Soccer: England did not deserve victory against Russia

Follow @JohnPlatinumG

The BBC, politics, sport and lies

Mainstream media has a lot to answer for in the way it propagandises everything: including sport. There used to be a policy to try and keep politics out of sport. But when the main defaulter in this policy is the BBC it is little wonder that the fans follow their lead. This is a page I came across when trying to select which matches I wanted to watch. It relates to promoting last night's match between Germany and Ukraine.

What alarmed me with this page was the top story under Headlines: MH17 Prosecutors want Russian answers. Remember this is a sports page. It is concerned with Ukraine and its match against Germany. But the first headline is reinforcing a meme which the BBC, and other mainstream outlets, have adopted as their mantra - blame Russia, blame Putin. They have perpetuated this ever since the western-sponsored coup to remove the legitimately-elected government of Ukraine. Click the link and you can learn how certain Australian lawyers are trying to get compensation for MH17 victims - nothing to do with football, nothing to do with Europe.

The irony here is that Russia is being called upon to provide evidence about the shooting down of MH17. Russia was the first to provide evidence. Countries withholding evidence are the USA (its alleged satellite images) and Ukraine (its air-traffic control records for the day). Not that that will bother the BBC which used to have some credibility but has sold itself so far down the road of perfidy there can be no turning back. In Ukraine for months before the coup the BBC covered street protests on the Maidan. When the overthrow took place and Poroshenko started a civil-war in which 10,000 have been killed the BBC virtually clammed up.

With street-fighting back in the international football frame, and FIFA threatening to ban Russia and England from the tournament because of fan behaviour, it is time to take a measured response to what is happening. Not all football followers are fanatical. Not all regular match-goers are fanatical. I enjoy watching a game of football myself and I agree it can get emotional. Drumming up hatred is something the mainstream media should not be doing. It should instead present unbiased politics-free sport. But even in the sport itself there is blatant disinformation.

A dubious foul that led to England's goal

I watched the England-Russia match (ITV1) with interest and am pleased to say that England had much more possession, especially in the first half, and more scoring opportunitites. That is not to say the Russian defence was shoddy, just that England were good. They passed well and showed the speed a young side should be able to show. Russia defended most of the attacks well and even put one or two together themselves.

Then came the so-called foul that led to England's goal. While England had been pressing it was becoming ever more evident they would not score from open play. In the 72nd minute Dele Alli ran into Georgy Shchennikov instead of around him. For some unaccountable reason, and right on the edge of the box, the referee penalised Shchennikov, yellow-carded him, and awarded a free kick in a very dangerous position. The goal that followed was superbly executed from a set-piece.

I thought at the time that it was never a foul. But ITV1 continued as though it was. No replay of the 'foul' was shown, and even after the match, when the talking heads summed up a match that Hodgson claimed should have been a victory but seemed more like a defeat because of Russia's late equaliser from open play there was still no replay. Because I did not believe it was a foul I tried in vain to get footage of the 'foul'. Google is crap. In the end I had to go to a Russian broadcasting station, Вести, to see the alleged foul. You can judge for yourselves. It starts three and a half minutes in. However many times I have watched this it is not a foul in my eyes. But the deceit, this time ITV1, is what most concerns me. As with the BBC over the non-reporting of the Ukrainian civil war they indulged in what Catholics call a sin of omission.

BBC - Is it worth the licence fee?

Follow @JohnPlatinumG What has been going on in Ukraine over the last week has been terrible for the poor people of the Donbass region. There is no water in some of the cities and many women and children have fled across the Russian border to refugee camps there. Ukrainians were not involved in a civil war with one another when Yanukovich was President. Since Yatsenyuk and the two right-wing parties of Right Sector and Svoboda there have been so many deaths like those in Odessa, and now in the Donbass Oblast'.

The BBC has been worse than sinful in its omission of reporting this news. My colleague, Professor Marcello Ferrada de Noli, a human rights’ activist living in Sweden, who was himself imprisoned under Pinochet’s dictatorship in Chile, depicts the stark reality of what has not been reported on any mainstream media channel. WARNING: There are images in this blog which are not for the squeamish. The BBC, as ever, is as disgusting as it was during the Iraq war. What do we pay our licence fees for?

http://professorsblogg.com/2014/06/03/what-responsibility-does-sweden-have-in-the-massacres-of-civilians-perpetrated-by-ukraine-junta/

None of this has been reported. My information is that the lady who was a victim of Yatsenyuk's air strikes who is talking to rescuers in the third video died in hospital. Her name I believe was Inna. What abject cruelty! We are the only animals who delight in killing for killing's sake.

Craig Murray exposes sham UK government "Vote No Borders" campaign for Scotland

Follow @JohnPlatinumG In another sleuth-like piece of worthy journalism Craig Murray shows the Tory government and its servile messenger, the BBC, up for what they are - biased manipulators of opinion. Instead of letting the Scottish people decide their own fate the Tories, it appears, have used a private limited company, with funds which have suddenly appeared from nowhere, with a PR executive experienced in advising on campaigns of countries like Bahrain, Dubai, Israel and England at its helm. The other helmsman director makes key donations to the, guess what, Conservative Party.

To begin with I did not wish to see a breakup of the United Kingdom, but with major insurance companies and banks despicably threatening to pull their Scottish-based business, a dirty piece of attempted leverage, I changed my mind. The more I read about it the more I think independence for Scotland will be a good thing. I think it will be a good thing for England too. Because then we can strive to equal Scotland which already has much more progressive educational system than ours, which is as elitist as the Tory cabinet. Congratulations Craig Murray for digging this story up.