2007 - 2021

Freak Yachting Accidents and Disaster Media

You probably didn’t need reminded that Aaron Banks is a bit of a shitebag, but in case you were in any doubt at all he helpfully tweeted this about Greta Thunberg who is traveling the North Atlantic by boat “Freak yachting accidents do happen in August”.

Thunberg attracts disproportionate hostility because she’s young, female and on the autistic spectrum, and the people she’s threatened the most are entitled men. In a world where young women’s main purpose is to be a sexual object Thunberg is just an annoyance.

Earlier this year Piers Corbyn, Brendan O’Neil, Iain Martin, Toby Young and Guido Fawkes all queued up to put the boot in to her.

But it’s not an exclusively male pursuit. Today Arron Banks was joined by Julia-Hartley Brewer who chipped in with the line thatAfter all the many, many, many angry tweets from the virtue signalling St Greta cultists who are happy to see a vulnerable child brainwashed and exploited to further their political aims… Level of guilt being felt for posting this tweet: still 0%.”

Virtue signalling is an alt-right buzzword (it’s used by poor Kevin McKenna in this spluttering tirade here) but I think it points to some element of self-doubt.

As the world prepares for what will be the first general climate strike next month, things are coming to a climax.

An Economic Argument Too (!)

It’s dawning on climate science denialists and cheerleaders for disaster capitalism that they’ve lost the political, scientific and moral argument, and they’re not happy.

What really irked Alex Massie writing in The Times, ostensibly about Edinburgh, is this realisation:

“Increasingly concerns about so-called over-tourism are only partly about tourism. They are linked to an economic argument too.”

No shit sherlock.

“An agenda that considers economic growth a threat and says we must, instead, prioritise a “degrowth” strategy in which we should accept becoming poorer for the sake of the planet and some ill-defined sense of what a proper, or more pure and authentic, life should be.”

Warming to his theme Massie continues: “It is capitalism, which is really the story of human innovation, that will produce the technological advances necessary to reduce the dangers of climate change.”

We don’t hear what these “technological advances” are likely to be, it’s all a bit “ill-defined”.

If its all a bit TL:DR for you, the short version is “everything’s fine” (memo to reader that’s the short version of everything Massie has ever written).

There’s a continuity from Aaron Banks and Julia-Hartley Brewer to the Alex Massie and Kevin McKenna. That continuity is called: “we don’t care”. If you don’t really care about the most important issue facing humanity then you’ve sort of lost your moral compass, so it’s just a hop skip and a jump to hoping a sixteen-year old girl drowns.

These columnists are a failure, but they represent a generation of failure. It’s not just them, they are speaking to a constituency of people that cheers and nods along.

Because there’s every indication that we’re not taking this seriously at all, are we?

The Potential to Fill Three Billion

Today it was announced to general fanfare that “300 million barrels of oil earmarked from Mariner field, 90 miles east of Shetland.” The field is run by Equinor (re-branded from Statoil). They have said: 300 million barrels of oil had been earmarked as recoverable, but believe there is the potential to fill three billion.

That’s a widely celebrated ecological disaster.

As George Monbiot has written: “The oil and gas industry intends to spend $4.9tn over the next 10 years, exploring and developing new reserves, none of which we can afford to burn. According to the IMF, every year governments subsidise fossil fuels to the tune of $5tn – many times more than they spend on addressing our existential predicament. The US spends 10 times more on these mad subsidies than on its federal education budget. Last year, the world burned more fossil fuels than ever before.”

“But in many nations, governments intervene not to protect humanity from the existential threat of fossil fuels, but to protect the fossil fuel industry from the existential threat of public protest. In the US, legislators in 18 states have put forward bills criminalising protests against pipelines, seeking to crush democratic dissent on behalf of the oil industry. In June, Donald Trump’s administration proposed federal legislation that would jail people for up to 20 years for disrupting pipeline construction.

Global Witness reports that, in several nations, led by the Philippines, governments have incited the murder of environmental protesters. The process begins with rhetoric, demonising civil protest as extremism and terrorism, then shifts to legislation, criminalising attempts to protect the living planet. Criminalisation then helps legitimise physical assaults and murder. A similar demonisation has begun in Britain, with the publication by a dark money-funded lobby group, Policy Exchange, of a report smearing Extinction Rebellion. Like all such publications, it was given a series of major platforms by the BBC, which preserved its customary absence of curiosity about who funded it.”

Still, Shetland oil – yay!

Now there’ll be many of you out there who immediately complain – in a rare moment of unity between nationalists and unionists – that Scotland is to wee , too poor and too stupid to make any impact on climate change – certainly that is McKenna’s central message.

Perhaps he should listen to that Pope Francis who says in his encyclical on ecology, Laudato Si: “Those who will have to suffer the consequences . . . will not forget this failure of conscience and responsibility.”

These guys are surely just reflective of a disaster media engaged in clickbait, self-denial and warming each other by the fire of their shared ignorance. It’s media run by middle-aged white men who don’t need any encouragement to boost their sense of entitlement.

But as Greta Thunberg herself reflects (presumably in baby spinach virtue signalling):

“I think that as long as they go after me personally with insults and conspiracy theories then that is good. It proves that they don’t have any arguments. And that they see us as a threat because we are having an impact.”


Comments (31)

Join the Discussion

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. Jo says:

    “There’s a continuity from Aaron Banks and Julia-Hartley Brewer to the Alex Massie and Kevin McKenna. That continuity is called: “we don’t care”. If you don’t really care about the most important issue facing humanity then you’ve sort of lost your moral compass, so it’s just a hop skip and a jump to hoping a sixteen-year old girl drowns.”

    Ridiculous Mike, just ridiculous to link Banks’ comment and tag it on to McKenna. It’s equally awful to liken McKenna to Hartley-Brewer who is a class A monster and living proof that certain journos are as untrustworthy as politicians.

    Yes, Banks is a piece of dung but what on earth were you thinking by going on to suggest that Kevin McKenna was equally likely to want a young woman to drown? That’s preposterous and right out of order.

    I think what really upset you about McKenna’s column was that, in it, he defended Stuart Campbell. I also think you owe him an apology. He has daughters of his own and I think anyone who joked about any of them drowning wouldn’t be laughing long!

    Have a word with yourself.

    1. They don’t care. They say it themselves.

      I talked about continuity. It’s very clear.

      Try and read and understand what I write before responding.

      1. Millsy says:

        Sorry , Mike , but Jo is correct in her complaint about your coupling Kevin McKenna with several pretty shitty people .
        I don’t get how you link McKenna with the Greta story. I re-read the article you linked , but there is only a rather soft rebuke of the politics of Patrick Harvie – a Green MSP , true , but no reasonable cause to conflate his scribblings with a tasteless attack on a young environment activist from a piece of sh*t like Banks .

        1. milgram says:

          Bella: “there’s a continuity of ‘we don’t care”
          McKenna: “We try to recycle, we hate cruelty to animals and we’re trying to reduce our reliance on plastics. However, if after all the global summits on climate change and low-carbon initiatives it’s a country of only five million souls which is leading the way, then I’d say your campaign is Donald Ducked.”
          That’s a level of complacency, common in that generation and in that level of comfort that amounts to not caring.

          BC are right to point out the connecting line, no matter how personable folk might find that one particular journalist, because it’s a thread pulling us all underwater while cheering on the boat captains steering us into icebergs they claim are dry land.

          1. Jo says:


            “that generation”

            What generation?

            McKenna is mid to late fifties, same generation as I am. I don’t see complacency. I see someone recognising the efforts, albeit small, which many of us are making in our immediate surroundings to change and check our behaviour. I also sense frustration that small groups may not have a major impact if the really big players aren’t on board.

            There is simply no “connect” between that and the tweet by Aaron Banks, nor is there a connection to “not caring”.

            It’s not about how “personable” anyone thinks McKenna is for goodness sake. The article in question wasn’t even setting out his views on about climate change. The few sentences Mike has selected were just an aside in a much longer piece about Stuart Campbell. Hardly sufficient to perform any sort of analysis (or,in this case, hatchet job) on the writer!

          2. But recycling, being against animal cruelty and reducing use of plastic doesn’t really have anything to do with climate change. It’s just gibberish.

      2. Jo says:

        “It’s media run by middle-aged white men who don’t need any encouragement to boost their sense of entitlement.”

        And then you direct this at me:-

        “Try and read and understand what I write before responding.”

        Patronising, much?

        You bang on about men treating women as if they’re stupid and then come out with this? You may as well have added, “dear” at the end! You’ll defend young Greta from all these bad men but you’ll dismiss female contributors on Bella by suggesting they have neither read or understood your article. Totally bonkers Mike. Double standards abound!

        Fact. I DID read your article. I’ve read it a number of times now. I read McKenna’s article several times too. The trouble is, you’re suggesting that because I disagree with you I haven’t “understood” it. I understand all right. I understand that anyone who disagrees with you is to be slapped down. I understand that you are “entitled” to express a view and it’s right! So, in fact, you’re behaving exactly like those entitled white men you’re having a go at.

        You say:-

        “I talked about continuity. It’s very clear.”

        It’s not clear! It’s bonkers. You’ve “continued” by linking an appalling tweet by Banks to an article penned by McKenna which doesn’t even mention Greta, nor does it say an awful lot about climate change.

        McKenna observes, from my understanding, that if only small numbers are involved in the fight then we’re “Donald Duck’d.” I think Greta might agree! Isn’t that why she’s headed now, across an ocean, to deliver that message? McKenna also states that many of us are doing our best on climate change. He’s right. I am, I’m sure he is, I’m sure you are. He is absolutely not saying he “doesn’t care”. Nowhere is he saying that.

        You’ve ignored the real subject of the article, which was actually Stuart Campbell’s plan to stand list candidates for Holyrood, and plucked one small part out of it. The article explained why McKenna backs Campbell’s idea. Yet you’ve totally twisted what McKenna said and claimed he’s basically just like Banks and is hoping a sixteen year old girl drowns. That’s simply deplorable.

        In another comment btl you say of another comment by McKenna, to do with the Greens and Patrick Harvie, that it was

        “..probably stoked by a reactionary conservative religious worldview.”

        What on earth is that about? You’re attacking him on the grounds of his religious beliefs now too? Would you do that if he was Jewish? What is wrong with you?

        For what it’s worth, I was once happy to give my second vote to the Greens but I don’t now because I really don’t like Patrick Harvie. I know others who feel the same about him. I think his manner is awful. Are we all to be condemned as followers of a reactionary, conservative religious world view”? Jings!

        Here’s what I’ve understood, Mike.

        You despise Stuart Campbell. You wrote a piece in Bella about him just a few days ago and “gave it laldy”.

        Along comes McKenna, in the National, with an article about why he’s backing Campbell’s idea to stand list candidates. He makes a casual reference to the Greens and, next thing we know, you’re accusing him of not caring about climate change and of wanting a sixteen year old girl to drown in the sea! You lift a few sentences out of a long article and dump him in with a monster like Banks.

        I looked for a trigger Mike, a link to this demolition job you’ve tried to pull on McKenna. The trigger is Stuart Campbell and the fact McKenna backed him. The article you cite isn’t even about climate change. I don’t actually know what McKenna even thinks about that subject yet, it seems to me, your feelings towards Campbell led you to select McKenna as your next target, turning him into Banks.

        Attacks like this aren’t helpful if you’re genuinely interested in climate change or any other subject. More importantly, they also hurt Bella and surely you should care about that?

        1. Hi Jo – I didnt dismiss you, I disagreed with you.
          No, Kevin McKenna’s view of climate change is not the same as Greta Thunbergs. I’ve not twisted anything he’s said, I’ve pointed out that it is plainly ridiculous, which it is.
          His conservative world view is attached to his religion. That’s self-evident. He’d probably agree himself.
          You seem upset that I have focused on one aspect of his article. I dont know why.
          Clearly McKenna and Massie are not as bad as Banks and Brewer. My point was though that there views about climate change – from one that action in Scotland is meaningless, and from the other that capitalism is the answer and will come up with some technical solution is plainly nonsense. If you have the privilege of having a newspaper column in a national newspaper and that’s the standard of your take on the world then you are open to criticism given the very dire problems we face. Are you not?

          You say: “For what it’s worth, I was once happy to give my second vote to the Greens but I don’t now because I really don’t like Patrick Harvie. I think his manner is awful” Which seems an odd reason to change your vote – but whatever.

          This is not about about personalities this is about politics. I think it is important to call people out who have substantial platforms because we face an existential threat in climate change. That’s all I have done here.

          1. John Monro says:

            Thanks contributors and Editor, not many sites provide this sort of continuity of argument that sees the writer respond to others’ views. Obviously there’ll still be disagreement at the end of the day, but it’s very easy to misinterpret what people write and I thought both critic and editor had some good points here. And Editor, you were a bit condescending when suggesting Jo should read your article, though I didn’t notice any sexism, was that being a bit sensitive? And thinking one is being “clear”, doesn’t always mean that you are! Tricky ground, though, isn’t it?. I thought the article made some very good points about climate denial and the hitting out of deniers in desperation, even at 16 year old girls, a disgraceful verbal abuse. It all shows how worried they are becoming as global warming, and many other environmental issues, are coming to the forefront and there’s an increasingly concerned populace out there. Keep up the good work all of you .

  2. Tommy Lusk says:

    I agree with Jo. I don’t like Wings but I liked Kevin McKenna’s article. He made a fair point about climate change (“if after all the global summits on climate change and low-carbon initiatives it’s a country of only five million souls which is leading the way, then I’d say your campaign is Donald Ducked.”). It wasn’t the articles central point and it wasn’t saying we couldn’t make any impact.

    1. It’s not a fair point, its pure gibberish.

      He writes on climate change: ” We try to recycle, we hate cruelty to animals and we’re trying to reduce our reliance on plastics.” That’s literally meaningless.

      What does the sentence you quote mean if it doesn’t mean we cant make any impact? This is the central line of Wings and his supporters on north sea oil.

      1. Tommy Lusk says:

        It means we’re not making much of an impact….which is the point Climate Extinction is making.

        1. What’s “Climate Extinction”?

          1. Tommy Lusk says:

            Oops. Extinction Rebellion.

  3. SleepingDog says:

    I read the McKenna (paywall has been lifted) article. Perhaps I have stepped into some long-running conversation and he has some reasons for making the comments he does that elude me, but what exactly is he on about when he says:
    “The Greens, though, aren’t really a political party. They exist solely as a means of making it look like Holyrood is all diverse and fresh. They have contributed precisely nothing of any note in the 20 years of Holyrood’s existence and not one of their MSPs has ever won a constituency election. They are a boutique party serving as a vehicle for the prejudices of Patrick Harvie.”

    1. I have no idea. Its a combination of cheap populism and complete ignorance, probably stoked by a reactionary conservative religious worldview.

      1. Elaine Fraser says:

        I’m sorry but I simply do not believe you have’ no idea’.

        On climate change Patrick Harvie say s ‘ the science is clear’ yet when comes to basic biology for him science is transphobic. You can perform mental gymnastics all day long. I’m never falling for it.

        Am I right in thinking he inspired 12% turnout at the recent leadership vote ? Am I right the Green party membership is down on his watch? Women members leaving in droves.

        See how much you care about Climate Chaos/Brexit/ Independence when it s you being thrown under the bus.

        Can I also say the religious sideswipe at McKenna not what I expect from Bella but informative none the less.

        1. Jo says:


          Well said.

    2. Tommy Lusk says:

      I don’t know about “the prejudices of Patrick Harvie” but I take the rest of that quote to be comment on the size of the green party vote.

      1. SleepingDog says:

        Thanks for the responses, I have not been following Scottish party politics recently.

        It seems absurd for McKenna to say that the Scottish Greens are a fake party which is a vehicle for its leader’s prejudices and at the same time laud this new one-man show from this Wings person, who apparently described the Scottish Greens as a far-left party with radical policies (the Wikipedia page more reasonably says centre-left and left), which possibly tells you enough about his politics. A problem with the party system is that it is difficult for the public to influence policy, which can be promised and jettisoned at will, and tied to a manifesto stack. Or dropped during party political horsetrading. The Scottish Greens are so mainstream they have now adopted the formal practice of electing leaders.

        Making a protected characteristic owner-definable seems to weaken the concept of a protected characteristic. The broad church of Extinction Rebellion has advantages from being outwith the party system, but they still are wary about offending sectional interests. So much so, that (in spite of some interesting articles) some of the views in the book This Is Not A Drill (I have only read the first half so far) seem incoherent. Many issues are just not central to the deep adaptation needed to respond rationally to the Climate Emergency, and possibly may fade once the few survivors are reduced to wearing worn-out unisex potato sacks, and what little medical resource is left employed in pandemic mitigation.

        I believe that survival will require adoption of some kind of Green Authoritarian based on robust science. And I believe that Greta Thunberg is a philosopher of the kind that this age needs, and that this age is likely to produce, on the basis of reading through the articles/speeches in her book No One Is Too Small to Make a Difference. She does what philosophers do: take a complex problem, use better and better questions to break it down, finding meaning and coming to a conclusion on what we should do. It says something about how irrational, corrupt and sophistic our society is if that philosophical approach can be seen as odd.

  4. Graham Ennis says:

    Well, none of this surprises me. But Scotland has a problem. The Government there is still not getting it. Scotland has no Science Minister, no proper environment department, and is disorganised as to what actually needs to be done. It talks the talk, but does not walk the walk. SNP politicians are not getting their act together, and speaking as a scientist, I have to say that we are now well into a disaster phase on Climate. We have perhaps ten years to get a climate survival plan established as Scottish national policy, funded from the budget, and properly planned and organised. Deafening silence when I say this to Scottish politicians. Central to this is land reform, rewilding, farm diversification, and hydro, and more wind energy, becoming carbon neutral, etc. and establishing food sovereignty. (Scotland could not feed itself, from its own agriculture, in a climate disaster. It would starve.) I have localised this comment to Scotland, but it applies generically, to most of Europe. But I see no realistic prospect of the SNP getting its act together on this one.

    1. I agree with you completely Graham.

    2. Gary says:

      A lot is said (rightly) about the SNP’s (or Sturgeon, depending on how you see it) inaction on independence, but it’s nothing compared to their abject failure on climate change. They might just about get away with their timid, managerial approach on domestic issues by releasing a few highfalutin statements here and there, but when it comes to the climate crisis then if you’re either doing what needs to be done or you’re doing nothing at all (to paraphrase Greta Thunberg): there’s no middle ground, if you don’t take action now then it’ll be too late. It’s no excuse for doing nothing now, but the increased scope for transformative, truly world-leading climate action should be at the front and centre of any independence campaign.

      On McKenna, I’ve not bothered to read his latest drivel, but it’s not surprising to hear he’s making an idiot of himself again. He’s been a bitter, angry parody of himself for ages, his diatribes were one of many reasons I gave up on The National. My favourite was when he started having a pop at people who raised millions of pounds for homelessness.

      As for Aaron Banks, talking about “freak accidents” sounds like something a super-villain in a film would say with a cackle when they were plotting some kind of nefarious deed,does it not? Not that I’m suggesting Banks is out on the Atlantic with a bag of Acme TNT, but when you look at some of the things that have happened recently, it’s especially horrible language. I often think it’s fortunate for the likes of him and many others of his ilk that they’re as rich and privileged as they are…if you cut about any normal pub behaving like they do and speaking to people in the same way, they’d get a scheme booting every day of the week and absolutely nobody would feel sorry for them. It’s the behaviour of the 5 foot nothing playground bully who’s dad is also the head-teacher, nothing at all about them yet safe in the knowledge that there will be no comeback or retribution. It’s pathetic, but their time will come sooner than later.

      1. Elaine Fraser says:

        Agree with you Gary
        Aarron Banks – a nasty wee man attacking a female crossing the North Atlantic. I wish Greta all the best , a safe journey and that her efforts have the impact we all need them to have. She is very brave. Appreciate you sticking up for her.

        Meanwhile, women in Scotland are facing another challenge and we might as well be floating in the North Atlantic for all the support we have had from the ‘woke’ blokes now coming to the defence of Greta.

        Example – I attended a public meeting in Edinburgh this summer where ordinary people got together to discuss the reform of the GRA and its potential impact on women s existing legal rights. There was an unsuccessful attempt to assault one of the speakers as she left the building. Following this attendees myself included ( (mostly women) were hastily ushered out the back entrance of the building by the security men hired by the women organisers. I walked home alone and on edge.

        A few weeks later another nasty wee man Patrick Harvie shouted and pointed at the Scottish Parliament decrying those inside ( specifically women MSPs) as ‘transphobes’ and ‘bigots’ for daring to raise legitimate concerns and questions on behalf of their worried constituents.

        The attempted assault on the female speaker was widely reported and anyone interested in current affairs would have read about
        Pat Kane ( Commonweal Board member?) has as I understand it ‘bowed out’ on this particular debate for the time being , Mike Small has , we are expected to believe, ‘no idea’ why anyone would take a swipe at Mr Harvie and on and on it goes. The twilight zone.

        1. Wul says:

          More power to you Elaine.

          If I were a woman, I would be very angry indeed that some men feel they have a right to claim my sex by simply announcing it and filling in a form. Men have historically trampled over women’s rights. To try to steal their very sex from them is an abomination.

    3. Tommy Lusk says:

      I agree with Graham.

  5. John Learmonth says:

    All this talk of ‘climate change’.
    Can somebody on this discussion please tell me what the ‘ideal’ climate is and why?

  6. Graham Ennis says:

    re my earlier comments:
    The vital issue is that Scotland, like other countries, is now not in a state of climate change. its worse than that. Its in a state of being on the edge of a climate emergency, which within 15 to 20 years, will morph into a literal climate disaster. Say 2040 max, but since the climate emergency is accelerating, relentlessly, and the Arctic is now undergoing climate change at about ten times the speed of the Temperate regions of the Northern hemisphere, much more likely to be in a serious situation by possibly 2030. At that point, the impact on agriculture is going to be massive. Scotland has not got “Food Sovereignty”, ( which means it cannot grow inside Scotland all the food it needs and has to import). By about the late 2030 decade, there will be serious food shortages. Scotland will stave. (Slowly). None I spoke to in the SNP showed any interest in this issue. Again, the SNP Government is hostile to suggestions as to establishing a proper science policy, funding its own localised climate studies, and making any contingency plans fo what is to come. Scottish Labour and the Tories are even worse. Hopeless. The greens do not have the resources, or scientific advise, to make any effective efforts about this. I despair.

  7. Adam Barker says:

    Final Revision for my post! I just checked my comments and so sorry I made too many mistakes in the first two! I have revised it again, hopefully of the worst errors; Please IGNORE PREVIOUS TWO POSTS this is it! Wishing you a very happy and Save The Planet Together New Year!
    Post; Thanks for the detail regarding the funding of fossil fuels, I knew they existed but not to that extent. It’s a useful arrow to the bow in the fight against ignorance. It’s interesting, personally I don’t think it’s all about statistics, fundamentally, in my opinion, it is quintessentially about being connected to life; an open heart and mind can see what is going on; Native Americans said it as they met the European colonists; “No one wants to live downstream from a white man!” They also famoulsy often said; “White man speaks with forked tongue!” Now any Capitalist, regardless of colour does! I mean statistics can be useful if they’re ‘good for your cause’ and of course, they are relevent in a serious scientific analyses and applictaion, but politicaly and in the media and amongst the general public trying to make false cases or being twisted or misinterpreted for false ends…there are always stats and counter stats! Stats can be looked at in different ways and so on…but some statistics are so staggering they are hard to ignore or twist and these fossil fuel one’s seem to fit that bill, so I will use them perhaps nowand then-thank you! When I said it’s about ‘connection’, I mean the current Global way of life, by and large, isn’t based on a genuine reverence for life; when that is in a person, you really do think, even if your elatively poor already; “Yes, I’d ration to save the Planet!” What’s more, maybe we would become communities working together in a common cause-Saving- taking care of- Our Home Planet Earth!- and increase our personal creativity in the process! Perhaps more people would PLAY football and enjoy their local team than …(you say the stats!) except, one team is going to spend 500 million making ONE new stadium, Everton I think; compare; Macron recently Pledged 28 million Euros-I guess not dollars?- to help ‘Save the Amazon’….so footie gets untold more billions lavished on it than saving life on Home Planet Earth? That shows what the Billionires care about and to a large degree the largely unthinking general public-not thinking in a good way that is, as they obviously have thoughts rummaging around in there, like; ‘How much will so and so pay for the transfer!”; I like footie but I just think it’s better in the back yard played between freinds or if a local club actually represents the locality not which, often foreign, billionire comes in and buys players from round the world and call’s it MU or whatever! MU my foot!-couldn’t resist the pun!Footie, more important than the Planet? Really? Really! Why not just play it! Same with Pop Stars, Film Stars…it’s part of a system and what bugs me is how a Public Braodcaster like the BBC perpetuates it; on CBBC and CBeebies..chidlren’s channels there isn’t a ‘Green Your Parents’ or ‘Care for your Planet ‘ or ‘Fight Climate Change’ or ‘Planet SOS’….but there is a ‘Hot Rod Your Parents Car’ and another programme introduced thus more or less; “Hi I’m Grace and I’m a Motorbike Racer and I Love Machines!” …carries on the same way! I believe this is a clear inculcation in uutterly midnless, actually conciously Earth Raping consumerist petrol -hedonism in it’s most ravaging detrimental and indeed utterly CYNICAL FORM-a public broadcaster striving to do it’s utmost to inculcate CHILDREN effectively in their own suicide with the Planets suffocation! It is a clear and staggering and utterly cynical, greedy, crime in my view. Purposefully and carefully creating a new generation of climate denying-climate change Mocking-fools to fit into Top Gear Boots..the speed limit is 70…Ferrari’s and posh BMW’s and Merc’s are a crime against the Planet and Humanity not something the BBC should be pushing as we stand on the brink of destruction!
    My main point here is we need to care from seeing and feeling the obvious, not relying, though we may refer to and use statistics, Native Americans warned us long ago, without a single stat! They could see the Bison slaughted, species going extinct, at least in localities, wanton disregard for Nature! You don’t need stats in that sense to say ; “Stop the Destruction! Have some reverence for that which gives you LIFE!’ It’s life, relationships, nature which are our riches, true riches, not cars and mansions and gold plated toilet seats Dag nabbit! We have to, simply put, genuinely care and reverence that which Gives us Life! Our Home Planet, Nature our eco-system and call out unnecessary dangers like nuclear power; we don’t need another Chernobyl or Sellerfeild which they don’t know how to decommission! Problems left to future generations created by some share holders greed and power crazy-playing God- scientists! We need children given education to understand that the waters are.. the waters of life! Trees are indeed ‘the Trees of Life!’ Every breath, given for free, the Breath of life!… and of our all needing Clean Oceans and Huge Native Forests and coral Reefs and Polar regions and all other Habitats to be there, left, protected, reverenced, INTACT!.. and well helping kids understand that a species being wiped out by our activities is more important than some pop stars tweet or make -up or relationship up’s and down’s and only an educational system that puts value on life itself, NATURE, coupled with public broadcasters actually acted like IT MATTERED-they didn’t mid wall to wall ‘Islamic Terrorist Threat and ’50 years Moon Landing’ rammed down our throats-without need- is likely to change that large scale. help affect that societal shit we urgently REQUIRE, after all those parents who know, already do what they can for their kids but the Common Culture needs to change; further; British Conservatives by the way are lying about their dedication to our pLanet and reversing Climate change-many don’t even believe in it or think as Jcabob Rees Mogg unashamedly confessed it’s, along the lines; ‘not a problem!’-; The British Conservative Party are the Capitalist Earth Raping party of lies! Their track record is there and searching their private records will easily show where their hearts, minds and pockets REALLY LIE! ( I purposefully say, “really Lie” rather than the more kind ‘Really Lay’ by the by!) Thank you for your work and statistics despite my other words, they CAN be useful at times hand in hand with a basis or truth, reverence and love for our inestimably -well truly invaluable greatest treasure in the Know Universe, Home Planet Earth…oh yes, multi- billions spent on visiting sterile Planets in outer space, that’s one the greatest Crimes against Humanity and the Earth; I agree with People4Planet who have put Space Agencies and Space Scientists on their list of Terrorist organisations and terrorists…the space industry poses a direct threat to life on Earth, that’s a fact. AB. The sane alternative to Aaron Banks!

Help keep our journalism independent

We don’t take any advertising, we don’t hide behind a pay wall and we don’t keep harassing you for crowd-funding. We’re entirely dependent on our readers to support us.

Subscribe to regular bella in your inbox

Don’t miss a single article. Enter your email address on our subscribe page by clicking the button below. It is completely free and you can easily unsubscribe at any time.