Squelching through the mud, Bob Martin at , blathered on
thus, and it became the following missive...

in 232855 20071011 151411 wrote:

I'm sorry Tudor but I fail to see how you feel the need too back up
the BBC, they are increasingly biased in their representation of the
world. If you were upset at my jibe about living in Warlingham or was
it woldingham. Due to the mature of my work iver the years I have seen
people who are pivitol in creating local communities even to the point
of who lives there yet all in my experience that all ,all get the hell
away from the mess they helped create. It goes firther those who are
sift on crime arn't the ones that have to live with it are they. Why
not sell up home (you'll make a killing) move to the New Addingtom
Estate and lets see how liberal you are four years down the line.

Sorry but I see every day the stuff the BBC conciously ignores

Pardon?


Its damn good job lawrence doesn't hold a position in the BBC News hierachy,
cos he wouldn't hold it for long.

lawrence take your medication, you're even more looney than mayor ken of
london....

And if you don't like what we're saying, take it to uk.politics or whatever the
group is called.
--
Rob C. Overfield
Hull

"Rob Overfield" wrote in message
.. .
Squelching through the mud, Bob Martin at , blathered on
thus, and it became the following missive...

in 232855 20071011 151411 wrote:

I'm sorry Tudor but I fail to see how you feel the need too back up
the BBC, they are increasingly biased in their representation of the
world. If you were upset at my jibe about living in Warlingham or was
it woldingham. Due to the mature of my work iver the years I have seen
people who are pivitol in creating local communities even to the point
of who lives there yet all in my experience that all ,all get the hell
away from the mess they helped create. It goes firther those who are
sift on crime arn't the ones that have to live with it are they. Why
not sell up home (you'll make a killing) move to the New Addingtom
Estate and lets see how liberal you are four years down the line.

Sorry but I see every day the stuff the BBC conciously ignores

Pardon?


Its damn good job lawrence doesn't hold a position in the BBC News hierachy,
cos he wouldn't hold it for long.

lawrence take your medication, you're even more looney than mayor ken of
london....

And if you don't like what we're saying, take it to uk.politics or whatever
the
group is called.
--
Rob C. Overfield
Hull

What amuses me is that people are quite happy to knock Lawrence but they don't
killfile him, why? Is it that secretly they enjoy his posts? Just a wicked
thought.

PS I have just one person in my killfile - a troll.

Weather at Haytor - cloudy and boring 12.6C

Will
--

While we're off piste.......

Although this is not the right group for political rants I don't object to
Lawrences regular offerings in general. Not least because I broadly agree
with his world view.

Other than the odd occasion when it floods the forum, I think it does no
harm to see the internal workings of the people who congregate here for a
whatever reason. It adds a bit of character! I would never take offence at
any comment made by the local pub bore or nut job - what ever he said about
my mother.

To be honest, without the colourful nature of many of the regulars, I
wouldn't waste my time here and I've been coming here since the days when
Will might talk to himself for a few days just to create traffic, over ten
years now I think!!

As for the BBC, I find it incredible that anyone takes any of their output
at face value. They, along with all the big broadcasters, have just been
outed for their inbread stupidity, dishonesty and arrogance. I am proud to
say that I was never taken in by any of it. Since they dropped the "Atlantic
Chart" I don't even watch the BBC forecasts. Way too dumb!!

I wonder who'll pay Algore the most to have the pleasure of broadcasting "An
Incontinent Spoof" or whtever it is. It won't be before DVD sale dry up for
sure.

Maybe it will be broadcast on all channels simulateously. Rather like they
would broadcast the "Protect And Survive" public information films in the
event of a nuclear war.

Paul

Sorry, but I just couldn't help myself.

http://disillusionedandbored.blogspo...d-survive.html

I thought I was going to laught when I watched it.

Quite the opposite. I was a young boy when they first showed this. I had
forgot the effect it had on e then.


Paul

On Oct 12, 9:30 am, Rob Overfield wrote:
Squelching through the mud, Tudor Hughes at , blathered on
thus, and it became the following missive...







On Oct 11, 3:28 am, wrote:
snipped
Tudor that's hogwash isn't it, either Gore's Hollywood blockbuster is
based on actual strong scientific evidence or it isn't.

The fact this fellow who's challenged this 'band wagon propaganda
educational tool ' belongs to the so-called New Party is beside the
point as well. Was the man wrong to challenge this or not. As for his
"dark ideas" that's pretty rich considering some of the Marxist t
members hat exist of the Labour Party: people who are/were so demented
and twisted they all prefer the old soviet union or china to the USA.
regardless of the fact that the two communist countries killed
collectively over 80 million people -now that's what I call really
dark
As you've made this political, why is it that the only lefts I can
find nowadays are well off middle class white people usually living as
far away as possible from the **** they've helped create -how are the
mean streets of Warlingham?

I used to be part of the hard left and their one striking denominator
is their inability to tell the truth, that's why you take such
exception to this lorry driver who belongs this "dark" party and yet
he has exposed the lie and the con in Gore's film
from the hysteria he hopes to create is well paced to cash inhttp://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22663

The truth didn't come from Geoge Monbiot or Johann Hari did it

As for the BBC, they have never ever taken a balanced view on this
topic, they've always promoted al Gushing Gore andd never once
retracted or amended one of their news stories. The Snows of Mount
Kilamajaro come to mindhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4362561.stm. There's
dozens of biased report on the BBC web site on just this subject
alone. Yet you feel that I'm being unfair to them-do me a favour.

That High Court decision was over a week ago, for some reason last
night they for the first time in many years made their dramatic leader
story about flaws in the GW bandwagon-these are the people who hosted
earth-day and yet to tell me that isn't strange. Has some one spiked
your trombone?

.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That's pretty rude.

It's lawrence, he never lets his biases and delusions get in the way of the
facts.

In fact his thinking, unlike the climate, has never changed on decades...
--
Rob C. Overfield
Hull- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Hey Rob the origianal post was about the *facts*. The fact that Al
Gore had posited in his film which did not hold up to scrutiny when
tested at the high court. It's there that the Goricals warnings whiich
where based on chicken entrails and the way they fell; got their come
uppance and chamged from facts to opinions.

On Oct 12, 9:30 am, Rob Overfield wrote:
Squelching through the mud, Bob Martin at , blathered on
thus, and it became the following missive...





in 232855 20071011 151411 wrote:

I'm sorry Tudor but I fail to see how you feel the need too back up
the BBC, they are increasingly biased in their representation of the
world. If you were upset at my jibe about living in Warlingham or was
it woldingham. Due to the mature of my work iver the years I have seen
people who are pivitol in creating local communities even to the point
of who lives there yet all in my experience that all ,all get the hell
away from the mess they helped create. It goes firther those who are
sift on crime arn't the ones that have to live with it are they. Why
not sell up home (you'll make a killing) move to the New Addingtom
Estate and lets see how liberal you are four years down the line.

Sorry but I see every day the stuff the BBC conciously ignores

Pardon?

Its damn good job lawrence doesn't hold a position in the BBC News hierachy,
cos he wouldn't hold it for long.

lawrence take your medication, you're even more looney than mayor ken of
london....

And if you don't like what we're saying, take it to uk.politics or whatever the
group is called.
--
Rob C. Overfield
Hull- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You do have a point about posting elswhere, but in mitigation over the
years where global warming was was seemingly still a theory. in the
last decade it's really taken off, It's now everywhere and this groop
has reflected that. Global Warming post years ago were politely
tolerated or met on many occassions with a "this is a weather group
not a climate NG. and a distiction between weather and climate sharply
drawn But now things have changed . I mean blimey even the Met office
calls it's self weather and climate change with much of it's output
dedicated to climate change.

Maybe if my post had agreed with the GW bandwagon you would have found
it more on topic with more toleration being shown.

On Oct 12, 2:35 am, Tudor Hughes wrote:
On Oct 11, 3:28 am, wrote:





On Oct 11, 1:29 am, Tudor Hughes wrote:

On Oct 11, 12:58 am, "lawrence jenkins" wrote:

Quite spooky really, after my post about the Kent Lorry driver who recently
succesfully challenged the showing of an "inconvenient Truth" to British
school childrenhttp://newparty.co.uk/news/october2007/government-u-turn-in-al-gore-h...
The BBC news at 10 pm last night had this as it's main story. This is very
odd for the BBC as they have always taken a very subjective emotional view
of this subject: and odder still that the high court ruling happened over a
week ago! Just to compound this mystery even further although BBC1 10 pm
news had this topic as it's main headline; I can't find a mention of it
anywhere on their website.

You know in my view and many others that for some time the BBC has become
some sort of lefty middle class increasingly biased marxist organistion.
They rarely if ever question the mantra of global warming and it's dire
consequences, yet last night a week after thye event took place they report
this high court ruling, which in their coverage clearly stated that the
judge believed that nine major tenets of gore's apocolyptical film had no
scientific measurable basis. In fact it painted Gore in a very poor light
two days before he becomes St Gore when he recieves his Nobel Peace prize.

This is all so very odd, as if the editor had been hi-jacked.

There is definitley something afoot at the BBC,

It takes some considerable contortions to have a pop at the BBC
over this matter. In the first place it is a High Court decision and
needs to be reported simply as news. Secondly, the decision will
impinge seriously on what is taught in schools on climate change and
clearly the government is seriously embarrassed about it, as they
ought to be. This makes it all the more newsworthy, hence its
prominence. The BBC would be in neglect of their duty if they did not
report it whether they like the conclusions or not, or whether or not
it embarrasses the government.
Who are the New Party, by the way? I have never heard of them
or know what their agenda is. Their title gives nothing away, making
one suspicious that this coyness conceals some rather dark ideas,
probably of a far-right nature.

Tudor Hughes- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

.
Tudor that's hogwash isn't it, either Gore's Hollywood blockbuster is
based on actual strong scientific evidence or it isn't.

The fact this fellow who's challenged this 'band wagon propaganda
educational tool ' belongs to the so-called New Party is beside the
point as well. Was the man wrong to challenge this or not. As for his
"dark ideas" that's pretty rich considering some of the Marxist t
members hat exist of the Labour Party: people who are/were so demented
and twisted they all prefer the old soviet union or china to the USA.
regardless of the fact that the two communist countries killed
collectively over 80 million people -now that's what I call really
dark
As you've made this political, why is it that the only lefts I can
find nowadays are well off middle class white people usually living as
far away as possible from the **** they've helped create -how are the
mean streets of Warlingham?

I used to be part of the hard left and their one striking denominator
is their inability to tell the truth, that's why you take such
exception to this lorry driver who belongs this "dark" party and yet
he has exposed the lie and the con in Gore's film
from the hysteria he hopes to create is well paced to cash inhttp://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22663

The truth didn't come from Geoge Monbiot or Johann Hari did it

As for the BBC, they have never ever taken a balanced view on this
topic, they've always promoted al Gushing Gore andd never once
retracted or amended one of their news stories. The Snows of Mount
Kilamajaro come to mindhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4362561.stm. There's
dozens of biased report on the BBC web site on just this subject
alone. Yet you feel that I'm being unfair to them-do me a favour.

That High Court decision was over a week ago, for some reason last
night they for the first time in many years made their dramatic leader
story about flaws in the GW bandwagon-these are the people who hosted
earth-day and yet to tell me that isn't strange. Has some one spiked
your trombone?

.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Do you know the one about someone (American, I think) who said
that the State of Texas had gone from barbarism to decadence without
an intervening period of civilisation? You, equally, have gone from
the loony left to the loony right without an intervening period of
sanity, balance and commonsense.
This is a weather group and people (me, for one) waste
considerable energy having to refute your inflammatory nonsense.
There must be some forum where you can rant about the BBC to
your heart's content, surrounded by like-minded nutters. Please find
it and stay there.

Tudor Hughes- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Tudor that first sentence says so much about you and confirms my
perception of you. By the way what is my inflammatory nonesense? That
I say the BBC are biased? That the Labour Party (your lot ) are
cynically tweaking the met office, putting in their own like mnided
people. The only thing I can agree with you on is that maybe I should
not post this stuff here. By the way I'm not part of the looney
right,

Tudor that first sentence says so much about you and confirms my
perception of you. By the way what is my inflammatory nonesense? That
I say the BBC are biased? That the Labour Party (your lot ) are
cynically tweaking the met office, putting in their own like mnided
people. The only thing I can agree with you on is that maybe I should
not post this stuff here. By the way I'm not part of the looney
right,
~~~~~~~~
Uk.politics.misc and alt.british. politics could do with your postings
Lawrence since your thoughts tend to be accurate insights into the way the
Elite rule this country.Notice how The infestation of the BBC with Marxists
and Marxist dogma (that we all pay for)is often reflected in the rest of the
media and your ordinary man in the street thinking is frequently deemed
politically incorrect by the thought police.It's the Liberal Bigots that
endanger free speech far more than Socialists.Don't be silenced by them--we
need you on our political forums.
WB

"william brookson" william wrote in message
...


Tudor that first sentence says so much about you and confirms my
perception of you. By the way what is my inflammatory nonesense? That
I say the BBC are biased? That the Labour Party (your lot ) are
cynically tweaking the met office, putting in their own like mnided
people. The only thing I can agree with you on is that maybe I should
not post this stuff here. By the way I'm not part of the looney
right,
~~~~~~~~
Uk.politics.misc and alt.british. politics could do with your postings
Lawrence since your thoughts tend to be accurate insights into the way the
Elite rule this country.Notice how The infestation of the BBC with
Marxists and Marxist dogma (that we all pay for)is often reflected in the
rest of the media and your ordinary man in the street thinking is
frequently deemed politically incorrect by the thought police.It's the
Liberal Bigots that endanger free speech far more than Socialists.Don't be
silenced by them--we need you on our political forums.
WB


Don't get me wrong I used to champoin the BBC over all other forms of
independent Radio and TV media. I remember once a comparison being made in
the 70's as to defining the allways popular -and in my view nonsense -Tiz
Woz and the more polite well structered Saturday Morning "Swap Shop". It was
defined thus by who, I now can't remember: "Tiz Woz" is the sweet pudding
that's tasty but doesn't do you that much good; whereas "Swap Shop" os more
your meat, potatoes and lots of greens .

Anyhow since that the BBC has become increasingly a tool of the left. Just
listen to radio four it's almost wall to wall programmes about village life
in Zambia, or Somalian cirucumcision theres a few good science programmes
but it never ever looks at the fantastic achievments of western
civilisation medicine, light, meteorology even and so on.

The whole world will eventually benefit from the progress of the last 300
years that started in places like the UK. Now Marxist would argue it could
have stared anywhere once given the favourable conditions: well that may be
the case but it actually started and accelerated with what is now seen as a
dirty word, the west. All the bbc and their ilk do is look at every negative
like slavery and always fail to omit how poor conditions were for most.
Anyhow I digress slightly, yes I will pop over to Uk.politics.misc and
alt.british. politics and give all my good friends here a well deserved
rest. Especially Tudor who can now stop having to refute my inflammatory
comments and therefore give him more time to practise on his trombone, which
by his own addmission he could do better. Just to back up that last
statement: Tudor used to play at a pub just down the road from me ......it
has since closed ;-)

On Oct 12, 12:28 pm, wrote:
On Oct 12, 9:30 am, Rob Overfield wrote:





Squelching through the mud, Tudor Hughes at , blathered on
thus, and it became the following missive...

On Oct 11, 3:28 am, wrote:
snipped
Tudor that's hogwash isn't it, either Gore's Hollywood blockbuster is
based on actual strong scientific evidence or it isn't.

The fact this fellow who's challenged this 'band wagon propaganda
educational tool ' belongs to the so-called New Party is beside the
point as well. Was the man wrong to challenge this or not. As for his
"dark ideas" that's pretty rich considering some of the Marxist t
members hat exist of the Labour Party: people who are/were so demented
and twisted they all prefer the old soviet union or china to the USA.
regardless of the fact that the two communist countries killed
collectively over 80 million people -now that's what I call really
dark
As you've made this political, why is it that the only lefts I can
find nowadays are well off middle class white people usually living as
far away as possible from the **** they've helped create -how are the
mean streets of Warlingham?

I used to be part of the hard left and their one striking denominator
is their inability to tell the truth, that's why you take such
exception to this lorry driver who belongs this "dark" party and yet
he has exposed the lie and the con in Gore's film
from the hysteria he hopes to create is well paced to cash inhttp://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22663

The truth didn't come from Geoge Monbiot or Johann Hari did it

As for the BBC, they have never ever taken a balanced view on this
topic, they've always promoted al Gushing Gore andd never once
retracted or amended one of their news stories. The Snows of Mount
Kilamajaro come to mindhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4362561.stm. There's
dozens of biased report on the BBC web site on just this subject
alone. Yet you feel that I'm being unfair to them-do me a favour.

That High Court decision was over a week ago, for some reason last
night they for the first time in many years made their dramatic leader
story about flaws in the GW bandwagon-these are the people who hosted
earth-day and yet to tell me that isn't strange. Has some one spiked
your trombone?

.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That's pretty rude.

It's lawrence, he never lets his biases and delusions get in the way of the
facts.

In fact his thinking, unlike the climate, has never changed on decades...
--
Rob C. Overfield
Hull- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Hey Rob the origianal post was about the *facts*. The fact that Al
Gore had posited in his film which did not hold up to scrutiny when
tested at the high court. It's there that the Goricals warnings whiich
where based on chicken entrails and the way they fell; got their come
uppance and chamged from facts to opinions.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The first sentence says it all. If you had stuck to that you
would have found a good deal of support here and there could have been
a useful discussion. Instead, you used the post as merely yet another
vehicle for your blind hatred of the BBC, which I suspect was your
orginal purpose.
There are reasons for criticising the BBC from a weather
enthusiast's point of view but they are not the reasons you give, but
more to do with dumbing down, insufficient time and idiotic graphics
etc. But faced with your avalanches of bile most of us feel obliged
to defend the institution, thus inhibiting any reasonable discussion
of their shortcomings.
Look at the length of this thread! Hardly any of it is about
the original subject. But it seems you need to be repeatedly told
that socio-political rants are out of place here. They generate heat
but no light. Take them elsewhere.

Tudor Hughes.