Tag: propaganda

BBC Flagship Soap Being Used To Push Pro-Migrant Propaganda By Activist Infiltrators

A campaigner for “migration and racial justice” has been employed to shape storylines for EastEnders – Britain’s long-running BBC flagship soap opera set in London’s East End – featuring plots about exploited African migrants and racially motivated murders, it has been revealed.

It is clear evidence of such activists operating inside the UK’s national broadcaster.

The revelation also fits a deepening pattern where institutions, from the BBC to schools to shadowy government units, work to reframe mass immigration as an unquestionable good while suppressing public concerns over its costs.

EastEnders, the BBC’s flagship soap opera that has aired for decades and draws millions of UK viewers, has run plots about an autistic Ghanaian repeatedly exploited and the racist murder of another African immigrant since the hiring of campaigner Ade Lamuye in 2022.

Lamuye also serves on the advisory board of the Power of Pop Fund, launched by Comic Relief. The fund has directed almost £5 million to narrative change organisations seeking to use media to reframe the debate on migration.

She has confirmed her role in her own writing and stated that “entertainment and media holds influence and power to make real change”.

She has additionally acted as a facilitator for Media Movers, a migration messaging group run by the charity Heard.

Heard has received funding from the Power of Pop scheme and previously lobbied producers of a BBC children’s show to “impact the framing of migration”.

Keep reading

Illinois DEI Training Equates Whites With Mosquitoes — Which Can Be Killed With Fire

If you want to know why there will be more Karmelo Anthonys — angry black youth all too willing to kill whites — look no further than diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) training offered by the Illinois government. It portrays white people and police as mosquitoes inflicting “microaggression” bites that maddeningly accumulate over time. Don’t worry, though, there is a remedy.

The training also shows a black woman using a flamethrower to incinerate the whites and cops mosquitoes.

(Such propaganda may help explain why so many believe Anthony was justified in killing white teen Austin Metcalf.)

You can, however, avoid this fiery fate by refraining from making certain comments. “When I look at you, I don’t see color” and “My best friend is Black” are forbidden. “Your English is so good” is, too. For these are all microaggressions — and who knows what else could be fancied so? So you just have to walk on eggshells with ballerina-like skill.

The Washington Free Beacon recently reported on the story:

Illinois governor J.B. Pritzker’s (D.) administration offers a taxpayer-funded training on “microaggressions” and other “exclusionary behaviors” that depicts white people and police officers as mosquitoes who suck blood from people of color.

The training — which Pritzker’s Department of Human Rights offers to “private-sector, government, and public participants” and which the Washington Free Beacon attended [on May 15] — is meant to “increase knowledge, awareness and prevention of discrimination and harassment issues and offer solutions to employers and employees on how to appropriately respond to situations as they arise.” It defines “microaggressions” as “the everyday verbal, nonverbal, and environmental slights, snubs, or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages to target persons solely based upon their marginalized group membership.”

The Content Tells the Tale

The irony here is that the Illinois “microaggression” training is itself a macroaggression, as its content evidences. As Red Right Daily (RRD) informs:

One training slide reportedly classified the phrase “When I look at you, I don’t see color” as a racial microaggression because it allegedly “denies a person of color’s racial/ethnic experience.” Another example listed “My best friend is Black” as evidence of “denial of individual racism.”

Then came the now-infamous mosquito analogy.

The training video asks participants to imagine microaggressions not as “stupid comments” but as mosquito bites that accumulate over time. In one example, a white woman tells a Black woman she is “so well spoken” before transforming into a mosquito and biting her. Other examples include comments like “Where are you really from?” and “Your English is so good.”

Now, I’ve been told many times over the years that I’m well spoken. Would it be less true were I black? And were I, should I have taken offense at the innocuous comment? But it gets worse. RRD continues:

But the video escalates far beyond awkward social interactions.

“Beyond just being annoying, some mosquitoes carry truly threatening diseases that can mess up your life for years,” the narrator says before transitioning into references to policing.

“And other mosquitoes carry strains that can even kill you. He looked like he was up to trouble. Okay, I felt threatened.”

The implication is not subtle. Police officers and racially insensitive individuals are folded into the same metaphorical category as dangerous, disease-carrying insects capable of killing people.

Besides being obviously ridiculous, it’s hard identifying an aspect of this “training” that isn’t based on a falsehood or fallacy. The idea that police unfairly target blacks, for example, has been repeatedly refuted.

Just consider 2016 research by black Ivy League professor Roland Fryer. Much to his own surprise, he learned cops were less likely to shoot black and Hispanic suspects than white ones. Other studies have drawn the same conclusion. But, hey, can’t let the facts get in the way of a good narrative.

The DEI training video also shows a white person mosquito asking a black woman, “Can I touch your hair?” Now, I’ve heard this lament from “sensitivity training” sources before, as if it’s some pervasive phenomenon. I’ve never actually witnessed it occurring, though. So I’ll ask my fellow whites: Do any of you have a burning desire to feel a black person’s hair? Is this something I’ve missed?

Keep reading

Israeli Desperation Leading to Enormous Sums for Lobbying, Media Manipulation

Things aren’t going so well these days for Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu. While his partner President Trump is working actively to end the war with Iran by inking a memorandum of understanding to halt the fighting, American public opinion of Israel continues to plummet. That is no surprise — Israel’s war on Gaza has now killed over 73,000 Palestinians (at least), the Gaza Strip is largely rubble, and Israel has moved to do the same in south Lebanon.

Netanyahu blames the loss of support on TikTok and social media writ large (not his government’s own policies) and is spending hundreds of millions of dollars to pursue media management and pro-Israel advocacy in the U.S. On a parallel track, Israel is seeking unprecedented integration with the U.S. military and its intelligence agencies — which would mean co-production on weapons, technology and sharing of sensitive intel. Experts say this is why Israel has been insisting it doesn’t “need” the 10-year agreement that provides Israel $3.8 billion annually in military aid. This would shift that aid to the places that don’t require the same oversight and overt American buy-in.

My colleagues Ben Freeman and Nick Cleveland-Stout, who form up the Democratizing Foreign Policy program at the Quincy Institute, have been digging away at these Israel efforts on myriad fronts. Ben has been writing about the integration legislation on both the military and intel sides, now making their way through Congress. Nick has been sifting through Foreign Agent Registration Act and other public efforts to expose the millions that have been going to former Trump campaign guy Brad Parscale to push pro-Israel messaging through conservative media platforms, text campaigns, manipulating ChatGPT, and more.

Both talk to me this week about how all of these efforts have ramped up as Israel is more keenly aware that it has lost the thread with the American people and that powerful lobbying forces like AIPAC are not enough.

Keep reading

Israeli foreign agent took over The Charlie Kirk Show days after his killing

The Charlie Kirk Show is now distributed by a federally registered agent of Israel tasked with seeding American media with Zionist propaganda. It is part of a whopping $46 million dollar annual contract between the Israeli government and Brad Parscale, the former chief of staff for Donald Trump’s 2020 presidential campaign. This may be the largest lobbying contract in the history of foreign influence operations in the US.

On September 10, 2025, Kirk was assassinated during the first stop on his American Comeback Tour at Utah Valley State University. Eight days later, Parscale registered as a foreign agent of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, assuming responsibility for a propaganda blitz “tailored to Gen Z audiences across platforms, including TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, podcasts, and other relevant digital and broadcast outlets.”

The deal meant that the Charlie Kirk Show, which had been distributed by the Salem Media Network since 2020, was placed under the control of a foreign agent for Israel, with Parscale assuming a role as Salem’s Chief Strategy Officer. According to the terms of the contract, Parscale’s Clock Tower would “integrate its pro-Israel messaging into Salem Media Network properties.”

According to a December 2025 report by Radio Ink, The Charlie Kirk Show “will continue as a podcast on the Salem Podcast Network, as Salem Media ‘will maintain its close professional and personal relationship with Turning Point USA.’”

“Salem has been so gracious through this process and even encouraged us to continue broadcasting the show on the Salem Radio Network,” said Andrew Kolvet, the TPUSA spokesman and host of The Charlie Kirk Show.

Since Kirk’s killing, his successors have done their best to bury his vehement opposition to war on Iran, as well as his public fits of disgust with Netanyahu and his army of lobbyists in the US. Kirk’s widow and replacement as TPUSA CEO, Erika Kirk, now insists that she and her husband never wavered in their support for Israel. She has also been unwilling to state what her late husband would have thought about the war the US and Israel waged on Iran this year.

“My husband isn’t here to say whether or not we should be at war with Iran,” Erika Kirk said in response to a question at a May 2026 TPUSA event. “I would love for him to be here right now and tell us if we should or should not.”

Keep reading

Hillary Clinton Fears “Revolution” Preventing The US From Becoming A “Rainbow Nation”

The word “Democracy” is thrown around frequently within progressive circles as a call to arms; a rallying cry based on a fraudulent narrative of patriotic duty.  Throughout the entirety of Joe Biden’s first and last term, the political left painted conservatives as a threat to democracy.  Anyone who opposed pandemic mandates, compelled vaccination, open borders, mass immigration, gender ideology in public schools etc., was labeled a danger to society.  

The inherent fallacy being that leftists (and by extension Democrats) represent the majority of the nation.  However, this notion has been consistently debunked by multiple elections, polls and the fact that the vast majority of liberal movements have been exposed as astroturf funded by NGOs.

If Democrats actually cared about democracy, they would listen to the actual American majority, instead of waging a propaganda war on the majority in order to manufacture a false consensus.  And, the majority of Americans do not support multicultural or “intersectional” ideology.  The liberal vision is on the decline and that’s a good thing.

Not surprisingly, Hillary Clinton disagrees. 

At the first Rainbow PUSH Coalition conference since the death of Reverend Jesse Jackson in February.  Pete Buttigieg and Hillary Clinton took to the stage in front of a small audience in Chicago this week to sell their Utopian future, but mostly they slandered the Trump Administration.  Their rhetoric continues to echo the message of the Biden era, that conservatives want the end of civil rights and voting rights in the US. 

Buttigieg asserted that the Trump Administration was “corrupt” and “corruption is bad”.

Keep reading

How US Media Gaslights Everyone Without You Even Knowing It

The most useful aspect of US media propaganda is how it acts like even recent history doesn’t exist. It’s a wonderful form of gaslighting. Even the slightly less pro-war, less pro-death-spiral articles vomited forth by Western media act like history started yesterday.

They run with headlines like “US Strikes Iran In Response To Downing of Apache Helicopter” or “Iran, US Exchange Fire As Ceasefire Seems To Be Breaking Down.” Those types of headlines. It’s nearly every article in the US media about Iran. For examples just look here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. And that’s just the past TWO DAYS.

None of the articles acknowledge that the US war machine went thousands of miles around the fucking world to fucking attack Iran in the first place despite Iran attacking no one. Despite the US and Israel having nuclear weapons and Iran having none. Despite the US and Israel committing genocide in Gaza while Iran commits none. Despite the US surrounding Iran with dozens of military bases while Iran has none outside their own country.

Leaving any and all of this out (or putting some of it in the last sentence that 95% of readers don’t get to), means that even a seemingly, somewhat, possibly, kinda“unbiased” article still serves US imperial propaganda.

Keep reading

MINISTRY OF TRUTH: Government To BLOCK ‘False Information’ During ‘Crisis Events’

Vague new rules will allow UK regulators to pressure platforms over “legal but harmful” content whenever government ministers declare a crisis, while the same government ploughs ahead with mandatory phone scanning, digital ID lockdowns, and jail threats for tech bosses who refuse to spy on every device.

The latest move from Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn makes explicit what privacy campaigners have long warned: the Online Safety Act is being weaponised far beyond any child-protection claim.

Benn confirmed that the internet regulator will now wield enhanced powers to tackle “false information” online during “times of crisis,” directly tying the recent Belfast unrest to this framework. The regulator has already contacted platforms, with ministers asserting that violence “appears to have been incited online.”

Benn stated that if people put online ‘false information,’ “it is not acceptable and it may well be a criminal offence depending on the circumstances as the chief constable made clear yesterday.”

When asked how a “time of crisis” would be defined, Benn said it “will be set out in due course.”

Keep reading

NATO Propagandists Again Proclaim That Ukraine Is on the Verge of Winning the War

NATO partisans in both Europe and the United States are perpetual optimists about Ukraine’s prospective fortunes in its war against Russia.  Lately, there has been yet another inundation of such accounts in Western news media outlets.  Many of them emphasize that Moscow’s latest military offensive against Ukrainian ground forces has come to a halt with inconclusive results.  The lack of a decisive breakthrough, members of Ukraine’s fan club contend, means that Russian president Vladimir Putin has again failed in his quest to conquer Eastern Europe’s resilient “democratic” frontline state.  That version of recent developments contains just enough truth to gain credibility among gullible opinion shapers and political leaders in the United States and in most other NATO countries.

In fact, even if Kyiv continues to receive extensive financial and military support from Alliance members, Ukraine is no closer to defeating Russia than it was before.  Over the long run, Moscow is still likely to prevail against its weaker, less populous neighbor and Ukraine’s NATO supporters.  Moreover, Russia’s geostrategic position remains formidable.  It is especially significant that Putin’s diplomatic and military ties with China’s president, Xi Jinping, continue to be robust.

The West’s stubborn optimism about Ukraine’s victory prospects is reminiscent of the attitude of Chicago Cubs fans who spent more than a century of futility insisting that “this will be THE YEAR” their team would finally win the world series.  Their optimism did finally pay off in 2016, some 108 years after the team’s previous championship.  Unfortunately, neither Ukraine nor NATO has the luxury of waiting 108 years for their strategy to pay off.

Yet, excessive optimism has been the norm in Western capitals since the earliest weeks of Russia’s February 2022 enlarged military incursion into Ukraine.  The unexpected failure of the Kremlin’s invading forces to capture Kyiv led to widespread predictions in U.S. and European media circles and some NATO foreign ministries that Ukraine was poised to score a stunning upset victory.  Indeed, some Western analysts speculated that Kyiv would prevail in a matter of months or even weeks.

Similar flares of optimism and predictions of Ukraine’s imminent triumph have occurred on several occasions since then.  Examples include Kyiv’s initial successes in launching attacks using cheap drones against Russian targets, and the spectacular June 2025 assault deep inside Russia on the country’s strategic bomber fleet.  There were also spikes of optimism throughout NATO whenever a Ukrainian military ground offensive scored even the most limited gains or a Russian offensive bogged down.  Lost in all the hoopla on the multiple occasions, though, was mounting evidence that Russia was slowly making gains in this meat grinder of a war.  That fundamental reality has not changed despite recent developments.

Indeed, the latest events signal more of the same in terms of the conflict’s trajectory and ultimate outcome.  Russia has made new territorial advances into Ukrainian territory, but the gains are minimal.  Both sides have made larger and more lethal attacks than before with drone and missile strikes.  Despite being more destructive than previous assaults and inflicting more suffering on already traumatized civilians, however, the latest blows have not been large enough to produce a decisive military outcome.

New predictions throughout the NATO countries that Kyiv is finally poised to prevail in the war are based on little more than wishful thinking.  The expectation seems to be that because Ukraine has been able to hold out this long against a larger opponent, Moscow cannot continue to sacrifice money, armaments, and manpower at this pace much longer.  Either Putin will seek a face-saving exit that includes making major concessions to Ukraine, the optimistic scenario concludes, or Russia’s oligarchs will finally replace their country’s aging, flailing leader.

Keep reading

Stop Weaponizing Everything!!!

Jan Marco Müller, the European Commission official who drafted the EU’s new science diplomacy framework, just said the quiet part out loud: “Science diplomacy is not about being nice to each other.”

Yes, it is, dumbass. That was the whole point.

For centuries, science diplomacy worked precisely because it allowed ordinary human beings to humanize one another on neutral ground while governments were busy failing.

My good friend, Norman Neureiter, former science advisor to the Secretary of State, defined science diplomacy as “an intentional effort to engage with other countries where the relationship is not good otherwise. The science allows you to deal with non-sensitive issues that both sides can work on together for the good of all.”

That was true for science. It was true for sports. It was true for music, academia, medicine, and cultural exchange more broadly. These were spaces where ordinary people from hostile societies could interact as human beings rather than abstractions, propaganda categories, or geopolitical chess pieces.

During the Peloponnesian War, Greek city-states suspended hostilities during the Olympic truce (ἐκεχειρία) so athletes could compete together despite ongoing conflict. During the Cold War, Soviet and American scientists collaborated through the WHO to eradicate smallpox because viruses, unlike diplomats, do not care about ideology. Apollo-Soyuz demonstrated that rival superpowers could cooperate in space even while pointing nuclear weapons at each other on Earth. The 1972 Summit Series between Canada and the Soviet Union became more than hockey. Millions of ordinary people on both sides suddenly saw the “enemy” as talented, emotional, funny, proud, exhausted, flawed, and recognizably human.

Even music mattered. In 1987, while the Cold War was still very real, my undergrad’s Peabody Conservatory Symphony Orchestra went to Moscow and Leningrad. The orchestra did not solve geopolitics, but simply engaged with Soviet music students, argued about phrasing, drank together, traded jokes, and discovered that the terrifying enemy looked remarkably like us.

In the 1950s, at the height of McCarthyism and Stalinism, Soviet scholars were welcomed at Columbia University. One of them was Alexander Yakovlev, who later became one of the principal intellectual architects of glasnost and perestroika under Gorbachev – a transformation I wrote about in my earlier piece, “The Marketplace of Ideas Works Only If We Leave the Doors Open.”

Today we do the opposite. We close Confucius Institutes, crack down on foreign funding, and impose severe student visa restrictions out of fear of foreign government influence. Yet at the very same time, we are dramatically expanding U.S. government control over science and education, allowing political appointees to override peer review, giving agencies the power to terminate grants at any time if they no longer serve current political priorities, and restricting collaborations and publishing with foreign scientists.

All of it reflects the same underlying assumption: that American students and scholars are apparently too naive or too fragile to encounter foreign propaganda without immediately succumbing to it.

Keep reading

Iranian Opposition News Outlet Got $800 Million In Debt Relief: Report

An $870m debt-relief deal suggests that Iran International, an Iranian opposition outlet, has ties to Saudi Arabian investors, according to a Financial Times report on Thursday. The links stem from documents related to a debt-for-equity swap that Iran International conducted in December to shore up its finances. Iran International has spent hundreds of millions of dollars since its founding in 2017 by British-Saudi investors, the FT reported.

According to the report, Iran International’s parent company, Volant Media UK, has lost more than $550m over the past five years, and it owes related entities about $645m. Those numbers came from documents that the FT reported as covering the financial year ending December 2024.

Iran International says it is the “most popular Persian speaking foreign based news channel in Iran”.It employs 700 people and broadcasts into Iran from London via satellite, radio and social media outlets.

Iran International has been accused by critics of promoting “regime change” in Iran and advancing the position of the former shah’s son, Reza Pahlavi, for a return to power. The outlet has long denied links to Israel or Saudi Arabia.

Iran International reported heavily on protests that struck Iran at the beginning of this year, sparked by a cost-of-living crisis brought on, in part, by US sanctions.

In January 2025, the news site reported that more than 36,500 people were killed in a crackdown on protests. Those numbers were significantly higher than those estimated by the US and other western-based human rights groups.

US President Donald Trump cited casualty numbers similar to those reported by Iran International days before launching a war on Iran on February 28, but did not disclose where he had gotten the death toll number.

Keep reading