Latest / UK Column Radio / UK Column News - 25th August 2025

Transcript

UK Column News - 25th August 2025 · UK Column Radio

• 0:07
  OK, hello and welcome to UK Column News.
• 0:10
  It's Monday the 25th of August 2025.
• 0:16
  Welcome to UK Column News. Just after 1:00, I'm your host,
• 0:19
  Mike Robinson. Joining me in the studio today
• 0:22
  is Charles Mallett, Brian Gerrish, Diane Rasmussen,
• 0:26
  McCarthy, Ben Ruben, and Patrick Henningson.
• 0:30
  I got it. All right.
• 0:38
  Massive thank you to everybody that's in the room and all the
• 0:41
  people that are outside waiting to get into the room.
• 0:44
  It's fantastic. We're going to begin with
• 0:47
  Charles today. And Charles is talking about
• 0:51
  something or other. What is it, Charles?
• 0:54
  National security, Yes. OK.
• 0:56
  Thank you very much, Charles. National security, of course,
• 1:00
  concerning everybody, always, all the time.
• 1:03
  Thank you very much. And I should just say, if you're
• 1:05
  tuning into UK column News for the very first time and
• 1:08
  wondering why we've overlaid this particular track onto our
• 1:11
  news programme, we haven't. We're at a festival and there's
• 1:14
  a music tent directly outside this one, so you'll just have to
• 1:18
  bear with it. But national security coming
• 1:20
  into the headlines at the moment from Hong Kong via the South
• 1:24
  China Morning Post talking about the protracted trial of Jimmy
• 1:29
  Lai, which I won't go into great detail on.
• 1:32
  But suffice it to say that this is being documented at least in
• 1:37
  the mainstream as being a pro democracy trial.
• 1:41
  So we're just going to examine some of the things that have
• 1:43
  fallen out from it and indeed some of the things that it's
• 1:46
  pointing towards. But the situation in Hong Kong
• 1:52
  at least, is that they're in the concluding phase of the trial
• 1:55
  now in the United Kingdom. This is being something that's
• 1:58
  reported going back to 2019, the protests which which were
• 2:02
  apparently being supported by lies media organisation Apple
• 2:07
  Daily subsequently having closed reported or reputed to have
• 2:11
  links at least with the Pentagon and indeed with a number of
• 2:15
  other organisations. But that will be something for
• 2:17
  you perhaps to look into further.
• 2:20
  The point I want to make in that the the government has put out a
• 2:24
  document about this is that they have in here referred to what
• 2:29
  China did in 20/20, which was to pass the national security law.
• 2:34
  Now the way that's been written up as it were by both Hong Kong
• 2:38
  and the United Kingdom is that Hong Kong lacked sufficient
• 2:43
  political will to do it. So China stepped in and made it
• 2:47
  happen, which was deemed to be a contradict, A contravention at
• 2:51
  least of Hong Kong status as a special autonomous region.
• 2:58
  So the point here to be drawn out is that the national
• 3:01
  security law was being deemed to be inappropriate or indeed to
• 3:07
  have been conducted in a manner that didn't fit the correct and
• 3:13
  lawful system, rather than dealing with the content
• 3:17
  therein. And that's the bit that I want
• 3:18
  to concentrate on now. The fallout from this, as far as
• 3:21
  the United Kingdom was concerned, was that as a result
• 3:24
  of the apparently draconian national security law passed in
• 3:29
  Hong Kong by the Chinese authorities, there was a
• 3:32
  concession made by the United Kingdom under the British
• 3:37
  National Overseas visa, which was effectively to grant status
• 3:43
  of British nationality to people in Hong Kong that wanted to move
• 3:46
  into this country. And just give you an idea of the
• 3:49
  effect of that. We've got a government document
• 3:52
  there talking about people coming via safe and legal
• 3:54
  humanitarian routes, updated just two days ago, or if you're
• 3:58
  watching on screen four days ago, no.
• 4:02
  Oh good. This is the graph that shows
• 4:07
  that effect. And I think it's worth pointing
• 4:09
  out because not only does it deal with the Hong Kongers who
• 4:13
  are at the lower end of the thing.
• 4:14
  And if you're, if you're listening and not watching, then
• 4:17
  I'm sharing a bar chart that has at June 2022, an enormous spike
• 4:23
  in the number of people coming into this country described as
• 4:27
  having safe and legal humanitarian passage.
• 4:30
  And the top of the the bar is dominated by 179,000 people from
• 4:35
  Ukraine and a slightly lesser figure from Hong Kong.
• 4:38
  So with migration so much in the news at the moment, it is worth
• 4:42
  looking back to this as it's described safe and legal route
• 4:47
  and the hundreds of thousands of people that do come into the
• 4:50
  United Kingdom that way. Now also recently, and this is
• 4:56
  where the hypocrisy becomes most obvious, we have the what's
• 4:59
  called the G7 rapid response mechanism, the RRM who've made a
• 5:03
  statement on what they're describing as being
• 5:05
  extraterritorial arrest warrants.
• 5:08
  And the the crux of the statement here made by the
• 5:12
  government and sponsored by other governments is that the
• 5:15
  authorities have, this is Hong Kong authorities have put out
• 5:18
  arrest warrants for bounties on individuals outside of Hong
• 5:23
  Kong's borders, including in the G7 countries, for exercising
• 5:28
  their freedom of expression. So that's what we are to take
• 5:31
  away. We are to take away that because
• 5:32
  of a law that China put in where Hong Kong lacked political will.
• 5:38
  The consequence of this is that Hong Kong is now prohibiting
• 5:44
  people from exercising their freedom of expression.
• 5:46
  Now we will go to examine whether we think this is really
• 5:50
  the case. They go on to say this form of
• 5:52
  transnational repression undermines national security,
• 5:55
  state sovereignty, human rights and the safety of communities.
• 5:59
  So we've heard of all this. What we don't really get to hear
• 6:03
  quite so much about is our own National Security Act which came
• 6:06
  through in 2023, shown here on the the headline as it is on the
• 6:11
  government page. I would just make the point that
• 6:16
  in relation to part of the policy and indeed regulation
• 6:21
  that's enabled by this, which is the Foreign influence
• 6:23
  Registration Scheme, which you will have heard Dan Jarvis, the
• 6:26
  security minister, talking about the entire time.
• 6:29
  I would just like to point out the failure to use any sense of
• 6:33
  objectivity when evaluating what might be constituted as undue
• 6:39
  foreign influence or indeed foreign interference.
• 6:41
  And I've got on screen a particular clause about there
• 6:44
  being an enhanced tier where foreign influence is concerned.
• 6:50
  There are only two countries in that enhanced tier at the moment
• 6:54
  and you're probably already there, but they are Russia and
• 6:57
  Iran. It is not substantiated as to
• 6:59
  why they should be, but they are.
• 7:02
  And this is all part of the way in which the narrative is
• 7:04
  developed via means of the legislative tool that is there
• 7:09
  to create that particular situation.
• 7:11
  Now I've talked about the the the registration scheme furs as
• 7:15
  it's abbreviated to. I just thought I would point
• 7:17
  this out, which I have done before just to articulate really
• 7:22
  the hypocrisy. It says that it requires the
• 7:24
  registration of particular activities in order to
• 7:28
  strengthen the integrity of UK politics and institutions and
• 7:35
  protect the country from state threats.
• 7:38
  Quite rich language, one would say in 2025.
• 7:43
  Now additionally, they do go on to talk about freedom of
• 7:47
  expression, which is exactly what the rapid response
• 7:49
  mechanism has just been complaining about in terms of
• 7:52
  extraterritorial warrants. And they say, no, absolutely,
• 7:56
  this will not affect people's freedom of expression and nor
• 8:00
  will it prevent anyone from engaging in political influence
• 8:03
  activities. It simply requires openness and
• 8:08
  transparency. Well, how much openness and
• 8:11
  transparency really is there, because we are talking about the
• 8:15
  situation of extraterritorial activities where criminal
• 8:20
  proceedings are concerned. So I have on my UK column
• 8:23
  clipboard the particular sections of the National
• 8:27
  Security Act 2023, which causes the British law which has
• 8:30
  extraterritorial powers. Section 1 concerning espionage.
• 8:35
  Absolutely, the British government may do precisely what
• 8:38
  they're accusing Hong Kong of doing now.
• 8:40
  Section 2 concerning trade secrets.
• 8:42
  Section 3 in terms of assisting a foreign intelligence service.
• 8:46
  Section 35 to concerning bodies corporate.
• 8:49
  And this of course, is the most explicit, which is Section 36,
• 8:53
  specifically labelled offences committed outside the United
• 8:57
  Kingdom. So the level of hypocrisy here
• 9:01
  is absolutely spectacular. And I should also point out, as
• 9:04
  has been referenced for those of you sitting in the talk tent
• 9:07
  earlier today, I appreciate people, people watching the news
• 9:09
  on the screen. This might not make much sense,
• 9:11
  but we've talked about the, the way in which the Terrorism Act
• 9:14
  2000 is used in a, in a absolute multitude of ways now
• 9:19
  incorrectly. But of course one such would be
• 9:22
  Section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2000 which includes action taken
• 9:28
  outside the United Kingdom and of course stipulated in Section
• 9:31
  1, including action taken for the benefit of a prescribed
• 9:36
  organisation. Which takes us straight back to
• 9:39
  the whole idea of freedom of expression.
• 9:41
  And at the moment we are talking a lot about Palestine action and
• 9:45
  its prescription. But what I'm getting to is that
• 9:48
  if you were to express support for Palestine action from a
• 9:53
  foreign country, then you would still be captured by both the
• 9:57
  National Security Act and indeed the Terrorism Act 2000.
• 10:00
  So what the government are putting out about the Hong Kong
• 10:02
  authorities is absolutely disingenuous.
• 10:05
  Now the reason I mention this is because as we all know, freedom
• 10:09
  of expression is lumped into what's described loosely and
• 10:13
  lazily as conspiracy theory and how that is taken on and used
• 10:18
  and manipulated. And of course we are at Hope
• 10:21
  Freedom being run by the Hope Sussex Community.
• 10:24
  And I would just remind you, if you have not already aware that
• 10:28
  they chose to speak to the BBC the other day and were, as you
• 10:34
  might imagine, misrepresented to put it diplomatically.
• 10:38
  But I think the key bit of text to draw out from the BBC sounds
• 10:41
  advertisement is this bit of text here saying is a home
• 10:44
  educating community really teaching children conspiracy
• 10:48
  theories. Now the answer to that question
• 10:50
  is neither here nor there. The point is really that the BBC
• 10:54
  are conceding that they have an issue with children learning
• 10:57
  anything that hasn't come from either the government or the
• 11:00
  BBCI. Think that's the inference to be
• 11:02
  drawn from that. And just to draw that point out
• 11:06
  a little bit further, in terms of where one is meant to receive
• 11:08
  information from, I would point you towards GCHQ, where on their
• 11:13
  culture page they have a section about education and outreach,
• 11:17
  which means they are running courses and classes for young
• 11:20
  people during school holidays in order that their minds might be
• 11:24
  set on the right path. So we go back to more or less
• 11:28
  where we started, which is the National Security Strategy from
• 11:32
  2025. And as it says in that document,
• 11:35
  extremist ideologies are on the rise.
• 11:38
  All of this has a link going right the way through it, and
• 11:41
  you are in the middle of it here by being in this talk tent at
• 11:45
  this magnificent Hope event. So that's where we go from the
• 11:49
  trial of Jimmy Lai straight through to our own national
• 11:52
  security strategy, with many gargantuan lies told upon the
• 11:56
  way. Thank you, Charles.
• 12:08
  Slight change of topic here. We're going to head over to
• 12:10
  Ukraine issues and Nord Stream pipeline in particular with
• 12:14
  Patrick. I suppose this has a national
• 12:16
  security context as well. Pat Straight.
• 12:22
  Away. Here we go.
• 12:23
  Yes, Thank you, Charles. Thank you, Mike.
• 12:28
  First thing I'm going to say is we have to get out of this
• 12:31
  paradigm that we're stuck in. Extremism, Extremist ideologies.
• 12:36
  There's nothing extreme about what we're talking about here.
• 12:39
  They're the extremists, OK? They're the extremists.
• 12:44
  What's going on at the the high echelons, The wealth gap that
• 12:47
  we're seeing is just unbelievable.
• 12:49
  Historically, that's extreme, OK?
• 12:52
  This is not a counterculture event.
• 12:54
  You got to get out of their framework, OK?
• 12:56
  This is the culture. They're the counterculture.
• 13:00
  Just understand that they try to disempower you.
• 13:03
  This is one of the hangovers of the 60's.
• 13:06
  The counterculture. No, no, we're the we're the
• 13:09
  culture. McDonald's is the
• 13:10
  counterculture. OK, Bank, the investment banks,
• 13:16
  global transnational corporations.
• 13:19
  That's the counterculture. OK, just want to get that
• 13:23
  straight. I'll talk about the Nord Stream
• 13:27
  pipeline a little bit. If you've watched the headlines
• 13:30
  just to kind of, it's an interesting story.
• 13:33
  It does have an effect on our lives, of course.
• 13:35
  It affects our fuel bill. It affects the cost of heating
• 13:39
  and powering our homes. And they, if you read, if you
• 13:43
  read the news, there's been an arrest.
• 13:46
  The Germans, the Germans are on the case.
• 13:48
  Rest assured, they're going to get to the bottom of it.
• 13:51
  They have their best people on it.
• 13:54
  They've nabbed A Ukrainian named Sergei Kuznetsov.
• 13:59
  OK rested in Italy on holiday with his family and they believe
• 14:04
  he's one of the Nordstrom saboteurs connected to the crack
• 14:09
  team of Ukrainian super soldiers that were seen drunk on the pier
• 14:13
  in Poland with a cigarette hanging out of their mouth with
• 14:16
  a 50 foot sailboat. Pretty plausible, isn't it?
• 14:22
  That's that's the story they're going with.
• 14:24
  That's the story they're going with.
• 14:25
  So this is the biggest red herring story imaginable.
• 14:30
  So what I'm going to say is pay attention to the timing.
• 14:34
  Pay attention to the Tommy, Why have they arrested this guy?
• 14:36
  All of a sudden, this Ukrainian, they're keeping the story alive.
• 14:41
  There are political negotiations going on vis A vis Ukraine with
• 14:46
  the United States and the European powers.
• 14:49
  And trust me, the Russians have made Nordstrom an issue and they
• 14:53
  made it known to the Americans and whoever their counterparts
• 14:57
  are in negotiations that that is one of the chips in
• 15:01
  negotiations. They want to have an independent
• 15:04
  investigation as to who did it. Now, the Germans did an
• 15:08
  investigation and they've been sitting on their findings for a
• 15:12
  year and a half. And Sweden and Denmark, the
• 15:15
  Nordstrom pipelines were blown up in their exclusive economic
• 15:19
  zones, OK, They sent investigative teams and
• 15:22
  reconnaissance teams immediately.
• 15:25
  But Sweden can't release any of that information because of
• 15:28
  sensitive national security concerns.
• 15:33
  As far as the Danish go, a similar excuse.
• 15:36
  So it is very likely that the Swedes know and it's very likely
• 15:42
  that all of the NATO countries, in my opinion anyway, based on
• 15:46
  the evidence that I've looked at exhaustively, some of which we
• 15:50
  published and reported on at the UK column, that most of the NATO
• 15:56
  countries that were involved in the drill which took place in
• 16:00
  the Baltic Sea in July, I believe in June and July,
• 16:05
  BALTOPS 22 in 2022. They know about the Nordstrom
• 16:10
  sabotage, OK, at least at the higher echelons of the European
• 16:16
  Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, Even so far as the Sakur
• 16:22
  and NORTHCOM as well. All of these countries, United
• 16:26
  States, Britain, Norway, Germany, would very likely have
• 16:31
  been involved in this. That's that's my understanding
• 16:35
  and I don't share that opinion alone.
• 16:38
  Many top investigators agree with that and many mainstream
• 16:41
  pundits are now saying the same thing.
• 16:44
  But still, we have this Ukrainian story that's being
• 16:46
  drifted out. So I think this is designed to
• 16:50
  deflect and distract from the real saboteurs.
• 16:55
  And that's all this story is. They're going to kick the can
• 16:57
  down the road for another 10 years and we'll still be arguing
• 17:03
  about it like JF KS assassination in 20 years.
• 17:06
  If we're whoever's still around was saying did they did?
• 17:09
  Did they not? Did they do it?
• 17:11
  This is one of the biggest acts of industrial infrastructural
• 17:14
  sabotage really in the modern era.
• 17:18
  It's state terrorism and it's gone unpunished.
• 17:24
  But the worst thing about it is you're not allowed to talk about
• 17:26
  it. If you're in the mainstream
• 17:28
  media. Imagine something that
• 17:30
  significant and that consequential to the cost of
• 17:35
  living in Europe and our economies.
• 17:37
  You can't even talk about. It's verboten.
• 17:41
  So that itself is incredible. It tells you the type of
• 17:45
  situation, the type of time in history we're living in.
• 17:49
  The other story which has come out is there was, there's been a
• 17:53
  story. I've got a point to make on this
• 17:56
  that is probably unexpected, but in terms of the deaths in Gaza,
• 18:02
  officially 62,000, officially, not unofficially, officially
• 18:07
  62,000. The number is quite likely
• 18:11
  higher, which I'll show you in a minute.
• 18:13
  But this was a story investigation done by the
• 18:15
  Guardian in the UK and 972 magazine.
• 18:19
  I think this is an Israeli publication. 85% of those died
• 18:24
  are quote, civilians in Gaza. So Israel has been even by
• 18:29
  mainstream standards has been under, has been playing down the
• 18:34
  the amount of civilian casualties.
• 18:36
  So now you have British and Israeli mainstream media
• 18:40
  basically debunking the Israeli government.
• 18:43
  OK, it's taking a long time, but they're doing it as well.
• 18:48
  Harvard Dataverse and Ben Gurion University in Israel released a
• 18:53
  report which we reported on a few months ago, the the true
• 18:58
  number of casualties in Gaza that they pegged at 377,000,
• 19:05
  dead or missing 377,000. Now some people would say, well,
• 19:11
  that's the Guardian or it's an Israeli media outlet.
• 19:15
  Why would you trust them? It's all lies.
• 19:17
  The mainstream media is lying. And Harvard Dataverse.
• 19:21
  I mean, Harvard must be. It's an elite institution.
• 19:23
  Why would you listen to them? Ben Gurion University, it's an
• 19:26
  Israeli institution. Why would you listen to them?
• 19:29
  These are mainstream sources. And the point is, there are a
• 19:34
  lot of lies in the mainstream media.
• 19:37
  A lot. But not everything is a lie in
• 19:40
  the mainstream media. And sometimes, and not everybody
• 19:43
  in the mainstream media is evil. There are good journalists in
• 19:46
  all of these institutions, and there are bad journalists and
• 19:50
  corrupt editors and gatekeepers and men in black suits standing
• 19:54
  off the camera directing and denotices issued.
• 19:57
  OK, that happens. But belatedly, sometimes the
• 20:03
  truth starts coming out and that is what's happening.
• 20:07
  So when you see mainstream outlets and institutions telling
• 20:12
  you something that sounds shocking and it's going against.
• 20:16
  The government, your government's narrative and
• 20:18
  against the, in this case, the Israeli government narrative,
• 20:21
  you should take notice because that means the penny is finally
• 20:25
  dropping. My opinion, way too late, way
• 20:29
  too late. It's not going to save any of
• 20:31
  those 377,000 dead or missing Palestinians.
• 20:36
  And the other study that says 85% of civilians, what do they
• 20:41
  mean by civilians? So in their own way they framed
• 20:46
  it in in that sense, when I I would make an argument against
• 20:49
  that is a is a, is an armed militia in an occupied
• 20:54
  territory? Are they, is the militia part of
• 20:58
  the civilian population? Some people would define it as
• 21:01
  such, international law and the UN Charter defines it that way.
• 21:06
  But our governments in the UK, in the United States and in G7
• 21:11
  countries or EU countries, many of them will say no armed
• 21:15
  resistance in Gaza is terror. Are they terrorist
• 21:20
  organisations? We've prescribed them that's, I
• 21:23
  love that word prescribed. We prescribe them as terrorist
• 21:27
  organisations, but that goes against UN Charter.
• 21:31
  International law says every country has the right to an
• 21:34
  armed resistance struggle if they are being illegally
• 21:38
  occupied and according to multiple UN resolutions that is
• 21:42
  undoubtedly the case full. There's a massive body of
• 21:45
  international law that supports that.
• 21:47
  But our government in the United States, in Britain and in
• 21:51
  European countries, they don't recognise that, that in their in
• 21:56
  their mind and in their foreign policy, their proscription of
• 22:01
  these groups, even though these groups have never attacked
• 22:04
  America, have never attacked Britain, have never done any
• 22:07
  Expeditionary terrorism at all. But because Israel says they're
• 22:13
  terrorists, they have lobbied hard on our governments to label
• 22:16
  them as terrorists. And not just those groups in
• 22:20
  Gaza. There's many around the world
• 22:22
  that fall into the exact same category.
• 22:25
  Anybody that goes against the US foreign policy or against the
• 22:29
  dictats of the US State Department most likely will be
• 22:33
  labelled a terrorist organisation.
• 22:35
  They will be proscribed. OK, is that fair?
• 22:39
  Does that make any sense? Is that aligned with
• 22:41
  international law? And somebody say, well, there's
• 22:43
  no such thing as international law?
• 22:45
  No, there's not, not here and not in America, but the other
• 22:50
  90% of the globe actually follows it and has to follow it.
• 22:54
  But our governments don't because we're we're special.
• 22:58
  This is 2 tiers of geopolitics. That's the irony.
• 23:01
  That's the dichotomy. And that's where the debate
• 23:05
  needs to be. So I will just leave leave you
• 23:09
  with those two things to think about.
• 23:10
  And yeah, to my colleague Mike, thank you.
• 23:15
  Thank you, Patrick. OK, let's let's move on to
• 23:21
  online safety. And I just want to everybody
• 23:24
  know what 4 Chan is. Yes, for for those that don't, 4
• 23:29
  Chan is a, a discussion group, A forum based in the United
• 23:32
  States. It has quite a reputation for
• 23:37
  hosting pretty much any kind of content that possibly exists.
• 23:40
  Some of it's very unpleasant, but nonetheless it's there
• 23:44
  because apparently the United States has a constitutional
• 23:48
  right to freedom of speech. But Ofcom, as we know, is the
• 23:53
  body in the United Kingdom that is required to implement the
• 23:56
  Online Safety Act and to act as the generator of government
• 24:01
  censorship in the UK. And Ofcom has decided that it is
• 24:04
  going to be a regulator of the entire Internet and on the
• 24:07
  entire globe. So they have decided to open and
• 24:12
  they decided in June actually to open an investigation into 4
• 24:17
  Chan. And I'm sure you won't be able
• 24:19
  to read that, but So what it says is we're initiating an
• 24:21
  investigation to determine whether the online discussion
• 24:24
  board, 4 Chan has failed or is currently failing to comply with
• 24:27
  its obligations under the Online Safety Act.
• 24:29
  Our investigation will focus on potential breaches in the
• 24:32
  following areas. Failure to respond to statutory
• 24:35
  information requests. Remember, they're based in the
• 24:37
  United States. They're not here.
• 24:39
  There is no statutory information request that applies
• 24:42
  to them. Failure to complete and keep a
• 24:45
  record of suitable and sufficient illegal content risk
• 24:48
  assessment and non compliance with the safety duties about
• 24:53
  illegal content. So that was in June and then ten
• 24:58
  days ago or so they issued a notice to 4 Chan saying Ofcom is
• 25:07
  satisfied that that there are reasonable grounds for believing
• 25:10
  that the provider has contravened its duties under
• 25:13
  Section 102 B of the Act to comply with two requests for
• 25:16
  information. We'll consider any
• 25:18
  representations provided in response.
• 25:20
  Blahdy, blahdy blah. The Ofcom statement then doesn't
• 25:24
  go on to define sanctions, but 4 Chan's lawyers are saying that
• 25:28
  Ofcom has imposed a £20,000 fine with daily penalties after that.
• 25:33
  And I'm pretty sure that they'll be interest applied to any
• 25:38
  outstanding payments. That's what they're going to try
• 25:41
  anyway, but unfortunately for Ofcom, the 4 Chan lawyers have
• 25:47
  decided to reply with a statement which although it
• 25:52
  appears quite long on screen, then there ends with the word
• 25:55
  off. So you can imagine what that
• 25:58
  said. Now, as I say 4 Chan
• 26:01
  controversial because people are able to post just about anything
• 26:06
  that they like. But of course, as we've seen
• 26:08
  with the issue of age assurance and so called pornography or
• 26:13
  pornography size, but I say so called because that's how it's
• 26:16
  being presented in the media, that age assurance and the
• 26:20
  requirement to identify yourself to websites.
• 26:23
  Now it's just about pornography, when in fact it's about just
• 26:26
  about every social media platform that's out there at the
• 26:29
  moment. And of course, we've seen as a
• 26:33
  result this massive rise in people getting interested in
• 26:36
  VPNs, virtual private networks and the ability to to be
• 26:40
  relatively anonymous in your Internet usage, but also to
• 26:44
  appear to be coming upon these sites from a different country
• 26:47
  and therefore not subject to the age assurance requirements.
• 26:54
  Other related news then is that TikTok has decided that they now
• 27:00
  just before we said, but this TikTok is the most censorious
• 27:04
  social media platform that we have ever come across.
• 27:07
  Kenny, if you speak to Kenny later, who's at the back of the
• 27:10
  room will tell you that we are regularly having TikTok channels
• 27:14
  shut down and he's regularly having to buy another SIM card,
• 27:17
  get another mobile phone number and open it in order to open
• 27:21
  another TikTok account. And but so they are the most
• 27:24
  censorious. So you you perhaps understand
• 27:27
  that I'm not terribly sad that they've decided to fire or at
• 27:31
  least make redundant most of their moderation team.
• 27:36
  Hundreds of hundreds of jobs being lost in the UK just at the
• 27:40
  time that of course they're required to start implementing
• 27:43
  an even more rigorous regime as a result of the Online Safety
• 27:46
  Act. That's the good news.
• 27:48
  The bad news is that the reason that they feel they can get rid
• 27:52
  of all these people is they're going to be increasingly relying
• 27:54
  on AI to make these decisions. OK, good news.
• 27:59
  Yeah. It's perhaps a a bit ironic then
• 28:03
  that they have decided to update their terms and conditions and
• 28:07
  their their policies in this area.
• 28:09
  So this is safety and civility. And so that's as you can see at
• 28:15
  the top there in the pink area, that is basically saying that as
• 28:19
  from the 15th of September, the rules are changing and that the
• 28:21
  new rules are going to be implemented.
• 28:24
  So let's just have a look at the new rules here and let me just
• 28:28
  find this here. So the ones that I want to
• 28:30
  highlight hate speech and hateful behaviour, we don't
• 28:35
  allow content that provokes hate or attacks people based on
• 28:38
  protected attributes like race, religion, gender or sexual
• 28:41
  orientation. OK, Violent and hateful
• 28:43
  organisations and individuals, we don't allow people or groups.
• 28:47
  Now, I'd, I'd advise you just to sit carefully in your chair
• 28:50
  because you may fall off as I, as I read this, violent and
• 28:54
  hateful organisations and individuals.
• 28:56
  We don't allow people or groups that promote violence or hate,
• 29:00
  including violent extremists, criminal organisations or those
• 29:04
  responsible for mass violence, right.
• 29:08
  If we post anything to TikTok about Israel, it's taken down
• 29:11
  immediately, am I right, Kenny Right.
• 29:15
  OK, so that's that's why we haven't posted in TikTok for a
• 29:18
  while. It's it's taken down
• 29:21
  immediately. Any criticism of Israel?
• 29:23
  And yet in their terms and conditions, it says including
• 29:27
  those responsible for mass violence.
• 29:29
  Is Israel not responsible for mass violence?
• 29:33
  OK, that's what's the next one. Then the next one is integrity
• 29:37
  and authority. Misinformation.
• 29:40
  We don't allow misinformation that could cause significant
• 29:42
  harm to individuals or society. Define it, please.
• 29:49
  Right. What is the definition?
• 29:50
  It's what they decide and it's completely arbitrary.
• 29:53
  And of course, this is a reflection of the legislation.
• 29:57
  It is undefined in the legislation.
• 30:00
  It's undefined in their terms and conditions.
• 30:02
  They make it up as they go along.
• 30:03
  But more importantly, government, UK government is
• 30:08
  sending little hints. Maybe UK columns shouldn't be on
• 30:11
  this platform. Maybe 21st Century Wire
• 30:13
  shouldn't be on this platform, this kind of thing, right?
• 30:16
  So, so I just want to finish this segment then with a report
• 30:20
  that's appeared in the Register entitled.
• 30:24
  It's not a report, it's an opinion piece.
• 30:25
  I should say it's entitled. The Online Safety Act is about
• 30:28
  censorship and not safety. Patrick, how many years have we
• 30:32
  been saying this? 7-8 years we've been saying
• 30:36
  this. The Online Safety Act was never
• 30:38
  about safety, never about the safety of children.
• 30:42
  It's only about censorship. But I just want to highlight a
• 30:44
  few of the things that this guy says.
• 30:46
  Now this is a guy called Paige Collins, he's from the
• 30:51
  Electronic Frontier Foundation. This is a a campaign group based
• 30:57
  in the United States that that tries to make sure that the
• 31:00
  Internet is is open and free and non censorious and non
• 31:05
  surveillance as possible. And he's saying here,
• 31:08
  implementation of the UK Online Safety Act is giving Internet
• 31:11
  users around the globe, including those in the United
• 31:13
  States moving to enact their own age verification laws, real time
• 31:19
  proof that such laws impinge on everyone's rights to speak, read
• 31:23
  and view freely. I'll just make the point that
• 31:24
  that's not my mistake in the text there that was just copied
• 31:27
  and pasted from his article. So he did say U.S. states.
• 31:31
  So anyway, it goes on to say the new USA rules require all online
• 31:35
  services accessible in the UK, social media, search engines,
• 31:40
  music sites and adult content providers to enforce age cheques
• 31:43
  and keep children from saying quotes harmful content.
• 31:47
  Social media platforms Reddit, Blue Sky, Discord and X all
• 31:51
  introduced age cheques. Spotify are requiring users to
• 31:54
  submit face scans to a third party digital identity company,
• 31:57
  Yoda to access content labelled 18 Plus.
• 32:02
  Now the point here is he again is falling into this trap of
• 32:07
  yes, OK, he's recognising that, that the legislation is pushing
• 32:11
  at the moment to verify that somebody is over the age of 18
• 32:14
  before they get access to certain content.
• 32:18
  I'm not aware that anybody except the UK column has been
• 32:21
  pointing out that, yeah, that's fine, but nobody is doing
• 32:24
  anything to assure the age of an adult who's using a child
• 32:28
  orientated website and pretending to be a child.
• 32:31
  Children are not required to age to verify that they are under 18
• 32:34
  for those platforms and therefore adults are still able
• 32:37
  to access those platforms. And the numbers of cases that
• 32:41
  are reported to social media platforms of adults grooming
• 32:44
  children on, you know, platforms that are age appropriate for
• 32:48
  children is through the roof and nobody's looking at this.
• 32:52
  Ofcom is not really too concerned about it.
• 32:54
  They're saying, well, age assurance is going to deal with
• 32:56
  it. It is not going to deal with it
• 32:58
  anyway. Page goes on to say the scope of
• 33:02
  so called harmful content is subjective and arbitrary and
• 33:05
  often sweeps up content that governments and CEOs of online
• 33:09
  services might not want, regardless of whether it's legal
• 33:12
  content or not. That is a fair comment.
• 33:15
  But you know, he's still not not grasping the full nettle here.
• 33:19
  And there's, there's much more to this act we've got to
• 33:21
  remember. So far we've only had two
• 33:23
  aspects of the Online Safety Act actually published by Ofcom that
• 33:28
  is so called illegal harms, again, not fully defined, and
• 33:32
  the age assurance thing. The age assurance thing is the
• 33:35
  thing which has caused this to happen.
• 33:38
  It is that is the the aspect of the act that has caused that to
• 33:41
  happen. But these are only two of a wide
• 33:45
  ranging and really unpleasantly draconian act.
• 33:50
  And there will be more to come on this.
• 33:53
  But again, just to reiterate, we need this number to be around
• 33:59
  the 2,000,000 mark as as a goal. Because once we start getting it
• 34:02
  to that level, then more and more people are starting to get
• 34:05
  some kind of oversight of what this is.
• 34:07
  And we need to start talking about the other aspects of it
• 34:10
  that are coming. And one that I just want to
• 34:12
  briefly mention once again before I finish is this issue of
• 34:16
  protecting so called journalistic content from
• 34:20
  recognised news publishers. And that is the mainstream media
• 34:23
  mainly that's who they have in mind for this.
• 34:26
  So that most people who are commenting social media can have
• 34:29
  their content arbitrarily removed.
• 34:31
  But the mainstream media, the aim of the ACT is to make sure
• 34:34
  the mainstream media that their content is retained and is there
• 34:38
  for everybody. So, so that's that's where I
• 34:41
  want to leave that for today. Now add break.
• 34:46
  Who wants to do the ad? Do you want to do the ad break
• 34:47
  chart? No, OK, I'm doing the ad break.
• 34:49
  OK. For everybody that's watching on
• 34:51
  Monday, if you're not AUK column member, please do join us.
• 34:54
  We do need your financial support.
• 34:56
  Thank you to everybody that is supporting us this way.
• 34:59
  If you look on the UK column, new website front page, there's
• 35:02
  a nice big button there for you to press which will show you all
• 35:05
  the various options. And the only other ad that I
• 35:08
  want to mention today is the York event coming on the 18th of
• 35:13
  October. It's going to be a fantastic
• 35:14
  event. Lots of people have bought
• 35:16
  tickets already. They're running out fast.
• 35:19
  Andrew Wakefield is going to be speaking to it.
• 35:21
  And if anybody is joining us for that, everybody either online or
• 35:25
  in person will get access to Andrew Wakefield's film Protocol
• 35:28
  7. Tess Laurie is also joining us
• 35:31
  for that. And we'll be announcing more
• 35:33
  speakers in the coming week. Brian, you're next.
• 35:49
  Well, it's a pleasure to see a live audience because normally
• 35:53
  we look at a a camera screen or a computer screen and that's the
• 35:57
  audience and I'm talking to a black screen.
• 36:00
  So it's great to see faces. Now we've done a lot of
• 36:04
  geopolitical stuff. We've done a lot on law and
• 36:08
  legislation, and the message in today's news has overwhelmingly
• 36:13
  been something is closing in on our society.
• 36:16
  It's designed to silence us. It's designed to restrict what
• 36:21
  we can do. It's designed to change us in
• 36:25
  all sorts of different ways. But I just want to bring in
• 36:28
  another layer, hopefully, which of these is going to do it.
• 36:36
  I seem to have this problem when I there we are.
• 36:39
  OK, It's gone now. Little things make a big
• 36:42
  difference. So this is an email that came in
• 36:46
  to me a couple of days ago and it just said, dear Brian, the
• 36:49
  church is trying to destroy itself.
• 36:52
  There can be no doubt. Please do as you wish with the
• 36:56
  information below. And that came from Auk column
• 36:59
  supporter in Cornwall. Now I knew the context of this
• 37:05
  because unknown to quite a few people, there is a massive
• 37:10
  attack going on at the moment against not only Christianity
• 37:15
  but churches, and this is happening all across the
• 37:18
  country. It's very pernicious.
• 37:20
  Many people can't see it, except the people who are still active
• 37:25
  in the Church of England and are still going to their local
• 37:29
  church because they are seeing things happening.
• 37:32
  Now, one of the groups that set itself up in Cornwall is called
• 37:37
  Save the Parish. And this is just a local group
• 37:41
  and they are fighting. They are really trying to fight.
• 37:45
  And what are they seeing happen? Well, they're seeing the Church
• 37:48
  of England deciding that basically they can't afford
• 37:53
  vicars. Church of England doesn't have
• 37:55
  any money. We'll challenge that a bit, a
• 37:57
  little bit later in this news segment.
• 37:59
  But, and so what's going to happen is that vicars are going
• 38:04
  to retire, leaving fewer vicars. And then the vicars that remain
• 38:08
  are going to be asked to look after more than one church, 2
• 38:13
  churches, three churches, 4 churches, 6 churches.
• 38:18
  And when you look at this plan of action, of course, it's
• 38:21
  totally untenable. It's impossible for one vicar to
• 38:26
  do the proper job of not only looking after the church and
• 38:30
  running Christianity in his his, his or her parish, but also the
• 38:35
  pastoral care, getting round and visiting people in need and
• 38:40
  doing things which perhaps good Christians should be doing.
• 38:44
  So this is a a created protest group in Cornwall and they've
• 38:49
  been starting to push back now. I was given a little heads up
• 38:55
  that this man is retired Admiral called Sir James, Sir James
• 39:01
  Burnell Nugent and he he was former commander in Chief fleet.
• 39:07
  So this is a man of some of some substance.
• 39:10
  He has actually been involved with this group challenging what
• 39:14
  the Church of England is doing. And I take a lot of comfort for
• 39:18
  this because very often, and I've been very frustrated in the
• 39:21
  past that we've never seen senior military officers having
• 39:26
  the guts to stand up and be counted on a number of issues.
• 39:30
  But here, very quietly, this man has been standing up to
• 39:33
  challenge what's been happening with the church.
• 39:36
  This is a little bit of of his CV, if you like, in relation to
• 39:41
  this. So he's been a church warden and
• 39:46
  he's been a member of the Bishops, Diocesan Council, the
• 39:49
  Deanery Synod and the local worship leader.
• 39:53
  And his objective at the moment is to persuade the Church of
• 39:56
  England in its various forms to place parishes higher in their
• 40:01
  priorities rather than seeing them a source of resources.
• 40:07
  Now that's very polite language, and I'd expect nothing less from
• 40:10
  a senior officer because they will always go for the polite
• 40:14
  language. I can read through this and say
• 40:17
  this man is actually starting to wake up and he's seeing
• 40:21
  something. So this is a bit more.
• 40:24
  Has that changed? Yeah, what he said here is if
• 40:29
  you have experience of being in a large benefits with few clergy
• 40:33
  where there's limited pastoral care and much reduced regular
• 40:37
  Sunday services, especially Holy Communion, then please make a
• 40:42
  representation explaining why these large groupings do not
• 40:46
  work. That's the the amount of the
• 40:50
  grouping up of churches he's talking about.
• 40:53
  Then he goes on to say there's a growing body of evidence that
• 40:56
  these amalgamations lead to quote a doom loop of reducing
• 41:02
  church attendance, decline in pastoral care and deteriorating
• 41:07
  finances. And if this machine will work
• 41:09
  for me, let's bring this in. This is a Christian saying.
• 41:14
  I can see doom, death, destruction coming into the
• 41:19
  church system. I am looking at the church
• 41:22
  system itself, the Christian Church being undermined and
• 41:27
  destroyed and who is doing it? The Church of England itself,
• 41:32
  the highest authorities in the Church of England.
• 41:36
  So the final part of what he what he states publicly in this
• 41:40
  group is that they failed to deliver the Church of England
• 41:45
  strap line of a Christian presence in every community.
• 41:49
  So instead of the Christian Church trying to expand and win
• 41:53
  over people and convince people that perhaps in faith and the
• 41:57
  Christian faith there's something to be gained, they are
• 42:00
  looking at the policies coming from the top of the Church of
• 42:03
  England are actually destroying the very church and faith system
• 42:08
  itself. He says that many diocese,
• 42:11
  including Truro, are ignoring this evidence and pressing on
• 42:16
  with large parish groupings of churches.
• 42:19
  If you can add evidence of your own experience that these large
• 42:23
  groupings do not work, it would be extremely helpful to any
• 42:26
  parish unhappily facing the prospect of a merger,
• 42:31
  particularly those in the Lizard Peninsula.
• 42:34
  Now if you think this is localised to Cornwall, it's
• 42:37
  absolutely not because this is centralised Church of England
• 42:40
  policy which is happening across UK and there's been some
• 42:45
  disastrous examples of how this policy has been unfolded in the
• 42:51
  Midlands, which is absolutely devastated the remaining Church
• 42:57
  for communities. So how can we show what's really
• 43:02
  happening? Well the UK column about a year
• 43:06
  ago now focused in on this man who was at the time the Bishop
• 43:11
  of Truro. And it was his policies that was
• 43:14
  bringing in this grouping up of churches, getting rid of vicars
• 43:19
  and increasingly increasing the number of staff who had nothing
• 43:22
  to do with faith or pastoral care.
• 43:26
  And we were very taken with this image because it was the image
• 43:31
  used in a talk that he gave over what he was trying to achieve.
• 43:35
  But the words were there will be no return to the way things
• 43:40
  were. So not only is the church
• 43:43
  destroying itself from the inside, there's the warning.
• 43:47
  Don't even think that you are going to do something to stop it
• 43:51
  because there's no way back now. What he didn't anticipate was
• 43:56
  that in Cornwall at least a group of people would stand up
• 44:00
  and say no, we're fighting back. And as a result, when he left
• 44:06
  his post as Bishop to move on to a a new, a new site, I think he
• 44:13
  went to Winchester, he went under a very big black cloud and
• 44:18
  his reputation was in a bad place.
• 44:21
  And what am I talking about here?
• 44:22
  Really, this is people power in action.
• 44:26
  So if we look at him, what he said, Bishop Philip has said in
• 44:33
  a publicly available, sorry, publicly available video, there
• 44:37
  will be no going back. The change will take place.
• 44:40
  Things are not to remain the same.
• 44:43
  And he claims to be guided in this destruction of the
• 44:46
  Christian Church by God. This is fantastic, absolutely
• 44:52
  incredible arrogance. He claims to be guided in this
• 44:56
  by God in response to the dire financial shortages in the
• 45:01
  county's bishopric, the Diocese of Truro.
• 45:04
  This is another lie because the Church of England is not short
• 45:08
  of money. It's just where it chooses to
• 45:11
  use money. All the while, he's being
• 45:14
  assisted by external advisors and facilitators who must be
• 45:18
  paid money sucked away from pastoral care to a big corporate
• 45:24
  machine. Truro diocese already employs 38
• 45:28
  permanent staff compared to 64 clergy.
• 45:33
  So the Church of England is becoming a corporation, a
• 45:36
  corporate body which is destroying the faith which is
• 45:41
  supposed to be promoting. And this is a very big attack on
• 45:45
  what remains of our culture. And lastly, it says here it
• 45:49
  spends 30, sorry, 350,000 lbs annually on net zero climate
• 45:56
  change work. Never mind supporting the poor,
• 46:01
  the ill, the sick, the suffering.
• 46:04
  We're going to get into climate change, right?
• 46:07
  This is deliberate policy. The beast is in the church and
• 46:12
  it wants to destroy it and it wants to destroy Christianity.
• 46:16
  Now UK Column has reported this is one of the articles you can
• 46:22
  find on the website Welbeys Church of England 2021.
• 46:26
  Trillions for guy. Agreed, but peanuts for the
• 46:30
  peasants. Why do we, why did we use
• 46:33
  trillions? Well, because when you get into
• 46:36
  what is known as the Church of England's Transition Pathway
• 46:41
  Initiative, in the centre of the description of what it's about,
• 46:48
  this was Wellby, Archbishop of Canterbury at the time, boasting
• 46:52
  that he was interacting with global bankers and investors,
• 46:58
  huge hedge hedge funds, and that they had already raised 10.1
• 47:03
  trillion in order to progress climate change.
• 47:09
  So the head of the Church of England was not doing anything
• 47:12
  to repair the roofs of the churches.
• 47:14
  He was not doing anything to pay the wages of the vicars.
• 47:18
  He was doing nothing to help the poor and the needy, but
• 47:21
  supposedly as a Christian he was interfacing with those bankers
• 47:26
  like Christine Lagarde for example, and they had already
• 47:31
  raised 10.1 trillion. Right now two things are going
• 47:38
  on here. They want to destroy the
• 47:40
  Christian Church. I'll just bring in some more
• 47:43
  articles from UK column. Let's put them up on the screen.
• 47:48
  So this is the one where we were talking about what was happening
• 47:52
  with Truro and what was taking in place in Cornwall.
• 47:56
  If I bring up the second one here, this was Christians in
• 48:01
  Cornwall speaking out and I was able to do an anonymous
• 48:05
  interview with somebody in Cornwall who was prepared to
• 48:08
  talk about what was happening in the church.
• 48:10
  Why was it anonymous? Because they are frightened of
• 48:14
  the backlash from within the church.
• 48:17
  And indeed, the Bishop of Truro had built himself up a
• 48:21
  reputation that people who went to him to remonstrate against
• 48:25
  these packaging up of the churches, He was very abrupt,
• 48:30
  abusive, particularly to women in the discussions.
• 48:35
  And he was incredibly arrogant. And so it took somebody to come
• 48:40
  and see me to do an interview anonymously.
• 48:43
  Now Charles is Charles Mallett has also been digging into
• 48:47
  what's been happening with the church.
• 48:49
  And of course, here he's flagging up the no prayer laws.
• 48:56
  And I'd say to you, just think about this.
• 48:58
  What is the state frightened of? It's frightened of you speaking
• 49:03
  your mind. It's frightened of you doing
• 49:06
  what you think is right, but it is frightened of prayer.
• 49:10
  There's a reason for this. When I get the opportunity to
• 49:13
  talk to you at the end of the day, we'll discuss it a bit
• 49:15
  more, but that's another one of the articles up on the website.
• 49:21
  We've also got another one there where's where will be no prayer
• 49:24
  zones, a challenge to the churches.
• 49:27
  And finally this one back to where we started, which is about
• 49:32
  well be and the fact that he can raise 10.1 trillion for climate
• 49:38
  change, but he can't solve the problems inside the Church of
• 49:42
  England. If I sum this up, this is an
• 49:46
  immense attack on culture in this country.
• 49:49
  As we came here, Ben and I drove through a really lovely little
• 49:53
  village, can't remember the name, but it was a postcard with
• 49:57
  a beautiful church. I would guess Norman, I may be
• 50:01
  wrong. You might not be a churchgoer,
• 50:04
  but you can appreciate the architecture and beauty of the
• 50:08
  churches in this country. This is all to be destroyed, as
• 50:13
  is any real engagement with faith, because they regard
• 50:19
  people of faith as being too strong to stand up against these
• 50:24
  draconian laws, which the start of the UK column News has talked
• 50:29
  about. So I'm going to end there.
• 50:32
  And I'm going to say it's beautiful to see your faces
• 50:35
  instead of that camera. We've got more time today, so
• 50:40
  today, happily, we'll be able to discuss some more of the subject
• 50:44
  matter, perhaps in extra time, but also at the end of the day.
• 50:48
  Thank you. Thank you, Brian.
• 51:01
  And you know, we criticised the British government for not
• 51:04
  defining terms in legislation, but I did notice that when you
• 51:07
  were talking about Welby and Lagarde, you left the term
• 51:09
  interfaced undefined. I'll leave you to think about
• 51:12
  that now, Diane. Hello everyone, thanks Mike.
• 51:26
  Can I go back to the outbreak for just a moment please?
• 51:28
  Just to let everyone know, the interview going out on Tuesday
• 51:31
  is Louise Payton. She is a a former NHS nurse,
• 51:35
  trained in the NHS, still is a nurse.
• 51:37
  However, she has been deemed non compliant by the NHS since 2001
• 51:42
  because she refused taking jabs far back as 25 years.
• 51:46
  So she has an amazing story to tell about her career and her
• 51:49
  new role as a holistic healer. And I met her at the Thetford
• 51:52
  Truth and Freedom Festival that I went to you a few weeks ago.
• 51:55
  So please join us Tuesday at 1:00 or streaming afterward.
• 51:59
  I have some different topics I'm going to talk about today that
• 52:03
  relate mostly to libraries and education as you might expect
• 52:06
  from me. If you watch UK, call them
• 52:07
  regularly. I do first have a bit of
• 52:09
  breaking news that I do not have in the slides.
• 52:12
  For those of you who have been following the Fernethi
• 52:14
  Residential School case that we've been following since what
• 52:17
  about over three years now. Colin Smith MSP who was the the
• 52:21
  the MSP who has led the the petition for their their fight
• 52:25
  to justice. These were young girls at the
• 52:27
  time who were badly abused and always possible as young girls
• 52:31
  from Glasgow at Fernethi Residential School from
• 52:34
  approximately 1960 to 1991. Colin Smith got this all the way
• 52:39
  to the debate on the floor of the Scottish Parliament like I
• 52:43
  believe it was last month. It was just announced this week
• 52:47
  by the BBC and other mainstream outlets that Colin Smith, who is
• 52:51
  who was a member of the Labor Party until this week, has been
• 52:55
  suspended from Labour for possession of indecent images of
• 52:58
  children. And he's the one who's been
• 53:00
  fighting for the sexual abuse of these girls that happened for
• 53:04
  all of this time. So I just want you to be aware
• 53:06
  that even if we think that it's somebody that seems trustworthy,
• 53:10
  we have to watch everyone because chances are they might
• 53:13
  not be. So what I want to talk to you
• 53:15
  today about specifically in today's news is this was a tweet
• 53:21
  that I saw that actually UK Column Viewer shared with me a
• 53:25
  few days ago. This is a man called Luke
• 53:28
  Glowacki. He is a PhD from end
• 53:31
  anthropology from America. He is an anthropologist at
• 53:35
  Boston University. He's done some really amazing
• 53:39
  work. I believe he's still rising up
• 53:42
  in his career. He's currently an assistant
• 53:43
  professor, but over the years he's been doing a lot of work in
• 53:47
  Ethiopia in in truly disadvantaged areas and trying
• 53:50
  to make things truly better for people in that part of the
• 53:52
  world. This is just part of his CV
• 53:55
  thing. You know, he was educated at
• 53:59
  from Harvard. He's working at Penn State
• 54:01
  University, Boston University, some of the top universities, as
• 54:05
  we call the Ivy League schools in America for the last several
• 54:08
  years. And he did his training there.
• 54:10
  So here's here he is out in the field in Ethiopia, truly making
• 54:14
  connections with people in the field, trying to understand how
• 54:19
  to create relationships. And really, I, I looked into
• 54:22
  what he's done quite a bit. And as a, you know, as a
• 54:24
  cancelled academic myself, I, I do truly respect his work.
• 54:27
  And I can't say that for a lot of academics anymore in the
• 54:30
  field. So what happened to him this
• 54:33
  week? He shared this tweet.
• 54:35
  It's had over 600,000 views and thousands of shares.
• 54:40
  He, as you all know, or you know if you watch me at all, I'm a
• 54:43
  cancelled librarian as well as a cancelled academic for trying to
• 54:48
  speak out in favour of children and against ideology taking over
• 54:51
  the university libraries in this country and throughout the West.
• 54:55
  He shared this information saying that he, his university
• 54:58
  librarian, so again at Boston University, just reached out to
• 55:01
  faculty members asking us to sign a quote citation justice
• 55:05
  pledge. So now we don't just have social
• 55:08
  justice, we don't just have climate justice.
• 55:10
  We now have citations justice, right?
• 55:12
  So what are citations? Just as a reminder as UK columns
• 55:15
  librarian, that when you write a paper, you have to put your
• 55:18
  citations at the end, just as we do in show notes, right?
• 55:21
  Those are citations to link back to the original sources that we
• 55:24
  used. So now we have to have citation
• 55:27
  justice. And so he's shared photos of all
• 55:29
  this and he, I'll show this to you in just a minute.
• 55:32
  He said I was quiet for years in the face of Allison Anity,
• 55:35
  looking for a job, didn't have tenure, etcetera.
• 55:38
  But after seeing how our universities have been rocked,
• 55:41
  if we are to have any hope of fixing them, we have to speak up
• 55:44
  more, much more. Let's give Doctor Luke a round
• 55:47
  of applause, please. It takes a lot to speak out.
• 55:54
  So the citation Justice pledge, which his faculty was asked to
• 55:57
  sign up for, I'll just, I'll just share a bit of it.
• 56:00
  They have a big impact apparently on scholars and their
• 56:03
  successes. Citation Justice allows us to
• 56:05
  use the power of citations to address historical and
• 56:09
  continuing under citation of certain groups by being
• 56:12
  intentional with our citation practises.
• 56:15
  This fall, your Librarian is launching A Citation Justice
• 56:18
  Pledge to encourage all of us at Boston University to commit to
• 56:21
  intentionally uplifting and centering the scholarship of
• 56:25
  individuals who, because of our systems and the legacy of
• 56:28
  historic system, which means Western universities, even
• 56:30
  though they're in the West as I'll be here, have not been
• 56:34
  centred in publishing and research.
• 56:36
  This includes authors who are Black, Indigenous, persons of
• 56:39
  colour, of varied abilities and part of the two SL, GB, TQIA
• 56:44
  Plus community. Can't say that after a beer.
• 56:48
  Can you commit to being intentional with your citations
• 56:50
  this semester? By signing up, you could receive
• 56:52
  a sticker. Wow.
• 56:55
  One person will win a Boston University Libraries tote bag,
• 56:58
  mug and T shirt. Wow, I'm excited.
• 57:01
  So we go on into a little bit more of what this means.
• 57:03
  We need to recognise what sources we cite are a reflection
• 57:06
  of our own identity and positionality and understanding
• 57:09
  our own identity and bias, we can seek to integrate other
• 57:12
  perspectives. Nick was on and on basically.
• 57:15
  So who are you citing? So for those of you who don't
• 57:17
  know the story of what happened to me, this, this tide, This is
• 57:20
  why I'm so passionate about this.
• 57:22
  The first thing that started the route to my cancellation as a
• 57:24
  librarian and as an academic was because I spoke out at a panel
• 57:27
  session about whether or not the act of citing, referencing was
• 57:31
  actually a racist and oppressive practise.
• 57:33
  And I said no, you just have to cite the thing so people can
• 57:35
  find the thing, right? No, that was not the case.
• 57:38
  I got a letter saying I violated the conference code of conduct
• 57:41
  and two years later I'm not working full time for UK.
• 57:44
  Call them. So it all worked out in the end.
• 57:51
  So anyways, Doctor Luke replied to the librarian, he said thank
• 57:54
  you for your email and I'm very glad to know that we have these
• 57:57
  resources available. Thank you because she listed all
• 57:59
  these resources to find citations that are from these
• 58:02
  different communities, he said. I'm writing because of your
• 58:05
  encouragement that we signed a pledge for citation justice.
• 58:08
  I know citation is a citation justice.
• 58:11
  Sorry, not citations. It's a relatively new effort,
• 58:14
  but it's one that many, including myself, find
• 58:16
  belittling and discriminatory. Further, I don't think asking
• 58:20
  faculty to sign a pledge has any place in an email introducing
• 58:23
  yourself and your services to faculty.
• 58:26
  I'm disappointed that this is how the library has decided to
• 58:29
  spend its time and resources. I'm happy to discuss more with
• 58:32
  you or any of the faculty on this list.
• 58:34
  Now, it's quite possible that he will be looking for an
• 58:37
  alternative news outlet to work for in a couple of years after
• 58:39
  he sent this back to the librarian.
• 58:41
  But I just want to show you, like how infiltrated
• 58:44
  universities and libraries have become, which goes throughout
• 58:47
  all of the different institutions that we talked
• 58:49
  about at UK column, of course, because here you see the
• 58:51
  replies. Anytime you see someone on X who
• 58:54
  has a blue sky profile, you know, to watch out for that
• 58:57
  person because they're the ones that are putting all this into
• 59:00
  place. And so she was basically
• 59:01
  questioning him, saying, so are you basically all these people
• 59:05
  calling him the discriminatory bigot?
• 59:07
  Even though, as I said in the beginning, he does his field
• 59:10
  work in Ethiopia and has done so for years, He's now bigoted.
• 59:13
  Now I'd like to see how these people are spending years in
• 59:16
  Ethiopia living in the field helping those communities.
• 59:19
  But he's the one who's the racist bigot, right?
• 59:23
  So here's what we're supposed to be doing.
• 59:25
  What is citation justice? I didn't know I had to look it
• 59:27
  up. Cite black women.
• 59:29
  It is the site of active citing authors based on identity,
• 59:32
  although they wrote identify as they had a typo to uplift
• 59:36
  marginalised voices with the knowledge that citation is used
• 59:38
  as a form of power in a patriarchal society based on
• 59:42
  white supremacy. Again, this is what I was
• 59:45
  counselled over. The University of Birmingham
• 59:48
  says that Citation Justice is using the power of citations to
• 59:51
  address the historical and persistent under citation of
• 59:54
  certain groups by changing citation practises.
• 59:57
  As Preena Vaya Gopal puts it, a largely white or largely male
• 1:00:00
  curriculum is not politically incorrect and is often believed,
• 1:00:04
  but intellectually unsound. So all of you straight mind
• 1:00:07
  white men out there, you're intellectually unsound,
• 1:00:09
  including all my colleagues up here today, guys.
• 1:00:14
  Monocultures do not produce good thinking and are in themselves a
• 1:00:17
  lethal form of unmarked, narrow identity politics.
• 1:00:22
  So this woman, Professor Gopal that they cited, that's her
• 1:00:25
  work. She's professor in the Faculty
• 1:00:27
  of English at the University of Cambridge, and she talks a lot
• 1:00:31
  about all these issues. She wrote a very long article in
• 1:00:34
  2021 called on decolonization, and the university basically
• 1:00:38
  saying that everything needed to be decolonized, which of course
• 1:00:40
  means destroyed, destroying Western culture, destroying
• 1:00:43
  Western heritage. Everything that the University
• 1:00:45
  of Cambridge has held for hundreds of years needs to be
• 1:00:49
  put aside for things that are not British, essentially, right?
• 1:00:52
  Or English or Scottish or whatever you want to say.
• 1:00:55
  So here's some more recent articles from other people
• 1:00:58
  talking about the issues of citation bias and diversity.
• 1:01:02
  That we are not being diverse, we are not being proper
• 1:01:06
  academics if we are not including a range of sources and
• 1:01:09
  that we are being biassed if we are using sources that come from
• 1:01:12
  the own country where we are choosing to work and educate
• 1:01:14
  people. Now we have to have a citation
• 1:01:17
  diversity statement as well. So we have to put, well I don't
• 1:01:22
  have to anymore because I'm free of the system.
• 1:01:23
  Thankfully we are, we are supposed to now if we are
• 1:01:27
  academics put a statement and do a search and determine the
• 1:01:31
  percentage of women, the percentage of non binary, the
• 1:01:34
  percentage of etcetera that we have cited.
• 1:01:37
  And they've got a specific statement here in this one paper
• 1:01:41
  that I chose this from our references contain 30% woman
• 1:01:45
  first name. They're basing on names, which
• 1:01:47
  is a lot of assumptions, right? Woman last name 11% man stroke
• 1:01:52
  woman, 15% woman stroke man and 40% man stroke man.
• 1:01:56
  This method is limited in that names, pronouns, and social
• 1:01:59
  media profiles used to construct the database may not in every
• 1:02:03
  case be indicative of gender identity.
• 1:02:05
  And B cannot account for intersex done by new or
• 1:02:08
  transgender people. We look forward to future work
• 1:02:11
  that could help us to better understand how to support
• 1:02:13
  equitable practises in science. The diversity conclusion
• 1:02:17
  statement. So these are just some, this is
• 1:02:19
  from the journal. You see the rainbow cake.
• 1:02:21
  You anybody want a slice of the rainbow cake?
• 1:02:24
  So this is from one of those journals saying this is how we
• 1:02:27
  have talked about inclusion and diversity from a particular
• 1:02:30
  journal. That last one was from a certain
• 1:02:32
  paper. So we're seeing this everywhere.
• 1:02:34
  However, it's not very inclusive that in order to view that
• 1:02:36
  paper, you have to pay £48 just to download the PDF.
• 1:02:39
  That's not very inclusive and diverse to me.
• 1:02:43
  Or if you want to purchase the entire issue, it's 485 lbs.
• 1:02:49
  So Nature have used bioengineering, which is that I,
• 1:02:53
  I did a report on UK column news on Monday about Nature, Springer
• 1:02:57
  Nature, which is one of the biggest academic publishing
• 1:02:59
  areas in the world companies. And this is saying we encourage
• 1:03:03
  citation diversity statements to put those into their articles.
• 1:03:07
  So again, we're seeing this all over and we're here.
• 1:03:09
  We're talking about first basing it on 1st and last names,
• 1:03:13
  looking at pronouns, self attested race or ethnicity on
• 1:03:16
  professional websites. So of course if I were to
• 1:03:19
  identify as a black man, you couldn't tell that without
• 1:03:21
  asking me. So that may create some
• 1:03:23
  inaccuracies and that they have these tools that they've that
• 1:03:26
  they've started promoting where you can actually download
• 1:03:30
  people's names of the citations that you have created to try to
• 1:03:34
  predict whether or not they are male or female or, or black or,
• 1:03:38
  or British or whatever they are. So now we're getting really
• 1:03:41
  technical about it and nature portfolio once again, here's the
• 1:03:45
  more information about the citations.
• 1:03:47
  And this is what I'm going to be talking about at 3:00, if you're
• 1:03:50
  around, is the Sustainable Development Goals, because what
• 1:03:53
  they're saying is that citation diversity relates to Sustainable
• 1:03:56
  Development Goal 5, gender equality.
• 1:03:59
  So if you want to hear more about my talk at 3:00, it's
• 1:04:02
  called How to How to be a Globalist Librarian.
• 1:04:05
  Please join me then or otherwise later if you're at home.
• 1:04:08
  Thanks very much. Thank you, Dan.
• 1:04:16
  We'll just mention that Diane left home at 3:00 this morning
• 1:04:19
  to get here for this. So thank you, Dan, very much.
• 1:04:27
  And finally, let me welcome Ben. And, well, we're talking about
• 1:04:31
  design councils. Good afternoon.
• 1:04:38
  I'm going to define some terms. Firstly, justice the the
• 1:04:42
  maintenance or administration of what is just and morally
• 1:04:47
  correct. You don't need to play around
• 1:04:49
  with that too much. And people who are playing
• 1:04:52
  around with words like justice are not interested in justice,
• 1:04:54
  they're interested in the opposite.
• 1:04:56
  And extracting revenge a lot of the time for perceived slights
• 1:05:00
  and things that may have or may not have happened through
• 1:05:02
  history. It's a very dangerous game that
• 1:05:04
  they're playing, unfortunately. And that Lady from Cambridge, I
• 1:05:07
  think I heard recently that Cambridge University have said
• 1:05:11
  that just the very idea that there is a distinct Anglo Saxon
• 1:05:14
  ethnicity is itself racist essentially, you know, so
• 1:05:21
  they're trying to destroy the culture, they're trying to
• 1:05:23
  destroy the physical infrastructure of the church,
• 1:05:26
  which has been taken over by the beast.
• 1:05:28
  And actually I'm going to talk a bit about the beast because
• 1:05:32
  whether I realised it or not, for most of my adult life, I
• 1:05:36
  chose to and was trained to serve the beast system,
• 1:05:39
  specifically the right wing of the beast system, also known as
• 1:05:43
  international capital, with the left wing being global
• 1:05:46
  governance. And what I'm going to take you
• 1:05:49
  through now in a slightly technical and perhaps autistic
• 1:05:52
  way, is how international capital and global governance
• 1:05:57
  are harnessing the generative power of humanity in order to
• 1:06:01
  affect the transformation of the global system, right.
• 1:06:05
  And I'm going to explain where those tools came from that they
• 1:06:09
  that they're using to do that. And a really good place to start
• 1:06:13
  is the Design Council, which is a, a British organisation
• 1:06:17
  started in 1944 by 33rd degree Freemason Winston Churchill to
• 1:06:24
  look at options for the reconstruction of the country
• 1:06:28
  economically, politically, socially in the wake of the
• 1:06:31
  Second World War. Right.
• 1:06:33
  So this is where that organisation came from.
• 1:06:35
  And earlier this year they issued this framework.
• 1:06:38
  This is the doubled Blimey, the double diamond.
• 1:06:42
  It's what they call it. And to cut a Long story short,
• 1:06:45
  this is about setting challenges in order to deliver outcomes and
• 1:06:50
  getting creative teams to redesign the system.
• 1:06:55
  So what this is about, it's about telling people what we
• 1:06:58
  need to happen and then unlocking their creative
• 1:07:01
  potential to get them to build that thing for you, right?
• 1:07:05
  That's how global governance gets things to happen around the
• 1:07:07
  system everywhere on Earth, right?
• 1:07:11
  So I've already mentioned that I'm going to get quite specific
• 1:07:17
  about terms, right? So I talked about international
• 1:07:20
  capital, but the capital doesn't just mean money.
• 1:07:23
  It's part of the equation. The way I think about it is the
• 1:07:27
  coordination of knowledge, assets and capabilities for the
• 1:07:31
  purpose of creating and extracting value, right?
• 1:07:35
  And we create and create value for and extract value from
• 1:07:39
  citizens. And citizens are people owing
• 1:07:43
  loyalty to and entitled by birth or naturalisation to the
• 1:07:47
  protections or privileges of a nation or state.
• 1:07:49
  As all of us, we're all citizens of somewhere, OK.
• 1:07:52
  And capital is coordinated by the chief is an individual
• 1:07:57
  leading coordination of knowledge, effort and ability
• 1:08:00
  and assets to deliver value to citizens, to deliver value to
• 1:08:03
  and extract value from. Actually, as I'll get into quite
• 1:08:06
  importantly. And the chief runs an entity,
• 1:08:08
  it's a discrete operating unit in the system.
• 1:08:10
  And our system is divided into 3 parts.
• 1:08:13
  We have the public, private in the third sector, the charity
• 1:08:15
  sector also previously in centuries part known as the
• 1:08:18
  church, right? But that's kind of been done
• 1:08:20
  away with. We then had charities.
• 1:08:22
  We've now got something called civil society, right?
• 1:08:24
  So there's been a transformation that's happened over decades
• 1:08:27
  there that we can see. And the discreet operating unit,
• 1:08:30
  the entity can be tiny, could be a little organisation, it could
• 1:08:34
  be the health hub up there, that's a discreet operating unit
• 1:08:36
  where I had some breakfast earlier on.
• 1:08:38
  It could be a big international corporation like Google.
• 1:08:41
  It could be the UN, right, top to bottom.
• 1:08:44
  They all have someone leading them.
• 1:08:45
  That's the chief, importantly. And what's the chief doing?
• 1:08:50
  He's trying to engage in a transaction with the citizen.
• 1:08:54
  They're trying to deliver value to and extract value from the
• 1:08:57
  citizens. So to go back to the example of
• 1:08:59
  the health hub earlier, I went in there and I said, can I have
• 1:09:02
  a cup of tea, please? And they delivered that value to
• 1:09:06
  me and they gave me a cup of tea.
• 1:09:07
  And in exchange for that, I gave them one of these nice tokens
• 1:09:10
  that someone gave me when I got here.
• 1:09:12
  Yeah. So that was the value exchange.
• 1:09:14
  They gave me a cup of tea, I gave them something back.
• 1:09:16
  And that's actually how it's supposed to work.
• 1:09:17
  Like if you've got a healthy system that's working properly,
• 1:09:19
  then capital delivers value to the citizen, citizen gives some
• 1:09:23
  value back, and then there's some leftover afterwards and
• 1:09:26
  capital gets to keep that. And then essentially it's how
• 1:09:28
  the system operates, Right. But they're, they're playing
• 1:09:31
  around with it and doing all sorts of bad things.
• 1:09:34
  I haven't got time to go into now.
• 1:09:35
  But I mean, if you watch the UK column on a weekly basis, then
• 1:09:38
  you'll hear about those things. And essentially what what what
• 1:09:41
  should be happening is that when this transaction takes place,
• 1:09:45
  capital and citizen, the chief and the citizen enter into a
• 1:09:48
  state of symbiosis with each other.
• 1:09:50
  You know, so this is mutual dependency essentially, because
• 1:09:55
  I need as a citizen, the health hub as capital to give me a cup
• 1:10:00
  of tea and they need me to give them something back, right?
• 1:10:03
  I mean, it should have a symbiotic, mutually beneficial,
• 1:10:06
  mutually respectful relationship with each other.
• 1:10:08
  A lot of the problems that we got right now are to do with
• 1:10:10
  this being degraded. So capital isn't behaving in a
• 1:10:15
  symbiotic fashion with the citizen, is behaving in an
• 1:10:18
  abusive and an extractive in fashion with the citizen.
• 1:10:22
  That's a lot of what we're experiencing.
• 1:10:24
  Yeah. And, and, and, and a lot of the
• 1:10:27
  organisations that I was working for, as I, as I came to realise,
• 1:10:30
  are the ones that are the the most responsible for that
• 1:10:33
  actually now in this framework, which is something I've
• 1:10:37
  developed myself by the way. But this just kind of helps me
• 1:10:39
  explain a bit about my world view and how I look at the look
• 1:10:43
  at the world. We then have things that are out
• 1:10:45
  and in so out there visible to the citizen.
• 1:10:48
  So again, to go back to the cafe, this is the seating area
• 1:10:52
  where we can all go and sit down and there's something to eat.
• 1:10:54
  And that's the kitchen. Yeah, out in.
• 1:10:58
  And also, these are the things that are externally visible to
• 1:11:02
  and experienced by the citizen. And these are the things that
• 1:11:04
  are invisible and inside and hidden away.
• 1:11:10
  And this is where things get interesting, right?
• 1:11:13
  Because the international capital and global governance
• 1:11:15
  are particularly playing around with this bit, the internal.
• 1:11:19
  And this also maps quite neatly to the kind of left brain, right
• 1:11:22
  brain idea. Because the value that you
• 1:11:25
  deliver to the citizen is expressive and experiential and
• 1:11:30
  the way that you do it is linear and predictable and scientific.
• 1:11:34
  And I won't read all of this stuff out, but this actually
• 1:11:37
  links to the thoughts of Ian Gilchrist.
• 1:11:41
  So there's probably some people here who've been reading in the
• 1:11:43
  Gilchrist. He's become quite prominent
• 1:11:44
  recently, right? So this idea of left and right
• 1:11:46
  brain, analytical and creative, it's not strictly art and
• 1:11:51
  science, right? Those two things are linked to
• 1:11:52
  each other. And this bit here, top right,
• 1:11:57
  the, the expressive, external, outward facing, valuable thing
• 1:12:04
  that can be delivered to the citizen is what I call magic.
• 1:12:08
  It's about creativity, it's about stories, it's about
• 1:12:10
  experiences, it's about the value that we deliver.
• 1:12:12
  And if you look at an organisation like Google, so
• 1:12:16
  we've talked about the, the, the health hub, let's put it a kind
• 1:12:20
  of big international corporation level, this is the magic that
• 1:12:23
  they deliver. And you may or may not like
• 1:12:25
  this, right? But this is actually, if you
• 1:12:27
  think about it in a historical context, astonishing, Yeah, that
• 1:12:31
  something like this exists. They have these stores, they
• 1:12:34
  have this technology that they communicate.
• 1:12:37
  They're offered to us. They can arrest our attention
• 1:12:40
  through visual creativity. They can articulate all of the
• 1:12:45
  different complexities of the proposition that they can
• 1:12:47
  actually do, like what value they can actually deliver to us
• 1:12:51
  these incredible devices, you know, which themselves or you
• 1:12:56
  show that to someone from 100 years ago, they wouldn't believe
• 1:12:58
  that it existed, right? You know, it is
• 1:13:00
  indistinguishable from magic in a sense, right?
• 1:13:03
  So this is the the front end stuff that we're talking that
• 1:13:08
  the the corporations think about.
• 1:13:09
  And then the internal stuff is what I call money, logic,
• 1:13:15
  process, technology, how value is delivered, the stuff that
• 1:13:18
  goes on behind the scenes. This is Google's European
• 1:13:21
  headquarters in in Kings Cross. There's a fascinating stuff
• 1:13:24
  going on in Kings Cross, by the way.
• 1:13:25
  They're basically built a completely new city around
• 1:13:29
  King's Cross in Houston and Camden.
• 1:13:32
  And it's it's like the old city's been pushed to the side
• 1:13:35
  and this new global, international corporate thing
• 1:13:38
  has just been layered in over the top of it.
• 1:13:39
  We've got a friend who's been doing some research on this.
• 1:13:42
  It's really interesting to look at, probably share more of that
• 1:13:45
  over the next couple of months. And then this is what happens
• 1:13:48
  behind the scenes. So it's about people, of course,
• 1:13:52
  in offices playing computer games because like it's a lot of
• 1:13:56
  what you see in these tech companies, right?
• 1:13:58
  Like it's work, but it's also kind of not work as well.
• 1:14:01
  You know, it's, you know, this, they're not getting their hands
• 1:14:04
  dirty, let's put it like that. And then also crucially for
• 1:14:08
  organisations like this, and increasingly so, it's about this
• 1:14:14
  hardware, physical infrastructure, data centres,
• 1:14:19
  algorithms and the the people are becoming less of a component
• 1:14:23
  of the system, right? And those two things together
• 1:14:29
  are how I and actually, frankly, how they might use slightly
• 1:14:33
  different language. But this is how international
• 1:14:35
  capital, global governance, people at the top level of the
• 1:14:37
  system think about things, think about magic, think about money.
• 1:14:41
  You could also call that creativity and commerce.
• 1:14:45
  This is also in some sense the feminine and the masculine.
• 1:14:49
  Yeah. And actually from the Masonic
• 1:14:51
  sense, this is the compass and the square.
• 1:14:54
  Importantly, I mentioned Churchill earlier, right?
• 1:14:57
  It's very similar stuff. And when you get into the top
• 1:15:00
  level of those organisations, what they do is they bring these
• 1:15:04
  things together because if you understand the way our, our
• 1:15:07
  education system is, is built, people are either creative or
• 1:15:11
  they're analytical, right? We get sort of hired off in
• 1:15:14
  different directions quite early in our education.
• 1:15:17
  That's deliberate because they don't want us being able to
• 1:15:19
  bring those two things together effectively unlocking our
• 1:15:22
  generative potential ourselves, right?
• 1:15:25
  Really importantly. And the bit in the middle ties
• 1:15:29
  it all together to bring it back to design.
• 1:15:31
  Is, is design, right? So actually, when you want to
• 1:15:34
  think about how to take a structured approach to complex
• 1:15:38
  problem solving and organisational transformation,
• 1:15:42
  which is what they are attempting to affect globally
• 1:15:45
  across every single area of the system, from the the top biggest
• 1:15:49
  international corporations to the smallest companies through
• 1:15:51
  things like the B the B Corp scheme.
• 1:15:54
  Then you use design to do that. And this framework has been
• 1:15:59
  around for quite a while, probably 20 years in, in, in,
• 1:16:02
  in, in this form. So this double diamonds been
• 1:16:04
  around for quite a long time. But earlier this year they
• 1:16:07
  introduced an expanded version, which crucially includes the
• 1:16:11
  word stakeholders, which you didn't before, right?
• 1:16:14
  So you can see how they're trying to engineer a situation
• 1:16:16
  where stakeholders, an additional layer of participants
• 1:16:20
  in this generative process need to be involved.
• 1:16:23
  And also the idea of collaboration, Co creation,
• 1:16:27
  creating things together, IE with them, in order to align to
• 1:16:31
  the challenges that they're setting in order to unlock the
• 1:16:35
  outcomes that they're looking for.
• 1:16:37
  And who's behind the design council these days?
• 1:16:41
  Bunch of people essentially representing the combined
• 1:16:43
  interests of the United Nations and the World Economic Forum in
• 1:16:47
  order to bring those two things back together.
• 1:16:50
  Money and power. Magic.
• 1:16:51
  And what was it? Magic and money, creativity and
• 1:16:53
  commerce. The feminine and the masculine,
• 1:16:57
  the compass and the square at the top level in order to bring
• 1:17:02
  forth that change that they're trying to unlock across the
• 1:17:04
  global system. Thank you.
• 1:17:14
  Thank you, Ben. And that brings us to the end of
• 1:17:16
  today's UK Column News. Thank you to everybody that's
• 1:17:18
  joined us. Thank you to everybody that's
• 1:17:19
  taken part. We will have a 5 minute break
• 1:17:23
  and then we'll be starting UK Column News Extra.
• 1:17:27
  So stick around for that. We'll be back in 5 minutes.
• 1:17:30
  Thank you.