Latest / UK Column Radio / UK Column News Podcast 31st January 2025

Transcript

UK Column News Podcast 31st January 2025 · UK Column Radio

0:08
Speaker 1: Good afternoon. It's Friday, in the thirty first of January
0:11
Speaker 1: twenty twenty five, just after one o'clock. Welcome to UK
0:13
Speaker 1: Colin News. I'm your host Mike Rudson. Joining me in
0:16
Speaker 1: the studio today is Patrick Henningson. Welcome to the program.
0:18
Speaker 2: Patrick, it's great to be with you, Mike, and.
0:20
Speaker 1: By videolink, we have Mark Anderson joining us today. Now
0:23
Speaker 1: we're going to begin with the air crash in Washington, DC.
0:29
Speaker 1: And the reason is because the BBC was pushing this yesterday.
0:33
Speaker 1: This was the front page of the BBC website. Trump
0:37
Speaker 1: says cause of Washington DC aircrash it's left sixty seven dead,
0:40
Speaker 1: is unknown. Then the sub text there says the President
0:44
Speaker 1: also suggested without evidence that diversity hiring policies in air
0:49
Speaker 1: traffic control could have been a factor. And well, first
0:53
Speaker 1: of all, is there a politician on the planet that
0:56
Speaker 1: doesn't say things without evidence?
0:57
Speaker 2: Patrick, there's not, as especially Donald Trump. Everybody should know
1:02
Speaker 2: that by now.
1:03
Speaker 1: Absolutely now. But however, what this implies is that he
1:07
Speaker 1: was telling lies. That's certainly what the BBC is implying.
1:11
Speaker 1: But if we go across the Atlantic to ABC News,
1:15
Speaker 1: Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer was accusing Trump of throwing
1:19
Speaker 1: out idle speculation with outsiding evidence. So here we've got
1:23
Speaker 1: this common narrative on both sides of the Atlantic again.
1:27
Speaker 1: But the question is what actually happened. So to try
1:31
Speaker 1: to just explain this a little bit, let's bring up
1:34
Speaker 1: the air chart for the airport. Now, this is the
1:37
Speaker 1: helicopter chart in particular, and what you can see on
1:40
Speaker 1: there the purple well, you can see the three runways
1:44
Speaker 1: at the airport in the center with the green dot,
1:46
Speaker 1: but the purple lines around the place are roots for helicopters.
1:49
Speaker 1: So these are helicopter roots, and the helicopter that was
1:52
Speaker 1: involved in the crash was heading this direction here along
1:56
Speaker 1: Route one and on the Route four. Now, the key
1:59
Speaker 1: point about this is that the maximum height that they
2:04
Speaker 1: should have been at was two hundred feet. They should
2:07
Speaker 1: have been below that, and that would have taken them
2:10
Speaker 1: below the glide slope for the runways. The pilot had
2:14
Speaker 1: a light the helicopter, though, declined to at least three
2:17
Speaker 1: hundred feet at the time of the accident, So that's
2:20
Speaker 1: one thing to note. The regional jet itself was originally
2:25
Speaker 1: intended to land on runway one, which is the one
2:30
Speaker 1: that heads north south basically, but he was asked by
2:33
Speaker 1: our traffic control if he could take runway thirty three instead,
2:37
Speaker 1: and he agreed to do that and carry it out.
2:39
Speaker 1: What most of the commentator qualified commentators that I've seen
2:43
Speaker 1: talking about this are calling a challenging approach. So, in
2:46
Speaker 1: other words, he was totally focused on that. Atc the
2:49
Speaker 1: air traffic control asked the helicopter pilot twice if he
2:52
Speaker 1: had the regional jet in sight, and each time the
2:55
Speaker 1: helicopter pilot asked for and was given visual separation. In
3:00
Speaker 1: other words, it was the helicopter pilot's responsibility to maintain
3:03
Speaker 1: that clearance. Now, Trump said that the airplane was on
3:07
Speaker 1: a perfect and routine line of approach to the airport.
3:10
Speaker 1: The helicopter, he said, was going straight at the airplane
3:13
Speaker 1: for an extended period of time. It was a clear night.
3:16
Speaker 1: The lights on the plane were blazing, and Trump was
3:19
Speaker 1: asking why didn't the helicopter go up or die or turn?
3:23
Speaker 1: Why didn't the control tartell the helicopter what to do
3:26
Speaker 1: instead of asking if they saw the plane. That's a
3:29
Speaker 1: bad situation that looks like it should have been prevented.
3:33
Speaker 1: Not good. Now, The only good question in that comment
3:37
Speaker 1: from Trump was why didn't why did the air traffic
3:40
Speaker 1: control leave it to the pilot to decide? Because the
3:43
Speaker 1: likelihood of error here was huge. Flying at night over
3:46
Speaker 1: a city. All you know, it's one thing looking from
3:49
Speaker 1: the ground up at aircraft, you see all the big
3:51
Speaker 1: flashing lights and all this kind of thing. But when
3:53
Speaker 1: you're in the air and looking across at other aircraft,
3:56
Speaker 1: what do you have is this landscape of lights from
4:00
Speaker 1: the city, which an aircraft will disappear into very very easy,
4:05
Speaker 1: so the lights merge with the city. But even worse
4:07
Speaker 1: in this case, it's known that the helicopter pilots were
4:10
Speaker 1: using night vision goggles, which are great for landing in
4:13
Speaker 1: a dark field in the middle of nowhere, but it
4:15
Speaker 1: makes it even harder to distinguish another aircraft that's flying
4:19
Speaker 1: at the same time. But the worst part of this
4:21
Speaker 1: is the two aircraft we're approaching each other for most
4:24
Speaker 1: of that time, absolutely head on, so there's no relative
4:28
Speaker 1: motion or very little relative motion, which even makes it
4:31
Speaker 1: harder to recognize the danger that wins. So the helicopter
4:35
Speaker 1: pilot undibledly should not have asked for and should not
4:38
Speaker 1: have been given clearance for visual separation under these circumstances,
4:42
Speaker 1: and the question is why did that happen? And the
4:45
Speaker 1: issue does seem to be one of understaffing, and in fact,
4:49
Speaker 1: this is being commented on for a very long time now.
4:52
Speaker 1: So this is a CNN from twenty twenty four from May.
4:58
Speaker 1: FAA is still short about three eight thousand air traffic controllers,
5:02
Speaker 1: new federal numbers show. And the issue here is that
5:06
Speaker 1: the FBAA began it's deihiring program in twenty fourteen. Now,
5:11
Speaker 1: on the face of it, there doesn't seem to have
5:13
Speaker 1: been a marked increase in near missus or grind mishaps.
5:16
Speaker 1: And if you look at this article here diversitly in
5:19
Speaker 1: air traffic control, the figures seem to show that. But
5:22
Speaker 1: this is a complex issue. It takes time for the
5:25
Speaker 1: effects of a new hiring policy to take effect. As
5:28
Speaker 1: long serving staff retire gradually and the influence of the
5:32
Speaker 1: younger new generation becomes greater. The shortage of staff may
5:37
Speaker 1: be manageable for a time, but probably not forever. And
5:41
Speaker 1: I mean I have to say, I do watch this
5:44
Speaker 1: and in the last twelve months there have been quite
5:47
Speaker 1: a number of near misses which could be absolutely attributed
5:50
Speaker 1: down the shortage of staff, over work, and so on.
5:53
Speaker 1: So I would suggest that Trump was absolutely right on
5:57
Speaker 1: this issue, that the BBC is absolutely to be criticizing.
6:01
Speaker 1: This is something that absolutely has to be considered. The
6:04
Speaker 1: question of why they're not first of all, they're not
6:07
Speaker 1: able to recruit, and is that because they are busy
6:10
Speaker 1: trying to recruit from certain you know, with positive discrimination
6:14
Speaker 1: in mind, rather than finding the best people for the job.
6:17
Speaker 2: Well, you know, first of all, you have to just
6:20
Speaker 2: underline the fact that this is a fluke. If you
6:23
Speaker 2: look at the data over a long period of time,
6:25
Speaker 2: very rare air to air collisions in America, almost never
6:29
Speaker 2: in terms of fatalities for an air accident, it's also unusual.
6:33
Speaker 2: So just to be a devil's advocate the other party
6:37
Speaker 2: is I assume military? Is that right?
6:39
Speaker 1: That is correct? Yeah?
6:40
Speaker 2: So, and again nobody's pointing the finger at any negligence
6:44
Speaker 2: or incompetence from the military pilots that seems to be
6:48
Speaker 2: off limits and verboten in the conversation. Certainly, that would
6:51
Speaker 2: put a lot of heat on the Pentagon at a
6:54
Speaker 2: time when their controversial defense secretary has just been confirmed
7:00
Speaker 2: and they're hoping for no pun intended a nice runway
7:04
Speaker 2: into the first term, and then this happens. So I
7:07
Speaker 2: want to know what the story is there, because if
7:10
Speaker 2: these are experienced pilots, they should know not to go
7:13
Speaker 2: above a two hundred foot deck around Reagan Airport, which
7:16
Speaker 2: is really busy around there. So a lot of different
7:20
Speaker 2: questions there. But yeah, you know, the diversity issue is big,
7:23
Speaker 2: especially after the LA fires, it became a front and
7:26
Speaker 2: center issue, so it's obviously part of the debate.
7:29
Speaker 1: Absolutely, no, let's stay in the United States. And of
7:32
Speaker 1: course yesterday was a big day for confirmation hearings, Patrick
7:35
Speaker 1: and well, we're going to kick off with Tulsey Gabard
7:40
Speaker 1: and the question of well, there were a number of
7:43
Speaker 1: questions came up during the hearing, but the question of
7:46
Speaker 1: chemical weapons in Syria was certainly one of the key ones.
7:49
Speaker 1: So let's just look at a quick piece of video
7:53
Speaker 1: from the hearings.
7:55
Speaker 3: Can you explain to me then, why you doubted the
7:58
Speaker 3: intelligence commun unities conclusions in these two cases Duma and
8:04
Speaker 3: kanche Kun, but not the others, And please be specific.
8:08
Speaker 4: These two cases were being looked at as to be
8:14
Speaker 4: used as a pretext for major military movement, and another
8:21
Speaker 4: my fear was a repeat of the deployment of another
8:25
Speaker 4: half a million soldiers like we saw in Iraq towards
8:28
Speaker 4: what was the Obama administration's goal, which was regime change
8:32
Speaker 4: in Syria. The questions specifically that I raised around these
8:36
Speaker 4: two came about because there were two reasons. One that
8:41
Speaker 4: assessment was made with high confidence and low information. The
8:44
Speaker 4: information that they had came from those on the ground
8:48
Speaker 4: in an al Qaida controlled area and therefore were al
8:51
Speaker 4: Qaeda linked sources. And there was conflicting information that came
8:55
Speaker 4: from the UN's Office on the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
9:00
Speaker 4: as well as an MIT Professor Ted Postel.
9:06
Speaker 1: Patrick. She mentioned the UN Chemical Weapons Inspectors of the
9:10
Speaker 1: OPCW Chemical Weapons Inspectors, but she didn't at least I
9:13
Speaker 1: didn't notice her specifically use the word whistle blower. And
9:17
Speaker 1: she talked about dissent, but she didn't use that word
9:20
Speaker 1: whistle blower, and I think that puts an important context
9:23
Speaker 1: on this that was missing from her evidence there.
9:26
Speaker 2: Definitely it was a missed opportunity in terms of she
9:29
Speaker 2: didn't really get the full scope of the argument across.
9:33
Speaker 2: I mean, she has put it on the record it's
9:35
Speaker 2: kind of on the radar, But the media aren't going
9:37
Speaker 2: to run with this at all. They're just going to
9:39
Speaker 2: gloss over it. But it was nice to hear it
9:42
Speaker 2: at an official capacity, an official form that at least
9:46
Speaker 2: the issue was approached, and so that's positive. But I agree,
9:49
Speaker 2: Mike very very much. A lost opportunity to really nail
9:53
Speaker 2: the point across. Is that really what she wanted? Was
9:57
Speaker 2: she there to nail this point across or was she
9:59
Speaker 2: just kind of squirming her way out of a difficult situation.
10:02
Speaker 1: Do you think do you think she's trying to walk
10:08
Speaker 1: a line with a view to actually getting confirmed rather than.
10:11
Speaker 2: Making absolutelytely that's undeniable. So it goes with the territory
10:17
Speaker 2: that some things aren't going to maybe be fleshed out
10:19
Speaker 2: as well as they should. Yes, this is unfortunate, but
10:22
Speaker 2: this is how Washington really works.
10:24
Speaker 1: Well, she made a really important point during her opening statement.
10:27
Speaker 1: But before we get to that, I just mentioned that
10:29
Speaker 1: we have a new article up in the UK CALME
10:31
Speaker 1: website by doctor Pierce Robinson. Why is this not working? Okay,
10:38
Speaker 1: so we do seem to have a problem there. So
10:40
Speaker 1: that's so, Look, this is Hams twenty twelve and the
10:43
Speaker 1: genesis of the Syria chemical weapon start of This is
10:46
Speaker 1: going to be the first in a series of articles
10:48
Speaker 1: taking us through the stages of the chemical weapons start
10:52
Speaker 1: and so see if we can see what the get
10:56
Speaker 1: an idea of what the whole narrative is at the
10:58
Speaker 1: end of the day. But as I say there, we
11:03
Speaker 1: do have a technical problem here today. So let's just
11:08
Speaker 1: see if we can get this second clip running and
11:11
Speaker 1: then we can see if we sort it out. So
11:14
Speaker 1: Telsey Coalbart then in her opening statement, made a comment
11:18
Speaker 1: about intelligence.
11:21
Speaker 4: To my husband Abraham, my family, friends, fellow veterans, Medal
11:25
Speaker 4: of Honor recipients, and patriots, thank you for your love
11:29
Speaker 4: and support. I'm honored and grateful to President Trump for
11:33
Speaker 4: his trust and confidence and nominating me to serve our
11:36
Speaker 4: country as the Director of National Intelligence at a time
11:39
Speaker 4: when trust in the intelligence community, unfortunately is at an
11:42
Speaker 4: all time low. Chuck Schumer admitted a few years ago, quote,
11:46
Speaker 4: you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways
11:49
Speaker 4: from Sunday at getting back at you. For too long, faulty, inadequate,
11:55
Speaker 4: or weaponized intelligence have led to costly failures and the
11:59
Speaker 4: undermining of our national security and God given freedoms enshrined
12:02
Speaker 4: in the Constitution. The most obvious example of one of
12:07
Speaker 4: these failures is our invasion of Iraq based upon a
12:10
Speaker 4: total fabrication or complete failure of intelligence. This disastrous decision
12:16
Speaker 4: led to the deaths of tens of thousands of American
12:19
Speaker 4: soldiers and millions of people in the Middle East, mass migration, destabilization,
12:24
Speaker 4: and undermining of the security and stability of our European allies.
12:28
Speaker 4: The rise of isis, strengthening of al Qaeda and other
12:31
Speaker 4: Islamus jihadist groups, and strengthening Iran.
12:39
Speaker 1: So she's at least mentioning the intelligence failures. But did
12:44
Speaker 1: she go far enough?
12:46
Speaker 2: No, I think, And this is an even bigger missed opportunity.
12:50
Speaker 2: And this is one of the big criticisms I have
12:53
Speaker 2: with Tulca Gobard is that she's rightly pointing out, Mike
13:00
Speaker 2: that intelligence failures have dragged the US and its allies
13:05
Speaker 2: into forever wars that were unnecessary, that have caused blood
13:09
Speaker 2: and treasure. I mean, we've heard that narrative before many times. Right,
13:13
Speaker 2: has that stopped any US imperialist activity. It's arguable that
13:18
Speaker 2: it has, but maybe it has who knows. But she's
13:21
Speaker 2: leaving out the most important point, and the most important
13:24
Speaker 2: point is where is this bad intelligence coming from? Well,
13:28
Speaker 2: on almost every occasion, this bad intelligence is coming from
13:32
Speaker 2: our quote allies, and which allies in particular, Well, the
13:36
Speaker 2: Israelis and the UK. Look at the yellow k uranium
13:43
Speaker 2: and hanagain, dear love the yellow k uranium WMD thing.
13:50
Speaker 2: The British played a huge role in kicking the US
13:53
Speaker 2: back into line on that, not even talking about the
13:55
Speaker 2: Steele dossier and all this other stuff. But here's the
13:59
Speaker 2: other thing, Guta. We don't talk about a chemical weapons
14:02
Speaker 2: attack in Syria East Guta, August twenty thirteen. You remember it, well,
14:07
Speaker 2: David Cameron brought the vote to the Commons. We nearly
14:10
Speaker 2: went to war over this. Who provided the key piece
14:14
Speaker 2: of intelligence, Mike, an intercepted phone call that created a
14:18
Speaker 2: narrative that siria Is somehow launched a Sarah attack while
14:22
Speaker 2: the UN Weapons inspectors were rolling in at the invitation
14:25
Speaker 2: of the Syrian government. Well that was Israel, wasn't it.
14:28
Speaker 2: That was the Israelis. So my fear is that I think, personally, Mike,
14:32
Speaker 2: that Tulsi has been groomed for this position at DNI
14:37
Speaker 2: and the bad intelligence. She has not addressed the source
14:40
Speaker 2: of it. So we could see a situation where intel
14:44
Speaker 2: on Iran is pouring in from the usual suspects, and
14:49
Speaker 2: Tulsi Gabbar will feel compelled to brief the president, as
14:52
Speaker 2: the DNI is supposed to do curate intelligence briefings from
14:55
Speaker 2: the different agencies, that this is a credible threat, mister President,
14:59
Speaker 2: and we need to act on it. I think she
15:01
Speaker 2: has been groomed for this, and if you look at
15:04
Speaker 2: her turn towards Israel, especially after October seventh, she's very
15:09
Speaker 2: pro Israeli and she well, we could show you some things.
15:14
Speaker 2: But that's my fear is that she Mike. She's known
15:19
Speaker 2: as an anti war person, she's known as one of
15:21
Speaker 2: us in the truth community and so forth. But this
15:25
Speaker 2: is this is not the perfect person to break but
15:30
Speaker 2: from the establishment and to DC changes you. You don't
15:34
Speaker 2: change the swamp. The swamp changes you. I think this
15:37
Speaker 2: is a perfect example of that. This is my biggest
15:39
Speaker 2: concern with Tulsi.
15:41
Speaker 1: Right, and you're talking about the lobby and there it.
15:45
Speaker 2: Is, well, there it is, there's Rabbi Shmooley Boutish and
15:49
Speaker 2: Mariam Adelson, And isn't it Thomas Massey said, everybody in
15:53
Speaker 2: Washington has an I pack, a guy, or a handler. Well,
15:57
Speaker 2: this is Tulsi arguably early in her career twenty sixteen here,
16:02
Speaker 2: but they've had their eye on Tulsi Gabbard for a
16:05
Speaker 2: very long time and her pivot to Fox News and
16:09
Speaker 2: her turn to become a Republican. In all this process,
16:13
Speaker 2: she's become very pro Israel and very anti Muslim or
16:18
Speaker 2: anti is a radical Islam and so forth. Plus she
16:24
Speaker 2: has her you know, Iraq bonafide as a serving in uniform,
16:30
Speaker 2: So she takes a lot of boxes. But my question
16:33
Speaker 2: is when it comes to the crunch, is she going
16:36
Speaker 2: to accept or reject intel coming from foreign intelligence services?
16:42
Speaker 1: If she assume as she's confirmed, only time will tell,
16:45
Speaker 1: but we can continue to discuss this. The other big
16:48
Speaker 1: confirmation hearing that was taking place yesterday as well was
16:51
Speaker 1: RFK Junior, And well, one comment that he has made
16:55
Speaker 1: seems to have at least one comment is making a
16:58
Speaker 1: lot of controversy. So let's just have listened to what
17:00
Speaker 1: he said about Operation Warp Speed.
17:03
Speaker 5: I do have a question for you on Project Warp Speed.
17:06
Speaker 5: What I want to do is I'm not a scientist,
17:10
Speaker 5: I want to win power scientists. I want to make
17:12
Speaker 5: sure that science is unobstructed by vestent or economic interests.
17:17
Speaker 2: That's good.
17:18
Speaker 5: I had culture, and I'll just say about operational warp Speed,
17:22
Speaker 5: it was an extraordinary accomplishment, should demonstration of leadership by
17:26
Speaker 5: President Trump when he promoted Operation warp Speed. He was
17:32
Speaker 5: looking at all of the different remedies, including.
17:35
Speaker 2: Vaccines, therapeutics are therapeutic.
17:37
Speaker 5: I remacan, hydroxychloric in, vamptivy, and even chlorine oxide all
17:42
Speaker 5: and he was not looking at shutting down our country
17:45
Speaker 5: for the year, forcing people to wear masks for a year,
17:49
Speaker 5: all forcing all social distancing that did not have any
17:54
Speaker 5: scientific basis, which doctor Fauci is now acknowledged.
17:57
Speaker 2: He said, we took it out.
17:58
Speaker 5: Of thin air. Oh but but all of those changed
18:04
Speaker 5: during the Biden administration and it became very narrowly focause
18:09
Speaker 5: we ended up with the worst, the highest death count
18:12
Speaker 5: of any country in the world.
18:15
Speaker 1: Is that true?
18:16
Speaker 2: What death count? Where do we start? COVID deaths? Is
18:19
Speaker 2: RFK really pushing that old chestnut? What COVID deaths?
18:24
Speaker 1: Is it true that in practice warp Speed was about
18:27
Speaker 1: anything other than voxines.
18:29
Speaker 2: No, it was all about vaccines. It was all about vaccines.
18:32
Speaker 2: They used to common near the military to drive this
18:35
Speaker 2: massive deployment of experimental, highly dangerous and non tested, non
18:42
Speaker 2: safe toxic shots period, end of story. I mean, how
18:46
Speaker 2: many times do we have to go through this? And
18:48
Speaker 2: R Junior for political reasons not to implement implicate his
18:53
Speaker 2: new boss, Donald Trump, He's backing off and saying what
18:56
Speaker 2: a great thing Operation Warp Speed is his whole or organization.
19:00
Speaker 2: Children's Health Defense has spent the last five years practically
19:06
Speaker 2: just railing against Operation Warp Speed and the experimental COVID vaccines,
19:11
Speaker 2: and in one fail swoop, RFK has thrown Children's Health
19:15
Speaker 2: Defense under the bus and everybody working in that organization
19:20
Speaker 2: and mothers with children with autism, and the list goes
19:24
Speaker 2: on and on and on, and I mean, it's just unbelievable.
19:27
Speaker 2: How can you defend the one of the worst crimes
19:31
Speaker 2: against humanity that maimed and killed countless people globally. How
19:36
Speaker 2: can you sit there and praise Operation Warp Speed. It's
19:40
Speaker 2: really unbelievable.
19:43
Speaker 1: It didn't end there, because we have a little bit
19:46
Speaker 1: more SERI would.
19:48
Speaker 6: You recommend that parents get their children vaccinated against.
19:50
Speaker 5: AP I recommend that children follow the CDC schedule, and
19:57
Speaker 5: I will support the CDC schedule when I got in
19:59
Speaker 5: there if I'm fortunate enough to be confirmed, would.
20:03
Speaker 6: You recommend the parents get their children vaccinated against the measles?
20:07
Speaker 1: Yes?
20:07
Speaker 5: Against measles?
20:11
Speaker 6: Well, I just remind everybody that.
20:16
Speaker 2: Okay, So Robert F. Kennedy, who's been campaigning against the
20:22
Speaker 2: childhood schedule for the longest time, says he now supports
20:26
Speaker 2: the childhood vaccine schedule. I mean, this guy is unbelievable.
20:31
Speaker 2: So he's capitulated to the establishment, to big pharma in
20:36
Speaker 2: the most profound way. I mean, I can't believe I
20:39
Speaker 2: heard that from him. Especially, he could have said, oh, well,
20:43
Speaker 2: the childhood vaccine schedule needs to really be looked at.
20:47
Speaker 2: It is excessive. How many vaccines did Robert F. Kennedy
20:51
Speaker 2: have as a child, three or something like that. He
20:55
Speaker 2: could talk to the boomers mic and say, we're healthy,
20:58
Speaker 2: we only had three. Why do these children need sixty
21:02
Speaker 2: or seventy vaccines before the age of five. I mean,
21:07
Speaker 2: you could easily make that appeal. But he is afraid
21:10
Speaker 2: of not getting confirmed and being labeled an anti vaxxer,
21:14
Speaker 2: so he has taken the middle of the road halfway
21:17
Speaker 2: house position and basically thrown again mothers against children with
21:22
Speaker 2: autism under the bus and all these groups like that.
21:25
Speaker 2: So let's take a look, Mike at the childhood vaccine schedule.
21:29
Speaker 2: It's important that people understand in the United States, especially
21:33
Speaker 2: how aggressively this policy is pushed a state to state
21:37
Speaker 2: and even at the federal level. I mean, there's so
21:39
Speaker 2: many of these lists. It's endless here. And so what
21:43
Speaker 2: I've done here is also compiled Mike from the Cleveland Clinic,
21:47
Speaker 2: which is a known pediatric authority in America, just to
21:51
Speaker 2: give you a little taste of basically what's available on
21:56
Speaker 2: this particular childhood vaccine schedule. And it goes on and
22:00
Speaker 2: on and on. Newborn to six months, two months, four months,
22:05
Speaker 2: six months, eighteen months, right up to the age of sixteen.
22:09
Speaker 2: Let's just take a look at it. I mean, it's
22:11
Speaker 2: just endless. This is the childhood vaccine schedule. This doesn't
22:15
Speaker 2: count the flu in, the COVID shots which are every year,
22:18
Speaker 2: the RSV shots that are every year up to the
22:20
Speaker 2: age of five, practically eleven to twelve year olds, tetanus.
22:24
Speaker 2: Repeat that again for the rest of your life and
22:27
Speaker 2: so forth and so on. Okay, so in RFK and
22:31
Speaker 2: all these previous statements about vaccine safety, all the virtue
22:35
Speaker 2: signaling has been tossed aside for the process of this
22:38
Speaker 2: public demonstration down on one knee to the pharmaceutical industry. Basically,
22:44
Speaker 2: I mean, I don't really know what else to say
22:47
Speaker 2: on this, but I mean it is quite shocking of
22:52
Speaker 2: all the issues he had to capitulate on the childhood
22:55
Speaker 2: vaccine schedule. It is really beyond belief.
22:59
Speaker 1: Okay, thank you. Let me welcome Mark to the program.
23:01
Speaker 1: Then on Mark, you're want to look a bit more.
23:05
Speaker 1: And at least James Rugoski has been given some commentary
23:09
Speaker 1: on Trump leaving the World Health Organization.
23:14
Speaker 7: Yeah, good day, Patrick and Mike and listeners. The issue here,
23:19
Speaker 7: in the general sense, is looking at what Trump says
23:23
Speaker 7: he's going to do and then looking at the actual
23:25
Speaker 7: details looking and of course we're looking for relative consistency
23:32
Speaker 7: and on Trump wanting to get the US out of
23:35
Speaker 7: the World Health Organization. This is a recent AFP dispatch
23:38
Speaker 7: I wrote that's published only in hard copy, and on
23:42
Speaker 7: the surface it appears, you know, fairly sincere there's this
23:45
Speaker 7: basic thrust that the World Health Organization is a tyrant
23:50
Speaker 7: or would be global tyrant and would be autocratic, and
23:54
Speaker 7: so hey, let's get out of it. And on this slide,
23:57
Speaker 7: I'll note some things that are important. Let's put that
23:59
Speaker 7: up on this screen. Longtime WHO watchdogs. James Ruguski lives
24:06
Speaker 7: in La. Of course, he's been interviewed on UK column
24:09
Speaker 7: has been following every move of the WHO for over
24:12
Speaker 7: three years. He closely examined the WHO Executive Order pardon
24:17
Speaker 7: the typo there President Trump signed. Roguski said that a
24:20
Speaker 7: keyword in the executive Order is intents, and section two
24:24
Speaker 7: of that EO says the United States intends to.
24:28
Speaker 8: Withdraw from the WHO.
24:30
Speaker 7: The Biden presidential letter to the Secretary General of the
24:33
Speaker 7: UN signed on twenty January twenty twenty one that retract
24:37
Speaker 7: of the US's July sixth, twenty twenty notification of withdrawal
24:42
Speaker 7: is revoked.
24:43
Speaker 8: Then it goes on.
24:44
Speaker 7: Regarding section two's last part, Roguski responded, revoking Biden's revocation
24:50
Speaker 7: of Trump's twenty twenty exit WHO action is not ideal.
24:55
Speaker 7: Raguski added, it be nice if a new clear letter
24:58
Speaker 7: could be sent directly to WHO. And we'll go on
25:02
Speaker 7: and pick it apart a little bit more. Another important
25:05
Speaker 7: part of the WHO EO, the Executive Order in section
25:10
Speaker 7: four states, while withdrawal is in progress, the Secretary of State,
25:15
Speaker 7: and then I added emphasis, will cease negotiations on the
25:18
Speaker 7: whol Pandemic Agreement and the amendments to the International Health regulations,
25:23
Speaker 7: and actions taken to effectuate such agreement and amendments will
25:27
Speaker 7: have no binding force on the US. But Ruguski adroitly responded,
25:32
Speaker 7: there are no active negotiations regarding the international health regulations
25:37
Speaker 7: going on at this time. It's not happening, but the
25:40
Speaker 7: EO implies it is. This needs to be followed up
25:43
Speaker 7: with an official letter, Raguski says, revoking the amendments that
25:47
Speaker 7: were adopted by the World Health Assembly on June first,
25:50
Speaker 7: twenty twenty four, but that hasn't happened yet, as well
25:53
Speaker 7: as a revocation and notice to the world that the
25:56
Speaker 7: United States is also exiting the National Health Regulations altogether.
26:03
Speaker 7: So what Riguski's seeing, guys, is a lack of resoluteness
26:07
Speaker 7: in the wording in the Executive Order to actually get
26:10
Speaker 7: out of the WHO. It sounds tentative. The word intends
26:14
Speaker 7: things like that so the question very quickly becomes is
26:18
Speaker 7: this just for show or is it some tactical maneuver
26:21
Speaker 7: that Trump will get benefits out of later Politically, as
26:26
Speaker 7: Patrick indicated, they write straight with crooked lines.
26:30
Speaker 8: In DC.
26:31
Speaker 7: There's a lot of maneuvering and jockeying that goes on
26:36
Speaker 7: due to the politics of the place and the corruption
26:38
Speaker 7: and the swamp. Anyway, we also have another matter, and
26:42
Speaker 7: that's the Education Department, which has long been a problem.
26:47
Speaker 7: Back in the nineteen fifties, Rudolph Fleisch wrote a book
26:51
Speaker 7: called Why Johnny Can't Read, and that was due to
26:54
Speaker 7: the adoption of whole language whole word techniques to teach
27:00
Speaker 7: us how to read, which was a total failure, rather
27:02
Speaker 7: than phonics. The alphabet is a phonetic system is based
27:05
Speaker 7: on sounding things out, so you have to teach reading
27:09
Speaker 7: through phonics. You learn to read so you can read
27:12
Speaker 7: to learn. That's the way education really advances. Anyway, this
27:16
Speaker 7: is another AFP dispatch. Trump looks to counter extreme left
27:20
Speaker 7: wing bias at the Education Department, and this is true.
27:24
Speaker 7: He sees a lot of DEI diversity, equity and inclusion
27:33
Speaker 7: policies going on across the federal government of course, but
27:36
Speaker 7: especially someplace like the Department of Education or DOE, and
27:41
Speaker 7: he wants to root that out, and that, of course
27:43
Speaker 7: is welcome in many quarters.
27:46
Speaker 8: I'll go ahead and put this slide up.
27:48
Speaker 7: Ever since Donald Trump signed a flurry of executive orders
27:51
Speaker 7: on his first day in office January twenty, the Department
27:55
Speaker 7: of Education has been carrying out significant education related changes
28:00
Speaker 7: thing here so far, there's no strong indication that they're
28:03
Speaker 7: going to get rid of the DOE. Rather, the DOE
28:07
Speaker 7: itself is calling out the DEI policies and wanting to
28:11
Speaker 7: root those out. So the DOE Department of Education is
28:15
Speaker 7: becoming activist here, acting more in concert with what Trump
28:19
Speaker 7: wants to do, rather than the Department of Education. For now,
28:23
Speaker 7: even being on the shopping block, that doesn't appear to
28:26
Speaker 7: be a current reality. Incidentally, the Department of Education has
28:30
Speaker 7: been around technically since eighteen sixty seven, just after the
28:34
Speaker 7: Civil War.
28:35
Speaker 8: It was reduced to a.
28:37
Speaker 7: Very small department after that, but then in the nineteen
28:40
Speaker 7: seventies during the Carter years, it was elevated to cabinet
28:44
Speaker 7: level status. Many true blue Conservatives and Reaganites have been
28:48
Speaker 7: saying for years that they've been wanting to get rid
28:51
Speaker 7: of the Department of Education altogether. Nobody seems to be
28:54
Speaker 7: willing to pull the trigger. So then the question becomes,
28:58
Speaker 7: will Donald Trump finally, after all these years, technically going
29:02
Speaker 7: back to just after the Civil War, will he finally
29:04
Speaker 7: pull the trigger and get rid of the DOE. Well, anyway,
29:07
Speaker 7: we'll move on and show that for now again, the
29:10
Speaker 7: Department of Education is taking an active role in carrying
29:15
Speaker 7: out Trump's policies rather than fading into the sunset. And
29:19
Speaker 7: here's some of the things that the DOE itself has
29:22
Speaker 7: been tasked to do. For instance, dissolve the Department of
29:26
Speaker 7: Education's own Diversity Inclusion Council, So it's dissolving one of
29:32
Speaker 7: its own councils, effective immediately. And Trump rescinded an Obama
29:37
Speaker 7: executive order that guided that council, and Trump issued a
29:40
Speaker 7: new EO ending radical and wasteful government DEI programs and preferencing. Also,
29:47
Speaker 7: we can go down that same list, keep that up there.
29:49
Speaker 7: If you would cancel ongoing DEI training and service contracts,
29:54
Speaker 7: which total over two point six million dollars. The Department
29:58
Speaker 7: of Education would also place its career staff passed with
30:03
Speaker 7: implementing the previous administration's DEI initiatives, they'd put them on
30:07
Speaker 7: paid administrative leave, and among other things, the Department of
30:11
Speaker 7: Education would remove more than two hundred web pages from
30:15
Speaker 7: its own website that house DEI resources and promoted harmful
30:20
Speaker 7: ideological programs. So the Department of Education is sort of
30:25
Speaker 7: making itself lean and means stripping a lot of DEI
30:29
Speaker 7: stuff out of its database, things like that. But for now,
30:33
Speaker 7: the Department of Education itself doesn't appear to be sunsetting. Rather,
30:38
Speaker 7: it's taking an active role and getting the DEI out
30:41
Speaker 7: of the system. So that, combined with Roguski's take on
30:46
Speaker 7: the WHO, shows that there's a lot of nuance involved,
30:50
Speaker 7: and at least for the time being, the World Health
30:53
Speaker 7: Organization and the Department of Education are not imminently threatened
30:57
Speaker 7: with being in one case solved. In the other case,
31:01
Speaker 7: the US pulling out, it might take time. We'll see
31:04
Speaker 7: what happens. Is this double talk? Is this double speak?
31:07
Speaker 7: I don't know, but it's definitely the reality of Washington politics,
31:11
Speaker 7: as Patrick alluded to.
31:13
Speaker 8: So back to you guys, maybe you have some comments.
31:16
Speaker 1: Yeah, Well, I was just going to say, it looks like,
31:18
Speaker 1: you know, he's done a lot to come in with
31:21
Speaker 1: a big buying with lots of executive orders, but maybe
31:23
Speaker 1: the wording of them leaves plenty of regal room for
31:27
Speaker 1: them not to follow through.
31:28
Speaker 2: At the end of the day, look all these departments.
31:31
Speaker 2: And by the way, if you know, there was talking
31:33
Speaker 2: to the Reagan administration about getting rid of the Department Education.
31:37
Speaker 2: So these are tools for any government coming in and
31:41
Speaker 2: you can see the department itself out of survival mode.
31:44
Speaker 2: His adopted all of Trump's policies because they don't want
31:48
Speaker 2: to be on the chopping block. But the end of
31:50
Speaker 2: the day, it's a tool. And while they're removing all
31:52
Speaker 2: the radical left material out of the Department Education, if
31:56
Speaker 2: Trump will put his people in or his these Republicans
32:01
Speaker 2: will put their people in. They could add things to
32:04
Speaker 2: the Department Education to replace DEI, like a prayer and
32:08
Speaker 2: school board, a Biblical council. They could bring in Mike
32:12
Speaker 2: Hawkabee to review the Israeli Holocaust remembrance education curriculum for
32:18
Speaker 2: every student in America. It could easily swing the other way,
32:22
Speaker 2: and that's something I'd be very concerned about. I personally
32:26
Speaker 2: think as Mark probably does get rid of the whole department.
32:29
Speaker 2: It's a huge waste of money, along with a bunch
32:32
Speaker 2: of other federal departments. I'm not hearing that from Doge.
32:36
Speaker 2: It was unfortunately, so the syop that is Doge. We
32:41
Speaker 2: can get into it another time, but we're not hearing
32:44
Speaker 2: any of that. Let's just get rid of the Department
32:46
Speaker 2: of Homeland Security that didn't exist before two thousand and two.
32:49
Speaker 2: What does it do? Nothing? What does it cost? Hundreds
32:52
Speaker 2: of billions? It's just one example. Mark.
32:56
Speaker 7: Yeah, Well, the Department of Education, like so many things
32:59
Speaker 7: that federal government is not authorized to be involved in
33:02
Speaker 7: education under the constitution. A clean break with it would
33:06
Speaker 7: be best. I mean if states, if states want to
33:10
Speaker 7: put prayer in schools on a state by state or
33:13
Speaker 7: you know, localized basis, that would be their business under
33:16
Speaker 7: the Tenth Amendment.
33:17
Speaker 8: But the yeah, the Department of Education.
33:20
Speaker 7: Charlotte Iserbeat one of the longtime critics of the DOES
33:24
Speaker 7: and she worked inside The Beast and others.
33:28
Speaker 8: She's the late Charlotte Aerbeat. She passed away.
33:30
Speaker 7: She explained in very detailed terms why the Department of
33:35
Speaker 7: Education really isn't reformable and it really should be shut down.
33:40
Speaker 1: Thank you, thank you for that. Mark. Okay, Now, look,
33:42
Speaker 1: we do have a technical issue. So I'm going to
33:44
Speaker 1: work my way through this as quickly as best we
33:46
Speaker 1: can today without without disrupting the program too much. But anyway,
33:51
Speaker 1: if you like what the UK Calm does, you'd like
33:53
Speaker 1: to support us, please go to support the UK colin
33:56
Speaker 1: dot org. There are options to help us out there.
33:58
Speaker 1: You can make a donation. I please remember that if
34:01
Speaker 1: you do make a donation rather than joining as a member,
34:04
Speaker 1: that doesn't give you access to the membership site and
34:08
Speaker 1: the UK Column News Extra and so on. So do
34:11
Speaker 1: join as a member if you'd like access to that.
34:13
Speaker 1: There are various membership levels there. You could pick something
34:16
Speaker 1: up at the UK Column Shop that helps us out
34:18
Speaker 1: greatly and helps get the word out about us. If
34:21
Speaker 1: you are at the health products and you'd like to
34:23
Speaker 1: pick something up from clibdecarl dot com, you can do
34:25
Speaker 1: so through here as well, and we'll get a small
34:28
Speaker 1: proportion of the sale price. If you can't do any
34:32
Speaker 1: of that, that's absolutely fine, but at least share the
34:35
Speaker 1: material if you possibly can, on the various platforms, because
34:38
Speaker 1: we do continue to suffer from censorship regime and so on. Now, yesterday,
34:45
Speaker 1: the interview with Raja Maya about Asian grooment Gangs went out.
34:51
Speaker 1: It is on the website now if you'd like to
34:53
Speaker 1: go and look at it. It is a fantastic interview.
34:56
Speaker 1: Look at it if you possibly can. And we do
34:59
Speaker 1: have a let me just see here. We do have
35:03
Speaker 1: a bit of an exclusive here, I suppose for Monday's
35:08
Speaker 1: news program in facts more than suppose an unreliable witness.
35:12
Speaker 1: So Brian has a little bit of a video here
35:15
Speaker 1: to show if this thing will even nearly work. Here
35:18
Speaker 1: we go, let's have a listen to this.
35:21
Speaker 9: Sometimes life throw something unexpected at you. It can be
35:25
Speaker 9: a letter, it can be a parcel, or it can
35:28
Speaker 9: be a chance phone call. And a few days ago
35:32
Speaker 9: I received such a phone call from another journalist. The
35:36
Speaker 9: conversation we had took me back many years to two
35:41
Speaker 9: thousand and eight in fact, and to a story that
35:45
Speaker 9: I was covering at the time. But it was only later,
35:49
Speaker 9: when I dug deeper into the UK column files that
35:53
Speaker 9: I realized the importance of a story that we covered many,
35:57
Speaker 9: many years ago. And I believe that that story is
36:02
Speaker 9: a significant part of the jigsaw in obtaining justice for Lucy.
36:09
Speaker 9: Let be so for our audience today and the wider
36:13
Speaker 9: audience for UK column. Please join us on Monday, the
36:17
Speaker 9: third of February at one pm, where we will be
36:21
Speaker 9: revealing what that case was, what our research was many
36:25
Speaker 9: years ago, and why we believe it holds a key
36:29
Speaker 9: part of the jigsaw for obtaining justice for Lucy. Let
36:34
Speaker 9: be join us then, thank you.
36:43
Speaker 1: Okay, so do join us at one pm on Monday
36:46
Speaker 1: for that for during the news program of course, but
36:49
Speaker 1: that is going to be an interesting exclusive.
36:53
Speaker 2: Ni.
36:54
Speaker 1: Let's move on to the European situation. And first of all,
36:58
Speaker 1: what we have here is the wonderful Ursula vonder lyon.
37:03
Speaker 1: So let's bring her on screen because she is here,
37:07
Speaker 1: she is with.
37:08
Speaker 2: She's very important Mike. She's got a lot of people
37:10
Speaker 2: around her.
37:10
Speaker 1: She's got a lot of people around her. But one
37:12
Speaker 1: of the people is King King Abdullah.
37:16
Speaker 2: King, yes, King Abdullah from Jordan, Lawrence of Belgravia, Lawrence
37:21
Speaker 2: of Belgravier.
37:22
Speaker 1: So the European Committee is because the European Commission has
37:24
Speaker 1: signed a three billion euro deal with Jordan on Wednessday.
37:29
Speaker 1: Actually this was Ershula said. Our financial and investment package
37:33
Speaker 1: of three billion reflects the urgency and skill of the
37:36
Speaker 1: challenge that Jordan's challenges Jordan face as the region. And
37:41
Speaker 1: my question is because this deal is all about well,
37:44
Speaker 1: it's mixture of loans and grants first of all, but
37:46
Speaker 1: it's all about strength, strengthening the Jordanian government, support for
37:51
Speaker 1: its armed forces, and quotes continue working on durable solutions
37:56
Speaker 1: for refugees, including complementary pathways for protection and save for
38:00
Speaker 1: involuntary dignified returns. The question is is this got anything
38:07
Speaker 1: to do with Trump's recent discussion on Gaza.
38:10
Speaker 2: Well, I can tell you those dignified returns will not
38:12
Speaker 2: be Palestinians being allowed to return to their old homes,
38:17
Speaker 2: ancestral homes in Palestine. I think this is absolutely connected
38:22
Speaker 2: because what Trump did. Listen, Mike, It's no secret Donald
38:26
Speaker 2: Trump has a big mouth, and stuff inadvertently always slips out,
38:31
Speaker 2: especially when he's doing these kind of casual, you know,
38:34
Speaker 2: informal conversations. And I don't think he was supposed to
38:37
Speaker 2: say the word Jordan. It kind of came out very awkwardly.
38:41
Speaker 2: He talked about Egypt and then he said Jordan, and
38:43
Speaker 2: then he does this sort of normal stumbling with a caveat.
38:47
Speaker 2: So I think he gave the game away. Donald Trump
38:50
Speaker 2: gave the game away. He gave the game away of
38:53
Speaker 2: the ethnic cleansing of the West Bank. So he has
38:57
Speaker 2: effectively already promised the West Bank or the annexation of
39:01
Speaker 2: the West Bank to the Israelis before. But to formally
39:05
Speaker 2: complete that process, you need to get rid of the problem.
39:09
Speaker 2: And the Israelis they need a final solution to the
39:13
Speaker 2: Palestinian problem. They need to get rid of the Palestinians
39:16
Speaker 2: in the West Bank, like like they're doing in Gaza.
39:19
Speaker 2: And so this is what they're radical right in Israel's
39:23
Speaker 2: talking about. This is what's being said in sort of
39:26
Speaker 2: muffled tones, and Trump just basically said the quiet part
39:29
Speaker 2: out loud, and now you can see the agenda is
39:32
Speaker 2: kind of coming open again. This has massive implications. I
39:36
Speaker 2: don't even know where to begin. On the Jordanian side,
39:39
Speaker 2: it could it could, it could destabilize Jordan in a
39:42
Speaker 2: way that might end up pushing out the royal family.
39:47
Speaker 2: There's already huge protests in Jordan. I mean, it's it's
39:50
Speaker 2: a it's a tinderbox already. And the royal Famili's position
39:54
Speaker 2: there has never been more pretenuous in its history. And
39:57
Speaker 2: so what Trump is proposing there, I mean, would just
40:00
Speaker 2: be the who knows it could cause a regime change
40:04
Speaker 2: type event in Jordan, Mike, And who would manage a
40:07
Speaker 2: regime change in Jordan? Let me guess, well, Trump, it
40:12
Speaker 2: would have to be the Americans in the British because
40:14
Speaker 2: Jordan is their colonial possession right full stop. So and
40:19
Speaker 2: then Lawrence of Belgravia might end up in Belgravia after that,
40:24
Speaker 2: and who knows who will be the technocrat that they
40:27
Speaker 2: parachute in to create the new Unity government whenever that happens.
40:32
Speaker 2: I mean these we're talking about these in theoretical terms, Mike.
40:35
Speaker 2: But if that happens in the West Bank, it's people
40:39
Speaker 2: get pushed into Jordan. Anything's possible at that point in date.
40:43
Speaker 1: Well, let's move on to Germany then, and overnight there
40:46
Speaker 1: have been protests because of a deal that was done
40:51
Speaker 1: on Wednesday between the CDU and AfD. Now, the CDU
40:56
Speaker 1: has a protocol and place where they always said they
41:00
Speaker 1: would under no circumstances do any kind of deal with
41:03
Speaker 1: AfD in order to win a vote in the Stag.
41:07
Speaker 1: But in this case they did do the deal, and well,
41:10
Speaker 1: lots of people have been very upset about that, including
41:13
Speaker 1: all have Shultz, including Angela Merkel and so on, and
41:19
Speaker 1: in fact that that was just a sort of intention
41:22
Speaker 1: on Wednesday. The actual legislation is supposed to come to
41:25
Speaker 1: the Buon stack today, so we'll see what happens. But
41:27
Speaker 1: lots of people complaining about this. But Elon Musk has
41:32
Speaker 1: been talking somewhat about the a f D as well,
41:35
Speaker 1: he's supporting them and whatnot.
41:37
Speaker 2: Yeah, he has. I mean, just on what you just said, Mike,
41:40
Speaker 2: I wouldn't I wouldn't rule out the possibility of something
41:43
Speaker 2: really extraordinary in Germany, like maybe a coalition between the
41:46
Speaker 2: Christian Democrats and AfD.
41:49
Speaker 1: Well, well, we should make the point that the Christian
41:51
Speaker 1: Democrats do find themselves in a very similar position in
41:53
Speaker 1: Germany as the Tories do in the UK. So Tories
41:56
Speaker 1: under pressure from reform reform snapping at their heels, AfD
42:00
Speaker 1: doing a very good job of stopic at the hills
42:02
Speaker 1: of the CDU as well. So yes, at least they
42:06
Speaker 1: have the opportunity of a coalition there. There's less chance
42:09
Speaker 1: of that in this country.
42:10
Speaker 2: And it would allow them to retain the chancellor ship
42:13
Speaker 2: as well. And so I mean I wouldn't rule that out.
42:16
Speaker 2: But so what's Elon Musk's interest in Germany in the
42:21
Speaker 2: a f D, he's been deployed there. He sort of
42:24
Speaker 2: did this appearance piped in here at their big rally,
42:28
Speaker 2: and the idea he's pushing here that he was pushing
42:31
Speaker 2: was interesting. He's saying, be proud to be German, He's
42:35
Speaker 2: already reclaim your germanness and so forth. And so this
42:38
Speaker 2: is kind of Elon Musk's kind of identitarianism that he's
42:42
Speaker 2: kind of running with, and he's trying to export this
42:45
Speaker 2: kind of right wing or what he's calling conservative, but
42:50
Speaker 2: it's more than that. It's definitely nationalist themes that he
42:53
Speaker 2: is basically trafficking in. So it's interesting that he's pushing
42:58
Speaker 2: all the culture war issues though with Germany. Now, why
43:01
Speaker 2: is Germany unstable politically? Does it have anything to do
43:05
Speaker 2: with the fact that is also unstable economically? I think so?
43:09
Speaker 2: I mean, the German economy is in the toilet proverbially
43:14
Speaker 2: compared to where it normally is. Why is it in
43:17
Speaker 2: the toilet? So? Why Elon Musk, who is an employee
43:20
Speaker 2: of the US government, I'm told now he's an agent
43:23
Speaker 2: of the US. He's in Germany meddling in their elections.
43:27
Speaker 1: Sorry, was this not something we were criticizing Russia for.
43:31
Speaker 2: Oh the Russians. Yeah, but the Russians. So he's an
43:34
Speaker 2: American basically dangling money in front of political parties in Britain,
43:39
Speaker 2: in Germany and other countries too, and he's telling them
43:43
Speaker 2: what they need to do. He's telling them how they
43:44
Speaker 2: need to feel. He's pushing the culture war issues. So
43:48
Speaker 2: he's pushing obviously emotive issues immigration, you know, grooming gangs
43:53
Speaker 2: in Britain, a German identity in the kind of white
43:58
Speaker 2: nationalist vein. Let's be honest, that's kind of where he's
44:01
Speaker 2: at on that. Okay, so all the culture war issues,
44:04
Speaker 2: but that's not what Germany's big problem is. Well, Germany's
44:08
Speaker 2: big problem is the sovereignty issue. Ah. And this is
44:11
Speaker 2: the one Elon Musk is not talking about. Because Germany
44:16
Speaker 2: has been occupied militarily by the United States for decades now.
44:21
Speaker 2: Germany can't even decide what it can have in terms
44:25
Speaker 2: of its own foreign policy. The US decides where Germany
44:29
Speaker 2: can buy its energy from. They're deciding who Germans can
44:33
Speaker 2: sell their products to. There's a sovereignty problem here, and
44:37
Speaker 2: Elon Musk is not talking about this. He is gaslighting.
44:41
Speaker 2: He's saying, look over here at these issues. We'll give
44:43
Speaker 2: you the culture war issues in America, but don't protest
44:46
Speaker 2: against us. And they Germans should have got the message
44:52
Speaker 2: when the nord Stream pipeline was blown up, Okay, I
44:55
Speaker 2: mean at that point, that's the wake up call that
44:58
Speaker 2: should have happened. Is Elon Musk mentioned nord Stream once? No,
45:03
Speaker 2: it is the single biggest consequential event active international terrorism
45:09
Speaker 2: in Europe in history, and you will not hear a
45:12
Speaker 2: guy like Elon Musk say a word about it. Okay.
45:15
Speaker 2: So I'm questioning why he's been dispatched, who he's actually
45:19
Speaker 2: working for. And by the way, he's very chummy with
45:23
Speaker 2: the CEO of Axel Springer, that media group, which is
45:27
Speaker 2: very much in league with Israel. So Israel is backing
45:31
Speaker 2: the AfD in a huge, huge way. The Israeli lobby
45:34
Speaker 2: want the AfD in power. Is that why Elon was
45:37
Speaker 2: dispatched to work on Germany? This is obvious question here.
45:41
Speaker 2: Or is he just doing this out of the kindness
45:42
Speaker 2: of his heart because he wants to de woke the
45:45
Speaker 2: world personally, Mike, the woke issue has already been defeated
45:50
Speaker 2: it's that we're talking about the big boy issues. Now,
45:52
Speaker 2: this is the adults table, sovereignty, Brexit for Germany, NATO,
45:59
Speaker 2: US military occupation, World War III. These are big issues.
46:03
Speaker 2: Elon Musk doesn't want to talk about any of them.
46:06
Speaker 2: So this is this is where I see this issue.
46:09
Speaker 1: Okay, but where does that take us?
46:11
Speaker 2: Then? Well, this is just an example of Germany real
46:13
Speaker 2: quickly the US and they've got Germany hooked on the
46:18
Speaker 2: Green New Deal. They got him to shut down their
46:20
Speaker 2: nuclear power plants, shut down their coal plants. And the
46:23
Speaker 2: US can at any time pull out of the Paris
46:25
Speaker 2: Climate Coords, they can pull out of all these international
46:28
Speaker 2: climate regimes. And they just did look at this and
46:31
Speaker 2: has Europe no. So this is I'm beginning to feel
46:35
Speaker 2: like this has been a trap at the Trilateral Commission level,
46:39
Speaker 2: in the US level to lure the Europeans into this
46:43
Speaker 2: environmental boondoggle and then basically pull the rug out from
46:46
Speaker 2: under them. And isn't that not what's happened in the
46:49
Speaker 2: last couple of years. So you know, watch Trump, listen,
46:52
Speaker 2: watch it what he does.
46:54
Speaker 1: Well, you mentioned nord Stream, Patrick.
46:56
Speaker 2: Well, speaking of Nordstream, there are some interestinctive developments along
47:01
Speaker 2: this line. Here we've got an exclusive which I invite
47:04
Speaker 2: people to go read at twenty first centurywire dot com.
47:07
Speaker 2: This is by Jeffrey Brodsky who was on site. He
47:10
Speaker 2: did one of the first reconnaissances with underwater drones at
47:14
Speaker 2: the Nordstream site along with Eric Anderson of a great
47:18
Speaker 2: Scandinavian engineer. And so let's take a closer look at
47:21
Speaker 2: this story and see what might be here. So what
47:25
Speaker 2: is this about, Well, General Valerie's ILLUSIONI he's the former
47:29
Speaker 2: head of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, Ukraine's highest ranking military
47:33
Speaker 2: officer at the time of the Nordstream attack, is currently
47:37
Speaker 2: the ambassador to the UK. Is not immune from prosecution,
47:41
Speaker 2: say legal scholars, bringing to light a crucial omission in
47:45
Speaker 2: mainstream media reporting as new revelations reinforce the idea of
47:49
Speaker 2: a US cover up. So the point of this article, Mike,
47:53
Speaker 2: is that whether you believe this Ukrainian diver story or not,
47:57
Speaker 2: it has opened a potential can of worm diplomatically and legally,
48:02
Speaker 2: and we have to now revisit the whole issue of
48:06
Speaker 2: how and why z ILLUTIONI, of all people, a barroom
48:10
Speaker 2: brawler was made Ukrainian ambassador to Britain. Let's just take
48:14
Speaker 2: a look at that for a moment. Here, this is
48:16
Speaker 2: a photograph. This is from the article itself. There's ILLUSIONI there,
48:20
Speaker 2: I believe at the embassy with his commission there. So
48:25
Speaker 2: did the British bring him in to protect him because
48:28
Speaker 2: he has immunity from prosecution as a diplomat and he
48:33
Speaker 2: should be deposed in Germany. If they're running with this
48:37
Speaker 2: Ukrainian super soldier diver team story, the Andromeda yacht story,
48:43
Speaker 2: then ZELUTIONI technically was the person who gave the order,
48:47
Speaker 2: so he would be the first one to be prosecuted.
48:50
Speaker 2: But you can't touch him because he's in London. But
48:54
Speaker 2: there's legal loopholes to this story that actually he is
48:58
Speaker 2: not immune from prosecution. And this this is a fantastic
49:01
Speaker 2: legal analysis by Jeffrey Brodsky that delves into two or
49:05
Speaker 2: three of these loopholes. And we have international legal scholars
49:09
Speaker 2: that we've consulted for the story, and there seems to
49:11
Speaker 2: be a unanimous agreement that no, he's not immune from prosecution.
49:16
Speaker 2: I mean, this is potentially an uncomfortable little snag for
49:20
Speaker 2: its Illusioni's whether you believe in the Ukrainian story, divers
49:24
Speaker 2: story or not is beside the point. This is part
49:27
Speaker 2: of a bigger geopolitical chess match. Now, so I find
49:31
Speaker 2: this to be incredibly, incredibly interesting. So speaking of Nordstream, now,
49:37
Speaker 2: who's involved in Nordstream? Does this have anything to do
49:40
Speaker 2: this story with Greenland? Just to remind people, here Donald
49:46
Speaker 2: Trump making the big play for Greenland. This is a
49:48
Speaker 2: Danish territory, autonomous region under the rule of Denmark, the
49:54
Speaker 2: Kingdom of Denmark. So what was this all about? Anyway?
49:57
Speaker 2: And you have to ask yourself look at this picture, Mike,
50:01
Speaker 2: Donald Trump is pushed hard right out of the gates
50:04
Speaker 2: even before he was sworn in at Denmark wanting to
50:08
Speaker 2: take Greenland. What was that about? Does Denmark have any
50:11
Speaker 2: leverage over Donald Trump in the United States? That's an
50:15
Speaker 2: interesting question, isn't it. Well, it just so happens. Two
50:19
Speaker 2: days ago this announcement comes. Denmark is going to allow
50:24
Speaker 2: the Russians back into the pipeline. They just announced this
50:28
Speaker 2: two days ago to work on plugging the leaks, the
50:33
Speaker 2: potential gas pockets in there. They're going to basically plug
50:36
Speaker 2: off the sides, but they're going to allow this team
50:39
Speaker 2: from nord Stream Maggie Too, which is a division of
50:42
Speaker 2: gas Prom which is listed in Switzerland, access to the
50:47
Speaker 2: area to do essential work for environmental safety reasons and
50:52
Speaker 2: so forth. The timing of this is extraordinarymark is there the.
50:56
Speaker 1: Opportunity for evidence gathering? A lot of time has gone past.
51:00
Speaker 2: Is there's still quite From what you're reading this article
51:04
Speaker 2: and from what I understand from the story and reading
51:07
Speaker 2: some of the people who are in Scandinavian journalists that
51:09
Speaker 2: are really on this story, there is quite a lot
51:12
Speaker 2: of evidence and data to be gathered still at the
51:15
Speaker 2: blast sites. And so what's interesting, This gets even more
51:20
Speaker 2: interesting here. This leads us to this story and again
51:24
Speaker 2: this is just today. Is Nordstream too back in business? Well,
51:29
Speaker 2: what's this all about? Let's take a look. Is this
51:32
Speaker 2: going to There's a permit that's been issued here, and
51:37
Speaker 2: so if you go to this article, which is right
51:39
Speaker 2: on our website at twenty first century why now, you'll
51:41
Speaker 2: see this is the Danish Energy Agency permit for work
51:46
Speaker 2: on the Nordstream pipeline here. And if you go here
51:49
Speaker 2: there is all of the information about the damage. Details
51:53
Speaker 2: that have not been seen before are in this. We
51:56
Speaker 2: translated it into English. There's a link to the original
51:59
Speaker 2: Danish verse. Here intricate details at the blast site. And
52:03
Speaker 2: what's really interesting is the actual damage here. Look at this,
52:07
Speaker 2: how the pipeline, the dimensions, everything. So what you can
52:11
Speaker 2: and what they're proposing is to use a remote vehicle
52:14
Speaker 2: to go with the diamond cutter to do the repair,
52:18
Speaker 2: to plug off the two ends and they'll come back
52:20
Speaker 2: and rebuild the section in the future possibly. But what
52:24
Speaker 2: you can do from this document, Mike, you can reverse
52:27
Speaker 2: engineer this operation by looking at the means and the
52:31
Speaker 2: methods and the technology that's available to fix it. You
52:34
Speaker 2: can kind of work out some of the unanswered questions
52:37
Speaker 2: about what was done and what technical equipment and remote
52:42
Speaker 2: vehicles could be used to actually do the job. And
52:45
Speaker 2: so this is stuff that is only really privy to
52:47
Speaker 2: people who work in the oil and gas industry. And
52:50
Speaker 2: this is very difficult document defined. It's not in English.
52:53
Speaker 2: We managed to find it and translate it here and
52:56
Speaker 2: we're sharing it with everybody at twenty first century Wired.
53:00
Speaker 2: So again a hat tip to Freddy Ponton, a French journalist,
53:05
Speaker 2: for discovering this and sharing that with us on our website.
53:09
Speaker 2: So that's kind of an interesting thing, Mike. So this
53:12
Speaker 2: is all going on at the same time that its
53:14
Speaker 2: Greenland controversy. So has Denmark fired off a little quiet
53:18
Speaker 2: warning shot to Washington. We're just throwing that out there
53:23
Speaker 2: as a question, could be could maybe it is, maybe
53:26
Speaker 2: it's not. And so there's a British angle to this, Mike,
53:29
Speaker 2: And you know, looking back at the Treaty of seventeen
53:34
Speaker 2: oh six. This is an article here at NPR. Well,
53:37
Speaker 2: actually Britain has first DIBs on Greenland. So if it
53:42
Speaker 2: comes to the crunch, we might say, you're going to
53:44
Speaker 2: like this. This is the old seventeen hundred Union Jack,
53:48
Speaker 2: So this is actually Briton's to claim if it's up
53:54
Speaker 2: for DIBs. Britain has first DIBs over the United States.
53:58
Speaker 2: So that's something, isn't it. So they could be flying
54:00
Speaker 2: the Union Jack in Greenland, not the American flag. Wouldn't
54:06
Speaker 2: that be something?
54:10
Speaker 1: Where does that take us? Then?
54:11
Speaker 2: Well, just the other point, and this is important. You
54:14
Speaker 2: heard about the funding being cut for Ukraine and a
54:17
Speaker 2: lot of the funding was going to opposition media or
54:20
Speaker 2: pro US media through USAID. And I'm going to point
54:24
Speaker 2: to this great piece here by Kit Klarenberg or a
54:27
Speaker 2: great threat. In fact, if you follow Kit on X.
54:31
Speaker 2: For those within the Empire's innercore, the full seismic implications
54:36
Speaker 2: of Trump's AID suspension may not be fully obvious. But
54:40
Speaker 2: here in the Balkans, where USAID and National Dumot for
54:43
Speaker 2: Democracy has penetrated every sphere of public, political, and even
54:47
Speaker 2: daily life, the impact is absolutely monumental. So what he's
54:51
Speaker 2: done here is potentially pulled the plug on the whole
54:54
Speaker 2: soft power complex. Because whether you go to Bulgaria, Dova, Ukraine,
55:02
Speaker 2: or in this case, the Balkans, as Kit's referring to,
55:05
Speaker 2: all of these media outlets that are supposedly independent are
55:09
Speaker 2: all being funded by the US government, and those are
55:12
Speaker 2: all the regime change instruments in all of these countries
55:15
Speaker 2: to help spin up color revolutions and so forth. So
55:18
Speaker 2: all of that has been threatened inadvertently or not. Is
55:21
Speaker 2: this one of Trump's master plans or did he make
55:24
Speaker 2: a mistake Because they did rescind part of this order
55:28
Speaker 2: to revoke federal grants. It was immediately reversed after forty
55:31
Speaker 2: eight hours. I don't know if Mark has any comment
55:34
Speaker 2: on that, but so there could be some confusion here.
55:37
Speaker 2: Somebody stepped on someone's toes in Washington. But the point
55:42
Speaker 2: that Kit Clarenberg has made here is that this money
55:46
Speaker 2: keeps this whole idea afloat of democracy promotion in all
55:50
Speaker 2: of these different countries, and when you pull the funding,
55:52
Speaker 2: all these people don't have jobs. Basically, this is an
55:55
Speaker 2: extraordinary story.
55:57
Speaker 1: Any thoughts, Mark, not a great deal.
56:01
Speaker 7: I read up on Moldova dot org just this morning
56:05
Speaker 7: and I discovered in the process that Demand Wilson, formerly
56:09
Speaker 7: a big honcho at the Atlantic Council, which is basically
56:13
Speaker 7: NATO's intel arm. He's now with the National Endowment for Democracy, which,
56:18
Speaker 7: as Patrick mentioned, is kind of teamed up with USAID,
56:21
Speaker 7: a longtime CIA asset. And so in the best scenario,
56:26
Speaker 7: they're pulling the plug on soft power, or at least
56:29
Speaker 7: reducing its influence. But as Patrick noted, there's other nuances involved,
56:33
Speaker 7: and we can't quite read the tea leaves yet, but
56:35
Speaker 7: it's an interesting development.
56:37
Speaker 2: Yeah, let's keep keep an eye on. This is an
56:39
Speaker 2: interesting thread here that kids brought up ahead.
56:43
Speaker 8: Yes, he's pulling the thread.
56:45
Speaker 1: Yeah, okay, thank you, Mark. Now let's just finish them
56:48
Speaker 1: with a section on the La Fars.
56:54
Speaker 7: Yes, I'm happy to report that last night, the Sonoma
56:59
Speaker 7: County Eagle had a program and they're really digging deep
57:04
Speaker 7: into the causes and nature of the fires. And it
57:09
Speaker 7: featured Robert Brame, a well known arborist and mountain climber
57:13
Speaker 7: and a contact of mine since two thousand and eight.
57:16
Speaker 7: Orlean Curla, and she is a longtime president of the
57:22
Speaker 7: Eagle Forum of California. And it mentions here in this
57:25
Speaker 7: slide a little bit more about Brame. He's been a
57:29
Speaker 7: forensic arborist since nineteen seventy five, so a very long time.
57:33
Speaker 7: Since the strange fires of Santa Rosa in twenty seventeen,
57:37
Speaker 7: he's been studying all of the unusual fires in California
57:40
Speaker 7: and their effects on trees and plants. Some of the
57:43
Speaker 7: trees burning from the inside out. I've written about that before,
57:47
Speaker 7: but outside not even the leaves or pine needles are
57:50
Speaker 7: typically burnt. He's talking about these anomalies. And Orlean curl
57:55
Speaker 7: is a noted fire victim and author. She had her
57:58
Speaker 7: house destroyed or almost destroyed in a fire, and she's
58:04
Speaker 7: been fairly close up to these issues ever since then.
58:06
Speaker 7: She's dealt with a smart meter issue a little bit.
58:09
Speaker 7: So this was last night and I sent a correspondent there.
58:13
Speaker 7: He goes by the name of Free Laser, and he
58:16
Speaker 7: is going to provide video and or still frame and
58:21
Speaker 7: a lot of notes and whatnot. He lives very close
58:23
Speaker 7: to where they had the program last night, and so
58:27
Speaker 7: this is really just a teaser about what's going to
58:29
Speaker 7: be coming up in the coming weeks on UK column
58:32
Speaker 7: about this. And I'm working very hard to get first
58:36
Speaker 7: hand photos and first hand videos right from the grassroots
58:41
Speaker 7: so as to avoid any photo manipulation, photoshop, video manipulation,
58:45
Speaker 7: things like that, so we get the most truthful picture possible.
58:49
Speaker 7: This next slide shows a photo that Orlean provided me,
58:55
Speaker 7: and that's the Santa Rosa where she lives. The wildfire
58:58
Speaker 7: the aftermath in twenty seventeen, an absolute uniform burning of
59:02
Speaker 7: the houses despite the differences and construction materials and things
59:07
Speaker 7: like that, and relatively few trees burn and it's just
59:11
Speaker 7: way too neat and way too atypical of how fires
59:15
Speaker 7: actually burned. But after the program last night, we're going
59:18
Speaker 7: to hear much more about Santa Rosa and all the
59:21
Speaker 7: subsequent fires up to and including the present.
59:24
Speaker 8: And I believe we have.
59:25
Speaker 7: A short video clip if there's time of mister bram
59:29
Speaker 7: on a show not too long ago talking about some
59:32
Speaker 7: of these issues, and it just gives you a little
59:34
Speaker 7: taste of what's going on.
59:37
Speaker 10: And all the homes are just gone white ash, hardly
59:40
Speaker 10: any black showing. But yet what I saw was trees
59:44
Speaker 10: up and down every street and between houses. That doesn't
59:47
Speaker 10: work for an old mountain man like me. I've learned
59:50
Speaker 10: every tree in a state years ago, and I've had
59:53
Speaker 10: thousands of campfires. It doesn't matter what you put in
59:55
Speaker 10: a campfire, it burns in one minute, any needle, any leaf.
1:00:01
Speaker 10: So this didn't go well for me. And I went
1:00:03
Speaker 10: up there a couple months later and walked every street
1:00:06
Speaker 10: I could for the whole day, and it was baffling.
1:00:09
Speaker 10: Nothing made sense to me. A year later, Paradise, California,
1:00:14
Speaker 10: I saw those pictures. This one also, fifteen thousand homes
1:00:18
Speaker 10: were just eliminated white ash, again with few metals. And
1:00:22
Speaker 10: there's the Ponderosa pine, the number one forest tree in
1:00:27
Speaker 10: California that burns more often than any other species. And
1:00:30
Speaker 10: by the way, there's twenty two different species of pine
1:00:32
Speaker 10: in California. This is almost inhabits every life zone we
1:00:38
Speaker 10: have from the coastal mountains to the inner Coast range,
1:00:41
Speaker 10: the northern Mountains, the entire Sierra Nevada, and the transverse
1:00:45
Speaker 10: range from San Santa Barbara over to San Bernardino. We
1:00:49
Speaker 10: have them everywhere. They didn't want to burn that day
1:00:52
Speaker 10: or that month.
1:00:57
Speaker 7: So that's just a sampling of what mister Brain spoke
1:01:00
Speaker 7: about in much more depth last night, and so stay
1:01:03
Speaker 7: tuned for a lot of in depth analysis and original
1:01:06
Speaker 7: photos as much as possible on what's going on, and
1:01:10
Speaker 7: it'll look at the entire timeframe from twenty seventeen to
1:01:12
Speaker 7: the present, So lots of good stuff coming up.
1:01:16
Speaker 1: Mark, thank you very much for that, well, thank you
1:01:19
Speaker 1: Patrick as well. We do have to leave it there
1:01:21
Speaker 1: for today. We will be back in a few minutes.
1:01:24
Speaker 1: If you are a UK cole member for some news extra,
1:01:29
Speaker 1: join us for that, stay around on the live stream
1:01:31
Speaker 1: if you're not, and you join us again on Monday
1:01:34
Speaker 1: if you possibly can, but in the meantime, have a
1:01:36
Speaker 1: great weekend. We'll see you then. Thanks for joining us
1:01:39
Speaker 1: all By