The B BC?

I rarely subject myself to the mainstream media’s ‘news’ programs (programming being exactly what they are), but even I can’t help noticing the blurring of the lines between national and international, especially American, coverage. It’s most obvious in the treatment of POTUS, who is usually just ‘the President’ and the story’s relevance to British interests, if any, is usually left unstated, but it’s quite pervasive.

I noticed a variation on this theme this morning. A BBC radio news bulletin reported the arrest of a retired U.S. State Department official and his wife on charges of spying on the U.S. for Cuba … without mentioning America once! We were told only that a ‘State Department’ official had been arrested for spying on behalf of Cuba. Is the State Department some outfit in Whitehall? Were the couple spying on Britain? You might be forgiven for thinking so.

I don’t believe the habit of never clearly distinguishing between British and American interests is accidental. It’s clear that most of our political and media elites are committed globalists and that the people’s stubborn scepticism about that project pisses them off.

It follows that we will be submitted to various subtle treatments designed ultimately to eliminate our identification with specifically British national interests, and to encourage identification with ‘global’ concerns, often to mean U.S. concerns as the U.S. is presently the most powerful instrument of the globalists.