Nigel Farage launched a crusade against political repression carried out by banks in the United Kingdom

The time was long overdue for a crusade against dubious individuals that have infiltrated financial institutions in the United Kingdom and are using bank account closures as a political tool against those they disagree with.

A series of resignation in banks like Natwest and branches like Cootts are just the beginning as Nigel Farage decided to take both Natwest and Cootts to court, regarding what could be widespread across financial institutions operating in the United Kingdom.

Nigel Farage was a prominent campaigner to get the United Kingdom out of the European Union, but also campaigners that wanted to keep Britain inside the European Union have been their banking facilities withdrawn. Government Ministers have seen their accounts closed down and even their relatives have not been allowed to open bank accounts. The issues are a lot more serious than initially thought. 

http://accountclosed.org

This is the link to Nigel Farage's website.

Migration: when full means full violence erupts

An unresponsive political system that seems oblivious to the damage illegal migration is causing or is actually encouraging it leads to people taking matters into their own hands. 

There is not enough hotels, military bases and barges to accommodate a very disruptive illegal migration that is destroying local communities by taking away whatever they have got including personal safety.

Instead of preventing illegal migration and instead of protecting national borders, the Royal Navy is supporting illegal migration.

Instead of pushing illegal migrants back to where they are coming from, Britain is actually investing millions of Pound every single day aiding trafficking gangs by allowing illegal migrants to enter the country.

Nigel Farage and a golden opportunity to reform the banking system

 

We are going deeper and deeper into the Digital Era, but even in the Digital Era there are thousands upon thousands of people that do not have bank accounts.

On top of issuing legislation that prevents any banking institution from using its leverage to cancel bank accounts for political purposes, there is also the issue of those that for no fault of their own have fallen by the side.

In the egalitarian society there are so who have bank accounts and those who don't and this is something that must be remedied.

If private banking institutions don't allow everybody to open a bank account, legislation must follow to guarantee that everybody can have access to his or her bank account. 

The time is long overdue to have a fairer banking system, a more rational banking system and especially taking into account that taxpapers saved private financial institutions from collapse more than once.

It is also relevant to emphasize that people must also have the option of using digital money and conventional currency. In a society in which there is always emphasis regarding choice, individuals must have the choice of using cash or not using cash at every point in time. It is well known that some businesses have decided to accept only digital currency. How is this allowed? Why is this allowed? Cash should always be legal tender.

Dame Alison Rose publicly stated that she gave confidential details to the BBC and now she is out

Tuesday, July 25th, 2023

Dame Alison Rose publicly stated that she revealed confidentical information regarding the bank accounts of a Coutts customer in conversation with a BBC journalist.

How come Natwest Bank still keeps Dame Alice Rose as member of staff of Natwest Bank?

This particular individual has dragged Natwest Bank's reputation through the mud, involving Natwest Bank in a personal political agenda that has nothing to do with the legal operations of a banking institution.

How come she has not been deprived of her personal freedoms when she has so publicly recognized that she engaged in illegal activities?

Is Natwest Bank in the business of protecting criminals? 

The news 02:26 Wednesday, July 26th 2023

Can the Gulf Stream be used as a weapon for war?

The Gulf Stream could be more powerful that many nuclear weapons exploding at the same time. 

We know that the Gulf Stream controls temperatures in Europe. By redirecting the Gulf Stream or making the Gulf Stream collapse, NATO will be finished and most of Europe will be neutralized for many years to come with massive loss of European population.

By neutralizing Europe - or in other words if Europe ceases to exist - the balance of forces across the world can suddenly be altered for good. 

Every world war is similar in some ways to the previous world war and also different in some ways. In 1939, the French believed that their Armed Forces were marvellous as they were the victors of 1914-1918. They fought and lost World War Two using the same conventional strategies of World War One with no communications, no proper command, in a war they believe was going to be like World War Two. They event sent the biggest numbers and the most capable forces towards Belgium and were caught up in a bag, leaving the way open for German forces to advance to Paris with little resistance.

Today, the world relies on nuclear weapons. Are nuclear weapons the biggest threat. Climate is the biggest threat. Climate is more powerful than nuclear weapons and has more lasting consequences. What can change climate dramatically? The sea. The sea is a weapon for war that can destroy hundreds of millions very quickly and neutralize enemies for many years to come. If the sea were to be used for war, Europe would be no more.

If Gulf Stream collapses, welcome to the Ice Age

 

Nowadays, folks are complaing about unusually high temperatures. Well, their concerns could soon be unfounded as there are predictions that as early as 2025 the Gulf Stream will collapse plunging Europe into a new Ice Age.

This will mean that very soon Britain and Europe will be covered by massive layers of ice and that Europe and much of Africa will be united by ice. There won't be any navigation and migration problems affecting Britain and Europe will come to an end. Who will want to come and live in areas that will have 60 degrees of more below zero. Magically, all those talking about Net Zero will automatically get it. We will not have to worry about the Bank of England raising interest, there will be no banking system, no dinghies crossing the Channel, no religious conflicts, because because there will be no Christians, no Muslims, no Jews or people of any other religion because they will simply be unable to remain in Britain and in Europe.

There was a time during the Ice Ages that Britain was under hundreds of meters of ice that one such time might be approaching pretty fast. It is said that the Gulf Stream collapsed and re-started several times during Earth's evolution. Imagine a time when there will no Labour Party, no SNP, no Just Stop Oil, no people sleeping rough on the streets and that if anybody tried to sleep rough on the streets there would be no streets as the entire land would be under hundreds of meters of ice.

I find the news about the soon to be collapse of the Gulf Stream absolutely wonderful. We need renewal. We need change for the better. If people themselves are unable or unwilling to change their ways, then Nature will do it for them. Imagine a world without Gary Lineker, without Coutts, without BBC. Absolutely marvellous.

Suella Braverman MP: deeply aware of the geopolitical critical importance of protecting British borders

 

The concerns regarding AI and digital piracy seem to have been overemphasize while the real present needs concerning the protection of British borders seem to be ignored by Liberal and Marxist politicians that willingly or unwittlingly confused Human Right with geopolitical security needs.

Her detractors don't have a clue about what they are talking about. As the daughter of immigrants that had to do things the hard she knows more than the champagne socialists and specialists of wokism.

For all the talk about about equality and rights of minorities, the main culprits - the Labour Party - constantly work against what they preach and even accuse non whites of not being black enough because they dare to challenge the falseties of the Labour Party.

We don't need redistribution. We need hard workers with creativity that do not need to be supported by state charity. We don't need a system that rewards mediocrity and inferiority. We need a system that recognizes greatness and superiority based on creativity and hard work.

 

A Prime Minister must have the power of his/her convictions and strength of character

Worrying sings appear when we see Prime Ministers and potential Prime Ministers falter and hesitate very publicly because it generates uncertainty and this is especially dangerous in difficult times. Britain is not any country. Britain is constantly at the centre of very difficult circumstances that can lead to international disasters.

We have enormous obstacles to overcome both nationally and internationally. A Prime Minister must inspire respect and confidence. Financially, politically and militarily, Britain is in the eye of the storm. The world looks at who is the British Prime Minister, almost in the same manner the world looks at who is the President of the USA.

More than ever before we need reassurance and the biggest problem for all concerned is that at the moment no British Prime Minister and no potential British Prime Minister inspires confidence and respect. Short-termism, hesitation, no sense of direction with decisions made today replaced the following day with decisions that go in exactly the opposite direction does not inspire confidence. Ordinary people are asking what those who represent them and those who stand to represent actually stand for and we don't get any credible information about the state of the parties.

It is usually said that we get what we vote for, but at this point in time we not even know what we are voting for. When you ask all the logical questions and either you don't get answers or get soundbites or fabrications instead of proper answers, when you are given a description that is totally at odds with reality, you have every reason to be concerned.

For more than a year we have heard talk about all kinds of very serious potential confrontations but when we look at the state of preparedness to deal with the said confrontations, what do we see? Total British military manpower: 73,000. There is talk of reducing the British Armed Forces by ten percent. How can anybody trust that what we are told is the truth, all the truth and nothing but the truth? In plain language, we cannot trust and we instinctively know that speeches and reality do not fit in. You cannot expect any serious participation in any military conflict given the size of British Armed Forces. We are not fit to fight in any external conflict and we are not even fit to defend the realm. When you are forced to use big ships to patrol British coastal waters and you are failing to keep Britain safe, you are not fit to fight any kind of war. Protecting borders is a sine qua non requirement for any country and Britain is failing to protect its own borders.

Thousands upon thousands of undocumented men in fighting age are entering Britain every year and what do the powers that are do about it? In fact, the numbers of those entering the country illegally vastly surpass the total numbers of the British Armed Forces that for many years have been suffering recruitment difficulties. When you look at recent announcement in terms of working conditions for members of the Armed Forces with the smallest salary adjustments when compared to other branches of the adminstration and of the private sector, you can immediately understand that this leads to widespread demolization. To start with, you can only have accommodation as long as you are a serving member of the Armed Forces, accommodation that you will no longer have once your leave the British Armed Forces. Then you will have to procure your own accommodation at market prices and you will not be able to save enough to do so because a private, for example, earns less than half the monies earned by a bus driver. When leaving the Armed Forces you will be poorer and force to leave in much worse conditions.

Neither the government nor the Opposition seem to care about the state of the British Armed Forces. Ben Wallace MP, the now leaving Secretary State of Defense, talks about quality being more important than quantity as justification for a ten per cent reduction of manpower. Well, in an international conflict you will need both quality and quantity and the British Armed Forces are getting neither.

Keir Starmer will say whatever he thinks you want to hear without actually meaning what he says

 

Keir Starmer's turnaround regarding ULEZ, about tuition fees and about two-children welfare payments tell you everything you want to know. He made promises to Stop Oil to get their financial support and to show certain factions of his own political party that he is truthful about environmental goals, but this is about it.

Keir Starmer is the kind of politician that will make meaningless promises. He will kneel down and tell you that he believes that women have penises and whatever else he thinks is popular only to turn against what he says if he senses that such statements will not bring him votes and his is oblivious to the feelings of segments of his own party that go against his declared official policies. If you need somebody that will take into account the entire country, Keir Starmer is not the man for the job.

As the budget to deal with illegal immigrants rises and rises, he will continue talking about open floodgates because segments of his own party have been indoctrinated to accept what is illegal and pretend that breaking laws and entering the country illegally for the benefit of criminal gangs is perfectly legal and normal. Such lack of consistency is dangerous as it is criminal. If you are a man in charge of enforcing laws and make a political career based on ignoring laws, then you are no different from a career criminal.

The Labour Party has quality politicians like Andy Burham. What the heck is the Labour Party thinking about when it chooses people like Keir Starmer. Things have got to the point when long term Labour supports are being preventing from standing and such is the case of Mayoral Candidate that chose to abandon the Labour Party to stand as independent because the London clique does not want to stand to represent its own constituents.

Andy Burham is consistent and experienced and it has proved it as Mayor of Manchester. Unfortunately, according to the Labour Party rules, Andy Burham cannot stand for Leader because he is not a member of Parliament. 

And what example is Keir Starmer giving to Londoners, when he turned around and accused Sadiq Khan saying that Sadiq Khan's policies lost the Labour Party the election in Uxbridge? Next year, there will be elections for Mayor of London and the London Assembly. Keir Starmer is dividing his own political party, having more political turnarounds than a merry-go-round, making statements about things he does not really believe, and failing to listen to Labour Party supporters. 

 

Three by-elections: wasted opportunities for the Opposition

When you are trying to make a major political impact, you must ensure that candidates that are certain to win the election are heavyweight candidates. For whatever reason both Labour and Liberal Democrats play their cards wrongly. 

The Liberal Democrats chose a totally inexperienced 25 year-old and Labour chose a woman who can only perform well with soft interviewers. As soon as she was press for answers, she faltered. 

ULEZ was a major disaster for Labour in area in the outskirts of London where there are major difficulties for public transport and people are forced to use cards for their day to day activities and businesses. As it was expected, voters rejected Labour's ULEZ zone and gave the victory to the Conservative Party that maintained a strategic Parliamentary seat that was the now former Prime Minister Boris Johnson's seat. Labour wanted to make a good impression and failed miserably, courtesy of the Mayor of London Sadiq Khan that persists with his plan to include areas like Uxbridge as part of the ULEZ plan.

When you look at the leader of the Labour Party, Keir Starmer, he has the odds stuck against him. In an area where people are religious and traditionalists, the present himself as the man that thinks that women have penises. In an area where people unavoidably need vehicles to move around and to survive, Keir Starmer presents himself as the 'anti-car' candidate. Ordinary people who earn a meagre living don't need any more taxes, but Labour insists in creating new taxes at local level. Labour talks about parking permits to be paid for by local residents. ULEZ to be paid by local residents. Labour talks about company permits that will make local services a lot more expensive. In its elan to 'save the planet', Labour is sacrificing ordinary Britons. 

If finding jobs is difficult and especially for those with fewer skills, Labour wants to import more illegal immigrants. If finding accommodation is expensive and sometimes impossible to find, Labour wants more foreigners to take over the jobs done by local residents and more foreigners to take whatever accommodation is available leaving local residents with nowhere to live in. Labour supports cranky individuals that go around causing disturbance and preventing access to hospitals, to name a few of the things that a minute bunch of crackpots have been involved in.

When it comes to defend democracy, Labour is nowhere to be seen. Does Labour support closing bank accounts for political reasons? Well, Keir Starmer has kept quiet on this subject and this leads people to believe that he is very much in favour of political repression. As somebody stated, Keir Starmer keeps quiet because he has nothing to say.

Sadiq Khan lost the Uxbridge election with ULEZ, but there is a lot more that should make people worry

 

Just when Labour thought that the Uxbridge by-election was in the bag, Sadiq Khan made his best to ruin Labour's chances of winning the seat of the former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

Sorry, Dad. I didn't know what I was doing. The expression on their faces tell the full story. Labour MPs had alerted that keeping ULEZ was a very bad idea and they pleaded with Sadiq Khan to postpone the implementation of ULEZ. Sadid Khan did not listen and Labour lost a key Parliamentary seat.

Labour voters turned against Labour because Labour voters in that area on the edges of Greater London need their cars and their small businesses depend on business transport and residents have very poor access to public transport so that using a car is often unavoidable. 

The Guardian itself published an article saying that the green revolution is not taking into account the needs of ordinary people that cannot afford to pay for it. Has Labour turned its back on the British people? Climate extremists, apart from making fools of themselves, are turning people off and Labour's association with Stop Oil is a losing card. Central London Labour has lost the plot. Outside London, stauch Labour supporters are t leaving the Labour Party. In one particular case, a Labour mayoral candidate resigned his party membership and is standing as an independent because London Labour did not want him to stand to represent his constituents.

Keir Starmer is making one mistake after another and keeping quiet when he should speaking loudly. One particular scenario is when politicians of both sides of the divide spoke against the cancellation of bank accounts for political reasons. He was very quick to talk about women with penises, but he is mute when he should be defending democratic rights. After all, Chris Bryant MP is reported to have been behind a hate campaign aiming at silencing people who do not agree with his views.

Strange political animal, Chris Bryant was originally a member of the Conservative Party, but he joined the Labour party in 1986. He even tried to work as Priest, was ordained Deacon in 1986 and Priest in 1987, but decided that being a priest and being gay were incompatible. Years later, he would have reconsidered his decision to abandon the priesthood as the Church of England is now promoting homosexuality and multiple genders and say that the Lords Prayer should be abandoned.

The British Broadcasting Corporation is in cahouts with individuals that are threatening political rights and human rights. Two prominent BBC went suddenly quiet when it was revealed that a Natwest CEO Dame Alison Rose was behind the closure of an undetermined number of bank accounts for political reasons and among those accounts were the accounts of Nigel Farage. The plotters were found out and exposed and public apologies had to be made. Keir Starmer has not spoken about it, Chris Bryant has not spoken about it and Jon Sopel and Simon Jack in spite of apologies should be fired for participating in a criminal plot as willing accomplices of Dame Alison Rose.  

An inconvenient truth: you can’t sell the green revolution to people who can’t afford it - Gaby Hinsliff

Even in the Labour Party some people are starting to realize the foolishness of Net Zero. As Gaby Hinsliff writes on The Guardian, 'an inconvenient truth: you can't sell the green revolution to people who can't afford it.'

The reality is that transport links in the United Kingdom are very poor. If you go out of the main urban areas, or even inside urban areas, the provision of public transpor is notoriously insufficient. Therefore, penalizing people for using cars or preventing people from using cars is madness.

Local authorities are using so called green policies to extract money that is in effect an increase in Council Tax. If you have to pay Congestion Charge and ULEZ, pay for parking and parking permits, you are in effect paying additional Council Tax because of the proceedings will end up in the hands of local authorities. 

Nobody has even calculated the impact of such taxes on the local economy in ways that will affect more those who have less. This wave of taxations has been promoted by the Labour Party, the Liberal Democrats, the Greens and by all the do-gooders that want to make good with somebody else's money. And what would will be done when local economies collapse under the burden of taxation and people are forced out of work?

You can't sell the green revolutoin to people who can't afford it. This is something that Keir Starmer and all other proponents of Net Zero and the upper class weirdoes that go around making a nuisance of themselves should be thinking about.

Sex has been weaponized for political reasons

Sex has been weaponized for political reasons

Sexuality is an indivisible part of being human, but it is now being used to destroy. Whatever the agenda, although almost always political, sexuality has been turned into an obsession and is being using as a manipulation and destruction tool.

We can also talk about gender wars that have been turning society upside down. A woman is no longer a woman. Now, there are those who talk about cis women. In schools, some teachers about 72 genders. The concepts about sex and gender have been blurred for maximum effect.

The questions that we must certainly ask is why? and what for? This is not part of normal changes. This is being promoted with intent to divide. Whether we talk about politics, gender, race or sexuality, the aim is visible to divide, to create conflicts and confrontation. 

We can talk about hacking. We can talk about sabotage. In which other ways, those who have the intent to harm the so called Western World can proceed? This is geopolitical. These issues are being used to weaken Western societies and is working perfectly. Divided societies, divided countries, can be easily defeated and this is precisely what is happening. Campaigns about gender, race and sexuality are geopolitical weapons and a threat to National Security. 

Western stupidity with the expansion of NATO towards the East caused the conflict in Ukraine

 

NATO expansion towards the East caused the conflict in Ukraine. President Reagan promised Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO would not get closer to the borders and NATO has done exactly the opposite of what was promised to Mikhail Gorbachev.

The reason Ukraine was not incorporated into the European Union was the gigantic levels of corruption existing in Ukraine that bankrupted Ukraine, not allowing Ukraine to pay for the energy that it needed. 

This led to scandal after scandal that completely destabilized Ukraine and led to internal insecurity with gangs of armed men terrorising ethnic Russians in Ukraine and after a decade of abuses committed against ethnic Russians, including announcements about banning Russian language that incidentally is widely spoken in Ukraine including by those who hate Russians, it came the point when the Russian Federation run out of patience and intervened to protect ethnic Russians.

Fuelling the conflict with weapons and money that will not be accounted for and cannot be accounted for, the main beneficiaries of the conflict will be international criminal organizations as weapons and money are already going out of Ukraine and falling into the hands of the said criminal organizations. As there are conflicts across Middle East, Africa and Latin America, there is a fertile ground for market expansion of the weapons trade.

Russian Federation/Israel/SouthAfrica: Sanctions don't affect governments. Sanctions affect people

 

When politicians, mass media and activists call for sanctions against countries, they are actually calling for sanctions against ordinary people. Sanctions against Cuba are not just sanctions against the government of Cuba. They will affect ordinary Cubans. The same goes for the sanctions against South Africa in the days of Apartheid. 

When people talk about sanctions against Israel, they are actually talking about sanctions against ordinary israelis, and the same goes for sanctions against the Russian Federation that would affect ordinary citizens. 

 

In the case of sanctions against the Russian Federation, such sanctions have actually benefitted the Russian Federation leading to foreign companies leaving the Russian Federation and creating the space for local, national companies, to prosper. But even so, there is a point of principle. If you apply sanctions against the Russian Federation then the Russian Federation has every right to counterattack and part of the counterattack is the refusal of the Russian Federation to renew agreements regulating gains exports from Ukraine.

It is self-evident that the USA and its acolytes will willingly sacrifice Ukraine that is being used in a war by proxy. The USA does not want Ukraine membership of NATO for very obvious reasons. They know that such membership in application of article 5 of the treaty will engage every single NATO members in a war of unforeseeable consequences. Turkey is using its approval of such membership to blackmail the EU, to force the EU to open its door, and many EU countries are reluctant to open the door to mass Muslim migration into Europe. We already see what is happening across the EU with mass migration levels. France has just experienced yet another series of very harsh events involving lack of integration. Hundreds of millions of EURO lost in just a few days due to riots. Hungary, especially given Hungary's past, is openly reluctant to accept mass migration and accepting Turkey as EU member will open the floodgates. This is something that Hungary does not want.

Sanctions, migration, the threat of an all-out European war are some of the main subjects of the day. When you look at the State of Israel and what it takes to keep the State of Israel alive, you understand why mass migration is rejected vehemently and you can therefore understand Hungary reluctance to mass migration.

When you are fighting a war for survival, you will seek to deprive your enemy of every possible resource. If grains exports stop, so be it. USA and the so called West have been trying to starve the Russian Federation and the Russian Federation is therefore entitled to deprive its enemies of resources that will be used in a war against the Russian Federation.

In a non declared war, the USA, Britain and others are killing Russians. It is funny to see how disagreements within NATO are leading to national political crisis. It is well know that President Biden did not allow British Secretary of State for Defense Ben Wallace MP to stand as candidate to lead NATO. When Benn Wallace MP told Zelensky that Ukraine should be thankful for the support it has received and stated that 'Britain is not Amazon', Ben Wallce MP was expression the feeling of exasperation. USA has not been the greatest supporter of Ukraine. Britain has been the greatest supporter of Ukraine and to do so it has made huge sacrifices. As a consequence of his expressions of exasperation, Ben Wallace MP was chastised by British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak. Ben Wallance MP then decided that he will not stay as Secretary of State for Defence, that he is leaving the cabinet in September 2023 and that he will not be standing for re-election in 2024. 

Lets not forget that this particular feud is the icing of the cake on top of several other internal feuds that have plagued the Conservative Party that is now facing at least three by-elections and it is early days. It is only July. A lot could happen before May 2024. The Prime Minister will have to appoint a successor in September 2023. There are rumous relating to an advanced General Election. With so many statements of Conservative MPs that have said that they will not stand for re-election and with the departure of key, very experienced Conservative politicians, Ben Wallace MP's departure combined with by-election losses could yet again trigger a leadership contest or an advanced General Election.

Once again, there is a link between what is happening concerning Ukraine and the state of British politics. There is no denying that after Covid the crisis in Ukraine led to an energy crisis that has severely affected not just Britain but Europe as a whole. The Bank of England has been forced to put up interests several times in a row to try to curb inflation and there have been periodical industrial action across the United Kingdom.

But Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has failed to recognize the fact that when you are facing a potential European war you need to beef up the Armed Forces that have been badly treated for many years. The recent 5.5% salary rise is an insult, especially taking into account that some Members of the Armed Forces earn less than a London bus driver. There is a recruitment crisis. At one point, legislation was passed to invite members of the Commonweath to join the Armed Forces and this did not work. Now, the British government is invited retired members of the Armed Forces and resigning members of the Armed Forces to return to active service. The situation is desperate. Britain has barely 73,000 men and women under the flag and with the absurd conditions in which military personnel have to live in, you have to be an idiot to want to return to active service, and this especially taking into account the fiascos of Afghanistan and Iraq.

 

Divisions promoted by race and gender campaigners benefit the Russian Federation and China

 As the West gets bombarded with race orientated and gender orientated campaigns that create hatred and division, weakening national identity, the Russian Federation and China get the upper hand by upholding traditional values and national unity.

Once again, the British government has slapped the British Armed Forces by giving demoralized and underpowered armed forces the lowest salary rises. British total manpower at the moment is 73,000, as for many years the British Armed Forces have been facing a recruitment crisis based on two factors: lack of enough fit candidates coming forward and a nationwide campaign aimed at destroying British identity and national pride.

How do campaigns based on racial hatred and gender hatred benefit Britain? They don't benefit Britain. Is this part of a plan to weaken Britain? Some say that this is not happening by chance. There is an agenda based in geopolitics to weaken Britain from within.

BBC Trial by the media: what goes around comes around

The BBC promoted a culture of abuse and now it is falling foul of the culture the BBC created. What was originally a public broadcaster with high standards was turned into a propaganda monster and into a centre of celebrity cults.

After the Jimmy Savile affair and others affairs including the Rolf Harris Affair, the BBC went after people who at one point or another had been close to the BBC.

Cliff Richard ended up being targetting for things he did not do, but the thirst for victims to prove that the BBC was whiter than white was too strong. The BBC was after its pound of meat. It backfired disastrously for the BBC.

When Martin Bashir used the BBC to manipulate Princess Diana, the BBC did not mind that there were conspiracy series been used to push up ratings.

The BBC had not minded either when a British scientist was led to his death by dubious reporting.

I guess the BBC rejoiced when the centre of scandals move out in the direction of ITV and Phillip Schofield.

Now, the BBC finds itself on the spot, once again, because of accusations involving presumed criminal behaviour directed against one of its star presenters that has not been named. This has pushed several male presenters whose reputations would be on the line of fire to issue statements saying 'it was not me'. 

We don't know for certain if there is a case to answer. Having said that, because of the culture the BBC has created, the BBC finds inself being declared guilty before any formal investigation/trial ever takes place. The fear regarding public scandals is getting stronger and stronger.

Just a few days ago, we learnt about the maneuvers of private banks cancelling accounts for political reasons. Commercial interest is being used as a weapon for political reasons. If you employ so and so, we will not do business with you.

US Senator Joseph McCarthy's campaigns come to mind. Using threats, a climate of terror is being created to prevent any kind of dissent. People are being threatened and discrimated against and just a few days ago the BBC itself was attacking Nigel Farage. What goes around comes around. By employing dirty tricks, the BBC has made itself a potential target of dirty tricks. 

In all this the one fundamental element that is missing is trust. The Church of England cannot be trusted. The BBC cannot be trusted. In fact, there is very little or no trust in the political system either. The education system has been corrupted and is now being used to promote political agendas and discrimination.

Support lessons only for black students? Isn't this Apartheid? Wherever you look, things are becoming extremely worrying. The points of reference are being lost. Labour is no longer Labour. Conservative is no longer Conservative.

Names have already been mentioned and things are spiralling. Huw Edwards has been mentioned several times and other presenters have come out to say 'it is not me'. In an effort to prevent damage, BBC will do a lot more damage not just to the reputation of the BBC, but especially to the reputation of professionals who have not been involved. And what about the morale of those working for the BBC?

BBC Television Presenter reported for having paid 35,000 Pound to a teenager as payment for naked pictures

Who has done it? Once again, the BBC is being economic with the truth. This is what you are paying for. Another Jimmy Savile scenario? To have paid 35,000 Pound for illicit pictures, the said presenter must be on a high scale salary that, as it is the case, it is paid with TV License. We can start by taking some names off the list and adding some more that have not been included. The public broadcaster has once again been the news instead of reporting the news and, as it has been noted, the BBC is more often than not making news instead of reporting news.Talking about setting up high standards, openness should be a number one priority. 

Clive Myrie

Jane Hill

Sophie Raworth

Huw Edwards

Fiona Bruce

Jeremy Vine

Rick Edwards

Patrick Kielty

Naga Munchetty

Evan Davis

Mishal Husain

Carolyn Quinn

Reeta Chakrabarti

George Alagiah

Charlie Stayt

Ben Brown

Stephen Nolan

Sarah Montague

Andrew Neil

James Naughtie

Tina Daheley

Victoria Derbyshire

Nina Warhurst

Jon Kay

Sally Nugent

Lyse Doucet

Martine Croxall

Mike Bushell

Tony Livesey

Colin Murray

Nihal Arthanayake

Adrian Chiles

Maryam Moshiri

Roger Johnson

Victoria Valentine

Gavin Ramjaun

Karin Giannone

Helen Skelton

Julian Worricker

Samantha Simmonds

Vanessa Feltz

Tanya Beckett

Ade Adepitan

Aaron Heslehurst

Karthi Gnanasegaram

Katherine Downes

James Coomarasamy

Tim Sebastian

Jo Coburn

Philippa Thomas

Roger Hearing