Skripals – When the BBC Hide the Truth 418


On 8 July 2018 a lady named Kirsty Eccles asked what, in its enormous ramifications, historians may one day see as the most important Freedom of Information request ever made. The rest of this post requires extremely close and careful reading, and some thought, for you to understand that claim.

Dear British Broadcasting Corporation,

1: Why did BBC Newsnight correspondent Mark Urban keep secret from the licence payers that he had been having meetings with Sergei Skripal only last summer.

2: When did the BBC know this?

3: Please provide me with copies of all correspondence between yourselves and Mark Urban on the subject of Sergei Skripal.

Yours faithfully,

Kirsty Eccles

The ramifications of this little request are enormous as they cut right to the heart of the ramping up of the new Cold War, of the BBC’s propaganda collusion with the security services to that end, and of the concoction of fraudulent evidence in the Steele “dirty dossier”. This also of course casts a strong light on more plausible motives for an attack on the Skripals.

Which is why the BBC point blank refused to answer Kirsty’s request, stating that it was subject to the Freedom of Information exemption for “Journalism”.

10th July 2018
Dear Ms Eccles
Freedom of Information request – RFI20181319
Thank you for your request to the BBC of 8th July 2018, seeking the following information under the
Freedom of Information Act 2000:
1: Why did BBC Newsnight correspondent Mark Urban keep secret from the licence payers that he
had been having meetings with Sergei Skripal only last summer.
2: When did the BBC know this?
3: Please provide me with copies of all correspondence between yourselves and Mark Urban on the
subject of Sergei Skripal.
The information you have requested is excluded from the Act because it is held for the purposes of
‘journalism, art or literature.’ The BBC is therefore not obliged to provide this information to you. Part VI
of Schedule 1 to FOIA provides that information held by the BBC and the other public service broadcasters
is only covered by the Act if it is held for ‘purposes other than those of journalism, art or literature”. The
BBC is not required to supply information held for the purposes of creating the BBC’s output or
information that supports and is closely associated with these creative activities.

The BBC is of course being entirely tendentious here – “journalism” does not include the deliberate suppression of vital information from the public, particularly in order to facilitate the propagation of fake news on behalf of the security services. That black propaganda is precisely what the BBC is knowingly engaged in, and here trying hard to hide.

I have today attempted to contact Mark Urban at Newsnight by phone, with no success, and sent him this email:

To: [email protected]

Dear Mark,

As you may know, I am a journalist working in alternative media, a member of the NUJ, as well as a former British Ambassador. I am researching the Skripal case.

I wish to ask you the following questions.

1) When the Skripals were first poisoned, it was the largest news story in the entire World and you were uniquely positioned having held several meetings with Sergei Skripal the previous year. Yet faced with what should have been a massive career break, you withheld that unique information on a major story from the public for four months. Why?
2) You were an officer in the Royal Tank Regiment together with Skripal’s MI6 handler, Pablo Miller, who also lived in Salisbury. Have you maintained friendship with Miller over the years and how often do you communicate?
3) When you met Skripal in Salisbury, was Miller present all or part of the time, or did you meet Miller separately?
4) Was the BBC aware of your meetings with Miller and/or Skripal at the time?
5) When, four months later, you told the world about your meetings with Skripal after the Rowley/Sturgess incident, you said you had met him to research a book. Yet the only forthcoming book by you advertised is on the Skripal attack. What was the subject of your discussions with Skripal?
6) Pablo Miller worked for Orbis Intelligence. Do you know if Miller contributed to the Christopher Steele dossier on Trump/Russia?
7) Did you discuss the Trump dossier with Skripal and/or Miller?
8) Do you know whether Skripal contributed to the Trump dossier?
9) In your Newsnight piece following the Rowley/Sturgess incident, you stated that security service sources had told you that Yulia Skripal’s telephone may have been bugged. Since January 2017, how many security service briefings or discussions have you had on any of the matter above.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Craig Murray

I should very much welcome others also sending emails to Mark Urban to emphasise the public demand for an answer from the BBC to these vital questions. If you have time, write your own email, or if not copy and paste from mine.

To quote that great Scot John Paul Jones, “We have not yet begun to fight”.


418 thoughts on “Skripals – When the BBC Hide the Truth

1 2 3 4 5
  • Sharp Ears

    O/T but the Chagos Islanders are fighting back. It was revealed in a BBC report by Andrew Harding that the thuggish buffoon ex-Foreign Secretary made threats to the Mauritius PM.

    ‘Next week the issue will come before judges at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague. We have had verbal threats,” said the Prime Minister of Mauritius, Pravind Jugnauth, in an interview with BBC News.

    He did not dispute a report that Britain’s former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson had called him personally to pressure Mauritius to back down on its demand that the islands be returned after decades under UK control.

    Unfortunately, we have been threatened with retaliation… on issues of trade and on issues of investment, you know, and on our relationship with the UK,” Mr Jugnauth added.

    Chagos Islands dispute: UK ‘threatened’ Mauritius –
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-45300739

    Makes you feel proud doesn’t it to know that low lifes are running this government.

    • Borncynical

      No surprise but yet again Johnson scores 0/10 for diplomatic skills.
      “….the islands be returned after decades under UK control”. Politically yes, but in reality “US control”. In the 60s the UK used its ‘imperialistic’ rule to deport the local Chagossians to Mauritius purely so that Diego Garcia could be deployed as a strategic Indian Ocean US airbase – and that is what it has remained ever since. In fact it was either the current Mauritian Prime Minister or the former Prime Minister who said in the BBC report that threats had come from the UK Foreign Minister (Johnson at the time) AND from the US. They really do behave like appalling bullies ganging up to exploit vulnerabilities.
      Many people would ask what the Chagossians are complaining about, after all they are living in a beautiful country. But in actual fact they have always been treated as second-class citizens in Mauritius. They suffer enormous discrimination in all spheres of life and most of them have always lived in slum conditions. That, combined with the fact that they understandably regard the Chagos Islands as their homeland from the last generation, is why they are so driven to return there.

      • berlingooner

        “Many people would ask what the Chagossians are complaining about, after all they are living in a beautiful country.” I thought you were sarcastically referring to the 3,000 strong Chagossian community in Crawley for a moment until I read the next sentence.

      • Michael McNulty

        100% social cleansing. No wonder the British and US establishments don’t care what Is.ael is doing in Palestine.

  • Ed Snack

    Just worth noting that in the hand-written notes taken by Bruce Ohr after meetings with Chris Steele, there is the comment that the majority of the Steele Dossier was obtained from an expat Russian living in the US, and not from actual Russian sources in Russia.

    That would tend to work against theories that involve Skripal in a significant role in generating the dossier; though it would not rule him out in a more peripheral role.

    • james

      we can also conclude neither bruce ohr, or the expat russian living in the us are neutral players in any of this too.. was someone paid a fee to say something?? your last comment-conclusion is very shaky at best..

    • craig Post author

      Ed,

      Could you give a link to the source of that info? Steele is a stranger to the truth in any event so I wouldn’t set much store by it – though if the dossier is third hand material at best it certainly explains why it is such rubbish. Steele’s ability to get cash by selling steaming nonsense to the gullible is amazing.

    • Jo

      5103
      “A Ukrainian political consultant has revealed to Sputnik that former MI6 agent Christopher Steele sought and paid for researchers in Ukraine to concoct fake stories about Donald Trump prior his election as US president to use in the now-infamous dossier that supposedly contained damning evidence of Russia-Trump collusion.

      Radio Sputnik’s Lee Stranahan spoke previously with Ukrainian political consultant and former diplomat Andrii Telizhenko about his connections to a Democratic National Committee (DNC) operative named Alexandra Chalupa who also worked for clients in Ukrainian politics. Chalupa told Politico in January 2017 that beginning in 2015, she pulled on a network of sources she’d established in Kiev and Washington to try and turn up dirt on Trump, once his star began to rise in the Republican primary campaign.”

  • Iain Orr

    Thanks for that post which is also a call to action. I suggest that those who wish to support Craig’s probing questions to the BBC address them (with appropriate background, NOT a scissors and paste job) to any or all of the BBC’s programmes that deal with news and/or investigative journalism, both radio and TV. So, depending on which ones each of us knows best and can therefore add illustrative points on the lines of “you had sufficient integrity to ask difficult questions of the Director-General when …” These questions should go to Today, Newsnight, Panorama, World at One, BBC Scotland, BBC Wales, News at Ten, the Sunday Politics etc. I also suggest that such messages are not automatically copied to this website. That might make it easier for the BBC to issue an unprofessional warning to all programmes that this is a campaign to which they must not respond. However, those who have a personal email for Craig should blind copy their complaints to the BBC to him.

  • pete

    I see Philip Cross has updated Mark Urban’s page to remove the word Orientalist with the explanation that:
    “”orientalist” can be a form of disparagement & is not developed in the main article or sourced”
    In fact the “Orientalist” bit was in the original 2012 page for the article, without any comment before it was noticed and deleted by Cross on the 5th July 2018, I guess due to Urban suddenly becoming a person of interest, so ubiquitous is this misinformation that an internet search for ‘Mark Urban’ inevitably mentions his Orientalist interest.

    • giyane

      Orientalist can mean many things, but in the context of politics it always means a student of the subversion of Islam.

    • MaryPaul

      Might the removal of the term Orientalist, which in the UK has historically meant a student of the history and culture of the region we traditionally refer to as The Orient, be for politically correct reasons? In the USA there is a”woke” view that the term Oriental is a disparaging one, (on!y to be used for carpets) and the peoples and culture of the region we traditionally think of as “the Orient” should now be referred to as South East Asians and South East Asia. This view has only slightly infiltrated the UK, not least because of our different historical relations with the regions in question. Oriental is still in general use in the UK.

  • laguerre

    Frankly we don’t know whether the Skripals are alive or dead. Such a degree of obfuscation speaks of a problem in the BBC, but it’s more than that. “They” don’t want us to know what happened to the Skripals, and the Beeb follows on. I doubt if it’s the Beeb’s fault.

  • giyane

    Does Mark Urban only work for the BBC?
    No he’s a zionist spook for MI5/6
    Does Boris Johnson only work for HMG?
    No he’s a Zionist spook for the EU

    Is there anybody in the ruling elite that isn’t simultaneously working with the Russians and in public against the Russians? Those who have salaries have many salaries.
    It’s our job to filter out the lies.

    • Agent Green

      I thought it was already widely acknowledged that most of the media in Western nations are intelligence assets. The idea of a free press is just laughable.

  • Kenny

    I have to say that the whole Skripal saga must in some way be for domestic consumption.

    Russia is not at all interested in this story. Of course, its diplomats must react — and do.

    The Russian public do not care in the slightest about this story. The banning of Russian athletes due to the “doping” scandal — yet. This? No.

    So do not look for reasons in the wrong places. I think the whole “raison” behind this is something aimed at the British public. What it is… I have no idea!

    • Neil

      Can’t speak on behalf of the Russian public but the Skripal story was pretty conspicuous on Russian TV (Pervy Kanal for example) including today.

    • PasserBy

      Kenny, the second bird killed with the same stone is how they are attempting to spin the Skripal/Novichok incident as “the taboo on chemical weapons being lifted” (see Hamish de Bretton-Gordon’s statements in the newspapers). In other words, they are going to use it to “legitimize” the UK stockpiling chemical weapons, because after all, “if the Russians do it, then so must we”. This is probably the only way the UK can be a Tier One (whatever that means) military force, as Gavin Williamson and his masters want.

      Note that the Salisbury false flag took place just three days after Putin announced (March 1st) that NATO’s missile defence shield was useless, due to Russia’s new hypersonic weapons.

      Both objectives (taking Skripal into hiding/silencing him as well as beginning to legitimize the UK’s possession of Novichok) were woven together into what is now playing out.

      See the following and read between the lines:

      “Last night chemical warfare expert Col Hamish de Bretton-Gordon said the decision to mount the exercise was “recognition that the 100-year taboo on states using chemical weapons, broken in Syria and followed on in Salisbury, is now truly and finally broken.

      In conventional terms. Russian’s military is no match for Nato – we saw that recently with the crash of its most advanced jet in Syria. But it outmatches us in terms of chemical weapons. I have no doubt that it would use everything it has, including Novichok, should a conflict break out.” https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1008515/nato-news-chemical-war-games-russia-gulf-war

      • Deb O'Nair

        “Tier One (whatever that means)”

        It simply means that a country’s armed forces are capable of unilaterally starting WW3.

      • Herbie

        That makes sense, unfortunately.

        A scam to legitimise the use of chemical and perhaps biological weapons.

        Especially since Russia got rid of hers, under international supervision.

        Now they have them again. By way of fiction and drama.

        Their new missile technology has made aircraft carriers redundant..

        The sea powers irrelevant.

        Proxies on the Eurasian landmass are being extinguished.

        There you go.

        We’re back to rock, paper, scissors.

    • Crisis Management

      Might I suggest, that part of the reason is to have an “enemy” with which to beef up our defence spending and add a few more billions to the BAe/Airbus/Rolls Royce/Raphael/Thyssen-Krups conglomerates, and to give cover to this, but also, perhaps to influence a second vote on Brexit negotiations… After All… as a little island nation, we couldn’t possibly hope to take on the might of the Russians and/or Chinese, so we would need to stay as part of NATO and contribute to the EU force… for security reasons, you understand…

      Then of course, if we invite a few johnny-foreigners into our midst, who hate us, and whose ideology is TOTALLY at odds with ours, we can rid the planet of a few more billions of souls, and have a bit more land to stretch our legs on… and flutter the Zionist Flag from the rooftops over a greater Israel… Noooo… Not possible… Is it?

    • Ophelia Ball

      10) Have you had contact – whether directly or via an intermediary – with either the Skripals or Mr Rowley at any time since the date of their respective initial release from the NHS hospital premises in Salisbury?

      11) Have you at any time received – or been offered – a financial incentive or other valuable consideration from any source other than the BBC to make public statements in respect of the Skripal and/or Amesbury incidents, and/or to refrain from making public statements about such matters either at all or subject to any guidance, constraint or incentive?

  • Ian

    All good questions, but I think we can be fairly confident that you will be completely ignored.

    Like other unexplained stories i.e. Kelly, I don’t think we will ever find out the truth of it. What does baffle me, though, is if the object was to stage a ‘Russian’ attack, why involve his daughter, given that they could do it any time, and why was it botched so spectacularly? All of it makes very little sense.

    • SA

      “…botched so spectacularly .”
      It really depends who you thought was attempting to do what. I would say it was a success so far and it’s sliw unraveling will be concealed or ignored.

  • Hatuey

    Craig: “This also of course casts a strong light on more plausible motives for an attack on the Skripals.”

    An attack by whom?

  • Suzanne Burrall

    I appreciate your knowledge, insight, and activism. Questions I have recently posted are 1.Where are the Skirpals. 2. Why is UK hiding them? 3. Why aren’t they allowed to speak publicly for themselves?
    If they were allowed to speak publicly, the press would be all over their story..

  • james

    thanks craig.. kirsty eccles asks good questions.. she is being obfuscated by the bbc at this point.. hopefully more pressure will be exerted, but as laguerre mentions above – “Frankly we don’t know whether the Skripals are alive or dead. Such a degree of obfuscation speaks of a problem in the BBC, but it’s more than that. “They” don’t want us to know what happened to the Skripals, and the Beeb follows on. I doubt if it’s the Beeb’s fault.” one has to start asking questions.i don’t believe it is the bbcs roll to silence information that is relevant to the skripal case, but this is indeed what they are doing here..

  • Peter Walker

    When the Skripals were first poisoned, it was the largest news story in the entire World and you were uniquely positioned having held several meetings with Sergei Skripal the previous year. Yet faced with what should have been a massive career break, you withheld that unique information on a major story from the public for four months. Why?

  • katie sabin

    Dear Mark,

    As you may know, I am a journalist working in alternative media, a member of the NUJ, as well as a former British Ambassador. I am researching the Skripal case.

    I wish to ask you the following questions.

    1) When the Skripals were first poisoned, it was the largest news story in the entire World and you were uniquely positioned having held several meetings with Sergei Skripal the previous year. Yet faced with what should have been a massive career break, you withheld that unique information on a major story from the public for four months. Why?
    2) You were an officer in the Royal Tank Regiment together with Skripal’s MI6 handler, Pablo Miller, who also lived in Salisbury. Have you maintained friendship with Miller over the years and how often do you communicate?
    3) When you met Skripal in Salisbury, was Miller present all or part of the time, or did you meet Miller separately?
    4) Was the BBC aware of your meetings with Miller and/or Skripal at the time?
    5) When, four months later, you told the world about your meetings with Skripal after the Rowley/Sturgess incident, you said you had met him to research a book. Yet the only forthcoming book by you advertised is on the Skripal attack. What was the subject of your discussions with Skripal?
    6) Pablo Miller worked for Orbis Intelligence. Do you know if Miller contributed to the Christopher Steele dossier on Trump/Russia?
    7) Did you discuss the Trump dossier with Skripal and/or Miller?
    8) Do you know whether Skripal contributed to the Trump dossier?
    9) In your Newsnight piece following the Rowley/Sturgess incident, you stated that security service sources had told you that Yulia Skripal’s telephone may have been bugged. Since January 2017, how many security service briefings or discussions have you had on any of the matter above.

    I look forward to hearing from you.

  • Sharp Ears

    Urban’s Twitter content is an eclectic mix – McCain, Labour A-S, Trump, a new Iranian fighter plane, weaponry……and so on.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/MarkUrban01?

    I see he is a Trustee of the Imperial War Museum. Of course. Along with Lord Ashcroft et al. Urban was appointed by the DCMS SoS in March
    That was Hancock who has been moved to Health and Social Care. Mrs May’s Musical Chairs.

    She is off to S Africa, Nigeria and Kenya to fix post Brexit trade deals.
    As if.

    She is also returning the SS Mendi’s bell to S Africa who lost over 700 Africans when the ship sank in 1917 after a collision with a Royal Mail steamship in fog on Southampton Water. Very sad.

    https://www.iwm.org.uk/corporate/trustees/trustee-profiles

    • Andyoldlabour

      It seems quite ironic that Urban is being sarky about the Iranians using a remodelled version of the US F5 jet, when the UK has to buy US F35’s for its new, leaky aircraft carrier.

    • John Goss

      Incidentally I had the same response:

      “The information you have requested is excluded from the Act because it is held for the purposes of ‘journalism, art or literature.’ The BBC is therefore not obliged to provide this information to you. Part VI of Schedule 1 to FOIA provides that information held by the BBC and the other public service broadcasters is only covered by the Act if it is held for ‘purposes other than those of journalism, art or literature”. The BBC is not required to supply information held for the purposes of creating the BBC’s output or information that supports and is closely associated with these creative activities.”

      to a FOI request regarding why the BBC took down a report from their own Russian correspondent. It appears to be a standard fob to any real journalists trying to get at the truth.

      • Antonyl

        The Skripal story is for the purpose of Art (of deceiving / fiction) so it does not fall under an act dedicated to fact finding. It is an admission of fake news from the Bravda.

        • Paul Greenwood

          Everything is Deception whether Skripal or Berezhovsky or Litvinenko or Aung San Suu Kyi or Poroshchenko – all manufactured, packaged and marketed to hide the blemishes beneath……oh and of course Armand Hammer and Al Gore; and William Browder………the Media is an illusion just as much as the Wizard of Oz

  • Deb O'Nair

    I find it impossible to watch BBC News, primarily because most of the editorial staff and senior correspondents seem to be working for MI5/6 and are more interested in disseminating Geo-political propaganda than upholding their journalistic responsibilities as defined in the BBC charter. People should not only boycott the BBC but refuse to pay the license fee on the grounds that it’s a compulsory political subscription.

  • Hatuey

    Isn’t it telling that Sturgeon saw fit to praise the war mongering sociopath John McCain today but couldn’t in the last few days convey any words of personal support to her long standing friend and mentor, Alex Salmond, in his hour of need?

    There’d be nothing prejudicial in terms of the allegations against him in saying “regardless of the outcome, Alex Salmond will always have my personal support and respect”, or some such tripe.

    “I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him…”
    ― William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar

  • Dungroanin

    “We have not yet begun to fight”.

    1. Boycott the Licence regressive poll tax.

    2. Boycott the news and political output of the BBC.

    3. Boycott public houses which show BBC news 24 if they don’t turn it off.

    4. Do not be a Truster of the establishments motives be a Dissenter
    https://www.jonathan-cook.net/blog/2018-08-26/corbyn-trust-deficit/

    5. Find, follow, support and share non MSM journalism.

    That is all.

    Ps one a day from Craig Murray after break – don’t wear yourself out sir! We need you to stay in fighting form. Thank you very much for keeping it real.

  • BrianFujisan

    Email Sent –

    ” Mark

    1 Why do you, and the BBC continue to commit war crimes Propaganda.

    2 Are you accepting payment from secret sources, as your activity regarding Sergei Scripal would
    sugest

    3 Why did the BBC try to ramp up the prospect of the END of Civilization as we know it, By
    stating that ” North Korea has Missiles Seemingly capable of reaching the U.S. west coast ”
    ( fool Some Eh )

    4 Have you any idea at all of the Consequences of a Nulear war with Russia

    5 Why did the BBC change it’s web headline on the Murder of a young pregnant Palestinian
    woman, and her 18 month old baby Daughter only moments after Irsael complained. You – BBC – tried
    then to White wash this war crime

    6 Where are the Scripals Mark ?

    7 Why were you ( BBC ) silent for so long on Yemen Sckool bus War Crime

    8 Why does the BBC Savage, Show Blatant Bias to only one Political party in Scotland, the SNP

    9 Are the Scripals Still alive Mark ?

    10 Do you think it’s a good idea for Jeremy Hunt trying to declare war with Russia, whilst in the U.S,
    Who in the BBC is Callimg him out for this

    11 Regarding Point ’10 ‘ Above Do think it would be a great idea for Scotland to become
    independant, ship the Nukes to London ?

    !2 What do you think of Albright’s ” yes the Price was worth it ” quote, And Clintons Evil , Laugh
    ” We came we saw He Died ” A lot More people Died Didn’t they Mark. With the BBC’s war
    crimes help

    13 Your ( BBC ) Silence on the Genocides in Palestine, and Yemen are Sickening, But the Most
    Despicable thing of all, is that the U.N allow it

    !4 I pity the Elite’s lack of Humanity. you will Never make a Poet Mark. Have a good laugh at that Mark

    • Jo

      I’m sure he will ignore such an aggressive, poorly constructed list, littered with basic spelling mistakes.

      If you can’t be bothered, why would he?

      • Clark

        Mark Urban was wrong to present himself as an objective, uninvolved TV commentator when he was concealing from the viewers his prior connection with Sergei Skripal.

        The dyslexic, the angry and those with poor spelling have as much right to raise questions as anyone else. I would say that they have more right to do so than has a news presenter to mislead the public.

        Mark Urban may choose not to answer those questions, but he cannot claim that the style in which they are presented makes them invalid.

  • Clark

    So (1) the reason Mark Urban kept his meetings with Sergei Skripal secret from the public, (2) the date and time at which the BBC discovered that Mark Urban had met Sergei Skripal, and (3) all correspondence between the BBC and Mark Urban on the subject of Sergei Skripal,

    are all:

    “information held for the purposes of creating the BBC’s output or information that supports and is closely associated with these creative activities”.

    This seems to imply that:

    (1) The BBC could not have created Newsnight as was shown had it included the specified facts.

    (2) The impression that Newsnight generated (the “creative activity”) would be shattered if these facts were released as opposed to “held”.

  • Simon Alderson

    At the time (the timing being so convenient to certain other parties whilst being immensly inconvenient to Russian interests) I thought it stank to high heaven of a very British false flag. MI5 and 6 should consider changing up their modus operandi on occasion. The following hullabaloo and 3 ring circus thrown up by the BBC only served to reinforce my conviction that our secret services were returning some murky favours.
    A very precise poisoning followed by a massively disproprotionate ‘clean up’ operation. No others suffered in the slightest degree in the immediate aftermath and, when this was brought up.by sceptics, then suddenly, and most belatedly, some poor joe winds up with a milder dose. As smelly as any other British affair.

    • Paul Greenwood

      Well here is a fact. A 35 year old joiner named Daniel Hillig who reportedly went to the aid of a woman being molested in Chemnitz was stabbed 25 times by the molesters.

      You will look in vain for reports of these details which have been replaced by a different narrative, one which has revived memories of the GDR in locals as they recall the same language used by Erich Honecker’s regime against the mass protests in Leipzig and Dresden in September 1989.

      The irony that today in Berlin the narrative is spun and the international press carries the headline in unison shows how insecure the established elites are as the earth moves beneath their feet. The old Cold War rhetoric is simply warmed over slogans

  • Paul Greenwood

    Then again we know the names of MI6 IM at BBC and Guardian inter alia. We also know that “Russian collusion” with the Steele Dossier is in fact “Ukrainian” and that is why Manafort is caught up in matters unrelated to the dossier, which in fact Ohr at DoJ whose wife worked for those who commissioned the dossier, forwarded to a sceptical FBI.

    Orwell had his famous Room 101 in “1984” is based on Room 101 at the BBC where Orwell endured tedious meetings with “Big Brother”

  • Sharp Ears

    Have you seen their advertorials for their Autumn drama output?
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/categories/drama-and-soaps/featured

    Massive. That’s to keep the sheeple amused and otherwise occupied so that they do not think and ask questions.

    They have started off with a serial called ‘Bodyguard’. Amber Rudd meets James Bond. Hot sex too and lots of guns and blood.

    ‘Bodyguard
    After distinguishing himself by courageously neutralising a terrorist threat, troubled war veteran Police Sergeant David Budd of the Metropolitan Police’s Royalty and Specialist Protection Branch (RaSP) is assigned as a principal protection officer to the home secretary, the Rt Hon Julia Montague MP.

    Julia is a controversial politician intent on pushing a new counterterrorism bill through Parliament which would give the security service enhanced surveillance powers. Her political ambitions make Julia a high-profile target. Dedicated to his job but concealing deep resentment of politicians following his traumas in Helmand, David’s divided loyalties might make him Julia’s greatest threat.’

    It must have cost a fortune to produce.

    • Ian

      You’re scraping the barrel there. I suppose you would prefer a 24hr conspiracy theory news channel.

      • glenn_nl

        No, S.E. is quite right – it is an absolute affront. The BBC Drama department trying to provide entertainment?? How dare they! The bastards.

        (I’ll definitely keep an eye out for the “hot sex”, ready to be outraged at the first sign.)

        • Ian

          haha, yes it is shocking. BBC Drama – whatever next? Music? Comedy? Us poor ignorant sheeple must be kept in the dark with these cunning plans.

          • Clark

            Actually I did see a BBC “music” programme that kept going on about what an evil regime Iran is, suppressing its own musicians, but somehow omitted all mention of the 1953 UK/US Operation Ajax which overthrew Iran’s democratic government, funnily enough.

        • Clark

          Glenn, Sharp Ears is correct that propaganda is also projected through fiction and drama. For instance, the Pentagon is deeply involved in supplying “expert advice”, locations and providing military equipment for major film productions. I recommend you read the following; it’s only short, and if you buy it you’ll be supporting a good cause:

          Spectacle, Reality, Resistance: Confronting a culture of militarism
          – By David Gee, published by ForcesWatch, 2014

          https://www.forceswatch.net/content/spectacle-reality-resistance

  • Pouncing Nick

    “The rest of this post requires extremely close and careful reading, and some thought, for you to understand that claim.”

    What’s Craig getting at here? Is it simply that the BBC chose not to deny any of the claims? It seems to me that Craig is suggesting there is something more significant here and it is curious that he hasn’t spelled things out for us on this occasion.

  • Sharp Ears

    There is a new agenda on the Skripal ‘story’. Now Sky News throw in their ‘super recognisers’ rubbish.

    Two detectives from Scotland Yard’s unique super recognizers squad are spearheading the search for suspects in the Salisbury poisoning case…..
    http//news.sky.com/story/super-recognisers-help-identify-skripal-suspects-11483995

    • Clive p

      I wonder what happened with the extradition request for the identified Russians who the police were certain carried out the attack? All gone a bit quiet hasn’t it?

      • ZigZag Wanderer

        What happened indeed …. I thought there is a legal obligation for the government to ensure information ( such as names and photographs ) of suspects is published without delay when there is an ongoing public health risk.
        As a Salisbury resident I can confirm that we are still considered ‘ at risk ‘ as we continue to be advised not to touch anything we may find discarded in our local area.

1 2 3 4 5

Comments are closed.