Australian people remember their roots and don`t put up with being open prisoners of the political elite that crave to be welcomed in Brussels or Kyoto…what happened to enterprise and getting on with it all?
    Seem to have lost the will to win at anything now! Send for Tony Abbott!


  3. RGH says:

    “We know that that warming is changing our climate causing sea levels to rise, meaning there will be more days of extreme heat, meaning that we are at risk of more bushfires and droughts, meaning that great icons like the Great Barrier Reef are at risk,” warned Ms Gillard.

    No, Ms Gillard. We do not know that.

    To force the redistributive agenda, the very language used is revealing.

    Pollution, acidification etc.

    Touched up images with apocalyptic black cloud emerging from cooling towers.

    All part of the unremitting propaganda to support a redistributive ideological agenda.


  4. Umbongo says:

    Behind the Times payment wall we are informed about the continuing  blatant dishonesty (and desperation) of the warmists:

    “Climate-related disasters overseas should be exploited by the coalition to persuade British voters to accept unpopular policies for cutting carbon emissions, according to the Government’s chief scientific adviser. Droughts, floods and storms could be used as “policy windows”, making it easier to take “bold actions” that would otherwise be politically unacceptable. Climate-related disasters overseas should be used by the Government to persuade British voters to accept unpopular policies for cutting carbon emissions, says Sir John Beddington, the Government’s chief scientific adviser. Droughts, floods and storms in foreign countries could be used as “policy windows”, making it easier to introduce “bold actions” that would otherwise be politically unacceptable.

    Chris Huhne, the Energy and Climate Change Secretary, will propose one such bold action today by pledging support for wind turbines and nuclear power stations in a reform of the electricity market that could add hundreds of pounds a year to the average household’s energy bills.

    Sir John yesterday published a report entitled International Dimensions

    of Climate Change, which identified “a very real gap between people’s expressed concerns about the environment and their actions”.

    The report concluded that the Government must find ways of overcoming growing scepticism and “fatigue with climate change as an issue” to convince the public of the need for “costly environmental policies”. [my bold]

    At least the BBC is doing its “impartial” best for Beddington.


  5. Natsman says:

    Just HOW do you convince the public that a blatant collection of lies is factual?  Particularly when that same public can see, feel and hear with all their own senses, that the opposite to what they’re being fed is occurring.  That will take some powerful magic, or failing that, direction through taxation and control.

    The good old public loves being told what to do, and paying through the nose for the pleasure but all they do is whimper and pay up.

    Clearly alarmism isn’t working, so what’s next in the armoury of political (and BBC) chicanery?

    Nothing’s going to change, is it?

    I’ve no doubt that the likes of Black and Harrabin will be awarded richly deserved peerages for their selfless efforts, and then they can join the other greedy, greasy bastards in the Lords (I’m still smarting with outrage over that fat slug Prescott).