Boris Johnson, it is generally agreed, is the candidate most likely to rescue the Conservative Party from the doldrums and deliver meaningful Brexit.
He’s a hard (-ish) Brexiteer; he’s charismatic; he has strong brand recognition from the English shires to the White House.
Also, according to Margaret Thatcher biographer and immensely sound Tory Charles Moore, he’s a more than halfway decent conservative. (As Moore points out, there is much disagreement on what a ‘conservative’ actually is, but you know one when you see one. At least Moore does. He has conservative-spotting antennae similar to a ‘gaydar’.)
Boris Johnson: not a virtue-signaller (just as well, given his lack of virtue); loves freedom, prefers anarchy to authority; more humour than humbug, more imagination than ideology. 7/10.
I agree with all this. I like Boris personally. I agree he probably is the Conservative Party’s best hope (especially if he gets sensible people like Steve Baker, Priti Patel, Jacob Rees-Mogg to do the difficult, important stuff for him while Boris just swans around the world looking charmingly dishevelled and quoting Horace epigrams at bemused statesmen).
But I could never vote for him personally, after this:
Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore has testified to Congress on the imminent Sixth Great Extinction predicted in a recent UN report. His verdict could hardly be more devastating to the cause of environmental alarmism: he says there is no evidence to support these doomsday predictions whatsoever.
Moore – whose role in co-founding Greenpeace is so embarrassing to the organisation that it has tried to airbrush him out of its history – was appearing as a witness before the House Subcommittee on Water, Oceans and Wildlife.
He told the Democrat-led committee that the UN’s Global Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IBPES) was merely a “front for a radical political, social, and economic transformation of our entire civilization”.
The Guardian newspaper has decided to change the name ‘global warming’ because it doesn’t sound scary enough. From now on, the Guardian‘s editor-in-chief Kath Viner has ordered, ‘global warming’ is to be called ‘global heating.’
Theresa May’s Conservative In Name Only Government has caved to the Green Blob again — this time causing the resignation of its ‘Fracking Tsar’ Natascha Engel. Ms Engel, formerly a Labour MP, has tendered her resignation from her post as Commissioner for Shale Gas in protest at the government’s policy. Instead of accepting the overwhelming scientific evidence that fracking is safe, she complains, the government has been strangling the industry at birth by trying to appease ‘noisy green campaigners’.
According to David Rose, who broke the story in the Mail on Sunday, Ms Engel sent her ‘explosive’ resignation letter to Energy Secretary Greg Clark last night.
One is a brainwashed child in pig-tails pushing a hard-left, anti-capitalist agenda which will drive up energy prices, hamper industry with taxes and regulations, destroy jobs, cause the poor and elderly to die in fuel poverty, enrich crony capitalists, and spread lies and fear and fake news about a non-existent problem.
The other is leader of the free world, a longstanding friend and admirer of Britain, an outspoken defender of Western civilisation, who has transformed the US economy, made his people safer and freer, and brought a degree of stability to a dangerous, unpredictable world both as a peacemaker (North Korea) and a scourge of terrorism (Iraq/Syria).
So guess which one is invited to address Britain’s parliament. And which one isn’t.
The increasingly unwatchable and slavishly woke BBC plumbed new depths last night. It gave a prime time slot to a piece of environmental propaganda so blatant, shameless, and dishonest it might just as well have been a political broadcast on behalf of Extinction Rebellion.
Even the programme’s title was a lie.
Climate Change: The Facts was a farrago of alarmist cliches, exaggerations, and untruths which have been debunked on numerous occasions.
It lied about the cause of wildfires; it lied about heatwaves; it lied about storms and floods; it lied about polar melting; it lied about sea levels; it lied about coral reefs; it lied about droughts.
Did wildlife filmmakers from the $25 million Netflix series Our Planet accidentally drive a herd of walruses to their deaths – then lie about the incident afterwards in order to defend their preferred narrative that the creatures were tragic victims of climate change? From the perspective of a climate change sceptic like myself, sick to death of the relentless propaganda pumped up by green activists, it seems like a story just too good – and too darkly hilarious – to be true.
But the evidence seems to be pointing that way. Thanks to research from a crack team of maverick bloggers, we can now be all but certain that Our Planet misrepresented the facts in the now-infamous, widely publicised “tragedy porn” sequence of walruses plunging to their deaths over a cliff.
“All of us are going to have to recognize that there are trade-offs involved with how we live, how our economy is structured, and the world that we’re going to be passing on to our kids and grandkids. Nobody is exempt from that conversation,” Obama said.
He also noted that rising oceans risk coastal populations and environmental changes have boosted the frequency of insect-borne diseases.
“Moose right now [have] to deal with tick-borne diseases that they didn’t have to do 10, 15 years ago. I really like moose. I assume, Canadians, you do too,” Obama said. “These are just facts.”
Yesterday I gave you one reason to hate the BBC: its outrageous treatment of Tommy Robinson. Here’s another: its relentless lies about climate change – such as its recent bullshit claim that:
“…since 2005 the number of floods across the world has increased by 15 times, extreme temperature events by 20 times, and wildfires seven-fold.”
If this claim were true – and the BBC certainly acted as if it was, splashing the story across its environment pages, bigging it up on its flagship Today programme – then it would be a very big deal.
Those figures, no question, would represent a significant jump in the kind of “extreme weather events” that climate alarmists warn us we should expect in this alleged era of catastrophic man-made global warming. Only a fool could ignore such clear evidence of imminent catastrophe.
But of course, the claim isn’t remotely true. As Paul Homewood discovered it came via an organisation called GMO – of which more in a moment – from a database called EM-DAT (The International Disaster Database), which logs reported natural disaster events over time.