´óÏó´«Ã½

OFCOM have got it wrong again... Balance is an "overall" concept rather than having to be balaned within each programme - and as the overwhelming propaganda is on the side of the Climate Change lobby it is hardly damaging to point out the other side of the story. I don't remember OFCOM complaining about "An Inconvenient Truth" equally riddled with bias and bad science...

Al Capone had a white suit maybe Michael Crick will be the Al Capone of Newsnight !

It is plain to see that Newsnight cares more about foreigners and the middle classes than the average British working man. By scrapping Incapacity Benefit the Corporate Nazis have in fact introduced a tax increase on the ordinary working man ( national insurance ) by the back door. I suspect that the ten bob fat cats are generally too dim to notice

Of course disability benefits don't apply to ´óÏó´«Ã½ employees who never go near anything to make them disabled, if they do become disabled they put you in a pram and invent a new high paid tailor made position.

Why are you doing yet more reporting on US Democrat candidates for elections that we, your viewers can't vote in? Why isn't the state broadcaster's flagship news programme reporting on stories that have more relevance to it's British viewers?

On particular story that I consider to be 1,000x more relevant:

"A proposed "super-database" tracking every phone call, text, email and internet usage in Britain in real time would be "a step too far for the British way of life", the information commissioner warned"

"Richard Thomas said there needed to be the "fullest public debate" over the justification for - and implications of - a database which held details of everyone's telephone and internet communications and was potentially accessible by a wide range of law enforcement agencies."

So if Newsnight can bear to tear itself away from the traditional, almost daily topics of US Elections, Global Warming, Zimbabwe, McCanns etc and participate in some kind of debate about this 'Big Brother' database, it would be very much appreciated.

The Man in the White suit....Ealing studios 1952 starring Alec Guinness, story about a suit that would never wear out...but it did. Be careful, Michael.

Quick **Jaded Jean** slip in the cat's away we're getting away with Murdah here tonight ..

MORE EYE POPPING STUFF

"It is eyeball popping stuff, to be honest. How can Morgan Tsvangirai - a man who was last month hiding in the Dutch Embassy apparently fearing for his life - shake hands with his nemesis, Robert Mugabe."

So the member of the Socialist International (Zimbabwe division) and his 'I'm being persecuted' dramatics to solicit the rest of SI's dupes' support for his Trotskyite/anarcho-capitalist bid for power along with UN sanctions agains evil Stalinist Mugabe didn't fly, so he's now trying plan B.

What's so 'eye popping' about that Emily?

Please look up membership of the rose and fist club (The Socialist International) and think Fourth International with a makeover (Why are so many Trotskyites Jewish - e.g. 'Ted Grant' of Militant and 'Tony Cliff' of the SWP by the way?). The MDC/SI's manifesto could be, 'we bust nation states because we don't have one, except maybe for a while longer in the Middle East if we can keep Hamas and Iran at bay through making them look evil. We love the free market (like Hayek and Friedman) but we make out we're all for grass roots (workers') democracy as that means less government/regulation, but we can't say that in case more of you rumble us.'

Where's that anti-racist/fascist searchlight when its really needed? It's a bit too low powered I reckon. 'The Road to Serfdom' was in reality just a program for anarcho-capitalism through vilification of Big Government domestically (by creating a foreign bogeyman).

As to Gordon's efforts in the Knesset, he knows which side his funding's buttered:

"No nation has achieved so much in so short a period of time. And to have accomplished all this in the face of the war, the terror, the violence, the threats, the intimidation, and the insecurity is truly monumental.

"To paraphrase what one poet once said:
You were born against the odds;
You survived against the odds;
You grew against the odds;
You have prevailed and flourished against all odds;"

Someone should brief our PM that when the figures go so much against the odds, one should look very closely into the reasons for this. Affirmative action or positive discrimination isn't democratic it's racist. Look into the demographics of NYC - 2m+ blacks (mean IQ ~85), 2m+ Hispanics, 1m East Asians, 2m+ Whites (of which 2m are Jewish, look up these other groups verbal IQs). And why is it that the House of Lords is nearly 10% Jewish when Jews only comprise half a percent of the UK population, even though that's the same proportion as the British Chinese who are equally bright in terms of school results but as rare as hens' teeth in the House of Lords?

#7 jaded jean ( nee Adrianne )



Why don't you dump the Trotskyite/anarcho-capitalist terminology from the past when in the 21st century they could be more amply portrayed an understood for what they have become, Corporate Nazis. Before you trot out the often used Nazi's were originally good for the common man analogy it has to be remembered that leading figure Rhone was shot by Hitler, along with many others who may have significantly influenced policy. Its clear that Hitler sold out to big business as soon as the field was clear and the one time British mentality that it was wrong to target armaments factories with air raids because they were private property.

LORDS SCHMORDS

Nice stats JJ (#7). Do you know the percentage lawyers in the commons and/or in the government? I have always been lawyerphobic, as the idea of going up in the ranking by getting some devil-incarnate pronounced innocent, is anathema. The obvious link between law and politics is 'win at any cost in terms of truth, integrity and honour, but no one seems to notice. . .

brossen(#8) Because I don't agree? National Socialism (pre 1945 Germany) or Socialism in One Country (Stalinist USSR to 1953, China today, Cuba, Venezuela, N Korea, Iran, Zimbabwei) regulates business, eschews the free market as anarchistic/nepotistic, favours Big Government (the Public Sector) and people's welfare (Old Labour). Their efforts are universally underminded by anarchistic NGOs preaching Human Rights and there's nothing new in the C21st political vernacular other than a lot more crafty PR/subterfuge/spin/makeover. There's nothing National Socialist (nazi) about internationalism by definition. Global capitalism is internationalist/anarchistic and worst of all, it's nepotistic/racist. It vilifies National Socialism (or nationalism) as this resists market penetration through regulation. It makes out that regulation *can't* work a priori, and that the free-market is self-correcting, but the debacle brought about by the likes of Jeffrey Sachs and the Chicago Boys in S. America, Russia and S.E. Asia showed just how facile that assertion is, as does what's now happening across our Public Services in the UK.

Too few people see how Trotskyism and anarcho-capitalism are two sides of the same nepotistic/racist coin.

Now we know that you've got the *former* Chief Government Scientific Advisor we virtually know that the debate will be a sham: try getting Professor Sir David King to debate toe to toe with Lord Monckton and he'd be eaten for breakfast - except of course Sir David would decline. (Monckton, may not be formally scientifically trained but he can definitely "handle" scientific argument up there with the best of them; he didn't get a standing ovation at the Cambridge Union on a whim...)

King's position is to essentially parrot the IPCC/Royal Society/Met Office/etc. line that is being shown up for the utter tosh that it is day by day and month by month: he should be ashamed of himself for having been party to the propagandization of science - as should they.

The problem with this whole issue is the lack of full and frank public debate from which the mainstream media raises their collective game and tries to tease out the subtleties - in effect taking on part of the scientific method (to be sceptical) into their souls - you wouldn't have thought that journalists would find the very difficult: funny old world...

If only you could temporarily ditch Susan Watts (who doesn't "do balance") and replace her with Robert Pigot - tearing himself away from the Archbishop of Cant.'s little global difficulty (for a short "sabbatical") - you might come away more fully enlightened as to the rich and glorious complexity that is the subject matter of the climate science endeavour, coupled with how far it has to go to really deliver actual substantive, predictable theory. "Will that be just the one decade Sir, or would you like a half dozen...?"

Why not take the ´óÏó´«Ã½ Trust's advice and re-instigate "Impartiality" - "Wagon Wheel"-style or otherwise now, rather than when the proverbial starts hitting the fan?

And in that vein, maybe you could find the time to host a series of Newsnight full-length programme debates, one of which must only contain those who dis the IPCC on at least one level: contrary to what you might have been led to believe, they are on many a street corner, hang around some of our most illustrious academic, public and private institutions and some might even be ´óÏó´«Ã½ employ-or-contract- "ees"...

BARE-FACED STATISTICS

Barrie (#9) I'm not sure about The Commons, but Haaretz was rather proud of the Lawmakers in the Lords (which may be an underestimate of the Lords if they are not lawyers of course, I understood the figure to be close to 70). It's interesting to look at the EU ministers and their background/backers/consituencies. And of course, there was all that fuss over Ks and Ps and party funding recently.

Something's not right if this happens and the perpetrators effectively have dual-citizenship, are nepotistic, can claim non-dom status, are protected by the Race Relations Act and accuse those who point out the iniquity/injustice of all this of being conspiracy theorists who are persecuting them. The Bolshevik revolution was a Jewish led revolution which in its internationalist Comintern days conspired internationally to rule the world. It took the Axis powers in the 1930s to thwart that along with Stalin. Now these internationalists are trying another way. How else is one to explain this Jewish vs Chinese anomally?

The ´óÏó´«Ã½ again deliberately presenting those who dispute Man Made Climate Change as some sort of dangerous lunatics. Please let dissenters have their voice too - the ´óÏó´«Ã½ is far too find of mocking people they disagree with. The headline was that the programme did not mislead. It didn't. It was if anything too kind to the Man made Climate Change brigade, who are fundamentalists and pretty rabid about their pet theory. Just as a point of fact, recent authoritative (NASA) measurements have showed that there has been global cooling for the last 50 years.

BTW, if anyone thinks Mugabe will keep to a single line of any agreement at all, they haven't been awake for ten years. His thugs will continue to kill MDP supporters and anyone they dislike. Not a doubt, not a suspicion. That is what they will do. Tsangerai will probably have a car accident. Only when Mugabe dies will Zim change at all, and then there will be Rwanda style chaos. The army knows it, the people know it, our politicians know it. Why pretend? This is Africa, as it always was, and it is the Africa the British handed over to people like Mugabe all over the continent.

Wonderful news that Ofcom has finally exposed the shocking lies that were told during the Great Global Warming Swindle. While it is right to portray opposing views on political issues, nothing can ever excuse lying about scientific evidence. Sadly the film continues to be circulated in other countries, so the damage is done.
A great shame we weren't able to see this discussion in Scotland. Why was it left out in favour of yet another piece on the McCann's? Is that really more important than the exposure of people who lied about the future of the human race?

The performance of Sir David King on Newsnight, desperately defending the flawed and invented science of global warming, tells the viewer all they need to know.

Global warming is an invention which has now snowballed into a movement on which countless jobs depend. No wonder its members become rabid when someone questions it.

The purpose of the global warming scare is twofold:

1. To desperately try to put the brakes on China's industrial development to prevent it becoming the pre-eminent superpower, and

2. An excuse to introduce more taxes on the individual and an excuse to micro-manage every aspect of their lives.

History was rewritten by the Party in Orwell's 1984 - the global warming lobby is attempting exactly the same so have to jump on anyone who dares to question the orthodoxy.

Channel 4's "The Great Climate Change Swindle" made by Wag TV, which Ofcom have allowed off the hook, was made by a company known to make controversial films. Even scientists from the US were misrepresented, two are taking Wag TV to court in the US.

Channel 4 should be fined for allowing such a falsified film to be broadcast. Ofcom should have called expert witnesses as they would have shown how much damage the film has caused, not just in the UK but around the world. And Wag should be fined as well, considering where their so-called research came from. Certain people involved belong to the Climate Coalition, the right-wing lobby group in the US. Need I say more>

Emily take a look at Julie Etchingham's hair it may help you !

TURNER PRIZE BUT NO CIGAR

Behind Sir David King, on a video link, were strange stylised 'buildings' in white with black outline, and through the fuzzy background - a mysterious flashing blue light.
Behind Emily we had high-speed clouds.
I suppose clouds = climate and blue light = threat from authority. It's installation art Jim, and EXACTLY as we know it!

JJ#10

Unfortunately, I like most do not have the benefit of a university education in politics, but perhaps I should define the term " Corporate Nazi "

Corporate Nazi refers to the fact that its followers believe that " the Market "can be dominated by corporations alone with no room left for small business, just franchises. All public services to be handed over to corporations and the population virtually enslaved to the Banks.

Corporate nationalists owe no allegiance to nation states, just worship the internationalist Corporate Multinational Cartel which is currently responsible for the rampant inflation in order to save the theoretical global stock market value.

Yes Earthart, you need to say more. What happened to "I disagree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it"? (I paraphrase) Today, thanks in no small part to the EU, Nu labour, and the ´óÏó´«Ã½, it is becoming almost illegal and certianly damn near impossible to voice dissent to the "orthodoxy", especially that of the Islington classes. As for, "There were lies told and that is inexcusable", may I refer you to our rulers the EU commission, and to countless UK politicians, routinely caught telling huge untruths. We are not stupid, we know a porky when we hear it. And we also know, if you will pardon the intrusion of a fact, that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped dramatically. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.59C up to 0.75C, a DROP in global temperature large enough to erase nearly all the "man made global warming" recorded over the past 100 years. Get used to it, MMGW is merely a theory. Rather like the Pope's ... vide: Galileo.

Tonight's Newsnight presenter, Emily, allowed the ITV4 Head of Documentaries to do precisely what he wanted, which was to stop David King making awkward points. She let him burble on, defending a hopeless position, during which King strove to join-in -to be ignored and interrupted, blatantly! The result is that King could not correct ITV4-Documentary's distortions; and that in fact scientific evidence does, indeed,
substantiate the fears of global-warming. Was she by any chance keeping a career-path open? I hope she did: she didn't do much for the reputation of Newsnight!
D.Thomas

FUTILITY OF THE CLIMATE ARGUMENT

Is it not generally recognised that mankind could not have developed to the current high state of complexity unless an anomalously long period of clement weather had prevailed? There is no evidence that this has happened before. Being anomalous, it follows we were overdue for climate-change.
There seems to be a belief that we are destined to achieve 'Ever Greater Advancement' when the norm is low technology survival. Planet Earth is subject to a range of instabilities that can wipe out entire species - the larger animals being most vulnerable (especially ones who live in cities and have forgotten how to subsist).
Fussing about CO2 and trying to save 6 billion of us by reducing its atmospheric level
(contrary to Chaos Theory) is just displacement activity. Better to try to understand global strife with a view to taming it, and uniting to live on the high ground; if we are not to just give up and behave badly. Of the two, I predict the latter.

In last night's programme the Channel 4 commissioner sought to justify error and misrepresentation on the grounds that it helps promote debate. Is he up to the job?

Channel 4 may have been very clumsy in its viewpoint presentation of global warming, but it does raise the point that we need to get proper facts to debate the issue. There's too much ready acceptance, without proper questioning, of what is pushed on us by learned bodies or those with a political or commercial expedient that it's all our own fault. There is no doubt the world is warming up, but no definitive proof has been shown as to whether it is a man-made or a natural global cycle. Until then, neither side of the argument can claim to hold the high ground.

I must say, it took a lot longer to have the climate lobby attack the programme!!! tut tut naughty Channel 4, musn't upset dear old Al, especially after being awared the Noble prize. The fact is OFCOM didn't find the programme erred in fact, it just didn't put across the other side of the argument!! Excuse me, but that's ALL we hear day in day out. One lone voice of reason and all the toys are thrown out of the pram. No fear of forgetting Voltaire then!!!

Who was it who said if you tell a lie often enough, you will get the masses to believe in it? and with the full weight of the established media and govt, a super fat lie is easily formulated to be fact and believed readily by the stupid unquestioning mind.

The generally excepted global warming theory is a prime example of the above comment with well funded scientist who will always, thanks to govt funding spout the general concensus..and from a position of self interest is always the driving factor in their near hatred for others questioning their research and beliefs. Listening to the ´óÏó´«Ã½ report on the Ofcoms ruling regarding the channel 4 documentary, you would think this doc told lies from start to finish, when in fact it was a well researched piece of work that had a misquote/reported comment and a couple of inaccuracies. OFCOM would have a field-day with the output that the ´óÏó´«Ã½ sometimes produces. There is too much science and research that debunks the common orthodoxy re global warming even though its never heard in the mainstrem media.
The geopolitical support and hysterical push makes it even more questionable as a theory. I am more interested in who really benefits from putting forth these theories and giving it such credibity; what is the real agenda?
Can Ofcom investigate Al Gores claims in his documentary? its already been ripped apart by many eminent scientists and researchers and is viewed by many as scientifically inaccurate from start to finish but this never gets aired for mainstream consumer consumption to ponder and debate...its glossy production and marketing gets the attention of the sheep. Gore gets the gong and the Nobel . Can Ofcom challenge Gores documentary? ... NO!

On a more important note:
Emily let slip her sloan ranger pedigree with a 'yaarh' (yeah)...always new Em to be a bit posh.... nowt wrong with that.

A Great Channel 4 Swindle?

A quite disgraceful piece by Newsnight with a flagrant move to ignore the regulator's findings that C4's programme was NOT misleading.

Professor King was allowed to skillfully manipulate the debate to one of proving / disproving Global Warming. King conveniently ignores the fact that pro-Global Warming scientists are outnumbered between 6 and 7 to 1 in the scientific community. Not that you'd know that from any of the media coverage.

Try running a story on how, on a massive scale, temperature monitoring equipment has been resited to hotter locations...

TRUST BARONS?

brossen99 (#20) Corporate nationalists owe no allegiance to nation states, just worship the internationalist Corporate Multinational Cartel"

Then surely, by definition, the terms nationalist and socialist (nazi) are irrelevent here and this use of 'nazi' is merely a term of derision to tar national socialism?

Since thge end of WWII we've seen the erosion/subversion of nation states (incl. Old Labour's Public Services here) and all major partieshave done this since 1979. This has been in pursuit of international anarchism (the de-regulated liberal-democratic free-market) championed by the USA under the auspices of the Austrian and Chicago schools of economics. Whatever we call it, it's not benevolent if we go by the dysgenesis demographic statistics which I keep referring to (see 'Americas's Perfect Storm' from ETS and the Leitch Report for these in disguise).

As Barrie and others have said, this is a serious problem which should be picked up by Newsnight just in case the perpetrators are not fully aware of where they are headed. Adam Smith was not a liberal, he was an anarchist, just as Trotsky, Thatcher (really Keith ('I thought I was a Socialist') Joseph behind the scenes) and Blair were.



(Your 'corporate nazis' = top right 'trust barons'?)

DONKEY TILTS AT WINDMILL

Follow-up to #29. More on matters not being what they seem but it being Quixotic to expect otherwise?

But it would be nice to see NN pick up on the dysgenics theme.

Tsvangirai you have made a lot of noise about conditions for talks - WHATS CHANGED NOW? Absolutely nothing people are still being killed, Mugabe is still Prez, Mbeki is the mediator with AU and UN absent.

l have always stated its all about Tsvangirai being in power and not the people as he claims. How many times have you dithered, and changed your mind. You do not learn - in the past Zanu has gobbled all opposition - this is it for you - you have betrayed us the people of Zim after all the hardship zanu put us through.

maddy mania on newsnight? go on devote a whole show to it. you know you want to....

the story did not 'grip the world'. it gripped the tabloids looking to make money.

the evidence that this was more about heat than light is that after all the acres of coverage does anyone know the average figure of how many children go missing in the uk every year? of course not. because this was not about education but obsession.

brossen99 - Of course disability benefits don't apply to ´óÏó´«Ã½ employees who never go near anything to make them disabled

You doughnut. Would you include ´óÏó´«Ã½ security correspondent Frank Gardner in that category? Is your job one that puts you at risk of being shot? Please think for ten seconds about how offensive your stupid words were.

Perhaps Dr Milne would be good enough to point us to the parts of the Ofcom report that "exposed the shocking lies that were told during the Great Global Warming Swindle." Furthermore, perhaps he could substantiate his statement by explaining how the mistakes, later corrected, could be described as lies. And would this then also apply to Mann's infamous 'Hockey Stick' (used without apparant irony on the ´óÏó´«Ã½'s website report) or the erroneous use by numerous media of polar bears on melting caps?

Let's not hold our breath waiting as the report does not 'expose lies'. It merely critises a couple of aspects about the producer's methodology.

That a 175 page, highly coordinated complaint organised by David Rado was so overwhelmingly batted off the pitch by Ofcom leads us to ask who is paying for this total waste of time. Will David Rado apologise for such an expensive effort in stiffling debate?

The mistakes - not lies - contained in the first showing of TGGWS were corrected in subsequent showings and the DVD, and do not distract from the other aspects of the film. Al Gore's polemic, The Inconvenient Truth, however, was found by a high court judge to have 11 significant inaccuracies. These have not been corrected. When Channel 4 shows this programme it must surely be referred to Ofcom also - will David Rado be submitting a similar complaint?

And why have the hugely funded anthropogenic global warming theorists not taken TGGWS to the high court?

My biggest concern though is with the ´óÏó´«Ã½'s coverage of the report. Unless it was extremely lazy journalism, it was so, so clearly spun in the favour of the AGW lobby. Either way I personally can no longer trust the news reports from this organisation. This is a very sad situation, especially as I am legally obliged to pay a subscription to it though I'd rather watch other channels. I believe that the ´óÏó´«Ã½'s coverage of the causes of climate change, while it seems to ignore issues of global over population due to underdevelopment, which is the greatest cause of suffering to the people of this planet and the biggest risk to our future, will be its self inflicted fatal blow.

As the ´óÏó´«Ã½ moves ever further away from an ethos typified by Richard Dimbleby to one epitomised by Jonathon Ross, thank heavens for Channel 4!

The ´óÏó´«Ã½ has a chance to reclaim some honour by perhaps reporting on the errors contained in the overblown reactions to the Ofcom report by spokespeople from across the AGW lobby - it shouldn't be hard - it's all there in black and white. Read their quotes; read the report. See if they match or, to borrow a phrase from Dr Milne, expose the lies.

Oh, and Earth Heart... What damage can we attribute to TGGWS? Is there anything on the scale of the real damage driven by the AGW lobby and The Inconvenient Truth of Biomas fuels being grown where food should be, politally totemic yet ineffective windmills blotting our landscape?

'INACCURATE SCIENCE'

Or is it accurate 'Campbellian' journalism which has been misappropriating science for decades? From the 1980s onwards, the Civil Service seemed to be flooded with (usually female) 'Press Officers' who behaved eerily like political commissars.

"The British Government urgently needs to recast the sources from which it draws its climate advice. The shrill alarmism of its public advisers, and the often eco-fundamentalist policy initiatives that bubble up from the depths of the Civil Service, have all long since been detached from science reality. Internationally, the IPCC is a deeply flawed organisation, as acknowledged in a recent House of Lords report, and the Kyoto Protocol has proved a costly flop. Clearly, the wrong horses have been backed."