Propaganda and censorship in politics

I remember a time when the The Guardian was a respected newspaper. It’s owned by the Scott Trust, which was created in 1936 to “safeguard the journalistic freedom and liberal values of The Guardian free from commercial or political interference”. Sadly the Guardian is no longer a liberal newspaper. Instead it engages in political interference for a living. It’s renowned as a Marxist mouthpiece which peddles left wing lies and PC claptrap. It is famous for being a hotbed of propaganda and censorship. There once was a time when The Guardian told you the news. Now it tells you what to think.

The absolute gold standard of journalistic integrity

Of course, it isn’t the only media outlet that does this. The BBC is much the same. It used to be the absolute gold standard of journalistic integrity. Now it’s isn’t. Hence Emily Maitlis said everybody was outraged at Dominic Cummings when they weren’t. I wasn’t. The wife wasn’t. Nobody I knew was. So, some guy takes his wife and child to a cottage in Durham. Big deal. Of course, BBC news staff were then seething because Maitlis got ticked off for presenting personal opinion as nationwide fact. That’s par for the course for the BBC these days. They’ve lost their moral compass. That’s why poor old grannies pay through the nose for propaganda and censorship and secret sky-high salaries:

Still from the 1954 movie Animal Farm based on George Orwell’s 1945 book

There’s also Question Time which is now unwatchable. Fiona Bruce interrupts people like Nadhim Zahawi, the panel is loaded, and the audience is full of Momentum plants. As for the Today programme on Radio 4, ye gods. Have you ever heard those guys giving their side an open mike whilst shouting down the opposition? There was an article in The Telegraph the other day saying the Biased Today programme needs reining in. It also said “the corporation’s flagship radio programme has for too long pandered to a metropolitan, Remainer elite”. Too right.

The EU reverse-Robin

Is this a recent trend? Yes, I think it is. I remember maybe ten years back when Sky News had a great reputation. Now their one-sided reportage sides with the EU reverse-Robin fatcats. Just like the BBC, the EU take from the poor and give to the rich. Rich people like Michael Heseltine. He was part of Project Fear, and happily pocketing £90k a year as some kind of “farming subsidy”. Nice work if you can get it. Especially if you’re like Amazon, and you don’t pay tax. They got their Luxembourg sweetheart deal courtesy of Jean-Claude Juncker. That’s the former EU president whose name was the only name on the ballot paper. The EU despises democracy. They dismiss it as mere “populism”. They don’t care if the people of Greece are poor. The Brexit referendum took place four years ago, and since then they’ve done nothing to persuade us that we made the wrong choice. They never will. A leopard doesn’t change his spots. If only the EU had modelled themselves on the USA. In the USA, they have democracy coming out of their ears. In the USA, if you support your local Sheriff it’s probably because you voted for the guy. In the USA, you even get to vote for your President.


I knew Donald Trump was going to win the 2016 presidential election when I saw the documentary about Youngstown. It was once a place where you could live the American dream. You could have a job in a steel mill that paid well enough for a good home, plus a car and steaks and all the rest. But then “the industrial economy that drew various groups to the area collapsed in the late 1970s”. After that, Youngstown turned into rustbelt America. It got so bad it ended up being used as the set of a post-apocalyptic zombie movie. Sadly the burnt out cars, the broken windows, and the weeds growing out of buildings were for real:

Still image from Abandoned Ohio Factory by Abandoned Nation

Somewhere along the line blue-collar America was betrayed by the likes of the Clintons, much as working-class Britain was betrayed by the likes of Tony Blair. These people were supposedly rooting for the lower echelons of society, but in truth they were cosying up to the globalists. You know, the sort of people who close down a factory in Barnsley and transfer production to the Philippines, thereby slashing labour costs and getting even richer. These are the sort of people who also want to import cheap labour, which is one reason why minimum wage is way too common these days. These are the sort of people who whisper into the ear of people like Hilary Clinton, who made a big mistake when she called the Trump supporters deplorables. She basically said American workers are a bunch of racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic rednecks. They aren’t. They’re just like you and me. They wanted somebody who would root for them for a change.

The Goebbels big lie

Trump has been doing well. I think that’s because he did things that helped the economy. Like telling General Motors he would tax their cars from Mexico. After that, Ford announced that they’d increase production in Michigan instead of building a new factory in Mexico. Ford were of course the multinational company who took EU money to transfer van production from Southampton to Turkey, but I digress. Another reason Trump has been doing well is that the Democrats were not contrite. They didn’t sit down and ask themselves why they’d failed blue-collar America. Instead they doubled down on the nonsense because they were ultra certain that everything Trump stands for is wrong wrong wrong:

TDS image from RedState

What arrogance do these people have? I don’t know, but I do know that they too think they can tell you what to think. Because they think you’re stupid. They also think that if they repeat the lie enough, you will eventually believe it. People like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Nancy Pelosi actually believe in the Goebbels big lie. So do their friends at CNN and the Washington Post.

The ludicrous pantomime

Hence the ludicrous pantomime featuring Professor Christine Blasey Ford trying to stop Brett Kavanaugh’s appointment to the Supreme Court. Because he allegedly pushed her onto a bed thirty six years ago? When he was seventeen? FFS. I don’t know if you watched the show, or the body-language analysis, but it was crystal clear that she was lying through her simpering baby-talk teeth. It was also crystal clear that she also lied about her fear of flying, and that the hearing was really delayed because the coaching hadn’t been going too well. Another ludicrous pantomime was the Mueller Investigation which had been launched courtesy of the dodgy dossier. That was the Steele dossier, which the Guardian said was “one of the most explosive documents in modern political history”. What they didn’t say, was that it was a pack of lies to enable illegal phone tapping. That’s why Mueller ended up squeezing witnesses on trumped-up charges threatening lifelong jail terms to try to get them to fabricate evidence. It didn’t work, and it all ended in tears with Mueller’s stumbling shambolic train-wreck testimony. Then there were the pathetic efforts to impeach Trump for a phone call. Joe Biden had already bragged about getting Ukraine prosecutor Viktor Shokin fired, but that didn’t matter. Nor did it matter that Hunter Biden had been getting eighty three thousand bucks a month from Burisma, and landed a billion dollar deal after a trip to China in Air Force two. If Donald Trump junior had done that, we’d never had heard the last of it. But instead the US “mainstream” media tried to sweep it under the carpet. Nothing to see here, move along. Yeah right.

The weaponized judiciary

On top of that we’ve had the weaponized judiciary making it up as they go along to try to stop Trump delivering on his campaign promises. For example Judge Derrick Watson in Hawaii blocked Trump’s travel ban. See the Sunday Guardian which says “activist judges needed to effectively “fabricate” a new law just to block the ban”. Another example was provided by federal Judge David Briones, who ruled that Trump’s emergency funding for the border wall was illegal.

Judicial activism image found on Judicial Activism: It’s Not Just A River In Egypt by Dodd Harris

William Barr’s Wall Street Journal article on nationwide injunctions is well worth reading. He says things like “Shrewd lawyers have learned to “shop” for a sympathetic judge willing to issue such an injunction”. So true.

Immigration, which is a big issue

The latest example is the double-standards DACA ruling. That concerns immigration, which is a big issue. The champagne socialists do so love their skivvies. They also love importing voters and promising them free money and Medicare to make sure they vote Democrat. For them, it’s win-win, especially since they can also use it for virtue signalling. Especially since they can smear any dissent as racist. Then if they can tug your heartstrings using children, so much the better. What a pity they used pictures from the Obama era, and children are being rented out by people smugglers. I think it’s like what Brendan O’Neill said, the left was trying to find an issue with which “it might successfully harm its political opponents and, even more importantly, demonstrate its own presumed virtue”. However things like the killing of Kate Steinle took the edge off that. There’s been too many similar cases, see the Angel Families website. Also see this: the Somalis have brought a whole new level of violence to the streets of London. They say similar things about Minneapolis. Hence the migration card has been wearing thin of late, along with the sanctuary cities. Especially since the latter are where crime is rife, as are discarded needles and human excrement.

They still have no decent policies

Meanwhile, the Democrats have taken their eye off the ball. They’ve wasted their time attacking Trump, and they still have no decent policies. Take a look at the Democrat party website. All it talks about is getting democrats elected. They say they’re “fighting for a better, fairer, and brighter future for every American”, but they’re not. The Democrats are like our Labour party. Labour want you poor, because poor people vote Labour. It’s the same for the Democrats. They want you poor too, especially if you’re black:

Image from the Democratic party website

See their where we stand web page. It says Democrats believe health care is a right. That sounds good. After all we have our NHS here in the UK. Why not have something similar in the USA? The trouble is that the Democrats want an International Health Service – they want free healthcare for illegal immigrants as an inducement to come and swell the ranks. What else? There’s the economy should work for everyone, which is what Trump’s being doing, so that won’t wash. Then amazingly, they say facts and truth matter. Facts and truth matter? Coming from the Democrats? You have got to be f*cking kidding. These are the people who say they believe in immigration reform when actually, they don’t. These are the people who say they believe in cracking down on companies that ship profits and jobs overseas when actually, they don’t. These are the people who say black lives matter, when actually, they don’t give a damn.

The Democrats want to keep you in your place

They know full well that the biggest problem is that circa 72% of African American children don’t have a father at home. That’s the result of a self-perpetuating black macho ghetto culture. It was described in the 1965 Moynihan report. That’s 55 years ago. The Democrats have done nothing about it. Instead they hope to gain from it, Hence Barack Obama did nothing for black America. Are you a young black guy from Austin, Chicago? Do you want a better life? See the Larry Elder article on the Fox News website. It’s about a young black guy called Chad Jackson. He was “shocked to discover that his support for limited government, low taxes and school choice, and his opposition to abortion on demand, made him a Republican”. He got called an Uncle Tom. The Democrats want to keep you in your place.

George Floyd didn’t deserve to die

George Floyd didn’t deserve to die. But that’s no excuse for an orgy of looting and destruction. For myself I think the mainstream media should have made it clear that Floyd was a six-foot-seven bouncer who worked at the same club as Derek Chauvin, and that they didn’t get on. The man who said that has now retracted it, but Floyd’s family haven’t. That’s why they’re saying Chauvin should be charged with first-degree murder. I don’t know the truth of that, but I do know that Floyd’s death has been a cause célèbre for all the Marxists and anarchists who want to smash the system. These people really do want to defund the police. Their Democrat friends abolished bail for robbers and burglars, then turned a blind eye to all the trouble it caused. The Democrats have been actively encouraging the riots and the looting. They want mob rule in their streets, because they think it will harm Trump’s election chances. And woe betide you if you object. You will be “no-platformed”. You will be “cancelled”. You will get fired for having the temerity to say all lives matter. In the brave new world of Orwellian doublespeak, all lives matter is racist. Make sure you read If You Don’t Support Black Lives Matter, You’re Fired by John Daniel Davidson. It wasn’t just Grant Napear who lost his job. Because like Konstantin Kisin says, this isn’t about fighting racism, this is about power.

They are the InterNazis

The people causing the trouble are international socialists. Not national socialists, international socialists. They are the InterNazis. They lost the moral argument and the elections, but instead of coming up with something better, they’ve resorted to thuggery and thought police. The Covid-19 pandemic has been a godsend to them, because it upset Trump’s economic success. On top of that it’s now OK to wear masks in public. So when George Floyd died at the hands of a Minneapolis TO acting the tough guy, they were ready with their manufactured outrage. Antifa say they’re anti-fascist. But they label anybody who doesn’t like their hard-left anarchy as a fascist. Then they demand that such people are silenced. Then you can’t see that Antifa are the real fascists:

Antifa image by Mark Graves/The Oregonian

The truth is that to the Antifa blackshirts, black lives matter only when they can gain from it. And like Shaun King said, “Democrats, from top to bottom, are running the cities with the worst police brutality in America right now. We voted for them”. That’s cities like Chicago, where eighteen people were murdered on Sunday May 31 2020, most of them black. Thirteen people were murdered last weekend, see Newt Gingrich’s article Do black lives matter in Chicago? Not to the Democrats. Gingrich says this: “Every life matters. And after 89 years of Democratic control in Chicago, it is time for Republicans to extend a helping hand to suffering people in devastated neighborhoods”. Well said that man. David Dorn’s life didn’t matter. CNN didn’t even want to mention him on air. It would also appear that Jewish lives don’t matter either. Like the Nazis before them, the InterNazis don’t like Jews. They smash up shops and burn books too. As to where that leaves you if you’re a black Jew with a bookshop, I don’t know. Maybe you should ask Tim Scott.

Trained Marxists

The Black Lives Matter website looks reasonable, but it’s a sham. The New York Post quotes co-founder Patrisse Cullors saying she and Alicia Garza are “trained Marxists”. The Telegraph says Black Lives Matter is a radical neo-Marxist political movement. It’s true, check out Do your own research, and think for yourself. But do try alternative search engines, like just in case some sneaky do-no-evil organisation gets tempted to bury a few websites way down deep in the results. Then see what Nigel Farage has to say on Brietbart: “Black lives matter is a dangerous Marxist organisation hell bent on anarchy”. It’s just the militant wing of the Democrat party playing the race card for all they’re worth.

White silence is violence

They’re also fighting tooth and nail to stop anybody trumping them with the freedom of speech card. They don’t like freedom of speech. They like censorship instead. They learned it in college, in their safe-spaces where opposing views are verboten. The Guardian will try to tell you it’s a myth, but it isn’t. It’s real. In academia, it’s a way of life, and it’s spilled out into the world at large. Censorship is now utterly endemic, and the thought police are absolutely brazen. They’re even pushing for advertisers to boycott Facebook because they won’t censor Trump. Mark Zuckerberg knows full well that Facebook can either be a platform or a publisher. As does everybody else. But that doesn’t stop the “liberals” leaning on him to turn it into a ministry of truth. A place where all non-conformist views are declared to be hate speech, and therefore must be censored. Only you don’t get to see what’s censored. Because it’s censored. Neat trick. Then if something slips through the net there’s hell to pay. Hence at the New York Times, James Bennet lost his job because he ran an op ed piece by Senator Tom Cotton. It spoke of the need to protect citizens from rioters, looters, and left-wing radicals. He was spot on, but you can now read that the essay fell short of our standards and should not have been published”. It’s ridiculous. But not as ridiculous as the Huffington Post article by Jesse Damiani: “When you say “All Lives Matter,” you are perpetuating toxic racism”. Oh boy. That’s right up there with white silence is violence and capitalism is racist.

27 police officers injured during largely peaceful protests

However I think the best one was the stupendously stupid BBC headline: 27 police officers injured during largely peaceful protests. That’s the self-same BBC who cropped the picture of the man brandishing the big big stick:

Image from The Telegraph

That’s the self-same BBC who said the people who object to statues being pulled down are right-wing extremists. The self-same BBC who won’t tell you about the black slavers who went out and captured their fellow Africans to sell to Europeans. Or how we Brits put an end to the slave trade. That’s the self-same BBC who’ve kept a low profile lately about all the young black men in London getting stabbed to death. The Guardian have done the same. In similar vein NBC wouldn’t cover the ugly events in the Seattle CHOP.

It’s not how you vote that counts, it who counts the vote that counts

The irony of course is that too many so-called socialist love their Deliveroo pizzas brought by gig economy workers with no workers’ rights. Along with their Uber taxis driven by migrants working a 16 hour day. Like I said, the champagne socialists do so love their skivvies. And as for the snowflakes who want to destroy the statues of Abraham Lincoln, words fail me. Anyway, I hope that in the USA, the silent majority are numerous enough to outweigh the Democrats plus the fraudulent postal votes. You know, the fraudulent postal votes that are “fake news”. You have to laugh at the way Twitter tried to censor Trump with a voter-fraud “fact check” provided by CNN. See Fox News and the article by Greg Re: “Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud”. That was the conclusion of a bipartisan 2005 report authored by the US Commission on Federal Election Reform. The Democrats say they’re safeguarding the right to vote, when actually they’re rigging elections. Like in Orange county and Broward. Like Stalin said, it’s not how you vote that counts, it who counts the vote that counts. Come on, really, who wants to vote for Joe Biden? He has early onset dementia, his morality is dubious, and his track record is awful. If Biden gets elected, it won’t be God Bless America, it will be God Help America.


This Post Has 61 Comments

  1. Roy Lofquist

    “f Biden gets elected, it won’t be God Bless America, it will be God Help America.”
    “God has a special providence for fools, drunkards, and the United States of America.”
    ― Otto von Bismarck

    1. ↑ LOL. I shall probably get into bother for this one Roy, but I couldn’t think of another way to talk about censorship and propaganda in the world at large.

      1. Roy Lofquist

        But that’s the way it has always been and will always be. In America we have a lot of strictures on our government and if that doesn’t work there are more than 300 million firearms in the hands of the people.

        1. I think liberties can be eroded little by little Roy. I also think that if the wrong people gain power, a little can turn into a lot. I’m actually rather surprised at how readily people have accepted the recent restrictions, and how state governors etc have been very quick to assume dictatorial powers. Perhaps a state of emergency is the thing that paves the road to tyranny. I for one have had enough of the restrictions now.

          1. Roy Lofquist

            I agree about the erosion of liberties, but I believe that a major change in American politics is in progress. California governor Gavin Newsom banned fireworks displays for Independence Day. Reports, with videos, are that there were glorious displays throughout California, more than in previous years. Take that, Guv.
            There are many flavors to American politics. Walter Russell Meade has written essays where he defines them as variously Jeffersonian, Hamiltonian, Wilsonian, and the most common, Jacksonian. In the vernacular, Jacksonians have three rules – mind your own business, we can do business if we agree, and fuck with me and you’ll regret it. But they are also Stoics. They are slow to anger. They also tend to be thorough when they set their minds to it. I sense that they are annoyed.
            One of Mead’s essays is titled “The Jacksonian Revolt” (, published January 20, 2017. The first paragraph:
            “For the first time in 70 years, the American people have elected a president who disparages the policies, ideas, and institutions at the heart of postwar U.S. foreign policy. No one knows how the foreign policy of the Trump administration will take shape, or how the new president’s priorities and preferences will shift as he encounters the torrent of events and crises ahead. But not since Franklin Roosevelt’s administration has U.S. foreign policy witnessed debates this fundamental.”
            That comment on foreign policy applies doubly to domestic policy. Trump was elected in 2016 in large part because Hillary Clinton scared the living daylights of an awful lot of people. We didn’t quite know quite what to expect with Trump but we tossed the dice. Turns out he produced the magic wand that the Mocha Messiah said he didn’t have and threatened an awful lot of rice bowls. The US establishment has gone bat shit crazy, particularly the media. Do not believe anything they say. Their masters are in full panic. Trump is going to win big, very big.
            There is about a three generation rhythm to American politics. You can see it in this chart:
            I suspect the Republicans to dominate for the next couple of generations but it will be a different Republican Party, resembling the Democratic Party of the first half of the 20th century. America is going back to its roots.

            1. the physics detective

              I don’t know, Roy. I just don’t know. But I know that I’m seeing a big difference between the younger generation and the older generation in places like London. I presume it’s similar in places like San Francisco, but I don’t know for sure. We will see I suppose.

    2. Greg R. Leslie

      John, I am having a rough time getting receiving The Physics Detective in it’s proper format. This has been going on for about a week now. Also , is there a time limit when writing a reply,having problems with that as well.

    1. the physics detective

      No Greg. It’s just that I’ve been talking to a few people about recent events and the way censorship and propaganda is now endemic. So I thought I’d say something about it to set the scene for an article on Censorship and Propaganda in Physics.

  2. Greg R. Leslie

    Okey dokey, I was hoping that was the situation. Your political screed was so out of character from everything prior from the Physics Detective, I just had to ask. I will definitely will be looking forward to your next article then.

  3. Andrew

    You seem to have fully bought into one side of the propaganda competition to grab and sell your attention. I thought you had more brains than to fall for that. For the media, your attention is the ptoduct. The crap they put forward is just to suck you in. You can see it for the other side, but not for yourself. I’d stick to physics.

    1. All points noted, Andrew. I like to get my input from a wide variety of sources, and then compare them. I investigate and analyse, I don’t just believe what I’m told, and I don’t lap up some “fact check” from some guy with an axe to grind. ln addition, I feel freedom of speech is very important, and I note that only one side seeks to no-platform those who challenge what they say. I also note that only one side is calling for the removal of statues of Abraham Lincoln.
      Try thinking this: Duffield is a bit of an old-school socialist who believes in workers rights and Christian ethics, and is opposed to the globalist capitalists who have made people poor. Then re-read the article carefully, and try to point out where I’ve been misled, or where I’m mistaken. I’d be interested to find out if I am wrong about any of this.
      Greg, if you’d like to point out where I’ve been misled, or where I’m mistaken, I’d be interested to hear it.

      1. Andrew

        The media is well skilled at giving a false impression tithout lying or being factually wrong. It’s a matter of cherry picking the facts, rearranging and presenting them to construct the overall story that suits the purpose.

        Doing this has a lot of similarities to genuinely trying to work out what is going on – identifying the relevant facts and coming to an understanding that explains them all.

        The way to tell is usually by what is missing, not by what is there. I’m sure if you want to you could pick any one widely regarded as evil (e.g. Pol Pot) and go through all their public statements, pick out the insightful and charitable ones and make them look like a saint. (I’m not saying Donald Trump is similar to Pol Pot). You could further challenge anyone to find where your facts are incorrect, but it won’t make the overall impression you have given be accurate.

        I’ll see if there is something I can use as an example in your post.

        1. Andrew

          Okay, the first point about the Guardian. Their live blogs are usually quite up to date and for the most part just the facts. Sure there are plenty of editorial type articles pushing an agenda, but all media outlets these days push an agenda of one sort or another. It’s a market imperitive to “have a voice”, and even non-profit driven outlets need to do that to keep an audience..

          I’m sure you can find plenty of modern lefty articles in the Guardian, but a wide range of the relevants facts do appear on their web site.

          You give the impression that it is a communist propaganda organisation. It is not. I can find hundreds of examples of them giving just the facts.

          1. Andrew

            Here’s another. You say the Democrats think I’m stupid. They don’t. They don’t know who I am, and even if they became aware of who I am, they would not think I’m stupid.

            You also say that they think if they repeat “the lie” enough, I’ll believe it. They don’t think that. I’m not even sure from your article what “the lie” is. Yes I’m aware of Goebels, but are you really just trying to persuade people against the Democrats by making Nazi refetences? Is that really how you like to argue?

            The democrats are a political party that tries to spin things and “craft their messages” the same way the Republicans do and Donsld Trump does. That’s all it is. Of course they can be “found out” sometimes, as can they all.

          2. the physics detective

            Yes, the media is well skilled at giving a false impression without lying or being factually wrong. But sometimes they do lie, and sometimes, they are factually incorrect. When I compare what different news outlets are saying, yes I can see that some things are missing. I can see that somebody is lying to me. It’s happening far more often nowadays than it used to. As for Pol Pot, I don’t care much about his “insightful and charitable” public statements. I care about this:

            Yes the Guardian do provide facts. But when I go to their website at 13:12 12th July 2020, what’s their top article? It’s this: Revealed: Dominic Cummings firm paid Vote Leave’s AI firm £260,000. Really, is that the most important thing that’s happening in the world this day? No other media outlet seems to think so. It’s just the Guardian trying to make a big deal out of Cummings spending his own money. Because they are propagandists first and journalists second. They are not honest, they have no integrity, and people can see through them.
            I definitely think that the Democrats think the ordinary US voter is stupid. Barack Obama did nothing for blacks. The poorer people of America got poorer during his 8 years in office. When Clinton talked of deplorables, that came from the heart. The Democrats betrayed blue-collar America, and nobody but nobody in the party is saying people voted for Trump for a reason. They think they can persuade the ordinary voter to vote Democrat by inventing some stupid Russian collusion? By calling Trump a racist? And by encouraging looting burning mobs on some specious grounds that black lives matter? Despite all the killings in places like Chicago? The Democrats will never admit that they stood by whilst industrial America rusted. Instead they think they can have your vote because some Trump appointee pushed some girl when he was 17? They definitely think the ordinary US voter is stupid. They definitely think that if they lie enough, the ordinary voter will come to believe it. And those Antifa international socialists are definitely Nazis. Yes, the democrats are a political party that tries to spin things and “craft their messages”. But they have lost their integrity. I hope they pay dear for it.

            1. Andrew

              That was my point about Pol Pot. You need to look at all relevant facts. If you have an explanation for all of them, then you are likely close to the truth. A factually correct story that leaves important things out is not likely close to the truth.

              The less powerful parts of society have fallen in relative wealth since 1980 in most western countries. I don’t know of any party that has stopped it in any country. It is as much the right wing parties’ fault as the left wing parties everywhere, probably even more so. Thatcher and Reagan started it didn’t they.

              Why single out the Democrats for it, particularly in a country like the US with 4 levels of government, and very separate legislative and executive branches of government at every level. The democrats aren’t even a labour party.

              The voters must share some of the blame too. Plenty of them voted for Reagan, and the Bushes. I didn’t stop it either. Perhaps it’s my fault. What about people of the left in general who have lost important arguments in the public’s mind.

              The democrats are a group of millions of people. They have all sorts of diferent views. You have no proof that they as a group overall believe that repeating lies will result in those lies being widely believed. Just because they didn’t do what you thought they should have doesn’t make them evil.

              I don’t know much about antifa except that they are small and incosequential nobodies who Trump likes to asociate with the democrats to try to make the democrats look bad amoung his own followers. In this case Trump is the one telling the lie repeatedly in the hope it will ne believed. He does that more often than any other politician I have ever seen. George Bush and Tony Blair did the worst one with the weapons of mass destruction. But Trump does it more often.

              You like to label people as being Nazis. Nazis are Nazis, and nobody else is.

                1. Andrew

                  Funny video. I remember it from when it was on telly.

                  But the only point it supports is that you like to liken things to Nazis.

                  The fox news link is dead.

                  There is more mob behaviour going on these days. That’s a pitty.

                    1. Andrew


                      It’s a grab bag of unsubstantiated points, mixing and confusing various issues. It’s playing to the confirmation bias of a market segment for profit. Good example of the worst of the Guardian, but aimed at a different group of people.

  4. Greg R. Leslie

    Andrew, I am partially responsible for John’s screed. I was the one who told John to use his Bully Pulpit for more than science. It is a classic example of : “carefull what you wish for”. However, I am going to withhold my opions on the subject matter until reading the next essay.

  5. Greg R. Leslie

    I will be glad to John. Firstly, I dare not comment
    specifically on British politics or British society, mainly because I am woefully ignorant of the facts.
    Secondly, I agree that there is an increasing amount of censorship, mind control, media control by most political parties and most politicians. Ditto for most religions. Ditto for most groups consisting of self vested interests. Historically this has always been the norm for our human condition,it ebbs and flows with the current times.
    Thirdly, my personal political/religious/philosophical beliefs were formed mostly from my own true life experiences and observations. And to a lesser extent from experiences of family, friends, and acquaintances. I naturally expect the same is true for you and Andrew. I have never walked in any other’s shoes, therefore I do not pass judgement. I also was not offended at all by anything you stated John, just caught off guard, especially by the pro Trump endorsements. LOL !!! I do thoroughly agree and share your methodology, and probably
    most of the same ethics
    and morals; just not some of your results/conclusions. I also have absolutely no desire to proselytize or attempt to correct other’s political/religious/scientific beliefs. It gets in the way of the healthy exchange of ideas.
    With that just stated, I must add that I came to a conclusion back in the ’80s that Trump was just another narcissistic uber rich jerk,
    a personality type that I never liked, trusted, or voted for. Enuff of my screed for now and forever, so let us end by agreeing to disagree?
    ” Live and let live ” works really great for me in these types of situations. It was fun and educational as always,John, so MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

    1. the physics detective

      All points noted Greg. LOL, I think Trump probably is just another narcissistic uber rich jerk! But I do think he sees places like Youngstown and thinks that’s wrong, whilst Hilary Clinton doesn’t give a flying f*ck. I used to vote Labour you know. I used to like guys like Harold Wilson, who rooted for the common man. But I feel like people like Tony Blair have failed the common man, and now I vote Conservative.

  6. Greg R. Leslie

    John, I am having a horrible time with the CAPTCHA app malfunctioning and the ability to post.

    1. I’m sorry about that Greg. Like with everything else these days, people change software and screw it up. For example, I’ll turn on my laptop and some Microsoft tw*t has altered my Outlook. WTF! I had some trouble myself with the CAPTCHA recently, it was too fussy, asking me to click on low quality pictures of buses, and then saying I’d got it wrong. I will look into it. Please can you elaborate on your blog isn’t formatting the way it use to?
      Edit: Tsk. I had to click on a whole heap of pictures of bicycles. See things like this:

  7. Greg R. Leslie

    Of course John. When I try clicking on to the most recent article, which is at the very bottom of the articles list, a message page appears that states the page can’t be found. Directly underneath that is another message with a search box. Underneath that is a ” return to home” prompt box that I click which takes me to a whole new page I’ve never seen before. It is a list, in reverse chronological order of each article; and each article has the title and the first few sentences of said essay. Followed by a open up box prompt to continiue to the full length article.
    My personal opinion is that way too many Young IT HotShots think they have to reinvent the wheel in order to justify their professional existence or to get ahead in the corporate world. ” If it ain’t broke, then don’t fix it ” you bloody twats !

    1. the physics detective

      Sorry Greg, that page not found message was my fault. I’ve fixed it. That whole new page sounds like my physics detective home page. That’s what comes up when you click on I share your sentiment about if it ain’t broke it don’t fix it. There are far too many arrogant IT people around these days who think it’s just fine and dandy to change something that has lots and lots of users. I’d like to see a class action against say Microsoft to get the message through that it’s not OK. I’d also like to see some spammers going to jail. I put in Captcha because I was getting besieged with robospam. Mostly medical stuff like viagra, it was like a hundred comments an hour. I will however put some time into looking for something better.

  8. Navid

    You can’t understand any of this until you accept the fact that aluminum cannot penetrate thick steel columns as we “saw”. That’s just physics. So lies can be concocted and transacted at global scale. Purpose, beneficial outcomes for big oil, big war, big pharma with the control system of distraction (hollywood, tabloids) and mind manipulation (media) and unsavory methods of blackmail. If you think ontop of Covid there aren’t such operations, you are a lemming.

    I recommend this movie

    The scope of the “system” is deep. Epstein was friends with Krauss for a reason, and it wasn’t because “they” love QM – but rather to control every important aspect of society. “I don’t feel tarnished in any way by my relationship with Jeffrey,” Krauss added. “I feel raised by it.” Hooft, Hawking also had affiliations – I’m not accusing them of unsavory stuff, but you need to understand the wide birth of control.

    Your job is not to understand all of it – it’s a deep chasm – but to believe that it is possible – that ultra rich attempt to put guard-rails on society, and the people within it.

    BTW, in America both parties are the same – controlled by blackmail or $, or if not controllable unfit for governance, but Trump has become too much a wild card for the globalists — my guess there are rebels on the inside who want to create change (probably military), and the empire is striking back.
    The UK is home to some of the strongmen of the system, to be specific the royals…

    1. the physics detective

      Navid/Greg: some of your comments were deemed to be spam. I fished them out of the trashcan.

      1. Navid

        there are some duplicates – please remove!

        1. the physics detective

          Dammit, that CAPTCHA is irritating.

  9. Greg R. Leslie

    Navid: if you are referring to the 9/11 jets going into the Twin Towers, they fell because those jets had enough kinetic energy to burst thru the thin outer glass and then disintegrate arround the steel columns. It was the high temperatures created by the high octane aviation fuel fire which caught the interior of the jet and it’s contents plus the flammable interior of the building on fire that in turn un-tempered the steel columns. There was enough weight(mass+energy content) on the floors above the fires , that when they did collapse the kinetic energy (accelerated energy) was sufficient to pancake the remaining lower floors all the way to the ground. John wrote several great articles on gravity explaining mass, energy potential, and energy content, among other pertinent concepts.

    1. Navid

      Steel framed buildings don’t collapse. The designers of this building planned for everything happened. So kerosene pancakes is what John would say “lies for children.”
      Seismographs detected explosions underground.
      Smoke rising should be black, but it was white – not burning debris.
      The towers (3) were turned to dust.
      Fires burned till December 2001 deep underground.
      Many people died of radiation sickness.
      There were no air-blast wave, nor radiation, nor an EMP.
      Lookup term “ground zero” in a dictionary prior to 2001.
      You have enough to figure it out now; and enough to know that it can’t be anything like what you’ve been told.

      1. Navid, what’s with the conspiracy theory? Look up warehouse fire. Steel loses all its strength in a fire. It turns to taffy. Then the steel framed building ends up flat on the ground. The same applies to steel framed skyscrapers.

  10. Greg R. Leslie

    To add to John’s comment, the basic design of the twin towers also contributed to the pancaking. The majority of the steel columns were located in the center of the building called the tube. The high tempered glass and metal alloy exterior was also part of the load bearing system. And the floors of each Twin Tower were designed to only support themselves and one floor above/below . It was a more modern concept that was faster, easier and cheaper to build than the older classic steel girder box design of say: the Empire State, Chrysler or 30 Rock towers. It was also a more modern, esthetically pleasing look,to some. Those older buildings could be brought down too, but it would take a lot more time and effort.
    My only question to you Navid is : are you also a Flat Earther ?

    1. the physics detective

      Well said Greg. Navid, I’m all for free speech, but I really don’t like to see 911 conspiracy theory stuff here. Please check out the way steel loses strength in a fire. Then do a little blacksmithing to try it out for yourself. Then please can we stay on topic.
      Jesus H Christ, what is it with this CAPTCHA?

  11. Navid

    I told you the truth and you ignored it (especially the part about dust and reading a dictionary – inside language got out). Leave “flat-earther” accusations for someone who less aware of the physics. Go read the academic reports that are (finally) coming out: Engage in scholarly debate if you disagree.

    1. Navid, enough of the 911 conspiracy stuff. See this where you can read this: “Hulsey’s study was far more limited than NIST’s and didn’t even take into account the fire progression or the fact that there were fires on at least 7 different floors. Hulsey modeled only 2 small areas of 2 floors for potential fire damage, and there are major issues with how he did it. The fact that he claims, without caveat, such an absolute conclusion (and, in fact, he has been claiming this conclusion since before he even modeled column 79), shows that he did not approach this project scientifically. His original presentation even contained plagiarized passages from two random conspiracy theory blogs”. I know he’s being underhand because of animation 4.16 on Skyscrapers fall down, not over. Steel-frame buildings fall down because a fire massively weakens the structural steel. We have good scientific evidence of this. See for example Windsor Tower. Now, no more on this off-topic matter please.

  12. Eric

    Oh, oh no.
    I understand that the worldveiw you’re peddling is simple and so seductively explanatory, but please don’t shy away from nuance. Human society, in ecologic and economic models isn’t physics, and can’t be as simple and foundational as physics. Don’t let that scare you away, the struggle in understanding these highly nonlinear, chaotic systems is interesting in its own right, and of vital importance to human society.

    1. Eric: the simple seductive worldview is being peddled by left-wing “liberals” who are actually anarchists and Marxists who don’t give a fig about the common man. Most people grow up and come to realise this with experience. They also realise that their jobs are being exported by fat cat globalists who get rich whilst they get poor, and who sneer at “populism”. AKA democracy. That’s why they vote for Brexit, and for Donald Trump.
      All: Sorry about the CAPTCHA. I am going to have to do something about that.

      1. Eric

        ” left-wing “liberals” who are actually anarchists and Marxists”
        do tell me more about that simple worldview.

        1. Eric: read this article in the Washington Post:

          “There is no difference between those who beat innocent people in the name of the ideology that gave us Hitler and Himmler and those who beat innocent people in the name of the ideology that gave us Stalin and Dzerzhinsky”.
          I’m sorry Eric, but it’s time to face facts. The Nazis were socialists, and so are Antifa. Antifa are the Nazis now.

  13. Eric

    I guess I’ll have to concede there; the National Socialist Party of Germany was Socialist, and the People’s Republic of North Korea is a republic for the people. How silly that people think names could be anything other than the Truth. I mean, it’s a Name! Proper Noun and all!
    So anyways, tell me more about that simplistic worldview?

    1. Eric: the simplistic worldview is held by younger idealistic people. They don’t think hard enough about “the rise of kings”. The US constitution features safeguards like the people vote for their president and a president is limited to two terms of office. What happens with socialism? You get a strong-man dictator who executes his rivals. You get a Stalin, a Mao Tse Tung, a Castro, a Mugabe, a Kim Jong-un. A tyrant in charge for life. People suffer, people die, every time. Because some pigs are more equal than others. And because some people are ready to dispense with democracy when they don’t win.

    2. Anders

      Eric: do you see how you’re now arguing for the viewpoint that you just rejected : that “liberal” people are not really liberal?

      1. Eric

        I never rejected that, nor was I arguing for it.
        That a name is disingenuous, does not follow from the possibility of names being disingenuous.
        That being said: do liberals exist who don’t hold liberal values? Absolutely.
        How many, and to what extent is a much more interesting question. Majority? Minority? And if they don’t hold liberal beliefs, what do they believe? What are societal effects of such a group of people holding such beliefs? These are all questions I’d be interested in discussing if anyone here was willing to argue in good faith.

      2. Eric

        I never rejected that, nor was I arguing for it.
        That a name is disingenuous, does not follow from the possibility of names being disingenuous.
        That being said: do liberals exist who don’t hold liberal values? Absolutely.
        How many, and to what extent is a much more interesting question. Majority? Minority? And if they don’t hold liberal beliefs, what do they believe? These would be interesting debates if anyone could lay aside their reductionist attitudes and argue in good faith.

  14. Eric

    “What happens with socialism? You get a strong-man dictator who executes his rivals.”
    “People suffer, people die, every time.”
    Incredibly nuanced.
    I’d love to have a good faith argument, but that’ll be impossible until we can stop peripherally arguing.

  15. Greg R. Leslie

    Time to check in with the Monty Python Arguments Dept. down the hall……..and for the record, the parrot is still napping, just like me about these conversations………………

  16. Eric

    Oh, sorry John. I didn’t realize you don’t know what at good faith argument is.

    Or maybe I’m being too generous, and you simply latched on to a word I used, without trying to understand its meaning, just to try to squeeze some entirely unrelated self aggrandizement into the conversation.

    As for that article; it’s hardly enlightening. This is not a partisan issue. Our innate communal sense making seems to have always balanced group cohesion and group utility, rather than some platonic truth, and this has lead to some frightening problems.

    1. Mike Bergman

      As someone who is a faithful reader of this blog, and appreciates its questioning of physics orthodoxy supported by the scientific method and logic, let me say this: You have become an offensive troll, who has gone off topic to 911 and conspiracy theories and now wants to argue semantics and polemics. Off-topic bullies like you are ruining the Internet and much of social media. If you had enough experience of the world and critical thinking skills, you would be embarrassed to know how completely ineffective you are being with your polemics. Please piss on the discussion elsewhere.

  17. Eric

    Mike Bergman,
    I haven’t discussed 911 nor other conspiracies. Not on this blog, nor elsewhere. This only previous comment I’ve left on this blog, if I remember correctly, was a question about rectifying non-stationary black holes with a locally zero speed of light. You must be mistaking me for someone else. I’ve been intrigued by this blog since the third posting. I’d hope that qualifies me as a faithful reader, not that that should be a premise off of which to base any argument. This blog, I believe (on the topic of physics, this post excluded) has some interesting criticisms that has pointed me towards some interesting literature. Namely, Alexander Unzicker’s “The Higgs Fake”, preliminary research by Oliver Consa at the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, and of course, Thomas Kuhn’s “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” which I would recommend anyone curious of the current paradigm failings in any field of science to read. Anyone who dabbles in philosophy of physics has heard the name “Kuhn” thrown about, but few outside the field have read his work, and that’s frankly a damn shame.
    On your contention with my polemic argumentation, I’ll agree with you there, it was sadly ineffective. I’ve argued with John and others who hold similar political views, and after growing tired of the depressing dearth of good faith, I figured I’d stoop to his level and trade arguments on the periphery. It’s a sad realization. Critiquing one of the myriad of topics in a post like this will, with near certainty, result in him dumping non-sequitur after non-sequitur into the argument. This current attempt at picking a critique (lack of nuance) and refusing to acknowledge his attempts to divert the conversation, was definitely in poor taste, ineffectively antagonizing, and I’m sorry. I wish I knew how to argue productively with such identitarians.

    1. That’s a good comment Eric. I think you should make a real effort to analyse any errors in my essay above. I find that doing that sort of thing helps me to clarify my thoughts on a subject, and separate emotion and conviction from evidence and facts. That’s in essence what I’ve done with the physics. I’ve used my IT analytical skills on things like What is Charge? and looked at all available evidence to come to (what I hope is) a reasonable conclusion. Meanwhile can I reiterate that I believe in freedom of speech and right of reply. If you write a rebuttal, there’s no way that I would censor it. Heck, I might even put it up as a guest post to prove my point re freedom of speech and right of reply. However I feel confident that in trying to refute what I’ve said, you find that you can’t, and that you start to see why so many people felt disaffected and voted for Trump/Brexit/Boris etc.
      PS: I’ve flipped the words censorship and propaganda in the title. I thought I ought to mention it.

  18. Greg R. Leslie

    Hey John, after last night’s presidential debate fiasco, do you still think tRUMP is quality presidential material???
    If so, please email me for a free dvd/brochure for all the Great International Bridges and/or Beautiful Oceanfront Estates in Lichtenstein I have for sale !
    WAIT! THERE’S MORE: You may qualify for a ” Good Buddy ” discount !
    WAIT! THERE’S MORE: and If you need financing I highly recommend Deutsche Banke tax free programs !
    WAIT! THERE’S MORE: if you order now I will add as an EXTRA BONUS at NO CHARGE a free designer straight jacket and complimentary basket weaving kit !
    (shipping,handling&sales taxes may apply)

    1. LOL! I didn’t watch it Greg. I’m in the UK. Sorry. I’ll look out for it, and pay attention to the records here.

  19. Greg R. Leslie

    It is on, in it’s entirety on American You Tube, presented by PBS.

  20. I thought this was an interesting article by Brendan O’Neil of Spiked Online:
    The thing about Google “shadow banning” the Great Barrington Declaration was ominous. See this:
    “As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection”.
    I agree that we have to get out of this spiral of authoritarianism. I want my democracy back.

Leave a Reply