Latest / UK Column Radio / UK Column News Podcast 11th April 2025

Transcript

UK Column News Podcast 11th April 2025 · UK Column Radio

0:08
Speaker 1: Good afternoon.
0:09
Speaker 2: It's just gone one o'clock on Friday, the eleventh of
0:12
Speaker 2: April twenty twenty five. Welcome to UK column News. I'm
0:15
Speaker 2: your host, Charles Mannett, and joining me in the studio
0:18
Speaker 2: today is Patrick Henningson.
0:19
Speaker 1: Welcome to the program. Patrick, great to be with you, Charles.
0:22
Speaker 2: And by video link, Mark Anderson from the United States.
0:27
Speaker 2: Now we will have a full program today and we'll
0:29
Speaker 2: be covering the push for war with iron as well
0:32
Speaker 2: as farmers protests and indeed the latest on the pandemic treaty.
0:36
Speaker 2: But we will start with tariffs now. As Keir Starmer
0:41
Speaker 2: tweets about passover and Rachel Reeves sends out messages about
0:45
Speaker 2: Doncaster Airport, there is a rather bigger economic picture taking shape,
0:49
Speaker 2: and Mark's going to take the lead for us today
0:51
Speaker 2: on that.
0:52
Speaker 1: Over to you Mark.
0:54
Speaker 3: Good day everyone, after last week's spirited discussion on tariff's. Naturally,
1:00
Speaker 3: I've covered Congress a lot of years. I had to
1:02
Speaker 3: look to Congress and as we'll see here, on the
1:05
Speaker 3: very day April second, that President Trump gave his Rose
1:08
Speaker 3: Garden speech about emphasizing tariffs a declaration of economic independence.
1:13
Speaker 3: That very day there was a vote in the Senate,
1:16
Speaker 3: and The Hill reported on it. Four Republican senators vote
1:21
Speaker 3: with Democrats to undo trump tariffs on Canada. The thing
1:25
Speaker 3: is is, as is often the case with the media cartel,
1:28
Speaker 3: their headlines don't always match the stories, because, as I
1:31
Speaker 3: noted on this slide, what it actually said in the
1:35
Speaker 3: body of the story is that in a fifty one
1:37
Speaker 3: to forty eight vote, the Senate expressed its sense that
1:41
Speaker 3: it will disagree with Trump's tariffs on Canada. But the
1:45
Speaker 3: vote was on a resolution that does not have the
1:47
Speaker 3: force of law and is just symbolic. Now, of course
1:51
Speaker 3: I didn't stop looking there. The Senator Charles Grassley, a
1:57
Speaker 3: very noted veteran senator from Iowa. The very next day,
2:02
Speaker 3: April third, they issued a press release he and Maria
2:05
Speaker 3: Cantwell out of Washington State. And as I expected, Congress
2:10
Speaker 3: is trying to throw its weight around and regain its
2:14
Speaker 3: constitutional authority on trade. And indeed, as it states here
2:18
Speaker 3: Article one, Section eight Coss three, if the Constitution delegates
2:21
Speaker 3: to Congress the power quote to regulate commerce with foreign
2:26
Speaker 3: nations among the states, so that's internal and external and
2:29
Speaker 3: with the Indian tribes. So Senators Grassley and Maria Cantwell
2:34
Speaker 3: have introduced legislation quote to restore Congress's constitutionally authorized role
2:39
Speaker 3: in setting and approving setting and approving US trade policy,
2:44
Speaker 3: according to their joint news release. Now, a quick footnote
2:48
Speaker 3: here is that Congress has long had this power, and
2:52
Speaker 3: as is the case with the border, Congress is often
2:55
Speaker 3: making new laws when they don't have to. They have
2:58
Speaker 3: existing constitutional authority and existing laws in most cases, and
3:04
Speaker 3: they simply need to enforce or assert those things, and
3:07
Speaker 3: instead they spend a lot of time, burning up a
3:10
Speaker 3: lot of time carrying out onerous and often tedious legislation.
3:15
Speaker 3: That being said, Chuck Grassley had this to say around
3:19
Speaker 3: the time of that press release. For too long, Congress
3:22
Speaker 3: has delegated its clear authority to regulate interstate and foreign
3:26
Speaker 3: commerce to the executive branch. Building on my previous efforts
3:30
Speaker 3: as Finance Committee Chairman, I'm joining Senator Cantwell to introduce
3:34
Speaker 3: this Bipartisan Trade Review Act of twenty twenty five. That's
3:38
Speaker 3: the actual name of the bill, to reassert Congress's constitutional role.
3:44
Speaker 3: That's a US Senate photo. Pretty Much everything I'm reporting
3:48
Speaker 3: today is first hand and has not been in the
3:50
Speaker 3: regular news feed, except for that Hill item. Anyway, here's
3:54
Speaker 3: the basic thrust of that bill, and we'll be keeping
3:57
Speaker 3: an eye on it to see if it passes. To
3:59
Speaker 3: an end to new tariff. The President must notify Congress
4:02
Speaker 3: of the imposition of a new or the increase of
4:05
Speaker 3: an existing tariff within forty eight hours and explain his reasoning.
4:09
Speaker 3: The President also must provide an analysis of the potential
4:13
Speaker 3: impact on American businesses and consumers of these tariffs. Within
4:17
Speaker 3: sixty days, Congress must pass a joint resolution of approval
4:21
Speaker 3: on the new tariff. Otherwise, all new tariffs on imports
4:25
Speaker 3: expire after that deadline. And the fourth main plank here
4:29
Speaker 3: is Congress could end tariffs at any time by passing
4:33
Speaker 3: a disapproval resolution, although anti dumping measures would get special consideration,
4:39
Speaker 3: such as when China over the decades has occasionally dumped hardwoods,
4:42
Speaker 3: lithium batteries, toys, steel chemicals, things like that. There might
4:46
Speaker 3: be exceptions there moving forward, of course, the oldest committee
4:51
Speaker 3: in the US Congress is the Ways and Means Committee,
4:54
Speaker 3: created in July of seventeen eighty nine, and they still exist.
4:57
Speaker 3: Who knew, right, anyway? The full committee hearing on the
5:01
Speaker 3: Trump administration's twenty twenty five Trade Policy agenda was held
5:06
Speaker 3: this past Wednesday. I covered it virtually online and I
5:09
Speaker 3: only used the Ways and Committee's own broadcast, not any
5:13
Speaker 3: other news broadcasts. And the only witness, the only one
5:16
Speaker 3: to testify, was US Trade Representative Ambassador Jamieson Greer. I
5:22
Speaker 3: believe that's Jamieson Jamieson Greer. At any rate, the meeting
5:29
Speaker 3: went on and it had your typical bipartisan split in it,
5:33
Speaker 3: as this next slie kind of illustrates. The Party number
5:38
Speaker 3: one was mainly represented by Chairman Jason Smith of Missouri,
5:43
Speaker 3: the Republican and Party number two door number two ranking
5:46
Speaker 3: member Richard Neil, a Democrat out of Massachusetts, and they
5:50
Speaker 3: had your typical binary arguments, your typical Republican arguments, your
5:55
Speaker 3: typical Democrat arguments. And a quick observation there is that
5:59
Speaker 3: the absence of independent parties or non affiliated candidates or
6:05
Speaker 3: non affiliated members of Congress that is is very very
6:09
Speaker 3: clear when it comes to these rather divisive issues, because
6:12
Speaker 3: you never get anybody refereeing what's going on. It's just
6:15
Speaker 3: your typical Democrat, typical Republican. If you had a gym
6:19
Speaker 3: trafficknt at least someone independently minded even though he was
6:22
Speaker 3: a Democrat, or you had actual numerous third party candidates
6:27
Speaker 3: elected to office, you could get more nuanced, you could
6:29
Speaker 3: get more objectivity, but you often don't get that with
6:33
Speaker 3: the media only focusing on your typical Democrat Republican arguments.
6:37
Speaker 3: But anyway, we have some two quick video clips that
6:41
Speaker 3: are pretty far apart from one another, but it gives
6:44
Speaker 3: the range of views that were talked about from the
6:47
Speaker 3: Democrat side and the Republican side. So let's see those
6:49
Speaker 3: video clips.
6:52
Speaker 1: Mister Murphy, thank you, mister chairman.
6:55
Speaker 4: I just want to show a slide to everybody documenting
7:00
Speaker 4: where we are with the United States and the US
7:02
Speaker 4: trade deficit. I think this really shows why this is
7:05
Speaker 4: an emergency. If you look at where we are with
7:07
Speaker 4: manufacturing goods that's in the red column here. If you
7:11
Speaker 4: look at what has happened to the manufacturing capacity of
7:13
Speaker 4: the United States, we have plummeted, absolutely plummeted down here
7:18
Speaker 4: in twenty twenty two. We have such a trade deficit
7:23
Speaker 4: with manufactured goods.
7:24
Speaker 1: This is critical.
7:26
Speaker 4: This is why the President has said this is an emergency.
7:29
Speaker 4: The same thing with fuels and other total goods. We
7:32
Speaker 4: have plummeted in this nation's capacity to actually produce things. So, yes,
7:37
Speaker 4: this is an emergency, and this is by all means,
7:40
Speaker 4: altogether the right.
7:41
Speaker 1: Thing to do. If we do not reverse this trend.
7:45
Speaker 1: Again going with the.
7:46
Speaker 4: Absolute calamitous effect of how we are hurtling towards a
7:50
Speaker 4: sovereign debt crisis, this nation does not exist. And yes
7:55
Speaker 4: there is short term problems, without a doubt, but the
7:58
Speaker 4: same thing by taking medicine you don't want to take.
8:00
Speaker 4: If we don't help the body by intervening and doing
8:04
Speaker 4: what is critically important for this nation, nothing else matters.
8:08
Speaker 4: So this is why how manufacturing has plummeted, and this
8:12
Speaker 4: is why we are in a state of emergency.
8:14
Speaker 1: Thank you, bok.
8:18
Speaker 3: Footnote that's Representative Greg Murphy out of North Carolina Republic.
8:22
Speaker 3: And a quick footnote is I contacted his office and
8:25
Speaker 3: I tried to get that graphic so we could get
8:27
Speaker 3: a closer, clearer look at it, and I did not
8:29
Speaker 3: get a response yet. Anyway, we have a Representative Chew
8:33
Speaker 3: Chu out of California, a Democrat, giving the opposing view,
8:37
Speaker 3: and that's the next video.
8:40
Speaker 5: They are barely able to afford their everyday living expenses,
8:43
Speaker 5: but now they're hearing that the average family will have
8:46
Speaker 5: to pay forty six hundred dollars a year more because
8:50
Speaker 5: of the Trump tariffs. They are hearing this will be
8:53
Speaker 5: the largest tax increase for the American people in our
8:57
Speaker 5: nation's peacetime history. They are hearing Gold and sac say
9:00
Speaker 5: that we face a recession. The increases will be for
9:05
Speaker 5: food items that the US does not produce domestically, like
9:09
Speaker 5: cocw beans, coffee beans, tea and spices, and certain nuts,
9:13
Speaker 5: but non food items like clothing, consumer electronics, shoes, cell phones, furniture,
9:19
Speaker 5: and household appliances will be especially hard hit, as more
9:23
Speaker 5: than fifty percent of our consumption comes from countries facing
9:28
Speaker 5: tariff increases of thirty percent or more. I must point
9:33
Speaker 5: out that there are some items on the list, like
9:36
Speaker 5: bananas and cacw beans, which the US can never grow
9:40
Speaker 5: enough of to meet our own demand because of our
9:43
Speaker 5: mostly non tropical climate. In fact, the US produces a
9:48
Speaker 5: tiny number of bananas in Hawaiian Florida, but depends enormously
9:53
Speaker 5: on importing bananas from Guatemala, Ecuador, and Costa Rica, all
9:56
Speaker 5: of which receive tariffs, and in fact, the US is
10:00
Speaker 5: the world's largest importer of bananas. So this shoot first
10:06
Speaker 5: then aim approach is making Americans' lives much worse with
10:12
Speaker 5: no actual plan and doesn't make any sense.
10:19
Speaker 3: So that's the opposing view on that interesting stuff. Now,
10:23
Speaker 3: an interesting twist, and she alluded to food, is that
10:27
Speaker 3: we need to make a distinction between perishable and non
10:30
Speaker 3: perishable goods. In fact, it might make sense for the
10:33
Speaker 3: US to be striving for self sufficiency more in the
10:37
Speaker 3: food area than durable goods because food can spoil or
10:40
Speaker 3: become contaminated. There's only so much shelf life, and your
10:44
Speaker 3: supply chains might have to be dealt with differently. Now
10:47
Speaker 3: we have a miscellaneous item here. The shrimping industry in
10:51
Speaker 3: the US, however, is cheering the proposed legislation and cheering
10:56
Speaker 3: the Trump tariffs. They like what they see, and this
10:59
Speaker 3: is out of my art dot com. It happens to
11:01
Speaker 3: concern the port of Brownsville, where they harvest enormous amounts
11:05
Speaker 3: of shrimp, about an hour east to where I'm sitting.
11:08
Speaker 3: And there's another bill in Congress, as this willudes to
11:10
Speaker 3: House Resolution two O seven to one, The Save Our
11:13
Speaker 3: Shrimpers Act has been introduced there to prohibit federal funding
11:17
Speaker 3: from going to international financial firms that finance foreign shrimp farms,
11:22
Speaker 3: the Rio Grand Valley that's Deep South Texas, the shrimp
11:25
Speaker 3: industry here, and the rest of the domestic industry industry.
11:28
Speaker 3: Excuse me, hopes that resolution becomes law quote in light
11:32
Speaker 3: of the fact that US shrimpers have been brought to
11:35
Speaker 3: their knees by unrelenting waves of cheap foreign exports flooding
11:38
Speaker 3: the market and driving prices down past the point of sustainability.
11:42
Speaker 3: And we have one more item on this. It's a
11:46
Speaker 3: hard thing to police. We're hearing the US International Trade
11:49
Speaker 3: Commission found last year that imported farm raise shrimp is
11:53
Speaker 3: ultra cheap because quote other countries are subsidizing their fisheries
11:57
Speaker 3: and dumping their product on the US market, quote, according
12:01
Speaker 3: to that Trade Commission. So that's it for now, gentlemen.
12:04
Speaker 3: I have a little bit later on state level trade
12:06
Speaker 3: that adds another interesting twist to this that no one
12:09
Speaker 3: ever thinks about. But now over to you.
12:12
Speaker 2: Thanks very much, Mark and supply chains. Something we'll come
12:14
Speaker 2: back to you presently, But obviously this is very big topics.
12:17
Speaker 2: We're going to extend this theme, say Patrick's going to
12:19
Speaker 2: continue with the tariff's story.
12:22
Speaker 1: Well, the previous congressional speaker there, she said, they don't
12:26
Speaker 1: grow much bananas in America, but there's plenty of bananas
12:30
Speaker 1: in Washington. As we will show you shortly, this whole
12:34
Speaker 1: story has just completely exploded. Here. We'll look at this
12:38
Speaker 1: up on screen now. I tweeted this on Monday, April
12:42
Speaker 1: of seventh here, and I predicted that Trump would get
12:46
Speaker 1: pressure from the donor class and that he would then
12:50
Speaker 1: suspend the tariffs that he put on across the board
12:54
Speaker 1: to the entire world. And looks like that's exactly what happened.
12:58
Speaker 1: And I even quoted him almost verbatim on Monday. I
13:02
Speaker 1: predicted what Donald was going to say, We're postponing the
13:05
Speaker 1: implementation of the tariffs because quite frankly, what we've done
13:08
Speaker 1: is so great. Just the announcement has already had such
13:12
Speaker 1: a great impact in governments are now begging us for
13:14
Speaker 1: a deal. That's what I predicted Donald would say, and
13:18
Speaker 1: it's true. So here we are. This is the result.
13:22
Speaker 1: This is a bottle. This reminds us of you could say,
13:27
Speaker 1: Kevin Keegan's England team. But anyway, it looks like Trump
13:30
Speaker 1: has bottled it. The pressure came and he did cave.
13:33
Speaker 1: Trump announces a ninety day pause on the tariff war
13:37
Speaker 1: except for China, except for one country. So that's interesting. Now,
13:41
Speaker 1: this is where things are going to get a little
13:44
Speaker 1: bit dicey for the Trump administration. Let's take a look.
13:47
Speaker 1: There's Donald there. I guess he's claiming victory, Charles, but
13:52
Speaker 1: it seems to be anything but because this has started
13:55
Speaker 1: a tit for tat with China that is now getting
13:58
Speaker 1: unbelievably ridicted. Take a look at this. Consider these two
14:02
Speaker 1: or among each other's greatest trading partners. China has raised
14:06
Speaker 1: tariffs in reciprocal and reciprocation to what the US has done.
14:10
Speaker 1: China raise tariffs on all US goods up to one
14:13
Speaker 1: hundred and twenty five percent as the trade war ramps up.
14:17
Speaker 1: Now that's in response to Trump putting on forty or
14:20
Speaker 1: fifty percent. There's been so many changes in the last
14:23
Speaker 1: forty eight hours it's hard to keep track of it here.
14:26
Speaker 1: But Trump not to be outdone here he is. The
14:28
Speaker 1: White House says that a tariff right on most Chinese
14:31
Speaker 1: imports will now be one hundred and forty five percent.
14:35
Speaker 1: Where is this going to end? And you know, the
14:38
Speaker 1: whole basis of this. And this is the strange thing.
14:41
Speaker 1: Trump is called this trade war on a national emergency,
14:45
Speaker 1: and one has to look at the predicate for this.
14:49
Speaker 1: One of them was a fentinal crisis. Okay, some fentanyl
14:52
Speaker 1: coming over the Mexican border. They're blaming China for it.
14:56
Speaker 1: It's a bit tenuous, but they're saying that we'll bring
15:00
Speaker 1: bring the order up on screen here, this is what
15:02
Speaker 1: the White House published here, and then they're saying, no, no,
15:05
Speaker 1: this is a national emergency because of a trade deficit.
15:10
Speaker 1: But the thing is, how could it be an emergency
15:12
Speaker 1: when the United States has had a trade deficit since
15:15
Speaker 1: nineteen thirty four. So it's taking them over, I don't know,
15:18
Speaker 1: something like eighty ninety years to work out this so
15:22
Speaker 1: called emergency here. So he's invoking the International Emergency Economic
15:26
Speaker 1: Powers Act of nineteen seventy seven in order to ram
15:30
Speaker 1: this emergency through. But globalization's been going since the nineties
15:35
Speaker 1: pretty much full steam, so it's not as if this
15:38
Speaker 1: was a surprise. But nonetheless they're carrying on with this.
15:42
Speaker 1: Right now. Let's take a look here. There's the Donald
15:45
Speaker 1: and so this is what the line is here. You've
15:48
Speaker 1: probably heard this. Everyone's heard this. They're ripping us off.
15:51
Speaker 1: They're ripping us off for getting a terrible deal. Donald's
15:54
Speaker 1: been saying this actually since before he became president. Here,
15:58
Speaker 1: but are they really rip the US off? Let's take
16:01
Speaker 1: a look at the facts.
16:02
Speaker 4: No.
16:03
Speaker 1: Actually, in actuality, the US is ripping everybody else off
16:07
Speaker 1: by exporting their Fiat dollars in exchange for actual valuable goods.
16:12
Speaker 1: This is the advantage the US has had because they
16:15
Speaker 1: have the world reserve currency. This allows the US to
16:18
Speaker 1: deficit spend by the tune over two trillion dollars per year.
16:23
Speaker 1: And with that two trillion, they're able to fund their
16:26
Speaker 1: military industrial complex. They're able to project power globally, power
16:30
Speaker 1: and influence globally, effectively run a global empire on the
16:34
Speaker 1: US dollar system. The US has been running a trade
16:36
Speaker 1: deficit since nineteen thirty four. Fact, and the deficit is
16:41
Speaker 1: roughly the amount of government spending versus how much they produce.
16:45
Speaker 1: So there's a deficit there. It's almost mathematical as an equation.
16:49
Speaker 1: The US deficit is not caused by other countries ripping
16:53
Speaker 1: off America. It's caused because the United States has gone
16:56
Speaker 1: through the process of offshoring its manufacturing it used to
17:00
Speaker 1: be an industrial power, but now it's a financial power.
17:03
Speaker 1: It's a financialized its economy. Guess who's an industrial power China.
17:08
Speaker 1: China's doing what the United States did back in eighteen
17:11
Speaker 1: ninety and that's the golden years that Trump and his
17:14
Speaker 1: team keep harkening back to. So this conversation just the
17:17
Speaker 1: more you look at it, it just doesn't add up.
17:20
Speaker 1: And we go on exporting dollars in exchange for debt
17:23
Speaker 1: props up the US dollar as a world reserve currency.
17:26
Speaker 1: As we said earlier, and here's the key point. This
17:29
Speaker 1: is essentially a corrupt system which allows the US to
17:32
Speaker 1: pay for all of these wars on its national credit card.
17:36
Speaker 1: This is what it comes down to. It's not about
17:38
Speaker 1: other countries ripping off the president here and you know
17:42
Speaker 1: when Trump and this is the terror of fallacies, This
17:45
Speaker 1: is the terror of chart This is the calculations on
17:49
Speaker 1: this was totally arbitrary and completely bogus. He's been panned
17:53
Speaker 1: by the pundits for this year. He's even getting panned
17:57
Speaker 1: by the financial press on this fortune. Some of these
18:00
Speaker 1: are generally pro conservative, pro Trump publications. Here Trump's terror
18:04
Speaker 1: formula used the wrong value in its calculations. Conservative think
18:08
Speaker 1: tank says this whole thing was rigged. They're talking about
18:11
Speaker 1: this entire tariff farrago. The formula of the White House
18:15
Speaker 1: used to calculate it. It's recent tariffs is based on
18:17
Speaker 1: an error that roughly quadrupled the rates from what they
18:21
Speaker 1: should have been. So, I mean, this is a serious
18:24
Speaker 1: problem here when we're talking about competency of the Trump administration.
18:28
Speaker 1: He's the businessman, he's known as the billionaire, the money maker,
18:31
Speaker 1: the deal maker. How could he get the economics and
18:35
Speaker 1: the numbers so horribly wrong? We'll continue here more terraff fallacies.
18:40
Speaker 1: There he is again, he's still angry. He's saying, well,
18:44
Speaker 1: correct a deficit with money raised from tariffs, that's the
18:47
Speaker 1: claim the Trump administration's making. But actually, punitive tariffs deincentivizes
18:53
Speaker 1: trade with the US, meaning less revenue. A recession is
18:56
Speaker 1: coming now because of a lack of confidence. Inflation is
18:59
Speaker 1: moving in, meaning less affordability and demand, and no immediate
19:03
Speaker 1: quote cheap US made goods to replace the expensive imports.
19:08
Speaker 1: We're looking at five to ten years away from the
19:11
Speaker 1: United States becoming reindustrialized, even if they had all of
19:15
Speaker 1: their eggs in their ducks. In a row on that score.
19:18
Speaker 1: So second fallacy. It worked in eighteen ninety when the
19:22
Speaker 1: US had tariffs and no income tax. This is the
19:25
Speaker 1: basis of the whole gambit here from the Trump administration,
19:29
Speaker 1: at least the public facing pitch. Eighteen ninety, the US, again,
19:32
Speaker 1: as I said, had an industrial economy, and the US
19:35
Speaker 1: ran massive trade surpluses back then. This is why their
19:39
Speaker 1: foreign policy became more aggressive because they needed markets at
19:43
Speaker 1: that time for their products. So they're having a de
19:47
Speaker 1: inflationary period and they needed to expand. That was the
19:50
Speaker 1: beginning of the US Empire. Twenty twenty five, however, we
19:53
Speaker 1: have a financialized economy and the US is offshot. It's
19:56
Speaker 1: manufacturing mostly for the better part thirty years. But actually,
20:01
Speaker 1: in reality, even before that, Okay, now for some trade
20:05
Speaker 1: tariff realities here and some realities, let's just lay it
20:09
Speaker 1: on the table. Tariffs have further triggered inflation, fact recession, stagflation,
20:16
Speaker 1: collapse in the bond market. Arguably, this is where the
20:19
Speaker 1: pressure came onto Trump from some of his billionaires who
20:22
Speaker 1: have all of their money in long plays on the
20:25
Speaker 1: stock market. The stock markets have taken a beating, not
20:28
Speaker 1: just in the US but internationally. Here arise in the
20:31
Speaker 1: cost of living. That means lower living standards, wiping out
20:35
Speaker 1: gains from trade, so buying cheaper imports, selling advantage goods.
20:40
Speaker 1: That's the normal gains from trade that the US would
20:43
Speaker 1: normally have in this very delicate balance of a global
20:46
Speaker 1: trading system. Trump is just basically taking a wrecking ball
20:50
Speaker 1: to this in the course of a week or two.
20:52
Speaker 1: Unbelievable and unprecedented. Here, fewer US goods means more expensive
20:58
Speaker 1: at home, is well more expensive to export, so no
21:01
Speaker 1: significant trade in the trade bounce. This is what the
21:04
Speaker 1: expert are saying, is not going to be a big
21:06
Speaker 1: difference in the trade deficit. The result is going to
21:10
Speaker 1: be look less trade less trade both coming in and
21:13
Speaker 1: going out. So this is a contraction of the economy.
21:17
Speaker 1: This is what Trump has done by disrupting the economy,
21:20
Speaker 1: and this is why a lot of people are really
21:22
Speaker 1: going crazy in the analytical world. Here stock market crashes,
21:26
Speaker 1: trains have been wiped out on market cap and here's
21:30
Speaker 1: the main point, further wrecking the US economy, wrecking the
21:33
Speaker 1: world trading system. It might not be ideal for the
21:37
Speaker 1: United States, but the United States didn't have goods to export,
21:41
Speaker 1: and that is not the fault of China or anybody
21:43
Speaker 1: else in the world. What they're trying to do is
21:45
Speaker 1: punish everybody else for their problems. And this is not
21:49
Speaker 1: going to go down well for future relationships here, and
21:53
Speaker 1: we'll just move forward and see, Okay, this is a
21:56
Speaker 1: good point here, and we'll bring this next up on stage.
22:01
Speaker 1: Americans need a little history lesson and I'm sure even
22:04
Speaker 1: the British know this. The Boston Tea Party December sixteenth,
22:08
Speaker 1: seventeen seventy three, No Taxation without Representation. Mark Anderson did
22:13
Speaker 1: a great job in showing the issue of the congressional authority.
22:17
Speaker 1: Trump as one man is trying to basically levy taxes
22:20
Speaker 1: effectively here, but really also messing with the entire global
22:25
Speaker 1: trade system here. So this is a drawing made by
22:28
Speaker 1: a fifth grade student. So I would direct the Trump
22:34
Speaker 1: economic team to this fifth grade student just to remind themselves,
22:38
Speaker 1: and we bring an irony alert in here, Charles that
22:41
Speaker 1: the Boston Tea Party originally was to bail out the
22:44
Speaker 1: British East India Company. The Parliament wanted to maintain that
22:48
Speaker 1: ability to tax the colonies, but it was really about
22:51
Speaker 1: bailing out the corporations on that they had a huge
22:55
Speaker 1: balance of payments problems with the British government at the time.
22:57
Speaker 1: But this is another key issue. European market were very
23:00
Speaker 1: weak at the time due to debts from the French
23:04
Speaker 1: in Indian Wars among other wars at the time. Does
23:07
Speaker 1: this sound familiar, It certainly does. And so you have
23:10
Speaker 1: all these monopolies back in the day, back in the
23:13
Speaker 1: late seventeen hundreds, and it created a situation. And that
23:16
Speaker 1: was only a two percent tax, Charles, and it was
23:19
Speaker 1: enough for the colonists to rebel. And look at what
23:22
Speaker 1: they're throwing now on imports and exports, these teriff wars.
23:26
Speaker 1: It dwarfs even what was going on back then. So
23:29
Speaker 1: we can learn a little bit from history. And again
23:32
Speaker 1: note the irony alert. So a lot of Trump fans
23:35
Speaker 1: are saying this is just three D chess, he's escalating
23:38
Speaker 1: to de escalate, right or six million D chess as
23:42
Speaker 1: it's now being called escalate to de escalate. But is
23:45
Speaker 1: it really or do they actually know what they're doing?
23:49
Speaker 1: And you know, to be very critical here, and we'll
23:52
Speaker 1: show you a video clip in a second. Every millionaire
23:55
Speaker 1: I've spoken to or who I follow has made an
23:58
Speaker 1: absolute killing in the last week. They have absolutely they
24:01
Speaker 1: have put short positions down, They made tons of money.
24:04
Speaker 1: Working folks I know have had their retirement savings slashed
24:08
Speaker 1: by twenty to thirty percent. It's been an absolute route
24:11
Speaker 1: again for the middle class and surely not going to
24:14
Speaker 1: be good for the working class. And Donald Trump is
24:16
Speaker 1: the man of the people. He breached the like Boris
24:20
Speaker 1: breached the Red Wall. Donald Trump captured the rust belt
24:24
Speaker 1: and got all those blue dog Reagan Democrats back. So
24:27
Speaker 1: listen to this. This is from the White House, just
24:30
Speaker 1: I believe yesterday. This is Trump with the famous Charles
24:33
Speaker 1: Schwab of Charles Schwab Brokerage fame here and they're boasting
24:37
Speaker 1: about how much money that they made in the last week.
24:41
Speaker 1: Watched this.
24:46
Speaker 6: It's not just it's actually he made he made today
24:52
Speaker 6: and he made nine hundred million.
24:55
Speaker 3: He's in financial I've always good fun.
24:59
Speaker 1: So there, I mean, right straight from the horse's mouth.
25:02
Speaker 1: They absolutely rinsed it these guys. I mean, it's kind
25:06
Speaker 1: of like insider trading, but on a galactic scale. And
25:10
Speaker 1: he was even tweeting out things like whoever runs his
25:12
Speaker 1: Twitter account, now is a good time to buy you
25:14
Speaker 1: know when the stock market was at it's absolute low.
25:17
Speaker 1: So this is like dog whistles to Wall Street. Plus
25:21
Speaker 1: there is a ticker symbol for one of the Trump
25:25
Speaker 1: businesses as well that went out on another Trump account.
25:28
Speaker 1: I mean, it's kind of a free for all. So anyway,
25:30
Speaker 1: let's look at the wrap up on this here, we'll
25:33
Speaker 1: bring this up on stage right now. Trump's real agenda, okay,
25:36
Speaker 1: the Golden Age of America. He wants to bring us
25:39
Speaker 1: back to McKinley's eighteen ninety. Let's look at the reality.
25:43
Speaker 1: This is the real agenda. Trump is trying to force
25:46
Speaker 1: down the value of the US dollar in order to
25:49
Speaker 1: refinance nine trillion dollars in US debt. Okay, that's the
25:53
Speaker 1: number one priority, and they're not really articulating that to
25:56
Speaker 1: the public very clearly, and that's part of the problem.
25:59
Speaker 1: That's actually the core. So the world has to suffer
26:02
Speaker 1: for US domestic fiduciary responsibility issues, right, So, increase external revenue,
26:10
Speaker 1: claims Trump, in order to pay for massive tax cuts,
26:13
Speaker 1: probably for the rich, like in twenty seventeen, So a
26:17
Speaker 1: loss of internal revenue and totally four trillion over the
26:21
Speaker 1: next ten years. So that massive tax cut is that
26:25
Speaker 1: really going to get paid for with the tariff and
26:29
Speaker 1: trade balance. It doesn't look like it will. It's debatable.
26:33
Speaker 1: The signals don't look good right now anyway. Massive deregulation,
26:37
Speaker 1: massive privatization, and so incentivizing direct investment. But this is
26:43
Speaker 1: a problem. This is also why the cost of living
26:45
Speaker 1: is so high. And this is why China has the edge.
26:49
Speaker 1: They have state run utilities. They're able to control and
26:52
Speaker 1: subsidize the cost of energy. This is why they're an
26:55
Speaker 1: industrial powerhouse because they have a hybrid mixed economy like
27:00
Speaker 1: the United States did back in the late eighteen hundreds.
27:03
Speaker 1: And again, Trump and his team need a history lesson.
27:06
Speaker 1: They seem to be cherry picking American history here, but
27:10
Speaker 1: not to be outdone here, allowing for wild levels of
27:13
Speaker 1: Washington insider trading. Listen, what we're showing you is just
27:17
Speaker 1: the tip of that iceberg. And then here bypassing Congress.
27:21
Speaker 1: As Mark pointed out that key issue earlier, the power
27:24
Speaker 1: of the person on living tax. This is a huge problem.
27:27
Speaker 1: It's really putting the power into the hands of one man.
27:30
Speaker 1: So this is ultimately weak in Congress with one person rule.
27:34
Speaker 1: This is an autocracy. Fair question. Main point zero sum policy,
27:40
Speaker 1: trying to control who trades with who, etc. Like with Russia,
27:44
Speaker 1: like with India and Russian oil. Nord Stream pipeline is
27:48
Speaker 1: a result of zero sum foreign policy here, and so
27:52
Speaker 1: what are we really looking at? And this is the
27:54
Speaker 1: big fear. Effectively, Trump is trying to sanction China through tariffs,
27:59
Speaker 1: to isolate China, to build an iron curtain like they've
28:02
Speaker 1: done with Russia. Economically, how did that work out with Russia.
28:06
Speaker 1: Russia's got projecting three percent growth, Europe's projecting zero percent growth.
28:12
Speaker 1: So Russia's beat this system, outperformed the US and Europe,
28:15
Speaker 1: and China arguably is set to do the same trials.
28:20
Speaker 1: So I mean that's the main takeaway here. This is
28:22
Speaker 1: hard foreign policy done through economic policy. And I don't
28:27
Speaker 1: know if this is going to end well for Trump.
28:31
Speaker 2: Well we obviously we shall see. It's certainly gone very
28:34
Speaker 2: well for the billionaire class who have made money at
28:36
Speaker 2: every turn. And as we see, consistently, you invoke the
28:39
Speaker 2: emergency and then you watch the money roll in so
28:42
Speaker 2: that there is some capital to be made. But of course,
28:45
Speaker 2: the idea that Trump is standing tough against China is
28:48
Speaker 2: something that can be sold to a certain extent. I
28:51
Speaker 2: wonder also about the you know, if we're moving a
28:55
Speaker 2: few steps closer to central bank digital currency with a
28:59
Speaker 2: etcetera of the collapse, but more stalk about in extra certainly. Now,
29:04
Speaker 2: with all of this in mind, economic conditions are certainly
29:07
Speaker 2: unfavorable for farmers in the United Kingdom, and there's been
29:11
Speaker 2: a lot out on social media recently. I spoke on
29:14
Speaker 2: Wednesday about protests a wheat strike. Now we've got farmers
29:18
Speaker 2: to action, putting out a note saying that they are
29:21
Speaker 2: going to be saying no to labor.
29:23
Speaker 6: Now.
29:24
Speaker 2: I urged a note of caution on Wednesday because I
29:29
Speaker 2: felt that there is a huge potential for a backfire
29:32
Speaker 2: effect as the government are very very able to spin
29:37
Speaker 2: this sort of direction as being that the farmers are
29:41
Speaker 2: causing trouble and indeed that they're not entirely necessary. And
29:44
Speaker 2: of course that was to do with the fact that
29:46
Speaker 2: a lot more wheat is being imported this year. In
29:48
Speaker 2: any case, and just to illustrate the point I'm making
29:51
Speaker 2: Farmers Weekly here advertising or at least reporting that Daniel Zeichner,
29:55
Speaker 2: the deafri Minister, was blocked from getting out for meeting
29:58
Speaker 2: in Tavistock. Now I'm sure it didn't last very long,
30:00
Speaker 2: but it's very easy to see how that sort of
30:02
Speaker 2: thing could be spun in a particular way to make
30:05
Speaker 2: small landowners and small farmers seem less relevant than of
30:09
Speaker 2: course they really are. I think the central issue here
30:12
Speaker 2: is that continually going to government to routinely and almost
30:16
Speaker 2: richuly abuse farmers and indeed the supermarkets is very much
30:21
Speaker 2: barking up the wrong tree. Why on earth would they
30:23
Speaker 2: change their behavior? What's in it for them? Just to
30:25
Speaker 2: illustrate the sort of lack of care in this regard,
30:31
Speaker 2: I should just point out the Groceries Code of Judicator
30:33
Speaker 2: is the one man band that is supposed to arbitrate
30:36
Speaker 2: over the relationship between producers and supermarkets. So consider that
30:42
Speaker 2: he is incredibly underresourced, and also that the entirety of
30:46
Speaker 2: the DEFRA budget for this year is two point four billion,
30:49
Speaker 2: which would take the National Health Service only five days
30:53
Speaker 2: to dispose of. So the message really, in so far
30:57
Speaker 2: as UK column is concerned, is absolutely to adopt what
31:01
Speaker 2: Julian Rose describes as the proximity principle, and this really
31:04
Speaker 2: should be an opportunity for farmers to be looking for
31:07
Speaker 2: markets elsewhere and dealing with people that are able to
31:12
Speaker 2: meet whatever type of shortfall. But obviously, with all the
31:15
Speaker 2: enormous uncertainty concerning the tariffs and trade, this would seem
31:19
Speaker 2: a time that farmers really have an opportunity to be
31:22
Speaker 2: providing a degree of self sufficiency that actually is not
31:25
Speaker 2: there at the moment, and to control parts of the
31:28
Speaker 2: market that they're absolutely not died down, shutting out supermarkets
31:31
Speaker 2: and indeed government in the process. So something we will
31:33
Speaker 2: definitely follow, but it remains to be seen how that
31:35
Speaker 2: story will be spun. Now UK column is funded exclusively
31:41
Speaker 2: by its members and viewers, and if you would like
31:44
Speaker 2: to take part in sustaining what it is that we
31:47
Speaker 2: do do and enabling us to go further and better,
31:50
Speaker 2: then please do consider making a donation via the website
31:53
Speaker 2: or joining as a member on a monthly or annual
31:56
Speaker 2: or even lifetime basis. Or you could go to the
31:59
Speaker 2: shop and pick up any amount of our very high
32:03
Speaker 2: quality merchandise there. Also we do stop Clived Decal's products there,
32:08
Speaker 2: which we get a little percentage from, so that's again
32:11
Speaker 2: another option. Please do share all of our contents critical
32:15
Speaker 2: in these days of censorship that does get pushed out
32:17
Speaker 2: by those that support UK Column because we fall foul
32:21
Speaker 2: of all the various algorithmic issues. And now we go
32:26
Speaker 2: to the case of Dan Kleinman, who gave a very
32:29
Speaker 2: good interview to Diane Rasmusen mcaddie on fighting sexual grooming
32:33
Speaker 2: in libraries and he's now looking for financial assistance in
32:35
Speaker 2: defending against two federal defamation lawsuits filed against him by
32:39
Speaker 2: a school librarian in Louisiana. So there'll be details of
32:42
Speaker 2: this in the show notes. Tomorrow in Glasgow there's going
32:45
Speaker 2: to be the Stand for Peace Scotland Glasgow Peace Walk,
32:49
Speaker 2: so please do get along to that if you're able.
32:52
Speaker 4: Now.
32:52
Speaker 2: Stand in the Light, which was attended by UK Column
32:55
Speaker 2: last year, is going to be happening at the end
32:57
Speaker 2: of May twenty third to twenty sixth up in Beautiful Cumbria.
33:00
Speaker 2: UK Column will be attending and we will be having
33:03
Speaker 2: Darren and Fie on to talk about that in due course,
33:06
Speaker 2: so do consider coming up to see what's going on there.
33:10
Speaker 2: We've published the article which follows up the appearance of
33:13
Speaker 2: John Kiriaku on the News last week, and this is
33:16
Speaker 2: an article by Fiorilla Isabelle about the censorship effectively censorship
33:21
Speaker 2: through frozen assets by Banking. Also up on the UK
33:25
Speaker 2: Column website now is the Scottish People's COVID nineteen inquiry.
33:29
Speaker 2: All the various videos are there, and then today being
33:33
Speaker 2: live streamed from Cambridge, the Sense and Sensibility Conference about
33:38
Speaker 2: the origins of the Russian Ukrainian War, and among the
33:42
Speaker 2: speakers there are Jet Major General Bakshi, who of course
33:46
Speaker 2: has been on a UK Column symposium, but also Brian,
33:50
Speaker 2: Lucy Morgan Edwards and George Galloway. And I should remind
33:53
Speaker 2: you that if you haven't yet got access to the
33:56
Speaker 2: recording of our event in Cheltenham on Saturday, then you're
34:00
Speaker 2: absolutely missing a trick. So please do go to the
34:02
Speaker 2: website and get dual access to the live stream there,
34:05
Speaker 2: which is very much still available. Yesterday the second part
34:09
Speaker 2: of Brian's interview with Carl Schwartz went out as following
34:13
Speaker 2: the first excellent one about what was known be leading
34:16
Speaker 2: up to the events of the eleventh September two thousand
34:18
Speaker 2: and one, and that was concerning sort of asbestos response
34:22
Speaker 2: felt in emergency responders, and part two, which came out
34:25
Speaker 2: yesterday is dealing with the aircraft reportedly involved in that day,
34:30
Speaker 2: but evidence substantiating the effects of a controlled demolition. Now
34:37
Speaker 2: that takes us back to Mark, and really on a
34:39
Speaker 2: related theme Mark, but the situation with trade in certain
34:44
Speaker 2: part of the States.
34:47
Speaker 3: A very interesting thing, gentlemen about trade that's never discussed
34:52
Speaker 3: is that individual states, especially here Texas, have their own
34:56
Speaker 3: trade deals, their own trade polas, ease and even send
35:01
Speaker 3: trade delegations to other nations. This first slide is very
35:05
Speaker 3: illustrative of that. Of course, Texas and California are the
35:09
Speaker 3: ones individual states with the longest coasts. California has the
35:13
Speaker 3: long beach in Los Angeles ports where trade goes in
35:17
Speaker 3: and out. If you haven't seen those ports, they have
35:19
Speaker 3: to be seen to be believed the massive amount of
35:22
Speaker 3: stuff that goes in and out of there. Texas is
35:25
Speaker 3: right behind them, especially out of Houston and Brownsville. Anyway,
35:29
Speaker 3: here this slide illustates that illustrate excuse me, that the
35:32
Speaker 3: state of Texas has a Taiwan office, and Texas trades
35:36
Speaker 3: with nearly two hundred and twenty foreign markets. It has
35:39
Speaker 3: a Japan office and it trades mainly with Mexico, Canada,
35:43
Speaker 3: the Netherlands, China, and South Korea. And there's an interesting
35:48
Speaker 3: part as it shows here Article one, Section ten of
35:50
Speaker 3: the US Constitution. Quote, no state shall, without the consent
35:55
Speaker 3: of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage, keep troops or
35:58
Speaker 3: ships of war in time of peace. And then I
36:01
Speaker 3: emphasize the main part or enter into any agreement or
36:05
Speaker 3: contact within the other state or with the foreign power.
36:10
Speaker 3: And that's without the consent of Congress. So the states
36:15
Speaker 3: are carrying out out quasi autonomous trade policies of their own.
36:21
Speaker 3: One has to wonder and talks about how that might
36:24
Speaker 3: harmonize or and different trade policling on now. And we
36:28
Speaker 3: have a couple other slides that will kind of drive
36:31
Speaker 3: this point home to try and figure out or at
36:35
Speaker 3: least consider the issue of state individual states having trade
36:40
Speaker 3: policies with regards to what Trump's doing at the federal level.
36:44
Speaker 3: If we could look at the next slide that it
36:46
Speaker 3: shows a little bit more about this with regards to
36:49
Speaker 3: Michigan and California. Michigan has nearly two hundred foreign markets
36:54
Speaker 3: and its main trade partners are Canada, Mexico, China, Germany,
36:58
Speaker 3: and Japan. And California has over two hundred and twenty
37:01
Speaker 3: five foreign markets, its main trading partners being Mexico, Canada, China, Japan,
37:07
Speaker 3: and Taiwan. Now, by foreign markets, that doesn't mean just
37:11
Speaker 3: individual nations. It means regional organizations and different institutions that
37:17
Speaker 3: are involved, different players that are involved in the trade schematic.
37:21
Speaker 3: But the main point here, gentlemen, is that Michigan, California, Texas,
37:25
Speaker 3: and several other states they send trade delegations to other countries.
37:30
Speaker 3: There's that constitutional measure that I just showed that says
37:33
Speaker 3: that they really ought not to do that without explicit
37:36
Speaker 3: congressional approval. And these are very massive trade deals that Texas, California, Michigan,
37:42
Speaker 3: and these other states have with these other nations. And
37:46
Speaker 3: I'm bringing this up mainly as an awareness thing. How
37:49
Speaker 3: much has the Trump administration in Congress of the US Congress,
37:53
Speaker 3: which I talked about earlier today, how much have they
37:56
Speaker 3: considered this and how much will the Trump policies colloise
38:00
Speaker 3: with or maybe harmonized with or maybe be neutral regarding
38:04
Speaker 3: all these state trade efforts that are at least constitutionally questionable,
38:09
Speaker 3: especially having such large amounts of trade going on with
38:13
Speaker 3: individual states acting as if they're separate nations. So it's
38:18
Speaker 3: just an awareness thing. It's a constitutional thing. It's another
38:21
Speaker 3: piece in the puzzle to consider. I'll leave it at
38:23
Speaker 3: that for now, but it's a very interesting topic at that.
38:27
Speaker 2: Marm thanks very much, and I think we might have
38:29
Speaker 2: time to come back to that in extra Now move back.
38:31
Speaker 1: To the UK, where we are in.
38:34
Speaker 2: Effact hosting up the case for I would say, potential
38:37
Speaker 2: war with Iran. News today put out by Defense Science
38:41
Speaker 2: and Technology Laboratories that they've had a crytical advancement in
38:45
Speaker 2: the UK's defense capabilities. What you're actually looking at is
38:48
Speaker 2: a fake picture of a fake hypersonic missile that doesn't
38:52
Speaker 2: yet exist, but nonetheless they're talking about it as though
38:54
Speaker 2: it does. They say that this might be ready by
38:56
Speaker 2: twenty thirty, part of a joint project, and this gives
39:02
Speaker 2: them opportunity to hark back to what was happening last
39:06
Speaker 2: year being put out by Defense intelligence, where the suggestion
39:08
Speaker 2: was that there was an inextricable link between what was
39:12
Speaker 2: going on in Russia Ukraine and indeed Iran's support of it.
39:16
Speaker 2: So this is a shaping operation, certainly in people's minds,
39:19
Speaker 2: to show the idea that state threat from Russia is
39:23
Speaker 2: absolutely synonymous with state threat from Iran and therefore that
39:27
Speaker 2: something has to be done about it, and we see
39:29
Speaker 2: that the British Forces broadcasting surface here its Forces News
39:33
Speaker 2: is again pumping up exactly the same story about this
39:36
Speaker 2: hypersonic what's been called a successful test, but of course
39:40
Speaker 2: it's still five years away from being a reality. And
39:43
Speaker 2: I think interesting to note that they conclude the article
39:45
Speaker 2: by saying Brazil, China, France, Iran, North Korea and Japan
39:48
Speaker 2: are among other countries with plans or programs devoted to
39:51
Speaker 2: high personic weapons. Of course, what they completely failed to
39:54
Speaker 2: mention is that since twenty eighteen, via its KINJAU system,
39:59
Speaker 2: Russia has had a hypersonic capability. And this is one
40:03
Speaker 2: of the things that is not to be talked about
40:06
Speaker 2: because it clearly highlights the fact that the UK is
40:09
Speaker 2: not only well behind Russia, but supposedly it destroys the
40:13
Speaker 2: narrative that Russia is actually presenting a state threat, because
40:16
Speaker 2: if it really were, as I've asked before, why on
40:19
Speaker 2: earth would it not be doing rather more than it
40:22
Speaker 2: is as we sit there and supposedly build up our
40:25
Speaker 2: various arsenals. So a question to be asked there, but
40:29
Speaker 2: that obviously the authorities not to be deterred in so
40:32
Speaker 2: far as the building of a narrative, and indeed the
40:36
Speaker 2: intelligence that's supposed to support that goes and we look
40:40
Speaker 2: at the country Policy and Information note on the government's
40:44
Speaker 2: website on Iran. Now this says November twenty twenty two.
40:47
Speaker 2: This is actually the most recent document, and rather remarkably,
40:52
Speaker 2: it refers back to statistics on military capabilities that are
40:57
Speaker 2: first of all not put together by this entry. Their
41:00
Speaker 2: American statistics, and they go back to twenty nineteen. And
41:03
Speaker 2: that is the information upon which we are supposed to
41:06
Speaker 2: be deciding what relationship Iran has with the United Kingdom
41:11
Speaker 2: in terms of a state threat. Now I've shown this
41:14
Speaker 2: slide before, but this is Hamish Faulkner, Minister for the
41:17
Speaker 2: Middle East and North Africa, and he has stated that
41:21
Speaker 2: it is regressibly true that Iran's nuclear program has never
41:24
Speaker 2: been more advanced and it threatens international peace and security.
41:29
Speaker 2: And this has been bandied around absolutely up and down
41:32
Speaker 2: the place. There's been debates on this in both the
41:35
Speaker 2: House Commons and the House of Lords, but there is
41:38
Speaker 2: not one shred of evidence with which they can substantiate this.
41:41
Speaker 2: So I think it bears a lot more scrutiny but
41:44
Speaker 2: we'll just go to look at the former ambassador for
41:48
Speaker 2: Iran two thousand and two, two thousand and six, so
41:50
Speaker 2: Richard Dalton, who spoke on Newsnight recently, and this is
41:52
Speaker 2: what he had to say.
41:55
Speaker 5: How seriously do you take this from President Trump?
41:58
Speaker 6: I doty serious? The risk of a war between Israel
42:03
Speaker 6: and the United States on the one hand and Iran
42:06
Speaker 6: on the other has never been higher. And that's because
42:11
Speaker 6: it's been Israel's aim for many years to strike Iran,
42:16
Speaker 6: and they've always wanted to attract United States to their
42:20
Speaker 6: side to do it because of limitations in Israel's capabilities,
42:24
Speaker 6: particularly in sustaining a long war. This is chiefly about
42:30
Speaker 6: weakening Iran as a state. Iran and of course President Trump,
42:36
Speaker 6: President and mister Natiner, who know that it knows this
42:39
Speaker 6: does not have a nuclear weapon and does not have
42:42
Speaker 6: a military nuclear program, and that has been the consensus
42:47
Speaker 6: of US intelligence agencies in the US National Intelligence estimates
42:54
Speaker 6: for the last twenty two years.
42:58
Speaker 1: So let us hope that.
43:00
Speaker 6: On this occasion the Americans adopt a more reasonable position
43:05
Speaker 6: than has been sketched out for Iran.
43:07
Speaker 2: Hitherto some hope, I think, we might say, but nonetheless,
43:14
Speaker 2: he is quite right to point out that there is
43:16
Speaker 2: no intelligence to support this position, and yet politicians banded
43:19
Speaker 2: around absolutely willing, nearly never with any comeback on this.
43:23
Speaker 2: And it is therefore pertinent and coincident that a carrier
43:28
Speaker 2: strike group is about to depart Portsmouth towards the end
43:30
Speaker 2: of this month to go towards the Mediterranean and then
43:33
Speaker 2: on to the Indo Pacific. And we'll just listen to
43:36
Speaker 2: what Luke Pollard, Enforces Minister has to say about this
43:39
Speaker 2: and why it's happening.
43:43
Speaker 7: From the bridge of our flagship, HMS Prince of Wales,
43:47
Speaker 7: I'm proud to announce that our carrier Strike Group, made
43:50
Speaker 7: up of Keen, naval, air and land forces from Britain
43:54
Speaker 7: and our allies, will depart from Portsmouth at the end
43:58
Speaker 7: of the month on its twenty five global deployment code
44:03
Speaker 7: named Operation High Mast. It will engage with more than
44:07
Speaker 7: thirty countries stretching from Italy to Japan and from South
44:11
Speaker 7: Korea to Australia. This isn't just any mission. With nearly
44:16
Speaker 7: four thousand British personnel accompanied throughout by a Norwegian frigate
44:20
Speaker 7: and auxiliary ship, We're leaving a multinational task force of
44:25
Speaker 7: thirteen nations in a demonstration of integrated deterrence across the
44:30
Speaker 7: globe for periods, the carrier Strike Group will come under
44:34
Speaker 7: NATO command, strengthening the bedrock alliance of our national security.
44:40
Speaker 7: Naval power remains vital to upholding the international rules based
44:45
Speaker 7: system that underpins our security and prosperity. Through Operation High Mast,
44:51
Speaker 7: we stand firm with our allies against those who challenge
44:55
Speaker 7: the international order, reminding the world that threats in one
44:59
Speaker 7: region affect every region, that the security of the euro
45:03
Speaker 7: Atlantic and Indo Pacific are fundamentally indivisible.
45:10
Speaker 2: Fundamentally indivisible. I think of the words to concentrate on there,
45:13
Speaker 2: because soon it appears that the state threat from Iran
45:18
Speaker 2: will be fundamentally indivisible from that posed by Russia, and
45:21
Speaker 2: that seems to be the messaging that's going on here.
45:23
Speaker 2: There's a couple of other points to draw out of that.
45:24
Speaker 2: It's referring referred to as Operation High Masked and not Exercise. Therefore,
45:30
Speaker 2: there is a suggestion there inherent that there is a
45:34
Speaker 2: specific potential for kinetic action, and of course, interestingly he's
45:40
Speaker 2: actually they're defying the naming convention there and Operational name
45:44
Speaker 2: should never have anything to do with the operation itself,
45:47
Speaker 2: but naming it high masts would seem to be in.
45:49
Speaker 1: Breach of that. Also.
45:51
Speaker 2: Of course, initially it's going to be under command of
45:55
Speaker 2: the NATO exercise, which means that should the carrier strike
46:00
Speaker 2: group be engaged at that point, that would of course
46:03
Speaker 2: trigger Article five and a response from all NATO members.
46:07
Speaker 2: So I think that's something that absolutely people should be
46:09
Speaker 2: bearing in mind. It's also said to have a cargo
46:11
Speaker 2: of all these capability of up to twenty four F
46:14
Speaker 2: thirty five fighters, and if you've listened to Tim Davis,
46:19
Speaker 2: the former fast jet trainer and pilot with Ronevian Royal
46:22
Speaker 2: Air Force, talk about the F thirty five capability against
46:25
Speaker 2: Russian air defense, then you would know that having twenty
46:27
Speaker 2: four thirty five's on board is not much to write
46:31
Speaker 2: home about. But this really, as I say, suggests that
46:35
Speaker 2: there is that linkage between what we're told about Russia
46:38
Speaker 2: and indeed what we're to be told about Iran. So
46:41
Speaker 2: it's a very clear sort of telegraphing of intent, at
46:45
Speaker 2: least what people are supposed to believe.
46:47
Speaker 1: Well, as you know, Article five is not an automatic reflex,
46:51
Speaker 1: especially if you happen to be out of area. So
46:55
Speaker 1: it seems like the British Navy having difficulty of fielding
46:59
Speaker 1: more worships than they have admirals at the moment. It's
47:02
Speaker 1: a bit of a casius belli or a bait as
47:05
Speaker 1: it were, and so that's a little bit worrying when
47:08
Speaker 1: you think about it. Strategically militarily, I can't see how
47:11
Speaker 1: they could make a big impact in any conflict versus
47:15
Speaker 1: the adversaries which they are claiming to be opposing there.
47:19
Speaker 1: But just quickly on the Iran issue here, I'll bring
47:22
Speaker 1: this up on screen, Charles. If the United States attacks Iran,
47:26
Speaker 1: that's just a little summary there. It's a couple of
47:28
Speaker 1: years old, but twenty twenty four, I think US bases
47:31
Speaker 1: and troops deployment in the immenate vicinity of Iran, so
47:35
Speaker 1: all those would be targeted in a matter of minutes.
47:38
Speaker 1: So this is a huge number of target lists that
47:41
Speaker 1: doesn't include Israel as well as a Cypress, which may
47:46
Speaker 1: or may not be included in that if they believe
47:48
Speaker 1: that that's where the origins. Even Oman and Saudi Arabia
47:51
Speaker 1: are on that list because they've got US bases there.
47:54
Speaker 1: Not say anything about the fifth fleet in Bahrain or
47:57
Speaker 1: Kuwait and Iraq for that matter. You know there will
48:01
Speaker 1: be a blowback or a price to pay for the US.
48:04
Speaker 1: And I might add, too, Charles, that to what the
48:08
Speaker 1: Trump administration are proposing for Iran, that they basically dismantle
48:13
Speaker 1: or that the US is allowed to destroy Iran's civilian
48:16
Speaker 1: nuclear program and eliminate all of their missiles, so the
48:20
Speaker 1: demilitarization of Iran, and if they don't comply, the US
48:24
Speaker 1: will launch a preemptive tactical nuclear strike and a decapitation operation,
48:30
Speaker 1: as it were, to take out the leadership. So it's
48:33
Speaker 1: regime change, destroying the country and so forth. These aren't negotiations.
48:38
Speaker 1: And I want to warn people just a little lesson
48:42
Speaker 1: of history, shades of nineteen fourteen. The Austro Hungarian Empire
48:46
Speaker 1: imposed huge stringent demands on Serbia at the time, by
48:52
Speaker 1: which Serbia complied with all but one of those, and
48:55
Speaker 1: they still Austria Hungarian still declared war on Serbia. So
49:00
Speaker 1: that's what's happening here. The United States has issued a
49:03
Speaker 1: declaration of war. It's only a question of when they're
49:07
Speaker 1: going to attack. These are not negotiations and this can't
49:10
Speaker 1: be seen as any kind of acceptable state craft unless
49:13
Speaker 1: you're talking about the rules based international order, where he
49:17
Speaker 1: who has the power and the money makes the rules.
49:20
Speaker 1: And unfortunately, I believe that's where we are right now.
49:23
Speaker 1: So something to think about there. But just note that
49:27
Speaker 1: Benjaminette Yaho was in Washington this week and there he
49:30
Speaker 1: is with Donald Trump looking at pictures of Benjaminette Yahoo
49:35
Speaker 1: and Donald Trump. So as some people who like to
49:38
Speaker 1: talk about narcissists and power hungry oligarchs would get a
49:43
Speaker 1: chuckle at a photo like that, But last time Biebee
49:46
Speaker 1: was in Washington, it looked like they're plotting to cancel
49:50
Speaker 1: the ceasefire in Gaza. That's what eventually happened. Now we
49:53
Speaker 1: have a full blown resumption of that conflict in the
49:56
Speaker 1: carnage there. What exactly are they planning on this to Washington,
50:01
Speaker 1: and it could very well be a joint strike on
50:03
Speaker 1: Iran At that point all bets are off.
50:06
Speaker 2: Charles absolutely, yeah, and again more to talk about an
50:08
Speaker 2: extra but on the theme of things that won't go away,
50:11
Speaker 2: back to Mark with the pandemic treaty.
50:17
Speaker 3: Thank you. I'm continuing, of course, to follow this very closely.
50:21
Speaker 3: The inner governmental negotiating body that's working on the treaty.
50:26
Speaker 3: The talks resumed this past Monday, and they conclude today,
50:30
Speaker 3: April eleventh. But I confirmed pretty much it appears that
50:35
Speaker 3: the withdrawal of the US from the WHO system meant
50:40
Speaker 3: it literally meant that no US participation was seen for
50:44
Speaker 3: the first time ever. There were no delegates this past
50:48
Speaker 3: week concluding today from the US at the pandemic talks.
50:52
Speaker 3: And we're keeping in mind that the seventy eighth World
50:54
Speaker 3: Health Assembly, the nineteenth through the twenty seventh of May
50:58
Speaker 3: is coming up. It's also fairly clear I talked to
51:02
Speaker 3: James Roguski briefly last night and looked through a whole
51:05
Speaker 3: bunch of WHO literature from about a year ago and recently.
51:09
Speaker 3: And I'm saying here with this slide, I'm saying stay tuned.
51:13
Speaker 3: And I took this photo during the deliberations. Like my
51:16
Speaker 3: Congressional report in the Ways of Means Committee, I took
51:19
Speaker 3: those online photos virtually to get us as much firsthand
51:24
Speaker 3: stuff as possible. I took this photo here there's Tadros,
51:27
Speaker 3: the Director General, and a couple other top officials. And
51:31
Speaker 3: what I was able to distill out of this I
51:33
Speaker 3: watched some of the dry, tedious deliberations. I'll tell you
51:36
Speaker 3: it is a cure for insomnia. But the inter Governmental
51:41
Speaker 3: Negotiating Body as of yesterday was reportedly eighty nations shy
51:46
Speaker 3: of its needed consensus to finalize the treaty. But there
51:50
Speaker 3: are the talks today, and Raguski pointed out and I
51:53
Speaker 3: saw other indications that there might be additional pre World
51:57
Speaker 3: Health Assembly talks that could be called. They could be
52:01
Speaker 3: organized to try and move things along. So Ding Dong
52:05
Speaker 3: the witch is dead, cannot be pronounced yet. She's still alive.
52:09
Speaker 3: We'll just have to keep a close eye on it.
52:11
Speaker 3: But the WHO funding cuts led by the US that
52:16
Speaker 3: are troubling the WHO right now that I reported on
52:19
Speaker 3: last week, that is a bit of dead weight on
52:21
Speaker 3: the WHO, and it is creating some problems with them
52:25
Speaker 3: getting everything they want regarding the pandemic treaty. But we'll
52:29
Speaker 3: just keep a very close eye on this. It's a
52:31
Speaker 3: very critical time. The treaty has kind of been delayed
52:35
Speaker 3: and fallen out his face. Going about a year ago
52:38
Speaker 3: May twenty twenty four, they were working on it and
52:41
Speaker 3: it kind of got sidetracked and shelved for a while.
52:45
Speaker 3: So they're by no means having an easy time at
52:48
Speaker 3: this and anything that we can do to contact members
52:51
Speaker 3: of Parliament, local officials, members of Congress depending on where
52:54
Speaker 3: you live, would be very important right now. And so
52:58
Speaker 3: we'll just keep a close eye on it and see
53:00
Speaker 3: if they have another negotiating meeting prior to the World
53:04
Speaker 3: Health Assembly or if they wait for the World Health Assembly.
53:07
Speaker 3: That's the main question right now. So back to you.
53:10
Speaker 2: Guys, indeed, Mark, thank you very much, indeed, and as
53:13
Speaker 2: you say, we need to keep on it and where possible,
53:15
Speaker 2: act certainly at the local level to push back on that.
53:19
Speaker 1: Now.
53:20
Speaker 2: Other organizations that need to have an eye kept on
53:22
Speaker 2: the number among them the BBC of course, and they've
53:25
Speaker 2: just announced or at least revealed the fact that the
53:29
Speaker 2: statue on Broadcasting House by Eric Gill, which was damaged
53:33
Speaker 2: a couple of years ago, has been repaired, restored and
53:36
Speaker 2: is now covered in a protective glass case. And the
53:42
Speaker 2: story here really is that Gil himself, a well renowned
53:45
Speaker 2: sculptor of the twentieth centuries or sculptor, was also a pedophile.
53:50
Speaker 2: And it's not to suggest that there should be any
53:53
Speaker 2: sense of revisionism to this. The building is of course
53:56
Speaker 2: a Grade two listed building and therefore they're limited in
53:58
Speaker 2: terms of what they would be able to do, certainly
54:00
Speaker 2: without planning consent. But the point is is this necessarily
54:04
Speaker 2: consistent the BBC insofar as the way they deal with
54:08
Speaker 2: other subject matter. So just look at the treatment of this.
54:12
Speaker 2: This is what the Chief Executive of Historic England who's
54:15
Speaker 2: been sort of involved in the project says, and he
54:18
Speaker 2: describes it as being in line with our approach of
54:20
Speaker 2: encouraging thoughtful, long lasting and powerful reinterpretation of contested statues
54:27
Speaker 2: and sites, which keeps their physical context but adds new
54:31
Speaker 2: layers of meaning and understanding. Now it's hard not to
54:36
Speaker 2: interpret that in light of the sorts of things that
54:39
Speaker 2: are going on in the education system with regard to
54:42
Speaker 2: what children what's being normalized to children in terms of
54:45
Speaker 2: sexuality and all kinds of sexual perversions. This would seem
54:50
Speaker 2: to add weight to that narrative. And as I say,
54:51
Speaker 2: we're the question to be asked here is is the
54:53
Speaker 2: BBC being consistent, especially where other statue removals are concerned.
54:59
Speaker 2: And of course this is how they reported on the
55:01
Speaker 2: removal of the statue of Edward Colston in Bristol during
55:05
Speaker 2: the highlight the high point of the Black Lives Matter
55:10
Speaker 2: process back in twenty twenty they described as being a
55:12
Speaker 2: largely peaceful demonstration, where of course actually quite a lot
55:15
Speaker 2: of people were injured. And then we've got their absolute
55:18
Speaker 2: failure to deal properly with people that have worked for them,
55:22
Speaker 2: such as Rolph Harris, Jimmy Saville and of course, most
55:26
Speaker 2: recently Hugh Edwards. So I think the BBC at least
55:31
Speaker 2: can be accused of substantial hypocrisy, but also a certain
55:37
Speaker 2: degree of recklessness because they point out in the article
55:40
Speaker 2: that they are not condoning the behavior of Gil. They're
55:45
Speaker 2: trying to make a degree of separation between the man
55:47
Speaker 2: and the artwork. But therefore what they are certainly not
55:49
Speaker 2: doing is in any way condemning the behavior, and also
55:54
Speaker 2: in putting a glass case around it, they are recognizing
55:57
Speaker 2: that it remains vulnerable. And of course in in that
56:00
Speaker 2: statement is the fact that they feel like they're doing
56:03
Speaker 2: something wrong. Now, I think we'll have more to say
56:05
Speaker 2: about that sort of thing. In extra we're a bit pushnai,
56:08
Speaker 2: but we're now going to go into space.
56:12
Speaker 1: Indeed, so of all the stories here, this is a
56:15
Speaker 1: feel good story. In a certain way, you might get
56:18
Speaker 1: a little bit of a smile out of this. But
56:20
Speaker 1: there is this is the little Green Man in Kiev.
56:25
Speaker 1: And what's going on here is Zelenski tries to arrest
56:28
Speaker 1: an International Space Station cosmonaut who is in space. In
56:32
Speaker 1: Zelensky seeking a fifteen year jail term for this quote
56:37
Speaker 1: draft dodger, believe it or not. So he did everything
56:40
Speaker 1: but serve him with papers up at the ISS here,
56:45
Speaker 1: so waited for him to get up into space before
56:49
Speaker 1: well this week they put that through in the Ukrainian judiciary. There,
56:53
Speaker 1: let's take a look at this here and this astronaut here,
56:57
Speaker 1: This is Alexei Zubritski there, and you can see he
57:01
Speaker 1: is the one there on your left hand side. And
57:04
Speaker 1: he's there with another Russian cosmonaut and a US astronaut,
57:07
Speaker 1: Johnny Kim. So he's up there, and so he's found
57:10
Speaker 1: himself in the crosshairs of Zelenski. Little did he know
57:14
Speaker 1: that the Little Green Man had a beat on him
57:17
Speaker 1: from the moment he took off the Soyas rocket from Kazakhstan.
57:21
Speaker 1: But there you are. So Zelenski in his mission to
57:24
Speaker 1: find warm bodies for the trenches in Ukraine. Here he
57:29
Speaker 1: is always looking for conscripts these days. Zubrinsky was among
57:34
Speaker 1: the numerous Ukrainian military personnel who rejected the new government
57:37
Speaker 1: in Kiev we're talking about twenty fourteen and continued their
57:41
Speaker 1: careers in the Russian Armed Forces. So he's kind of
57:44
Speaker 1: a defector of sorts who was based in Selvestopol, so
57:47
Speaker 1: in Crimea. So he made that jump when the referendum
57:52
Speaker 1: happened in Crimea, as did many others. So he applied
57:54
Speaker 1: for the space program in twenty seventeen and was confirmed
57:57
Speaker 1: as a flight engineer for the soyas MS twenty seven
58:00
Speaker 1: mission last August, and by Russian reports, he is among
58:04
Speaker 1: their most promising astronaut young astronaut candidates in years, so
58:08
Speaker 1: highly decorated here, and Zelenski basically put out an arrest
58:12
Speaker 1: warrant for him as a draft dodger. But that's interesting, Charles,
58:15
Speaker 1: that Zelensky would be chasing draft dodgers, because we only
58:19
Speaker 1: have to look at this interview here with none other
58:22
Speaker 1: than Petro or Pyoto Poroshenko who claimed that his successor,
58:27
Speaker 1: President Zelenski was himself a draft dodger. And we have
58:32
Speaker 1: checked the background on this, it is true. In fact, Zelenski,
58:35
Speaker 1: we don't have the video with us, but there are
58:37
Speaker 1: videos on social media where he's kind of boasting that
58:40
Speaker 1: he's not going to be serving in the Ukrainian military
58:42
Speaker 1: while they were being trained by NATO at the time.
58:45
Speaker 1: This was after my don in twenty fourteen. So Zelenski,
58:49
Speaker 1: the draft dodger, is chasing astronauts that he claims are
58:52
Speaker 1: draft dodgers. I think that's just about the best thing
58:55
Speaker 1: I've read all week.
58:55
Speaker 2: Absolutely once a comedian, yes, I mean one wonders where
58:59
Speaker 2: that's the is going to go? Why on earth are
59:02
Speaker 2: we even to be made aware of it? It's extraordinary,
59:06
Speaker 2: But that is perhaps a suitable note upon which to
59:09
Speaker 2: draw the news to a close, but not before I
59:11
Speaker 2: remind you to make sure that you do go back
59:15
Speaker 2: to look at the part two of the cars Schwartz
59:17
Speaker 2: interview with Brian from yesterday pertaining to the events of
59:21
Speaker 2: September eleventh back in two thousand and one, and I
59:24
Speaker 2: think really significantly what was known before and in the
59:28
Speaker 2: immediate aftermath that has been so so heavily suppressed, And
59:33
Speaker 2: also again a reminder really to catch up with what
59:37
Speaker 2: happened in Cheltenham at our UK column on location event
59:40
Speaker 2: where of course Patrick spoke among others. It was very
59:43
Speaker 2: very well received, and I really would urge you to
59:44
Speaker 2: access the livestream if that's something you haven't already done.
59:47
Speaker 2: But otherwise it just remains for me to thank Patrick
59:49
Speaker 2: very much indeed for joining me in the studio today.
59:51
Speaker 2: Thank you Patrick, and to Mark for joining via video link,
59:55
Speaker 2: and we will look forward to seeing you again on
59:57
Speaker 2: the news on Monday.
59:59
Speaker 1: Thank you very much.
1:00:00
Speaker 2: An extra sorry and extra Patrick, Thank goodness you're here.
1:00:04
Speaker 1: Yes.
1:00:05
Speaker 2: For those of you that are members, please stay on
1:00:06
Speaker 2: the line and we'll be back in a few minutes
1:00:09
Speaker 2: for extra bye.
1:00:10
Speaker 7: Bye.