Weather, climate or pure lies


Skeptical Climate Documentary Set to Rock UN Climate Summit – ‘Climate Hustle’ To Have Red Carpet Premiere in Paris


The BBC is blitzing us with unadulterated pro-man-made climate change propaganda with green activists allowed free rein on the airwaves to say the most outrageous things….then repeated with sincere, uncritical approval by the BBC presenters.

What we are being told is that CO2 is the cause of global warming…..em…except where’s the proof?  Not only is there no proof of that but in fact CO2 is not the most powerful so-called greenhouse gas…water vapour is.  Is water vapour a pollutant?  CO2 is being denounced as a pollutant, one that the West is guilty of having produced and now we must pay the price for our sins…our moral obligation to fund the corrupt third world countries whose politiicans know a good scam when they see one.  Lovely new airport in the Maldives.…shame it will be under water very soon, won’t it?…what optimism those Maldivian politicians must have.

Curious that the world is about to burn if we don’t reduce CO2 emissions to, well, zero, if you believe, and yet, such is the urgency and the danger that nations like China, India and Brazil, which are pumping out huge quantities of CO2 emissions, are to be allowed to keep on pumping.   Odd that.  Anyone looking on with an impartial eye might think that those demanding the West close down its industry whilst allowing other nations to ramp up theirs might, just might, have an agenda that is completely unrelated to the climate.


Anyway here’s a reminder of just what the BBC produces on behalf of the climate lobby, just one of many, many films the BBC airs in order to manufacture our consent….

‘Climate Change – Britain Under Threat’





And here’s what they don’t want you to see:

The Great Global Warming Swindle






The politics of being non-political



Lord Hall makes a big play of the BBC being non-political and a lot of noise about interference from politicians….which is all nonsense when you think about it.

The BBC is in essence a creation of the politicians set up to use soft power to control the unruly unwashed.  The BBC though oversteps its political masters’ boundaries and tries not only to influence how we, the Public, think and behave, but also to pressurise politicians to steer government policy in particular directions.  No wonder politicians want to interfere in how the BBC is run.  The BBC has set itself up as a government in all but name.

Much as I claim the BBC is ironically, after itself issuing constant ‘warnings from history’ about them, to blame for the rise of the Far Right due to its promotion of immigration and Islam Robert Aitken suggests the BBC’s attempt to stifle debate on the EU will lead to ever greater scepticism about the benefits of membership and may lead to a vote for Brexit.

Aitken finishes his piece with this statement about the power of the BBC to influence politicians…

‘The point about the BBC is this: if it gets behind an idea it can exert almost irresistible pressure on a government. If BBC journalists had been in favour (themselves) of a referendum collectively they could have made it happen. But, almost to a woman, they set themselves against a vote throughout the ’90s and into the new century; indeed they still endlessly repeat the trope that the referendum was forced on the government by Eurosceptic Tories – ignoring the polling evidence which shows the electorate has long wanted to have its say.’

The BBC does have enormous power over politicians, knows it, and has never been shy about using that power to pressurise politicians to alter their policies in a way that then reflects the BBC view.

Any wonder politicians think they have a right, a need, to rein in the BBC?  If the BBC wants politicians to stay out of its business then it should stay out of theirs and not try to govern Britain by the backdoor.






Lean and Green


Remember when the Telegraph was castigated for allegedly downplaying stories about HSBC as HSBC was a major advertiser at the paper?  The BBC went all out on the story as it involved the Tories as well and was in the long run up to the election.

Wonder if they will do much digging over this story from Bishop Hill?…

‘Some years back I was discussing the state of environmental coverage in the media with someone from the Telegraph. I commented that I thought it was very strange that the Tele had taken Geoffrey Lean on as a correspondent given that his views were pretty much anathema to most of its readers.

“Ah, that’s simple” I was told. “He’s not there for the benefit of the readers but because green advertisers want him”. This made perfect sense at the time.

Now, as we all know, times are increasingly hard for the green blob, with George Osborne apparently wanting to put the whole renewables industry on a starvation diet. So it was interesting to see this from Lean on Twitter this morning:

Somehow I doubt it.



BBC climate lies


The BBC tells us…

‘A combination of a strong El Nino and human-induced global warming made the five-year period from 2011 to 2015 the warmest on record, researchers say.’

Hmmm….yes but isn’t the global warming still on pause?   2010 was another warming El Nino…so why cherry pick from 2011 and not mention that?  The global temperature has stayed pretty much the same in the period quoted, and longer, it may be hot but no hotter than ‘normal’ so the BBC’s claim that it is the hottest for 5 year period in history is disengenuous to say the least, intended to create a false impression of a planet on fire.  The BBC and its co-conspirators always try to tell us that the period from 1998 is too short to be significant and yet they now claim a 5 year period is significant to their narrative of a warming globe.


The BBC’s top headline tonight….

Global rallies demand climate action

Kind of gives the impression that there is a world wide movement to tackle the climate…which is curious as only two days ago the BBC told us this (a now hard to find report, gone fom its pages)…

Public support for tough climate deal ‘declines’

Sky gives us a different angle that the BBC doesn’t…about the Public’s growing scepticism about not only climate deals but the causes of climate change…

Poll: Growing Doubts Over Climate Change Causes

The finding comes on the eve of the UN summit in Paris that is expected to result in big cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.

Why would the BBC not like to reveal that?

The Express isn’t hiding the uncomfortable truthes…

Global warming FARCE: Overwhelming majority of Britons think climate change is FAKE


The BBC though is still twisting the story telling us…

‘Canada, France, Spain and the UK are the only four with majorities in favour of their governments taking a leading role.’

Once again a misleading slant on the story as in all those countries save Spain support is waning…



And do I believe that there is majority support for heavy-handed government action to tackle climate change in the UK?  No.  How many people really believe the major cause of climate change is man-made?  How many would attribute any man-made climate change to CO2 if they knew the facts?  Not many.  And yet the BBC et al present CO2 as the major factor in climate change and the one that must be tackled before any other….a convenient approach that fits neatly with the Left’s ambitions to undermine Western economic and industrial power.

Here’s a more reasoned and considered comment on the climate, from WUWT not the BBC…Climate and Human Civilization over the last 18,000 years.


And another thing….from the BBC…

Prince Charles links climate change to Syria conflict


Been there, done that…from WUWT…

The ultimate ‘Godwin effect’ – Science In 1941: ‘Global Warming Caused Hitler’



Increasing warmer temperatures throughout the world may produce a trend toward dictatorial governments in the opinion of Dr Clarence A Mills, professor of experimental medicine at the University of Cincinnati. In fact, Dr Mills believes that the rise to power of Adolf Hitler in Germany and Benito Mussolini in Italy may be due in part to the gradual warming temperature of the world. —The Mason City Globe-Gazette, 27 March 1941





Love Islam Or Shut Up

Dr. Deepa Kumar.


Bagley in the comments brought us the latest bit of ‘race’ baiting from BBC Trending, something that the BBC specialises in, generating anger, dissent and conflict where it can with tales of the White man’s evil ways or of the treachery of ex-Muslims and ‘native informants’ in criticising their own community.

Craig at Is the BBC biased?….LOL...has helpfully transcribed much of the interview and I have pulled the BBC interviewer’s comments out for your pleasure….note her chosen defender of the faith is a Muslim BBC employee…interesting to see how he wants to shut the critics up….what’s he hiding?…

‘Thousands explained why they left Islam online, using the hashtag #ExMuslimBecause, but some thought the discussion was badly timed, and labelled it ‘hateful’. We meet the woman behind the campaign, and ask if she intended to create such a pointed conversation.

A-MT: Is there a risk that there are others out there who would look at a hashtag like this and might not necessarily be prepared for the kind of backlash that might lie in store for them? 

A-MT: One of the tweets that I noticed was saying that this hashtag was more or less giving people an opportunity to bash Muslims. What do you have to say in response to a statement like that?

A-MT: ‘Can you speak?’ is one thing’; ‘when to speak’ is another. And when you look at the recent news events – say, for example  what happened in Paris, the Paris attacks. Let’s look at the refugee crisis around Europe. Did it occur to you that this was possibly not the right time to put out a hashtag like this? 

So quite a strident tone coming from Maryam Namazie.’


So in summary….explaining why you want to leave Islam is hateful, islamophobic, bigoted, bashing Muslims, dangerous in the present day climate [for Muslims] and doesn’t play well with the BBC’s narrative on immigration.

And you thought you could trust the BBC to bring you the news unadulterated, uncorrupted, by the bigotry, partiality, dishonesty and stupid, childlike naivete of its employees.

Not the first time the BBC has wanted to silence Maryam Namazie.…and reported less than honestly…

Open letter to BBC Sunday Morning Live on its unfair and biased reporting

Maryam Namazie
8 September 2010 BBC Sunday Morning Live invited me to join its debate on whether ‘it is right to condemn Iran for stoning’ on 5 September 2010 via webcam. During the debate, the programme allowed only two interventions via webcam (that of Suhaib Hassan of the Islamic Sharia Council and Mohammad Morandi of Tehran University – both of whom were in support of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani’s stoning and/or execution). I (who had presumably been invited to defend Ms Ashtiani and oppose stoning in the debate) was never given the opportunity to speak. To the BBC’s Sunday Morning Live Programme I am writing to ask that you rectify gross inaccuracies regarding Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani’s case and that of stoning in Iran in your upcoming programme……

Back to BBC is Maryam Namazie’s response in full….

Ayatollah BBC and #ExMuslimBecause

I was interviewed by Anne-Marie Tomchak for thirty minutes for BBC Trending on 26 November. Despite my also having referred 4 ex-Muslims, including those who maintained anonymity whilst Tweeting for #ExMuslimBecause due to fears for their safety, the programme spoke to Mobeen Azhar and Rashid Dar, two men who identified themselves as Muslims, about my segment which was highly edited for BBC World Service on 28 November.

The presenter Tomchak and the two Muslim men framed the entire discussion about apostasy and the basic human right to leave and criticise Islam without fear into one that was “hateful,” “bigoted,” “an attack on Muslims,” “Islamophobic,” “opportunistic,” “quite offensive”…

By doing so, they intentionally blurred the distinction between the criticism of Islam (an idea) and Islamism (a far-Right political movement) with bigotry against Muslims. For far too long, apologists like the BBC have conflated the three in order to silence critics by deeming any criticism of Islam and Islamism as bigotry against people. This despite the fact that Muslims are not a homogeneous community or society.  There are many secularists, freethinkers and even ex-Muslims amongst them (as the trending of #ExMuslimBecause shows). For every Muslim who opposes ex-Muslims, there are others who support the right of ex-Muslims to leave or criticise Islam without fear.

Nonetheless, Tomchak and her “experts” insist that #ExMuslimBecause was “bad timing” due to the Paris attacks. For apologists,  the timing for dissent is never right.

Whilst we mourn our dead in Paris, we must not forget the countless others killed by ISIS and Islamists, including this very month in Lebanon, Nigeria, Mali, Iraq, Egypt, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Afghanistan… as well as those executed perfectly legally via Sharia laws in Iran, Saudi Arabia… The refugee crisis is in large part due to this unbridled brutality.

In fact, if there ever was a “right” time to challenge Islam and Islamism, it is now.

Yet Tomchak says: “quite a strident tone coming from Maryam Namazie and the way she uses the term Islamists,” whilst Azhar says: “it’s quite uncompromising since there are many shades of grey amongst Islamists; lumping Islamists together is not going to be most helpful”… Luckily, many Muslims do not have the sympathy for Islamism that Azhar and Tomchak show. After all, Islamism kills more Muslims than anyone else.

What is embarrassingly obvious in this BBC report is that along with the misinformation on the “theory” behind apostasy laws which kills apostates  as we speak, any patronising “concern” for Muslims is fundamentally about defending Islam and Islamism at the expense of dissenters.

That’s why their response to #ExMuslimBecause is so hateful; it sees dissent through Islamist eyes.

It is also why the report widely misses the mark for basic standards in objective journalism.

Maybe this example will help Tomchak and the BBC understand what they have got so very wrong (though I am not holding my breath). What they’ve done in their report on #ExMuslimBecause is similar to labelling critics of the Magdelene Laundries or Symphsiotomy as “strident,” “Catholic bashers” or “openly hostile to the Catholic Church.” Such accusations do a gross injustice to those who are merely demanding what Tomchak and the two Muslim men take for granted – the right to believe in what one wants without fear.


I know the BBC and its “Muslim community specialists” would have preferred us to raise #ExMuslimBecause in private over coffee. Regressive laws and fascist movements, however, are not pushed back over private chats but via normalising the taboo and through very public challenges and renunciations.

Every movement – from the demand to end racial apartheid, for gender equality, and LGBT rights – were battles fought in the public square. The right to apostasy and blasphemy is no different.

Remove all the BBC’s bogus accusations and one fact remains: the right to religion comes with a corresponding right to be free from religion. #ExMuslimBecause is part of the effort to bring about that hugely important change.

Surely this Tweet is bashing Muslims, don’t they feel left out with all these memorials for the people killed by Muslims?  Careful what you say and think……


How ironic…the BBC’s Anne-Marie Tomchak is an ardent feminist and yet she seeks to silence women who leave Islam, and leave quite possibly because of the way they are treaated by that religion…

Here she is boasting of her work in the feminist cause…..




Saudi Arabian Delights


You can’t know whether to laugh or cry at the BBC’s tricks and desperate attempts to make us love Islam.

The latest is a rather sinister attempt to brainwash our children with a new version of the Arabian Nights...Jamillah and Aladdin..starting tonight on CBBC.

I noted the programme in the Sunday Times TV review.  I was going to ignore it though I suspected it was a programme with a message or two, not just a positive feminine role model with a ‘feisty girl’ in the lead, but perhaps the usual subtext about diversity, immigrants and of course Islam, it being set in the Middle East…love the characters, love Islam if just by default.  Then I had a look at the Independent’s write up and that just confirmed I was probably right about the motivation behind producing such a programme….

Why children should watch CBBC’s Jamillah and Aladdin this weekend

A new series based on the classic Arabian Nights story will air on Cbeebies and CBBC this weekend. It’s just the sort of diverse, positive series children need

Since the terror attacks in Paris two weeks ago, much has been written about what we should let children watch on television, and how much exposure to the news is advisable for young kids.

As the name suggests, it’s based on the classic Arabian Nights’ tale.

It’s perfect timing, I think. When we want to show children that other countries and cultures can be celebrated and enjoyed – and are not just places of bombs and fear. The cast looks like the Britain we recognise – the three lead rolls are played by black actors – and the characters are inquisitive. Genie translates Jamillah’s request for “an adventure” into a trip to the Middle East. She is transfixed in the bazaar by the snake charmers the belly dancers and the street vendors. Maybe some of the children watching will recognise the name Baghdad from the news and come to think about this city and others like it in a different light. And in Jamillah and Aladdin’s friendship they might see that while not all children look, talk or have the same beliefs as us, we can still all be mates and equals not foes.

Of course, it’s just a TV programme and we shouldn’t over-blow its importance, But, if we continue with positive, diverse programming, then it can play a role in shaping the next generation’s belief systems, values and morals.In an interview, 11-year-old Blossom was asked what her three wishes would be, given the chance. Her first? “Equality in the world.” Nice.

Sweet. But propaganda all the same, showing us loveable Muslims from which we, the children, are supposed to pick up the unspoken message that if ‘muslims’ are loveable then Islam could be as well.  What did the Jesuits, channelling Aristotle apparently, say?   Give Me the Child Until He is Seven, and I Will Show You the Man‘”

Shame the BBC is promoting another set of religious fanatics to young impressionable minds…..perhaps a better education about Islam would be more helpful to the children to make them understand what is going on in the world and what is the motivation behind terror attacks rather than a cosy little programme promoting love and harmony when unfortunately one side has no intention of ‘honouring’ such sentiments.


This cartoon in the Times illustrates the problem with the narrative which buries its head in the sand on one subject…..


The problem isn’t primarily the fact that Saudi is a harsh regime chopping off heads,  the problem is the reasons why they do it…and, more importantly, why they are allowed to come into this country spreading highly inflammatory fundamentalist Islamic propaganda through Mosques, universities, Islamic ‘information’ centres, madrassas and of course not forgetting the close ties with the great and the good in our society, not to mention the Government itself.

The problem is the theology behind the sword not the fact of the sword itself.  But who dares mention that?….except Rod Liddle in the Sunday Times who, jokingly, em, suggests we would be just as well to bomb Luton as the Islamic State because it is the ideology not IS itself that is the problem. Bomb IS and ‘radical’ Islam still exists….hoever bombing IS will stop a lot of killing on a grand and savage scale.













Brave new world ushered in by the BBC


The future’s bright….

A leaked document by German intelligence chiefs warned that fully integrating hundreds of thousands of what it termed ‘illegal migrants’ will be ‘impossible’.

It added: ‘We are importing Islamic extremism, Arab anti-Semitism, national and ethnic conflicts of other peoples, as well as a different understanding of society and law.’

The document, published in the heavyweight Die Welt newspaper, added: ‘Intelligence agencies cannot cope with these problems, [or] the response from the German population.’

The BBC, charged with maintaining civil society and cohesion, has done everything it possibly can to create a situation where this is impossible, it has created the exact opposite of that with conflict and social collapse the likely outcome.

The road to hell and good intentions.  Never was there a finer example.

Fixing the narrative



The BBC has always been against ‘austerity’ and spending cuts and things haven’t changed as in the week before Osborne’s Autumn Statement the BBC ran a spoiler clearly intended to put the case for spend, spend, spend.

Wake Up To Money invited on a guest a day to give us their verdict on spending cuts….not one thought they were a good idea.

Vince Cable tells us the government’s planned cuts could hit UK economic growth.

Former senior civil servant, Sir Richard Mottram, criticises planned spending cuts.

Adam Parsons and Mickey Clark look ahead to the publication of a major report into the collapse of HBOS in 2008. They also hear from one of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn’s economic advisers [No prizes for guessing her opinion]

With a week to go before Chancellor George Osborne announces the outcome of the spending review Adam Parsons speaks to former Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin about his experience of having to make similar major cuts.[Despite making ‘similar cuts’ he was strongly against further ones]

With the Chancellor due to deliver his spending review next week, Businesswoman and former Dragon on TV’s Dragons’ Den Hilary Devey tells Adam Parsons that further cuts could be going too far and investment is needed to maintain growth.


Ah yes, that old classic…too far too fast and ‘investment’ is needed to encourage growth.  Plan B anyone?

The BBC lined up a series of critics of government cuts and still claims it is not biased?  Pull the other one.

The past is not just history



The past can cast a cold hard light upon the mutterings of today and embarrass those who change their tune in order to press their own agenda.

Last year in the run up to the election we heard a lot about the government’s, the Tories’, intended spending cuts….we were told in alarmist terms of how savage they would be in the second term.  We were also treated to faux outrage at the size of the government debt at around £1.4 trillion.

Now Price Waterhouse Cooper had predicted way back in 2009 that the government debt would be £1.4 trillion in 2015….

pwc debt

So no surprise there…..unless you had an agenda that wanted to tell us that the Coalition had run up horrendous debts and this was a ‘shock’.

Curiously back in 2009 the BBC told us the same thing about debt….

The war of words between Labour and the Conservatives about which party is best able to make “nice” versus “nasty” cuts without details from either on exactly what will be cut is still going strong, yet leaves the public none the wiser.

A recent IPSOS/MORI poll found that 50% of people still do not accept that there is a need to cut spending to pay off the national debt, now rising at a giddy £5,656 per second, and set to go on rising until 2014 when it will settle at just under £1.4 trillion.

Not only that but the famous IFS, the goto organ of economic wisdom for the BBC, told us that we had at least 8 years of belt tightening to cope with….

Eight years

An even higher percentage of the electorate are probably unaware that based on current government forecasts, Britain’s is facing not one but “two parliaments of intensifying pain”, as the Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS) predicted.

The IFS said that for each of the next eight years, a new round of cuts will have to be found to fill the black hole in the nation’s finances – a hole the Treasury estimates amounts to a £90bn shortfall between tax revenues and government spending.


Odd how all that has been forgotten and the recent IFS’s alarmist tales of more savage cuts were taken up by the BBC and presented as if this was all news to them and the cause was either Tory incompetence or a political ideology that meant cuts for the sake of cuts…not the reality as noted by the IFS, and the BBC, back in 2009, under a Labour government, that the cuts were necessary to fill that ‘blackhole in the government’s finances’.





Why the outrage?



After blaming former prime minister Tony Blair for the 2005 atrocity, Mr Livingstone – who was mayor at the time – told the audience: ‘They did those killings because of our invasion of Iraq.

‘They gave their lives, they said what they believed. They took Londoners’ lives in protest at our invasion of Iraq.’

Why is there outrage at Ken Livingstone’s comments about the 7/7 bombings?  This is the narrative that the BBC and mainstream Muslims have been peddling for over a decade…a narrative that has supported and excused Islamist terrorism all that time….this is the narrative that has fed Muslims a line that tells them Muslims are under attack from the West, that Iraq was part of that and that their anger is justifiable about this…the violence is terrible…but…but…but….

There BBC can’t deny its guilt over this having spent the last two weeks excusing the Paris terrorism, starting just hours after the attack…this time adding in more alleged causes of terrorism…. poverty, unemployment, exclusion and alienation, as excuses to mass murder people.

Change the narrative, stop excusing slaughter on our streets.


Curiously Ken seems to have changed his narrative….in 2005 he told us that the 7/7 attackers were cowards out to destroy our free society and that they would fail…though bizarrely Ken thinks the bombers were out to stop immigration to the UK…..





Where’s McCarthy when you need him?



From the Spectator for your delight and amazement:

In 2008 during an appearance on This Week, Diane Abbott found herself fighting the communist leader’s corner during a discussion on dictators with Andrew Neil and Michael Portillo:

MP: Mao Zedong killed 30 million, 60 million. People still wear Mao t-shirts, people still carry Mao Little Red Books and if you go to China there’s still a huge picture of Mao Zedong in Tiananmen Square. It’s absolutely bizarre. When a royal prince dressed in an SS uniform he was absolutely condemned. Had he worn a Mao outfit, nobody would have blinked.

AN: Why is that? Why is it right to wear a Maoist t-shirt but obviously wrong, as it is, to wear a Hitler t-shirt?

DA: I suppose that some people would judge that on balance Mao did more good than wrong. We can’t say that about the Nazis.

At which point, both Portillo and Neil asked Abbott the not entirely unreasonable question: what good did Mao do?

MP: What?

AN: Remind me what the good was…

DA: Well, it’s funny I just had this debate with my son…

AN: Mao killed tens of millions of people.

MP: Just tell me what was the good thing that he did that made up for the 60 million people he murdered?

DA: He led his country from feudalism, he helped to defeat the Japanese, and he left his country on the verge of the great economic success they are having now.

Three cheers for Chairman Mao!

Update: After Mr S’s article, This Week have dug up the clip from their archives for your viewing pleasure…


Sacred Illusions Shattered


You have to admire the shameless, brass-necked dishonesty of the BBC’s delusional reporters as they discuss the possible collapse of the, their, European Dream.  A dream that the BBC has given fulsome support to with endless, relentlessly pro-European reports that were intended not to shine a light on events in Europe but to persuade a critical and dubious British Public of the EU’s benefits.

Here Gavin Hewitt tolls the bells for the possible death-knell of the EU…read it and your mouth will just gape wide open at the way he reports with a straight face all those doubts people had about the EU, immigration and Islamist’s in our midst but which the BBC spent years trying to playdown, cover up and deny…..

Is the European project falling apart?

An unwinding rarely has a start date. It settles in over time. It is an erosion, deceptive, slow at first, and then it is all around you; old certainties crumbling; the believer’s glint dulled; the claim on destiny weakened.

In just a matter of months, the idea of Europe has been unwinding, buffeted by successive crises; the Greek drama, the columns of migrants; the terror attacks.

So how does the unwinding reveal itself?

It can be glimpsed in the edginess of European officials.

In the confessionals: Sweden, declares its prime minister, had been “naive” about Islamist extremists.

[In the confessionals eh?….many a BBC journo should join them after having been such enthusiastic backers of the Islamist narrative]

It is an era defined by the stripping away of illusions.

[Let’s hope so……the BBC’s own biased illusions most of all…perhaps we can get some honest reportng about the EU from now on]

The terror attacks in Paris exposed layers of deceit and wishful thinking.

Europe’s borders were not secure.

The extremists had moved around Europe’s passport-free borders – guaranteed under the Schengen agreement – undetected.

[F**king cheek ….The BBC has been the chief cheerleader for mass immigration and open borders, and went so far as to try and deny there was any danger from Islamist Jihadis coming into Europe with the migrants so desperate were the BBC not to allow anything to give a reason to put controls on immigration….the BBC were happy to see terrorists enter Europe even if it meant mass murder…as happened in Paris.]

Schengen was more than just an agreement; it was an article of faith that there would be freedom of movement between 22 of the EU’s member states.

But recent weeks have laid bare the flaws. Returning citizens with EU passports were hardly ever checked against watch lists or security data bases.

But civil liberties trumped security.

[Yes they did…..liberal arrogance got people killed]

Change at last

Now belatedly change is coming.

[What?  The BBC is now the cheerleader for change in Europe and secure borders….FRO]

Even before the Paris attacks, Europe’s discomfort had deepened with the migrant crisis.

For Angela Merkel this was the latest great test of the European project; refugees were to be welcomed as a reflection of European values.

She was first baffled and then angered by the refusal of other countries to see it that way. They resisted the burden-sharing of quotas.

The attacks in Paris did have a link with the refugee crisis.

Most mainstream politicians correctly resisted the suggestion that migrants were potential terrorists but the fingerprints of two of the Paris bombers were recorded at a checkpoint in Greece in October.

[Ahhh…it’s all the politicians’ fault…the same politicians that the BBC lauded as they welcomed millions of immigrants to Europe, as they told us Islam was a religion of peace, as they told us of the peace and prosperity the European Union would bring us]

New realism

Europe, stripped of some of its illusions, is already engaging in a new realism.

The Europe of values will shortly try to clinch a deal with the increasingly authoritarian President of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

[The Europe of values…ironically the very values that are at most risk from the immigrants being allowed into Europe]

Plenty of those who support the deeper integration of Europe now say that officials and leaders allowed dreams to get ahead of reality.

Quite simply, if Europe cannot provide security then voters will demand the nation states step back in. The old slogans will not suffice.

A harder-headed Europe will have to emerge that protects people and delivers jobs and security.

[Laugh, laugh loud…isn’t this the same BBC that tried to malign the Front National leader’s policies as ‘typically hardline’…

Marine Le Pen, leader of France’s far-right opposition National Front party, has taken a typically hardline position in response to the attacks.

And here’s a whole article from only two months ago designed solely to portray Le Pen and her policies as somewhat odious…

Is Merkel a recruiting sergeant for French right?

“It [uncontrolled mass immigration] is welcome for all the xenophobic parties of Europe, who can say that what is happening now is not immigration. It is an invasion from the Middle East.

“And if, God forbid, there were to be a terrorist act carried out by someone who could be shown to be from this mass movement, then that would play into her hands still further.

“We can expect a lot more of the fear factor as the elections approach.”

[An invasion from the Middle East by millions of Muslims?  Can’t say Le Pen would be wrong if that is what she said.]


The biggest irony is that it is the BBC’s, amongst many others’, own deception of the public, its own self-deception on immigration and the European adventure that has led to this crisis, both in immigration and the EU as an idea.  Promoting open borders was always going to be a disaster and lead to anti-immigrant feeling and then ultimately to bloodshed.  The BBC’s refusal to report straight on the EU and to arrogantly sneer at the sceptics, going so far as to label them racists, was never going to be a successful strategy long term and only bred discontent and distrust over Europe.]


Douglas Murray in the Spectator has also noted the change of tune on the Left…

‘One minor point of interest to me over recent days has been watching some survivors of the left who have spent the last decade attacking anyone who has written on terrorism and Islamism now beginning to talk like old pros about Islamism and terrorism. You’d almost think they’d spent the last decade addressing these issues, rather than trying to shut down anyone who did address them. I suppose they’ll make some running of it and bluff along for a while, but these people seem to me little use to anyone.

Why should anybody feel cowed by accusations of ‘racism’ from a political side led by Jeremy Corbyn? The answer is that very soon they won’t be. So the left’s moral authority on racism seems to have gone. And any remaining authority on security or foreign affairs now looks likely to follow. All of which is wonderful news for the right. But I would say that it is beginning to look terminal for the left.’



Taxi for Mr Corbyn


Top story, front page in Independent….Corbyn must quit.


Curious what the BBC doesn’t want to highlight…..

From the Telegraph:

Jeremy Corbyn told to resign by Labour MPs as Syria vote engulfs his ‘unsustainable’ leadership


From the Independent:

From the BBC:

Shadow cabinet seek to defuse Jeremy Corbyn Syria row

Senior shadow cabinet members are seeking to defuse a row over UK air strikes in Syria that threatens to split the Labour Party.

Leader Jeremy Corbyn is against air strikes – putting him at odds with more than half of his top team.

He faced warnings of resignations after he wrote to Labour MPs rejecting David Cameron’s case for military action.

But Labour deputy leader Tom Watson and others who disagree with him say they will not be resigning.

The BBC almost ignores the fact that senior Labour MPS are calling for the leader of the Labour Party to resign…a huge story surely?  Not for the BBC who seem all too eager to play down any bad news for Corbyn.

They certainly know of the call to resign as it was made by one Labour MP on BBC radio…From the Independent:

‘The first Labour MP to publicly call on Mr Corbyn to stand down, Ms Mactaggart, who agrees with him in opposing British intervention in Syria, said his “weak leadership” was causing damaging divisions in the party and was failing the party’s responsibility to hold the Government to account. 

“He hasn’t got a strategy to lead the party from where it is to where it needs to be and the people of the country can see that,” she told BBC Radio Berkshire.

“I think it [his leadership] probably is unsustainable. The problem is that my party… doesn’t have the hunger for power that the Conservative party has and the Conservative party is good at getting rid of leaders who they can see aren’t getting to lead the party to victory – my party isn’t.”

Asked whether he should stand down, she said: “I think that would be a sensible strategy because I think that the division at the moment is causing real problems.”

Her comments were immediately echoed by Mr Spellar, who told shadow cabinet members not to resign if Mr Corbyn refused to give a free vote on air strikes.’

The BBC itself merely reports her saying this…

‘Another ex-minister, Fiona Mactaggart, said Mr Corbyn’s leadership was “weak” and “unsustainable”, although she was also unconvinced about the case for bombing Syria.’

No mention of her call to resign though they do mention Spellar’s call for Corbyn to resign…..but it is way down at the bottom of the report…

‘Labour MP John Spellar, a member of the defence select committee, said Mr Corbyn’s behaviour over the Syria vote debate had been “unacceptable”.

And he urged shadow cabinet members considering resignation to stand their ground, telling BBC Radio 5 Live: “If anyone should resign after this incident, it should be Jeremy Corbyn.”‘

Shouldn’t such a calamatous breakdown in trust within the Labour Party be headline news not buried at the bottom of the page where most readers won’t bother going to?