Snouts in the Kremlin trough
This picture shows the "cream of the crop" of the BBC's political journalists, Laura Kuenssberg, Nick Robinson, and Andrew Marr at The Spectator magazine's big Summer party. Although Marr is now retired from the BBC, he still has enormous influence and connections there.
The Spectator, by the way, was bought last September for £100 million by this man, Paul Marshall:
Marshall is worth around £600-800 million, made from hedge funds dealing in carbon-based fuels, but was happy to pump a large chunk of that into a prominent UK political magazine which typically makes £1 million to £2 million in pre-tax profits.
It is obvious that this is not a business venture but an attempt to influence peddle.
It is obvious that this is not a business venture but an attempt to influence peddle.
Now, Marshall is financially "joined at the hip" with these guys, Richard and Christopher Chandler, who are worth about $4 billion, most of it kept off-shore in Dubai:
An important part of their career was when they were heavily invested in Russian assets and losing badly until helped out by none other than Vladimir Putin.
Forex Club accurately describes this moment:
The funds were invested in Gazprom, as a result, the brothers owned about 5% of the gas giant. However, the slump in the market and poor financial results caused the stock price to decline all the time. As a result, the loss on investment was several dozen percent. After the experience with NLMK [Russian steel producer], the fund started looking for places where money was "leaking" from the company. The problem was the close relationship between Gazprom and Itera. According to the Chandler brothers, Gazprom was selling gas to Itera well below market prices. As a result, minority shareholders were robbed by the directors of Gazprom. At the same time, Gazprom granted very cheap loans to Itera, which meant that the management of the gas producer's assets was at a very low level. The changes came only after Vladimir Putin came to power in Russia, who placed his trusted man - Alexei Miller in this company. As a result, the process of selling the price below the market was stopped. The brothers sold their shares in Gazprom between 2002 and 2003, earning a modest 12,5% on the transaction.
So, basically, they had their financial arses pulled out of the fire by Vladimir Putin!
An article, originally published by the Daily Mail at this URL (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5722289/Billionaire-pro-Brexit-think-tank-denied-Kremlin-links-brother-boasted-it.html) and now suspiciously scrubbed from the internet, including even archive sites, mentioned the Kremlin ties:
My guess is that Putin would use this as leverage over them in his usual subtle, insidious, and cunning way. So, it's no surprise that when the Kremlin-backed Russia Today TV channel was finally closed down in the UK in 2022, after years of spreading disinfo and polarisation, there was already a more covert replacement performing a broadly similar role in the shape of GB News (launched June 13, 2021).
An article, originally published by the Daily Mail at this URL (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5722289/Billionaire-pro-Brexit-think-tank-denied-Kremlin-links-brother-boasted-it.html) and now suspiciously scrubbed from the internet, including even archive sites, mentioned the Kremlin ties:
"The Goodness of Business, a pamphlet published last month by Richard Chandler’s Clermont Group, states that after he and Christopher placed their own director on the board, they teamed up with Putin to launch a management coup at Gazprom. A separate document, an investor profile of Gazprom, tells how [the Chandlers' company Sovereign] ‘assured the Presidential administration’ it could rely on its support to reform the energy giant. It led to a modernising drive which turned the company into the £37 billion energy giant it is today. The revelation is a further embarrassment for Christopher Chandler..."
My guess is that Putin would use this as leverage over them in his usual subtle, insidious, and cunning way. So, it's no surprise that when the Kremlin-backed Russia Today TV channel was finally closed down in the UK in 2022, after years of spreading disinfo and polarisation, there was already a more covert replacement performing a broadly similar role in the shape of GB News (launched June 13, 2021).
So, who funds GB News? The exact details remain a little murky, as it is literally dark money based in Dubai. Technically, GB News is funded through All Perspectives Ltd, a secretive holding company, but the money behind this is from Marshall and the Chandlers.
Marshall’s confirmed investments in GB News include an initial £10 million and an additional £41 million, totalling at least £51 million, with indications of further investments in the tens of millions. The Chandler's contribution, meanwhile, through their Legatum Ventures Ltd, is confirmed as £20 million, with no specific updates on additional funding amounts post-2020.
As Marshall only owns 40% of All Perspectives Ltd, you can infer roughly what the Kremlin-linked Chandlers have pumped in, so you can at least triple that pre-2021 £20 million.
As Marshall only owns 40% of All Perspectives Ltd, you can infer roughly what the Kremlin-linked Chandlers have pumped in, so you can at least triple that pre-2021 £20 million.
Like The Spectator, GB News is definitely not a "for profit" operation. In fact, it is a long-running financial disaster. Since it was launched it has lost over £100 million!!!
Pre-launch start-up costs (before June 2021) were approximately £3 million. In the financial year 2021/22 financial year losses were £30.7 million. In the financial year 2022/23 losses were £42.4 million. In the financial year 2023/24 financial year losses were £33.4 million.
Pre-launch start-up costs (before June 2021) were approximately £3 million. In the financial year 2021/22 financial year losses were £30.7 million. In the financial year 2022/23 losses were £42.4 million. In the financial year 2023/24 financial year losses were £33.4 million.
As I said above, GB News performs the same function as Russia Today once did, namely to stir up divisions in the UK, push disinfo, and promote an isolationist petty nationalism that, whatever its merits, plays to Russian imperialist interests. These include seeking to violently annex new lands and infiltrate and dominate the weak democracies of Western Europe.
A key element in doing this is influence peddling, both directly through creating and controlling content at The Spectator and GB News, and also indirectly through becoming part of the wider "journalistic eco-system" and the social world of influential news media personalities. A top priority for the Kremlin is to especially influence or control employees of the supposedly neutral and impartial BBC. This is why it is so disturbing to see the likes of Laura Kuenssberg, Nick Robinson, and Andrew Marr laughing it up and schmoozing in this way.
Creating entities that can hold junkets and soirees, wining and dining journalists, surreptitiously rewarding them for "saying the right thing," and paying them fees for appearances or the occasional article gives the Kremlin enormous leverage to subtly change the messaging and narratives being pushed out to the British public. In plain and simple words, it is corruption designed to creep under the UK's inattentive radar.
The efficacy of this method was demonstrated by last year's general election, in which an unpopular Labour Party, full of natural pacifists, was able to win a crushing victory, thanks to the enormous boosting that Nigel Farage's Reform UK received from Russian-aligned influencers like GB News. Of a lot of Russian money had been pumped into the Tory Party as well, back when they seemed the "natural party of government," but their failure to play along with the Kremlin's agenda led to other alternatives being activated.
It is disappointing to see that the BBC and its staff are so wide open to such influence ops, and so willing to shove their snouts into a trough that they must know is being filled by the Kremlin.
It is disappointing to see that the BBC and its staff are so wide open to such influence ops, and so willing to shove their snouts into a trough that they must know is being filled by the Kremlin.
No comments:
Post a Comment
All Comments MUST include a name (either real or sock). Also don't give us an easy excuse to ignore your brilliant comment by using "shitposty" language.