Fairly Unbalanced: BBC Moves to Silence 'Climate Change Skeptics'

As if ignoring so-called skeptics all these years hasn't done the trick. Now the climate change warm-mongers and propagandists are making official government policy to try and ignore those interested in exposing the climate frauds.

What are they so afraid of?

Opponents of global warming should be given less coverage by the BBC than the climate change lobby, the corporation will rule.

The BBC is set to publish a report tomorrow on its science output announcing changes to rules on impartiality.

Following the overhaul, programme makers and broadcasters will be compelled to give less prominence to those who oppose the scientific community's majority view.

According to the Daily Telegraph, the report draws heavily on an independent review of BBC coverage by Steve Jones, a professor of genetics at University College London.

Professor Jones is understood to have cleared the BBC of any suggestion of bias in its programming.

Oh, so a genetics professor is now a media expert?

But the main conclusion made is that in cases where there is a widely held scientific view, such as on GM crops or the MMR injection, the BBC shouldn't give airtime to critics of the scientific consensus.

That's right. Just shut out the opinion of others and you can all believe your own bullshit.

Wonderful.

BBC 'Science' Reporter Insists Polar Bears In Trouble

I think it is time for the BBC to get a new science reporter. Today's breathless headline proclaims Polar bears can be saved by emissions cuts, study says.

Well that is all fine and dandy except for the fact that the polar bears don't need saving. Their population has been growing over the last decade.
From 2007:

In the Davis Strait area, a 140,000-square kilometre region, the polar bear population has grown from 850 in the mid-1980s to 2,100 today.

"There aren't just a few more bears. There are a hell of a lot more bears," said Mitch Taylor, a polar bear biologist who has spent 20 years studying the animals.

And then there is this story from Jan of this year with anecdotal evidence.

In the Western Hudson Bay area, where harvest quotas were reduced by 80 percent four years ago, communities are complaining about the number of polar bears. “Now people can look out the window and see as many as 20 polar bears at the ice-flow edge,” Flaherty says.

During a public hearing last September focusing on the polar bear population in the Baffin Bay region, hunters reported more sightings of females with three cubs. The normal litter is one or two. Flaherty, himself a serious hunter, says the abundant food supply – primarily baby ring seals – in the area is responsible for the bigger litters.

The on-the-ground reports, if accurate, seem to contradict the official story of the beleaguered polar bear. According to the standard theory, warmer temperatures (caused by human CO2 emissions) are shrinking the ice floe, the polar bear’s main hunting ground, forcing populations to compete for a diminishing food supply. Warmer temperatures also are to blame for the loss of thicker “multi-year ice.”

The BBC writer also seems to be worried about polar bears breeding with grizzlies, and while that might be of some concern if you were to stumble across one of these monsters I wonder if the author is harboring some sort of racist thinking. Can't have those white bears breeding with the brown ones after all, we all know what happens next.

Dr Brendan Kelly of the US National Marine Mammal Laboratory, and colleagues, write in a separate comment piece about the possibility of increased cross-breeding between the polar and grizzly bears.

A polar bear with patches of brown fur was shot by hunters in 2006 and this year, a hunter killed a polar bear thought to be the offspring of a polar-grizzly hybrid.

Dr Kelly suggests that as the ice cap melts and polar bears go ashore, the natural barrier between the bear populations will fall, and such hybrids, dubbed "pizzly bears" by some, might become more commonplace.

But hey, don't let real facts get in the way of your religion, er science.

BBC Weather Forecast: Cloudy With a Chance of Nazis

They're deeply sorry for any inconvenience.

The BBC has apologised for showing footage of a Nazi rally - instead of the weather forecast.

The footage posted on the BBC website showed images of the Second World War German occupation of the Channel Islands.

A human error meant the wrong footage was uploaded on to the BBC's South West region website which includes the Channel Islands.

Web users globally would have been able to spot the error which was quickly changed by BBC staff.

A BBC insider said: "This is another BBC cock-up. People in the Plymouth HQ were jumping up and down about it.

"Anyone looking at the weather website found images of Nazi rallies and the occupation of the Channel Islands which is a particularly sensitive issue.

Heh: BBC Weatherman Flips the Bird On Air

The look on his face is priceless.

A cold front passed over the BBC News channel as the show's weatherman gave the finger to his news anchor.

Simon McCoy, linking to the weather, perhaps with a hint of sarcasm, told viewers the weather was coming up, and would of course be "100% accurate and provide all the detail you could possible want."

At that stage, the cameras cut to Tomasz Schafernaker and his middle-finger salute as McCoy's female co-host gasped. But it didn't stop there as the fast-acting weatherman, realizing he was on screen, swiftly pretended to rub his face in much the same way a cheeky school kid might do when caught in the act.

The camera quickly cut back to a composed McCoy, who simply stated: "Every now and then there's always one mistake, that was it."

The BBC immediately apologized. "Tomasz was not aware that he was on air, and whilst the gesture was only shown for a second, it was not acceptable," a spokesman said.

'I Have Always Dreamed of Coming to Augusta'

Keep dreaming.

Better luck at the British Open, buddy.

A BBC correspondent flew to Augusta, Ga., to cover Tiger Woods' return to golf in The Masters - but instead filed his reports from a golf course more than a mile away.

James Pearce lacked the proper credentials to get inside Augusta National, so he gave his live updates from another local course.

Instead of following Woods and winner Phil Mickelson, Pearce delivered one report with a pair of elderly golfers puttering around in the background.

Pearce watched the four-day golfing major on television, then traveled to the golf course for his standups.

But on his BBC website blog and Twitter account, Pearce gave no indication that he wasn't anywhere near Augusta's famous "Amen Corner."

"I have always dreamed of coming to Augusta," Pearce wrote on the blog.

"This year I have finally made it. There is only one reason for that: Tiger Woods."

It's The Religion Stupid!

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Religious Differences Lead to Honor Killing

The BBC reports that this honour killing was the result of a religious disagreement, but fails to mention which religion or religions. I guess it must be a revival of the old Catholics versus Protestants thing that raged through England in centuries past.

The court previously heard Mehmet Goren disapproved of Tulay's relationship with factory worker Halil Unal because of religious differences and the fact Mr Unal was 15 years older than Tulay.

Tulay Goren was a 15 year old girl, and yeah I might have a little problem if I had a 15 year old daughter having a relationship with a 30 year old guy, but I think I would pursue child molestation charges, and I might be tempted to visit some real harm on the guy, but this father's solution is to kill his daughter.

It has taken 10 years to see justice done because no body was ever found.

I sure wish they would have said what those religious differences might have been.

BBC Asks 'Should Homosexuals Face Execution'?

Just imagine if a conservative news outlet ever posted something like this.

The BBC today asked users of its news website "Should homosexuals face execution?" on a talkboard discussion for a World Service programme for African listeners.

Posted on a BBC News premoderated talkboard, the thread was designed to provoke discussion ahead of the latest edition of interactive World Service programme Africa Have Your Say.

"Yes, we accept it is a stark and disturbing question, but this is the reality behind an anti-homosexuality bill being debated on Friday by the Ugandan parliament which would see some homosexual offences punishable by death," the post said.

The talkboard post asked users to send in their views to the programme, which goes out on the World Service and is also available online.

"Has Uganda gone too far? Should there be any level of legislation against homosexuality? Should homosexuals be protected by legislation as they are in South Africa? What would be the consequences of this bill to you? How will homosexual 'offences' be monitored?," the post added.

Premoderated posts included one from Chris, Guildford, posted at 8.59am, which attracted 51 recommendations of support. He wrote: "Totally agree. Ought to be imposed in the UK too, asap. Bring back some respectable family values. Why do we have to suffer 'gay pride' festivals? Would I be allowed to organise a 'straight pride' festival? No, thought as much!! If homosexuality is natural, as we are forced to believe, how can they sustain the species? I suggest all gays are put on a remote island somewhere and left for a generation - after which, theoretically there should be none left!"

Another, from Aaron in Freetown, said: "Bravo to the Ugandans for this wise decision, a bright step in eliminating this menace from your society. We hope other African nations will also follow your bold step."

Oh my. Give a forum to the yahoos and they'll take advantage of it every time. And these were moderated comments!

Oh, and just for the record, I would vote no.

Goes without saying the BBC will be receiving a lot of grief over this.

Thanks to Instapundit for the link.

'So You're Paid Nearly Twice As Much As An MP to Come On and Talk Nonsense On TV?'

Forget the fact you've got a Labour hack and a TV talking head going at it, making it difficult to root for anyone. Score a knockout for Lord Foulkes as he shreds BBC presenter Carrie Gracie.

Lord Foulkes: 'You are not at all sorry to interrupt me, you are quite happy to interrupt me because you do it constantly, every time an MP comes on you constantly harass them.

'MPs are going around the country, in their constituencies, doing a great deal of work. You never focus on that.

'They are paid £64,000 a year. How much are you paid for coming on television and harassing MPs and other people in this way.

'Can't you tell me how much are you paid out of the licence fee?'
Ms Gracie: 'My salary is...'

Lord Foulkes: 'Yes, Freedom of Information. What is it?'

Ms Gracie: 'My salary is £92,000...'

Lord Foulkes: '£92,000? So you're paid nearly twice as much as an MP to come on and talk nonsense on TV?'

El Baradei Snubs BBC Over Gaza

You know it is getting bad when the head of the Iranian Nuclear Proliferation Committee, I mean the UN International Atomic Energy Agency Mohamed ElBaradei has canceled a scheduled interview with the BBC, also known as the Al Jazeera of Britain.

The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency has cancelled interviews with the BBC over its decision not to broadcast a charity appeal for Gaza.

Guess we don't have to guess which side he is on in the ongoing problems the Israelis are having with Hamas and the Palestinians.

This is the guy who was supposed to keep an eye on Iran, and who kept issuing assurance after assurance that the Iranians were not up to any bad in the pursuit of their nuclear weapons, only to have to admit last year finally that he had not a clue.

We now have a report that Iran may have a nuclear weapon within a year.

I wonder what the "jizya" is that the BBC will have to pay to get back in ElBaradei's good graces?

Sky, BBC Refuse to Air Gaza Propaganda Appeal

Frankly, I'm stunned the BCC is now claiming to be objective. Sky I can understand. But kudos to both of them for refusing to knuckle under to pressure to air the terror propaganda.

Britain's Sky News on Monday joined the BBC in refusing to broadcast a Gaza charity appeal despite pressure from ministers and demonstrators, saying it risked the television channel's objectivity.

The BBC's refusal to air the appeal has further angered pro-Palestinian campaigners who believe the broadcaster was biased towards Israel in its coverage of the Gaza conflict.

But Sky News, the BBC's only domestic rival as a 24-hour television news channel, said Monday that it too felt it could not risk airing the appeal.

"The conflict in Gaza forms part of one of the most challenging and contentious stories for any news organisation to cover," John Ryley, head of Sky News, said in a statement.

"Our commitment as journalists is to cover all sides of that story with uncompromising objectivity.

"The absolute impartiality of our output is fundamental to Sky News and its journalism.

"That is why, after very careful consideration, we have concluded that broadcasting an appeal for Gaza at this time is incompatible with our role in providing balanced and objective reporting of this continuing situation to our audiences in the UK and around the world."

The appeal is by the Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC), an umbrella group of 13 charities including Oxfam and the British Red Cross, which kicks in with coordinated fundraising after disasters such as the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami.

ITV, Channel 4 and Five, Britain's three other terrestrial television broadcasters beside the BBC, have all aired the appeal.

Top Church of England archbishops, government ministers, opposition spokesmen, more than 11,000 viewers and more than 50 lawmakers have called for the BBC to reconsider its decision.

Media Bias: It's Not Just an American Problem

Those of us here in America who have to suffer through the relentless bias of CBS, NBC, ABC, PBS, CNN and MSNBC have it bad enough. The folks over in the U.K. also are subjected to it as well, though they have fewer viewing options.

Prime case in point is this propaganda piece disguised as a comprehensive look at "global warming," or whatever it is the doomsayers are calling it these days.

The BBC is being investigated by television watchdogs after a leading climate change sceptic claimed his views were deliberately misrepresented.

Lord Monckton, a former adviser to Margaret Thatcher, says he was made to look like a ‘potty peer’ on a TV programme that ‘was a one-sided polemic for the new religion of global warming’.

Earth: The Climate Wars, which was broadcast on BBC 2, was billed as a definitive guide to the history of global warming, including arguments for and against.

During the series, Dr Iain Stewart, a geologist, interviewed leading climate change sceptics, including Lord Monckton. But the peer complained to Ofcom that the broadcast had been unfairly edited.

‘I very much hope Ofcom will do something about this,’ he said yesterday.

‘The BBC very gravely misrepresented me and several others, as well as the science behind our argument. It is a breach of its code of conduct.

‘I was interviewed for 90 minutes and all my views were backed up by sound scientific data, but this was all omitted. They made it sound as if these were just my personal views, as if I was some potty peer. It was caddish of them.’

Ofcom confirmed it was looking into a ‘fairness complaint’ about the documentary.

A BBC spokesman said: ‘We stand by the programme.’

Lord Monckton, 56, a former journalist and Cambridge graduate, says scientific data shows the world is cooler today than in the Middle Ages.

Such scientific data is to be squelched since the proponents of the global warming theory have invested so much and can never admit they're been promoting a fraud.

The BBC should be held accountable, but probably never will be. The bias is too entrenched.

London Homicide Bombers Were Funded By BBC's 'Children in Need'

Some people would have complained, but of course that would have caused a grave offense to the people who want to kill them.

Funny how that is.

The BBC's Children in Need gave £20,000 raised by the general public to fund the 7/7 bombers, it emerged last night.

The cash was given to an Islamic bookshop operated by bombers Mohammed Siddique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer who spent it on propaganda videos glorifying Jihad.

It also funded computers, gym equipment and the notorious rafting trip to North Wales made by the pair a month before the attacks on London in 2005, which killed 52 and maimed hundreds.

Relatives of those who died in the atrocity claimed Children in Need was hampered from asking about the money for fear of causing offence to Muslims.

Children in Need Chief Executive David Ramsden last night said he was 'extremely concerned' and ordered an investigation.

But he insisted the charity had had no idea the money was being used to fund terrorism.

The £20,000 was part of an award made to Leeds Community School in the Beeston area of the city

The school was awarded just short of £250,000, of which £20,000 came from Children in Need and was given between 1999 and 2002.

Along with the school, the money also paid for the adjoining Iqra bookshop, which was run by the bombers and was the first place they came together to hatch their plans.

Children in Need and Leeds Council thought they were funding educational work for local children.

Instead, according to Martin Gilbertson, who worked at both the bookshop and the community centre, the atmosphere was anything but educational.

'They blamed everything on the Jewish conspiracy, they hated western culture it was like living with Jihad on a daily basis', he said.

They and Khalid Khaliq, who was jailed this year for terrorism offences, were all trustess of the Beeston Iqra charity.

According to Mr Gilbertson all three made a point of persuading local authorities to hand over hundreds of thousands of pounds which they subsequently used for terror purposes.

When Mohammed Siddique Khan detonated his bomb at Edgware Road tube station one of those who died was 22-year-old David Foulkes who was on his way to a job interview.

His father Graham Foulkes, from Oldham near Manchester, said he was 'horrified' and 'staggered' Children in Need had been funding those who killed his boy. But he claimed that he knew why no questions had been asked.

He said: 'There is a fear of anybody putting their hands up and saying 'just a minute NO' that the community will use that as - will accuse people of being racist or islamophobic and people are so frightened of being branded or labelled with these things that the easy thing to do is just to say yes and give them the money and I think the Jihadist network know that, they manipulate that, they manage it, and they will pull the wool over our eyes'.

Aided and abetted by our friends on the left.

‘Is This a Monty Python Sketch?’

Well, you've got to give them props for at least livening up an otherwise dreary political chat show. Besides, whatever happened to the notion of diversity?

THE BBC has been accused of “stomach- churning” television after inviting a transvestite dressed like Little Bo Peep on to highbrow politics show Question Time.

Viewers of the BBC1 debate programme flooded its switchboard and website with complaints.

As his alter ego Claire, prize-winning potter Grayson Perry, 48, sat alongside Minister Yvette Cooper and Tory shadow security spokesman Dame Pauline Neville-Jones on the panel of Thursday night’s edition.

But debate quickly turned to farce when the camera focused on Perry in a wig and a pale blue gown with a lace-trimmed collar.

“It was like a seated Rocky Horror show,” wrote one viewer. “Stomach-churning.”

Another wrote: “Does the BBC really see a place for such farcical behaviour when discussing issues integral to the nation’s moral fabric?” Other viewers were, at least, able to see the funny side.

One wrote: “Most would be hearing the words but thinking, ‘Is this a Monty Python sketch?’”

BBC Fawns Over Pakistan's Most Wanted Terrorist

The BBC seems to take great pride in being invited to interview Pakistan's most dangerous terrorist, Baitullah Mehsud, as they prominently announce on the web site "By Invitation Only". The article then goes on to list Mehsud's greatest hits, so to speak, such as the assasination of Benazir Bhutto.

This sure seems to be a strange way of describing the meeting.

With such a reputation, it is not surprising that there is a sense of awe as this short, plump, bearded man greets us.

I don't think I would use the word awe. Fear, trepidation, uneasiness, maybe, but I don't think awe would be in there.

The interview concludes with this quote from Mehsud.

"There can be no deal with the US."

I say good deal and I take him at his word. Now I don't know if the Obammessiah wants to sit down and talk to this learned and very religious man, but me personally, I would pick up the hotline to the Pentagon and tell them to warm up the B-52's.

Of course, the story has plenty of references to the usual accusations they use against our military. You know, things like innocent people's homes being bombed and stores being destroyed. Just remember, those same people trotted out for the interviews to tell of the destruction are also these people.

In our garden meeting, "Amir Sahib" (honoured leader) - as Baitullah Mehsud is affectionately called by his men - smiles and shakes his head when this query is raised.

Around us, dozens of militants armed to the teeth listen intently to their leader.

'Like Much of America These Days, the Airline Industry Feels Tired, Worn Down, and Old'

Laughably, this whiny nonsense comes from a guy whose own employers are stealing money from kids.

Some sniveling little shit has a few flights delayed and takes the opportunity to say it's all over for America.

Look at your own crumbling country, pal, and let me know where your best days went.

Like much of America these days, the airline industry feels tired, worn down, and old.

That is surprising in a country that often likes to think of itself as the best.

Arguably, it once was, but the airline industry - like the health system, like schools, roads - you name it, feels like it is just creaking along and leaving its passengers ever more frustrated.

If it sucks so much here, nobody is forcing you to stay.

Oh, and if you could ever identify a better place to live, feel free to move there.

BBC Stealing Money From the Children

It's not enough that the BBC lives on the taxpayer dole, but how low can they get when they're stealing money from the children?

The BBC was today forced to admit to another phone-in scandal in which £106,000 that should have gone to charity was in fact secretly banked by the corporation.

Viewers who called to take part in fundraising phone-ins but whose calls were made just after the lines had closed, were still charged for the call but a BBC subsidiary hung onto the money.

Sir Michael Lyons, the chairman of the BBC trust, which uncovered the practise, said that this was "a serious failure". He added: "This did not help the BBC or the people we serve."

Sir Michael ordered the corporation to hand over the cash due to the charities with interest resulting in a payment of £123,000, and said that disciplinary action could follow.

That disciplinary action probably means BBC executives will be denied caviar for a day.

Moonbats Blowing in the Wind

Shell Oil is withdrawing from a wind power project in the UK and the moonbats are angry. Additionally, by running this article the BBC editors once again document their own stupidity about economics.

A plan to build the world's largest wind farm in the Thames Estuary looks uncertain after Shell said it wants to pull out of the project.

Shell wants to sell its stake in the London Array scheme and said it planned to focus on wind power in the US.

It said that US government incentives offered Shell "competitive returns".

Of course the environuts are furious.

Environmental group Friends of the Earth said that Shell's decision to pull out left "a key clean energy project high and dry".

"Shell announced a 12% profit rise to £3.92bn," the group's energy campaigner Nick Rau said.

"It should be investing those profits in renewable energy projects, not focusing its efforts on making money from sucking fossil fuels out of the ground and contributing to climate change."

Here are a few clues for Rau and the BBC editors.

* Shell has no obligation to you or anybody else but their stockholders. Shell's obligation to the stockholders is to maximize the ROR on the stock, end of story. If you put down Das Kapital for a few minutes and tried taking an Econ 101 class you might have a chance of grasping that reality.

* Neither Mr. Rau or the BBC editors are on Shell's Board of Directors, so what you think they "should be investing" in is meaningless.

* If this wind farm is such a good idea, I suggest that Mr. Rau and the BBC should feel free to go take out a bunch of loans, liquidate all your assets and put every dime you have into this project. I won't stop you. But you have no business telling anybody else what they should be doing with their money.

So what is the downside of the windfarm project?

The chief executive of E.On UK, Paul Golby, said he was disappointed by Shell's decision.

"While we remain committed to the scheme, Shell has introduced a new element of risk into the project which will need to be assessed."

"The current economics of the project are marginal at best - with rising steel prices, bottlenecks in turbine supply and competition from the rest of the world all moving against us."

So, there is a lot of avoidable risk to this project such as marginal economics, competition, and rising costs. Shell did not introduce these risks to the project. They existed already and Shell just decided (correctly, in my opinion) to avoid them.

So if this is such a great investment, I invite the BBC to put all their assets into it immediately.

Otherwise, mind your own business.

BBC Slobbers Over Raul Castro

The BBC cheers the Cuban Communist government as they decide to raise some pensions. I mention the Cuban government is Communist for informational purposes only as the BBC editors somehow forgot to mention that in their article.

Cuban president Raul Castro has said he will raise state pensions by up to 20% and increase wages for court employees.

Raul Castro said the increases, which will come into effect next month, were "fair recognition" of workers' effort.

The BBC then break out the pom-poms for the new Communist leader in Cuba

Since taking over the presidency from his brother Fidel in February, Raul Castro has introduced a series of liberalising economic measures.

They include an easing of restrictions on the ownership of mobile phones, lifting a ban on Cubans staying at major hotels, and allowing private farmers more involvement in how they use their land.

So, how much is this wonderful bounty in the workers paradise?

Under the scheme, according to the newspaper, more than 2.1m pensioners will receive increases of about $2 (£1) a month, raising minimum monthly pensions to $9.50 (£4.70).

Two dollars a month, raising the minimum monthly pension to $9.50 ... wow. That works out to a total income of $114 a year.

I invite all American leftwing wackos such as Sean Penn, Alec Baldwin, Tim Robbins and Rev. Jeremiah Wright to move to Cuba if they hate America so much and try living on $114 a year.

BBC Making Viewers Sick

I usually get sick just hearing the nonstop America-bashing. Apparently though, a redesign is now also making viewers queasy.

Viewers complained of dizziness and nausea as a £550,000 rebrand of the BBC’s news operation, featuring a swirling red globe, was broadcast for the first time.

BBC presenters struggled to keep pace with a day of upheaval as the News 24 channel was rebranded BBC News in an attempt to bring “coherence” to the sprawling operation.

Declan Curry, a business news presenter, promised to “put a pound in the swearbox” after mistakenly telling viewers they were watching News 24, before correcting himself.

Viewers were most exercised by the design changes to the BBC newsroom and the flashy new graphics. Unhappy bloggers compared the changes to the 2012 London Olympic Games logo, which attracted widespread derision.

There could actually be health issues here, believe it or not.

The response echoed the outcry when the BBC overhauled its weather map three years ago. One viewer complained that the new swirling globe induced dizziness. Others found the motion “nauseating” and said that it could prompt epileptic fits.

Here's a recommendation: Don't watch the Beeb. You won't get ill and you'll avoid the propaganda.