Truth and Consequences


It must be an enormously frustrating time for BBC journalists…the Scots didn’t vote for independence and split the UK making it easy meat for an EU Empire annexation, the British people voted to leave the EU and Donald Trump was elected in the US…and ‘racist white police’ in the US shooting ‘unarmed black youths’ turned out to be just as much ethnic minority officers…so another one of those BBC ‘facts’ revealed to be a lie.  BBC ‘bias’ is of course just another way of saying BBC ‘fake news’ because that is what it is, untrue and shaped to present a view of the world that is entirely, and dangerously, false.

Still, never mind, they control the airwaves and so they think they can still control history as they remorsely pump out pro-EU, pro-immigration, pro-Islamic propaganda 24 hours a day.

The new narratives are naturally about fabricating a myth that the voters for Trump and Brexit were fooled by lies and fake news and that those voters don’t actually care anymore whether they are told lies or not…they’ll carry on voting regardless, facts just don’t matter.  A convenient narrative designed to delegitimise Brexit and Trump’s election, a narrative that the BBC has been pushing hard for the last two weeks or so and no doubt will continue to do so until it has established the legend as ‘fact’.

Just look at Radio 4…two series that are blatantly pro-EU, pro-immigration and which both push the lie that we are in a ‘post-fact’ era[that in itself is the biggest lie]. One series is ‘The New World’ and the other is ‘Imagining the new truth’…hmm yes, a very telling title, very apt as the BBC really does imagine, invent, fabricate, the new truth.

In ‘Imagining the new truth’ we have artists and writers telling us their vision of the world post-Trump/Brexit.  Naturally it is a very left-wing view…almost extreme.  For example we had on Tuesday author Daniel Kehlman telling us that all the worries about immigration, about the Islamification of Europe, about terrorism, are a result of paranoia, of foolishness, a lack of education and understanding, and of course, Right-Wing propaganda…fake news.  He compared it all to the witch-hunts of the Middle Ages, completely irrational attacks on innocent people as a result of fear and loathing whipped up by…medieval fake news.  Yep no bombs, no sex attacks, no Trojan Horse plots, no wgae drops, no job losses, no homelessness, no queues at GPs, at A&E, at schools, and no ever-increasing chaos on ever-more crowded roads and public transport.

Then we have ‘The New World’…..each programme a carefully crafted exercise in deceit and manipulation as we are fed narratives shaped to push a message…you listen and listen, it’s all fairly anodyne and on the fence for a while, then wham, we get to the malicious and misleading point they have been slowly, slowly working towards, the dramatic exhortation that denounces certain thoughts, people and ideas and preachs the preferred orthodoxy.

We had one that concluded that Putin, the Chinese Commies, and Trump were all the same…’fascist strongmen’ who were going to bring the world to the point of destruction….instead we need men of ‘vison and restraint’…really?  Like Obama?  The man who allows Iran to arm itself with nukes, who let Russia annex the Crimea and invade the Ukraine, who let Assad and Russia dominate in the Middle East and who stood aside as Europe was swamped with immmigrants.   Trump was lectured that he had to come to some agreement with Putin and not face him aggressively…hmmm…er…isn’t that exactly what he said he wanted to do and for which he was roundly condemned by the BBC for being a Putin stooge?

Then we had one about ‘populism’, that word used by the BBC to condemn and dismiss anyone who votes for anyone who doesn’t have the same values as the BBC.  It started off inoffensively enough but soon got to the real message…the ‘populists’ are bigots and racists, uneducated, working class, white country hicks.

We all know that the Left’s favoured weapon when faced with having to defend their open borders immigration policy is to call anyone who disagrees a racist.  Actually, you know, the BBC tells us, they’re absolutely right…those people who oppose immigration are racists and bigots…the only problem is they don’t care about beng called racist and so the weapon is ineffective now.  Hmmm…no…people are massively offended by being labelled racist for wanting to control immigration and it is a weapon used to shut off debate by ‘shaming’ people…a weapon that it is acknowledged has been hugely effective in silencing people, the result of which has been politicians, journalists and police officers prevented from doing their jobs and hugely damaging changes to society along with unspeakable crimes committed and hidden due to political correctness.  Thousands of young girls were raped and abused because the likes of the BBC stood silent.  The BBC knew…one BBC journalist admitted he saw what was going on and ‘wondered why the police did nothing’…why did he do nothing?  The police got away with doing nothing because they weren’t held to account by the likes of that BBC journalist.

Then we had one on ‘demography’…ie immigration…again a slow burn…a long explanation of why, and how beneficial itis, Africans just had to come to Europe….you waited and waited, you knew it had to come eventually and then bingo!…it’s there….mass immigration …we’re lucky to have it….it’s been a tremendous boon, we have a ‘favourable demographic’ in the UK, a demographic dividend that is very good and will help us to grow, be more dynamic, prosperous and open…whilst Brexit means no more lovely immigrants, the economy will collapse and you will have to work until you drop and all on lower wages. Oh and the answer to an ageing population? Keep importing millions of young people….yep…that’ll work, no flaw in that plan at all.  And one last hit….Whites in America are very racist…they don’t want to pay taxes to educate brown skinned immigrants….hmmm…really?  Maybe it is actually they don’t want to pay taxes to pay for the health, schools and housing, and all the rest, for illegal immigrants not because of skin colour at all.   Would you pay all that for someone who jumped over your garden fence and demanded you did so because it was his, and his family’s, human right?

And then there was Jo Fidgen bringing us ‘Nothing but the truth’….  ho ho ho.

Are we really living in a post-truth world? It has been an extraordinary year for the concept of veracity. Brexit. Trump. Experts have taken a beating, facts have apparently taken second place to emotion and feeling. And what about truth? It seems like fewer and fewer people, whether voters or politicians, care what’s true anymore.

This programme had been trailed for a week or two telling us that it would examine if we are really living in a post-truth world….problem was the programme was not at all about examining that question but instead used the programme as a vehicle to attack all the usual suspects that the BBC has issues with.

So what were the issues that so alarmed the BBC…Trump and his ‘lies’, the Brexit ‘lie’ about £350 million and Gove’s attack on the ‘experts’….coz they have been proved so right haven’t they so far?

Fidgen announces that she, as a liberal, is ‘flipping terrified‘ of the apparent new world order…why?  And just what is this new world order?  Just how different is it really and in what way will Europe not be able to work together just because the UK doesn’t want to be completely under the EU yoke?

Then we had the next BBC bête noire…the Iraq War…that organ of mass deception.  lol.  Trouble is Blair didn’t lie, the Dossier wasn’t ‘sexed up’, it was as David Kelly, that world renowned weapons control expert, stated, merely a run down of what the UN had already reported…and he himself thought the war was necessary as he recognised the huge danger Saddam posed to the world.  Let’s not forget that Parliament voted for the war.  Oh yes…Bush also very definitely lied about WMD and our thought processes are coloured by our ideology…hmmm…so pro-EU apparatchik, Sir Ivan Rogers, was never going to be a good head of negotiations to leave the EU then?  Who knew eh?

We rationalise away the facts…say on Brexit and immigration…we don’t want to accept that Brexit will be a disaster and that immigration, and the EU, is great for us…really.  We’re such stupid fools.  Thank Allah we have the BBC to guide us through the darkness of our ignorance.

We heard that’ ‘as a Jew’, ‘populism’ is a disaster….it’s the 1930’s all over again.  No, no it’s not.  Not unless a certain ideology takes over then ‘as a Jew’ be scared, be very scared…hmm…they already are…just the BBC hasn’t noticed.

But why has liberalism fallen, why have facts become so irrelevant, why have feelings and emotions become the new ‘facts’?  The Internet.  The Internet has changed everything as it creates echo chambers that mean people no longer encounter dissenting and different view points and information and we also have a new phenomenon…psycholgical geography….I kid you  not.  Of course both of these concepts are complete bunk.

The Internet if anything has opened up thought and opinion, it has democratised information and broken the monopoly of government and the MSM.  Before we had the bubbles…if you read the Telegraph did you read the Guardian?  No.  But now you can, pay-walls allowing.  There is a vast amount of easily available news, thought and opinion out there from all walks of life and people read it all the time.  How can the BBC possibly claim that the Internet creates closed off echo chambers when it does the opposite….the BBC itself is the biggest echo chamber around where received opinion is the only thought allowed.

As for ‘geographical psychology’ as a new concept…again bunkum….it’s not a new phenomenon….people have always moved towards areas where like-people live…either through the necessity of work or due to the constraints put on them by immigration to a new land….the cost of housing and the fact that they want to live in a strange land with people whom they know and trust.  Silicon Valley and California, the West Coast, is a lefty, liberal, hippy hotbed…it has been for ever….just as the shipyards and mines created certain communities because that’s where all the workers with the same interests and lives were, had to be…and Brixton is Brixton because Black immigrants moved there decades ago…it’s not a stunning new phenomenon that this academic has just revealed but he suggests it is in order to create the idea that a whole new world has come about where fascist, populist, Trump-like politicians have polarised nations to their detriment.  Yeah…accept there have always been Republican and Democrat states just as there have always been ‘safe-seats’ in the UK.  Politics has always been polarised.  That’s politics stupid.  That’s life.

I’m not even going to venture down the road of tackling politicised ‘neuroticism’.  Needless to say it’s all a convenient line to create the idea that the world is changing for the worse.

So we’ve had Brexit, Gove and experts, immigration, the Iraq War, Trumpism, what else is there, what other BBC bête noire to digest?  Oh…how about climate change?  Ah yes…Trump doesn’t want to argue with the facts he just ignores them and goes for the emotion, climate change has been politicised and the overwhelming sicentific evidence trashed.

Anyway….The Trump and Brexit campaigns were based on lies not supported by the facts….and facts matter more than ever now [whose ‘facts’ though?] but what’s really worrying is the people’s lack of trust in the experts, in the politicians, in the journalists…it’s bad for democracy.

No…it’s bloody good for democracy that we don’t believe these liars and charlattans in the media, in politics and in the ranks of the so-called experts who themselves set aside that expertise in favour of their own prejudices, ideologies and views.

The Internet is a vital tool for that democracy…one that the BBC, that inbred echo chamber, works relentlessly to neuter and silence…it’s just too damned truthful.



Bookmark the permalink.

31 Responses to Truth and Consequences

  1. Richard Pinder says:

    The facts are that the BBC has gained a growing reputation for censorship, in science and intellectual organisations, including censorship of Islamic violence, European Union Governance and the IQ levels of racial groups. This could be caused by bias or ignorance. Simply reading a Daily Mail or Daily Express could improve things for the BBC. But putting key words and statements in Google Scholar would expand knowledge to the maximum on many subjects.

    But then simple correlations can be used for many answers to problems, not just scientific problems. And correlations make it possible for people of different preduces and biases to agree with each other. That’s why the two most prominent Labour supporting scientists are both on the side of truth, when it comes to Climate Change and Brexit, as well as on immigration.

    The highest statistical correlations to date, used to determine the truth are.
    (1) Climate Change correlation with the speed of the centre of the Sun relative to the centre of mass or barycentre of the Solar System determines the length of the solar cycle, this in turn is caused by the orbits and masses of the Planets.
    (2) Correlation with the most similar Commonwealth territories to Britain, not in the EU, implies Brexit would give Britain an economic boost of over 10 percent.

    Both these correlations provide evidence without the need for complex explanations from experts. The simple explanation for (1) Solar Magnetic influences on changing Cloud Albedo, either directly, or by changes to Galactic Cosmic Rays, or both. And (2) Significantly less Administrative costs.

    My experience working with educational experts who were less educated than myself was that they try to produce complexity from simplicity, so as to justify their employment. For instance I remember being given a booklet full of statements, used to fill out forms, with complex jargon, when my plain English looked to simple for an educational expert.

    Also I think its obvious that people who think with emotion are going to prefer the Arts, and therefore more likely to work at the BBC and vote Labour. While people who think logically would prefer the sciences, and therefore could only work at the BBC as an Engineer and secretly vote UKIP.

    The above facts are the best facts that correlations can point too. But BBC articles are usually fact free due to the “post-fact or post-truth era” at the BBC. This seems to be the result of seminars at the BBC, were fake experts decide what the “new truth” or “fake news” is, which replaces the information censored by the BBC, due to advice from the participants of these seminars.


    • Edward says:

      “Climate Change correlation with the speed of the centre of the Sun relative to the centre of mass or barycentre of the Solar System determines the length of the solar cycle, this in turn is caused by the orbits and masses of the Planets.”

      Eh? The solar cycle is a constant 11 years. It has nothing to do with the planets. Am I missing something here?

      “Correlation with the most similar Commonwealth territories to Britain, not in the EU, implies Brexit would give Britain an economic boost of over 10 percent.”

      Seeking trade deals with countries just because they are in the Commonwealth would show weakness and desperation. It is up to those Commonwealth countries to knock on our door rather than for us to run to them. If we do that, they could insist on an open door policy, which is the last thing we want!

      Our target trade partners will be China, Brazil, Canada, USA, and Australia. As far as I understand, Singapore is already signed up for a trade deal with the UK.


      • Mustapha Sheikup al-Beebi says:

        The average length of the Solar Cycle is 11.2 Earth years but there is considerable variability.

        On a personal note, I recall projecting an image of the sun and accompanying sunspots onto a sheet of white cardboard in our garden in the Summer of 1980, at the time of a publicised Solar Maximum, to the great amusement of my family! I also recall going outside in the Summer of 1989 to take a look at the Northern Lights, reported on BBC Radio 4 as being observable at the time, another Maximum but clearly not exactly 11.2 years after the 1980 one. There was another Max’ in 1991 (which an amateur like me might have guessed at, on the basis that 1980 + 11 = 1991) which helped produce a beautiful solar corona in photos of the long total solar eclipse of July 11 that year, visible on Hawaii and in Central America.

        There have been other double peaks in more recent years and the 11.2 years figure is only an average. The dance of the planets does seem to have an effect on our sun, suggesting that Medieval astrologers were not as wrong as might be supposed, even if they didn’t understand the mechanism by which the sun (>97% of all the mass in its solar system) might be influenced by the other <3%.


        • Edward says:

          “Unfortunately, in true astrological style, many people are very good at forgetting about reality, and still talk about planetary alignments and sunspots.”


          • Richard Pinder says:

            Observed Solar Cycles show Solar cycles vary between 9 years and 13.7 years. That is a variation from the mean of up to 23 percent.

            Also the Australian Space Academy article on Solar Astrology has almost totally censored scientific papers dated after 1977, with the exception of papers by Frank Glassby (2002) and Geoff Sharp (2013).

            But there must be almost a hundred papers on the subject published since 1977. The most important ones to date would be found by searching Google Scholar for Ed Fix, Carlo Tosti, Nicola Scafetta, Paul Vaughan, Tim Channon, Rick Salvador and Ian Wilson.

            The Academy seems to have cherry picked papers which throw doubt on the theory, which must be the reason why almost all of them are dated before 1977. Very strange, but thanks for showing me proof of censorship.


    • AceFlyingPig says:

      ‘My experience working with educational experts ….. was that they try to produce complexity from simplicity, so as to justify their employment’.

      This could equally apply to civil servants in my experience. They are obsessed with projects, timetables (which they never meet), meetings, minutes, paperwork and anything else that means they can sit around on their idle back-sides, talking and doing nothing except arrange the date of the next meeting.

      I have listened to the great, the good, the experts and the media all stating that the trade negotiations are going to be difficult and complex. For the life of me I cannot see why. Most negotiations appear to falter as they become bogged down in agreeing the detail of the standards and regulations to be applied by both parties. All of ours already align to the EU. We simply take a position of, we want to be in control of our laws, borders and finances. Now EU, what tariffs do you wish to apply to our trade goods and services and we will reciprocate, unless you agree to zero or lower tariffs to the benefit of both parties. What is so difficult ? What is it that I am missing apart from the deliberate obtuseness and mendacity of the EU and their Remain/MSM acolytes.


  2. Edward says:

    Isn’t it ironic that the term “post-truth” made it into the dictionary after Brexit and the election of Trump, when it is a term associated mostly with communism and left-wing politics.

    One only has to view the BBC’s news and current affairs output to gain an understanding of the term post-truth; allow left-wing commentators and politicians to voice their political opinions without scrutiny, but aggressively challenge those from the political right-of-centre.

    Here’s a couple of post-truths you may remember from the run-up to the last general election:

    Over 100,000 people have used food banks in the last year. Double the year before! [The Trussell Trust]

    The truth (or should that be the post-truth) is that more than 100,000 food vouchers were issued and that people using food banks would, on average, use 3 vouchers. With this in mind, the amount of people using food banks would have been more like a third (33,000) of the amount claimed.

    The Trussell Trust did admit to this “error”, but claimed that – as a charity – they need to attract as much publicity as possible. However, in this case, the charity was certainly acting at a political level, and the BBC was taking every opportunity to highlight the trust’s figures, whilst ignoring those who had the facts ready for broadcast.

    The “Bedroom Tax”

    Not a tax at all, and – quite rightly – abolished due to a lack of one-bedroomed homes, even though the idea was heading in the right direction. But there’s an irony here that the word “tax” can be used as a good word and a bad word at the same time. When it’s used in conjunction with “rich”, it’s a good word, and when it’s used in conjunction with “poor”, it’s a bad word.

    The question is; is tax a good thing, or a bad thing? It can’t be both!

    Nevertheless, this was not a tax.


    • Dadad says:

      I rather like the counter to post truth, coined by the Raedwald blog.

      I’m living now in a ‘post credulous’ world.


      • Scroblene says:

        Pre-zactly, Dadad! (or should that be post-zactly)?

        Raedwald is always required reading!


    • JimS says:

      Re. the ‘Bedroom Tax’: Don’t forget the other BBC trick, that of ommission. This policy by the ‘wicked Tories’ was a continuation of the very similar ‘reforms that the ‘Likeable Labour’ government had made to housing benefit paid to tennants in private housing, i.e. ‘we will pay benefits to meet your needs, not your desires’.


    • Peter Grimes says:

      The ASA have recently outed Greenpeace’s lies on fracking. I think it is time for several of us to write to the ASA to ask them to investigate the Trussell Trust for similarly lying.


      • JosF says:

        Have not the ASA also slated Friends Of The Earth over some dodgy adverts recently as well Looks like the eco-warriors should employ a few scientists to check their claims first


    • chrisH says:

      Good points Edward.
      You`ve illustrated just WHO gets to define words, what words make their exalted lists of “approved words”-and what words can be binned , twisted into plaits and hollowed of any meaning.
      Orwell said it all-and it`s good that you`re reminding us.
      Funny how Obama “has a mandate, a landslide”-whereas Trump has to “reach out to heal the divide”.
      See?…the Lefts gaff, the Lefts rules ALL the tine when it comes to language, to who`s the custodian and to who defines definitions, patrols the borders and mans the watchtowers.
      Is this “populist”?
      And-we`ve now been “post truth” since Mid Staffs and Aberfan! Labour decides-the BBC slaver along.Thank the Lord for Orwell.G


  3. Oaknash says:

    The answer is all very simple.

    People like me have turned to “populism ” because we are sick of having the multicultural/transgender/impractical socialism smokescreen constantly shoved down our throat by a MSM that is more concerned with getting good reviews from the the Guardian and some Soros financed left wing “thinktank” rather than telling us the truth about what is going on in the world.

    Behind all of this garbage the left have been making fundamental changes to our society that if not stopped will change it forever.

    Their main tool has been using guilt and most peoples belief in authority and underlying compassion. No one wants to be seen as uncaring.

    Probably without the internet the left would have got away with this mass power grab instead we are onto them and many of us are now willing to fight for our culture and beliefs.

    It is interesting that the main cheerleaders for control of the media/internet are from the so called free speech loving liberals.

    Power to the people! – I dont think so – Sorry Wolfie – youve been busted!


    • Scroblene says:

      Excellent points, Oaknash.

      I do object to the term ‘populism’ though, as it is putting my beliefs in some pigeon hole, where others can easily poke fun at these beliefs. (I’m not getting at you of course)!

      I’ve been an independent soul for many years, and still feel pretty good about voting for UKIP in the GE in 2015, Brexit and hoping for Trump to win last year.

      Mrs Scroblene and I can still natter on for ages after lunch, both enjoying a tincture or three, and nobody in the MSM has a clue what we really think!

      It does help though, not listening to the BBC apart from earphones for ‘Up all night’, as I quite like Dotun on occasions, he has a nice way with callers, and the evening bBeeb news usually makes the old BP rocket, so I mute it as much as possible!


  4. JimS says:

    Anne Marie Walters has some interesting points to make about ‘truth’, how subjectivism has replaced the objectivism that built the science-based ‘West’. She includes the BBC and the Labour Party, (of which she was a member), in her criticism.


    • Marion says:

      Downloaded this earlier – just watched it.

      Outstanding – highly recommended. Brave woman.


  5. peterthegreat says:

    Through gritted teeth bibistan reluctantly ran the story of the racist torture of a mentally disabled white man by a black gang in US. It was a huge story and live streamed, so even Al beeb couldn’t ignore it, though I notice it was quickly relegated down to the US page, from where it will soon disappear no doubt. Imagine if the colours had been reversed, it would have been front page for weeks! An even worse crime occurred a few years ago in Knoxville, where a white couple were tortured for days by a gang before being murdered. To their shame the entire msm ignored the story, including of course bibistan. Google ‘Knoxville horror murders’ if you have the stomach.


    • Marion says:

      Have to confess I’d forgotten about Knoxville, though I remember the “Wichita Massacre”, which I’ve referred to in the Mid Week thread.

      All more or less ignored by the MSM.


  6. BBCReject says:

    I just see it as the ‘natural life cycle’ of politics.

    First there is the growth phase, when a new ideology, a new ‘religion’ gradually builds steam, and gets jumped on by those hungry for power, the young revolutionaries, the ambitious innovators and motivational speakers (or writers).

    Then comes the mature phase, when the ideology is established and powerful. The leaders are supported by the faithful masses, those who are brainwashed into believing heart and soul in the ‘new ideology’, those of little imagination who want to be part of something big and successful, or those who see a chance to gain promotion by showing devotion to an established cult.

    Then finally there is the death phase, when the cracks are showing and younger, more vibrant, ideologies are nipping at the heels of the old established religion. The faithful try desperately to cling to power at any cost, but in the end it can only go one way, and the old edifice tumbles in ruins, discredited and out of date.

    It has to do with generations as much as anything else, we can see the currently dominant liberal idealism of the West progressing to maturity in the mid 90s along with a certain age group who strongly embraced it, but now, twenty years on, it’s clearly had it’s day and is in it’s early death phase. The BBC is one of the last bastions of a defunct ideology, a safe haven for those who cling to has been ideas and the disproven and outdated ideals of previous decades and generations, it just hasn’t realised it’s a dead man walking yet.


  7. Rogerblackpool says:

    How come the BBC newscasts have not covered the Chicago kidnapping and torture of a special needs youth.He was scalped and derogatory remarks about Donald Trump was constant. Obama homeland ! four democratic supporters.


  8. s.trubble says:

    I enjoy Alan’s articles and here ,in particular, his use of the word “Bunkum” to describe the bbBC output, by and large.

    I checked Bunkum,s definition

    *insincere talk……………..CHECK
    *Claptrap ………………….CHECK
    *Humbug ……………………CHECK


  9. joeadamsmith says:

    It’s still those pesky Russians, again:


  10. RJ says:

    “but what’s really worrying is the people’s lack of trust in the experts, in the politicians, in the journalists…”

    The debate about how far we should trust experts reminds me of the arguments at the end of the 18th century about the benefits of Benevolent Despotism. The theory was that the best way to get things done was with an absolute ruler, and this would be acceptable because if he was guided by the principles of the Enlightenment he would govern in the interests of the people. This would be the perfect system – caring yet efficient – and everyone would be happy. The insurmoutable problem was that there was no way to ensure that your despot remained benevolent. The modern cult of the experts still hasn’t solved this problem of how to ensure that your “experts” aren’t corrupted by politics, power or money.

    The alternative is democracy – a system that has its own problems but remains better than anything else. The people choose their government and they choose how far to trust “in the experts, in the politicians, in the journalists…”. The more arrogant the BBC the less we trust it.


    • AceFlyingPig says:

      As usual with the MSM’s distortion of fact into fiction. Gove’s ‘Expert’ comment related only to the hysterical nonsense coming out of the Remain so called ‘experts’ on the effects of a Brexit vote. It was not, as is now being portrayed by the media, disparaging of all kinds of expert. But why let fact get in the way of a news headline.

      The fact is, as has now been admitted by the Treasury Senior Economist, there is no such thing as an economic expert. At best, like the weather, it is guess work based on flawed computer models and statistics. Hence why it is referred to as the dismal science. Virtually everything I learnt as a student many years ago has since been overturned. All but the basic principle which still holds good relating to supply and demand … and we know why the MSM do not want to study that logic too closely.


  11. 60022Mallard says:

    Just a small thought for those who comment on BBC HYS and the Guardian CIF is to throw in the question of whether they are being hacked by the Russians to produce the c**p that they do.

    Is Polly a paid agent sowing discord in the nation?


  12. Nibor says:

    Populism ! In a democracy ? Why would anyone want that ?


  13. Guest Who says:

    Meanwhile, Gramps Clampett hands the BBC another editorial integrity dilemma:


  14. Demon says:

    If populist means sensible or democratic (or any other positive words that would apply to Brexit supporters) then I’m happy to be called a populist. Viva populism.


  15. Alicia Sinclair says:

    The BBC started today with telling us all that Sturgeon will graciously hold back on that Second Referendum of hers-as long as we effectively stay in the EU for her.
    The BBC news monkeys made it sound as if this was reasoned, a fair deal-and Nicola has only the unity of the UK at her brave heart.
    This followed on from a hatchet job on ANOTHER British lady who heads up a devolved British Parliament-Arlene Foster over in Northern Ireland.
    Sturgeon good-Foster bad, needs to be sacked or resign.
    Within half an hour we all see what the BBCs ” British Broadcasting” means.
    The Left and the EU Project to be protected.
    Anything other, and any independent thinking from anywhere BUT the Left? Not a hope of getting the truth.