Deconstructing Marianna in Conspiracyland – Introduction
Iain Davis
Rejected artwork for the BBC podcast.
The BBC’s “Marianna in Conspiracyland” podcast series is presented by Marianna Spring, the BBC’s specialist disinformation and social media correspondent. Over the course of 10 podcast episodes, mixing fact with fiction and exploiting applied psychology, “Conspiracyland” is a disinformation and propaganda campaign designed to mislead the BBC audience into accepting dictatorship.
It is part of a much larger global operation which seeks to install a global governance regime. For any readers new to my work, this may sound like a pretty wacky “conspiracy theory.” Sadly, it isn’t and over the next few articles we will explore the evidence that proves the existence of precisely this global “conspiracy.” All I’ll say for now is that this “conspiracy” is not a “secret.”
Over the next few posts, by deconstructing the BBC’s Conspiracyland and Verify disinformation, we will reveal the BBC’s motivations for spreading falsehoods and engaging in “conspiracy theory” propaganda. We will also examine the wider context within which it occurs.
The next post, Part 1 of the series, is currently exclusively available to my paid Substack subscribers. However, there is no need to become a paid subscriber to read it. Preceding posts will be made freely available to all as and when each subsequent post in the series is published.
I am trying to earn a living as a journalist and writer. This is not something that Marianna Spring approves of. In her politically motivated attack on researcher, film maker, author and journalist Richard D. Hall, Marianna said:
Mr Hall is only making a living from his theories, rather than making huge profits – why keep going?
Marianna earns somewhere in the region of £70K – £84K per annum as a BBC correspondent. The journalists, writers and content creators she attacks aren’t salaried and ‘make a living’ purely from the kind support of people who are interested in and value their work.
They don’t earn anything like Marianna’s salary. Marianna is at a loss to understand why they keep going and is determined to assist government efforts to make sure they don’t.
The BBC welcomes the fact that its journalism is directly funded by the government, especially the work of its foreign correspondents and its overseas media operations in countries like Ukraine. British people, who wish to pay for their propaganda, currently fork-out £159 annually for BBC disinformation.
For many, this isn’t perceived as a choice because they can’t watch broadcast television without it. With steep fines payable for failure to pay your TV license, the government uses threats and menaces to coerce the public to fund the BBC.
A rapidly increasing number of people have realised that they don’t need to pay anything. Contrary to government propaganda, it is a choice.
Faced with the prospect of no one bothering to pay for their propagandists, so wedded is the government to ensuring that its BBC “programming” continues that it has frozen the current license fee for two years, in the hope of enticing people to stay, while it desperately tries to figure out how it is going to fund its State media operation.
Currently the proposed government solution looks likely to be a direct tax:
Our evidence was clear that some form of public funding for the BBC remains necessary. [. . .] A universal household levy linked to council tax bills is one option which could take greater account of people’s ability to pay. A ring-fenced income tax is another.
As the effectiveness of its threats and menaces wanes, it is clearly essential, from the government’s perspective, that all choice be removed. Taxation at source has the added advantage of stealing money from people who can’t abide the BBC and wouldn’t choose to support it if you paid them.
For the 2020/21 financial year the BBC claims that it received £3.8 billion in license fees and more than £1.5 billion in other income—direct government funding, etc.—giving it an annual budget of more than £5.3 billion. It also operates its own “charity,” called BBC Media Action, which spreads BBC propaganda and disinformation globally.
BBC Media Action was supported in 2022 with “charitable—tax deductible—donations” from, among others, USAID (the CIA), The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the UK Foreign and Commonwealth office—by far its biggest donor—the European Union (EU) and the United Nations (UN).
Unsurprisingly, the BBC license fee is currently set by the UK government. Nearly 30% of the BBC’s operational costs are directly funded by the UK government and its “charitable” operations are exclusively funded by a global public-private partnership between the UK government, other governments, global philanthropic foundations, intelligence agencies and supranational intergovernmental organisations.
Ofcom, the organisation that regulates the BBC, which itself is “directly accountable” to the UK government, refers to the BBC as a Public Service Broadcater (PSB) and denies that the BBC is a state broadcaster. According to Ofcom, a PSB delivers “impartial and trusted news.”
The generally accepted definition of state broadcasters is:
… media outlets that are under financial and/or editorial control of the state or government.
On 23rd March 2020, less than two weeks after the WHO declared their global pandemic, Ofcom published their official Coranovirus Guidance, to regulated broadcaster, such as the BBC:
We strongly advise you to take particular care when broadcasting [. . .] statements that seek to question or undermine the advice of public health bodies on the Coronavirus, or otherwise undermine people’s trust in the advice of mainstream sources of information about the disease [. . .] Such views should always be placed into context and not be presented in such a way as to risk undermining viewers’ trust in official health advice [. . .] Ofcom will consider any breach arising from harmful Coronavirus-related programming to be potentially serious and will consider taking appropriate regulatory action, which could include the imposition of a statutory sanction.
BBC’s reporting on the pseudopandemic was entirely controlled by the government via the government’s so-called “independent” regulator. The BBC only reported “official” government approved information. But the BBC went much further than most mainstream media (MSM) outlets.
In December 2020 Marianna Spring reported on BBC “Newsround,” the BBC’s current affairs program for younger viewers. Spring told the BBC’s child audience:
Big communities of anti-vaxxers, those who are against vaccines, have spent years spreading untrue conspiracies. [. . .] There is a big difference between real worries about vaccines [. . .] and these conspiracies which suggest that vaccines are a way of deliberately hurting or causing harm to people. [. . .] Social media sites and the government have committed to do more to tackle lies about the coronavirus vaccine online. [. . .] some say they have not done enough to label or remove topics on this subject.
Marianna did not think it necessary to tell British children that she was compelled only to report government approved messaging. She told the children to trust information from the government and its pharmaceutical corporation “partners” and to reject all opinions expressed from any other source.
She deliberately conflated concerns about jab safety and efficacy with suspicions about a possible nefarious agenda, misleading children into thinking that the people she labelled anti-vaxxers, who had continually highlighted jab safety risks and dubious efficacy, were spreading “conspiracies” that were “lies.” Marianna, like most of her BBC colleagues, was inducing children to take experimental jabs that they did not need.
Perhaps most concerning was Marianna’s willingness to normalise state censorship for children. Contrary to every democratic principle known to their parents, she suggested to the youngest generation that the government should “remove” information it doesn’t “approve.” Thus, Marianna was advocating dictatorship, as a preferred model of government, to British children.
There is no doubt that the centralised control of information is favoured by autocracies and other types of dictatorships. It goes without saying that dictatorships are, by definition, anti-democratic.
When German political scientists explored How Dictators Control the Internet, they found:
A growing body of research has studied how autocratic regimes interfere with internet communication to contain challenges to their rule. [. . .] In most autocratic regimes, governmental interference in digital infrastructure and communication is commonplace. [. . .] This influence occurs for political motives—to ban opposition activists from mobilizing their followers online, to contain the spread of information that is critical of the regime, or to spy on the population to identify potential dissenters. [. . .] [A]utocrats make systematic use of digital tools and interfere with online communication to contain challenges to their rule.
This is precisely the information control system that Marianna was promoting among children. Marianna Spring wholeheartedly endorses dictatorships and is vocally opposed to democratic ideals.
The BBC is funded entirely at the discretion of the UK government, it receives a significant proportion of its income directly from the government, it is regulated by an organisation that is bound by law to report to the government and which functions, via legislation, at the behest of the government.
Yet, despite all of this, in its mission statement, the BBC says of itself:
Trust is the foundation of the BBC. We’re independent, impartial and honest.
This is a deceptive statement intended to mislead. The BBC is not remotely “independent” from government. It is not impartial, but is rather directed by the government to report only “official” narratives. By any reasonable definition, it is quite obviously a state broadcaster.
Therefore, the BBC’s own mission statement is disinformation. In no way can it be considered “honest” and only the most naive would “trust” it.
The Oxford English Dictionary definition of “trust” is:
Firm belief in the reliability, truth, or ability of someone or something. [. . .] Acceptance of the truth of a statement without evidence or investigation.
Any news media organisation that insists that you trust it does not wish you to engage in critical thinking. It requires that you believe whatever it tells you “without evidence or investigation.”
The demand for “trust” has no place in a pluralistic, free media in a democracy. Our ability to question power, and not to trust it, is the most basic of democratic ideals.
Over the next few posts, we are going to review each episode of “Marianna in Conspiracyland” and, having downloaded and listened to all of it—using this handy online service—we’ll highlight the absurd propaganda and disinformation strewn throughout. But before we do, I just wanted to make a couple of points.
Marianna Spring has every right to her opinion, both as a reporter and as a human being. Of course she features heavily in my criticisms, but this is only because she is the chosen face of the Conspiracyland series and the BBC’s Verify campaign. I hold no personal animosity towards her.
Unlike Marianna and the BBC, I do not believe that anyone should be censored or personally attacked for expressing their honestly held opinion, including Spring herself. If she has been attacked or abused online, that is not something I support.
Her opinions are the antithesis of my own. I believe she is spreading dangerous disinformation that seeks to censor freedom of speech and expression and, thereby, end human freedom and promote enslavement of the population. I find Marianna Spring’s authoritarian, anti-democratic opinion, advocating dictatorship as she does, offensive.
That being said, I have no right not to be offended and both Spring, and the BBC, have every right to offend. Causing offence is one of the costs of free speech: a democratic ideal most people consider important.
I am also not clear as to the degree of Spring’s personal complicity. To what degree she has considered the appalling ramifications of what she promoting is unknown to me. I can only conclude that she is either a willing propagandist, who welcomes political dictatorship, or is unwittingly or wittingly spreading BBC propaganda and disinformation, simply to further her own career, without caring about the consequences.
I’m not sure which is worse.
You can read more of Iain’s work at his blog IainDavis.com (Formerly InThisTogether) or on UK Column or follow him on Twitter or subscribe to his SubStack. His new book Pseudopandemic, is now available, in both in kindle and paperback, from Amazon and other sellers. Or you can claim a free copy by subscribing to his newsletter.
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.
For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.
The ever-excellent Morgoth has just produced this article: https://morgoth.substack.com/p/tyralibs-a-taxonomy-of-cancel-culture
The Netherlands has a secret intelligence service called the AIVD, they are researching on Anti-Institutional-Extremism in our country. It’s a greyzone between being critical on the government and ‘steering the narrative into aggression towards the government’.
The AIVD is checking everything, what they don’t tell is hispeed internet will be used to sweep all internet data of the Dutch into government databases, etc. Everything to protect democracy ofcourse.
Use Google translate for the report pls.
https://www.aivd.nl/onderwerpen/extremisme/anti-institutioneel-extremisme
Bizarre, she is a perfectly normal journalist who showed talent whilst still at her school. She achieved a good degree in languages at Oxford and worked hard to get a job at the BBC. The fact that she so effortlessly skewers the conspiracy theorists and other crazies is down to what easy targets they make, not some conspiracy (sic)
She’s a freak show. She’ll be one of the first prosecuted hence her doubling down to sheer insanity. Let’s hope her downfall is civilised and we can all work out what was going on in her head.
it’s been a one world government for 100’s if not 1000’s of years. all countries are human farms. your owners are human farmers
Mariana is just a presstitute.
Listen but don’t acknowledge them.
Mariana, as in the trench? There is a short Video of the firmament down there.
If only people switched off their TV.
Harm to Health
Cited in that guidance is the following: Ofcom’s research on health claims in programmes
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/104650/Health-claims-report.pdf
Health and wealth claims in programming: audience attitudes to potential harm
Research Report
Prepared for: Ofcom
Prepared by: Richard Fincham, Ian Sparham, Jo Smith & Samantha Grew
Date: July 2017
—
Within that document the term “harm to health” is used 31 times – example below. This is a key concept. It will be used to regulate all communications – not just public broadcasting.
—
1.2 Key findings
Q. How well is the concept of harm in programming understood?
A. The concept of harm in programming was broadly understood as content which was directly damaging to audiences in that it had the potential to cause detriment to people’s lives.
Spontaneously, participants were more able to cite examples of content that may cause harm to health, rather than financial harm. In particular, there was recognition of the risks of content recommending alternative treatments and cures, which could have severe consequences on those affected, particularly if linked to more serious conditions.
They use “programming’ in lieu of propaganda or broadcasting.
Any mention of the harm to children, especially those aged less than 5 or so? Parents of the non-wealthy must use TV or other ICT to distract such children because (a) creeping serfdom has made full-time work by both parents a necessity (b) child care by others is too expensive and over-regulated.
With regards to children, “harms to health” will include:
a) failure to adhere to the recommended vaccine schedule
b) failure to affirm the child’s gender fluidity
The parent’s social media activities will be monitored for non-conforming attitudes – i.e. “potential harms to health”.
There’s a short video synopsis of the radio series is here (for those able to access it):
Conspiracyland UK (2023)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0ft1ln3/conspiracyland-uk
The radio series’ obsessive focus on “The Light” publication may in part be explained by this report (pdf) about current conspiracy belief in the UK
Those for whom “The Light” is their primary news source, being (according to the report) among the most likely to subscribe to particular conspiracy theories. The UK Column and 21st Century Wire also make the Charts of Influence (as per the pdf).
Though no mention of OffG, it has to be said.
Maybe that’s a good thing. Hovering a little below the detection radar. Or is it better to be on the ‘Most Wanted’ list for humankind’s and posterity’s sake?
Another great source of naked news which remains below her radar is here:
https://therealslog.com/2023/06/16/final-analysis-comsumerism-is-extinct-resistance-is-non-existent/
Ofcom’s ruling re Naomi Wolf and Mark Steyn
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/news-centre/2023/ofcom-finds-gb-news-in-breach-of-broadcasting-rules-for-a-second-time
9 May 2023
Ofcom finds GB News in breach of broadcasting rules for a second time
An Ofcom investigation has today found the Mark Steyn programme, which first aired on GB News on 4 October 2022, in breach of our broadcasting rules.
The programme included an interview between presenter, Mark Steyn, and a guest, Dr Naomi Wolf. During the interview, Naomi Wolf made serious claims about the Covid-19 vaccine, including that its rollout amounted to a pre-meditated crime – “mass murder” – and was comparable to the actions of “doctors in pre-Nazi Germany”. Ofcom received 422 complaints that alleged these comments were “dangerous” and included “misinformation” that went “unopposed”.
It is important to stress that in line with the right to freedom of expression – broadcasters are free to transmit programmes that include controversial and challenging views, including about Covid-19 vaccines or conspiracy theories. However, alongside this editorial freedom, the Broadcasting Code imposes a clear requirement that if such content has the potential to be harmful, the broadcaster must ensure that its audience is adequately protected.
Our investigation concluded that GB News fell short of this requirement by allowing Naomi Wolf to promote a serious conspiracy theory without challenge or context – for example through other contributions in the programme or by the presenter, who appeared to support many of her comments. There was also no scrutiny of the evidence she claimed to hold to support her claims.
We also took into account that the programme presented Naomi Wolf as a figure of authority, with particular knowledge and expertise in the safety of the Covid-19 vaccines. We consider this would have lent credibility to her unchallenged claims. Of particular concern was her significant and alarming claim that “mass murder” was taking place through the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccinations, which she repeated three times.
We found that the comments made by Naomi Wolf had the potential to impact viewers’ decisions about their health and were therefore potentially harmful. Given that GB News did not take adequate steps to protect viewers from this potentially harmful content, we have found the channel in breach of Rule 2.1 of the Broadcasting Code.
This is the second significant breach of the Code recorded against GB News . In light of this, we are requesting that GB News attends a meeting with Ofcom to discuss its approach to compliance.
You can read our decision in full (PDF, 409.1 KB).
Naomi Wolf also appeared on the Mark Steyn programme the following day, and made further claims about Covid-19 vaccines. Her comments were put into context by other views expressed during the programme, and a banner broadcast throughout the segment informed viewers that Naomi Wolf had “faced widespread criticism for Covid research”. Taking this into account, we will not be pursuing these complaints further.
—
https://dailyclout.io/dr-naomi-wolf-speaks-out-about-ofcom-censorship
The (Factual) Interview that Led OfCom to Censure Mark Steyn and Dr Naomi Wolf
May 15, 2023 • by DailyClout
Dr. Naomi Wolf Speaks Out About Ofcom Censorship
—
Dr. Naomi Wolf and Mark Steyn Ofcom Offending Clip
DailyClout
https://rumble.com/v2nx14i-dr.-naomi-wolf-and-mark-steyn-ofcom-offending-clip.html
Among these dark Satanic Mills
Prospero and Ariel over the door. They will survive the Beeb’s usurpation by the TB.Liar regime and its followers, same as Prospero triumphed over his usurper brother in Shakespeare’s last and most inspired play..
“O brave new world! … Pardon is the word for all”.
I think the statue was always intended to be Groomer and Child – it’s just labelled as Prospero and Ariel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Gill#Sexual_abuse
Gill’s personal diaries reveal his child sex abuse of his two eldest teenage daughters during their time at Ditchling Common, incestuous relationships with his sisters, and, in 1930, sexual acts on his dog.[4][10][43] This aspect of Gill’s life was little known beyond his family and friends until the publication of the 1989 biography by Fiona MacCarthy.[44] A 1966 biography by Robert Speaight mentioned none of it.[44] Gill’s daughter Petra Tegetmeier, who was alive at the time of the MacCarthy biography, described her father as having “endless curiosity about sex” and that “we just took it for granted”, and told her friend Patrick Nuttgens she was unembarrassed. The children were educated at home and, according to Tegetmeier, she was then unaware of how her father’s behaviour would seem to others.
Everybody knows that “conspire” literally means to breathe together; but it also means to act together in harmony. So a “global governance regime” presumably is meant to mean that a shady, but not so secret, group of actors is planning to get everybody to work together in harmony; as coordinated by‘them’ globally?
There are currently ~66mn people in the UK, ~31mn of whom constitute the workforce. On any given day ~20mn people get up, get ready, and go to work entirely of their own accord as autonomous self-regulating, self governing behaviour; mostly voluntarily, and mostly by ‘free’ choice of will intended towards one’s own end.
The workforce is therefore automatically self-governing, and it would indeed be completely impossible for real time control by shadowy and elusive third parties as nefarious co-conspirators. The workforce is therefore a self-governing conspiracy of indirectly coordinated cooperation; undergoing mutually supporting self-organisation without hierarchy or control. Take that principle of autonomous, self-organised governance and apply it ever more widely.
When the UK works, a great deal of the rest of the world also works as coordinated economically. So all these self-organised economic entities as ‘countries’ are in fact coordinated globally in nonlocal and nonlinear, direct and indirect ways. That is – without direct coordination, command, or control by conspiratorial entities – the globalised workforce is already a globally self-governing regime without a separated sovereignty, hierarchy or leaders.
So, this globalised self-governing populace is also a highly-integrated and high-functioning de facto anarchy. In fact; remote direct control of ~4-5bn workforce is a phantasmic impossibility due to the supercomplexity of any direct or indirect command and control mechanism.
Without this population-wide supercomplexity — as distributed cognitive behavioural cooperation — nothing would get done… And a great deal does get done; but only as self-organised “complex adaptive system” we call the globalised economy. Thereafter, the globalised economy is already a participatory globalised governance regime that is currently self-actualising as everybody, everywhere, all-at-once; as an all-inclusively singular activity.
This population-wide “species singularity” is now a globalised conspecific conspiracy breathing together, eating together, living together as a self-actualising multinational multiplicity that includes all human activity at once as self-actualising complex assemblage irreducible to any particular activity, individuality, or group of shady actors hierarchised as “in control.”
It is only when you consider human activity in all its complexity – as a corporeal and concrete continuum of activity or “complex civilisation” extended globally with massification, substance, distributed power-production and so on – that fictive characterisations like ‘governments,’ ‘states’ and so on (as unextended fictive personifications without concrete mass or substance) are revealed as speech-only abstractions. Abstractions already accounted for as corporeal and concrete entities incorporated within the continuum as species singularity.
Does anybody really think that the currently spectacular governmental shitshow in the media has any impact on UK corporeal organisational activity? Last year we had three PMs and two monarchs – so what changed? Some nameplates maybe whilst the organisational activity continued on a daily basis. This is a version of the pragmatic maxim: “No change in meaning without a change in practice.” Unless the self-organisation of corporeal activity changes then the meaning or purpose remains the same – something pantomime politicians do not understand. (Not that many actually corporeal people do either.)
Indeed, the economic system is not self-sustaining without a constant throughput of energy and matter as infrastructure, products and consumable commodities (which can be tracked as quantified) so the ‘government’ is a fictive entity that actually does fuck all (except maybe mess it up) whilst everybody self-actualises the ‘corporeal economy’ as individual and economic activity which is the seemingly uncoordinated daily activity of the people as corporeal and concrete as “local governance regime.” Indeed we are the de facto self-governing monarchy.
Take that principle and globalise it as incorporated in nonlocal, extended “global governance regime”; as a self-controlled, self-organised supercomplexity even the most powerful AI could never control in real time – but we who work or worked self-controlled our own activity whichever is nonetheless traversed across the surface of the earth in unrelenting and unceasing activity as an individually and collectively self-organising, self-governing Artificial Super Intelligence as monarchical, sovereign, and insatiate.
We, as a workforce — considered as a holarchic supercomplexity of orders of magnitude beyond manipulative man-management — mostly manage ourselves (with quite a bit of help from technology.) So, other than ‘us’ in our daily activity – whence are the shady and elusive “global governance regime” and whence is the conspiracy theory?
We govern ourselves and seek figmentary scapegoats to isolate and blame for the negative aspects of life we do not like. Therapists call them psychiatric projections or transference – but on to what? The corporeal and concrete continuum of activity in all its negative and positive aspects is in what we do daily – as distributed everywhere as an earth-transforming activity and anthropogenic singularity.
Instead of peddling conspiracy theories, we could learn dynamic systems theory? Instead of invoking incorporeal and abstracted entities, we could invoke corporeal and concrete entities?
Globally, we are in charge of our own destiny and as soon as we realise that we are not trauma-bound to shady and elusive mental idolatry or nihilistic rational institutions; we could get on with redirecting our lives toward extended liveability, sustainability, maybe even harmony of living and breathing together in daily activity? Maybe.
Metta.
“On any given day ~20mn people get up, get ready, and go to work entirely of their own accord as autonomous self-regulating, self governing behaviour; mostly voluntarily, and mostly by ‘free’ choice of will intended towards one’s own end.”
“Go to the ant, thou sluggard, consider her ways and be wise. She needs no boss to stand over her” — Book of Wisdom, Old Testament.
Word salad. It reads like something generated by AI.
‘Marianna did not think it necessary to tell British children that she was compelled only to report government approved messaging. She told the children to trust information from the government and its pharmaceutical corporation “partners” and to reject all opinions expressed from any other source.’
What is the punishment for children who say: ‘F**k off you self-righteous London c**t!’??
Blacklisting with UK universities? (Why would any sane child want to go to University for academic reasons any more? OK if you see it as three years of sport, socialising and sex – but you could get that without becoming indebted by working in winter- and summer resorts for 3 years)
Being sent to borstal for insubordination?!
And what if the child’s parents both said: ‘I heartily agree with their sentiments and the BBC usually responds better to bad language than to polite diplomacy!’??
It might be a source of fun for mischief-makers to get children to push back in the classroom and not accept teacher’s hectoring without evaluating evidence for themselves.
Etc etc etc.
As we are not now living in a democracy and it seems quite obvious to me that the next step will be a form of taxation under which not one person will be allowed to avoid subsidising the BBC. To the jellyfish sitting in Parliament this will come to pass without a whimper. Their spineless subservience was laid bare during the Scamdemic and we can expect another similar outcome should this development take hold. BBC viewing figures are falling rapidly and those with governmental influence are not prepared to see their propaganda flagship sink beneath the waves of alternative media sources.
‘“Conspiracyland” is a disinformation and propaganda campaign designed to mislead the BBC audience into accepting dictatorship.’
The simplest way to counter this is to directly engage with ‘the BBC audience’ to convince them to no longer watch, to no longer pay for a license.
You can’t mislead a significant audience if the audience is withering to a rump…..
This is how I deal with corporations nowadays: I don’t try and change their ways, I just stop spending money with them.
Very good article Iain – look forward to reading the rest. Be interesting to see if Ms Spring responds!! 🙂
What if a group of billionaires/NGOs hire blackmailing/human trafficking/pedophiles to collect scientists & media people, and folk in positions of power/influence to conjure up schemes of taking out large swaths of human population & implement technocratic systems to control it in the future?
Not watched the BBC since 2016.
Corrupted to the core, full of Satanists, globalist minions, EU zealots and obsequious virtue signallers.
“Independent” and “the truth”, should not be used in a sentence when describing the BBC…
I’ve not watched it since 2012 and I wonder if Capita has stopped sending the threatening letters on the BBC’s behalf? I used to get one almost monthly, now I get very few.
Not watched the BBC since 2003, when TB.Liar sacked its governing body for revelations about Bliar’s Dodgy Dossier, and remade the BBC in his own image.
I can’t exactly remember without looking it up on YouTube, when I wrote ‘Ashamed and disgusted with the BBC.’ They say 6 years ago aka 2016. no wonder they have never let me near their output.
Apologies for the quality but I had only just written it and hadn’t rehearsed it enough. But here it is:
(3) ASHAMED & DISGUSTED WITH THE BBC – YouTube
jab safety risks and dubious efficacy
There cannot be jab efficacy for a concocted disease that is itself a conspiracy.
Can somebody help me resolve the following issue?
This outlet publishes one article after another that examines from yet another angle how the elites, the government, the globalists, the powers that be are after the common folk, how they want to enslave them, impose totalitarian tyranny, the usual suspects.
And day after day, year after year, the commenters keep bleating about the aforementioned subjects served on a silver platter to them for this very purpose.
Is this the purpose of this outlet, to keep people in a petrified state, forever incredulously watching how the world changes before their eyes? Or is this the limit of the balls and wits of the editors and authors? In other words, is this outlet yet another conduit of doctored content aimed at would-be intellectuals? Or do you people think that anything can be accomplished by whining about how things ain’t what they used to be, or should be?
I’m undecided. My first thought would be that the authors are shills for sure, but one must never underestimate the extent to which people are fucked up!
Thanks in advance for shedding some light on!
Dear Mr Cannoneer,
We here at OffG take the facetious observations of our commenters very seriously, and have opened a company wide investigation to get to the bottom of it.
All I can say is that when our authors contribute their articles, almost all of them tick the box “not a shill”, so I’m certain that can’t be it.
To help in our investigation, could I ask what you think the purpose of an alt-news publication is?
I would say it was to ‘inform’, and we attempt to do that by publishing an array of different authors with an array of different opinions, if you require one of our team to come and hold your hand, we are happy to provide such. They can whisper “everything is alright, you’re okay, you got this, champ!” in your ear whenever that dastardly petrified state starts creeping up.
However, in the unlikely event that this is just the provocative whinging of an entity of questionable intent… maybe just put some music on, have a cup of tea and consider all the more positive and meaningful directions your life could go. It’s never too late!
We will let you know the results of our investigations, heads will roll for this.
Yours,
Will x
Correct. Hence Lenin’s famous heading: “What is to be done?”.
“What is your greatest regret about the rise of the Nazis before the War, Herr Brandt?”
“That we Social Democrats were too genteel to combat them on the streets”.
“Obama suggests ‘digital fingerprints’ to counter misinformation ‘so we know what’s true and what’s not true’,” June 16, 2023. Obama has for many years stated need to return to era when “news” could only be defined by 3 tv networks….https://www.foxnews.com/politics/obama-suggests-digital-fingerprints-counter-misinformation-we-know-whats-true-not-true?intcmp=tw_fnc
Putin espouses “Traditional Values” to distinguish Russia from The West…Putin champions “Traditional Values” whilist promoting the Technological Society that will destroy those “Values”…
“The conservatives are fools: they whine about the decay of traditional values, yet they enthusiastically support technological progress and economic growth. Apparently it never occurs to them that you cant make rapid, drastic changes in the technology and the economy of a society without causing rapid changes in all aspects of the society as well. and that such rapid changes inevitably break down traitional values.” Ted “Unabomber” Kaczinski…
https://im1776.com/2023/06/14/obituary-ted-kaczynski/
The BBC where truth goes to die.
I wonder when the theme of cute young totty as presenter began. It used to be the avuncular male e.g. Richard Baker with the calming authoritative voice. Now it’s the nubile hottie bubbling over and offering schoolboy fantasy.
A graduate of Pembroke College Oxford.
That says it all.
Entitled, arrogant, and self righteous.
Trained in an academy of hubris.
A pawn of the parasites.
Yes, she’s just a tool, as far as I can see from her appearances on video. Not much between her ears, I’d day, and beset with all the prejudices of the modern young Englishwoman.
When people really want to be ‘important’ high-profile journalists does God even know the nature of the ilk He has spawned?
I exchanged hostile emails with Mike Wendling, one of spring’s colleagues and was shocked at the vapid quality of the arguments he presented re “conspiracy theorists” in general and Richard D. Hall in particular. It appeared to me that Wendling really believed Hall was in it for the money and was cooking up his research so he’d have something to sell … the implication being that RDHall was in it for the money and didn’t care if the material he was publishing was true or not.
This took my breath away and I could only conclude his analysis of Hall was a straightforward projection of his own motivation and carelessness regarding facts. I’m guessing Spring is the same but, going by the jawline on her, a more determined operator than him.
These people lack character, in my view. It is impossible for serious, honest people to understand such creatures. As Emanuel Swedenborg said,
“Truth is to spirit as water is to the earth”.
These people appear to be spiritual deserts. No water there to find.
Wendling managed to delete all his contributions to our emails after the exchanges.
I presented him with a significant number of facts relating to 7/7 (mostly taken, with references, from 7/7 Inquiry transcripts) of which he was not aware and told him that if he published them I’d give him the name of one of the men* who planted the bombs (he is not a Muslim. It was an odd thing to discover that if you want to know something badly enough then, mysteriously, the information just lands in your lap).
I knew this would just freak out the kind of person who doesn’t give a shit who did what to anybody (as long as it’s not him) Maybe Wendling thought these emails might possibly later be used against him so he deleted his part of the chain.
*not a criminal, not a terrorist, just an employee of a government sponsored subcontractor.
He couldn’t “delete his part” of an email chain.
The entire chain is also stored on the server/system/provider YOU use so you have
a copy HE is unable to delete.
Both in you inbox, and in your sent items
Maybe this is just technical misunderstanding on your part, or the communications media wasn’t email, or your story is BS.
One of the three.
You are wrong. My email address is in gmail. My sent emails remain. Wendell’s replies are ALL disappeared. He must have done this. I know not how.
Considering most of the “conspiracies” have now become fact, its bizarre they continue with the same line of defence ie-labelling anyone with a different option as a conspiracy theorist or far right (or both)…
conspiracy theorist, far right, anti-semite, If every normie was gay they’d call us heterosexuals. They’ll use all they’ve got and that ain’t much in terms of truth but they pack all the PR power that we lack … and still are slowly losing this battle, in my opinion.
I’ve mentioned this before, but it’s worth remembering how Blue Peter started this BBC fashion of treating adults like idiots, and older children like new-born puppies.
It was bound to end badly, and it did.
The next generation of ‘adults’ never actually made it to adulthood.
What their children will be like is beyond the compass of any normal speculation.
I always thought Blue Peter was total and utter middle class drivel for wet lettuce southern softies when I was a kid. How right I was.
How right, indeed! A similar instinct led my youthful self into the far healthier embrace of “Magpie”.
Ambition:
The most pervasive and UGLY disease on Earth.
It IS contagious, rampant, and sucks the Life, Love and empathy out of humans.
Ambition.
Cardinal Wolsey: “Cromwell, I charge thee, fling away ambition:
By that sin fell the angels; how can man, then,
The image of his Maker, hope to win by it?”
— William Shakespeare, Henry VIII, Act III, Scene 2
So Long Marianne, you really need a better plan:
Legs
Sexy legs. Who do they belong to ? Presumably not Marianna.
“Soul Sickness”, brought on by Human overpopulation , a disease of the conscious mind is far more deadly to humanity than the various rumors of viral plagues and the attempts to “manage” them for profit by our overlords .
Over population is a BS pretext for climate change and blaming the average person for the destruction of our environment. There is plenty of room for everyone.
Remember, remember, the fifth of November
Gunpowder treason and plot
We see no reason
Why Gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot….
Alan Moore’s comic book is infinitely better than the WB movie.
“I have got a lot of sympathy with Crowley’s vision. I think he was the 20th century’s magickal equivalent of Einstein”.
Alan Moore sure seems fond of Aleister Crowley while denying he’s a foillower of Thelema.. BTW he was probably masterfuly speaking here, knowing that both Crowley and Einstein were frauds and puppets.
Crowley’s most famous ritual, the one in the desert with Victor Neuberg, was on December 6 1909. Anything famous happen sixty years later to the day? Did the main participant wear a shirt with an Omega as if this was finishing something started earlier? Did the location bear an uncanny phonetic similarity with the fortress HQ of a certain esoteric society founded by Hassan I Sabbah? A location suggested by Louis Jolyeon ‘Jolly’ West? Who directed a film that Omega-wearer starred in the following year? Not someone whose father was a big pal of Crowley’s and who the director had known as a child? Not a film in which he reads from Hassan I Sabbah?
Still think that 1969 event was just an unfortunate set of circumstances produced by naivety and bad luck?….
(Credit to Hans Utter for linking some of the above details. This is not to say, of course, that this central figure knew everything that was to go down on that day in 1969 – but it sure looks like somebody did).
I would have preferred a factual account rather than a series of questions tbh but okay, I worked it out. So: what’s with The Demon Seed?
Wasn’t the Gunpowder plot spun historically as a failed attempt by English Anglican nationalists to rid itself of a King , thought to have French catholic and Scottish presbyterian sympathies . James I was like most of the Stewart elites a practicing homosexual . A lifestyle considered sinful at the time .
Lets revisit her salary in 12 months time, 100k -250k, eye watering sports pundit amounts perhaps? Or will she be replaced by a one armed man named Alice once she has a breakdown. Anything is possible at Circus BBC.
I’m a celebrity get me out of here appearance as well another £100k.
https://memes.yarn.co/yarn-clip/d85e0046-0c93-4bfb-88ed-97a2e127d637/gif
Good piece, but referring to global dictatorship/tyranny as ‘global governance’ is not going to help those resisting it.
Many people will support the idea of global governance, or even global government, believing it’s necessary to manage the world’s problems. The global propaganda operation has already put that idea into the heads of many people. As a result of oligarchic funding, global governance is viewed positively in academic and other mainstream circles, associated with resolving disputes, avoiding conflicts and international cooperation. We may know that global governance is inherently totalitarian, but many people don’t think that way and believe it could be democratic if done right. It’s a euphemism at best.
Better to refer to it as the global totalitarianism it portends, with the population stripped of all rights and freedoms and enslaved to a global oligarchy. No one is going to publicly support that.
Good point.
You only used it once in this really good article, but I had been thinking about it earlier this week when I saw someone using it.
For those who like conspiracy theories I suggest reading “Them: Adventures with Extremists” by Jon Ronson. Its quite an old book now (it was published in 2001) but its main idea is relevant today. Its premise was that because a typical conspiracy theory was about World Domination by people in Smoke Filled Rooms a suitably motivated and resourced journalist should be able to find them. What he found was the typical extremist, the sort we’re told to fear, usually turned out to be a very ordinary person. He also found out that those “Smoke Filled Rooms” really don’t exist. They’re actually smoke-free.
The truth is often stranger than fiction. Its a fun read.
I agree, it was a fun read.
Also an apt book reference, given the book’s coverage of ADL (Anti-Defamation League) vs ‘The Spotlight‘ newspaper of the time (1998-2001). The arguments and accusations/mudslinging of that debate, seem to parallel closely the current ‘BBC vs “The Light”‘ scenario. Little seems to have changed in that respect.
Ronson did uncover (pre-9/11) the reality of Bilderberg meetings and witness firsthand the strange goings on in Bohemian Grove. Though he had a different interpretation of events to Alex Jones et al.
So maybe not all smoke-free rooms and non-reflective mirrors 😎
I read it soon after it was published and found it a steaming pile of gatekeeping ordure by a writer whose tone (a kind of Wallace and Gromit version of Gonzo journalism) was confusingly pitched between superficial (but clearly manipulated and manipulating) reportage and cack-handed attempted comedy.
Thank you.
If Jimmy saville was still alive he would be debunking the baseless “conspiracy theories” that he was a pedo.
And the bbc would be supporting him
As they unswervingly did for his entire life.
Marianna Spring is the BULLSHITTER EXTRORDINAIRE for the ministry of untruths.
Ah, I would quibble she’s not extraordinary at all, she’s just one more in a long line of seemingly smart people who will sell out on the cheap. I have never had to watch or listen to her, and I’ve not hit on any of the links that would provide me with that opportunity, but from what little I’ve read about her and others like her, she’s nothing special at all. And one fine day, she may just find that out, but will she even be bright enough to see it? I doubt it. The day she will realize it is the day she too will be thrown on the dust heap of history with all the other worn-out shills who can’t even sell the bullshit propaganda anymore. Now, if only she would find the gallows at the end of her journey through the dust heap, that would be truly worth seeing. Kinda like that meme where one of them develops all the nasty side effects from that “safe and effective” magic shot and the realization hits said individual that they are simply not important enough to receive the placebo… Too bad, so sad.
For those in power, this is a benefit of pervasive poverty and uncertainty in employment: you can get people to do all sorts of things.
I don’t think people from Marianna’s background ever have to worry about sleeping in doorways, hiding from the bailiffs or facing benefit “sanctions” (as introduced by New Labour) unless they eagerly and promptly accept zero-hours serfdom on the minimum wage.
“Seemingly smart”? She strikes me as a typical overpromoted dullard.
What exactly is an “untrue conspiracy” and how do you spread one?
What exactly is an “untrue conspiracy” and how do you spread one?
“Marianna in Conspiracyland” via bbc.
A truth deemed to be a falsehood for the purposes of nefarious institutionalized deception.
Join a trusted institution and utter the falsehoods.
Russiagate, spread by the MSM, comes to mind as an example.
Her very small brain was trying to say “untrue conspiracy theories” but in a sudden flash realised that she could shorten it and even help her cause by doing so. What she did not (and could not) think was that the concept of an “untrue conspiracy” requires the existence of a true conspiracy, somewhere.
A good point – way above her head…
I noticed that too. It must have been a person with a certain genius for language and knowledge of the effect of these sentences on the reader. It feels like non-conforming newspeak with a little NLP mixed in!
By the way, while I’m responding, in general it strikes me that there seem to be two kinds of people, roughly speaking. Some kind of love; they have a good heart and lie little. And a species that seems to lack love, that species seems soulless; ‘woke’, they call them. Those woke people seem hypnotized when one sees what nonsense they spout sometimes. They seem a bit soulless to me. Like psychopaths, or rather like in a mass hysteria. It looks like a mental illness. That species doesn’t seem to understand, or they don’t feel (anymore?) that lying is in fact a major crime. Perhaps technology plays a role in the background, such as 5g or other technical inventions. Because they are known. An awful lot is known, for example, about signals influencing the brain. So they (the top-PTB) are playing a ‘false’ game. (Unethical/loveless. The latter can help us. And the game (to ‘enchant’ people) seems to be centuries old. So it’s probably described in books.)
Yes. It strikes me that the “woke” are psychopaths dressed up as Care Bears.