{"id":15663,"date":"2026-09-22T21:19:42","date_gmt":"2026-09-22T19:19:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/expatkaliningrad.com\/?p=15663"},"modified":"2026-09-22T21:21:17","modified_gmt":"2026-09-22T19:21:17","slug":"rt-breaking-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/expatkaliningrad.com\/ru\/rt-breaking-news\/","title":{"rendered":"RT Breaking News: Why Don’t They Want You to See It?"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>\n

I think those chaps at RT write a jolly good article …<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

22 September 2026 – RT Breaking News: Why Don’t They Want You to See It?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\ud83d\ude31 If you’ve arrived at this page from the EU, look away now!!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, there I was a few weeks ago flicking through the western news channels which saturate the internet trying to dream the impossible dream, ie to find one whose coverage wasn\u2019t overtly couched in the propaganda of the liberal left, when I came across an article on the United 24 Media website, described by Media Bias Fact Check as \u2018centre-left\u2019  [https:\/\/mediabiasfactcheck.com\/united24-media-bias-and-credibility\/<\/a>].<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Media<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

At the time I had no idea, honestly, m\u2019lud, that United24 is in fact a fundraising platform launched by erstwhile comedian, now Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Excuse me for droning on, but you learn something new every day!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For the purpose of this post, however, whatever it was that Zelensky was up to had everything to do with nothing as far as I was concerned. It was the article\u2019s headline that interested me:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2018EU Court Confirms Blanket Ban on All RT Russian State Media Content\u2019<\/strong>
\u201cThe Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has ruled that the EU ban on distributing content from Russian state broadcaster RT<\/em> (Russia Today<\/em>) applies to non-commercial websites that provide free access to such material, regardless of whether they generate profit or the specific content being distributed.\u201d \u2013 United 24 Media<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

“Well, I never did (honestly). They\u2019ll be banning straight bananas next! \u2013 Don’t believe it if they tell you differently; MEPs seem to prefer anything bent or twisted, such as expecting us to believe that boatloads of migrants pouring into Britain after a nice sojourn in France are not part of an EU plot conceived in pique at Brexit, which the froggy French and the Gerries saw, and indeed continue to see, as an audacious British rebuttal of their suicidal \u2013 you could say insane \u2013 open-border policies.” – A man who never voted to Remain<\/em> but wishes to remain anonymous<\/em>. Only his mum knows who he is, but not, apparently, by whom<\/em>. His mum comes from Wellingborough.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By the way, on the subject of France, let’s talk about Germany and say well done to the AfD for its recent seismic shift of the EU\u2019s leftist political landscape. Onwards and upwards, one might say, without f\u00fchrer mention of bent bananas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n


RT describes itself as providing an “alternative point of view”<\/strong> and a “second opinion”<\/strong> on world affairs, framing its coverage as a counterweight to mainstream or censored Western media. \u2013 AI Gemini, 7 September 2026<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Like the UK, which, allegedly, has seen more than 60,000 arrests for online communications offences over a five-year period* but isn\u2019t very hot when it comes to halting illegal migration and\/or stopping the rumoured money-laundering racket fronted by a growing succession of high-street barbers shops, nail bars and sun-lounge boutiques (guess which sector of society owns most of them) \u2013 every small town has a dozen or more \u2013 the EU is shit hot on clamping down on RT links but doesn\u2019t do much at all, except take the UK\u2019s money, about stopping the migrant boats that sail merrily and unhindered from its teeming shores, except, perhaps, to help Britain-bound migrants pump up their monstrous dildos<\/s> dinghies, grant them rights of passage, and wave them off as they happily go. John told me that. He’s a six-year-old far-right activist who was given a very powerful pair of binoculars by his mum for his birthday – incidentally, she comes from Wellingborough – and he took them with him to Dover. So there!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How the UK treats RT News<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Whilst RT is officially hampered in the UK, the legalities surrounding its access and sharing links via social media and through one-off blogs like this are nowhere near as Orwellian as they are in the ‘liberal’ EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The UK is a country that fields many regulators that regulate things to make them seem regulated, like Ofgem, Ofcom and Ofwat (the only thing missing is ‘t’). It even has a special body, Ofsted, which is devoted to the science of persecuting teachers by way of enforcing woke in Britain\u2019s state-run schools. When Reform eventually comes to power, I hope to witness the rollout of an entirely new and much-needed regulator officially known as OffFck (the only thing missing is \u2018u\u2019), whose powers will heavily regulate the landing on Britain\u2019s shores of thousands of things which, by look and presence, could spark a prodigious uptick in balaclava sales. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Ofthing that regulates UK media is the regulator Ofcom, and it was they who ruled, for the good of the public, naturally, that RT News\u2019 broadcasting licence be revoked in Britain, possibly because the news that it promotes is nowhere near as laundered, by which I mean clean and impartial, as that disseminated by the BBC, The Guardian<\/em> (of what), and the thoroughly speculative Independent<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As far as I can ascertain, because UK law is as comprehensible as a bowl of dropped spaghetti, which is why we need such erudite people as lawyers, judges and the like, to whom we can pay lots of money to untangle what they\u2019ve tangled for us, it is illegal in the UK for television companies to transmit RT across the airwaves. Similarly, the big lefty tech companies and lefty-controlled social media platforms actively restrict RT\u2019s distribution channels, but there is no restriction, as far as I can discern, should Joe and Abdul public wish to access RT\u2019s coverage via alternative digital sources.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Andy Burnham pledges to stand \u2018shoulder to shoulder with Ukraine\u2019 but appears to have adopted his predecessor\u2019s, Sir Kier Starmers\u2019, strategy of turning the other cheek and kicking Britons so hard up the arse regarding the migrant invasion that perhaps he hopes by the laws of cold shoulder they might stay indoors and forget it is happening \u2013 Political Anatomy<\/em> by A.R.S Elbow et al<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Part II: RT Breaking News: Why Don’t They Want You to See It?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lookee here for RT links!<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Note> “The views expressed in this post are not necessarily those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of individuals or companies that grow and\/or ship bananas, manufacture rubber dinghies, and make up colourful stories about old white ladies living in Dover being ‘genuinely disturbed’ by white men saying hello to them whilst wearing black balaclavas.<\/a> Even though in days of yore they tuned in every Saturday night to the BBC\u2019s<\/em> Black and White Minstrel Show<\/strong> \u2013 and while you\u2019re at it, take down that flag; it\u2019s British and you’re in Britain!\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Please note that in the present Western geopolitical climate of mass Russophobia, I have provided links to RT\u2019s articles not to its website itself but via the Archive.org website so as to mitigate suggestions that the objective of this post is to direct traffic to RT. As if!<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"Comedy<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Headline: Starmer out, Burnham in: What you need to know about leadership change in UK<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Can you see anything inherently wrong with the substance of an article, which considers the strange way in which new prime ministers are elected internally when one becomes unpopular and not fit for purpose and provides valid reasons why Starmer had to go whilst questioning the media-hyped regenerative powers of his Labour makeover Andy Burnham? Is there anything in this RT article that reeks of the untrue, or isn’t it merely confirming what we already know?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20260720043923\/https:\/\/www.rt.com\/news\/643240-uk-leadership-change-explainer\/<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"A<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Headline: White students in minority at nearly one in five UK universities \u2013 Telegraph<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The headline says it all, but it doesn\u2019t say anything more than we know already, given the anti-white ethos of British politics. RT merely highlights a disproportionality which, if it is correct, proves that white British are fast becoming a subordinate class in their own country. Whilst most of us are aware of this, our political elites would rather it not be shouted around the globe megaphonically. The word \u2018surreptitious\u2019 or even ’embarrased’ springs readily to mind.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20260703041317\/https:\/\/www.rt.com\/news\/642502-uk-white-students-minority\/<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"Snow<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Headline: Pakistani serial child rapist cannot be deported from UK \u2013 media<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Is it true? Or do we, the British, need to be protected from a story that beggars belief?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Well, judge for yourself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cA Pakistani rape gang ringleader convicted of dozens of child offenses in the UK cannot be deported under British immigration law despite being stripped of his citizenship, the Oldham Chronicle<\/em> newspaper has reported.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Who thinks that something like this just couldn\u2019t happen in Britain today?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20260701105345\/https:\/\/www.rt.com\/news\/642412-rape-gang-leader-not-deported-uk\/<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"A<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Headline: Britain needs war: Why London can\u2019t afford peace in Ukraine<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Intro: \u201cThe UK\u2019s power machine runs on war, and conflict in Eastern Europe is its new fuel\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I fully comprehend and appreciate why the content of this article and its alternative perspective on the perpetuation of the Ukraine conflict might be something that the British establishment would rather we did not read. But if, as we are constantly told, we live in a democracy and not an Orwellian state, then surely different points of view matter as much as black lives, and whilst avoiding a knee-jerk response to either is an excellent act of prudence, what we choose to view and read could be considered a sovereign right.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is one statement within this article that I do find hard to agree with, and that is \u201cBritain has always known how to turn disaster into capital.\u201d Could it be the exception to the rule then, the ongoing, never-ending and soon-to-be-fatal full-scale migrant invasion?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20251112152617\/https:\/\/www.rt.com\/news\/627673-britain-needs-war-in-ukraine\/<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"King<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Headline: King Charles loses historic \u2018Defender of the Faith\u2019 label<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

And in yet another cultural and historic climbdown in which we cede our Christian heritage to appease those who oppose it, we have another prime example of\u00a0Woke in the Royal Family\u2019 (We won’t mention the other one …)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

RT reports:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cBuckingham Palace has dropped \u201cDefender of the Faith\u201d<\/em> from King Charles\u2019 official job description, swapping the 500-year-old title for a vaguer pledge to safeguard religion across Britain\u2019s \u201cmulti-faith nation,\u201d<\/em> according to the UK\u2019s annual royal finance report.\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why not just open Buckingham Palace as a bus-them-in-migrant-hostel and donate the Crown Jewels to Black Lives Matter? If you\u2019re going to give the country away, at least make a proper job of it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20260629151222\/https:\/\/www.rt.com\/news\/642356-king-charles-loses-defender-of-faith\/<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

And now for something completely different …<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"A<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Headline: British MPs demand ban on Russian children\u2019s cartoon<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

So does a Russian cartoon about a little girl and a bear pose any threat to Britain? Or is the call by \u2018more than 50 British MPs\u2019 for a ban on this children\u2019s programme \u2018a culture-war theatrics\u2019 staged as a diversionary tactic in our pantomime of politics to steer us away from our homegrown nightmares? “Look out! They\u2019re behind you!\u201d \u2013 a little girl and a cartoon bear.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A spokesperson for the Russian company that produces the cartoon, which has been entertaining families in more than 100 countries for nearly two decades, states that the programme contains no militaristic content and has gained popularity purely for its \u201cfriendship, kindness and imagination.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The article goes on to say \u201cMoscow has condemned these measures [the call for a ban on the programme] as censorship and Russophobia, accusing Western governments of using the Ukraine conflict to suppress Russian culture, language and media.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Perhaps if Russian culture, language and media came from where the bananas come from, all may be forgiven, even, perhaps, exhorted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Read the article yourself and see what you think, and then go and watch the cartoon. I think you might enjoy it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20260703232540\/https:\/\/www.rt.com\/news\/642534-uk-mp-russian-cartoon-ban\/<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n