Friday, July 1, 2016


At first I did not know what to make of this. 

It looks and sounds like the BBC, but that could have been done by clever people in some basement in London, Moscow, or Omaha, Nebraska. But, as you watch this, especially readers in the UK, you will gradually be able to see the extreme amateurishness of the video, I HOPE.

If the BBC did do this, the talking heads are not entirely convincing. The interview with PM David Cameron is disconnected and lacks detail we could expect from him with nuclear war in progress. The other talking head interviewed went on and on too long to be convincing.

Also, I have heard the BBC interrupt with grave news. I grew up in Africa listening to the BBC every night after dinner.

They would not waste the listener's time with a graphic and music introduction, which by the way, is professionally faded in as the news man talks. Bah When something like war, or the death of the king or queen, is being presented, there is NO fluff at the BBC. It is stark and not very pretty stuff. This was way too well prepared to have been a surprise to anyone.

The most doubtful aspect is that too many war moments and actions take place during the short time period of the video.

There is no such person as "Sir Norman Fairchild," the alleged expert on military issues in the UK.

The explosions which were put up behind the correspondent speaking, that is, in Turkey, were peanuts. Russia would not start such an action with such small shells. Bah.

The nuclear underwater explosion was clearly a test. The ship in the foreground was an old freighter, not a war ship. This must have been some nuclear test by the USA in the South Pacific. Nor was it any kind of a torpedo. It was a bomb deep in the water. This is not useful in nuclear war at sea other than perhaps to cause a tsunami.

It is comical, the pace of the war build up in one short half hour, but even more comical to hear the all-knowing "Sir Norman" give instant detailed descriptions of what it all means. Whoever did this, it was not the BBC. I don't even think the Russians would do this. They are much more clever than that.

The talking head from NATO or Europe who went unnamed was clearly talking about past activities of Russia on European borders.

The clips of the Prime Minister's motorcade and bombs going off, as well as helicopters flying in formation, were clearly from stock footage, and one shot was from a web cam in someone's vehicle, not a professional BBC cameraman.

The message seems to be, "We are unprepared, we have been caught napping, and the situation is nearly hopeless." That would mean the motivation of the video is not to give the British TV viewers hope and confidence in the British and NATO Militaries. Thus, the motive seems to me to be to demoralize the British, not to help them survive. This is very unlike the BBC.

I loved the morbid run down on how to survive, as if the average Englishman could absorb all of that, and what possible chance is there that people could do all the things required.

And the siren going off with an echo, as if it were in the street outside the BBC studio. Oh, I am sure they have a microphone outside the window for just such a situation, right?

And the piece de resistance..... the blank screen as part of the video still playing instead of the video just stopping. ROAR, it is to laugh.

So, what is this? The following are possible:

1. A stunt by some enemy of the Western nations, possibly by North Korea, or even some high school brat from his closet in London or Los Angeles. All the clips could have easily been harvested from YouTube, and the only authentic thing about it is the British accents.

2. The BBC was playing games, possibly serious, getting ready to make a bogus emergency in order to put England under Martial Law etc. This I do not believe at all. They would do a far better job of it, and I doubt if they would store it where it could be hacked.

3. Someone in the media wanted to make another modern version of "War of the Worlds" done on radio by Orson Welles in 1938. The original broadcast long ago caused people to panic and go into fits of terror, even though the audience was warned at the beginning that is was only a dramatic program. Some creep may have the idea that this could be flown on YouTube in such a way to cause panic over WW III. Help yourself if that is what rocks your cradle.



For the record, the bogus BBC war emergency video was brought to us by one or both of two YouTube entities:

Ben Marking, who seems to be associated with Public Broadcasting Sevice (PBS). This is very strange, but when I search YouTube for his name, it keeps coming up in titles for PBS. 

It was also posted, with commentary, at SuperStation95 here. And, their YouTube site here. Do not be impressed by SuperStation's seemingly even handed approach, with speculation that it was a hoax. SuperStation needs to be watched to see what they are really trying to do.

Here is Hal Turner of SuperStation95

I have found true stories at SuperStation95, but I now conclude that the true stories are bait to make us think they are trustworthy. Meanwhile, they are trying to cause a stampede.

Can we learn a lesson here? 

First, nuclear war will probably be over before the BBC can locate film footage for even the most rudimentary bomber take offs. The most likely nuclear attack will be a nuclear Electro-Magnetic Pulse attack. There will be no warning, and all technology, including the BBC, will go dead suddenly. See EMP in my topics list below.

The only way any nation can win a nuclear war is with complete surprise with no build up at all. So, prepare for THAT. You will not get to sit and watch the television for half an hour as the world slowly goes into attack mode. 

Instead of watching the shelling of Turkey by the Russians, your lights will simply go out and stay out for up to three years. But, that would not possibly make a panic video. How could it be done and get Adsense clicks from the suckers?

I also have to wonder if such a program could be used after all television networks are hacked and taken over by agents provocateur. I suppose that is not possible, but who knows?