I’m British, so I simply don’t believe a word the BBC says.
It’s all spin — every word, every image, the disempowering tone & natural submission to authority that automatically flows from the presenters’ subjugated speech patterns.
Subjugated by their salaries. The Principle Agent Problem. Conflicts of interest. They’re maximising what is good for themselves, at no small cost to the country.
Lying on the Couch
Run an emotional audit on the facial expressions and tone of voice on the BBC Breakfast couch.
Look out for what’s not said.
They have mood managers instructing them through their ear pieces. Who are they? What is their agenda? It’s all secret. Hotly guarded stuff. Strategic Ignorance.
So who are the knowers and who are the unknowners?
We can’t say exactly but we live inside their work. They call real journalists “The reality-based community” They engineer our perceptions of reality. This used to be called Public Opinion. It is also referred to as Agenda Setting. The Former Soviets have a natural advantage in this field as they researched it and applied the principles during the seventy year duration of the USSR.
But they do it in the trusting tone. They’re salespeople. Selling Corporatism. Human rights violations. Fake empathy. Corruption. Fascism. Everyday fascism.
Patronage. Oligarchy. Finance “Capitalism”.
Pretending to adhere to a set of principles. But permanently happy to go outside every code in order to get the job done ie preventing truth & justice from ever getting to the places that need it most.
“You know, I go to the theatre to be entertained. I dont want to see plays about rape, sodomy and drug addiction…I can get all that at home.” Peter Cook
There is an idea that the BBC may be trustworthy. But its propaganda is so transparently infantilising that trust levels appear to be eroding at an accelerating rate.
Speaking of corruption:
Trump Biden Ukraine Corruption
I wanted to know what the latest was in relation to the Trump / Biden / Ukraine story.
After having seen the following image at 5am UK time:
The Trump Biden ‘Backstory’
Democrat Leader of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, recently decided to impeach Trump over a telephone call he made the new President of Ukraine, former TV star, Zelensky.
A whistleblower claimed that during this telephone call Trump threatened to withhold funds from Ukraine unless it launched full investigations into the sacking of a Ukrainian former prosecutor who was investigating corruption at a pro-Putin Ukrainian gas company — one of whose directors happened to be Hunter Biden, son of former US Vice President Joe Biden.
Joe Biden was filmed, as shown in the following BBC clip, showing off about getting the Ukrainian prosecutor sacked in exchange for aid money.
Questions about Biden
But why did Biden get the official sacked?
Is that even legal?
The US exerts its power in so many ways.
Lolz at Play
Just as the European Union doesn’t want to admit how powerful it is and how much corruption it enables, is this example of Biden using the US to feather his own nest just another one of those normal things that the powerful do that we aren’t supposed to talk about or frame as everyday corruption?
Do US rules require further proof of the link between the sacking of the official and the investigation into Biden’s son’s firm?
And should Biden even be visiting Ukraine when his son is a director in a pro-Putin gas firm?
Although this might have been legal at the time in Ukraine, it looks very bad in America and elsewhere.
Pragmatism Vs Principle
Having a dad who is able to pull strings on a geo strategic level would be regarded, in some industries, as a game changing business asset.
Though this may look like prima facie nepotism to any normal person, to someone who wants to win a gas concession it is just getting things done.
And therefore cheaper.
Get it Done
In Britain, Boris Johnson and his cabinet keep going around saying “Get Brexit done”. Using force and bullying tones to hope that their Brexit deal is not scrutinised.
The EU does much of its work completely under the radar too.
So what are the rules around nepotism?
The noises I have heard coming out of the US say there are rules for nepotism in the US but that they don’t apply to the White House.
Though Trump is credited with helping people discover this, the Bidens may also have been well aware.
Have the Bidens been playing a regulatory arbitrage game?
US influence via Ukrainian Loopholes. Ewwww!
En français on dit “ça pue!”
Y en Castellano digamos “Huele Mal!”
Transformation from Illegal to Legal Corruption
What was legal in Ukraine, and practical for the Bidens in terms of US influence, despite looking like nepotism, allows corrupt practices to shift from being obviously corrupt to business as usual.
How is this politically possible? Is it Alchemy? Or is everything permitted?
David Whyte of University of Liverpool on the transition from Illegal to legal Corruption:
Just because it’s Biden this time, that’s not to say that Trump wouldn’t try something like this.
Maybe some of his kids are signed up to help steer US policy in various countries to suit foreign interests.
The names Ivanka and Chief of Staff Jared spring to mind!
Thinking back to the BBC video, I can’t help but think the report is a bit rushed.
The turning points are merely touched on and Mr Biden is given a fairly easy ride.
No questions are asked about whether any of what Biden has done is legal. And the fact that it is Pelosi who is impeaching Trump for looking into Biden’s corruption rather lets Biden and the Democrats off the hook.
The whole thing stinks and could backfire on the Democrats but I guess they were already in a desperate situation or they wouldn’t have picked this to be the issue with which to beat the President.
There is so much else going on, it looks like the Democrats only care about protecting Biden.
How many people spoke in the BBC news clip?
How long did each clip or person get?
Did anyone offer deep explanations? Or was much of the thrust basically conjecture? Was there a tone of powerlessness from the presenter? Is that not the usual British disgust at that which it doesn’t understand?
What the BBC expects its producers and presenters to tap into is their perceived primeval fear of the other.
Must have been very useful in the early days of the BBC and the final days of the empire.
But now it is merely a series of tricks that revolve around who is in power at any one place and time, and whatever the broadcasters’ Military Intelligence copywriters (script writers) happen to have been told about the latest short term objective.
Which is why only BBC employees and certain academics are allowed full access to iPlayer.
They don’t want people going through old issues of the 6 O’clock News. Or especially breaking news. The propaganda would be too transparent.
Here’s a relevant news item that has been systematically suppressed, but contains some clues about the draconian surveillance powers being exercised over iPlayer access. The Unknowers Spreading Amnesia.
Amol Rajan is back from paternity leave. Congratulations, old chap.
Personally I would love to go through all of the Amol Rajan tv reports since he has been the BBC’s Media Editor.
I’ve taped a couple of them, but most are inaccessible.
Rajan is incredibly incisive but equally distorting.
The BBC Media Editor job didn’t exist before and he appears to have been given it because he is super charismatic and a loyal part of the apparatus.
Having a decent address book and being a spook probably also helps.
From Phone Hacking and press intrusion to Big Tech, he has quite a wide beat.
And he manages to always steer things away from election rigging, patronage, and finance capitalism.
Full disclosure: I may be rather green eyed about this as he is younger and more successful than me. (enough of that, ed)
In 2013 when he was appointed editor of the Lebedev-owned Independent newspaper I sent him a congratulatory email and told him that Genetically Modified was back in the news and that I knew people who were influential and politically active on the topic.
A deal has clearly been struck between Lebedev and Putin, and between Lebedev and the UK state, in whatever form.
Russian, Israeli, UK Military intelligence control our media. ‘Tis clear.
Luke Harding’s recent review of Alexander Lebedev’s biography revealed that he said NOTHING about Putin.
Bit weird, don’t you think?
Jeffrey Epstein’s girlfriend and alleged procurer Ghislaine Maxwell’s father Robert owned Pergamon Press and did plenty of business with the Soviets and Israel.
He released this book in the early 80s.
Alexander Lebedev’s father was a KGB agent in London before going onto become a banking, energy, and airlines billionaire.
Maybe he read it. Maybe he knew Maxwell. Who knows.
Epstein did business with Maxwell, Trump met him too.
Did Lebedev pick up the pieces in the oligarch’s orgy that followed Maxwell’s demise?
Maxwell was a go between between Soviet and western engineers and Israeli military intelligence in the construction and sales of databases with backdoors and of military technology.
Epstein travelled to Saudi using a fake Austrian passport.
I composed this a few weeks ago – it includes a sample from Facebook at a congressional hearing on social media and mass shootings before going into Whitney Webb who shines many lights on the mass shooting business model of big tech as well as Epstein and Israeli military intelligence.
You won’t hear pro-GM gatekeeper Amol Rajan saying that!
Capital without Borders
The big people have their money stashed away in Cayman, Panama, Luxembourg etc and they like shareholder value and Bilderberg style unscrutinised decision making.
So though we have this all pervading fascistic self-policing façade of equal ops and meritocracy, the only thing that counts is still patronage, influence and who you know.
The Guardian is obviously pro-GM like Lebedev.
But this is all part of the omertà code.
Nothing written down but everyone that matters knows the rules.
Clearly the EU would be doing the same if they could get away with it.
Look at the deregulatory deal they just gave the UK.
This permanently unfolding coup, in which the power to discuss things openly is repeatedly taken away from us and so heavily policed, deplatformed, and infiltrated as to become meaningless, creates a strong feeling of mistrust but also the need to rebel.
And if that need is not met using the means that our imaginations find least adventurous, then people will become more creative in their descriptions of their own powerlessness and in their attempts at structural change.
The Emperor’s New Clothes
I used to feel sorry for the Saudi Princes that have all this wealth and no power. But now that Saudi are buying stakes in Goldman-backed Babylon Health which is gobbling up NHS Business along with UnitedHealth and Google Health formerly known as Deep Mind, I can see that the holes in Saudi’s deep pockets are gutting the UK Welfare state in order to pay for a new suit.
I used to live in Spain and everywhere I went I would hear people say “My Taylor is Rich”. I began to realise that this may have had something to do with the way in which people were taught english back then.
Eddie Izzard used to do a great sketch about how he could never use the language he was taught at school in his everyday life. “The Monkey is in the Tree” didn’t really work that well at the airport.
It turns out the audio-lingual approach to language learning that emphasises rote learning was favoured by the Assimil method of Learning English without difficulty.
If my tailor is rich and my english poor then maybe my tailor is my banker and my media and he is prospering from rinsing my mind as well as my wallet.
Babylon / PIF / Google Health / NHS / Tencent / Russians
The web of financialised influence which allows international finance capital to bob in and out of our public services like a yo-yo is really something to behold.
Rather than going into it now, let me deposit some primary source documentation.
This piece is explosive from Amol Rajan. He is an insider to all this stuff so you have to wonder about conflicts of interest and revolving door.
The last media secretary Jeremy Wright issued a public interest intervention because of the Saudi stake in Lebedev Holdings.
The court ruled this August that the Media and Culture Department had taken far too long to launch proceedings.
The only person to report on this was Jim Waterson of the Guardian.
This followed FT pieces in early 2019 speculating as to the identity of the mystery Saudi investors.
But Amol Rajan had told us about it back in 2017.
We just didn’t notice.
And he intimated the Prince in question was basically the Saudi state.
Lebedev previously employed Amol Rajan and current Today programme editor Sarah Sands.
Both blatant Tories.
So the Government court case against a Tory press baron was timed to fail.
Financial Adviser and Bank Confidential whistleblower protection campaigner Steve Middleton has spoken about the way banks “buy precedent” by choosing which fraud cases to lose in order to control the law and set precedents that suit their long term interests.
I call this “falling with style”.
More Lebedev links:
He must be tight with Jared Kushner. Jared owned the New York Observer and used it to conduct Agenda Setting operations, like his father in law’s mentor Roy Cohn.
The whole Epstein / MBS / Weinsten / Prince Andrew thing is in play.
Back to Babylon / Palantir
Babylon is doing business with chinese surveillance capitalists Tencent
I’m guessing these documents show that Babylon, like WeWork and Uber is a loss making Private Equity unicorn vehicle designed to grab market share while Goldman and Morgan Stanley let their mates at Vostok capital fill their boots.
Look at Vostok’s ownership. It’s Russian with a Swedish CEO.
Look at the interview with Ali Parsa on page 6 of the pdf above. He is talking to his biggest investors. He says Babylon is available in Saudi, Rwanda, Malaysia, China and UK. Think about the repressive nature of some of those regimes. Rwanda is run by Tony Blair Associates using their deliverology model. Bill and Melinda Gates are involved. Philanthrocapitalism replacing the World Bank and private banks.
The NHS is being torn to shreds by a Goldman & Google backed Russian Saudi Chinese surveillance capitalist private equity vampire and the BBC say hardly a word.
Although I’ve been blogging on and off for four years now, I think I’m finally hitting my stride. It’s nice to draw on previous wanderings and to channel an automatic structuring of unstructured information. If you are going to share this, please share it outside the UK as much as possible!
Thank You for your Time and Attention, and please do come back for more!
What I’ve since learned has profoundly changed the way I view establishment coverups and corporate corruption.
Chris Wynn, had been pressuring me to edit a blogpost I had written about Lord Adonis signalling Ofcom and BBC collusive corruption over Brexit.
Little did I realise that, White, along with Lord Adonis and George Osborne attended the 2017 global elite Bilderberg Conference.
Sharon White is an ex-Treasury official and is married to Robert Chote, the head of the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) a independent body that was set up by George Osborne to scrutinise his budgets.
White herself worked for the World Bank in Washington DC.
Her 2014 appointment as head of Ofcom was approved by then Culture Secretary, ex-Deutsche Bank toxic derivatives salesman, Sajid Javid.
in 2016, bullet-proof Javid, himself an attendee of secret hawkish US gatherings along with Michael Gove, admitted to Jon Snow live on UK TV that, along with everyone else at Deutsche Bank, he knew about illegal tax evasion schemes at Deutsche Bank, schemes which were designed to defraud the UK taxpayer.
Javid is now in charge of the police, the National Crime Agency, and the online fight against financial and cybercriminals.
In that same period Javid appointed controversial HSBC Director Rona Fairhead to head up the BBC Trust.
Email to Sharon White of Ofcom
The previous week I’d emailed Chris Wynn:
So far I’ve received no reply from Chris or Sharon.
Is this just old fashioned bad manners, or have cyberbullying and intimidation become official Ofcom Policy?
We know Ofcom allowed the BBC to air Enoch Powell’s River’s of Blood speech in mid-April.
On Saturday, for 1st time EVER, Enoch Powell’s Rivers of Blood speech will be read in full on UK radio (by actor Ian McDiarmid). Please join us @BBCRadio4 8pm. Super-brains Nathan Gower + David Prest have done an amazing production job. Great guests too: https://t.co/3XvDMSH16d
Shortly afterwards it was revealed that the Tory UK Home Office had been illegally deporting British Citizens of Afro-Caribbean descent for several years and yet the entire UK media establishment, including every BBC journalist, had said and done nothing.
Similar BBC coverups took place with Jimmy Savile who operated with impunity throughout his lifetime and operated in plain sight.
At what point does it become ok to point out the elephant in the room?
Political appointees like BBC’s Media Correspondent Amol Rajan and George Osborne’s friend Sharon White are massively complicit and compromised. They’ve helped promote Enoch Powell but said absolutely nothing about the non-reporting of the government’s illegal deportations programme.
The BBC’s Media Correspondent and its regulator, OFCOM, are supposed to inspire trust not rumours of cover ups and corruption.
According to this Sky report, Sharon White was one of only seven Brits invited to the last Bilderberg meeting.
Two of the others were George Osborne and Lord Adonis.
BBC Media Editor, Amol Rajan, edited the Independent from 2013 to 2015, and was widely seen to have backed the Tories in the run up to their 2015 general election victory.
Rajan’s closeness to his former boss Sarah Sands, and their former boss Lebedev and, by extension, the Tory establishment, makes him anything but an impartial commentator on UK media affairs.
That the appointment of such a compromised figure to such a trusted position at such a sensitive time occurs with no national outcry speaks volumes about the “establishment’s” capacity to dismantle the potential for even the tiniest opposing view right before our eyes.
At least things are out in the open now. The Tory sleaze that took down John Major’s government in the 1990s is back with a vengeance.
Whereas back then the likes of Ian Greer associates were involved in various levels of Westminster sleaze, the Tory government is way more in control of the media than ever before. The Tory war to shape public opinion has been characterised by its reliance on dark money think tanks and media outlets funded by dodgy donors such as Lord Ashcroft.
But there is still the problem of the social media and the youth vote.
An organisation whose very ethos is the promotion of inequality, by definition will have to use psychological operations to confuse swing voters into voting against the majority’s interests in favour of billionaires.
The rise of Momentum and Novara and the inability of so called Millennials to get on the housing ladder or find secure employment all work against the Tories.
Thomas Frank wrote Pity the Billionaire in 2011 in which he outlined how Rupert Murdoch’s Fox Network in the US epitomised the Tea Party’s radical right conservatism. It was a movement directed at the poor but in service of the rich. Trump’s alliance between the Alt-Right, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Wall Street being its logical conclusion.
Media and Culture Secretary Matt Hancock received plaudits last week for saying he would clamp down on social media providers while maximising “freedom of the press”.
By “Freedom of the Press” we mean freedom for billionaires. Does clamping down on social media mean that Google and Facebook will have to start paying taxes or that we can prepare for some curbs on freedom of speech?
According to a recent Reporters without Borders study, Britain came in at just above Burkina Faso for Press Freedom:
Just as the polls have proven to be useless and credit ratings agencies and audit firms have been used to rubber stamp fraud in the highest places, so too is the Office of Communications (Ofcom) an institution which places the safety of normal consumers and citizens at the very bottom of its priority list.
In a way all the posturing makes more sense now. The Brits have a history of selling weapons to both sides.
So why wouldn’t UK institutions themselves be open to capture?
London has been the home to oligarchs and billionaires for several years now.
With so much capture taking place under the surface – and yet in plain sight – who amongst you never thought that one day the chickens would come home to roost?
What can be done?
There is too much silence and darkness where there should be conversation and light. The politics of information, transparency and privacy need a radical restructure. And this only happens if we are prepared to go to first principles and set up systems that prioritise the values we hold dear as a society. Just in case there is any confusion about what those values are, perhaps we should use these various political crises as an opportunity to clarify just what is on the table and how much we are prepared to give up to achieve our goals.
This isn’t supposed to be an anti-Russian or anti billionaire diatribe. Merely a stimulus for conversation about corruption and what you might like to see done about it.