James: I'm sorry PeterM, you are incorrect there. There were death threats. Maybe the disconnect is in our definition of "death threat". I presume you have seen the letters? Would you not have taken them to police and considered them a death threat? If not a death threat, what kind of threat? As for the timing of the ANU move, this had nothing to do with whether there were death threats or not. That's more to do with a detail that the ABC got wrong and The Australian took on trust without checking the story themselves. Not the first time, of course, that The Australian took something on trust without checking the details. Just look at its coverage of the Iraq war, for instance. gnome: Ravenred: 14 Jun 2012 9:54:36am The scientists were moved in person due to appearances in person by angry Climate Change deniers. The Australian misunderstood (or misrepresented) the original Canberra Times article in relation to the emails. Go watch the episode again, it's a generally fact-based examination of the matter. gnome: Bighead1883: 14 Jun 2012 8:21:53am Clearly put,thank you Mark.Just like our diets we need diversity of product.The main stream media run the same stories.Media monopolies have to be broken up,otherwise totalitarianism ensues and delivers a singular ideology.Also as with the lease expiring on the American Federal Reserve on 21/12/2012,why have we not seen Hong Kong lease expire stories?.Not even one journo has quoted Woodrow Wilson about it.Surely in this massive GFC this is the biggest