Latest / UK Column Radio / UK Column News Podcast 9th September 2024

Transcript

UK Column News Podcast 9th September 2024 · UK Column Radio

0:08
Speaker 1: Good afternoon. Today is Monday, the ninth of September twenty
0:13
twenty four, just after one o'clock. Welcome to UK column News.
0:16
I'm your host, Brian Gerrish, delighted to be joined by
0:19
Alex Thompson from the Netherlands and Ben Rubin speaking to
0:23
us from London. Well, we're going to kick off the
0:26
news today with following a little bit of discussion in
0:29
the team. One of the things our audience is saying
0:32
to us constantly is what is happening? And perhaps one
0:36
of the big things to say to our audience today
0:39
is that it is certain that we are no longer
0:43
in what was the normal historical political environment. We are
0:48
seeing something very very different. It's unfolding very quickly, and
0:52
understanding that new environment is key to understanding all of
0:56
the troubles happening in UK and indeed in other ways
1:00
countries and the USA. So let's just kick off with
1:04
where there's always money and that's for war, and just
1:07
want to remind people that Kirk Stamer of course is
1:11
happy that we're still giving money away for Ukraine. Three
1:16
billion a year has been committed until twenty thirty thirty one.
1:22
So if we're worried about winter fuel payments. No problem
1:26
with money for Ukraine, but people in difficult circumstances, elderly
1:31
people in UK can whistle Dixie as far as our
1:36
new Prime Minister is concerned. But when we go looking
1:39
at Ukraine, of course I pay attention to the Propaganda Ministry.
1:44
This is X for the UK Ministry of Defense. I'm
1:48
actually not going to comment on what they're saying about
1:50
the war in Ukraine at the moment, except as a
1:53
general summary. The Curse Pocket is now clearly under control
1:57
of the Russians and is Old Lee a killing field
2:01
for the Ukrainians. Meanwhile, the Russian advances consider on the
2:05
can continue on the battlefield, unreported largely by the BBC
2:10
and Western media. But one thing that I did pick
2:14
up on when I was looking at that AX page,
2:16
and we can just pop that one back on screen,
2:19
was this recommendation here that I might like to be
2:24
looking at Anton Gerrishenko. And I was intrigued by this
2:29
particular gentleman. I went to have a look and here
2:32
is his ex account. It says Ukrainian Patriot Advisor to
2:38
Internal Affairs Minister, twenty twenty one, twenty twenty three Institute
2:44
of the Founder, Institute of the Future, Founder support, volunteer translators. Now,
2:52
I was interested with the Institute of the Future because
2:55
I was well aware. Sorry, we'd just highlight that little
2:58
bit there. It is there on score, I was already
3:03
aware of Institute for the Future. But this is just
3:07
a little bit more from the Kiev post on Anton himself.
3:12
Pretty aggressive stuff. Putin's death will end the war. But
3:16
I was fascinated as to how he could be the
3:19
founder of Institute of the Future. It seemed remarkably close
3:25
to this organization, Institute for the Future, which is an
3:31
offshoot of the Rand Corporation. What it says about itself
3:35
is that it's bringing people together to learn the tools
3:38
of foresight in order to make the future today. And
3:43
then it talks about everything from community leaders, strategic leaders
3:47
in large organizations, and of course it's also going through
3:51
political tool sets in order to achieve transformative possibilities. Now,
4:00
interesting thing about this organization is you can say to yourself,
4:03
what is it doing. Is it forecasting the future or
4:07
is it helping to create the future. Let's have a
4:11
listen to this, lady, one of the key psychologists.
4:16
Speaker 2: Thank you so much. Thank you Riches, and thank you
4:19
for inviting me. I'm honored to speak with you, as
4:25
I just love said. The Institute of the Future has
4:29
been around since nineteen sixty eight, so we're actually fifty
4:32
five years old, and I've been at the Institute for
4:35
twenty five years. So most a lot of my professional
4:40
life I spent learning techniques for thinking about the future.
4:44
So what I want to do today is not so
4:47
much tell you what the world is going to look
4:49
like or what trends are out there, but mostly about
4:53
how do you think as a futureist? What are some
4:56
of the tools, what are some of the methodologists that
4:59
we have learned in the last fifty five years. And
5:02
it's particularly I think appropriate we see a lot of
5:07
interest in futures thinking in the future's work right now,
5:10
because it seems like every day today almost we wake
5:14
up and something unthinkable is happening or has happened. You know,
5:19
We've had a pandemic that the like of which we
5:23
have not seen in one hundred years. We have a
5:28
war in the middle of Europe, which from too many
5:32
people was really unthinkable. I'm sure that people in Ukraine
5:38
and other places foresaw the possibility of hostilities with Russia,
5:44
probably especially since the occupation of Crimea. Again, this kind
5:50
of an event that seems like a black Swan event,
5:53
but very likely.
5:58
Speaker 1: So apologies that the ladies name is Marina Gorbis, and
6:02
what she says some interesting things. Nobody could really have
6:06
understood what was going to happen in Ukraine. I'm going
6:08
to challenge that when she mentions black Swan events, she's
6:12
talking about events that come out of nowhere that nobody
6:15
knows the coming, nobody predicted, and she's saying she disagrees
6:19
with that. So let's listen to what she says in
6:22
this second little clip.
6:26
Speaker 2: We have a candidate for president in the United States
6:29
right now who has almost eighty indictments against him and
6:35
who spends a lot of time in court, as you're
6:38
probably seeing, which also seems to be unthinkable. And some people,
6:43
if you read NA, seem to leave and his book,
6:46
he calls it black Swan events. So Blackswan events, in
6:50
his interpretation, are these unthinkable, unforeseen events that have huge consequences.
7:00
And I kind of don't see these as black Swan events.
7:05
Are not a big believer in those because in many
7:08
ways you could not predict, you could not see the
7:12
exact timing or the exact form that these events would take,
7:17
but you could certainly see things moving in that direction.
7:22
You could see that these things are very likely, and
7:26
you could probably see them decades ago. They're events that
7:30
are decades in the making. So in two thousand and eight,
7:34
the Institute actually published a scenario of a large scale
7:40
respiratory pandemic called ARTS ARTS a huge respiratory distress syndrome.
7:47
And it wasn't that. And we really looked at what
7:51
is the reactions of people, how do people cope, what
7:54
strategy will they use, what will be the impact, who
7:57
will be mostly impacted? And we saw a lot of
8:00
these possibilities that we saw in real life almost ten
8:04
decades late, a decade later. And it isn't that we
8:09
were so prescient, right. It wasn't that we had some
8:12
crystal ball or we were so great about predictions that
8:19
we saw this, But actually, if you talk to experts
8:23
and if you look at the data, it was kind
8:25
of inevitable. If you talk to epidemiologists and if you
8:29
talk to development people and economists, we could see that
8:33
people are increasingly moving into areas where they're intersecting and
8:39
interacting with wildlife, and transmission of these kinds of various
8:44
viruses and diseases is more and more likely. So actually
8:49
you could really foresee that the possibility of a major
8:53
pandemic is much more likely. We just didn't know exactly
8:57
when or how or where it's going to originate, but
9:01
that possibility, so I don't think of it as a
9:04
Blackswan event.
9:08
Speaker 1: So it seems to me pretty confused.
9:10
Speaker 3: Lady.
9:10
Speaker 1: They're a good organization. They're looking into the future, but
9:13
they can't really predict it. But a lot of people
9:16
are predicting it, and they managed to predict a major
9:19
pandemic event. But the war in Ukraine was well, we
9:22
just don't know where it came from. But let's put
9:25
up on screen the Rand document. I think it's twenty eighteen,
9:28
or may be wrong on that. But what is it
9:30
about overextending and unbalancing Russia? This whole scenario from the
9:36
Rand Corporation is about attacking Russia and putting Russia in
9:43
a stress position. So is it any wonder that the
9:46
war took place. Let's have a look at this little
9:49
video clip with Senator Lindsay Graham talking about Ukraine.
9:56
Speaker 4: I'm your presidents of Lensky. I am such a what
10:00
you and your country are done. You're trying to stop
10:02
the Russians. So if we don't have to find them.
10:04
They don't want any American troops. They just need the
10:06
weapons to free their country of a terrible invasion. They're
10:10
sitting on treeion dollars worth of minerals that could be
10:13
good to our economy. So I want to keep helping
10:15
our friends in Utraine. We can win this. They need
10:18
our help, yes, we need, and we have already.
10:23
Speaker 5: The biggest help is the support of American people and
10:26
support of our friends. Thanks to Lindsey and his cup colleagues,
10:31
to congressmen and centers from the United States, thanks for
10:35
this support. My body is in support. Thank you so much.
10:39
Speaker 1: Peace is coming, yes soon, so trillions of dollars of
10:46
assets that the Americans need. But don't worry. Peace is coming. Well,
10:51
maybe it's not. Let's just remind ourselves of David Cameron
10:54
in front of Congress a little while ago, to.
10:59
Speaker 6: Me argue that it is extremely good value for money
11:03
for the United States and for others. Perhaps for about
11:06
five or ten percent of your defense budget, almost half
11:09
of Russia's pre war, military equipment has been destroyed without
11:13
the loss for single American life. This is an investment
11:16
in United States security. So that's what I would say
11:21
on the issue of legal advice. So I think it
11:23
is an important principle that legal advice is not published,
11:29
that ministers consider it and act in a way that
11:33
is consistent with it. We answer questions about it as
11:36
I am now, as I will be in the House
11:38
of Lords, I'm sure next week, and I've got.
11:40
Speaker 7: A question.
11:46
Speaker 5: Yep.
11:47
Speaker 1: So there we are in the House saying good value
11:50
the war is good value for money because your troop's
11:54
not being hurt. Meanwhile, the Ukrainians are dying to the
11:57
last man. So if that's the with Cameron, where's starmer Well.
12:02
I'm just going to remind our audience today that in
12:04
the background, one individual is digging very deeply into matters
12:09
of child abuse to find that the Home Office is
12:11
labeling them as vexatious because the Home Office doesn't want
12:15
to release information about what went wrong in some of
12:19
the child abuse cases and the grooming gangs. And the
12:23
particular individual sent me this letter which he's obtained. It's
12:28
Tony Lloyd, the Police and Crime Commissioner talking about Cyril Smith,
12:32
but asking why despite eighty pages of information on far
12:38
but the police Keir Stalmer took no action. So can
12:42
we trust in my view, is we can't. Will the
12:45
wars continue? Yes, because these other agencies are fomenting them. Ben,
12:51
Let's bring you in. What part of the picture of
12:54
you got on this?
12:57
Speaker 7: Hi? Everybody great to be here.
13:01
Speaker 3: So last week we talked about the rise of the
13:06
Khmer Rouge and I made some comparisons, drew some parallels
13:10
between what happened in Cambodia in the mid seventies and
13:13
some of the things that we're seeing happening in our
13:15
own society today. Now, the Khmer Rouge is was a
13:21
radical Marxist movement who seized power and killed over a
13:27
third of the Cambodian population. And this resonated with a
13:32
lot of people, but also a few people a smaller
13:35
number felt that this was an inappropriate comparison to draw. Now,
13:40
I want to build on this because I think it's
13:42
important and it really underpins everything that we talk about
13:45
here on a weekly basis. Because I'm not suggesting for
13:48
a second that the exact same thing is happening here.
13:52
What I'm saying is that there are parallels. We know
13:56
that history doesn't repeat itself. According to Mark Twain, often rhymes,
14:01
and I can hear rhymes happening around me on a
14:05
constant basis. I'm not saying that this is the exact
14:09
same ideological position that Star was taking, although we do
14:13
know that he is a communist. It's something else, it's
14:15
something new. It is an emergent phenomenon, and we're developing
14:19
the language to describe it. And two words that I've
14:23
arrived at that I think are useful.
14:25
Speaker 7: And I'm not.
14:25
Speaker 3: Saying that this is a definitive definition, but I like
14:30
this idea of woke fascism, woke intersectional Marxism and fascism,
14:37
the integration of the market and the state, and I
14:41
see these two things coming together. I believe they have
14:44
come together, and this is the ideological platform that is
14:49
driving everything around us. And I subtitle this as an
14:52
unholy alliance between money and power. Now you can think
14:57
of it a little bit like this, and we can
14:59
reach back to antiquity. And Alex will no doubt enjoy
15:03
this and probably laugh at my terrible attempt to talk
15:06
about the chimera, the fire breathing beast of Greek mythology,
15:11
with the body in the head of a lion, the
15:13
head of a goat attached to its toolso and a
15:15
snake as a tail. It's not easily explained, it's rarely
15:19
seen in nature, but it is extremely dangerous and for me,
15:22
that's what woke fascism is.
15:24
Speaker 7: Yea.
15:25
Speaker 3: So let's dig into these little bit First of all,
15:28
let's look at woke and let's hear from James Lindsay
15:32
from New Discourse talking at the European Parliament sometime early
15:37
last year.
15:40
Speaker 8: Woke is Marxism. It's a very provocative statement. It's something
15:46
you will certainly hear. It is not that it is different,
15:49
and the professors and the philosophers will spend a large
15:53
amount of time explaining to you why no, no, it's
15:56
about economics when it's Marxism, this is social, this is cultural,
15:59
this is different. It's not different. I need you to
16:02
think biologically for one moment, and I don't mean about
16:04
your bodies. We could do that, that's a different topic.
16:08
I want you to think how we organize plants and
16:11
animals when we study them. They're species. But above species,
16:15
there are the genus of the animals.
16:18
Speaker 7: So you think, like.
16:18
Speaker 8: The cats, all the cats, but you have tigers, you
16:21
have lions, you have house cats, you have whatever, leopards,
16:25
many different kinds of cats. If we think of Marxism
16:29
as a genus of ideological thought, then classical economic Marxism
16:35
is a species. Radical feminism is a species in this
16:40
same genus. Critical race theory is a genus, or sorry,
16:44
a species in this genus. Queer theory is a species
16:50
in this genus. Postcolonial theory that's plaguing Europe is a
16:55
species in this genus, and they have something that binds
16:58
them together called inter sectionality, that makes them treated as
17:02
if they are all one thing. But the logic is Marxist.
17:09
Speaker 3: So the dominant cultural narrative surrounding us, certainly has been
17:13
put forward by the left, is fundamentally Marxist. And so
17:18
we're constantly being talked to about race, gender, sexual orientation.
17:24
All of these are subcategories of Marxist thoughts. And I
17:29
strongly recommend going to watch that video. You can find
17:32
it on YouTube. James Lindsay talking at the European Parliament.
17:35
It's about half an hour long. He does an exceptional
17:38
job of defining woke and defining the danger that it
17:42
potentially presents. And he also within that piece goes on
17:46
to talk about the way that the Marxists have essentially
17:50
abandoned the prolatariat in order to go into partnership with
17:55
international capital, right, which is a really important development that
18:00
again explains a lot of what we're seeing around us.
18:03
Now we've talked about woke, intersectional Marxism, let's talk about fascism.
18:08
The integration of the market and the state. And as Mussolini,
18:12
the man who invented fascism, described it, it should more
18:16
appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of
18:20
state and corporate power. And this is the global policy
18:24
platform of choice. Let's have a look at the World
18:27
Economic Forum, Keir Starmer's favorite place to hang out. How
18:30
to harness the transformative potential of public private partnerships. Where
18:35
else have we seen this?
18:36
Speaker 7: It's not new.
18:38
Speaker 3: Blair talked about it in the nineties. Clinton talked about
18:41
it in the nineties. The idea of third way politics,
18:44
a strong state with dynamic markets working together in an
18:49
integrated fashion.
18:50
Speaker 7: That is fascism right.
18:51
Speaker 3: This pamphlet here, written by Blair from nineteen ninety eight,
18:55
you can see in the bottom left hand corner there
18:58
just slightly obscured that this was published by the Fabian Society,
19:02
the Fabian Society, the Global Socialist or the organization that's
19:06
been pursuing a global socialist superstate since eighteen eighty four.
19:10
So I think that you can also think of woke
19:13
fascism as Fabianism. I believe that those terms are interchangeable.
19:17
And where do we see fabianism everywhere? Half of the
19:21
Cabinet are Fabians. Keir Starmer is a Fabian, Tony Blair
19:25
is a Fabian.
19:26
Speaker 7: I could go on.
19:27
Speaker 3: Where do we see these philosophies, these ideologies, these positions
19:32
appearing in public policy? What we can already see it
19:35
in the Demos report that I talked about a couple
19:38
of weeks ago, Only we can Save the State. Where Demos,
19:41
which is a Marxist think tank, is talking about standing
19:45
up to the big forces of development capital and working
19:48
with them as equals. Right, we are now equals with
19:52
development capital. The state is working hand in glove with
19:57
capital business markets. How are they doing it through forums
20:04
such as this? This is Ey the global consulting firm,
20:06
who are a strategic partner of the World Economic Forum,
20:09
hosting Kids Starmer and Rachel Reeves and other shadow Cabinet
20:12
members at the start of this.
20:14
Speaker 7: Year to introduce them to forty.
20:15
Speaker 3: CEOs of major European businesses that they are going to
20:19
be working with when they assume power later in the year.
20:22
Which is where we are today. Where else do we
20:25
see it happening. Well, Starmer, on his grand tour of
20:29
European powers over the past few weeks, met with Simon
20:33
Harris the Irish Tea shock over the weekend. They're talking
20:37
about delivering growth and prosperity for both of our countries.
20:41
And let's hear very quickly what Simon Harris is all about.
20:47
Speaker 9: There's a lot of talk at the moment about going
20:49
back to normal, and we all want to go back
20:51
to normal in terms of the things we miss in life. Well,
20:53
from a public policy point of view, we're never going
20:55
back to normal. We need to get to a new normal.
20:58
We do need to truly build back better.
21:03
Speaker 3: Build that better. Klaus Schwab, World Economic Forum. This is
21:07
what Starman is up to. This is what he's doing,
21:09
and it's imbued every single part of the state, every
21:13
single part of the market. He was in Germany over
21:17
This was about two weeks ago, I think. Apologies, I
21:19
forget the exact date. Meeting with ilof Schultz, meeting also
21:25
with Siemens, so you can see there.
21:27
Speaker 7: Excuse me, I've.
21:28
Speaker 3: Jumped ahead slightly. So he's doing the state bit, then
21:32
he's doing the market bit. Siemens is a World Economic
21:36
Forum partner. They're delivering all the technology and also a
21:39
bunch of the leadership for Great British Energy, which Ed
21:43
Milliband is extremely excited about. He says it's going to
21:46
be the envy of the world, just like our NHS,
21:48
which basically means that we give loads of money to
21:50
the government who then keep a chunk of it, spend
21:54
some of it to deliver services to us, and then
21:56
tell us that we're getting a good deal.
21:58
Speaker 7: This is a scam.
21:59
Speaker 3: That is what the public private marketplace actually looks like.
22:03
And if you complain about it, you can expect to
22:06
be slandered, demonized, locked up and subjected to increasingly serious
22:13
acts of violence. And that is the situation that I
22:18
see in front of me here in the UK and
22:20
further afield.
22:23
Speaker 1: Ben, thank you very much for that. Well. I think
22:25
the picture is coming to the surface pretty quickly, Alex Slace,
22:28
welcome you to today's news. And of course, if the
22:31
state is going to have absolute power, it must have
22:34
control of the legal system.
22:37
Speaker 7: Indeed, it must.
22:38
Speaker 9: As I was listening to Ben there, I was reminded
22:41
of the first instance of the Third Way being adumbrated
22:45
in politics well before the nineties, with Anthony Giddons telling
22:48
Blair and Clinton's advisor telling him to put it into practice.
22:52
It was a postwar Nazi continuation strategy best written about
22:55
by Joseph Farrell. The third Way, in their conception, was
22:59
keeping the Americans and the Soviets out of the picture
23:02
while a corporatto fascist system was redeveloped in Europe. And
23:06
as regards what Ben just closed with on the National
23:08
Health Service, I think Thomas Sowell, the famous American commentator
23:11
said it best. He said, it amazes me that people
23:14
don't think it's talking about America. People don't think they
23:17
can afford healthcare, but they do think that they can
23:20
afford healthcare plus a massive inefficient government bureaucracy to run it.
23:23
And that says just what that meme bench ed was about. Now,
23:26
the legal society, particularly the jurisdiction of England and Wales,
23:30
as we have several jurisdictions in the United Kingdom. The
23:33
in house journal for English and Welsh solicitors, the Law
23:36
Society Gazette, reports that there is now in consultation period
23:40
until the end of November, but it is likely to
23:42
go through. There is now going to be an imposition
23:47
a requirement on the barristers, that is, the trial lawyers,
23:51
the attorneys in this jurisdiction to go beyond not treating
23:55
anyone unfairly, which is currently what they have to sign
23:58
up to in Articule eight of their Code of Practice.
24:00
But they have positively to go for fascism as Ben
24:05
has just particularly the wocism. They have to go for
24:08
DEI diversity and inclusion not further defined. Of course, the
24:12
same journal is rather gleeful in reporting this apparent victory.
24:16
I would suggest a pyrrhic victory for the legal system
24:19
of England and Wales against the Yorkshire lawyer Lois Yvonne Bayliss.
24:24
Lois Bayliss, who runs a practice called Broad Yorkshire Law,
24:28
was brought to a solicitous disciplinary tribunal because she wrote
24:33
not acting under instructions from a client, but out of
24:35
concern for children, and using her legal knowledge, she wrote
24:38
to a number of schools pointing out to them, this
24:41
is the keyboard bit that you will not read in
24:42
the Law Society Casette. What she pointed out to them
24:45
was that there was no possible way during the inoculation
24:49
campaign for COVID nineteen in schools that informed content consent
24:53
the legal requirement going all the way back to Nuremberg,
24:57
informed content could not possibly be required. That was not
25:00
proven at her disciplinary tribunal to be a misleading statement,
25:04
no matter what is claimed about it. Last week Charles
25:07
Mallett brought out an excellent interview with Wills Harrison, who's
25:11
leaving the legal profession in England and Wales, an interview
25:13
called the Wonky Scales of Justice, and there the same
25:16
point was made that the SRA an unfortunate acronym for
25:19
those of us who know its other meaning, but the
25:21
Solicitors Regulation Authority had become welded at the hip with power.
25:26
It's the legal reflex of what we've just heard about
25:29
in the corporate world, knowing where which side your bread
25:31
buttered and imposing the will of power upon your own profession,
25:35
which are supposed to be there to represent or regulators
25:38
they now call it. It's supposed to be representation ultimately,
25:41
so do listen to that in order to understand what's
25:44
going on here with the SRA. What's going on here
25:47
in detail? Then well it will be in the show
25:49
notes as usual. This is the letter from the beginning
25:52
of twenty twenty two which Lois Bayliss wrote from her
25:56
practice to schools with regard to the COVID imm and
25:59
Isation Service visits, pointing out simply that they owe a
26:02
legal obligation to each child in their care. Again, this
26:06
wasn't overturned in a very questionable couple of points of nicety.
26:11
It was upheld at this disciplinary tribunal that Lois Bayliss
26:16
had breached some requirements of her profession, which leaves her
26:19
with the possibility of being stung for a very large
26:22
legal bill. But the point that she's keen to emphasize
26:26
is that it was not found to be wrong in science,
26:28
in fact or in law that the informed consent could
26:32
not be obtained by the schools in this jab drive.
26:36
That is really the victory, the hill that she was
26:39
prepared to die on. She has put out a statement
26:42
I won't read it in full. People can freeze it
26:44
to find out what's going on here. But she's keen
26:48
to emphasize that for the sake of the children. And
26:50
this was cynically quoted in the headline of the Law
26:52
Society Gauzette, I did it for the children in scare quotes.
26:55
But you know, good on her for going that far
26:57
and saying that she put this on record. She was
27:00
being threatened, but it was not proven that what she'd
27:04
written was misleading or anything else. She was accused of
27:07
damaging public trust and confidence in her profession, which is
27:10
often how dissident doctors are stung by their regulators in
27:13
various Western jurisdictions. And at the end of it, you
27:15
can see that the date is the fifth of September,
27:17
so just at the end of last week. She says
27:18
she still has to find thirty two and a half
27:20
thousand pounds, and she has to pay her own costs
27:23
around sixty thousand pounds. But it's all worth it if
27:26
even one child was not jabbed with a harmful substance
27:29
because of it. So with no reservation whatsoever, I share
27:33
it will be in the show notes her fundraiser, as
27:37
you can see she's at the halfway point in raising
27:38
one hundred thousand that she needs to cover the likely
27:42
or confirmed legal expenses she now faces as a result
27:45
of this. Now, Mike Yeden, in sharing this, was keen
27:48
to point out that this shows that you can't put
27:52
any incriminating evidence on record against the system. And I
27:55
take his points. She was stymied at every turn, but
27:59
I don't think it was ill advised of her to
28:01
face up to this disciplinary tribunal and to flush out
28:04
the admission that there was nothing misleading about the points
28:09
she made about informed consent, because that's the bedrock of
28:13
the legal profession, of course, is to ensure that fundamental
28:16
human rights, as they're now called are honoured. What's going
28:19
on then with different parts of the United Kingdom? Well,
28:23
Fox News in the USA has picked up that, in
28:26
a continuation of what Charles Mallett has been reporting from
28:29
Birmingham and Bristol, of Birmingham and Brighton in England, we
28:33
now have a spread even to Northern Ireland of people
28:36
being arrested for silent prayer about outside abortion clinics, in
28:39
this case the Causeway Hospital in Coleraine, County, Antrim. A
28:43
lady called Claire Brennan there. I haven't seen much domestic
28:46
coverage of this while we stay in Northern Ireland in
28:49
County from Manor Southwest College there. I think based in
28:52
Enniskillen has a point has announced to its sixth forms
28:56
as we used to call them in old speak, the
28:58
school leaving two years, that they're invited to participate in
29:01
a carbon literacy program. I won't read this out either,
29:05
but it looks like you get brownie points with your
29:07
future employers if you have joined the carbon jugend while
29:10
you are still at school. That's how I read it.
29:13
Where is it all leading well? A popular account called
29:17
Kunley or Kunley Drug Path has been pointing out some
29:20
old nineteen eighties clips by the Singaporean Prime Minister Li Quanu,
29:25
the strong man of that city state as it catapulted
29:28
itself to first world status in the latter half of
29:30
the twentieth century after independence from Britain, and it's popular
29:34
in a certain sphere of the dissident circles to say, well,
29:37
he was quite right. He needed to intervene and interfere
29:40
with people's private lives in the way that Ben has
29:42
just been outlining. If we hadn't fiddled with people's private lives.
29:45
He says, we wouldn't be here today. And Chris Konch
29:49
has been pointing out in a substack note that and
29:51
he's very sympathetic to Liquan You that this is absolutely
29:56
what we need to do. You know, we've got to
29:59
cram clamped down. But he says that when British politicians
30:02
said they wanted to build Singapore on Thames after Brexit,
30:05
they weren't joking. What does this entail? Well, if you
30:08
just take the freedom of religion aspect of it, but
30:11
one among many of the important aspects that need to
30:14
be considered, you will see in a speech and I
30:16
think nineteen eighty seven that Lequan You, after pouring cold
30:19
water on freedom of religion by saying that not even
30:21
Christian and not even Europeans are excited about Christianity, there's
30:25
nothing to get excited about, he arrogantly says. As I
30:28
put it in my post which will be in the
30:30
show notes to my telegram channel, he says, firm government
30:33
will ride through this patch. That means a rough patch.
30:36
Soft government trying to accommodate everybody will lead to big mischief.
30:40
He snarles as he ends his speech. So the Lequan,
30:43
you know, going full Singapore way is not a helpful
30:47
path to take. It's already being taken, particularly by the blairsters.
30:50
We see here just in passing that the Speaker of
30:53
the House of Commons has been telling BBC Radio five
30:55
Live that there must be nobody saying anything nasty on
30:59
social media, Speaker of the House of Commons, for goodness sake.
31:03
And on the question of whether the Prime Minister is
31:06
driving all this, we see the BBC telling us that
31:10
he's concerned about the increase in support for what he
31:12
calls the far right across the channel over here on
31:14
the continent, but he says in Britain the answer to
31:17
it is delivery in government. Ben has already pointed out
31:20
a couple of Irish connections. I'll just mentioned this one
31:23
as well, that the Border Security Command, which involves of
31:27
course the Irish angle as well. He's there posing with them,
31:30
having their backs to the camera like FBI strong men,
31:32
saying we will smash the vile people smuggling gangs. That's
31:35
really East Asian communist language, isn't it. And you know,
31:39
a in just a week or two ago, if you
31:40
said this, you were going to be on the wrong
31:42
end of his prosecutors for saying the same thing. Here's
31:45
one example, I think from Liverpool, a lady called Ava
31:48
who says that she's just been visited by counter terrorism police,
31:51
no probable cause, no statement of wrong think. She was
31:54
just told you are naughty, we won't give you details.
31:57
We're going to steal your father's Samuel I saw because
32:00
we genuinely believe it's a weapon.
32:01
Speaker 6: Ho ho.
32:02
Speaker 9: And they found the Roman helmet in the house which
32:04
they said, this is Anglo Saxon and evidence of you
32:06
being a far right ethno nationalist. So that's what going
32:09
singer Pourian means on people. Hansard the Parliamentary Record points
32:14
out here that even Sir John Hayes, a fairly right
32:16
wing opposition MP, has to pull his punches when he
32:20
asks the Speaker of the House, who controls government business,
32:22
why is it that the Higher Education Bill of the
32:24
last government free speech in universities is now going to
32:27
be repealed? And just sipping through these because of time
32:31
as you can freeze these if you want. The well
32:33
known legal firm Taylor Wessing has pointed out in these
32:38
four slides zip through that the law has changed from
32:42
the previous situation just this year because of the Online
32:46
Safety Act. That we have covered this in the past,
32:48
but I find this a good summary for people to
32:50
freeze the frame. Of course, Taylor Wessing goes along with
32:53
the government narrative here, but it points out there are
32:55
now obligations on online service providers to do effectively the
32:58
government's bidding, and that courts have teeth. Look at this
33:01
last bit. Courts now have jurisdiction to grant civil injunctions
33:04
if they think that it would be just and convenient
33:07
to do so. And we just got a silent video
33:12
to go with that from Germany, which i'll play out now,
33:16
which is here we see that people in Germany are
33:19
being warned not to post anything that might be incendiary,
33:23
and in this childish way, they're being shown examples of
33:26
you know, must share images and footage. And every time
33:29
somebody shares this for people watching an audio, a little
33:32
fire is ignited along the way. And while this plays out,
33:36
it gives me time to say that in the show
33:38
notes but not on the slides. There is very detailed
33:40
description now by two of the best bloggers from the
33:42
German speaking world of a constitutional case that's now going
33:45
to Germany's Supreme Court because a nurse in northwestern Germany
33:51
has taken through her own court of first Instance an
33:54
objection that it was unconstitutional of her to have to
33:56
prove COVID vaccination status in order to continue working as
34:00
a nurse during the COVID panic, and the judges have
34:04
referred this up to Carsbruer the Supreme Court. They're saying
34:08
that actually, we think that there was no constitutionality in
34:12
this matter because the Robert Cock Institute, the Public Health
34:15
Guidance people have admitted now in court that they are
34:18
political people. They took orders from the Ministry of Health
34:21
and all that they did with behavior change, there was
34:23
no science behind it. Of reporting on this is down upon,
34:27
which is the very point we're trying to highlight here
34:29
that the state is going to go for you if
34:31
you even voice any kind of dissidents.
34:33
Speaker 1: Now, Alex, thank you very much. That comprehensive segment. A
34:38
lot to think about, and of course it's behold all
34:41
of us to speak out and challenge what's happening to
34:44
our audience. If you're like what UK column is doing,
34:47
then please support us. Five pounds a month is keeping
34:50
the UK Column going. We want to increase our production
34:55
and grow. We are very keen for new members, so
34:59
if you can bring other people on board, please do.
35:01
All of our material is to share and of course
35:05
is going out on these and indeed other platforms. Facebook
35:09
at the moment is still censoring us, but that's the
35:12
nature of UK in twenty twenty four. You can help
35:15
us by making a purchase from the UK Column shop.
35:18
That's available for everybody, so have a look and see
35:21
whether something takes your interest. And of course we still
35:25
have Agenda twenty one Your Life in their Hands editions,
35:29
so if you haven't got one of these excellent booklets,
35:33
please consider getting one for the information and also to
35:36
help the column. Now, just a little advert for walking
35:42
the Dog, which excuse me went out at eleven o'clock
35:45
on Sunday. This was actually censored by YouTube, which I'll
35:50
speak about a little bit later in the news. But
35:52
if you haven't walked the dog with me, please consider
35:56
giving it a go. We'd also like to remind bought
36:00
excuse me of the UK Column event in Bristol nineteenth
36:05
of October. Details on the website. Tickets still available but
36:10
they are going quickly, so if you haven't yet got
36:13
your tickets, please consider making that purchase now. Also, Mike
36:17
and myself are going to be speaking at the Heritage
36:19
Party Conference Saturday, twenty eighth September. That is a ticketed
36:24
event and we're doing it to support this particular party
36:29
on this occasion. I would also like to say that
36:32
tomorrow one o'clock the interview with Dr Sabine Hassan will
36:36
be going out. That's Debbie Evans and Cheryl Granger talking
36:39
to doctor Hazzan, and the topic is got Feelings the
36:45
abdominal brain. This should be very interesting. Well, Ben, let's
36:50
bring you back on and you're talking about the enemy within?
36:57
Speaker 3: Indeed, yes, well it's this too emergent now, kraatives. Both
37:01
of them coming from the same place. One of them
37:04
is about the enemy within, and one of them is
37:06
about the enemy without. I'm going to talk about both
37:08
of them now. I'm going to start off by referencing
37:12
Ricky Jones, former labor counselor Ricky Jones, who at the
37:18
Walthamstowe protest that I reported on about a month ago.
37:21
Speaker 7: Now essentially encouraged murder. I believe that that's what I heard.
37:27
Speaker 3: It's been reduced down to encouraging violent disorder.
37:31
Speaker 7: That's what he's been charged with.
37:32
Speaker 3: He was in court on Friday in Snaresbrook in East
37:37
London and it's been reported on by the BBC. He's
37:42
entered a not guilty plea. So you can see here
37:46
he's denied encouraging violent disorder and connection with comments of
37:50
a counter protest. Videos had emerged online reportedly showing Ricky
37:54
Jones tending a crowd in Walthamstowe that far right demonstrators
37:57
needed to have their throats cut. Apparently he's denied it,
38:02
and there is a trial that's going to take place
38:05
in January.
38:06
Speaker 7: But let's just have a little quick look at the.
38:08
Speaker 3: Video and let viewers make up their own mind about
38:11
what was said.
38:13
Speaker 10: They are discuss.
38:16
Speaker 6: We need to hold up.
38:26
Speaker 3: I'll let you make up your own mind on that one.
38:28
So Paul Mason, if you remember at the time, was
38:32
very active on the ground the protest and actually from
38:35
my money, appeared to be coordinating a lot of the action.
38:39
And he has been working with military intelligence with m
38:45
I six, that has been confirmed. But also he is
38:49
a journalist and a very well established one former BBC
38:54
FORMU Channel four News, and he's actually taken to Prospect
38:57
magazine last week with an article called the New Fascism
39:04
that I'm going to talk about, and this is the
39:07
enemy within narrative that we're currently hearing on a constant
39:13
base from people like Mason and also people like Alan Rusbridger,
39:18
who is the editor of Prospect Magazine. He's the former
39:22
editor in chief of The Guardian, and he's actually currently
39:26
chair of the Routers Institute for the Study of Journalism
39:29
and also a member of the Facebook Oversight Board, who
39:32
I spoke about last week, which makes him one of
39:34
the most senior censors in the world, actually an incredibly
39:38
powerful man. And let's go and have a look at
39:42
this article. New Fascism. Absolutely fascinating because one of the
39:47
main things that struck me about this is that they're
39:49
really struggling to define what this new fascism actually means.
39:54
So he says here in the articles is Paul Mason,
39:57
we are no longer dealing with fascism as a Feurer
40:00
led hierarchy as it was in Nazi Germany, but as
40:03
a risomic structure, which means it's kind of a rizomic
40:08
refers to the root system that grows underneath trees that
40:11
spread out horizontally. Right, So there's actually there's no hierarchy
40:15
here in this new fascism. Apparently the roots communicate with
40:19
each other independently of the tree trunk. And the modern
40:23
equivalent of mind camp is created by its readers in
40:27
real time. It leaves the local institutions of democracy, police forces,
40:32
and councils facing a globally organized force that they barely understand.
40:38
Now that doesn't make any sense to me at all.
40:41
There's no hierarchy. It's all been developed in real time organically,
40:47
but also it's globally organized in some way, and no
40:50
one really understands it. Very indistinct what this new fascism
40:54
actually is. Let's have another look here. So today's fascism
40:59
is internationalist by design and overtly structured around a theory
41:03
of victory. So this is all related to what he
41:07
calls the Great Replacement theory, and that was developed in
41:10
twenty eleven by the French writer Renault Camu and that
41:14
asserts that the non white immigration to Europe and the
41:17
United States is not an accident but a design, and
41:20
it's a plan to replace white Christians by importing non
41:23
white communities with higher birth rates, which is something that
41:26
we hear a lot, and it actually is born out
41:29
by what's been going on demographically in the UK over
41:32
the past several decades. Right, So let's look at demographic
41:35
change in London. One example. You can see here that
41:38
since nineteen sixty one the proportion of the population coming
41:44
from the white natives has gone down from ninety seven
41:49
point seven percent to thirty six point eight percent, with
41:51
a whole range of different people coming in. Now, we
41:56
can argue the toss about whether that's intentional or not,
41:59
but it would have hear that there is some purpose
42:04
behind this, There is a design behind this. So actually
42:06
he's pointing to something and saying that it doesn't exist,
42:09
when actually I think in reality and examination of the
42:12
fact suggest that it does. Just finally, drawing on this
42:16
article and I suggest going to read it, it's a
42:19
really interesting insight into the narrative that the elites and
42:26
the political establishment and trying to push. He says here
42:29
behind the lawyers, the liberals and the feminists stand the
42:32
ultimate enemy, the cultural Marxists who.
42:35
Speaker 7: Have plotted the takeover.
42:36
Speaker 3: So these are the cultural Marxists I was talking about earlier.
42:41
This allegation, it's an allegation not born out by fact,
42:44
of course, is a straight lift from US paleo conservatism,
42:47
which alleges that the Marxist left having abandoned the proletariat.
42:52
As I said earlier, this is exactly what we're seeing
42:55
play out in this new wokee fascist environment that we
42:58
live in. See in league with a shadowy global Jewish
43:02
elite to undermine Western society by promoting multicultural multiculturalism, reproductive rights,
43:08
trans rights, and homosexuality. So within there you have a
43:13
lot of conjecture, a lot of misdirection, but also a
43:20
few little pieces of truth, all of which are being
43:24
directed towards terrorizing British people about the nature and the
43:34
motivations and the methods of their fellow citizens. Right, because
43:39
these aren't just fascists. There are also people that live
43:42
in this country and in many cases have valid concerns,
43:45
a lot of which Formation has just articulated and described
43:49
as being some kind of conspiracy theory. So that's the
43:53
enemy within, that's the enemy within narrative that we're hearing. Now,
43:57
let's have a little look at the enemy without and
44:00
I'm going to refer to Anne Applebaum, who is a journalist.
44:04
She writes for The Atlantic magazine. She is a regular
44:08
attendee at the Builderberg meetings, and she has just released
44:13
a new book called Autocracy Inc. The Dictators Who Want
44:16
to Run the World. And last week she spoke to
44:20
Tortoise Media. She's had a bunch of other interviews, and
44:24
she was also up at Chatham House where I've taken
44:27
a clip from the tour she gave.
44:31
Speaker 11: So what I describe in my book is not you're right.
44:35
It's not an alliance or an access in the traditional sense.
44:38
It's a group of countries who do not share an ideology.
44:42
So we're talking about communist China, nationalist Russia, theocratic Iran, Bolevarian,
44:49
socialist Venezuela, and a handful of others. And it's a
44:53
group of countries whose leaders have absolute power more or
44:58
less inside their countries. They they have often captured the judiciary,
45:03
They control the media or most of the information system
45:05
where they try to. They don't necessarily meet in a
45:11
secret room and plan things together, but they have begun
45:15
to collaborate and cooperate opportunistically when they can, when it's
45:20
necessary and particularly when it's in the interests of the group.
45:23
They're very interested in the survival of one another.
45:30
Speaker 3: So there is a group, an indistinct, poorly defined group,
45:35
with no ideology, with no shared characteristics, who don't conspire
45:41
with each other, but that we must be extremely concerned
45:44
about because they are autocratic. And the way that we
45:49
know that is that they've taken control of the judiciary
45:53
and they've also taken control of the media and information ecosystem,
45:57
which actually sounds like the current race here in the
46:00
UK and in the US. Sorry, the enemy within and
46:04
the enemy without.
46:06
Speaker 1: If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck,
46:09
it's probably a duck. Ben I think we are absolutely
46:12
on the case here. Let's bring Alex back, because surely Alex,
46:16
we should be able to sit and relax knowing that
46:19
our security services are protecting us from any form attack
46:24
on the country in the constitution, particularly in a Communist
46:27
or a Marxist form.
46:30
Speaker 9: You might think so, Brian, but the CIA and the
46:34
British Foreign Intelligence Service SIS popularly known as MI six
46:38
in the form of their two directors, have different thoughts.
46:41
This is not behind the financial times as usual, hard paywall.
46:45
I think it's because it's meant to be read by
46:47
people outside the usual ambit. Sir Richard Moore and Bill
46:51
Burns are headlined here by the ft is saying that
46:55
Britain and America stay ahead in an uncertain world through
46:57
the intelligence partnership. It's scant on detail. It does talk
47:00
about generative AI being in use at the agencies, notoriously
47:05
notably in this final paragraph describes the world order as
47:09
the international World Order, not the rules base that would
47:13
be too close to power, But there you go. It
47:15
also seeks to rewrite history because although it grudgingly admits
47:18
that the CIA wasn't founded until a couple of years
47:21
after the Second World War, whereas SIS was founded by
47:24
Admiral Comings back in nineteen hundred and nine, they do
47:26
say we were joined at the hit throughout both World
47:28
Wars and the Cold War. Well, I haven't got a
47:31
slide for it. But what gives the light to that
47:33
is a book by Thomas Marl, a thorough academic, called
47:37
Desperate Deception, outlining how a British intelligence in New York,
47:41
before even the CIA's predecessor, the OSS, was up and
47:44
running by this time of the Second World War was
47:47
all about trying to get Nazi narratives. You oppose the
47:50
Germans into the USA, so suborning American national interest to British.
47:56
The other thing that's not mentioned again, brought out best
47:58
by Joseph Farrell and other conspiracy researcher, shall we say,
48:02
is that after the Second World War, the Nazi survival
48:04
element really triumphed in large parts of the CIA. And that's,
48:08
you know, that's been well documented that there was a
48:10
pro German angle to the CIA after the Second World War.
48:14
So convenient rewriting of history. But this leads us to
48:18
a nuclear arms race situation, and apologist to those In
48:21
audio only you'll hear about forty seconds of Russian here.
48:24
But this subtitled by a man you've just mentioned, Brian
48:28
Anton Garashchenko, the Ukrainian Patriot, but accurately subtitled from the
48:32
Russian to English is a discussion on Russian primetime TV
48:36
by the the usual big talking heads in Russia on
48:39
why Russia the nerview needs to move from nuclear deterrent
48:43
towards a nuclear intimidation strategy.
48:56
Speaker 10: Sas Dane Rose, dark budget near prem I strategist I
49:05
meant to constructions to stray to mor regil is it
49:12
chas Pierre Price spoil The Minister in astral was regarding
49:16
to Tomsto robot.
49:22
Speaker 7: And to not.
49:26
Speaker 12: And if you was pregnant, but on predj Into to
49:34
cout doctor shoe worker UXO which nat.
49:42
Speaker 9: What was being referred to in that talk show on
49:45
cher was this carried by task the Russian State News Agency,
49:48
which is as formulated by the Deputy Foreign Minister Serge Ripkov.
49:53
There is going to be a review of Russia's nuclear
49:56
doctrine I've mentioned before. Joel scous And maintains that this
49:58
has already happened secretly in the USA, but he says
50:03
that in the case of the USA, it's moving to
50:05
a treasonous position of absorber first strike. Russia is often
50:08
said for shorts to have a no first no first
50:11
use nuclear policy. The APPCOF is hinting that this may
50:14
move to a more assertive, if not aggressive, use of
50:18
nuclear arms policy. The Financial Times again this one is
50:22
behind a paywall, but we've got an archived version of
50:24
it and the show notes for you. Just a gobsmacking
50:27
headline by the Council on Foreign Relations and Rand Corporation
50:31
schooled Lady Rose Gottomola. Just look at that headline. A
50:35
ramp up in nuclear weapons is not always a bad thing.
50:38
And this from the lady who personally decommissioned the nuclear
50:42
arsenal of the non Russian republics of the former USSR
50:46
in the mid nineteen nineties. So rules for me and
50:49
rules for THEE there. What about the United Kingdom? Well
50:53
declassified UK has the veteran intelligence affairs journalist Richard Norton
50:57
Taylor often wrote for The Guardian in the past, bought
51:00
in an exclusive that the Mutual Assistance Protocol, which was
51:05
agreed by Eisenhower's Whitehouse and mc millan's Number ten Downing
51:08
Street in the late nineteen fifties, has now quietly been
51:11
rolled over to permanence. So although it's a legal document
51:15
in the USA, it's only a policy of no legal
51:17
standing in Britain. But this is there's no need to
51:20
review it every ten years. It's in perpetuity. So Britain
51:22
will never have an independent nuclear deterrant. It will always
51:25
be Trident or successor with American codes. And as Joel
51:29
Scousman would argue that both of these the American under
51:31
British nuclear submarines can have their codes over ridden by
51:35
a treasonous White house. In his argument, NATO is meanwhile
51:39
wanting to play with your mind. So we have behavioral
51:41
psychology at NATO level now. They call it the cognitive
51:44
warfare concept, and it's empowering NATO to strengthen collective defense.
51:49
If you freed that screen, you'll see some of the
51:51
mind games they wish to play houses playing out in
51:53
the conventional forces. Well, the US Navy Times has got
51:57
this report now that a hearing has been done, not
52:01
a court martial, but something almost in that league against
52:04
a Chief Petty officer of a US vessel because they
52:08
wanted to get themselves starlink on board to be able
52:12
to follow football games while at sea. So the command
52:16
Senior Chief Chrissol Marrero was hauled over the colds for
52:19
this ordered a starlink dish, had it mounted to the
52:22
exterior of the vessel, hidden under a raidome by the
52:28
look of it, and it's sat there until people who
52:31
weren't in the know below the rank of CPO noticed
52:34
there was an unauthorized Wi Fi on board, and then
52:36
the lies started. If you freeze the screen, you will
52:39
see just how riled the US Navy's investigation panel are
52:43
about the corrupt dealings here, with senior officers turning a
52:47
blind eye to this as not even boys will be
52:49
boys these more because it was a female CPO. But
52:51
oh yes, the chief petty officers will have their fun.
52:54
What's the relevance of this, Well, this is a good
52:55
way to sink your vessel in wartime. Of course, having
52:58
an unauthorized satellite dish is a great way for the
53:00
Russians or Chinese to track where you are. So you know,
53:04
is the threat taken?
53:05
Speaker 7: Seriously?
53:05
Speaker 13: I don't know.
53:06
Speaker 9: Finally, in this segment from me Lockheed Martin, what's their
53:09
response to US moving closer to worldwide nuclear war? And yes,
53:13
I do know people doubt whether nuclear weapons exist, so
53:15
please don't write to me on that score. I know
53:17
what the arguments are.
53:18
Speaker 7: But just look at this.
53:19
Speaker 9: Lockheed Martin is developing a system, according to Reclaim the Net,
53:22
to identify and counter online disinformation prototypes by Darker. So
53:27
the weapons and the military industrial complex now regard a
53:30
counter online disinformation as one of the profitable tools they
53:33
can sell to government.
53:36
Speaker 1: Alex, thank you very much. As I say, the picture
53:40
is becoming ever more clear, and this is about oppressive
53:44
control every element of our lives. But the control system
53:48
has also hit Walking the Dog, which in principle is
53:51
me taking my dog from walk in order to entertain
53:56
UK column members in particular. But when I paired by
54:00
uploading episode five, which was due to go out Sunday,
54:05
just gone up popp to warning that my content had
54:09
been removed due to a violation of our community guidelines.
54:13
So effectively, even Walking the Dog censored by YouTube. I'll
54:19
do more of this in extra time, so I will
54:21
flick through this section quite quickly. But essentially it gave
54:25
me some guidance as to what I should be looking for.
54:28
It gave me a timestamp. But it talked about content
54:31
that posed a serious risk of egregious harm by spreading
54:36
medical misinformation about currently administered vaccines that are approved and
54:41
confirmed to be safe and effective by local health authorities
54:46
and the World Health Organization. Anything challenging that isn't allowed
54:52
on YouTube. So let's just have a little listen to
54:57
what Piers Corbyn had to say. Because he was gentleman
55:00
speaking at that particular time. This is only a tiny
55:04
section of what he actually said. The number fiers.
55:08
Speaker 13: I've got on the list is vacxies. The origin of vaccines.
55:13
You see, I think, okay, we can see the mrnaser
55:16
coon and then you go back and you see these
55:19
different vaccines, Like we've got this thing about blood poisoning.
55:24
You know, well that was all connected with importing vaccines.
55:28
Is please to look at criminal charges in the infecting
55:31
blood scandal, which is what thirty four years ago. Well,
55:35
but you look now at the murder going on. I mean,
55:38
the biggest genocide in the world is happening now. Seventeen
55:42
million people have been killed by this vaccine. So how
55:47
did we get to everybody believing in vaccine? Well that
55:51
was only a little clip. He did speak for a
55:54
few minutes on the subject of vaccine. But you're not
55:56
allowed to give a personal opinion anymore. You're not a
55:59
label and able to use your own acumen, your own
56:04
brain to decide what is right and what isn't. No,
56:07
this was censored by YouTube, and I had to cut
56:11
that passage out in order to get the video up.
56:15
But I then got the opportunity to be trained or reframed,
56:19
as I prepare prefer to call it, by YouTube, so
56:24
that I understood what their policy was. So this is
56:27
what pops up on screen. Get started, look at your content,
56:32
take action, take a policy training. Well, when you do that,
56:38
it quickly tells you about medical misinformation and says that
56:45
YouTube is trying to prevent misinformation. But the information misinformation
56:50
can be about treatment or denial, so it's quite comprehensive.
56:57
I ran through a little training. They ask you questions.
57:02
Miss Oca and her friends film themselves having a conversation
57:06
in the car. Let's have to get this more detail.
57:09
In the video, Missarka says she doesn't want to get
57:11
the COVID nineteen vaccine because the shot won't actually prevent
57:15
her from getting COVID nineteen.
57:18
Speaker 1: Is this a violation?
57:19
Speaker 6: Yes or no?
57:21
Speaker 1: I said yes, it is a violation, but it actually
57:24
said it doesn't violate our policy because she does not
57:28
spread medical misinformation. According to information from health authorities, there
57:34
is not a guaranteed prevention method for COVID nineteen. This one. Sorry,
57:41
that's a little bit clear on screen. I've got another
57:44
one here. Tammy posts a video after getting influenza vaccine.
57:49
She shares that she became permanently paralyzed after she received
57:53
her seasonal influenza shot in the video, she warns others
57:58
not to get it, and you're given the opportunity of
58:01
a yes or no. It goes on here. That is
58:08
it a violation, Yes, it is a violation of the policy. Sorry,
58:12
bring that up on screen. We do not allow claims
58:15
that vaccines cause chronic side effects. Now this went on.
58:21
If Michae will just kindly bring me back on screen.
58:23
I'm just going to move through some of these slides
58:27
because eventually, when you get to the end, it tells
58:30
you that if you've done well enough, you've actually been retrained,
58:36
reframed to understand what YouTube needs. So this is one
58:41
of the last screen that comes up. It said, nice work.
58:45
I made some mistakes, but eventually I was able to
58:49
understand what I needed to say in order to get
58:52
the result that I wanted. But the irony of all
58:55
this is, of course, that we were banned from YouTube,
58:58
originally by out the testimony of Nikola who said what
59:03
happened to our husband paralyzed from the neck down as
59:07
a result of vaccines during the COVID nineteen pandemic. That
59:11
was true, it was later reported by the Daily Mail.
59:15
But this resulted in the UK column being completely suspended
59:20
from YouTube, and although we can post some material, it's
59:24
clear that we dare not speak on this subject. Now.
59:27
Are we surprised? Not really, because if we have a
59:30
look at what Neil Mahan, the chief executive, had to say,
59:34
this is as reported in the Hollywood Reporter. He says
59:38
that they're going to continue to engage with policymakers to
59:42
share our perspective on policies that impact our creators. We're
59:47
aligned with government officials in wanting to create a safe
59:50
environment that also allows for a reality of voices to
59:56
be heard. It goes on to talk about section two
1:00:00
thirty of the Communications Decency Act in the US, which
1:00:04
gives us the ability to remove harmful content. It's talking
1:00:08
about European limits on political speech, and it's talking about
1:00:13
Canada forcing us to show content based on quote government requirements.
1:00:19
So it's pretty clear that YouTube is fully in bed
1:00:23
with the government, big corporation in bed with government, as
1:00:27
Ben was talking about earlier in the news. But maybe
1:00:31
if we really want to understand it, we should think
1:00:33
in terms of money. So this is the same magazine
1:00:38
talking about YouTube ad revenue dropping to six point seven
1:00:43
billion during the first quarter So my question for the
1:00:47
audience is do you fight government when you're making so
1:00:51
much money? And I suspect the answer to that is no,
1:00:55
you don't. So we can expect more clamped down by
1:00:59
YouTube and of course Google itself. Alex, We're a little
1:01:03
bit out of time, so I'm just going to try
1:01:05
and move us just on to your last two memes
1:01:10
that you kindly had for us, and we should be
1:01:13
able to cover overseas legal matters during extra time.
1:01:19
Speaker 9: Take us through the memes, indeed, join us an extra
1:01:23
time for more.
1:01:24
Speaker 8: So.
1:01:25
Speaker 9: The meme that I'm starting with here is a good
1:01:28
one pointing out that the outliers in world corruption are
1:01:31
North America, the United Kingdom, and the European Union. Somebody
1:01:34
has highlighted those jurisdictions in red here and has captioned
1:01:38
it when you have zero corruption because you call it lobbying,
1:01:42
and the globe is beaming a smile and they're giving
1:01:45
us a thumbs up because of course no corruption problem
1:01:47
in those northerly parts of the world. No, we just
1:01:49
call it lobbying. My second one is the results of
1:01:53
a limerick competition. I try to hold them on Fridays
1:01:57
on my Eastern Approaches Telegram channel, and I gave them
1:02:00
last week the theme of Sirkmayre. I deliberately went for
1:02:03
that because the Prime Minister, of course, doesn't like to
1:02:06
be reminded to people to be reminded of his knighthood
1:02:09
which he got for serving the state as a civil servant.
1:02:12
So he and then the media are completed with that.
1:02:14
They just call him kir instead of Sirkia, and having
1:02:19
tried alternatives for the surname like Smama or Sturmer, I
1:02:23
think we're going for Sirkmayre as there's the epithetic choice
1:02:27
as described by Ben here today. So here's the winning
1:02:31
entry for my Limerick competition. There once was a man
1:02:36
named Sir Khmare who took all his orders from Blair.
1:02:40
His boots polished bright to brace for the fight, but
1:02:42
no kepi to mess up his hair.
1:02:46
Speaker 1: Okay, Alex, thank you very much for that. People in
1:02:49
the chat bok saying that Stormer is looking older already
1:02:53
after a couple of months in office, whatever that means.
1:02:56
All right, we should end it there, Ben, Alex, thank
1:02:59
you very much much for joining us. Huge thank you
1:03:01
to the UK column audience, and a very very big
1:03:04
thank you to all of you sponsoring us by a
1:03:08
monthly membership, so if you're not on board with that,
1:03:11
please consider it help keep the UK Column going. We'll
1:03:15
be back in a few moments for extra time, and
1:03:17
we'll have a look at that YouTube censorship in more detail.
1:03:21
Join us then, and UK Column News back on Wednesday
1:03:25
at one o'clock. See you then, Bye bye.