A Place to Stand

During the recent tribunal the director of BBC News, Helen Boaden, took the stand to declare that the 2006 secret panel was comprised of “scientists with contrasting views.” But as the list proves, all present were solidly in the alarmist camp.   ...Incongruously, also in attendance was Trevor Evans, a  member of the US embassy serving as ECON/EST Officer   ...With a body so loaded with one-sided opinions the only meaningful discussion among these “Specialists” would have been how best the BBC could “sell” it’s message on global warming. Critics could be forgiven for inferring that the few scientists there were only to advise how far the panel could go before any such “message” went deep into the realms of climate propaganda and meeting the bounds of any legal challenge under the BBC Charter.

    I think the final paragraph is a reasonable assessment. Such a body simply could not deliver any sort of expertise on whether catastrophic warming is valid (so many of them being "aid" workers weren't even fit to put the alarmist viewpoint. But they were admirably equipped to say how a propaganda campaign can be run.

    I have done a bit of checking for Trevor Evans online. Assuming the people of that name who are a Berlin Professor and the boss of the American Rifle Association are different Trevors the only reference I can find is that he was Charge d'Affaires to Slovenia in 2000. That is a sort of junior ambassador to a country to small to have a full ambassadot, so quite a high ranking but low visibility post. This was just after the bombing of Yugoslavia so a post in Slovenia would be a sensitive one where one would certaibnly be reqiored to "lie abroad for his country". Indeed a thought strikes. During the coup against Milosevic there was said to be a COA psy-ops operation said to be based in Zagreb Specifically, these were the psyops used to bring down Milosevic.  Was Evans part of that? Certainly it would explain how one could be so relatively high ranking and yet invisible. ECON/EST means Economic- Education, Science and Technology Officer but that seems a meaningless catch all cover,

   The statement by Helen Boaden, now reinstated after the Savile scandal clearly cannot possibly be described as truthful and this, when testified to in court, makes it seem indisputable that she is personally guilty of perjury. It may well be that other BBC employees have also been so.

   Since the British state spent well over a million investigating and prosecuting Tommy Sheriden for perjury, in a case far more complicated and less clear cut, I will be forwarding this to the Attorney General.

   Unless the entire British judicial system is not only wholly corrupt bit willing to be shown indisputably to be wholly corrupt they will put at least a significant amount of effort into prosecuting this and other BBC possible BBC perjurers.

   Also interesting is the number of hits Google generates for 28 gate 456 million today and for Google News 57,800 today (not including, at least at the top, a large number of articles I know of. If the subject was Stonehenge we might expect a 9,000 to one ratio against recent news but since 28 gate is a term invented just over a month ago for a news story the obvious conclusion must be that Goolge News is being censored.

Unpublished (call it a hunch) letter
Sir,
      New developments in the BBC's 28 gate scandal, where the BBC were caught having lied for many years to claim they had the support of 28 "leading scientists" giving the "best scientific advice" - namely that catastrophic global warming was certain and despite their legal duty of "balance" should censor any dissent on the subject. In fact the "scientists" were, with 2 exceptions, not scientists and were all warming activists.

      Unfortunately this news still gets little coverage except online, perhaps because, unlike Savile, it does not involve celebrities or sex or perhaps because it is at least 1,000 times more important.

        The new finding is that in their legal actions to prevent the names of the "scientists" coming out, for which the BBC probably paid over half a million of our £s, BBC News boss Helen Boaden (now reinstated after suspension during the Savile inquiry) told the court that the symposium consisted of "scientists with contrasting views". Neither part of that was true. As Tommy Sheriden learned, lying to a court is a criminal offence known as perjury for which you can and should be sent to jail.

        If Britain is a country in which the Rule of Law applies the authorities, who put over £1 million into prosecuting Sheriden must do the same with Boaden and any other BBC employees whos spoke similarly. That Sheriden was a left wing politician and Boaden is a pillar of the state broadcasting monopoly who has lied and propagandised to promote a catastrophic warming story which, while false, served the interests of government by terrorising the people is irrelevnt. The law must apply to equally to everybody.

Labels: BBC, eco-fascism, Unpublished letters