Category Archives: Uncategorized

BBC secret exposed: Greenpeace, activists, BP decide what “science” brits see — Hello TwentyEightGate

Oh the irony. The BBC, supposedly the public owned broadcaster, had a meeting with 28 climate experts in Jan 2006 where it decided on its policies on climate coverage. It led to the extraordinary move of the BBC abandoning any semblance of impartiality (a principle that’s so important it’s written into its charter). In the meantime, the BBC did everything it could to hide those influential experts names. It’s been nearly seven years since the seminar, but now we know why their names were top secret. No one is even pretending this was about “the science”. The BBC has become a PR wing of Greenpeace.

In mid 2007 Tony Newbery of Harmless Sky started asking who was at the seminar, but the BBC wouldn’t give up the names. In fact the BBC thought the names were so significant that when Newbery sent them an FOI, they not only refused to hand over the list, but they used six lawyers against him (see The Secret 28 Who Made BBC ‘Green’ Will Not Be Named). The BBC, improbably, argued they weren’t “public” and even more improbably, they won the case. Who knew? The BBC could be considered a “private organisation”. Where are the shareholders?

Having spent many thousands defending their secret meeting with such elaborate wordsmithing and lawyering, presumably, the irony is sweet that when Maurizio Morabito (omnologos) hunted online, he found the sacred list published in full. (Thanks to the wayback machine.)

The BBC is a tax funded organization with a charter to be impartial. So which climate experts were allowed to help decide what the British public should see and pay for?

These ones: Blake Lee-Harwood, and Li Moxuan, Greenpeace; Andy Atkins, Advocacy Director, and Tadesse Dadi, Tearfund (Charity); Trevor Evans, US Embassy; Iain Wright, BP International; Joe Smith, The Open University; Saleemul Huq, IIED (Int. Inst. for Environment Development); Mark Galloway, Director, IBT (International Broadcasting Trust); Tessa Tennant, Chair, AsRia; Andrew Dlugolecki, Insurance industry consultant; Anita Neville, E3G; and more… (see below)

Continue reading →

From Global Warming Policy Forum
Germany’s Green Energy Transition May Be Running Out Of Money, Study Warns
Bill Gates: Renewable Energy Can’t Do The Job

Greece & Italy see solar energy as path to economic stability
–Steve Leone, Renewable Energy World, 12 April 2012

Germany’s green energy transition has cost more than 100 billion euros so far. It has hit large and small electricity suppliers with force and put traditional business models in question. But 15 years after the start of the transition, experts are asking themselves an anxious question: is the energy transition running out of money? Quite possible, is the answer that the German section of the World Energy Council and the consultants from Roland Berger provide. –Andreas Mihm, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 23 June 2015

Germany’s Energiewende was a plan that from the outset reflected all the unexamined beliefs central to the modern green movement, and it’s been plagued by problems at every step. The Energiewende does manage to do some good by serving as a cautionary tale to the rest of the world: this is what happens when you let starry-eyed greens take the reins. –The American Interest, 30 June 2015

1) Germany’s Green Energy Transition May Be Running Out Of Money, Study Warns – Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 23 June 2015

2) Germany’s Energiewende Finds the Sour Spot – The American Interest, 30 June 2015

Continue reading →

Huge Loss For Free Speech In Europe: Human Rights Court Says Sites Liable For User Comments

from the this-is-big-and-dangerous dept

Last year we wrote about a very dangerous case going to the European Court of Human Rights: Delfi AS v. Estonia, which threatened free expression across Europe. Today, the ruling came out and it’s a disaster. In short, websites can be declared liable for things people post in comments. As we explained last year, the details of the case were absolutely crazy. The court had found that even if a website took down comments after people complained, it could still be held liable because it should have anticipated bad comments in the first place. Seriously. In this case, the website had published what everyone agrees was a “balanced” article about “a matter of public interest” but that the website publisher should have known that people would post nasty comments, and therefore, even though it automated a system to remove comments that people complained about, it was still liable for the complaints.

The European Court of Human Rights agreed to rehear the case, and we hoped for a better outcome this time around — but those hopes have been dashed. The ruling is terrible through and through. First off, it insists that the comments on the news story were clearly “hate speech” and that, as such, “did not require any linguistic or legal analysis since the remarks were on their face manifestly unlawful.” To the court, this means that it’s obvious such comments should have been censored straight out. That’s troubling for a whole host of reasons at the outset, and highlights the problematic views of expressive freedom in Europe. Even worse, however, the Court then notes that freedom of expression is “interfered with” by this ruling, but it doesn’t seem to care — saying that it is deemed “necessary in a democratic society.”

Think about that for a second.

The Court tries to play down the impact of this ruling, by saying it doesn’t apply to any open forum, but does apply here because Delfi was a giant news portal, and thus (1) had the ability to check with lawyers about this and (2) was publishing the story and opening it up for comments.

The rest of the ruling is… horrific. It keeps going back to this “hate speech” v. “free speech” dichotomy as if it’s obvious, and even tries to balance the “right to protection of reputation” against the right of freedom of expression. In other words, it’s the kind of ridiculous ruling that will make true free expression advocates scream.
When examining whether there is a need for an interference with freedom of expression in a democratic society in the interests of the “protection of the reputation or rights of others”, the Court may be required to ascertain whether the domestic authorities have struck a fair balance when protecting two values guaranteed by the Convention which may come into conflict with each other in certain cases, namely on the one hand freedom of expression protected by Article 10, and on the other the right to respect for private life enshrined in Article 8
And the court insists that the two things — reputation protection and free speech “deserve equal respect.” That’s bullshit, frankly. The whole concept of a right to a reputation makes no sense at all. Your reputation is based on what people think of you. You have no control over what other people think. You can certainly control your own actions, but what people think of you?

Continue reading →

MISTAKEN ASSUMPTIONS
OF THE EU REFERENDUM BATTLE

AnthonyScholefield CIB
1. Business supports staying in the EU. WRONG.
Many businessmen make speeches about the advantages of staying in the Single
Market. It is perfectly possible to stay in the Single Market and leave the EU, as
detailed in the FLEXCIT plan. Businessmen do not make speeches about
supporting any other part of the EU membership.
2. The referendum is about business. WRONG.
By staying in the Single Market there will be no change to jobs, investment or
trade.
3. The referendum is about the UK’s trading arrangements. WRONG.
Staying in the Single Market means there will be no change to jobs, investment or
trade. Deciding future trading arrangements will be done at a future date by the
democratic discussion in an independent UK.
4. The alternatives are presented as staying in the EU as it is or departing to an
unknown future. WRONG.
There is no option of staying in the EU as it is. The correct alternatives were put
by Jacques Delors, in 2012::
“If the British cannot support the trend to more integration in Europe, we can remain friends
but on a different basis. I could imagine a form such as an European Economic Area or a Free
Trade Agreement.”
5. The referendum is about whether or not Cameron’s reforms are satisfactory.
WRONG.
The referendum is about ‘in’ or ‘out’ of the European Union, not choosing
between an ‘unreformed’ and ‘reformed’ European Union.
6. A ‘remain in’ vote proved to be a blank cheque in 1975. The British government
took a ‘yes’ vote as authority to push through numerous further treaties, further
integration and loss of independence. A new ‘yes’ vote is another blank cheque.
7. The referendum is about British influence and sitting at the ‘top table’. WRONG.
The UK is not, and does not want to be, a member of the inner core of the EU
either in the eurozone or the Schengen agreement on open borders. This lack of
involvement has not diminished British influence because the EU long ceased to
be the ‘top table’ and is nowadays more a transmission belt for regulation from
global bodies.

How Neil Young, Greenpeace work to starve the world’s poor

By Owen Paterson

How Neil Young, Greenpeace work to starve the world’s poor

This month, rock legend Neil Young will release his 36th studio album. It’s a bit different from his usual fare.

Called “The Monsanto Years,” the album features the collaboration of Young and Willie Nelson’s sons, Micah and Lukas, and targets Monsanto, the company known for producing food made from genetically modified organisms, or GMOs.

According to Rolling Stone, listeners will hear Young sing this gem: “I love to start my day off without helping Monsanto/ Monsanto, let our farmers grow what they want to grow/ From the fields of Nebraska from the banks of the Ohio/ Farmers won’t be free to grow what they want to grow/ If corporate control takes over the American farm/ with fascist politicians and chemical giants walking arm in arm.”

The aging songwriter is following the lead of activists who claim that GMOs are harmful to health, farmers and the environment.

This is tragically wrong. In reality, GMOs can save millions of lives. It’s the environmentalists who are doing real harm.

Continue reading →

History[edit]
Cloward and Piven were both professors at the Columbia University School of Social Work. The strategy was formulated in a May 1966 article in the liberal magazine The Nation titled “The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty”.[1][2]

The two stated that many Americans who were eligible for welfare were not receiving benefits, and that a welfare enrollment drive would strain local budgets, precipitating a crisis at the state and local levels that would be a wake-up call for the federal government, particularly the Democratic Party. There would also be side consequences of this strategy, according to Cloward and Piven. These would include: easing the plight of the poor in the short-term (through their participation in the welfare system); shoring up support for the national Democratic Party-then splintered by pluralistic interests (through its cultivation of poor and minority constituencies by implementing a national “solution” to poverty); and relieving local governments of the financially and politically onerous burdens of public welfare (through a national “solution” to poverty).[2]

The strategy[edit]
Cloward and Piven’s article is focused on forcing the Democratic Party, which in 1966 controlled the presidency and both houses of the United States Congress, to take federal action to help the poor. They stated that full enrollment of those eligible for welfare “would produce bureaucratic disruption in welfare agencies and fiscal disruption in local and state governments” that would: “…deepen existing divisions among elements in the big-city Democratic coalition: the remaining white middle class, the working-class ethnic groups and the growing minority poor. To avoid a further weakening of that historic coalition, a national Democratic administration would be constrained to advance a federal solution to poverty that would override local welfare failures, local class and racial conflicts and local revenue dilemmas.”[3]

They further wrote:

“ The ultimate objective of this strategy—to wipe out poverty by establishing a guaranteed annual income—will be questioned by some. Because the ideal of individual social and economic mobility has deep roots, even activists seem reluctant to call for national programs to eliminate poverty by the outright redistribution of income.[3] ”
Michael Reisch and Janice Andrews wrote that Cloward and Piven “proposed to create a crisis in the current welfare system – by exploiting the gap between welfare law and practice – that would ultimately bring about its collapse and replace it with a system of guaranteed annual income. They hoped to accomplish this end by informing the poor of their rights to welfare assistance, encouraging them to apply for benefits and, in effect, overloading an already overburdened bureaucracy.”[4]

Continue reading →

City region “devolution” means the end of England

The most important policy in Wednesday’s Queen’s Speech wasn’t the EU Referendum Bill, it was the Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill which finally marks the end of the English nation.

The British establishment has defiantly held firm on its policy of denying any recognition of the English nation and is now using the increasing demand for an answer to the West Lothian Question to break England up into artificial regions and wipe the country off the map.

The Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill will see local government in England reorganised around city regions with powers and investment sucked out of rural areas and urban areas outside of the sphere of influence of the city regions. Town hall empire builders will be able to choose to dismantle the local government system in large swathes of the country and replace it with a “metro mayor” (no doubt ‘regions’ to be eventually renamed as Reichsgau and the Metro Mayor as Gaulieter) who will have executive powers over their city region.

There will be very little decentralisation involved in the city region plan with most of their powers being centralised on the city region from local government but there will be very limited powers handed down from the British government to the city regions. Unlike in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland where local government answers to their national governments, the British government will still control English local government and set an agenda that benefits the interests of Big Britishers rather than those of 50m English people.

With its economic and industrial heart ripped out, there will be very little to keep England together and we will become West Midlanders, North Easterners and Bristol City Regioners. Within a generation, English will be replaced with made-up regional identities as the British government, the BBC and the British education system unite to put the final nail in the English coffin.

City regions will never be able to compete against countries on the international stage, they won’t even be able to compete against Scotland, Wales and NI within the UK. They will give the illusion of localism and prosperity but it is just centralisation on a regional scale and prosperity for cities at the expense of the rest of the country.

LARISA BROWN FOR THE DAILY MAIL see also 2012-022 Degrading the morale and capabilities of UK Armed Forces
Britain’s defence is ‘balanced on a knife edge’ and will reach crisis point unless more money is found, a former head of the Royal Navy has claimed.
Warning of the crippling impact of further cuts to the Armed Forces, Admiral Lord West said the UK was on the ‘road to disaster’.
He said Britain was becoming a foreign policy ‘irrelevance’ and accused David Cameron of ‘not practising what he preaches’.
His comments came as it emerged that the Ministry of Defence has been told to slash £1billion from the annual defence budget of £36.5billion in a move that could hit operations overseas.
The department has already suffered devastating cuts. It is understood that Chancellor George Osborne is seeking to cut the budgets of most government departments by 5 per cent this year.
As a result, the Treasury has told departments – with the exception of health, education and international development – to find savings totalling £3billion or more before the Budget in July.
The move has infuriated military chiefs and will anger many Tory MPs, who have repeatedly called for the Prime Minister to commit to spending 2 per cent of national income on defence in line with the Nato target.
Analysts say cutting the defence budget to such a degree would mean the UK would be likely to fall short of the target and this would reduce Britain’s standing on the world stage.
Lord West, a former first sea lord and Labour security minister, said: ‘We must not delude ourselves. We are at a turning point. Unless more money is found for defence, defence is in a crisis.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3103275/Armed-Forces-road-disaster-Ex-Navy-chief-s-warning-amid-fears-1billion-cuts.html#ixzz3bgpjdbOt
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Climate Change is not the only one to suffer cod science.

Chocolate covered science: The terrible state of scientific publishing
Anthony Watts / 7 hours ago May 30, 2015
A scientist / journalist shares his story of a sting operation on the scientific publishing process with frightening results.

chocolate-science Howard Booth writes:

An interesting sting was done on scientific publishing to show how remarkably easy it is to get published despite doing a poor research project (in this case on purpose). John Bohannon, a PhD chemist and science journalist, was contracted to do a documentary for German television on the poor research in nutrition that produces outlandish claims about diet and dietary supplements. They conspired to create a research study intended to produce fantastic results, and see how often their poor research would get called out through the entire publishing process.

The study had a terrible sample size, poor quality control, and zero peer review. They managed to produce factually correct results that made an outlandish claim, write it up, get it published (with their choice of venues as many offered to pick it up), and get it splashed into the media with virtually no challenge to their methodology. It was picked up by several noteworthy outlets and on track to get picked up by Men’s Health magazine, but no doubt John’s confession of the sting will forestall that.

I know that WUWT is primarily concerned with CAGW, but I thought this was an interesting peek into the terrible state of the scientific publishing process, and the media’s inability to hold scientists accountable.

Continue reading →

Napoleon is going to have last laugh

DESPITE David Cameron’s red line insistence on a referendum for the British, on just how long we are to obey our Brussels masters as opposed to our elected Parliament, it is astonishing how even a Conservative government will prefer to obey the EU rather than UK law.

Later this year we will be commemorating 800 years since Magna Carta, sealed on the banks of the Thames in 1215. It is extraordinary to read even now the freedoms, liberties and rights inscribed on those two expanses of sheepskin.

Almost all that we now call the Rights of Man stem from them. So we will have the usual whistles and bells for a British ceremony. DC has earmarked a million pounds for the occasion. The Queen will come to Runnymede to pay tribute. The Guards will present arms.

How odd therefore that David Cameron, in the last Parliament, merrily abandoned one of the Carta’s prime rights in order to please Brussels. Let’s just glance at the history.

Magna Carta crossed the Atlantic Ocean. It is revered in the US. It is written on a wall just inside the Capitol building in Washington, but it never crossed the Channel.

Continue reading →

EU Referendum – What Are We Voting For?
MAY 25, 2015 / PETERWIDDOWS
One of the key issues in the upcoming referendum will be understanding what we are actually voting for. There have been endless analyses about what a Brexit would mean, so voters should have a reasonable picture of what exit entails, if they avoid the scaremongering and propaganda. However, as yet, nobody has framed what a vote to stay in the EU means.

The stated aim of nearly every member of the EU, and the European Commission, is for “ever-closer political union”, with the ultimate goal of a United States of Europe. Does that mean we are voting to be a part of a federal Europe?

Whether or not the voters think they are giving British politicians a mandate for a federal Europe may not matter, as no government is going to subject itself to a never ending series of referendums each time a new treaty change is proposed.

To this end, simply framing the argument as: ‘Yes’ means status quo, and ‘No’ means Brexit and change, is somewhat disingenuous.

Whichever way we vote we will get change. If we vote to stay in the EU, we will see a continued push for federalisation of the union and EU officials will use the UK vote to accelerate this process, seeing it as a roadblock removed. If we vote for Brexit, we’ll see the exact opposite — all of the powers ceded to the EU will be returned to the UK.

Continue reading →

EU wants to merge UK with France
Tuesday, 12 May 2015 13:26
FURY erupted last night after a European Union plot to “carve up Britain” by ­setting up a cross-Channel region was exposed.

EU chiefs have been quietly pouring around 1billion a year of taxpayers money into the regions

EU chiefs have been quietly pouring around £1billion a year of taxpayers’ money into the regions

Senior Tories condemned plans to merge southern England and northern France into a territory called “Arc ­Manche” complete with its own flag.

Brussels chiefs have already earmarked millions of pounds for lavish projects designed to give the zone its own “identity”.

Schemes include a £7.6million “cross-Channel” network of cycle paths, a £2million travelling ­exhibition of “contemporary” ­artworks and even a ­bizarre ­international tour by ­circus clowns costing £5.5million.

Continue reading →

Fire service bans white men from open days – to boost number of ethnic minority recruits

By MATTHEW HICKLEY
Last updated at 13:00 26 January 2008

White men have been banned from fire brigade recruitment sessions because bosses want to hit their diversity targets.
Four out of five “open” days held by Avon Fire Service were restricted to women and ethnic minorities.
Critics last night accused the West Country brigade of discrimination. An MP said the move would fuel resentment and undermine race relations.
Avon’s bosses insist their ban on white men is simply “positive action”.

(Be interesting to know if those responsible for this decision are Common Purpose. it is surely Malfeasance. ed)

Scroll down for more …
Avon fire brigade
Back in October, the same brigade demoted a fire crew who shone their torches at four men they found having sex in bushes.
The decision sparked an outcry from critics who claimed it was politically correct madness.
In the latest incident, five “have-a-go” days at the brigade’s Bristol HQ were set up to allow potential job applicants to try out firefighting equipment.
They also had the chance to chat to staff and learn more about selection tests ahead of an application deadline next week.
Two of the six-hour sessions have been limited strictly to women and ethnic minorities. Another was for women only and a fourth was laid on exclusively for ethnic minorities.
Only today’s event is open to everyone, allowing white men to attend.
Philip Davies, Tory MP for Shipley in West Yorkshire, said: “This sort of thing just makes people’s blood boil and does more damage than good to race relations in this country.
“How would people react if women and black people were banned from an open day?
“I don’t care whether the fire service is only made up of ethnic-minority women – as long as they are the best people at fighting fires.
“If the chief fire officer is so concerned, he should give up his job to an ethnic minority woman instead of depriving other white men of a job.”
One Avon fireman, speaking anonymously, warned that the targeted recruitment drives were ‘not helpful’ and would cause resentment.
“It has a very negative effect on everyone,” he added.
“When you see people from black and ethnic communities the first thing you think is ‘has he or she only got the job because of their minority origin?”
“It’s not helpful to them as they may also feel that this is the case. Open, across-the-board recruitment is the only way to stop this.”
Avon officials said they were trying to recruit women and ethnic minorities because 97 per cent of their 921 staff were white men.
Kevin Pearson, the brigade’s chief officer, said: “I totally refute the allegation that Avon Fire Service is engaged in any form of positive discrimination.
“It is unlawful and we wouldn’t do it. We are doing what we can to encourage applications from women and minority groups who are currently under-represented in the fire service.
“It is my concern to improve diversity so the service reflects the community it serves and we can provide the best possible service.
“But that positive action stops at the point of selection. Once someone has applied, they are selected on merit.”
He said Avon was aiming for 15 per cent of its staff to be female and 3 per cent to come from ethnic minorities.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission said the fire brigade appeared not to have broken any equality laws.
While positive discrimination between candidates is illegal, a spokesman said, encouraging applicants from particular groups is not.
Avon Fire Service said 103 women and ethnic minority hopefuls had attended the three restricted open days held so far.
The women-only event was attended by 47, the ethnic event by 28, and the joint women and ethnic event by 28. The final event, also joint, will be held today.
Yesterday’s session, which was open to all, attracted 179 people within the first 90 minutes.
The open days, along with all other recruitment information, were advertised on the brigade’s website.
Avon and Somerset Police were embroiled in a race row two years ago when the force rejected 186 white applicants at the first stage of selection.
The force received 800 applications for just 180 jobs and admitted it had “deselected” white male applicants in a bid to increase ethnic diversity. Chief Constable Colin Port was forced to apologise.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-510418/Fire-service-bans-white-men-open-days–boost-number-ethnic-minority-recruits.html#ixzz3a5Cp7ORp
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

THE BBC IS A SINISTER ORGANISATION: IT MUST BE ABOLISHED, NOT REFORMED

WWI propaganda came of age. The Establishment realised how naive people’s opinions could be manipulated and moulded. It is a form of deceit and has been refined considerably since then.

Social Media has provided the public with a source of information that has the Establishment in a panic and want to control it and stop the uncontrolled information it provide to the public.

BBC(2)
by MARTIN DURKIN12 May 2015419 Breitbart
The Daily Telegraph says the BBC is ‘outdated’ and wants it to ‘demonstrate its continuing relevance’. Excuse me while I reach for my revolver. The BBC is a State broadcaster. State broadcasting was ‘relevant’ in the same way Communism was.

Let’s spell it out, for those who don’t know the history. The BBC was set up to limit free speech.

In June 1920, Marconi, with backing from the Daily Mail, made the first (private) radio broadcast in Britain. The British State, run by Britain’s ruling class, was horrified. They feared the masses, and they feared free mass communication. In America there had been an explosion of private radio stations, broadcasting whatever they liked. Within months, radio broadcasting in Britain had been banned. Scores of private companies were itching to get into radio broadcasting and repeatedly petitioned the government. In response, the British State announced in 1922 that it would control all radio broadcasting. When TV came along, the same thing happened. Companies like Marconi, the Daily Mail, HMV, EMI and others were dying to plunge in. But TV was declared to be a State monopoly.

Continue reading →

THE BBC IS A SINISTER ORGANISATION: IT MUST BE ABOLISHED, NOT REFORMED
886
8
425
BBC(2)
by MARTIN DURKIN12 May 2015419 Breitbart
The Daily Telegraph says the BBC is ‘outdated’ and wants it to ‘demonstrate its continuing relevance’. Excuse me while I reach for my revolver. The BBC is a State broadcaster. State broadcasting was ‘relevant’ in the same way Communism was.

Let’s spell it out, for those who don’t know the history. The BBC was set up to limit free speech.

In June 1920, Marconi, with backing from the Daily Mail, made the first (private) radio broadcast in Britain. The British State, run by Britain’s ruling class, was horrified. They feared the masses, and they feared free mass communication. In America there had been an explosion of private radio stations, broadcasting whatever they liked. Within months, radio broadcasting in Britain had been banned. Scores of private companies were itching to get into radio broadcasting and repeatedly petitioned the government. In response, the British State announced in 1922 that it would control all radio broadcasting. When TV came along, the same thing happened. Companies like Marconi, the Daily Mail, HMV, EMI and others were dying to plunge in. But TV was declared to be a State monopoly.

We’re now well into the 21st Century and, astonishingly, that State monopoly still holds. The BBC’s resources are vast, crowding out any realistic competition. According to Roger Mosey (former Head of BBC Television News, and Editor of the Today Programme), the BBC enjoys a 70 per cent share of ‘news consumption’ on British TV and Radio.

The BBC shares the same dire failings as every other State producer. Those of us who have worked there know the staggeringly vast waste, the meaningless jobs, the corruption (look at the salaries).

Continue reading →

Australia had a massive problem with Uninvited Boat People (UBPs) forcing their way into Australia. They solved their problem by returning any intercepted to SE Asia. The flow of UBPs has stopped.

The great majority are young fit men. Surely better that they join the police or army in their own county to establish a ‘better life’ there.

The EU could easily use the same technique to stop UBPs coming from Africa and effectively Q jumping ahead of those who legally apply for a visa by paying people traffickers instead up to £5000. If they are destitute how can they pay that?

The more they allow to land in Europe the more will come. Return them to Libya and the flow will stop. EU should provide money and faculties for them to stay in Libya.

The Boat People are anxious to get to Europe to have a better life Style. There are perhaps some 500 million + other Africans who would like to come to Europe for a better life. By sheer weight of numbers that would destroy our ‘better life’ and the better life they are seeking would no longer exist. Surely better to keep their £5000 to improve their home country.

Many drown on the way and the people traffickers are making £millions out of their desperate desire to get to Europe for a better life.

Continue reading →

Call to arrest Climate Change deniers and Scroll down for Angelia Ruskin item

Eric Worrall / April 7, 2015

The champions of Climate Cod science are quite unable to refute the counter arguments to Man Made Climate change so they want to imprison AGW deniers. Shades of the Galileo Affair when the Catholic Church put him under house arrest until his death for declaring that the earth goes around the sun. The Catholic Church, and in 1616 the Inquisition declared heliocentrism to be formally heretical. The Global Warmists have the same mind set. (ed)

They believe people should be punished for being climate skeptics.

Adam Weinstein, of the Gawker, has added his voice to the growing list of greens, who demand a brutal authoritarian response to the vexing problem of people who have a different opinion.

According to Weinstein;

Man-made climate change happens. Man-made climate change kills a lot of people. It’s going to kill a lot more. We have laws on the books to punish anyone whose lies contribute to people’s deaths. It’s time to punish the climate-change liars.

Continue reading →

UK Column Discussion / General / Agenda 21 / AG21 hidden facts

youtu.be/TzEEgtOFFIM  Agenda 21 for dummies  a very good explanation of Agenda 21 – you will need to copy and paste this into Google

Just thought I would let loose some deeper insight to AG21…….

see also http://www.theeuroprobe.org/2016-030-the-un-new-world-order-for-the-enslavement-of-mankind/

Today, the means of pushing the New Age one-world religion is the environmental movement of the UN. The more deceptive aim of the Environmental movement, however, is its use to further the eugenics agenda, by arguing for limits to growth, and creating the backwardness that serves British Imperialism.

Its covert and fundamental aim is the eradication of the white tribes of the world.

The Aspen Institute, together with the United Nations, the Club of Rome, the Tavistock, and other such organizations originating from the Round Table, began propagandizing around the issue of nuclear energy.[1]

Continue reading →

Fron Cyberboris

ED’S MILLIONAIRES 7 in the shadow cabinet and 13 more act as advisers and backers.
Harriet Harman,
Ed Balls,
Yvette Cooper,
Liam Byrne,
Hilary Benn,
Emily Thornberry,
Chuka Umunna,
Jon Cruddas,
Tom Baldwin,
Sir Charles Allen,
Neil Kinnock,
Glenys Kinnock,
Roland Rudd,
Margaret Hodge,
Shaun Woodward,
Michael Meacher,
John Mills,
Assem Allam,
Andrew Rosenfeld
Tristram Hunt

BenSwann.com has become TruthInMedia.com CLICK HERE to learn more.

00000
Many people regard Magna Carta as the first Constitutional guarantee of the basic liberties of the English-speaking world.

Fewer people know that Magna Carta wasn’t imposed on King John just because he abused his power (which after all has been true of most kings and governments throughout history), but because he had handed away the sovereignty of England to a foreign governing institution in Europe. That institution was The Holy Roman Empire.

John had unilaterally handed England to Pope Innocent because earlier arguments with Rome had left England under an interdict (a kind of nationwide ex-communication), so John was facing the possibility of an invasion from a strong, Catholic France with a papal blessing that would have made finding allies impossible and inevitably led to John’s defeat. To split his enemies, and peel away the Church from France, John gifted the pope sovereignty over his entire country and leased it back as the pope’s vassal. For a time, Britain was ruled from Europe.

For the barons at Runnymede, that was the last straw: they responded to the fundamental transfer of power out of their country and forced Magna Carta on John.

More than 500 years later, the (British) founders of the USA, in the very tradition of which Magna Carta was an early part, would make explicit the intuitive principle on which the Barons had acted then, and many have acted since: that the power to govern is delegated by the people governed, in whom it entirely resides. But that principle is so deep in the Anglo cultural psyche that even the barons who faced King John at Runnymede were not the first to state it in some way or another: the Charter of Liberties of Henry I had already formally established in the year 1100 that the rule of the king was by consent and that those who made the Law were not above it.

By this long-standing principle, power is lent by the people, in whom it resides, for a limited time to those in government for the purpose of protecting the rights of those people. A British prime minster today has not more right to give his country away to a foreign power than King John had to give the country away to a pope, and it makes no difference how the prime minister is chosen. And no king or prime minister has any more right to do either than a tenant of my house has to sell or give my house away just because he is temporarily living in it. Power to govern is no more possessed by those who are allowed temporarily to exercise it, than my house is possessed by the person temporarily allowed to live in it.

Silencing skeptics, conservatives and free speech

This is steadily coming to UK (ie Hacked Off, BBC bias, EU trying to get control of all Media)

Anthony Watts / 15 mins ago May 3, 2015
Congressional Democrats and Vatican join White House and Leftist assaults on basic rights

Duct-TapeGuest essay by Paul Driessen

Our scientific method and traditions of free speech and open debate are under assault as never before, by intolerant inquisitors in our media, universities, government agencies, and even Congress and the Vatican.

They threaten our most basic rights and freedoms, our political and scientific processes – and ultimately our continued innovation and invention, energy reliability and affordability, job creation and economic growth, and modern living standards, health and welfare.

Congressman Grijalva and Senators Markey, Boxer and Whitehouse sent letters to universities, think tanks and companies, demanding detailed information on skeptics’ funding and activities – in an attempt to destroy their funding, reputations and careers, while advancing “crony climate alarm science.” Equally intolerable, Democrats and the White House are blocking efforts to ensure that environmental regulations are based on honest, unbiased, transparent, replicable science that accurately reflects real-world evidence.

Continue reading →

The 319 Misbehaving Councillors You WON’T Have Heard About On The BBC

by A.B. Sanderson29 Apr 201520

for more info see http://nopenothope.blogspot.co.uk/

Ukip Deputy leader Paul Nuttall responded to the findings, saying it was “Incredible that these 319 councillors from the legacy parties, all convicted or stood down since January 1st have gone virtually unreported in the national media.”
“If one of these were from Ukip there would be wall to wall media coverage for days.

Campaigning website Nope, Not Hope have published details of 319 councillors from Labour, Conservatives and Liberal Democrats who have been involved with the police over criminal activity or investigated for their behaviour.

The document lists all 319 Lib Dem, Labour and Tory councillors researchers have found since 1st January and which they are updating regularly.

Site founder Dave Briggs wrote, “We have received a number of enquiries about downloadable versions of our list of councillors from other parties who have escaped national media attention for crimes and actions far worse than anything done by the odd UKIP candidate. We have therefore consolidated the list into a pdf document which features all the links, with a breakdown by crime.”

“Our Facebook page will feature rolling updates, and we will update the downloadable version as appropriate. As the document stands, it runs to 24 pages.”

Continue reading →

Generations betrayed is a booklet published by the Campaign for an Independent Britain.
Forward by Lord Stoddart of Swindon
The deliberate dumbing down of British history by the Educational Authorities. ISBN978 1901546 5 5 2 from 78 Carlton Rd Worksop S80 1PH 07092 587 684

The American Environmental Movement – The American Counter-Movement Perspective

By William Walter Kay

Intro

A loose affiliation of millionaires and billionaires presides over a vast well-knit network of like-minded funders, government bureaucrats, and enviro-activists who manufacture phony grassroots campaigns and churn out bogus propaganda disguised as science and journalism in an effort to control economic decision-making across America.

The green billionaires oversee America’s environmental movement which in turn steers major policy decisions and lobbies to further empower ideologically aligned government agencies, like the Environment Protection Agency (EPA), that are statutorily prohibited from lobbying on their own behalves. continue reading go to http://ecofascism.com/review38.html

TORY STANDING AGAINST NIGEL FARAGE RUNS WEBSITE THAT HELPS EU MIGRANTS CLAIM TAX CREDITS.
THE Conservative candidate fighting Nigel Farage at the General Election owns a website that helps foreign nationals claim welfare benefits – despite his party pressing for stiffer controls.
Craig Mackinlay, who is running against the Ukip leader in South Thanet, previously owned a dormant website called Angolmelo.com,

which urged Hungarian migrants to come to the UK for jobs. The website, which was later abandoned, had boasted “substantial opportunities across the UK to work in the agricultural and food processing sectors.” But now it has emerged that Mr Mackinlay is also the partner of accountancy firm Beak Kemmenoe, based in Chatham, Kent, who have a website called claimtaxcredits.com. The new site offers advice to EU nationals on how to claim British tax credits, describing them as “unbelievably generous.” It tells migrants from low-wage economies how they “will almost certainly find yourself in line for a substantial tax credit claim.”
The homepage also says the firm is “the UK’s only professional practice whose sole business is to deal with tax credit claims”. The website features flags of the countries where foreign nationals could qualify to claim and says the businesses, and older people planning for their retirement. “My company – and I – have a particular speciality when it comes to tax credits, which means we have helped significant numbers of people on low incomes to do their best for their families. “As part of this work, we have also helped some foreign nationals to claim tax credits.
“This is completely legitimate from a legal, moral and political perspective: foreign nationals who are entitled to tax credits are working and making a contribution to our country. The system is “uniquely complicated but unbelievably generous.” It adds: “Newcomers to the UK are often unaware of the Tax Credit system