top of page

The 'Disappearance' That Brainwashed Britain

Written February 2024

Television is the mainstay of any good propaganda campaign. Almost every programme broadcast has some kind of purpose, designed to nudge the gullible public into a certain way of thinking. There is a reason they call them ‘programmes’. Some use subtle programming, like aspirational home improvement shows, convincing you that what you have is never good enough. Others, such as ‘documentaries’ which recount news stories that ‘gripped the nation’ are more obvious. A good rule of thumb: if a news story receives enormous mainstream press coverage, then there is probably more than a little whiff of dodgy about it. Especially when it is followed up several months later by a ‘documentary’.    


A recent much-anticipated Channel 5 offering, ‘Nicola Bulley: The Disappearance That Gripped Britain’ can be added to this vast catalogue of programmes for programming. Billed as a documentary, the piece instead feels like a lesson by rote of the official narrative of the case. Repeat a lie often enough, and it becomes the truth, so said a famous Nazi. By the end of a first viewing, most would be able to summarise the alleged facts of the case word by word.


In brief, the story that is weaved is that on 27th January 2023 Nicola Bulley, a 45-year-old Lancashire woman, vanished after dropping her kids at school, and taking her dog for a walk. Her mobile phone was discovered on a bench by the River Wyre, still connected to a work Teams call, and the dog was found alone, his harness removed and on the ground by the bench. Despite there being no evidence of such, the police quickly announced a working hypothesis that Nicola had accidentally fallen in the river and drowned. Nicola had allegedly been suffering with the menopause, and had had some recent struggles with alcohol. A few weeks later, on 19th February, her body was supposedly discovered in the river, and the incident was ruled an accidental drowning, confirming the rushed-to theory of the police.


Anyone who was not living under a rock in those early months of 2023 will remember that the case attracted wall-to-wall coverage in the media, and very quickly it was impossible to ignore the gaping holes in the official narrative. How had the police ruled out foul play so quickly, despite the lack of any evidence that she had been involved in an accident? Why were there so few photographs of the missing woman, and why did the few that were released look so odd? Why was there just one friend interviewed, and why was this friend so involved with the search, almost directing it at some points, if her prolific television interviews were to be believed? Why were the Lancashire Constabulary press briefings so peculiar, with experienced police officers looking like rookies, like deer caught in the headlights?


In the Channel 5 documentary, the story is narrated with all the drama of a made-for-tv movie across the first two segments, and so tight is the script of the official narrative, that this is achieved by interspersing sentences from each of the ten talking heads, as if they are reading one line each from the same story book. This compliant and obedient cast is made up of seven reporters from various mainstream outlets, and three so-called experts. So, while one is shown saying something like: ‘Nicola dropped the kids to school’, they then cut to another who continues the story with: ‘then she took the dog, Willow, for a walk’. Do you see how this goes? No questioning, no curiosity. Just repetition of the ‘facts’ we are supposed to accept.


So, who are the group of esteemed ‘reporters’ excitedly narrating their parts in this play? Unsurprisingly, the man with a great face for radio, Nick Ferrari, has topped up his vast personal fortune by agreeing to appear. When he is not spouting nonsense on his breakfast show on LBC, or making a substantial dent in the This Morning sofa, espousing his sickening views on the unvaccinated, he pops up on programmes such as this, enthusiastically embracing his role as government propagandist and trousering the fee.  He makes some fascinating contributions to this particular Channel 5 pantomime, including comparing the Nicola Bulley disappearance as being like ‘Columbo or Midsomer Murders’. Hmm, like a made-up drama, you say? The contemptable, Daddy Pig-shaped vaccine pusher can’t wait to get to his real purpose later on in the show, when, dripping with disdain, he gets to talk about ‘conspiracy theories starting to swirl’, and ‘amateur sleuths’.


There’s also Clare Fallon of Channel 4 News, whose animated narration is really quite theatrical. She also has some pure gold nuggets to add, such as when, without a hint of irony or suspicion, she declares that ‘hundreds go missing and the vast, vast majority don’t get such a big police response’. Well quite, Clare. Another reason this case has more than a whiff of fishy about it. With little self-awareness of how much she is revealing, she goes on to offer another corking observation, that ‘there are murders that get less attention than the disappearance of Nicola Bulley!’ Indeed!


Another interesting character to pop up is ex-detective turned media crime expert, Mark Williams-Thomas. Like old Nick, Mark is a regular on the This Morning sofa, commentating on all matters crime related. However, Williams-Thomas’ credentials for seeking truth leave something to be desired. He is touted as the man who revealed to the world that Jimmy Savile was a massive paedophile, after he made a documentary about it in 2012. Given that we have all learned since that many, many people knew about Savile and his debauched activities, and had openly spoken about it over the years, I wonder how it was Williams-Thomas who was chosen to be the one to get the kudos for ‘revealing’ the story. He is also heavily involved in the protection of the McCanns after the disappearance of their daughter, Madeleine. He conducted a 27-page review of the case, at the end of which he concluded that the McCanns did not ‘have anything to do with her disappearance’. This is contrary to not only the official Portuguese Police investigation, but also the masses of available evidence which points in one direction only. Damn all those ‘amateur sleuths’, eh. More recently, our esteemed expert, Williams-Thomas, has made a film that essentially exonerates disgraced Tory peer Michelle Mone and her husband, who have been accused of making £203m selling dodgy PPE during the ‘pandemic’. Given that the film was funded by the couple themselves, it is hard to imagine Williams-Thomas coming to any other conclusion than ‘not guilty, gov’. As he also spends much of the introduction of the film propping up the shaky government narrative of there actually having been a pandemic, which is necessary if we are to believe that the PPE contracts were required in the first place, we can safely assume that his investigative skills are ‘for sale’.  So, it was not a surprise to see Williams-Thomas in the Nicola Bulley show, pontificating on the whys and wherefores, while rigidly sticking to the official narrative.


As the show continues, after the many repetitions of the official story which narrate the slow-motion dramatic recreations of the scenes, the mood changes in segment three, as it now knuckles down to the real purpose of the programme: to convince us all that the ‘amateur sleuths’ damaged the investigation and caused immense distress to all those involved. The music becomes mournful, and the talking heads begin recounting the various horror stories, of Facebook discussions and Tweets, of ‘internet detectives’ daring to turn up at the scene and look for evidence and clues, and YouTubers and Tik-Tokers who had the audacity to make videos which questioned the dubious official narrative.


Alongside those pesky amateur sleuths, Peter Faulding, a world-leading confined space rescue and forensic search specialist, with well-documented success in recovering bodies from water, is subjected to the full hit-job treatment. During the initial phase of the investigation, Peter offered his services, including his substantial sonar-searching kit, for free. However, rather than embracing this generous offer, it seemed to put a few noses out of joint in the Lancashire Constabulary. Could it be that this unexpected boon to the investigation in fact disrupted the playing out of the official story? Faulding, after a thorough search using his expert techniques, announced categorically that Nicola’s body was not in the river. His confident statement threw a grenade into the police theory that Nicola HAD gone into the river, a theory which they had somewhat strangely, and against usual investigative protocol, run with from very early in the investigation, despite there being zero evidence to support it. Nick Ferrari uses his most disdainful tone as he repeatedly describes Peter Faulding not as an expert, or a professional, but instead as ‘this guy’, and, ‘loquacious’, just to really make sure the viewers are not tempted to question how such a consummate professional ruled out there being a body in the river, when several weeks later, a body was indeed found, in the very area his team had searched.  


During the search for Nicola, a ‘close friend’, Emma White, was all over the television, always with a somewhat distasteful aura of enjoyment about her five minutes in the spotlight. You could not move for footage of her mug (she bore a remarkably close resemblance to the missing woman, oddly). The Channel 5 documentary, however, notably shows just one or two quick snippets of Nicola’s BFF, which struck me as very strange indeed. Could it be that, with hindsight, it was realised that she is less than believable as the grieving, awfully concerned friend? There was also the very odd coincidence of Paul Ansell, Nicola’s partner, having been tagged in a Facebook post back in 2021, from a casting agency, looking for an actor for a ‘major television campaign’. So very many peculiarities in this case.


As the documentary draws to a close, we are again treated to portly Nick Ferrari making the very directive statement that ‘Social media, they have to learn from this!’. And Jane Moore, from the Sun assuring us that ‘this was a real person, a real family’, with a heavy need to persuade. Our friend Clare Fallon gives the game away again by telling us that ‘they went through much more evidence in the inquest than in most’. Of course, ultimately, the ruling of accidental death was given with the hope that any questioning will be shut down. But the opposite is true. They allude to the Fitbit that Nicola was supposedly wearing, and note a spike in her heart rate which is apparently the moment they believe she entered the water. Case closed. What they don’t give is a single explanation as to WHY Nicola ended up in the water.


So, what is the end game of a psychological operation such as this? There are a few possibilities, and it could be a combination of several. Firstly, vulnerable little menopausal women should go get that medication! Do not risk becoming drowned, victim of your uncontrollable hormones and addiction to Chardonnay. Pop some pills! Big Pharma has your back. It is also worth noting that since Nicola Bulley’s apparent tragic demise, two further women have been reported as missing and subsequently been found dead in rivers: Gaynor Lord, 55, and Lucy Charles, 39, both clearly of possible menopausal age. Odd, that.  


Or, how about tracking? She was already wearing a Fitbit, which gave some intelligence on her vital statistics, but how much less painful it would have been if Paul could have simply hopped onto his laptop, or attended a locating centre, and had them scan to find out where his errant Mrs had got to.


And, of course, last but not least, how convenient for the pushers of the so-called ‘online safety bill’, the bill which will shut down free speech as we know it, that the pesky amateur sleuths got so busy. Now there is supposedly a good reason to push the bill through, so that this kind of thing can never happen again! Damn those free-thinking, questioning ghouls, who refuse to buy into the narrative so conveniently provided for them!


Any or all of the above motives, amongst others, could be at play here.


Whatever the truth behind the Nicola Bulley case, we can only speculate. But what is certain is that the official story is a sham. This documentary was aired just around the time that Richard D. Hall, an investigator of great talent and courage, has been dragged through the gutter press for daring to challenge the official narratives of many cases, most recently the Manchester Arena incident. The court case against him is a blatant message to ‘amateur sleuths’ to desist, or risk reputational ruin. And yet, Hall’s work is detailed, thorough, professional and highly enlightening. Richard Hall was also victim of an earlier smear campaign by Marianna Spring, of BBC infamy – you can read my article about her here. The irony of Spring doorstepping Richard D. Hall, so she could have a pop at him for doorstepping alleged victims of the Manchester incident, is, unsurprisingly, lost on her and her handlers.


Be under no illusions. Television and mainstream media do not exist to inform the public, but to deceive. And those critical thinkers who dare to question the lies are under attack.


To end, there is one last sad and strange factoid about the Nicola Bulley saga. Peter Lawson, one of the leading investigators for the Lancashire Constabulary, and one who, in my opinion looked extremely awkward and uncomfortable during the press briefings, ‘died suddenly of natural causes’ just a short time after the investigation ended. Curiouser and curiouser, one might say.  

If you have enjoyed this article, please do check out some others on the site (by clicking here), which you might find of interest. Please feel free to share on any socials. And if you are able, please do consider making a donation - any amount helps support my writing, and is gratefully received! Thank you x


Recent Posts

See All


bottom of page