Surreal in Solihull

Surreal in Solihull: "

This is a guest post by Israelinurse

Last week I was approached by the BBC with a request to appear on its BBC1 Sunday morning live religions and ethics debate programme ‘The Big Questions’ as what is termed an ‘expert contributor’. The subject of the debate was to be ‘Is antisemitism on the rise in the UK?’.

Obviously, there is not much debate to be had on that subject as the data gathered by the ever-meticulous CST proves, so it was quite clear that the real debate would be why antisemitism is increasing and I had no doubt that accusing fingers would be pointed in Israel’s direction. I informed Hawkeye of the invitation I had received, and agreed to his request to act as CiF Watch’s representative on the programme.

From the outset, the producers of the programme were well aware that I occasionally contribute to CiF Watch and other forums out of a personal belief that there is a pressing need to try to counteract the tsunami of distortions and downright lies regarding all things Israeli in much of the British media. Indeed, in my initial telephone conversation with the programme’s assistant producer I raised the subject of the BBC’s suppression of the publication of the Balen Report at an estimated cost of some £200,000 so far to the license-fee paying British public. Despite this, they decided that they wanted me on the show.

Then, a couple of days before the journey to Birmingham, I received a further phone call instructing me that I must not mention The Guardian on air. My protests that this rather Fawlty Towers-style ‘don’t-mention-the-war’ restriction was absurd were met with the explanation that as no representative of The Guardian would be present at the time of broadcast, and therefore that organisation would not have the right of reply, there was a danger of legal action being taken against the BBC which they were keen to avoid.

After consulting with Hawkeye and trusting in the intelligence of the British public to connect between a blog called CiF Watch and the publication concerned, I decided that there was in fact no need to mention the ‘G’ word, and so decided to go ahead despite the gag-order.

Upon arriving at the broadcast venue early on the Sunday morning, I considered it prudent to check with the assistant producer exactly under which ‘tag’ (the potted description under one’s name when one appears on screen) I would be appearing. Yet another moment worthy of the Fawlty Towers script writers ensued when I was informed that they did not wish to define me as being connected to CiF Watch as “the public will not know what that is”. So much for the media’s duty to inform; apparently if the public doesn’t know, the BBC isn’t going to tell them!

Having already sacrificed my weekend, there was nothing to be done at this point but just get on with it. Imagine then my joy, dear reader, when I discovered that the ‘expert contributors’ on the opposite side of the debate were none other than Haim Bresheeth and our old friend Tony Greenstein – the latter complete with a ‘Boycott Israeli Goods’ lapel badge the size of a jam jar lid, which fortunately did not make it into the studio. Interestingly, at some point during the programme, both of the above had their ‘tag’ written as ‘Vilified by Zionists’. Now that you really could not make up!

Despite the frustrating format of the programme which at best only allows one to make one or two points in soundbite style, I think we managed to counteract the argument that Israel’s actions are the root cause of antisemitism reasonably well. Alex Goldberg, Jonathan Sacerdoti and Mark Gardner from the CST were all in excellent form and some very pertinent observations came from Rabbi Arkush in the audience.

For those who managed to view the show, the entirely disgusted look on my face at one point aimed in Tony Greenstein’s direction was due to his telling me off-microphone that I had no idea what I was talking about and that I know nothing about Israel!

One does have to ask oneself if a TV programme such as this can in fact make any worthwhile contribution to highlighting the worrying trend of rising antisemitism in Britain. Personally, I very much doubt it. The claim made by the show’s host Nicky Campbell whilst we were in the ‘Green Room’ before the broadcast that the Balen Report is merely a ‘journalistic’ issue serves only to strengthen my view that the ‘group-think’ within the media industry is so well rooted that business – in all senses of the word – will continue as usual until some brave and pioneering producer will stand up and question the commonly held premises which currently prevent the media from tackling the real truths behind the increase in antisemitism in Britain and many other countries.

As long as broadcasters are afraid of legal actions on the part of other media organisations and more concerned about gaining PC credibility by ‘giving a balanced view’ than doing any real analysis …… I’m not holding my breath.

Tagged: Antisemitism, Comment is Free, Guardian, The Big Questions

"

“Israel Controls the BBC” – Jewish Conspiracy Theory from the Jewish Conspiracy Thread #2

“Israel Controls the BBC” – Jewish Conspiracy Theory from the Jewish Conspiracy Thread #2: "

I am sure that some of you were amused that in the David Cesarani piece rebutting Oborne’s peddling of Jewish conspiracy theory that Cesarani highlights some of the antisemitic comments that were posted on the Channel Four comment thread publicizing Oborne’s “investigation” into the so-called “UK Israel lobby”.

Here’s what Cesarani writes:

At 21.34 Stuart Downie posted his congratulations to the brave programme makers who showed that “the UK parliament has, like the USA senate and congress, become Israel’s occupied territory”. It showed that British MPs “buckle under pressure from people whose first loyalty is not to the UK but to the State of Israel”. So in a few lines this posting accused Jews of dual-loyalty and echoed the name ZOG – Zionist Occupied Government – that the far right in the US uses to designate Washington.

A few comments further on and Detta asked, “why does Israel have such power? Why do most of the world seem afraid of upsetting them?” Nazir, posting at 12.11, chimed in that it is “time to reclaim British policy from those working for a foreign country”.

Funny that because those comments have a strong resemblance to comments that appear on a certain site operated by the premier left-wing media publication in the UK run by a certain journalist that recently resigned from the PPC code committee. So lets see what we discover “below the line”.

First off there is this comment from General X to get us warmed up.

GeneralX

17 Nov 2009, 4:08PM

Guess what, I couldn’t care less about Israel, if Iran invaded them tomorrow, I couldn’t give a toss.

Yeh. Who cares if another 5 million Jews are slaughtered in a nuclear holocaust.

Then there is this idiotic comment from raymonddelauney that thinks that we along with HP and MEMRI are part of the Israel lobby.

raymonddelauney

17 Nov 2009, 4:27PM

BigNowitzki

What did you think of Undercover Mosque?

From a long line of distinguished Dispatches journalism – compelling viewing.

Which doesn’t change the fact that after last night’s programme Harry’s Place and CifWatch and MEMRI can begin to be perceived for what they truly are.

I’m still perplexed why I haven’t made CiFWatch’s hate list…

Then we have the old Zionism=Racism trope mixed in with a Nazi analogy.

Constituent

17 Nov 2009, 4:26PM

Israeli racialism is as evil as Nazi racialism

[recreated from Berchman's 17 Nov 2009, 4.43PM comment]

Oh and rather than responding to that comment with “No to antisemitism on CiF”, Berchmans, the self-appointed defender of antisemitism, states “This is counterproductive and an own goal”.

Why is that counterproductive and an own goal Berchmans? Is it because Consitituent fails to adequately conceal the antisemitism behind antizionism?

And it gets even worse (if thats possible!) with this comment from chomskyite that sounds a lot like the antisemitic 9/11 conspiracy theories.

chomskyite

17 Nov 2009, 4:32PM

By the definition of “Terrorism” passed on a vote of 182 in agreement, versus 1 abstention (Honduras) and 2 votes against (The USA and Israel) in December 1987 at teh UNited Nations, both The USA and Israel are deemed to be Terrorist States. If that is so, then surely those MPs and others who support Israel and the War Crimes they have perpetrated are guilty of supporting terrorism as defined in the UK Anti-Terrorism Legislation.

Why then have they not all been brought to justice??

The lack of a independant and on-oath investigation of Dr Kelly and the 7th July 2005 attacks on London must be reviewed in a different light. What part did members of the Labour administration and the Conservative party have in these actions and what did they know about them BEFORE the incidents??

Then we have this comment, which speaks for itself.

ThePrompter

17 Nov 2009, 4:44PM

The Israelis treat the Palestinians like shit and then tries to silence anyone who points this out with the charge of anti-semitism, so I will say in advance that I am anti Israel, anti Zionist, anti anyone who supports Israel, and anti all religions including the Jewish religion. But I am not anti the Jewish race just because they are Jewish.

I object to Israel having any influence at all in British politics and I believe that the fact that they pay for that influence is corruption. If British Jews are so tied to Israel that they are prepared to subvert the British political system to get the Israeli point across then I suggest that they should be charged appropriately. If it is illegal for commercial organisations to pay MPs for influence over legislation, it should be illegal for anyone to do it. The people who tried to get the BBC to gag Jeremy Bowen should be told in no uncertain terms to stick their gag where the sun doesn’t shine.

The Israeli abuse of the Palestinians cannot be justified.

We then have this comment which while not overtly antisemitic provides an interesting insight into the sheer ignorance of Guardian anti-Israel posters:

zendancer

17 Nov 2009, 4:45PM

The sad fact is that British and American Jews feel they must support Israel ,though the thought of living there never crosses their mind.You have to ask is this a way of getting “forgiveness ” from God, as they survived and thrived ,while others died.

The question is, will Israel ever be able to make a future for itself,as it has grouped a huge number of people in a very small area but,there seems very little that will help them build a Nation.

Finally,if you insist Israel must exist why treat the Palestinians so badly ?.Jews claim to have been victimised for years but,does that allow them to take revenge on a group, so weak they can hardly survive even before Israel takes their land etc.Take revenge on your tormentors ,do not repeat history,in the future it may be weak Israel that has to face World fury (after USA loses some of its power and has to compromise).What is happening at the moment is hardly an “eye for an eye ” situation,unless we are talking Crusades era again ?.

A disinterested bystander must wonder what happens when religious zealots meet western exiles ,how will they find common ground to settle disputes.As long as they are threatened they will stand together against the foe but,peace will be more difficult.

And check this comment out. The antisemitism is quite astonishing.

JAH62

17 Nov 2009, 5:27PM

I recall in primary school at the age of 6 being called anti-semitic by the only jewish boy in my class. I was totally unaware at that point what it meant. He called me this because I wouldn’t let him in on our game of football because none of us liked him for who he was, not what he was.

Peter Oborne’s programme last night was important not because of who was involved but because of the implications for British foreign policy and democracy itself. It could have been the nuclear industry or the coal industry lobbying for more power stations, the point being that policy should not be dictated by MP’s who have effectively been bought. David Cesarani’s article simply re-enforces the point that any criticism of Israel is anti-semitic. Indeed you could be pilloried by Israelis for saying you don’t like lox or baegels.

There is a strong jewish community here in the UK and our government’s willingness to listen to them over matters like the West Bank is truly worrying. If Israel feels isolated it is only because they take the view that they are right and everyone else is wrong. It’s the ‘chosen people’ line they cling to. I can remember going out with a very attractive Jewish girl and being mortally offended when I was handed different cutley and crockery than everyone else because I was not Jewish and they wonder why people don’t like them.

Tony Blair’s role in the invasion of Iraq has become abundantly clear now he has dropped the pretense that religion was not part of his life. It was infact key to his agreement to take the UK to war because of his sympathy with the US Judao-Christion faction that is the Republican party. The person that mentioned ZOG is in a sense quite right in that it seems that the same thing has happened to both the Labour Party and now the Conservatives.

We may then say that all our MP’s are corrupt or indeed corrupted unless proven otherwise.

Vote then not for them but for someone who will treat our democracy with some sense of of honour.

Then here are some comments that play on Jewish conspiracy theory (surprise surprise).

forthurst

17 Nov 2009, 5:29

What I find truly disgusting is that our elected representatives allowed themselves to be bought by a pressure group for a foreign power. I believe this group has also had a thoroughly malign influence on our internal politics and the course of our post war history. We need politicians who will not engage with traitors for cash.

antimutoid

17 Nov 2009, 5:30

In a representative democracy, any organisation seeking to subvert that function should be surgically resected and disposed of. However, the electorate lacks the scalpel to perform surgery by choice, instead we flip-flop between different factions of the same party. Indeed, these are two factions dedicated to one thing, to sustain the upward chain and transfer of wealth from the public to private sector. As long as the “Israel Lobby” has a confluence of interest in this aim, it can continue to function and also coincidentally ensure Britain’s “support” of Israel. If however, like its supreme leader the US has shown in the past, should Israel do anything to perturb the pre-existing balance of power, the “Israel Lobby” would be rendered into a talking shop.

Today, Israel has authorised 900 further units to be built in the illegal settlement of Gilo on Occupied Palestinian Territory. I expect the response of the UK government will be a very tepid (at best) displeasure of such actions, and this moderation exists due to necessity. Otherwise, both parties risk losing critical funding. Already CNN has been pressured into calling Gilo a “neighbourhood” rather than a settlement – something discussed in the Israeli press but ignored widely here (as usual).

Its about the the survival of 2 parties, Labour and Conservative, which would would disappear if not kept resuscitated by rich donors and backing by corporate media.

sayonara2

18 Nov 2009, 9:43AM

They forgot to mention Mandelson’s links to Rothscgild and the oligarchs.

he situation is even more extreme in the USA.

Whiting

18 Nov 2009, 9:58AM

David Cesarani’s objections to the programme seem to be based on the fact that the pro-Israel lobbyists are only doing collectively what Murdock and Goldman Sachs are doing, and that it’s all perfectly legal. So that’s O.K. then.

HAMOURABI

18 Nov 2009, 11:38AM

It is really surprising to me that Israel needs a lobby here at all……………..

when they have Daveed Miliband as the British Foreign Secretary !!

He is at this moment in time, too tied up with his assualts on Muslims to make any comment about the latest word from Israel about the additional Al Quds illegal settlement they have just announced !

Perish the thought that you would ever hear a bad word spoken from his forked tongue about Israel and their 110 oustanding resolutions!

Seems as if he is in the right job but the wrong country

Hammie

Then we have the most laughable (and disgustingly antisemitic) comment of the thread with this:

29numbers

17 Nov 2009, 5:57PM

For one thing, BBC is controlled by the Israeli government.

Then we’re back to more Israel-bashing with this virulently antisemitic comment (undeleted I note) invoking, among other things, Nazi analogies.

Conie

18 Nov 2009, 3:22PM

This programme was long overdue and explains the terrible imbalance there has been in government attitudes to the Palestine question and the media’s uncritical support for Israel’s apartheid policies which are illegal and nazi-like in inhumanity. Israel has been getting away with illegality and murder for too long with the shameful acquience of Western governments – with the honourable exception of the Swedes. The Zionists game is being exposed for the evil that it is – hopefully it will go the same way as the racist south africa which failed to maintain itself despite its equally brutal apartheid policy. This will be no thanks to those who make the loudest claims to ‘democracy’ and ‘freedom’.

And yet despite all of the above, this is what the despicable Berchmans writes on the thread.

Berchmans

18 Nov 2009, 3:30

SE26lad

## Many people use attacks on Israel as a cloak for being rude about Jews. ##

Who are the many people doing this??? please identify them so we may all condemn them..if not no to vague , anonymous allegations of anti Semitism on CIF ..

B

And then he writes this.

Berchmans

18 Nov 2009, 3:38PM

contrarian2

## The Guardian is unremitting in its hostility to Israel, ##

This is another totally unreferenced allegation of bias…I dont know know why the Guardian allows this …this could be dangerous for her reporters if Zionist loopies are being fed this tripe.

The pro Israel lobby is alive and well on CIF.

B

And then we have this comment which competes with the “BBC comment” for comment of the thread.

Principled

18 Nov 2009, 3:47PM

Isn’t the very fact that Israel is destined, if the Zionist regime has its way, to become a “Jewish State” (as opposed to a Semitic State) and Britain is still in effect a Christian State (until completely absorbed by the EU, against the wishes of the majority of British people it seems), our two “States” are founded on a gross incompatibility? The very reason Jesus Christ is the foundation of Christianity is because he (and, according to the Bible, God) forsook the then “Israelites” their convenant as they acted contrary to God’s Law – the Law Christians are supposedly bound by.

The heavy presence of Jews (some Zionists) in British and US (and no doubt therefore EU) politics, and the undoubted (according to Oborne et al) insidious influence of Zionism throughout Labour and Conservative politicking – not forgetting Bliar’s previous (till sacked having been “outed”) advisor who amongst others foretold of a government that may well be a “Scottish Freemason collaboration with Zionism” – does not gel within a religious context let alone a “what is best for Britons” context. The concept of a Secular Britian, US and Europe may even be driven by Zionism – after all Christianity must be anathema to fundamentalist Jews and I can think of several prolific outspoken “secularism- demanding” politicians of Jewish origin.

Britain and Brits realised, through turbulent and oft-selfish times, a parliamentary and political system founded on democracy and free speech – I support those ideals, but they are being eroded rapidly and will soon become extinct post Treaty of Lisbon. The EU does not hold with those fundamental principles. There is no reason why people of all faiths and all beliefs might reside humbly and peacfully in British shores, and political parties evolve out of all those peoples, but our system (and therefore those currently in power) must scrupuously cleanse their parties and their policies of any other than those whose intention and drive is purely Britain for the British – not US, nor Israel, nor EU, nor any other – charity begins at home. Only when we have sorted out own obvious mess in this region can we move forward to engage with others in a mature humane and honest way.

All parliamentary presence, voting and politicking must avoid non-Briton interests without fear or favour; not long since we saw 3 Conservative candidates resign at the eleventh hour to make way for a Jewish Leader – Michael Howard – under circumstances suspicious to any reasonable person. Two candidadtes enjoyed polls of around 28%, another around 15%, whilst Howard was only 5% – the three suddenly resigned and Howard became Leader. Where was democracy in the Conservative party that day? Bliar appointed a string of Jewish supremos in various roles of influence, some still there; “appointed” has no place in those roles in a British democracy. Where was democracy in Labour that day?

There are many moderates in all religions and all politics in Britain, they are the people Britons should find in favour of once again.

And what would a thread like this be without deletions of pro-Israel comments:

blockthekick

17 Nov 2009, 4:35PM

I don’t get it. Are you saying that the Jews control Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, David Cameron, William Hague and Boris Johnston?

That would be quite some accomplishment. Then maybe we can have them declare the United Kindom as the latest Israeli settlement.

I see, The Jews control the world. I’ll bet the do it using their MONEY. Isn’t that right raymonddelauney?

My god, they just keep coming out of the woodwork. The Guardian is alllowing straight forward anti-semetic diatribes to be openly shared and promoted in their forum.

[recreated from raymonddelauney's 17 Nov 2009, 4.38PM comment]

blockthekick

17 Nov 2009, 6:02PM

WilliamBapthorpe

said “Oh? You are above empiricism all of a sudden? Berchmans, bless his cotton socks, sometimes writes in quite an odd way, if he’ll forgive me for saying so, but he is not alone in these pages in being fed up to the back teeth with allegations of anti-Semitism being thrown around like confetti with not an iota of evidence. “

Want an example of anti-semitism? Just look at GiyusandTrolls703

above.

And yes, claiming that the Jews control everything from gold mines to the british government is anti-semetic.

What I find particularly sad is that every day that goes by, the anti-semetic comments on this board get more numerous, and the commenters get more bold, and the Guardian seems pretty content just letting it fester.

BertyShalom

18 Nov 2009, 4:07PM

Where is my comment? Why has it been removed? I’m sorry I criticised your precious newspaper editor and said I have seen a lot of anti semitic comments on this website. (as well as intelligent posts critising some of Israels policies).

Why can’t we see how much hatred is wipped up by your correspondents?

Jubilation1

18 Nov 2009, 4:09

People who deny the existence of Palestine are history twisters along with Holocaust-deniers and other evasive criminals.

Just like those who deny the existence of Kurdistan

Let me end this by leaving you with some thoughts from wordsareimportant.

wordsareimportant

17 Nov 2009, 4:25PM

Shermanator and MindTheCrap

After last night’s Channel 4 Documentary, I’m just tired of shouting. There is no point in arguing or discussing. The posts go off topic so quickly and back to anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism at its core.

I am really scared that in ten years, 200,000 Jews will HAVE to make aliyah.

I really don’t know what they win but keep up the good work on other CiF posts. I’m off. Bye.

Oh and I’m waiting with bated breath for Cesarani’s follow up piece on the comments in this thread.

Tagged: Antisemitism, Comment is Free, Guardian, Jewish Conspiracy

"

SOMETHING ABOUT SARAH..

SOMETHING ABOUT SARAH..: "BBC's Kevin Connolly covers the Sarah Palin book tour on Today this morning. (7.24AM) I thought it was a pretty fair although I smiled at Kevin accepting he is seen as part of the liberal elite media. Quite so.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

UK DEATH PANELS...

UK DEATH PANELS...: "The BBC covers the decision by N.I.C.E. to deny those suffering with liver cancer the opportunity to be treated with a drug that will alleviate their pain and hopefully extend their lives by some months. Professor Littlejohn from N.I.C.E. was allowed to get away with blue murder in his attempt to shift the blame onto the Pharmaceutical company behind the drug. Socialised health care, as manifest in the NHS, does not work and the not so nice quangocrats in N.I.C.E. merit much more intense scrutiny from the BBC. I shan't hold my breath awaiting this.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

ON THE ATTACK...

ON THE ATTACK...: "Did anyone else catch the Cameron interview on the Today show this morning? John Humphrys seem determined to suggest that there was some form of collusion between David Cameron and Sir Christopher Kelly when it came to highlighting the total failure of Brown to deal with certain aspects of the Kelly report. What did Dave know and when did he know it? - was the line being pursued by the BBC this morning. Nice way of deflecting the issue. John!

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

Sexy Danish Model Photos

Sexy Danish Model Photos: "Hat tip to Deegee in the comments for drawing attention to the BBC slide show about an 'Oxfam exhibition of photographs taken in Peru by model Helena Christensen to document climate change'.

Yesterday I noted that the BBC's World Have Your Say blog was expressing despair over its failure to inspire interest in the topic of climate change. The WHYS team might consider that one reason so many people are turned off by the BBC's approach to this subject is its readiness to promote the vacuous bullshit observations of hypocritical flyby celebrity eco-activists.

The Christensen photos highlighted by the BBC are mediocre at best (which is particularly disappointing given the huge potential of the subject matter) and furthermore, as Deegee points out, the captions seem to contradict the pictures. One reads, 'These mountains were covered with snow years ago and they're not anymore [sic]', and yet we see snow-covered mountains in shot. Another says, 'Obviously, the waterfalls are less frequent and the rivers are drying out because of the disappearing glaciers', but there in front of us is an impressive looking river.

The caption for the final picture quotes Christensen as saying:

'The most important thing is to stop the huge emissions of carbon dioxide into the world.'

Well, that's pretty rich to say the least. Last month she told the Times that she 'divides her time between Copenhagen and New York, but has a soft spot for Essex' because her agent's charming home is there:

The house is near Stansted airport, which is extremely convenient — you step off the flight and feel you can almost touch the house — but thankfully you can’t hear the planes because the landing strip goes the opposite way.

With those convenient carbon-spewing planes out of earshot it's so much easier to keep the plight of those poor Peruvians out of mind.

(Follow the Times link for Helena's amusing tale about a swimming rodent she once saw. The long winter evenings must just fly by.)

The message is clear - if your charity tin says 'climate change' and has a picture of a celebrity on it, the BBC will help with your PR without a second thought.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

Another Vast Jewish Conspiracy

Another Vast Jewish Conspiracy: "

Robin Shepherd has an excellent op-ed in the Wall Street Journal today discussing how the British media has embraced Jewish conspiracy theory in the wake of the Oborne documentary. According to Shepherd,

[i]n the media, the Guardian newspaper has stepped up its already obsessive campaign against the Jewish state to the extent that the paper’s flagship Comment is Free Web site frequently features two anti-Israeli polemics on one and the same day. The BBC continues to use its enormous influence over British public opinion to whitewash anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial in the Middle East. Its Web site, for example, features a profile of Hamas that makes no mention of the group’s virulent hatred of Jews or its adherence to a “Protocols of Zion”-style belief in world-wide Jewish conspiracies.

Nice to see that someone else is shining the spotlight in the international media on the depths to which “Comment is Free” has sunk. You can read the full op-ed here.

We have disabled comments for this post. If you wish to comment, please join the discussion over at Robin Shepherd’s blog.

Tagged: Antisemitism, Comment is Free, Guardian, Robin Shepherd

"

Question Time 19th November

Question Time 19th November: "The traditional Question Time live-chat is here tonight, so please feel encouraged to join our usual Biased-BBC hecklers and jesters in providing a running commentary on the pronouncements of Immigration Minister Phil Woolas, the Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling, Sir Menzies Campbell, Clare Short and Nick Ferrari. See you at 10:30pm

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

TORIES TO CAUSE CHIEF CONSTABLES TO QUIT?

TORIES TO CAUSE CHIEF CONSTABLES TO QUIT?: "Sir Hugh Orde is the most politicised senior Police Chief that I know of. His period as Chief Constable of the PSNI was distinguished, if that is the correct word, by his playing of the political game to accommodate the requirements of the 'Peace Process'. For example, he hailed the admission of a convicted IRA bomber onto the controlling Policing Board as progress. Sir Hugh was doing the rounds of the BBC this morning, warning that his fellow Chief Constables might well resign if Conservative plans to bring about more accountable local policing come into being.

On a purely political point of view, I hope some of them carry out this threat since we would be well rid of several Chief Constables. But on the topic specifically of BBC bias, why was there no one invited to defend and explain the Conservative view? Why was Orde's own heavily politicised history not examined? This item could be seen as the BBC allowing an attack on Conservative policy through the back door and one wonders if the uberCop-come-politician Orde is not simply paying back his Labour masters?

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

CATHY COME HOME..

CATHY COME HOME..: "

So, after the anointment of Baroness Ashton as the EU's High Representative on Foreign Affairs and Security last evening, the BBC has swung into the 'Hail Cathy' mode this morning. We had independent commentator Neil Kinnock on to say what a swell gal she was and how no one could be more suited to carrying out such a function as the unelected Baroness. The BBC also provided us with a sanitised version of her CV with the pro-Communist CND dimension left unstated - never mind that Dalek in her sitting room.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

Hadley CRU Hacked

Hadley CRU Hacked: "(Update - the Examiner article linked to below stated that this was the UEA Hadley Climate Research Centre. Hadley is not in the title. The leaked documents are from the UEA's Climate Research Unit (CRU). Hadley is a separate Met Office organisation. Thanks to a very agitated Pete Pisspoor in the comments for pointing that out.
Further update - CRU has provided a lot of the 'climate simulations data' for Hadley's LINK project. It has also ' developed datasets in conjunction with Hadley Centre of the UK Met Office'. Search HadCRU and HadCRUT on Google.)

And now, back to our original programming...

This could get very interesting:

The University of East Anglia's Hadley Climatic Research Centre appears to have suffered a security breach earlier today, when an unknown hacker apparently downloaded 1079 e-mails and 72 documents of various types and published them to an anonymous FTP server. These files appear to contain highly sensitive information that, if genuine, could prove extremely embarrassing to the authors of the e-mails involved. Those authors include some of the most celebrated names among proponents of the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW).

CRU has confirmed that it has been hacked and it has cancelled all existing passwords. If you see or hear any mention of this on the BBC please point it out in the comments so we can monitor how this story is spun, both by CRU and the BBC.

Update 13.45. Andrew Bolt has been picking through the emails and documents and, if they are all genuine, the information in them is simply astonishing.

There's a document by CRU's Professor Phil Jones which shows that he was so concerned by Freedom Of Information requests for raw data that he was contemplating ways to remove key information and reconstruct the data to make it fit the preferred conclusions.
There's an email from American climate scientist Tom Wigley advising Professor Jones how to manipulate some data to emphasise warming trends.
There's an email from Jones telling his colleagues to delete incriminatory emails.
There's another from Jones in which he tells a colleague that he's used the same 'trick' as Michael Mann (Mr Hockey Stick) 'to hide the decline', and in yet another he calls the reported death of a climate sceptic 'cheering news'.
There's an email from Mann himself promising senior CRU staff that they can use the RealClimate website to post articles and he will ensure the censorship of any comments from sceptics challenging what they've written.
There's an email from senior IPCC scientist Kevin Trenberth in which he asks, 'Where the heck is global warming?…The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.'
There's an email in which CRU staff promise to blackball scientists from the IPCC report whose work doesn't conform to their alarmist predictions: 'keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is !'

If the BBC's environment correspondents are too upset to touch the story, perhaps the BBC's Open Secrets blogger Martin Rosenbaum will do something about it. Deleting data and emails demanded by FOI requests is, after all, illegal.

Update 17.00. The BBC has reported it here. Hat tip to 1327 in the comments who points out, as does Mr Eugenides, that the potentially explosive contents of the emails and documents are not mentioned.

Update 17.30. The Guardian's report does mention the email contents. There's also a quote from a very angry sounding Michael Mann: 'I'm hoping that the perpetrators and their facilitators will be tracked down and prosecuted to the fullest extent the law allows.'

Update 17.40. Our old friend Jo Abbess responds: 'I've read a number of them, and there's nothing untoward in anything. It's all a hoax to make you think that the Science is unravelling or that the Scientists are misbehaving (aka 'lying').' She adds: 'I await put-downs from the Climate Science community after the weekend.' I'm not sure they'll wait that long to start the 'put-downs', Jo.

Update 18.30. (With a reminder of the health warning until it's all proved to be kosher) One of the leaked emails from Michael Mann addressing the recent 'What happened to global warming? article by the BBC's Paul Hudson which caused such outrage among the econuts (emphasis added) :

From: Michael Mann
To: Stephen H Schneider
Subject: Re: BBC U-turn on climate
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 09:00:44 -0400
Cc: Myles Allen , peter stott , “Philip D. Jones” , Benjamin Santer , Tom Wigley , Thomas R Karl , Gavin Schmidt , James Hansen , trenbert , Michael Oppenheimer

extremely disappointing to see something like this appear on BBC. its particularly odd, since climate is usually Richard Black’s beat at BBC (and he does a great job). from what I can tell, this guy was formerly a weather person at the Met Office.

We may do something about this on RealClimate, but meanwhile it might be appropriate for the Met Office to have a say about this, I might ask Richard Black what’s up here?

mike

Looks like Richard Black is considered a reliable sort by this bunch. I wonder if they're in contact with him now, coordinating their response. (Hat tip to a guest in the comments.)

Update 19.00. The email from the IPCC's Kevin Trenberth (mentioned above @13.45 update - follow link to Andrew Bolt to view) in which he says, 'where the heck is global warming?... The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we cant' comes from the same email exchange relating to Paul Hudson's article. Trenberth seems to be backing Hudson.

Update 19.30. Reminder: 'Climate 'hockey stick' is revived' by Richard Black.

Update 20.00. Richard Black has a round-up of Copenhagen-related news on his blog, time stamped 18.16 UK time today. No mention of the CRU documents. (Last update this evening from me.)

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

CRU Update

CRU Update: "Tim Blair:

'BBC environment analyst Roger Harrabin wants us to feel sorry for his warmy friends'

My contacts at the CRU tell me the e-mails are being taken out of context and insist they are part of the normal hurly-burly of conversations between scientists working on some of the most complicated questions of our times.
They ask how many of us would feel completely comfortable if our own inboxes were emptied out for the world to see.

One small issue with that: most peoples’ inboxes don’t concern the multi-billion dollar restructuring of international economies to counter predicted climate change. Harrabin’s contacts at the CRU are quite literally seeking to change our world, yet they whine about us looking through mere email.

Or as the The Devil's Kitchen puts it 'Ah, diddums…'

From Richard Black's blog:

Because comments were posted quoting excerpts apparently from the hacked Climate Research Unit e-mails, and because there are potential legal issues connected with publishing this material, we have temporarily removed all comments until we can ensure that watertight oversight is in place.

As I pointed out in the previous post, in one of the leaked emails Michael Mann states that Richard Black 'does a great job' and indicates his intent to contact the BBC correspondent to find out how an article titled 'What happened to global warming?' by Paul Hudson was allowed to appear on the BBC website. Opposing views must be not be heard!

Bishop Hill has more goodies from the emails, or search them youself here.

Thanks to all in the comments for the tips.

Update 12.30. BBC to send 35 staff to cover Copenhagen. Nice quote from Conservative MP Philip Davies:

'On the subject of climate change, the BBC seems to lose all its critical faculties and it will probably be just a fawning exercise over these environmentalists anyway.

'It would be nice if one of these 35 people asked some pertinent and critical questions about climate change. But I suspect they will all be subscribers to the extreme environmental agenda.'

I suspect so too. They wouldn't want to upset their friends on the CRU mailing list.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"

Gathering Storm

Gathering Storm: "I am well aware that Peter Oborne’s C4 anti-Jew documentary was not a BBC programme. However, years of biased reporting on the Israeli/Palesinian situation well and truly prepared the ground for Peter Oborne to score his illegitimate goal.
Meanwhile, if anyone was acting as referee, they must have steadfastly withstood the pressure from the mighty Jewish lobby and looked the other way.

The inferior quality of the programme was no secret, and many of the supportive comments that popped up in response seem to be of a similar standard. But the obvious flaws in both provide little reassurance that the groundswell of anti Israel feeling can be disregarded as an aberration of the ignorant; like tattoos.

The insinuations littering the programme were designed to implant the idea that everything ever said in support of Israel was sponsored by wealthy Jews with an ulterior motive, while if any denunciation of Israel remained unsaid, that was only because wealthy Jews with an ulterior motive have suppressed it.

Peter Oborne says anti-Semitism is no longer a racist abomination against Jews, but a weapon used by them to quash protests from victims of the sinister Jewish lobby. The suggestion that Jews cynically use accusations of anti-Semitism as a silencing tool is itself a silencing tool of the first order.

What really is sinister is the media’s suspicion and dislike of Jews and the BBC’s affection for Muslims. Is nobody aware of the gathering storms of 30s Germany? How long before they drop their guard and blurt out that Hitler was right.

See Robin Shepherd’s article in the Wall Street Journal, read his blog. Check out CiFWatch.

Click through to read and contribute comments on this post.

"