5 Filters

Is it me or do others see a shift in UK Column's reporting on the genocide by Israel?

Hi folks, although there has been an occasional analysis of Israeli’s genocide of Palestinians by UKC it seems to be unwilling to push the point home and the subject seems to be regularly framed as a “delicate issue”! Are they concerned about their continued funding , some coming from pro-Israeli sources? I have no idea , but even Vanessa Beeley’s reports for UKC seem to get diverted away from the continuing horrors of the genocide taking place daily onto “safer subjects”.

Look at the list of items below the video - nothing specifically on Gaza. As an example there used to be quite a big interest in religious issues and yet the killing by IOF snipers of a mother and daughter inside a Catholic Church in Gaza gets no mention!
Even the Graun manages to mention some of the event in between pushing out Israeli propaganda to try to bury the event :

Maybe its been like this from the start?


1 Like

Hi @CJ1 . I agree with you. They seem to be pulling their punches and I’m guessing this is to avoid polarising their viewers. David Scott has gone from the main news reporting which I like to think I played a small part in (maybe I’m delusional?) but there is definitely still no real political analysis of Israhell Palestine and genocide, even with Vanessa Beeley on there. Perhaps they will argue their focus has to be the UK and we have to recognise that the new OFCOM legislation means they will have to walk a few tightropes. I’ve gone from been a regular viewer to now regular but skipping over sections.


Hi @PatB I agree with you but it seems they don’t want to even try to walk any - OFCOM is a bit like the Israeli government it will keep on censoring and attacking despite attempts by their victims to temper their resistance. The media in all its forms need to push back and certainly at least establish a baseline - no holding back from reporting honestly on genocide as its everyone’s duty to prevent genocide and to self-censor to protect the aggressors could in the end amount to complicity in genocide - so it really is in their best interests to challenge any OFCOM restrictions on this issue .


1 Like

Hi CJ1

I think it might be a question of future survival. I remember reading something in the online harms bill that essentially implied that only ‘recognized news groups’ would survive. This was because the bill isn’t aimed at controlling the mainstream media - as the government controls them already.

The crux was that a “recognised news publisher” was basically exempt.
What is a “recognised news publisher”?

51 “Recognised news publisher”
(1) In this Part, “recognised news publisher” means any of the following entities—
(a) the British Broadcasting Corporation,
(b) Sianel Pedwar Cymru,
(c) the holder of a licence under the Broadcasting Act 1990 or 1996 who
publishes news-related material in connection with the broadcasting
activities authorised under the licence, and
(d) any other entity which—
(i) meets all of the conditions in subsection (2), and
(ii) is not an excluded entity (see subsection (3)).
(2) The conditions referred to in subsection (1)(d)(i) are that the entity—
(a) has as its principal purpose the publication of news-related material,
and such material—
(i) is created by different persons, and
(ii) is subject to editorial control,

[so there needs to be editor and news creators, who can’t all be the same person?
This made me think of UK Column - or I might have read this suggestion somewhere, but the idea was that’s how big you would need to be.

Continues, with new legal and adminstrative shackles:]

(b) publishes such material in the course of a business (whether or not
carried on with a view to profit),
(c) is subject to a standards code,
(d) has policies and procedures for handling and resolving complaints,
(e) has a registered office or other business address in the United
(f) is the person with legal responsibility for material published by it in the
United Kingdom, and
(g) publishes—
(i) the entity’s name, the address mentioned in paragraph (e) and
the entity’s registered number (if any), and
(ii) the name and address of any person who controls the entity
(including, where such a person is an entity, the address of that
person’s registered or principal office and that person’s
registered number (if any)).
(3) An “excluded entity” is an entity—
(a) which is a proscribed organisation under the Terrorism Act 2000 (see
section 3 of that Act), or
(b) the purpose of which is to support a proscribed organisation under that
Link https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-03/0209/220209.pdf
(Caution, old link: Probably some of this has been re-written.)

1 Like

I unsubbed and haven’t watched since. The Duran channel on YouTube does err towards the Russophile but what the hey, so do I. Their Israel/Middle East coverage is quite balanced in fact: distinguishing clearly between what they hope will be the outcome and what might realistically be the outcome.

1 Like

Surprised but pleased if David Scott has been disappeared. For me the lack of Patrick Henningsen was decisive. He seemed to fade quite quickly after the rather bitter argument between himself and Vanessa Beeley. He was rude, and who knows maybe it was a disciplinary thing… They weren’t even that far apart.

The spark for this was discussion of RFK Jr who has gone right down in my estimation. Vanessa had him sussed more thoroughly than PH as it turns out.


I completely missed the spat between Henningson and Beeley, but thanks for the summary. I agree both on the JFK front (whom I detest now despite his previous good work on environmental issues) and Henningson’s disappearance. He was a loss as his whole attitude on screen and his sarcasm improved the presentation significantly.

Thought this ties in to @CJ1’s “Is it me or do others …”


I should have clarified that the quarrel between Patrick and Vanessa was on one of the Extra broadcasts which I assume I won’t be able to access anymore so can’t link. It might have been as long ago as April/May 2023.

These had gone downhill too over the last few months, especially when David Scott was allowed to dominate discussion. [I assume(d) he was connected to an external funder of some kind, the hasbara kind to be specific.]

In all honesty I don’t miss it at all, much of the material is second-hand, and often inaccurate or at any rate editorialised in slanted ways.

When I wrote to correct a statement made by Mike at the time when care workers were being coerced into jabs I was not impressed that this went uncorrected. He misinterpreted a clause in the regulation (subsequently repealed) that seemed to say, but definitely didn’t, that any visitor or tradesman carrying out work (etc) would have to satisfy the registered manager that they were ‘vaccinated’. His reply was basically: “oh, really…?”


We have for some time regarded PH as a bit of a lightweight, though we thought he probably had the right of it in that daft spat with VB (but yes, he was definitely pointlessly rude to her on that occasion). The spat we remember was over the arrest & interrogation of the French journalist who arrived in the UK in April - an experience that VB was well qualified to talk about because it had happened to her but, whatever, the two of them found occasion to fall out (sadly, we’ve forgotten why we thought PH was actually in the right!)

We reckoned that PH’s disappearance was more due to his rant the previous Friday on behalf of ‘no-virus’ which, despite Debbie Evans proclaiming on air that she’s a ‘terrain theory girl’, was a position obviously deemed unsafe by the UKC editors (and DE never repeated it, in fact gave no indication of disbelieving in viruses subsequently as far as we know).

David Scott, the self-confessed (to us) Christian Zionist was always going to be a liability despite Brian Gerrish’s protestations (to us). Mike never engaged with us about anything and we’re still cross about his and PH’s unwarranted and nasty demolition job on Rosemary Frei over the Geert vanden Bosche fraud for which RF is still owed a big apology from them both.

We too have long since moved on.
And our flag is still up, a bit battered by the elements but unquestioned since that police visit (thanks for asking KE).


Happy New Year Folks, I just checked out the UKC first broadcast in the New Year after a 12 day break - I couldn’t see anything on the menu about Gaza despite the massive numbers of Gazan innocents massacred over that period and the RSA filing against Israel for genocide with the ICJ. Maybe there were mentions which didn’t rise to a specific link in the video feed - but to me there is something amiss with UKC re its Israel Gaza coverage which is strange given their anti US UK EU reporting on Ukraine!


1 Like

UK Columnnews 29th jan 2024

Absolutely no mention of Gaza, the ICJ decision on Israeli charge of genocide, the breach by Israel of ICJ orders one day later, the defunding of UNRWA by US UK AUS CAN & IT, the Houthis action to block shipping aimed at stopping Israeli genocide!

  • and according to Yahoo’s account of the msm no-one else is reporting any of these key issues:

they missed the Morning Star which is bristling with news items on Gaza:

Perhaps I should reduce my updates on UKC to those editions that do actually raise current issues on Gaza - so this thread may become dormant very quickly.



Appalling. Despite very seldom looking at press or media sites, I seem to be more informed about these things than I ever was as an avid watcher of at least one news show a day, and many a newspaper or news website.

Admittedly that’s from within a bubble of anti-US, pro-Russia, anti-Israel think-alike, but I always was a tankie lol. I think back forty years and genuinely don’t think many of my positions have changed, albeit that the political spectrum has itself definitely wandered off W-A-Y over there ----->

I only stumbled upon UKColumn a few weeks into the Flu D’Etat. Their ‘angle’ was always somewhat mysterious but I enjoyed Patrick Henningsen enough to put up with the general “read out the slides” amateurism. The backgrounds of most of the presenters in the military/police ought not to matter but starts to look fishy when the silence is so resounding on certain key issues.

Sod 'em. I watch the Duran quite a lot, and Larry Johnson is doing some good stuff recently.

1 Like

Us too, never been so well-informed as now, having long since ditched the tele (20 years) and put our last radio in a cupboard (3) (we’d been listening only to R3 for 3 years before that). No newspapers for far longer.

We’re currently enjoying, if that’s the right word, Larry Johnson’s contributions on Andrew Napolitano’s ‘Judging Freedom’ podcast:


Most of the commentators are really good value; Alastair Crooke, Ray McGovern, Karen Kiatkowsky, Matt Hoh, Max Blumenthal, Scott Ritter et al. (but one or two are dodgier than the word dodgy; Jeffrey Sachs, Bill O’Reilly spring to mind). Aly posts them sometimes.

If only the judge would stop playing clips of Blinken etc. to his guests (the suffering of innocents in Gaza, “gut-wrenching” “breaks my heart”). Once each for them but constant repetition for us. Bloody infuriating.


I wrote to the UK Column some time back about this exact subject. I referred them to (from memory) three pages in a book all about the selection of TED talks, that pointed out the folly of exactly that.

For @CJ1 , I agree completely with you on this. However, their one redeeming feature is a new ‘reporter’, Ben Rubin, who talks mostly without slides and has a bit of Henningson’s irony and sarcasm.


Benjamin Rubin. Yeah, right.

I believe UKC justify the reading out of slides (and actually promote it) because some people only have an audio stream. I am wondering who.

But in any case there’s far too much on the slides in the first place, a sure sign in my humble opinion, of someone who tries to win the argument by way of bombardment. (Bullshit blizzard as the phrase goes…) In fact it’s a fact-checker tactic: spell out the adversary’s detailed case and slip a crowbar into one tiny crack then condemn the whole thing. Or:

Paul Revere: the British are coming!

Snopes: well, ackshully it’s only part of the British Army so this is, at best, semi-factual disinformation. (or is it ‘mis_’?)

Sorry K but I’ve missed the meaning. Was that Benjamin Rubin, oh sheeete? Or was it Yah, Benjamin Rubin?

1 Like

It was: Benjamin Rubin, could you possibly find a Jewier name if you tried. Ten-to-one says he’s Mossad.

I guess time will tell. If we see a gradual change in the reporting towards a more Israhell supportive slant, then you win the bet.

But bak to the title of this thread. I only skimmed the midweek episode of UK Column news and I don’t recall any mention of Gaza. Recently lots of stuff decrying the decline in Britains “defence” forces without any speculation as to why this matters or from whom we might need defending.


They’ve been spinning that line, ie that UK Defence forces are laughable, for quite a while now. Often linked to stories about Europe-wide army and how very terrible it is that British troops are having to follow orders from Belgians or whatever.


My wife saw that comment and said is that me posting under pseudonym?

1 Like