Last modified on October 2, 2023, at 23:40

Guardian (UK)

The Guardian (Sunday edition: The Observer)[1] is a UK national daily newspaper known for fake news and its very left-wing stance. Originally known as the Manchester Guardian, since it was originally published there, it is owned by a charitable organization, the Scott Trust.

The Guardian is dominated by atheist and homosexual rights viewpoints. Regular contributors include atheist Charlie Brooker, LGBT campaigners Peter Tatchell, Rev. Richard Coles, Julie Bindel, Owen Jones, Patrick Strudwick and transgenders Jack Monroe (born a woman), Paris Lees (born a man) and Jane Francesca Fae (born a man).

In 2017 the total circulation of The Guardian had dropped to 149,000, making it number 19 among British newspapers.

Prior to the 2014 U.S.-backed Maidan coup, The Guardian actually reported on Ukrainian Nazism.[2]

Examples of inaccuracy and bias

The Guardian report on the defeat of Azov Nazis in Azovstal.[3]

In 2016, when the UK magistrate Richard Page was dismissed from his post in the judiciary for merely saying he believed children were better off with a mother and father, The Guardian reported the case as "Magistrate sacked over religious opposition to same-sex couples adopting". This was not true. Page's opinion was based on the best interests of the children and their welfare, not on a mere religious prohibition. Page's view is supported by the best available scientific evidence i.e. the Regnerus Report. Within a few months of Page's dismissal, in 2017, a pair of lesbians, Deborah and “wife” Jennifer Harrison, were convicted of starving a child and hitting her with a hammer. Very soon afterward, a baby girl named Elsie was murdered by her homosexual adoptive "father" Matthew Scully-Hicks. The Guardian did not connect the three cases.[4][5][6][7]

In September 2016, The Guardian reported that there had been a huge "spike" in hate-crimes against Eastern Europeans in Britain since the Brexit vote, and highlighted the death of Arkadiusz Jóźwik, who died in a late-night fight in Harlow, Essex, which they called a "suspected hate-crime".[8] They repeated these allegations in a series of articles.[9] But when the case eventually came to court, the verdict was that Jóźwik's death was the result of a drunken brawl, not a "hate crime attack".[10] The source of the figures about a so-called "spike in hate-crime" was just a single police statement taking figures from a website called True Vision where anonymous reports can be made without proof. Many complaints are of a petty nature e.g. verbal disagreement. The police noted that over a four-day period, the previous figure of 54 had risen to 85. So 31 allegations made without proof were reported as a national "spike" in hate-crime.[11][12]

On May 6, 2017, The Guardian published an article taking the side of Spanish Stalinists over Trotskyists and anarcho-syndicalists during that country's three-year civil war, specifically the firefights between the different factions of the Spanish Republicans, documented by George Orwell's autobiographical Homage to Catalonia, which regards his experiences serving in the war as a private of the Trotskyist POUM (Workers' Party of Marxist Unification). The article criticized Orwell's book, with the headline, "George Orwell's Spanish civil war memoir is a classic, but is it bad history?" It accuses Orwell of being too biased and partisan to understand the situation properly enough to obtain a proper judgment. Given that he was merely a private, The Guardian postulates that he can't have possibly understood the nuances of the situation that led to government-affiliated Stalinists gunning down anarchists and Trotskyists in the streets.[13] Ironically, in the appendices of the book, Orwell defends The Guardian of the time as a fair and non-biased source of information which does great journalistic work.

On 14 June 2018 The Guardian published an article by Claude Moraes entitled "The far right is organised and growing. Those Nazi salutes are serious". It referred to a demonstration held on 9 June in London in protest at the imprisonment of campaigner Tommy Robinson. The only evidence the article brings of "Nazi salutes" is a photograph in which one man is holding up both arms with fingers splayed, and another behind him is holding up a placard.[14] The article alleged that the demonstrators had been violent and aggressive and had attacked the police. This was untrue. No arrests were made at the demonstration despite the fact, reported by many who attended and shown on video coverage, that the Metropolitan police went to great lengths to try to provoke a violent incident. [15]

Nowhere does the article admit the real cause for Robinson's arrest and the demonstration, which is the gigantic grooming gang scandal. For at least twenty years, organized Muslim gangs in England and the Netherlands have exploited very young British girls from vulnerable backgrounds, who have been terrorized, drugged, prostituted and gang-raped. It is reliably estimated that there have been 50,000 victims in 73 towns and the problem still persists. [16] The authorities continue to turn a blind eye or minimize the problem. Robinson and others have been whistle-blowers, and the government was intent on silencing him but the article presents the protesters as merely "racists" who have no genuine grievance, which is a grave misrepresentation.

In May 2019, the newspaper announced it would use the terms "climate emergency, crisis or breakdown" rather than "climate change,"[17][18][19] and that it would describe "climate skeptics" as "climate deniers."[20] It has also adopted extreme pro-abortion language, including using the terms "anti-abortion" and "pro-choice" rather than "pro-life" and "pro-abortion," and it has banned the term "Heartbeat Bill."[21]

Palestinian Authority's Mamhmoud Abbas Abu Mazen praises Hitler's pal - Mufti al-Husseini (Nov 23, 2010)

What The Guardian won’t report: Mahmoud Abbas praises late Mufti of Jerusalem who Collaborated with Hitler.[22]

condemned but pushed another bigotry

In 2023, The Guardian, had Arab anti-Israel taking advantage to promote a libel via a letter of "condemning" Abbas' falsehood statements re Holocaust and history,[23] while not a word about Abass' anti-Semitism was even mentioned.[24] Yet, even these were condemned by Abbas as "shame."[25]

As 'The Guardian attacks the Jews…. again,' activist:[26]

It is almost impossible to overstate how far the Guardian has fallen. Once the voice of the liberal left – the paper has turned into a ‘Palestine’ obsessed rag that consistently promotes voices that are attacking British Jews. Just this week we were given yet another example – Haroon Siddique wrote an article about a report attacking the use of the IHRA definition of antisemitism on campus grounds.

Conspiracy theories About Brexit

Following the referendum on European Union membership, which the Leave faction narrowly won, The Guardian ran a series of articles attributing the outcome to sinister foreign influences or illegal funding, attempting to prove that the result was invalid. One of these, by Carole Cadwalla, claimed that UK's Information Commissioner's Office had launched legal proceedings against Arron Banks and the LEAVE.EU campaign. This was not true.[27]

Misleading statistics about transgenderism

The Guardian regularly publishes articles claiming that half of the children diagnosed as so-called "transgender" in the UK have attempted suicide. But these figures are dubious as they do not come from an objective source, only from biased LGBT campaigning groups such as Stonewall which use online surveys, very small sample spaces, and have no proof that the answers correspond to fact. These organisations get more and more funding according to the size of the problem they claim exists. [28] [29] [30] [31] When checked objectively by, there was a lot of doubt about the accuracy of the figures.[32] There are no statistics that prove transgender people become any less likely to commit suicide in later life if their delusion is affirmed and made official. Moreover, what such alarmist reports do not mention is that the actual number of children classified as "trans" in the UK has rocketed by 2,000% in eight years, in response to LGBT ideas being taught in schools. So if the problem exists at any extent, it is being largely created by the LGBTs, and by left-wing promoters and propagandists. [33] GID specialists are warning that hasty treatment or premature treatment is not in the interest of the children.[34]

Sexist hypocrisy

The Guardian, calling the Republican party sexist, published a blatantly sexist article insulting women who support Republicans. The author of the article is a columnist who published other smears, such as accusing Donald Trump of being a sexual predator.[35]

Russia collusion

See also: Trump-Russia collusion hoax

Notable employees

Paris Lees and Jane Francesca Fae, two of The Guardian's transgender journalists, both have unusual backgrounds. Lees has served prison time for the crime of violent assault, while Fae, whose previous name was John Ozimek, campaigned for ten years for the legalisation of extreme and hard-core pornography. He is currently suspended from the UK Labour Party for repeatedly inciting violent attacks on women.[36][37]

Campaign against UKIP

The Guardian newspaper conducted a fierce campaign against the UK Independence Party (UKIP) a political party formed in 1992 with the aim of withdrawing the UK from the European Union. The Guardian branded UKIP a "far-right" and "neo-fascist" party without any evidence either from its manifesto or anywhere else, and printed smear articles about virtually every prominent member of UKIP on a regular basis, claiming they were racist, guilty of financial misconduct etc. An example of how they distorted the facts is a story they printed on 13 June 2017 with the headline "MEP resigns amid investigation into alleged misuse of funds".[38] The article reported that Roger Helmer, a UKIP member of the European Parliament, was going to resign while undergoing investigation for alleged misuse of funds. The implication was that his resignation was triggered by the investigation, and was an admission of guilt.[39] That was highly misleading. In fact, Helmer who was aged 73, had decided to retire because after the Leave vote in the EU Referendum held in May 2016, he regarded his work as done and was looking forward to retirement. Some months previously, EU officials had challenged two of his staff, Nick Tite and Paul Oakden, to prove that they had done the work for which they were claiming payment through EU expenses. That is a routine gambit used by the EU to harass and make life difficult for all MEPs who campaign against their country's membership. All UKIP MEPS are regularly subjected to this sort of inspection, while MEPS of other parties are not. Just before the Guardian story appeared, Nick Tite had been cleared, and no evidence of misconduct was ever found against the other staffer either. No money ever had to be paid back, and there was no connection between either case and Helmer's retirement.[40] Nevertheless, despite a refutation by Helmer on his personal blog, The Guardian never withdrew its slanderous allegations, and still has the story on its website. The story was copied from The Guardian to other sources where the allegations were made even more explicitly. Free newspaper The Metro ran a story with the headline "UKIP MEP quits over “misuse of £100,000 of EU money”. False allegations of disgrace were then spread widely, and never retracted. Helmer commented that The Guardian was motivated by "malice". Their story described him as having "controversial views on homosexuality". What they deemed "controversial views" was his defence of man-woman marriage and objection to threats and menace against those who wished to uphold it.[41]


The Dawkins inspired "atheist ranters" come out in force on Guardian pages. They hate organised religion with a zeal, they deride the faithful as mentally retarded, they gibber on about spaghetti monsters and sky pixies, as if such talk actually added anything meaningful to the debate. ... It is easy to picture these sycophantic drones smugly typing their intolerant bile, glowing with inner pride at their own rebellious contrariness.

Another Angry Voice, a socialist internet blogger.[42]

The Guardian has recently set up versions of its website in Australia and the United States; its website in the United Kingdom is one of the most popular in the country, and the majority of the site's views come from the United States.[43] The Guardian also runs the largest internet forum of any British newspaper in the form of Guardian Unlimited Talk.

The comments on their internet opinion blog, Comment is Free, are filtered by a moderator.

Political stance

The paper was described in the 1930s as "the Communist paper, The Manchester Guardian" by Lord Beaverbrook,[44] and even earlier in Victorian times by the communist Friedrich Engels as "an organ of the middle class",[45] and by Ted Scott as "a paper that will remain bourgeois to the last".[46]

Today in 2018, the Guardian is regarded as a far-left liberal paper, as well as being pro-abortion on demand, anti-Bush and anti-American, pro-Obama and critical of Tony Blair's support for the war in Iraq (and of New Labour in general). The newspaper's reputation as a platform for liberal and left-wing opinions has led to the use of the epithets "Guardian reader" and "Guardianista" for people holding such views,[47][48] or as a negative stereotype of such people as middle class, and politically correct.

Clark County fiasco

On October 13, 2004, the Guardian paper attempted to influence the election between George W. Bush and John Kerry in one particular Ohio county, Clark County.[49][50] They called it "Operation Clark County",[51] and the effort is generally regarded to have been a failure and a fiasco for the paper.[52][53][54][55][56]


Its columnists include the irritated atheist and agnostic comedians Charlie Brooker[57] and David Mitchell,[58][59] as well as Ariane Sherine,[60] who was responsible for setting up the atheist bus campaign, which propagated anti-Christian and pro-atheist slogans on buses in the United Kingdom, on behalf of the so-called British Humanist Association.

Given its openly left-wing stance, a blogger whose article appeared in The Guardian stated that the movie An American Carol was "propaganda masquerading as entertainment."[61]

Typographical errors

The paper's nickname The Grauniad (sometimes abbreviated as "Graun") originated with the satirical magazine Private Eye.[62] This anagram played on The Guardian's early reputation for frequent typographical errors, including misspelling its own name as The Gaurdian.[63]

See also


  1. The Observer began as a separate Sunday newspaper in 1791 and predates the Manchester Guardian by 30 years. Guardian Media Group acquired The Observer in 1993.
  4., 10 March 2016
  17. Frazin, Rachel (May 17, 2019). Guardian updates style: Climate change now 'climate emergency, crisis or breakdown'. The Hill. Retrieved May 17, 2019.
  18. Chasmar, Jessica (May 18, 2019). Guardian issues new style guidelines: 'Climate change' is now 'climate emergency'. The Washington Times. Retrieved May 18, 2019.
  19. Starr, Penny (October 18, 2019). UK’s Guardian Changes Style Rules to Reflect ‘Crisis’: ‘Global Heating,’ ‘Climate Emergency’. Breitbart News. Retrieved October 18, 2019.
  20. Williams, Thomas D. (May 20, 2019). Guardian: No Climate Skeptics, Only ‘Deniers’. Breitbart News. Retrieved June 13, 2019.
  21. Williams, Thomas D. (June 13, 2019). The Guardian to Enforce Pro-Abortion Language. Breitbart News. Retrieved June 13, 2019.
    See also:
  22. What The Guardian Won’t Report: Mahmoud Abbas Praises Late Mufti Of Jerusalem Who Collaborated With Hitler, CAMERA, Nov 24, 2024.
  23. Rachel O'Donoghue, The Guardian Prints Dubious Anti-Abbas Letter With Israel Libel, The Guardian, September 12, 2023.
  24. Adam Levick, Palestinian Activism Demands Checking Your Liberalism At The Door, Camera-UK, Sep 13, 2023.
  25. Ben Cohen, The 'Antisemitism Month' of Arab leaders, JNS, September 22, 2023.

    In the Middle East, antisemitism emanates from the corridors of power, walking hand in hand with corruption, political repression, torture, racism and other reprehensible features of authoritarian rule.

    There was a pertinent observation offered up in an opinion piece published last week by the French magazine Marianne.

    "There are kindness weeks and human rights days," wrote the author, Martine Gozlan, "but right now, we are in the middle of the antisemitism month of Arab leaders."

    Gozlan was referring to two outbursts by Arab leaders at both ends of the Middle East: Palestinian Authority head Mahmoud Abbas, who declared during a speech in August that the Nazi Holocaust had been provoked by the Jews' "social role"; and President Kais Saeid of Tunisia, who detected the hidden hand of international Zionism behind the floods that devastated neighboring Libya earlier this month.

    We live, of course, during a time when the mild taboo upon antisemitism that prevailed after World War II has been shattered, leaving tech billionaires, rock musicians and minor parliamentarians on left and right to articulate and enable antisemitism of the most venomous sort, all too often using social media to do so. But that realization shouldn't mask the distinctive origins and strategic purpose of the antisemitism in the Arab and wider Muslim worlds that was so neatly expressed by Abbas and Saied.

    It's important to remember the key difference, contextually, between Arab and Western antisemitism. In Western countries, as well as in Eastern Europe, Jews were a largely defenseless minority who were nonetheless assigned near mystic powers by an assortment of pogromists and ideologues. In the Middle East, while the same myths about disproportionate Jewish power have won over the masses, the Jews whom they confronted—and still do—are not powerless. These Jews are, through the existence of the State of Israel, empowered and sovereign—not only in possession of an army (and navy and air force), but one that is supremely capable of punishing the enemy and winning the wars it fights.

    The historic Arab failure to eliminate Israel from the map of nations is one key reason for the persistence of antisemitism in the rhetoric of some Arab leaders. In that regard, antisemitic ideology has played a useful dual role. Firstly, it allows Arab leaders to distract their publics from real issues like employment, social welfare, environmental degradation and education by pointing to "the Jews" as the ultimate source of their complaints. Secondly, the widespread acceptance of conspiracy theories over the extent of Jewish power enables Arab leaders to explain away, far more easily than is justified, their own failings.

    There is another significant difference between antisemitism in the West and outside it that further explains the Abbas and Saeid outbursts. In the West, much of the time, antisemitism is a feature of disgruntled social movements that go through troughs and peaks in terms of their popularity, but whose grasp on power is fleeting; rarely do they win a sustained engagement with genuine political power. But in the Middle East, antisemitism emanates from the corridors of power, walking hand in hand with corruption, political repression, torture, racism and other reprehensible features of authoritarian rule.

    Indeed, Abbas's response to the group of Palestinian intellectuals and influencers who publicly objected to his latest verbal assault on the Holocaust is a perfect example of this tendency. No matter that this group forthrightly condemned Israeli "occupation" and "apartheid" in its statement, thereby repeating antisemitic tropes about Israel even as they condemned antisemitism. They had the temerity to confront Abbas, the Palestinian caudillo, over his crude, cringeworthy antisemitism, and were therefore worthy of denunciation as the "shame of the nation." Mark as well how Abbas's antics perfectly fit the approach of Arab dictators towards the Jewish state; when you are unpopular and when your disapproval ratings are at an eye-watering 73%, as are his, point the finger at the real culprits.

    Saeid, meanwhile, operates with a similar logic. A conservative legal scholar who came to power in 2019 and has stalled Tunisia's hesitant progress towards democracy ever since, his remarks about the floods in Libya—the fruit of Storm "Daniel," a Jewish name that was chosen, said Saeid, because "the Zionist movement has infiltrated our minds"—are the second occasion this year that he has expressed antisemitic sentiment. On the first occasion, back in May, he told a meeting of Tunisia’s National Security Council that a deadly gun attack upon worshippers at a historic synagogue on the island of Djerba was not motivated by antisemitism. Mocking those "who talk about antisemitism when we are in the 21st century," Saeid accused those who raised the issue of antisemitism of wanting "to sow division to benefit from this discourse." The following day, in defiance of the actual historical record, he doubled down by pointing to supposed Jewish ingratitude, insisting that the Jews of Tunisia who survived the 1942-43 Nazi occupation did so because of the goodwill of their neighbors and not because the Allied armies trounced the Germans in North Africa. As well as being an antisemite, Saeid is also a racist who has whipped up feelings against black migrants from Sub-Saharan Africa. In a speech in February, he claimed that "hordes of irregular migrants" had come to Tunisia "with all the violence, crime and unacceptable practices that entails." He argued that this was an "unnatural" situation, part of a criminal plan designed to "change the demographic make-up" and turn Tunisia into "just another African country that doesn’t belong to the Arab and Islamic nations anymore." Following this rant, angry mobs attacked African migrants in several cities, while the police detained up to 1,000, deporting many of them.

    This Islamist and Arabist form of supremacism—with its disdain for Africa’s black majority population and its barely concealed loathing of Jews—is no less threatening than any other form of bigotry. As long as it is left unchecked and unchallenged, we can anticipate many more "Antisemitism Month" from Arab and Muslim national leaders.
  26. The Guardian attacks the Jews…. again], David Collier, Sep 19, 2023.
  35. E Jean Carroll's lawsuit against Trump is a victory for sexual assault survivors
  42. Richard Dawkins and the slave trade, Another Angry Voice.
  43. However, despite being a UK-based website, is a more popular in the United States and multiculturalist Sweden than in the UK.
    Statistics Summary for
  44. Crozier, W.P., edited by A.J.P.Taylor, Off The Record, London, 1973, p.259. ISBN 0-09-116250-5 "I found Beaverbrook with Walter Citrine, General Secretary of the TUC. He presented me to him (Citrine) as 'The Editor of the Communist paper, The Manchester Guardian.'"
  45. Engels, Friedrich, The Condition of the Working Class in England, Progress, 1973, p. 109.
  46. Ayerst, The Guardian, 1971, p. 471.
  47. Department of the Official Report (Hansard), House of Commons, Westminster (19 November 2001). Hansard 374:54 19 November 2001. Retrieved on 28 July 2009.
  48. "What the papers say", BBC News, 17 October 2005. 
  49. Euro-Socialists Say: Assassinate Bush, Operation Clark County, post-mortem, FrontPage Magazine
  50. My fellow non-Americans ...
  51. Dear Limey assholes
  52. Guardian calls it quits in Clark County fiasco, Daily Telegraph
  53. Did Guardian turn Ohio to Bush?, BBC
  54. Lady Antonia of Clark County, Why 'The Guardian' and its readers are still feeling the wrath of Ohio , The Independent
  55. US election 2008: remembering Guardian's Operation Clark County
  56. Brits' campaign backfires in Ohio, USA Today
  57. The Guardian - Charlie Brooker
  58. The Guardian - David Mitchell
  59. See: Atheism and depression
  60. The Guardian - Ariane Sherine
  61. Does An American Carol signal the rise of the Hollywood right? Guardian, October 1, 2008
  62. Sherrin, Ned. "Surely shome mishtake?", The Guardian, 16 December 2000. 
  63. Bernhard, Jim (2007). Porcupine, Picayune, & Post: how newspapers get their names. University of Missouri Press, 26–27. ISBN 0-8262-1748-6. Retrieved on 11 August 2013.