As any party that wants to win an election promises ‘change’, and portrays themselves as ‘anti establishment’, the only one they are helping is Chump ‘if’ that is to be believed.

Cider.  10.47.   10.54.  Fully agree.
  10.27.  10.38. 10.59.  12.13 poster - stupid man.
Thinks JFK started the BBC.  Stupid man.
He blocks me, he doesn’t block me, he blocks me, he doesn’t block me.

TM demanding people answer questions...mm. never mind

Prepare to be amazed-I can name several media outlets that have not published fake news or distorted the truth in the last 7 days, and if they have I am no judge. Economist New Statesman Spectator

Start laughing-I recommend the Economist as unbiased, and if anything it is centre left, and hates Trump. But it is unrivalled in its coverage of geopolitics and the only indispensable

All media is not publicly-funded. Twix doesn't post lies, its users do, particularly Putin and his bots, of which there are too many to count

The beeb has been relentlessly anti-Trump from the outset (and anti Istrael and pro Palestinian) but you seek to make lighty of this blatant example and would blow up deluxe had it been the other way round and appeared on, say, GB news

A publicly funded org carrying on like Putin is a disgrace and not just an error, it shows a sickness at the heart of it. You cannot underestimate the shameful behaviour involved in faking news from an org that has a remit to inform educate and entertain and trusted with 2 billion a year of our money yet is so consumed by its own politics, internal and external that this can happen and might well have happened before

Busy I would only make one change to your eloquent post.
I would change the word relentlessly for either virulently or, both together, relentlessly and virulently.

‘Scottish saltires are criticised up here’ - Hunchback. Where’s ‘up here’? Llandudno?

What were you banned for previously Christy ??  I didnt realise it was an offence for trying to Bore the forum to death. ??  Good luck with your " new " username although I cant see it lasting long.

CaptainCristy 10 Nov 25 13:58 
Yeah, they were at it during WW2 as well, poor old Hitler got some real bad publicity there



Is that the best you can do? Please explain

Stupid man.

Wrong again Christine;

When it came to winning the war against a sophisticated propaganda machine, the BBC hit upon an ingenious idea: tell the unvarnished truth.

An academic trawl of the corporation’s archives has revealed that while the N*zi regime used puppet broadcasters such as William Joyce – nicknamed Lord Haw-Haw – to spin messages of German invincibility, the BBC was choosing to broadcast detailed news of Britain’s military setbacks. The decision was part of a deliberate strategy to win the hearts and minds of the German people, says Dr Vike Martina Plock of the department of English at Exeter University, who discovered memos from the time during research at the BBC Written Archives Centre in Caversham Park, Reading.

The BBC wanted its German language service – set up in 1938 at the time of the Munich crisis, when it became apparent another world war was likely – to become a trusted news source, which meant even defeats had to be truthfully reported. Notable examples include the 27 November 1942 report of the German bombing of Toulon and the scuttling of the French fleet to avoid its capture, and the 6 April 1940 report – days before the invasion of Norway – of the sinking of 52 Norwegian ships by the German navy, resulting in the death of 392 people.

What was at the centre of this double resignation of the two top dogs at the BBC? I understand it was to do with the BBC editing of President Trump's speech about his "invasion" of the White House, was that correct?


Close.

No invasion, capitol hill, distorted speech, resigned as they were made aware of it and took no action.

Among numerous other examples.

As loyal honcho pointed out, there was no honour involved in the resignation as I had suggested in my original post
I assumed he had fallen on his sword just because it had happened on his watch and he was the top dog, didn't realise the extent to which he knew what had happened and the cover ups

https://www.theguardian.com/media/video/2025/nov/10/side-by-side-comparison-of-bbc-edited-trump-speech-from-day-of-capitol-attack-with-original-video

The words were taken from sections of his speech almost an hour apart.  You couldn't make it up.  But the bbc did.

Stupid man.

What is it you are after stupidfool? You post a load of waffle and then keep expecting a response when there is nothing to respond to.

All you’ve done is done a cut and paste from fc uking google, what a waste of time.

You aint fooling anyone Christine

Wrong again

Embarrassed again

Chickening out again

I gave you a chance to creep off and pretend you’d never written that load of old cobblers to start with, but oh no, you have to prove you were right all along

What do you think of the BBC?

So you can answer a question. Well done. Albeit not the original

tip; lines of emojis are a sign of discomfort and do not disguise your true feeling