BBC BLOGS - Newsnight: From the web team
« Previous | Main | Next »

Wednesday 24 June 2009

Sarah McDermott | 18:29 UK time, Wednesday, 24 June 2009

From the web team:

Bank of England Governor Mervyn King has called for more government action to keep the UK's "extraordinary" budget deficit under control.

Appearing before the Treasury Select Committee, Mr King voiced concern about how quickly the British economy may recover from the global financial crisis and said that plans set out in the Budget to cut deficits were not "clear enough".

Tonight we ask when will Gordon Brown say what he plans to cut - and are there divisions in the cabinet over Brown's strategy?

Also tonight, we have the finale to Justin Rowlatt's Reborn in the USA, in which our Ethical Man makes a 6,500 mile journey in search of solutions to global warming.

It has been an action-packed trip in which we have seen Justin recycle his own excrement, round up rattle snakes and check out Daryl Hannah's hemp oil-fuelled car. You can watch a sneak preview of tonight's film here, and flick through a photo gallery of Justin's adventures by clicking here.

Tonight we ask how the US is tackling the challenge of climate change and whether Mr Obama is delivering as was hoped. We will be discussing with - among others - the former White House Chief of Staff John Podesta, The Secretary of State for the environment Ed Miliband and, of course, the Ethical Man himself.

Plus, we will be taking a look at the burqa debate - and ask whether British politicians would be able to have the same debate here as President Sarkozy has in France. We'll be speaking to Bernard-Henri Levy.

Do join Jeremy for all that at 22:30.

Comments

  • Comment number 1.

    " our Ethical Man makes a 6,500 mile journey in search of solutions to global warming. "

    If he'd called on me I have told him everything and more what he needed to know. But

    " our Ethical Man makes a 6,500 mile journey in search of solutions to global warming. "

    Nice work if you can get it and don't have a conscience as regard what you are supposed to be doing or want to set an example...etc ..etc..

    Celtic Lion

  • Comment number 2.

    A lot closer than 6,500 miles.

    http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/ecodome/

    One of the tricks of sustainable planetary management is not wasting resources searching for things that already exist. Such as those on your own blog.

    Celtic Lion

  • Comment number 3.

    How about some balance on global warming for a change, why not have somebody on the show who doesn't believe in it? Oh wait this is the BBC, no opposition is allowed.

  • Comment number 4.

    Well at least your showing some stills but it could be a lot better,
    here is a little bench mark to aim for:

    http://whitney.org/www/eggleston/index.jsp

    I hope the mods will allow this rare interview with William Eggleston
    one of America's important documentary photographers. Note the
    simplicity and ordinary articulated with fine visual accuracy,
    this brings intensity and makes the work compelling.

  • Comment number 5.

    LETS DO SOME PROPER THINKING (IT WON'T PASS EXAMS THOUGH) (#3)

    If you poke round on the web (link not risked - Blogdog sulking) for the warming of OTHER PLANETS in the solar system, reported by NASA, it becomes likely that Earth is warming too. The question to ask is 'why'. Until we find a duplicate Earth in pre-industrial mode, circling the sun, and inject its atmosphere with equivalent CO2, we cannot PROVE either way. But if we look also at the elegant science of the Electric Universe guys, we find a plausible non-CO2 hypothesis. I keep telling Susan, but she is in the grip of Dogma's Dark Lord. Science is no more valid than governance or finance or religion in the modern world. It is all of a piece.

  • Comment number 6.

    The Iraq Debate Enquiry Is The Cat amongst The Pidgens Is The Terrior amongst The Rats.

    Real Things Remain 2 be really Seen.

  • Comment number 7.

    gordons %10 CUT election/selection mantra is mentally damaged.

  • Comment number 8.

    From the top deck No 11. Wednesday, 24 June 2009

    It is frustrating to know that in 1979 stroke 80 of three young families living in a single bedroom in a Luton terrace house only the adult males of the families spoke any english. As the - male - head of the the family being dealt with had a professional qualification gained in the UK and was working in the blank skills area gaining promotion along the way it was excruciatingly hard to listen to his explanation as to why he saw no need to allow his pregnant wife to learn the the language nor, for him, the value for any of the three - then - children to be educated in indigenous language skills. Why three children of school age during the school day were at home playing football was not adequately explained beyond ...not well.

    Skip forward to 2008 ... a male from Bangladesh on UK benefits for in excess of ten years attending a HMG funded gissa job course was unable to answer any questions with sentences of more than three words of english, some of which had no appropriate relevance to the matter for discussion.

    For many years few observers and commentators have questioned the policies of immigration correctly on the basis available space, infrastructure, and demographic and social changes. The bleaters, blitherers and it-must-be-ok-in-your-backyard-because-it -would-be-ok-in-mine-were-any-to-actually-live-here-ers have suffocated, strangled and buried free discussion by inaccurate cries of racism.

    Then the BNP come along!

    Consequence, rightly, these issues must now be discussed, luvvie! i.e. three immigration pieces on the Today programme inside thirty minutes this morning.

    Suddenly it is not racist to discuss immigration.

    And about time too!

    NN now asks whether it is possible, in the UK, to ever have a sensible debate about socially stroke benefactor imposed non religious attire. Oops, sorry, the burqa. Sadly the fact that it is necessary to ask whether we can ask the vital questions affecting the GBP on the top deck panders to the same level of crassness that the liberal left and suited socialists have used to sacrifice potential, and essential, social cohesion.

    It is in the same way that the yellow star segregated and identified that unnecessary symbolism will isolates and consequently negate integration in the current climate.

    Undoubtedly their will be those for and against - any bets on tonights guest? - and there will be many that start from a bigoted viewpoint but ....

    Secularism begets equality much better than any religion.

  • Comment number 9.

    CLIMATE CHANGE

    The BBC, the media and Government's are just wasting time and resources in their 'climate change quest'.

    homeostasis of the biosphere

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeostasis

    is a very complex process and involves far more than CO2. BBC so stop focusing on it. Natural systems will evolve to maximum stability and productivity.

    Just restore the ecological systems of the planet. Whether in your back garden, the street, the country, the world. We can assist their restoration locally globally.

    Their cumulative affect will provide the optimum conditions for life on Earth- whatever. Simple basic applied planetary engineering.

    The stuff the BBC is peddling is diversionary from the real challenge the sustainable ecological management of the planet for ALL life. It is nothing more than tat. And dangerous tat at that.

    The celebrities are running the asylum.

    As-Salamu Alaykum-Peace be upon you

    Celtic Lion

  • Comment number 10.

    YOU NAILED THAT ONE JAperson! (#8)

    Have you seen what happens in the NHS when a confused stroke-patient meets medical staff qualified in all-but-English? Perhaps they take A WRITTEN test? Or maybe there are no bewildered elderly 'indigenes' sitting in on the oral examination.

    We intrepid British had an excuse when 'they' were inferior and we were kicking them all round 'our' colonies. But now that - if anything - 'they' are intrinsically superior, how do we have the gall to strip them from their one-time-colonial homelands, to serve as cheap labour (even untouchables) here, replicating the old days. I have seen a ward info booklet that not only says 'they' can have a translator, but 'we' can have help if 'we don't understand the staff! Monty Python shall count himself accursed he was not here.

    No wonder the more militant 'theys' want to kill us - so do I. And I am a perishing indigene! If all the wicked Brits were exterminated (instead of bemused Iraqis) we wouldn't do these terrible things. We might even have a bit of money left.

  • Comment number 11.

    # 6
    can't wait

  • Comment number 12.

    JAperson (#8) "Then the BNP come along! Consequence, rightly, these issues must now be discussed, luvvie! i.e. three immigration pieces on the Today programme inside thirty minutes this morning. Suddenly it is not racist to discuss immigration"

    I'm not disagreeing with the good points that you make, I just thought I should point out that nearly two years ago, there was lots of discussion over a week or so about immigration here, but then... as usually happens.., something else cropped up and ...

  • Comment number 13.

    PS

    dAllan169, I am beginning to understand you. Does that mean I have gone mad or are you getting sane? How many loonies does it take to change a lightbulb? 2. One who can see in the dark, and one who has seen the light.

  • Comment number 14.

    Any chance of getting someone who doesn't believe global warming is man-made and not treating them like a cretin? I'd like to see that.
    As for the great burkha debate, Sarkozy is right. The 'bien pensants' are always insisting we should 'respect other cultures' - but perhaps it's time Muslims respected ours? In this country - our culture - we look upon anyone who covers their face as suspicious or downright criminal. We find it offensive that anyone would conceal their face from us. So do the decent thing and uncover your faces or go to live in a country where it is acceptable.

  • Comment number 15.

    There seems to be a belief that all we need is to use less fuel and raw materials and can maintain the year on year growth and lifestyle which has produced the current difficulties. There seems no longer to be an ability to visualise a different way of living. Perhaps we prefer to continue till we fight each other for resources and to get our own way. It sounds like pious ramblings to go against cultural trends but aren.t we supposed to be rational and adaptable or have we teched ourselves too much to remember how.

  • Comment number 16.

    BURKHA DEBATE:

    What would happen if the wearing of Burkha's was completely disconnected from the Muslim religion and Victoria Beckham started wearing one as a fashion statement (remember the sarong... ?) - Gucci of course?

    Would there be such a fuss over people who started wearing them around town (as ridiculous as they may appear!)?

    Personally, I see no reason to cover your face irrespective of your religion or the football team you support etc.

  • Comment number 17.

    Excellent interviews by Jeremy tonight - both the climate change discussion with Ed Milliband & Co, and particularly the lively burkha debate with Bernard-Henri Levy & Ken Livingstone. Bernard's arguments were correct, that it does not give equality to women and does make them subservient. I suspect the real reason politicians do not make the same remarks in the UK is due to the fact that it would hinder trade with Islamic countries, and there is a large Islamic electorate too. Remember what happened with the Danish cartoon row? All Islamic countries banned Danish goods. Britain would never risk that.

  • Comment number 18.

    Ken Livingstone doesn't understand the Muslim issue with his PC blinkered vision. Bet he doesn't have thousands of Ghettoised Muslims living in his area. In Kings Cross, Camden where I live they are the fastest growing ethnic group. It is rapidly becoming the Camden caliphate. On Friday lunchtime the local residents car park area is taken over by predominately Bangladeshi and Somali Muslim males which only gives credence to the French philospher's point about male and female in equality.
    Mats are thrown around in the open air in front of the flats without consideration for non-muslims who might object. Taxpayers money is given in the form of community grants to build mosques and Islamic education centers. One state school is now exclusively Mulim and Id is demanded as a school holiday. Surely religion is a private matter. This outward display is divisive. Ken's multi-culturalism is not working. So much for the melting pot.

  • Comment number 19.

    Newsnight gets it wrong again on the burkha! Imagine having someone like Ken Livingston be the 'non-biased' opinion on the burkha discussion. It beggars belief that they didn't even consider asking a female to join the discussion. The point is that if we allow the burkha in the U.K., we are subjecting the very women (who escaped from this type of religious degradation in their own countries) to be forced again into submission by the males in these 'non-integrated' communities we've allowed to flourish. I find this absolutely apalling in modern society. We open our doors to asylum seekers and then recreate their hell right here in Britain.

  • Comment number 20.

    10. At 9:57pm on 24 Jun 2009, barriesingleton wrote:
    YOU NAILED THAT ONE JAperson! (#8)

    Heres wishing that you would be able to say the same thing, about the same subject, in praise of HMG in due course. Bets being taken .....

    12. At 10:33pm on 24 Jun 2009, JadedJean wrote:

    Good and accurate observation, thank you. And the real fear is that the issue will drift the same way again. Whatever anyones opinion as to why the BNP gained two seats cannot be ignored - as quasi indirectly by MR L in tonights NN - especially by the politicians. As previously said Mr Woolas is trying to deal with the issues but whom so often gets the airtime? Answer IMHO The bleaters, blitherers and it-must-be-ok-in-your-backyard-because-it -would-be-ok-in-mine-were-any-to-actually-live-here-ers!

    Burqas .....

    Mr Levy put the case far better than expected. Mr Livingstone represents whom? - Answer IMHO The bleaters, blitherers and it-must-be-ok-in-your-backyard-because-it -would-be-ok-in-mine-were-any-to-actually-live-here-ers!

    Whew! Nightmare that would have been to type so, seriously, thanks for copynpaste -

    Whomsoever asks the GBP?

    No-one .....

    Outcome .....

    Two BNP MEPs.

  • Comment number 21.

    #8 JAperson

    I always read your interesting posts, this one is a jewel, I hope NN read them carefully as well. ; )

    Ever since John Simpson hid under a burka, I've always worried who is inside one!

  • Comment number 22.

    Reported in The Sun yesterday.....
    Published: 24 Jun 2009

    THOUSANDS of riot cops were called in last night to stop anarchists helping UK-bound asylum seekers from storming the Channel Tunnel.
    Police armed with batons, rubber bullets and CS gas held back hundreds of protesters at Coquelles, near Calais.

    The No Borders activists, who come from all over Europe including BRITAIN have threatened to rip down fences to help migrants across.

    Calais mayor Natacha Bouchart has blamed the UKs lax asylum and benefit systems for the immigrants in her town.

    She also wants border controls to be lifted so they can come to Britain.


    As the BBC hasn't reported it, did it really happen, or is The Sun going mad?

  • Comment number 23.

    dAllen at 7 wrote:

    "gordons %10 CUT election/selection mantra is mentally damaged"

    Gordon knows the proletariat (your average thick labour voter of which there are many) only need to hear a few short nippy sound bites - and as often as possible - and Gordon knows he will get his core voters, as well as the waverers to not vote Tory at the next general election; tell a lie/talk nonsense often enough blah blah blah...Blair was a master at this technique. Anyway, regardless of what they say at the run up to the next general election, Labour wll be annihilated.

    Muslim women are covered because their men don't trust themselves.
    Ban religion.. its dangerous!

  • Comment number 24.

    So, Mr. Livingstone believes that those who 'attack Muslims', or, more accurately, QUESTION and CHALLENGE Muslims' views, fear Muslims 'may drag Western society back to the Dark Ages'.

    This could only happen if loony-lefties like him allowed it or, more accurately, PROMOTED it - which I'm sure he's itching to do.

    They let their 'toleration at all costs' blind them to what the rest of us (outside of the Leftie confines of the broadcast media) can clearly see: subjugation of women as a matter of course.

    It's a breathtaking irony - completely lost on them - that a group that is the most antagonistic and hostile to religion and feminist in beliefs, fiercely defends the right, of those who practice an extreme religion, to deny a woman her freedom of choice. Don't believe any Muslim woman who says wearing the Burqa, Niqab or Hijab is a personal choice; she's been conditioned since childhood to wear it and feel 'naked' without it.

  • Comment number 25.

    IS IT MY OVERHEATED IMAGINATION (at 72) ?

    When a woman expertly paints the area around her eyes and then, having covered all else, peers through a slit in that defensive facade, is this not blatant exploitation of the male? The only burqa that bears scrutiny (!) is the one with the fencing mask on the front. Let's get Esther back on the streets interviewing the wearers. I predict the ones with painted eyes are on a power trip, not crushed and subservient. 'Muslim eyes' (note the eye-ist terminology) already start with an unfair advantage - the adornment, and slit burqa, just exacerbate this.

    "The eyes have one language everywhere." (George Herbert) The eyes looking fearlessly out of that slit project - with no need of translation - "In your dreams little man".



  • Comment number 26.

    #25 Barrie Good point! I'm always amused at the heavily made up eyes! Very sexy!

    I wonder if this form of dress, which is mainly adopted in hot countries, was originally to protect women from the sun. I've thought this for some time. They don't get sunburnt, and I believe arab men like women with dark hair, and a very pale skin, and I was told this by a man. All this veiling would have been good protection from the sand storms as well, as it could easily cover the airways. Although I thought white reflected heat, and black obsorbed it, but perhaps white wasn't available, or reserved for men, as they worked outdoors.

    Perhaps originally these clothes all had nothing to do with religion, but were merely protective garments. I wish muslim men and woman would post here with their views.

  • Comment number 27.

    Nos4
    Is a rare interview with Willian Eggleston posted on The Whitney Museum of American Art. Eggleston is one of Americans most celebrated documentary photographers who works in colour. It says something to me that the BBC moderators have a problem with it.

  • Comment number 28.

    #26 ecolizzy
    An interesting take on the history of the burqua!

  • Comment number 29.

    Ecolizzy #23

    "I wonder if this form of dress, which is mainly adopted in hot countries, was originally to protect women from the sun."

    I believe you are right, I once had it explained to me by an Arab friend that the total swathing of the figure (both sexes) was to defend the wearer from the sun. He also tried to explain to me why black works better than white (something to do with convection currents within the garment) but I wasn't quite convinced about that. We can certainly discount the necessity of wearing such an extreme garment in this country on account of the climate. Unless there is a waterproof option of course.

    Burkas (Burqas) worry me. They hide the wearer's identity - now why should that be be necessary unless skulduggery is afoot? In conversation they deny the listener of all the subtle nuances of meaning that are usually picked up in facial expression. (You can't tell when they are lying.) It's just old fashioned bad manners to me like someone wearing sunglasses when they speak to you.

    Some will say that it is to cover the woman's magnificent beauty (what - ALL of them?) so as not to excite any passing male, driving him into a sexual frenzy which he cannot control. Far from filling this particular western male with jealousy for the massive macho charge barely contained withing the average Muslim male, I'd say it showed nothing more than a distinct lack of civilisation. Not something to be proud of.

    As Strugglingtostaycalm explained, it is pointless asking the wearer of the Burka why she does it as she probably doesn't know.

    JJ will probably suggest that it is 'a good thing' inasmuch as the little woman should be kept from the rest of society, at home, bearing children and not causing trouble on the streets. ;-)

  • Comment number 30.

    In response to the Quote from Bryan Appleyards thought experiments blog:
    Bernard, Ken and the Burqua
    Jeremy Paxman kept me up last night by trailing a confrontation between Ken Livingstone and Bernard-Henri Levy on the subject of Sarkozy's remarks about the wearing of the burqua. Only the prospect of Ant and Dec taking on Ludwig Wittgenstein on the vexed question of the private language argument could have induced more eager anticipation. //
    Paxo tried to steer them to the heart of the matter, the cultural differences between our two 'great' nations, but he needn't have bothered, the abyss that is the Channel was up there on the screen for all to see. And burquas? I don't know. I don't like them, they depress me and they depress everyone I know. But what are you going to do?

    Bernard-Henri Levys argument was predominantly based on the issue of equality between men and women which, one can quite safely say, methinks, Nicolas Sarkozy has proved himself to be not only a real believer in but also a practical proponent of. All these women in important positions in his Government, and not only white on top of it!

  • Comment number 31.

    EXTINCTION: THE PRICE OF FEMALE LIBERATION?

    kebabmon(#16) "Personally, I see no reason to cover your face irrespective of your religion or the football team you support etc."

    Men like to have sex with women. If they see an attractive face they sometimes follow the female and try to mate with her. In Islam there are strict rules about this and especially adultery.

    The Islamic world has above replacement level fertilty, the Liberal-Democracies do not Eastern Europe now 1.1-1.3). Interestingly, the Orthodox Jews also have strict rules of behaviour and appearance for their women. Their birth rate is also above replacement level too. Below replacement level fertility ultimately leads to extinction. Before that, the economies start to crumble through differential fertility.

  • Comment number 32.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 33.

    thank goodness for iplayer that allows one to FF past nonsense like ethical 'happy pills' man.

    burkas

    i think ken spotted the motivation. a narrative that has selective discrimination against muslims.

  • Comment number 34.

    #26 Ecolizzy

    From a physics perspective you are very close. The absorption or emission depends on a number of factors.

    A motorbike engine ( yes got it in again) which is air cooled when running is hotter than the environment. In a hot environmental conditions the lack of temperature gradient could cause over heating.

    As the engine needs to radiate heat away it will do this more effectively if it is black. What we are looking at is the optimum equilibrium point depending on conditions.

    If someone was in a hot climate but in the shade. Black would radiate more heat away from the body than white. remember the human body is already at 37c anyway so body heat must be radiated away. In cooler climates there is a greater temperature gradient to do this.

    New Fazer is also correct in that the circulation of air withing the garment plays a role.

    There again there has always been this thing about equality for women, all looking the same is levelling. This standardisation of dress also removes the need for all the pointless fashion circus flying round the world. "I'm better than you because I can afford these high priced exclusive designer clothes". Perhaps taking that away people get judged on ability and attitude.

    Women only showing their eyes. Well when it suited marketing to sell Turkish Delight chocolate it was quite acceptable.

    Just throwing some ideas into to pot.

    Celtic lion

  • Comment number 35.

    "It's a breathtaking irony - completely lost on them - that a group that is the most antagonistic and hostile to religion and feminist in beliefs, fiercely defends the right, of those who practice an extreme religion, to deny a woman her freedom of choice. Don't believe any Muslim woman who says wearing the Burqa, Niqab or Hijab is a personal choice; she's been conditioned since childhood to wear it and feel 'naked' without it." - Strugglingtostaycalm

    Actually Strugglingtostaycalm, without me having to tell you that stereotyping absolutely anyone is just plain wrong, I thin kit's fair to note that a lot of the women who choose to wear the hijab, veil, niqab, burka, jilbab etc. did not wear one as a child but chose to wear one in their teens, 20s or maybe even much later such as their 40s or 50s.

    Many of the second generation ethnic Muslim women in Britain were not brought up knowing anything about Hijab/Jilbab/Burka - especially if their parents are South Asian. Their culture largely only promoted a basic scarf if that and not anything akin to the Arab-style dress.

    Many British Muslims of South Asian origin who wear the Hijab, Burka or Jilbab have chosen to later in life after learning about a more orthodox Islam. Of course, there are instances of women being somewhat 'forced' to wear various cultural/religious dress, but this is in the minority of cases and this would be wrong.

    Today, some third and fourth generation ethnic Muslims dress their children in Hijab but because they and their parents are inherently British, they will most probably be as free to choose how to live and dress when they are older.

    Islamic dress should not be looked at with any more hostility that one would afford Nuns with Habits, Orthodox Jews with Kippas or Yamulkes, or religious observing Christians, Jews and Muslims who wear gowns and robes.

    The fact here is simple, we are a democratic nation who doesn't dictate to people what they should wear. For the sake of security, many Muslim women who wear the veil do remove the face veil for ID photographs for passports and driver's license and are more than happy to comply further if ID probed further by a female member of staff.

    The fact that many people are suggesting they feel insecure, threatened or suspicious of women who cover their face, or anyone who covers their face fo rthat mater, says more about the person themselves. There is so much prejudice being made by people on the news and on these threads towards women who wear the burka or veil - but realistically if you want to know more about the women, how they feel and help to alleviate some of your own fears about them, the best thing would be to talk directly to them and not speculate without their input. Peace.

  • Comment number 36.

    BECAUSE YOU'RE WORTH IT

    NewFazer(#29) "JJ will probably suggest that it is 'a good thing' inasmuch as the little woman should be kept from the rest of society, at home, bearing children and not causing trouble on the streets. ;-)"

    Excellently anticipated NewFazer. Your post was under moderation when I posted my contribution.

    I am of course being deadly serious. We know not what we do. Knowing being an intensional idiom of propositional attitude, it is as reliable as snake-oil.

  • Comment number 37.

    at 29:

    "JJ will probably suggest that it is 'a good thing' inasmuch as the little woman should be kept from the rest of society, at home, bearing children and not causing trouble on the streets".

    This would be a good thing!

    There are fundemental differences between the sexes. Men fart, sweat and swear whilst holding the TV remote..women make tea and have babies. You can't play around with a million years of evolution.

  • Comment number 38.

    Blog Dog's a little edgy today. Maybe Jan Fennel could help?

    The link was to a shot of a young woman wearing a burka - slung back over her shoulder to reveal a bikini. Now, the other evening BBC4 treated us to a quick history of TV holiday programmes. This involved several shots of young women wearing only the lower half of their bikinis (I think we referred to them as monokinis at the time). So it can't be the female form which got Blogdog up onto his/her hind legs, Auntie Beeb is OK with that. Then it must be fear of an Islamic backlash at the root of it. "We can't allow that, someone might get upset!" PC, cultural Marxism, cultural fascism, call it what you will. Go back and find who was at the root of it, it might surprise you. It was JJ not long ago who pointed out the number of black/brown/red/whatever exclusive groups which are deemed allowable contrasted to the fact that any 'white' group was quite beyond the pale. Something going wrong with Auntie Beeb here, pandering to these over delicate sensibilities. (Anybody looked up 'pandering' lately?)

  • Comment number 39.

    SomewhereInBlighty #35

    "Islamic dress should not be looked at with any more hostility that one would afford Nuns with Habits, Orthodox Jews with Kippas or Yamulkes, or religious observing Christians, Jews and Muslims who wear gowns and robes."

    Absolutely right - it's ALL ludicrous.

    Could you comment on how we should view the fact that western women in Muslim countries are looked upon with hostility unless they wear sleeves? How on earth can an arm possibly offend any reasonable person?

  • Comment number 40.

    DEGREES OF FREEDOM (#34)

    Hey Celtic, how much 'black body' (:o) radiation are you going to get when the air temperature is equal-to/above 37 degrees C? Might this have something to do with the invention of perfume in the East - rather as the multi-armpitted Jatravartid folk invented the aerosol deodorant BEFORE the wheel? (Oh Douglas Adams, you are sore missed.)

  • Comment number 41.

    Ecolizzy

    BLACK IS BLACK

    Black is black because it does not reflect or emit light in the visible spectrum. It emits in the infra red (heat). Much of the energy from the sun is in the visible spectrum.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGeFf_rIAVQ&feature=related

    Plants use chlorphyll which absorbs in the too extreme ends of the visible spectrum. The red and near infra red and also towards the blue end. What is left is in the middle green. On a hot day walk into a wood under the canopy. It is cool because the leaves have absorbed the energy in converting CO2 and water to carbohydrates and oxygen.

    Black absorbs the visible light but re emits it in the longer wavelength infra red. This is why black feel warm.

    So if you were in the desert and wore a long loose black gown and were naked underneath it allowing an air space and insulation gap for convection and circulation movements. Yo would probably be cooler than say wearing a mini skirt and high heeled shoes.

    The black clothing is radiating heat in the infra red. The loose fitting providing a circulating 'air gap' next to the skin.

    One of the most bizarre dress codes i find is people like politicians, business men, lawyers and TV journalists. I've noticed most have a piece of material tied tightly round their neck.

    This seems almost compulsory in our society. It seems that if you go for an interview, court or almost any where you are expected to follow this bizarre dress code of having a thin piece of cloth pulled tightly round your neck. If you do not follow this strange custom you are treated as a second class citizen. It is compulsory in all but word and very discriminatory.

    I see no practical reason for it and looks stupid to me. Perhaps NN could start asking questions why we are expected to have pieces of material tied around our necks.

    If you don't believe me start looking at what the men wear on Newsnight. Most will have a piece of cloth knotted around their neck. If you haven't noticed have a look. I bet they think it is really smart.

    Me I can't take seriously anything any man says when he also has a piece of cloth tied around his neck. It's absolutely hilarious.

    Celtic Lion

  • Comment number 42.

    There appears to be a drive to securlise Muslims. Might that be anything to do with their anti-usury and higher than replacement level fertility rates? Might we be seeing some clever 'Stalinist' demographic warfare at work?

  • Comment number 43.

    A STRATEGY FOR DEFEATING (all) THE ENEMIES OF BRITAIN.

    Now that the military are clearly emboldened by the emergent truths of Iraq, Kelly, Terror, Afghanistan, 9/11 etc. might we hope for a military coup, after we have enough of 'our personnels' back in Blighty? Our poor 'only obeying orders' rank-and-file must surely know by now that their comrades died (and were high-tech maimed) 'that a few deluded Egos might live'?

  • Comment number 44.

    Cookieducker (#37) - you are a treasure! My sudden hoots of laughter quite frightened the dog.

    (Now SHE could show blogdog a thing or two - especially where rabbits are involved).

  • Comment number 45.

    Ooops.

    I should point out that my post at 38 was in response to my post at 32 being removed. The main text of which was enquiring what the preferred spelling of burka/burkha/burqa/burqua was. (All the previous being OK according to Google.)

    Also to apologise to Jan Fennell for spelling her name incorrectly.

    (Actually I think it was jolly sporting of blogdog to have allowed 38 through although he now appears to be gnawing away at 39.

  • Comment number 46.

    IT MAY NOT BE MAD - JUST AN ALTERNATVE..

    thecookieducker (#37) Isn't it just a little odd that almost any female or male who has been in a stable relationship for any length of time would agree? Even the major researchers in sex-differences (e.g. Doreen Kimura, Diane Halpern) make these points and lament the misleading political correctness peddled in our times. We know there are very important differences and yet something destructive, peddled as the opposite, is at work. That it is destructive shows up in biological fitness - i.e the birth rate. What those arguing the contrary (and they would, wouldn't they, either as saboteurs or 'useful idiots') have to accept that in a Liberal-Democracy, when the demographics shift as they are doing, Muslim ways will become de rigueur.

    Who would campaign for the reproductive destruction of an entire ethnic group?

  • Comment number 47.

    KCL #41

    "Me I can't take seriously anything any man says when he also has a piece of cloth tied around his neck. It's absolutely hilarious."

    "I see no practical reason for it and looks stupid to me."


    Hear, hear! Couldn't agree more although I often wear a piece of cloth around my neck but it's called a Buff and is highly practical.

    I'm impressed you got that comment through, I got badly mauled at 39 for making a similar comment. However, the item of clothing in question wasn't a 'tie', it/they were other equally impractical garments. I'd better not say which. I'm in enough trouble already today. It's one of those days.

  • Comment number 48.

    Wow! #39 made it!

    GOOOOOOD boy Blogdog! Did that nice Jan Fennell give yoou some treats then? Now bring the rabbit back to daddy...

  • Comment number 49.

    SomewhereInBlighty #35

    "The fact that many people are suggesting they feel insecure, threatened or suspicious of women who cover their face, or anyone who covers their face fo rthat mater, says more about the person themselves."

    Wrong. It is a manifestation of one culture being drowned out by another. ANY incoming culture appears to be given ascendancy over the indigenous culture in UK these days. Equality? Nonsense! The English culture is the underdog these days, anybody else can claim immunity for any odd behaviour they want by saying "It's my religion/culture." But if a white native says has the temerity to say he doesn't subscribe to someone hiding their identity while he speaks to them - then expect trouble.

    I suggest you sit down and watch Life of Brian several times this evening.

  • Comment number 50.

    #41 Mr Lion, that really made me laugh, that bit of cloth is the only fun thing about modern mans dress! ; ) At least they can go a bit mad with it, and "show off" their personality! And no my husband doesn't wear one, and neither of my sons if given the chance!

    I've thought for a long time about this covering thing, the men are also covered with their trousers and long overdress thingys. And they all wear a hat of some sort either skull cap or huge turban. I expect it is all to do with protecting themselves and keeping cool, than it ever has with religion. Trouble is, the human race is very OCD prone, and if god forbid we don't follow the norm, the world will end.

    I've also just thought of greek robes, they were supposed to be, according to frescos etc. to be loose flowing garments, to protect again from heat. It looks as though it was only the poor who dressed in more minimal clothes, so perhaps it's also a wealth indication as well. Crumbs why don't we look at these things in the round, and not just a religionist point of view.

    And I suppose all national dress is just pointing out, "hey, I'm different to you", but us in the west have lost our identity.

  • Comment number 51.

    #40 Barrie

    Absolutely. The system does reach an equilibrium at that point 37c then we do need the other variables. Evaporation of sweat inside loose fitting clothing.

    And also what is called adaptive behaviour

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdEnxNog56E


    Celtic Lion

  • Comment number 52.

    Last night Newsnight scotland stated that "climate change is happening, that is beyond doubt". That is, of course, a complete, total & deliberate lie that could never under any circumstances be maintained by any broadcaster that was not wholly & completely corrupt.

    I ask Newsnight to withdraw it.
    Otherwise we will have to take it that the BBC is deliberately maintaining it.

  • Comment number 53.

    Post 13 Barrie I am Mad and Sane at the Sane/Same Time. (it does help)

  • Comment number 54.

    HHhhmmm and what does JJ keep telling us? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1195323/Four-20s-London-arent-white.html

    Us europeans have got to get our breeding programme up to speed! ;o)

  • Comment number 55.

    FOOT-BINDING: YES BUT...

    NewFazer (#39) "Could you comment on how we should view the fact that western women in Muslim countries are looked upon with hostility unless they wear sleeves? How on earth can an arm possibly offend any reasonable person?"

    Sadly, Western women (especially those who ignore the dress-code) are often seen as no better than whores. This should be quite understandable to all who re not ethnocentric.

    I will also offer another observation. Given that men in Islamic (hot) countries tend to wear white which reflects the heat and keeps them cool, I have always seen the fact that Muslim women wear black as a subtle form of foot-binding. These very old human social traditions, repugnant as they may be many in the (dying?) Liberal-Democracies, have evolved, just as the height and other differences have. It is known as sexual-dimorphism. One should remember that females trivial modern engineering apart) are always sure of passing on their genes to their progeny, males cannot be so sure. Keeping (married especially) women indoors serves a powerful end, whihc females will naturally fight if they can hence the shorer stature, lower muscle mass and more conservative IQ range?). Much else is derivative.

    Mess with nature and there is usualy a high price to pay (see Liberal-Democracies and their TFRs) Seen the CORVUS news?........:-(.

  • Comment number 56.

    SomewhereinBlightly wrote: 'There is so much prejudice being made by people on the news and on these threads towards women who wear the burka or veil - but realistically if you want to know more about the women, how they feel and help to alleviate some of your own fears about them, the best thing would be to talk directly to them and not speculate without their input.'


    Why do you assume that when we speak out against things like the Burkha, that we have never discussed these topics with Muslim women? There are so many modern Muslim women living and working in the U.K. and we do talk to them constantly and often feel we have to speak for them since they have found themselves living in a country (the UK!) where more recently it has been difficult to say anything against a Muslim custom or practice without fear. Many of these women are genuinely afraid of what is happening here and how the men in their families are becoming more and more extreme.

    Now from my perspective, I can't imagine why anyone with more extreme Islamic beliefs would want to live in modern Britain, unless they are expecting to change our society, and that is what many of us see happening. I would no sooner wear a Burkha in public in England than I would wear a bikini in public in Saudi Arabia. Both are equally offensive!

    As to the comment about identity and covering the face, I think this is a real problem when it comes to crime. If we allow Burkhas, then we also have to allow all other forms of hidden identity (balaclavas, face masks, etc.). How will a women identify a rapist or how will the average citizen identify a mugger in the future if people can walk around disguised at all times? Imagine what teachers will have to deal with! We need to think about the broader issues here.

  • Comment number 57.

    JJ #55

    "Sadly, Western women (especially those who ignore the dress-code) are often seen as no better than whores."

    I think that says more about their culture than it does ours. By the same token it could be said eastern women (who ignore our dress code) are seen as terrorists. (Does my bomb look big in this?) It's every bit as daft.

    Ecolizzy #54

    "Us europeans have got to get our breeding programme up to speed!"

    You lookin' for volunteers!?! ;-)

  • Comment number 58.

    JJ #55

    AND ANOTHER THING

    "Given that men in Islamic (hot) countries tend to wear white which reflects the heat and keeps them cool, I have always seen the fact that Muslim women wear black as a subtle form of foot-binding."

    You missed KCL's posts at 34 & 41?

  • Comment number 59.

    MESS WITH NATURE AND THERE IS USUALLY A HIGH PRICE TO PAY (#55)

    A synapse too far. The espousal of the inverse taboo. There is no way back. But it looks as if Nature is going to put the planet right. If you have a god, pray we are annihilated.

  • Comment number 60.

    Hhhmmm more comments on the burka http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article6565064.ece

    Read Fazils comment, the first one, he says it comes from the Prophets concubines having to be covered, so there's another angle. And the article is true we can never have a debate here, of course the French are highly educated, especially in philosophy, so they can talk about virtually anything. They are also very proud to be French, but we're not proud of being British, and our media is always putting us down.

  • Comment number 61.

    COUNT ME IN FOR THE BIG PUSH. (#57)

    Ho Fazer. Did you coin: "Does my bomb look big in this?" Priceless. Something on Radio 4 today - book reading. The writer has his gun aimed at one of 'them', wondering if he has a gun, when the bloke pulls out - a bottle of Coke. I feel the un-natural mixing of cultures is encapsulated there. Nature never intended it. We certainly can't cope with it.

  • Comment number 62.

    NewFazer (#57) "I think that says more about their culture than it does ours."

    Yes but.....;-) hopefuly it says something about both. In context it says that fervent supporters of the values of Liberal-Demcoracy are headed towards biological extinction, whilst those of Islamic Theocracy are not. In the end, that's all that really matters I suggest. Neo-liberal noises are just that unless these outcome measures (birth-rates) are refuted, and they are not just Western. The same pattern can be found in S Korea, Japan etc. The birth-dearth is positively correlated with intelligence. I suggest this may be symptomatic of unacknowledged fear of infidelity and abandonment which comes with hedonism and so-called 'freedom' - aka anarchism :-(

  • Comment number 63.

    NewFazer (#58) "You missed KCL's posts at 34 & 41?"

    No. Why don't the men wear black too? ;-)

    I don't expect neo-liberals to like what I say. It won't stop me though. Only our 'Basij' can do that ;-)

    PS. No offence to genuine Basij, as I suspect they are good Civil Servants aka Stalinists! Our 'Basiji are more often 'running dogs' of the Social Fascists/Democrats aka Anarchists ;-)

  • Comment number 64.

    barrie (#61) "Ho Fazer. Did you coin: "Does my bomb look big in this?" Priceless."

    NewFazer has many hidden talents not revealed in his blogging.

    His skills with the pen are breath-takingly mightier than they are with the word. He has a remakably astute eye and ear.

  • Comment number 65.

    JJ #63

    "Why don't the men wear black too? ;-)"

    The Touaregs do.

  • Comment number 66.

    52. At 2:43pm on 25 Jun 2009, neilninepercent
    Last night Newsnight scotland stated that "climate change is happening, that is beyond doubt". That is, of course, a complete, total & deliberate lie that could never under any circumstances be maintained by any broadcaster that was not wholly & completely corrupt.


    Not defending the repeated mis-usage by Aunty in any way, but having lived in the Far East, especially near the Equator, a little bit of change might not be such a bad thing. But, of course, I refer to seasonal weather patterns.

    Personally, I am prepared to accept that there are trends afoot, and they don't look optimal. Frankly I think we'd be better advised to be looking at coping mechanisms, but am a huge advocate of worthy reductions, better efficiencies and minimising waste, so I'll go along with anything there. If nothing else it could... should save money. What's not to like?

    However, such as sending some moppet and crew in a plane halfway round the world in a plane ('cos they are unique) to point at a car and say it has no emissions (when the exhaust pipe is merely elsewhere) reflects a standard of reporting ability and irony immunity that I feel £3.5B should be better able to cover.








  • Comment number 67.

    The 'burqa' debate should explain whether or not its female oppression. If its to do with convection currents ...... then take of the face cover, your closing the exhaust vent!

  • Comment number 68.

    FORENSICS AND NEDA AGHA-SOLTAN - NOT

    "Her fiance Caspian Makan told how he and other friends begged her to stay away from the demo. But she played down their fears, jokily telling them: "Don't worry. It's just one bullet and it's over."

    Standard forensic questions: Who shot her and why?

    1. Any evidence she shot herself (suicide protester)?
    2. Any evidence someone else in the car shot her?
    3. Any evidence another civilian shot her?
    4. Any evidence she was shot by a 'foreigner'?
    5. Add your own in place of 'the evil Basij dun it'.

    What happened to due process and criminal investigation?

  • Comment number 69.

    Already quarter past eight and no new thread for Thursday yet even though the e-mail is out and perhaps its due to the main topic being BBC expenses. Perhaps the blogdog feels the need to curtail the debate and not make a probable pre-scripted " discussion " on the BBC, well rehearsed if not edited.

  • Comment number 70.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 71.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 72.

    Clothes oppression

    given the the development of the tie [that originally was a symbol of a christian balkan victory against ottoman muslims] is the requirement in some jobs [e.g bbc, schools etc] for men of all faiths to wear one western sectarian oppression?

  • Comment number 73.

    70 and 71 removed. Just confirms the point that Jeremy was attempting to pursue last night (re Burkas) that there is a fundamental difference between what the French and the Brits can discuss openly.

  • Comment number 74.

    re: From the web team. Post No 5. Thursday, 11 June 2009 third line from the end of post... and 69. At 8:22pm on 25 Jun 2009, brossen99 plus others.

    The sign that the sign of things to come is inevitable? Or is there something else we will never know?

  • Comment number 75.

    indignantindegene (#73) Race Relations Amendment Act (2000)

    1) Every body or other person specified in Schedule 1A or of a description falling within that Schedule shall, in carrying out its functions, have due regard to the need
    (a) to eliminate unlawful racial discrimination; and
    (b) to promote equality of opportunity and good relations between persons of different racial groups.

  • Comment number 76.

    BACK IN BLACK

    New Fazer

    Back in Black

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h44LIiaZhHE

    Thanks for the back up re black. I have had a look around and like most things it is a combination of factors. Colour, weave of the fabric, loosely hanging, air movements between the body and fabric and the evaporation of sweat.

    Could I make another point though it is stating the obvious no one has posted on it. The nearer to the equator the more day and night are of equal length. In the desert due to lack of cloud cover etc it gets very cold at night.

    If you were sitting around a campfire, (nightfall being a lot earlier than the daylight here to 11pm) made with the meagre resources available for heat. Would you prefer a colour that reflected the small amount of warmth available or absorbed it?

    It is not just keeping cool during the day it is warm at night.

    consider the amount of posts on 'how can black keep you cool' re one item of clothing. So how much do we need to discuss even to get a basic understanding of climate change.

    I try to keep out of the pantomime oh yes it is oh no it isn't. Unfortunately I put in one UN report that climate change was a greater threat than terrorism. The media picked up on it. Unfortunately I wanted to use it as an example to widen the debate of the full global environmental imperative.

    The opposite happened and the debate narrowed to ecology of planet = climate change = CO2, It is a convenient simple soundbite. It is nowhere near the truth, but it is media friendly.


    Ecolizzy

    Glad you found my observations on tightly knotted pieces of material round men's necks funny.

    I assure you I wasn't making it up. Watch NN tonight I guarantee that you will see men with thin strips of cloth tied around their neck. I can't take anything they say serious. I mean if they think that is normal or sensible behaviour you really have to take anything they say as a joke as well.

    When I see a man with knotted cloth round his neck say something I roll around like a Martian in a smash-them-all-to-bits ad.

    Try it for yourself. Watch NN if a man starts speaking, check whether he has a knotted piece of cloth tied around his neck. I mean if they can't even dress themselves sensibly anything they say can't be taken seriously either.

    Celtic Lion

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h44LIiaZhHE

  • Comment number 77.

    OH WHAT A TANGLED WEB (#76)

    What's the word on woolley hats then Celtic? Are they thermo-neutral and are the wearers synaptically challenged?

  • Comment number 78.

    #76 CL

    Apology. Final link should have been

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCftkirSpHE

    Celtic Lion

  • Comment number 79.

    #77 Barrie

    ONE MAY BE DECEPTION

    Depends whether they are wearing them outside on a cold day or inside in a warm studio.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcOZ6xFxJqg

    Celtic

    from the land of men in skirts

  • Comment number 80.

    WOMEN IN BLACK

    KingCelticLion (#76) The bottom line is that males (especially Muslim males) do not trust women. That is why a woman's evidence has only half the value of man's. Like it or not, one needs to think why. Bear in mind the greater mean spatial IQ over verbal for males and the reverse for females. These are physical differences, not learned differences.

    Hard as it is to accept, females have little to lose genetically by being unfaithful, and they will resist control. There is a basic biological difference here and it is asymetrical. Life is cruel.

  • Comment number 81.

    #71 bookhimdano

    You talk about men having to wear a tie in Britain as 'western sectarian oppression' as some sort of defense of the burkha. Britain IS in the west. No one is asking you to live in the west and dress as you might in a Muslim nation, just as those nations expect us to wear scarves, cover our arms, etc. while in a Muslim country, and we respect that entirely. Why is 'when in Rome' only appropriate for non-Muslims?

    This isn't about religious tolerance in Britain but rather about specific behaviours. Do those of the Hindu, Jewish, or Buddhist faiths threaten to kill authors and cartoonists over religious opinions? No, of course they don't. It is this extreme form of faith that is so unsettling.

  • Comment number 82.

    #80 JJ

    Oh do I know all about it.

    A wise man once said to me "never treat a woman like a female human being".

    Easy to forget when you are in some really important discussion or situation trying to resolve really important issues. Like marriage, bringing up 3 children, £300,000 mortgages. etc etc.

    I look back an think to myself what an idiot I was. I was trying to have a logical rational conversation.

    I have been out with some of the most intelligent, gifted, beautiful, in all ways women imaginable. They have admitted after the fact they have just said gibberish, the first thing that came into their head. I not realising this at the time thought there was some substance behind their words.

    Men in western culture are brought up to be polite, considerate, understanding and above all truthful. Try it and at times this is the chink where the knife comes through. I now know don't bother to ask why.

    Life is cruel.

    Celtic Lion

  • Comment number 83.

    westsurreygirl (#81) "Do those of the Hindu, Jewish, or Buddhist faiths threaten to kill authors and cartoonists over religious opinions?"

    Yes they do. See Gaza and elsewhere re Jews. See partition of India and more recently for the Hindus. Buddhists don't as they have a fear of killing anything in case it's their reincarnated grandma or something.

    Most people are quite nuts when you get to know them.

  • Comment number 84.

    JadedJean #83. That is a fair statement but in my comment I honestly meant in Britain. My point is that most who immigrate to this country have not come here with the intention of changing it drastically. That is all changing rapidly now and many are questioning what the intended outcome is.

    KingCelticLion #82. Your comments never cease to amaze me. I don't know what stratosphere you live in but in my family, I am the one with the career, I pay the mortgage and all of the bills and I happen to be the female. I was also the prime carer for our children. It is no wonder you support the degradation of women through the burkha. It seems to me that you feel threatend by their value.

  • Comment number 85.

    #84 west surreygirl

    Not sure what planet you are on. I think you have just supplied an example of a comment that has added credence to something I never said, but JJ introduced.

    Where have I ever "supported the degradation of women through the burkha". If you read my posts they were about the science of cooling using black clothing. New Fazer added to them showing example this was also used by males.

    So what if you met a new man, the children were not his, yours from a previous relationship. You wanted to leave work

    "intelligent, gifted, beautiful, in all ways women imaginable." From that you then arrive with no intermediary. "it seems to me you feel threatened by their value".

    JJ posted something I didn't know. "That is why a woman's evidence has only half the value of man's". You have just come up with a statement that gives credence to what JJ posted.

    "I happen to be the female" was there any need for that west surrey girl.

    "I was also the prime carer for our children." What sort of language is this I don't know anyone who would use such a term. Do you mean love your children, that they are the raison d'etre for your life your existence. They are what your life is about.

    What if you met another man and wanted another child. What if you didn't like you job. You would have to leave your job. Unless you are in some public sector, media, service sector type job away from the reality of the real world. You then have no income.

    So your new man would have to provide for your present and previous life, either solely or in some partnership with you. With the best will in the world if you were in something like horticulture you could not be digging 8 months pregnant. Then when you have a new baby would either one of you really want someone else to be bringing it up.

    Sorry just realised you wrote "but in MY family". I tend to be in relationships where it is OUR family. Cultural differences.

    "It is no wonder you support the degradation of women through the burkha. It seems to me that you feel threatened by their value."

    You seem to consider it is perfectly acceptable to verbally assault someone, twist their words, never said, into a new meaning purely of your own construct.


    Celtic Lion




  • Comment number 86.

    #86 Westsurreygirl

    I am pleased that I amaze you though, thanks.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cm2YyVZBL8U

    Celtic Lion

  • Comment number 87.

    KingCelticLion

    If I was twisting your words, it certainly wasn't intentional. It was your post #82 and this part in particular:

    'A wise man once said to me "never treat a woman like a female human being".

    Easy to forget when you are in some really important discussion or situation trying to resolve really important issues. Like marriage, bringing up 3 children, 300,000 mortgages. etc etc.

    I look back an think to myself what an idiot I was. I was trying to have a logical rational conversation.

    I have been out with some of the most intelligent, gifted, beautiful, in all ways women imaginable. They have admitted after the fact they have just said gibberish, the first thing that came into their head. I not realising this at the time thought there was some substance behind their words.'


    If I interpreted this incorrectly, then I apologise.


  • Comment number 88.

    The BBC know perfectly well that after 30 years of alleged catastrophic global warming the globe is not proveably warmer than then.

    Simple statement of fact.

    For them to maintain that "it is beyond doubt" that we are now significantly warmer than then must (A) represent the very highest standard of honesty to which the BBC aspire & (B) be a total, complete & absoulute lie which no remotely honest news ,edia could claim.

    As can be seen from the refusal to address post #52 that is their position.

 

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.