Good reasons to suspect “Tommy Robinson” Panodrama event (at event venue hosting MediaCityUK) will be manufactured theatre

A rally is to be held in Salford on Saturday, 23rd February. It has been organised by the “Tommy Robinson” industrial complex – a self-explanatory term coined hereabouts, which, for convenience, can be abbreviated as TRIC – and it is going to feature a screening, to take place in an area outside of some BBC premises or other, of a so-called exposé of the official state broadcaster. For it is claimed, by the TRIC, that the BBC programme, Panorama, was to make an episode that would amount to a hatchet job on “Robinson”. Turning the tables, or so they say, the TRIC intends to reveal the bad practice employed by the BBC in the production of its programme: a grand reveal in film evidently called Panodrama.

The rally is going to be counter-protested: and it appears that people who perhaps think of themselves as anti-fascists, or anti-racists can buy tickets online to be bussed to the venue and organised into squads of demonstrators – the link here leads to a vendor’s page for the West Midlands, but there also appears to be an opportunity to purchase passage to Salford from Leeds and its vicinity, and also from London. There may be more that the author has not found.

It may not then surprise the reader to discover that, as reports trickling over the internet betray, the normal functioning of parts of MediaCityUK are to be adversely affected on the day of the rally and the protest against it.

For those who do not know, MediaCityUK, which is the name of the extensive business park and media campus where the targeted BBC premises is located, is a renovation of Salford Quays. As such it could not have been public land before its development by the Peel Media group. Moreover, the BBC and other institutions and corporations appear to be tenants on the land – although the BBC and ITV Granada are listed as joint operators of the site, which is a relationship that might indicate some kind of ownership. Whatever the precise permutations in this regards, the point being made is that MediaCityUK appears to be privately owned territory.

And yet the public is expected to believe that “Tommy Robinson” can somehow unilaterally declare that he could and would hold a rally on this land. Indeed, pushing the limits of incredulity slightly further is the idea that the landlord corporation(s) have meekly acquiesced to this proclamation for a mass meeting, even to the detriment of the normal usage of its private property. As the reader should appreciate, it is such simple details, easily overlooked by so many, and yet pointing to considerable difficulties regarding basic viability, that must create doubt about the veracity of the information. The basic question is this: how is it that “Tommy Robinson” can hold a rally at MediaCityUK?

There are two possible answers to this question – as far as the author can see. Before getting into those, we must consider a third semi-option: that “Robinson” would simply be trespassing on private property. This is something that the author can’t think would be allowed to happen, so either there would be public access that has not yet been discovered – and the author invites the submission of data by readers to that purpose if this be the case (upon which corrections will be made) – or someone has decided that any prosecution of trespass would not be pursued [effectively, then, the same collusion to be described below].

Now to those two promised explanations, the first of which is that TRIC has rented one of the event venue facilities that MediaCityUK makes available for hire for corporate functions. A likely candidate is The Plazza, which is an open outdoor area that can accommodate 5,000 people. Now, it follows that if TRIC has hired the location of its rally, and wants to convey an impression of public street protest, then it is entirely possible, if it is in the business of creating impressions, that it would want to hire a crowd to fill the space‡. The very good reason that this possibility is mentioned is to do with “Robinson’s” dismal failure in prior attempts to attract into the streets large numbers, and crowds that didn’t require cunning camera angles in order to make them look remotely substantial. This clear malfunction in “Robinson’s” appeal is something that has been charted in the many FBEL articles that have tracked his progress in these respects (the latest, As useless “Tommy Robinson” fails to besmirch Brexit, the writing is on the wall for his enablers, here, and please use this site’s search box, and the term “Tommy Robinson”, to find others).

The second possible answer is that the BBC is in cahoots with TRIC, and has granted permission for it to hold an event at BBC premises. This would certainly tally with evidence already noted at FBEL whereby it appears that the Panorama programme and the BBC have assisted in the creation of material for the “documentary” to be screened at the event. See Taking down the BBC: another “Tommy Robinson” psyop gets essential help from the Establishment enemy? (link)†.

Either way, the situation invites an evaluation along the following lines: what could be achieved in these circumstances is a closed-off and controlled area which, for all intents and purposes, could act like a stage upon which the theatre of “Robinson’s” rally could play out. As such, one must remember that here would be circumstances whereby anything could happen, and yet these happenings wouldn’t necessarily be real. This is especially pertinent because of the nature of the place: MediaCityUK. It’s not the usual kind of corporate-function venue hire facility. There are studios on site for the production of TV programmes. At this juncture, the reader might be interested in an incidental tale regarding the visit that FBEL had, after sending a query to MediaCityUK, from a machine with a Disney Worldwide Services Internet Protocol address. The two things might be unrelated – the author certainly doesn’t know of any connection between MediaCityUK, or Peel Media and Disney.

In any case, in support of the suspicion of which the title of this piece speaks is the fact that the rally is indubitably more important than the pretext for it; i.e. the so-called exposé of the BBC. We should note, therefore, that the location for the rally would be chosen deliberately for the effect that was desired of it; the rally would certainly not be an accidental consequence of the pretext, although, of course, the location would have had to appear as being a direct result of the pretext. Hence it looks to a naïve observer that Panorama provoked TRIC into picking a fight at BBC premises. (Incidentally, this reasoning leads us to suppose that the producers of Panorama have never intended to make an episode on “Tommy Robinson” – and it remains to be seen if there ever will be one).

The reason that the rally is more important than the pretext, as was stated above, is a conclusion that comes from observation of the recent history of “Tommy Robinson” and street protests connected to him, and the increasingly desperate necessity for UK Government to have a figurehead for a grouping of people who can be demonised as far-right racists and potential, if not actual terrorists. At the crux of the issue is the maintenance of politics for a world government (of which, the EU is a building-block). Anyone who appears to undermine the “rules-based order” by which this is to be achieved is to be dealt with by being marginalised or criminalised – and the certainty of this is something that will be covered in a forthcoming FBEL article (which will also note that the so-called “anti-Semites” of the “left” have newly become a target for the same treatment).

As for “Robinson” and the “far-right”, he is the figure upon which Government has been hoping to hang associations with its neo-Nazi phantom-menace projects, National Action being the primary one of these (and a subject for an FBEL series – please perform a search to find the articles). Upon this connection being made, anyone subscribing to Brexit could be associated with “Robinson” through UKIP (thanks to the wilful destructiveness of Gerard Batten), and be tarred with the same brush, not just of the anti-Islamism that “Robinson” is best known for, but also of the extreme racism of the so-called fascistic Nazi-resembling organisations that have been invented specifically for the job. The purpose of having “Robinson”, or his supporters on the streets was to invite trouble, and to tempt situations where violence would occur, so as to present the idea that there was a far-reaching problem with the Brexit-supporting public. Ultimately, this could have affected Government’s delivery of Brexit to the extent that it be cancelled or ameliorated (as far as Government sees things) with the excuse given that it was an expression of latent Nazism – and this is not an exaggeration. As things stand, although the “Robinson” project has routinely failed, it still very much poses a threat to Brexit, and to the safeguarding of general opposition to the Masonic Anglo-globalist New World Order. And this is why there should be concern that an irredeemably bad reputation, having been unattainable organically, is going to be manufactured this Saturday.

† In the previous article regarding this issue, it was posited that the fact that John Sweeney’s lunch guest was secretly filming the meeting between them suggested further collusion between the TRIC and the BBC. The basis for this theorising was the assumption that Sweeney would not be candid with an outsider. TRIC is now claiming that the lunch guest was an ex-employee of “Robinson’s” who was pretending to be willing to “dish dirt” on the target of the supposed BBC project. This person was also a young woman, and therefore playing on a weakness of Sweeney’s whereby he would reveal information when trying to impress her.

Unfortunately, this information only increases expectation that the term “exposé” has been applied rather hopefully to the material that TRIC has supposedly collected. Sweeney would be a fool indeed if he wore his heart on his sleeve for a known ex-accomplice of “Robinson’s”. That Sweeney’s incrimination looks to be non-existent to minimal, of course, adds weight to the possibility that the whole thing has been arranged as part of a collaborative effort. Indeed, we are reminded that the exposé would be secondary to the rally at which it is to be screened, and it’s poor quality irrelevant when its real function is the generation of interest through release of titillating excerpts. On the day of the rally, it doesn’t matter if the finished item – the so-called Panodrama – is mediocre, trivial, or completely pointless; the important thing – the objective – would be that it has created awareness.

‡ Additional, 22/02/19: As for the pro-“Robinson” social media crowd, the author’s monitoring of Twitter makes him wonder if creating visibility for the rally online has been a job for the 77th Brigade, which previously got a mention at FBEL for similar reasons during the Skripal hoax.

Additional, 24/02/19: a commenter under this article makes mention of an allegation that an ex-employee of “Robinson” was somehow encouraged to claim that a sexual assault had taken place. Please see Undead, still being flogged: “Tommy Robinson’s” resurrected career as street protest provocateur stinketh, refuses to come forth, here, for the author’s understanding of this.