Latest / UK Column Radio / UK Column News - 12th September 2025

Transcript

UK Column News - 12th September 2025 · UK Column Radio

0:08
Good afternoon. It's Friday the 12th of
0:10
September 2025, just after 1:00 and welcome to UK Column News.
0:13
I'm your host, Mike Robinson. My Co host in the studio today
0:16
is Patrick Hennigsen. Welcome to the program, Patrick.
0:18
Great to be with you, Mike. And journalist Mark Anderson
0:21
joins us by video link from the United States.
0:24
Later in the program. Patrick and I are going to be
0:26
reporting on the fallout from the Charlie Kirk killing.
0:29
And Mark's going to cover the visit to the UK and particularly
0:33
Chatham House by Israeli President Herzog.
0:35
But we're going to begin today with, well, of course, who else
0:38
but Peter Mandelson, because everyone will.
0:42
As everyone will know by now, Peter Mandelson has been removed
0:44
as EU KS Ambassador to the United States.
0:47
And of course, we should remember this is the third time
0:49
he's been sacked from a government role.
0:53
So he was ambassador to the United States.
0:55
He is no more. It is all collapsed in a heap
0:59
now. The reason this time, according
1:00
to the Foreign Office, was that the release by the US House
1:04
Oversight Committee of a batch of emails revealed what they
1:08
called additional information that was materially different
1:11
from what was previously understood about Madelson's
1:14
relationship with Jeffrey Epstein.
1:16
Well, have a look at that claim in a moment.
1:18
But in the meantime, Keir Starmer, of course, has
1:22
attempted to distance himself from the whole debacle.
1:24
But if we remember back at when Mandelson was appointed, the
1:28
statement from #10 was the fact the Prime Minister has chosen to
1:32
make a political appointment and sent Lord Madelson to Washington
1:35
shows how importantly we see our relationship with the Trump
1:37
administration. Could that be because they
1:40
recognize the the, the similar activities, the similar alleged
1:45
activities, we should say, between Madelson and Trump?
1:48
Yes, not the Trump administration.
1:49
Or is it the Epstein administration?
1:51
Well, good question, The statement at the time went on to
1:54
say we're sending someone close to the Prime Minister with
1:58
unrivalled political and policy experience, particularly on the
2:01
crucial issue of trade. He's the ideal candidate.
2:04
Is that the trade in children? Street trade, probably, but you
2:08
could be that, Mike. Ideal candidate to represent EU
2:11
KS economic and security interests in the United States.
2:16
And of course, if your security interests are guaranteed through
2:20
blackmail, then perhaps that is sort of.
2:22
I mean, these are all allegations.
2:23
Of course, we've got no evidence whatsoever.
2:25
I'm sure none of these dots connect Mike.
2:27
None. None.
2:28
Now let's come back to modern day and well, first of all, here
2:33
we have this Sky report. They called this a an exclusive
2:40
saying that security services had raised concerns around the
2:43
appointment of Mandelson, but #10 did not judge them serious
2:47
enough to block his path to becoming U.S. ambassador.
2:50
Now, the claim from the Starmer regime is that they were not
2:53
involved in the security vetting before Mandelson's appointment,
2:58
and his official spokesperson said that security vetting is
3:02
carried out by government departments and that these kinds
3:05
of roles are only filled subject to vetting checks being done.
3:09
They didn't say anything about vetting checks being passed,
3:12
just that the vetting checks have been done.
3:15
But getting back to the idea that this newly the newly
3:18
released emails provide any materially different
3:21
information, let's remember that in 2022, AJP Morgan report,
3:26
originally written in 2019, became public through court
3:29
documents for the first time. JP Morgan had written this
3:32
report because of their its relationship with Epstein.
3:36
Now, sadly, that report doesn't seem to be still available, but
3:40
it was cited in multiple media reports, for example, the
3:43
Guardian here. And they they quoted saying that
3:47
this internal report had found that Epstein appeared to
3:51
maintain a particularly close relationship with both Prince
3:54
Andrew and the Duke of York and at the time and Lord Peter
3:59
Mandelson, a senior member of the British government.
4:02
And they went on to say that Epstein wrote to his private
4:05
banker, Jeff Stanley on 17th of June 2009 in relation to
4:09
Mandelson say that Peter will be staying over at 71st over the
4:14
weekend. Do you want to organize either
4:16
you or you and Jimmy quietly Up to you.
4:19
So clearly the connections there were already pretty much public.
4:24
And I don't think that there was anything really in the latest
4:27
batch of emails that added aside aside from this statement that
4:31
that he considered Epstein his best pal, it didn't really come
4:34
bring any new information to the table.
4:36
So, Patrick, it seems pretty hard to to claim that that this
4:39
was materially different. I think, I think the thing
4:42
problem there, Mike, is the just daily trial, that whole case, I
4:45
mean, that was fleshed out to the federal courts, hugely
4:48
embarrassing. There was a massive payout also
4:51
as a result of that involving the banks as well and just
4:55
Staley himself somewhat implicated.
4:58
But to fact you throw Mandelson in there in the mix with Staley,
5:02
Epstein and all the things that were going on, reading those
5:04
emails is quite harrowing in retrospect.
5:07
I mean, what exactly are they talking about?
5:09
And the picture that shocked me the most is Epstein going out
5:13
shopping with Mandelson, you know, picking out belts and
5:17
cravat ties. I mean, when grown men go
5:20
shopping like this together, it's, it's not, it's not the
5:23
usual thing, you see, is it? I mean, it's so there is besides
5:26
having a close relationship, they seem to be more than
5:30
chummy. Let's just say or say very close
5:33
mates a good. They seem to be yes, although
5:37
Mileson, always released since this all came out for the last
5:40
couple of years has been complaining that he regrets ever
5:43
being introduced by Glenn Maxwell to Epstein.
5:47
But anyway. They all say that.
5:48
Yeah, I know that. But.
5:49
But look, yesterday someone asked me why, if Mandelson's
5:53
connections to Epstein were too hard to handle, is Trump, who
5:57
seems to be suffering the same kind of allegations, still
5:59
invited for a state visit when he seems to have questions to
6:04
answer on his connections to Epstein?
6:05
Well, let's just remind ourselves who Trump is coming to
6:08
see because, Oh yes, it's that man on screen there who allowed
6:12
Jeffrey Epstein to stay at Windsor Castle all those times.
6:15
Really. Yes.
6:16
Was that the same man that appointed ADJ to be his social?
6:20
Secretary, we're just, we're just indeed coming on to that.
6:23
Exactly. We've got exactly that, that
6:25
article from the Guardian. Jimmy Savile invited guests to
6:29
royal party on Prince Charles behalf.
6:30
Yes, exactly that guy. And of course, we should point
6:35
out that Mandelson wasn't sacked because Starmer thought he
6:38
deserved it. And why do we say that?
6:41
Well, in fact, many believe that Starmer himself has still many
6:44
questions to answer over the cover up of Savile.
6:47
So if we take that little grouping there of of Savile and
6:52
King Charles and Starmer and Epstein and Mandelson, could it
6:57
be that they're all part of the same club?
6:59
Well, you know, one might ask that question and the other
7:02
thing you said it was third time he's been sacked.
7:04
Yes. So he has been sacked multiple
7:06
times. So if you get sacked from your
7:09
post more than once is do you get rewarded with a lordship, a
7:13
peerage? Of course, yeah.
7:14
Is that how it works? That's.
7:15
Exactly how I was. Always confused about the
7:17
qualification process, but thank you for clearing that.
7:20
Up. Yeah, absolutely.
7:21
Now, of course, Starmer could still under pressure over this.
7:23
But before we get all smug that Starmer could fall, let's just
7:26
remind ourselves who the new Deputy Prime Minister right now
7:31
And well, maybe the grass isn't greener on the other side in
7:36
that case. But anyway, Patrick, let's let's
7:40
move on to international affairs.
7:42
And we did. We met, although we mentioned it
7:44
in passing on Wednesday's program, we didn't go into any
7:47
detail on the Israeli attack in Qatar.
7:50
Well, this is, I think, I think this is changing the game
7:53
slightly. Here, we'll bring this headline
7:54
up on screen here. The UN Security Council now kind
7:58
of in turmoil in the sense of members are condemning Israel
8:01
over their deadly strike on Qatar.
8:03
So the Israelis have attacked Qatar, trying to assassinate the
8:07
Hamas political delegation. The ones who are negotiating or
8:11
in negotiations with intermediaries with Israel over
8:15
lots of things like ceasefires and the release of the Israeli
8:18
hostages. Also the release of the
8:20
Palestinian hostages, which they don't talk about 'cause there's
8:22
9000 of those. That's not a popular topic in
8:25
America, but this is the pattern, Mike.
8:28
We've seen this with everything with the United States and the
8:31
US would would have probably provided or been involved in the
8:35
loop on the intelligence loop on this.
8:37
OK, negotiations are taking place high level with Ukraine.
8:42
This happened with Ukraine, whether it is Istanbul, huge
8:45
sneak attack against Russia, the same with Iran, why the Iranians
8:49
were in the within Oman negotiating a potential, you
8:54
know, impasse with the nuclear deal, a sneak attack by Israel
8:58
against the Iranians. And here we have again
9:00
negotiations with Israel and Hamas and they tried to
9:03
assassinate the counterparty. So this, this is how I mean, who
9:07
would want to go into negotiations with the US or
9:09
Israel at this point? Because it really you will be
9:13
attacked or they'll try to take out whoever they're negotiating
9:17
with across the table. I mean, this is basically what,
9:19
what's going on here. The, the, the Trump, the, the
9:23
Trump statement here. This, I mean, I'll just quickly
9:26
read a few sentences of this this morning.
9:29
The Trump administration was notified by the US military that
9:32
Israel was attacking Hamas in Qatar, which very unfortunately
9:36
was located in the section of Doha, the capital city of Qatar.
9:40
This decision was made by promised Netanyahu.
9:43
It was not a decision made by me unilaterally bombing inside
9:47
Qatar, sovereign nation, close ally. the United States is
9:50
working very hard and bravely taking risks with us to broker
9:54
peace does not advance the Israel or American goals.
9:58
And and he goes on, he's talking about Steve Witkoff here working
10:02
hard and so forth. And then it's embarrassed.
10:04
No condemnation. It's it's it's total
10:06
humiliation. The only thing missing from this
10:09
picture is, you know, a GIMP suit.
10:12
Quite frankly, this is just for America.
10:14
This is total humiliation. This is Trump getting down on
10:17
his knees and totally prostrating himself at the altar
10:21
of the Israeli lobby. I mean, it is really
10:24
humiliating. I don't know how much more of
10:26
this the president can do, but clearly, he's not in charge if
10:32
he was. So look at the we'll play this
10:34
news clip here. This is from one of the Qatari
10:38
foreign ministers here talking to CNN.
10:41
This will tell you basically where we're at on this issue.
10:45
You don't we. Oh, sorry about that.
10:50
Let's try again. This is theater.
10:59
That's that's what they call it. Honestly, I have almost to
11:04
express he needs to be brought to justice.
11:08
He's the one who's wanted to the ISIS.
11:10
That's number one. So I think that someone like him
11:15
trying to lecture the war about the law, he's he's breaking
11:21
every law he's breaking. He broke every international
11:24
law. He's a starving people in
11:25
Russia. He's doing all these rogue
11:28
actions in the entire region. What's next?
11:33
What's next for him? I mean, I honestly, I have no
11:36
words to express how rage we are from such an if you could just
11:40
run. And I say to Qatar and all
11:59
nations who harbor terrorists, you either expel them or you
12:04
bring them to justice, because if you don't, we will.
12:12
I mean, set it right there, right.
12:14
So no one to negotiate with. Basically we're going to kill
12:18
anybody. Any potential leader we'll kill
12:20
or imprison. So there'll be negotiation.
12:22
So that's where things are at. I think this is really, I didn't
12:25
think there could be an all time low Mike, but they've they've
12:28
outdone themselves, the Israelis on this.
12:31
Well, in the meantime then, of course, we mentioned this on
12:34
Wednesday, but this claim of drone strikes by Russia and
12:40
within Polish sovereign territory.
12:42
And a a major crisis for NATO. Everyone's screaming Article 5
12:46
on this. Let's but let's, we did a little
12:48
investigation on this MIC and I think we we have a pretty good
12:51
idea of where things are at. Let's take a look at this
12:54
Poland, the downed drones. So the accusation is that Russia
12:57
was flying drones into Polish territory.
12:59
But what really happened? Let's take a closer look here.
13:02
I think we're going to get some answers.
13:04
So Warsaw has asked is Poland has asked for formal
13:07
consultations with other NATO states under Article 4.
13:11
That's prior to Article 5. You go into Article 4
13:14
consultations here. The drones allegedly arrived
13:17
from Belarusian airspace rather than Ukrainian airspace.
13:22
That is a confirmed fact. So that's an interesting detail
13:25
that you don't read much, or at least it's not made prominent in
13:28
the Western media here. And Poland has yet to show any
13:31
evidence via official state agencies to prove that the
13:36
drones were identified as Russian.
13:38
So that is still yet to happen. There have been images put out
13:42
in the media, including The Associated Press image we have
13:44
in the background, which we showed at the beginning when we
13:46
showed the initial image. So that's something that has yet
13:49
to come. But here's the here's where
13:51
we're at. This is the important part.
13:53
Russian forces have successfully hit multiple arms production
13:57
facilities in western Ukraine. That's kind of what this is
14:01
about. Russia has extended their
14:02
targeting to the West of Ukraine, and it's causing huge
14:06
problems at NATO headquarters because they don't know what to
14:09
do before they managed to avoid this.
14:11
This is all part of the plan for Ukraine here.
14:14
So let's take a look at where we might be able to get some other
14:18
answers on this and take a look here.
14:20
Well, this is what the great and the goods say.
14:22
Here are the reactions from Europe.
14:23
Mike Kaliakalis, whether it was intentional or not is absolutely
14:27
reckless. This is absolutely dangerous
14:29
here. Mark Rutte whether it was
14:31
intentional or not, it's absolutely reckless.
14:33
It's dangerous. They're basically saying the
14:35
same thing, reckless and unprecedented violent violation
14:38
of Polish airspace's Vanderline. That picture is very strange of
14:42
Starmer and Zelensky and Macron. I just want to say on on the off
14:46
there, Russia conducted an egregious and unprecedented
14:50
violation of the Polish airspace, almost identical
14:53
statements from everybody. And Macron weighs in.
14:55
Russia must put an end to this reckless escalation here.
14:59
So the rapid response mechanism has been has been invoked here,
15:03
but well, we'll get some answers.
15:05
Let's go to Belarus. Let's talk to the Belarusian
15:09
MOD. And I think they know what's
15:11
happening. Minx has claimed credit for
15:14
giving the Polish military an early warning about incoming
15:17
drones. That's an important detail.
15:20
You didn't read that in on the CNN report, I can assure you.
15:23
Oh, and it gets better. Belarus were tracking Russian
15:26
and Ukrainian drones used for mutual strikes overnight,
15:30
confirming that some of them had lost their track as a result of
15:34
the impact of the party's electronic warfare assets.
15:36
So jamming, BPS, jamming has thrown some of the drones off.
15:40
Wouldn't be the first time that's happened here.
15:42
And the Belarusian warning allowed the Polish state to
15:45
respond promptly to the threat. And the general noted here, this
15:49
was one of the spokespeople from Belarus, adding that the Polish
15:52
side had also informed Belarusian forces on duty about
15:57
the approach of unidentified aircraft from the territory of
16:01
Ukraine. Another important detail which
16:04
was left out of Western coverage here.
16:06
And their Belarusian air fences shot down some of the stray
16:09
aircraft. That's another new revelation
16:13
here from this. And just so people can see,
16:15
that's the map there. You can see how closely this
16:18
tri-state, Tri national border area is.
16:21
And this is the the site there right over the Belarusian border
16:25
very close to Ukraine as well. So it's completely plausible,
16:28
Mike, here, by the way, the Polish shut down to two or three
16:32
major airports as a result of this.
16:33
But it's perfectly plausible as we found out, you remember in
16:36
November 2022 when there was stray anti aircraft missiles
16:40
that fell into Polish territory. The press immediately ran with
16:44
it and said it was a Russian missile attack, nearly came to
16:48
some kind of an Article 5 crisis.
16:50
And all sudden we find out that that didn't happen and the whole
16:53
thing was de escalated. I think we're seeing some of the
16:56
same things here. But what's important is they're
16:59
panicking because Russia has moved up, stepped up their
17:02
attacks against arms manufacturing facilities in
17:05
western Ukraine. That's really what this is
17:07
about. And yes, yeah, OK, OK.
17:10
Well, sticking on this topic, we want to let everybody know
17:15
because it's fantastic news, that the Starmer regime has done
17:17
a deal, sorry, with the United States for what they describe as
17:23
closer defence ties. Now this they're saying British
17:26
government is saying that working people will be more
17:29
secure. As the UK Armed Forces prepare
17:32
for the new era of threats with a major deal with Google Cloud
17:36
for the latest security technology strengthening
17:40
collaboration between the UK and the United States, The language
17:42
that they use is absolutely fascinating, they go on to say.
17:45
The partnership means that the latest technology developed by
17:48
Google Cloud, including AI, data analytics and cybersecurity,
17:51
were used by Defence Intelligence national security
17:53
specialists to share secure information between our partners
17:57
and out compete our adversaries. So this is a £400 million
18:01
contract. It's going to deliver what they
18:04
claim to be a key recommendation from the Strategic Defence
18:07
Review for a digital integrated service.
18:10
It's going to provide resilient and secure networks.
18:12
And John Healy said that today's investment shows how Defence is
18:17
an engine for growth, supporting highly skilled UK jobs in
18:20
Vibrant British tech startup ecosystem.
18:23
So this once again is being justified that jobs are are
18:28
going to be created as a result of the war narrative.
18:31
But unfortunately, people got a an early sight of this.
18:36
But let's head over to the United States because I want to
18:38
very briefly get your thoughts on this, Patrick.
18:40
And that was the news that Donald Trump has issued yet
18:45
another executive order. This was and he began by saying
18:50
this in his executive order on August the 7th.
18:53
Seventeen, 89236 years ago, President George Washington
18:58
signed into law a bill establishing the United States
19:00
Department of War to oversee the operation and maintenance of
19:04
military and naval affairs. He went on to say the name
19:07
Department of War, more than the current Department of Defence,
19:11
ensures peace through strength as it demonstrates our ability
19:15
and willingness to fight and win wars on behalf of our nation at
19:18
a moment's notice, not just to defend.
19:21
And he went on in the executive order to say, I've therefore
19:24
determined that this department should once again be known as
19:27
the Department of War and the secretary should be known as the
19:30
Secretary of War. I don't know what your thoughts
19:35
are. I mean, I don't know what your
19:37
thoughts are on that. It's it's very clear that they
19:40
have moved from a purely defensive footing onto an
19:43
aggressive offensive footing. But not it just rhetorically
19:46
offensive that's taking us back 150 years.
19:50
So this is this is classic reventionism.
19:53
Basically, we need to get back to the glory years.
19:56
We need to go to the golden age. This is classic is a
19:59
reactionary, political reactionary and fascist.
20:03
Language this is these are fascist proclivities.
20:06
It's just blows my mind like the thing they accused Trump of all
20:10
those years with Trump Derangement syndrome.
20:12
He was a fascist before he was actually doing fascism.
20:15
He's now actually doing he's actually now doing fascism and
20:20
the left is just paralytic. They, they, they're not
20:24
responding or not responding any coherent way.
20:27
I think they've just shot all of their rounds on fake scandals
20:31
during the Russia gate period and now you have a real problem,
20:34
right? I think why would you name it
20:36
the Department of War if you weren't planning for war?
20:38
Simple question. Very good question.
20:40
But anyway, coming back to the UK then for a second and the
20:44
Starmer regime has officially stood up the Cyber and Special
20:47
Operations Command to be led by this man, Sir Jim Hockenhill.
20:52
Hockenhall, sorry, he gave a keynote speech to the Defence
20:56
and Security Equipment International 2025 conference a
20:59
couple of days ago and he said that last week on behalf of the
21:03
Secretary of State for Defence and the Chief of the Defence
21:05
Staff, we officially stood up the Cyber and specialist
21:08
Operations Commander today. I want to set out the
21:11
implications of what that change brings.
21:15
So what are the implications? Well, this is yet another regime
21:19
agency to deal with this information.
21:21
He made that point very clearly, which he claims is used as a
21:25
weapon, eroding cohesion, a cohesion at home and sowing
21:28
doubt abroad. But that's not the only thing.
21:31
The mission of this new agency is to generate and operate
21:34
specialist capabilities ready to fight across all domains, they
21:38
say, to make the United Kings secure at home and strong
21:41
abroad. So this is the integrated
21:44
operating concept that we've been talking about so much over
21:46
the last few years since the previous defence review.
21:49
So this is it in action. Home is as much a theatre for
21:52
operations for these people as abroad is, and therefore the
21:56
British people are viewed by this government as much of an
21:59
enemy as the Taliban is, and this is really an unprecedented,
22:03
unprecedented situation. A war on free speech.
22:06
A war on opinions, A war on points of view.
22:09
Anything that could be labeled as, quote, Russian
22:11
disinformation or the viewpoint of the enemy.
22:15
You know what happened to the, the remember those great green
22:17
jobs all those years? Those have been replaced with
22:20
great defence jobs or Great War jobs if you're in America.
22:25
Well, if you're in Britain as well, although we haven't
22:27
overtly said it yet, but Mark, let me welcome you to the
22:30
program and back in the staying in the UK for a second.
22:35
And well, we had a visitor this week, the President of Israel,
22:41
indeed. Good day, gentlemen.
22:43
I, I was putting my other news together and I got on Chatham
22:46
House's mailing list recently to make sure I don't miss anything.
22:50
And of course, Israeli President Isaac Herzog spoke to the Royal
22:56
Institute of International Affairs, AKA Chatham House,
22:58
September 10th. And it was interesting as I
23:01
started watching the video, he was interviewed by the Chatham
23:04
House director, Bronwyn Maddox. And, you know, you normally
23:09
think of these globalist organizations and we're and
23:12
we're rightly suspicious of many of their machinations.
23:15
You normally think of them as more or less pro Israel.
23:19
But as we've seen in other avenues, at other think tanks
23:23
now, Chatham House has taken a little bit more of a questioning
23:27
approach to the Israeli machine. And this video we're about to
23:31
show shows that there's considerable skepticism of the
23:34
Israeli point of view on Gaza and related matters.
23:38
Well, let's go ahead and watch this.
23:40
It's quite revealing as well. Struck Qatar hoping to kill the
23:45
Hamas leaders, but they're there with US knowledge and
23:48
endorsement and are the negotiators for a potential
23:53
ceasefire. So should we conclude that
23:55
Israel does not want such a ceasefire?
23:58
What Israel wants most is to bring back the hostages and the
24:03
key to changing the entire Vista of the region and the future of
24:07
the region and getting out of this horrific situation which
24:11
we've endured for the last two years is getting the hostages
24:14
back home. Today, two hostages.
24:17
These are Gali and Ziff Berman, two brothers, 28 year old,
24:22
they're from Kibbutz Farazza. They this is a picture of them
24:27
touring Britain and they are wonderful, wonderful brothers
24:33
who have been abducted and kidnapped and their fate is
24:37
unclear since October 7th, so many countries, many, many
24:40
countries. President Herzog have called for
24:43
the release of the hostages for Hamas to return them.
24:48
But the hostage families seem dismayed by this attack on
24:51
Qatar, saying that Israel is destroying the negotiations that
24:56
might have brought a ceasefire. So let's speak about the
24:59
negotiations to bring back the hostages.
25:01
Israel has accepted every proposal and almost for the last
25:07
year or so, every proposal that was laid down by the mediators.
25:13
Israel has accepted the the whole notion that was led by the
25:17
United States, including with other other parties, meaning the
25:24
Qataris and the Egyptians. And then we were faced time and
25:29
time again with either a refusal or endless procrastination by
25:35
Hamas, for example, in the last few months.
25:38
You're probably going to ask me also about the humanitarian
25:40
situation because the way as it happens, I am, but I have to
25:45
answer because of the the Hamas's feeling that they had
25:50
the upper hand publicly in their image wall.
25:54
They decided not to move on any proposal.
26:00
As you can see, Mr. Herzog was put on the grill pretty, pretty
26:04
well at at least in terms of Chatham House being more
26:08
aggressive than they normally would be to get some information
26:11
out of him. Of course, his his statements
26:13
that Israel has been right on, right on top of this, you know,
26:17
trying to honor all the agreements and that it's
26:21
blameless are, are just not believable statements
26:23
whatsoever. And but it's good to see this
26:26
coming from the Royal Institute. I also just got this information
26:31
that Chatham House is continuing an intensified focus on the
26:35
Israeli Palestinian conflict with its long standing Middle
26:39
East program, as Chatham House is calling it.
26:42
And it talks about they've hosted Mr. Herzog and they've
26:45
hosted Yasi Bailin, Hussam Zamlot and other relevant
26:51
Israeli officials and mainly Israeli officials anyway.
26:55
And these engagements, they say at Chatham House reflect our
27:00
core purpose to support informed debate.
27:03
And Branwyn Maddox, the lady that we just saw is coming out
27:09
in favor of Palestinians, Palestinian statehood, she's
27:12
saying in the official Chatham House statements.
27:15
So these are some interesting developments.
27:17
Maybe you guys want to comment from here.
27:19
But this just happened and it was very important to get this
27:22
out there. Thank you.
27:23
Mark, what are your thoughts? Well, Isaac Herzog is really the
27:27
chief propagandist of the Israel.
27:29
They push him out to push all of the crazy stuff.
27:32
He's that's his, that's basically his job.
27:34
It's, it's a, it's a not a very powerful position in the Israeli
27:37
political government, but he has been tasked with basically
27:40
pushing most crazy stories and propaganda ever since October
27:45
7th. So it's no no surprise seeing
27:48
him squirm in his chair there when asked some really basic
27:52
questions. He was too much for him.
27:54
But what's Craig Murray been up to?
27:57
Well, he was protesting the the arrival of Isaac Herzog and the
28:03
fact that he was meeting I think probably with the British Prime
28:06
Minister Keir Starmer. We got some some video of this
28:09
actually. Take a look.
28:23
Murray heckling the motorcade of the Israeli president here.
28:28
And in his own defense, Craig basically comments here.
28:32
Hertzog is in the blue Range Rover.
28:34
Somebody kindly caught this video of me at Chatham House and
28:37
put it out on Instagram. I am normally such a mild
28:40
mannered person, says Craig Murray.
28:43
And he is a very mild mannered gentleman, Craig Murray.
28:46
So to get Craig out basically haranguing visiting heads of
28:51
state, I mean, that really takes something.
28:53
But those are the times we live in.
28:56
Indeed. OK, let's move on.
28:58
If you like what the UK column does, you'd like to support us.
29:00
We do need your ongoing support and thank you very much to
29:03
everybody that is contributing in some way.
29:07
If you would like to help us, there is a link on the front
29:10
page of the website which will take you to a page that gives
29:13
you all the various options for how you can help.
29:15
If you can't help us financially, please do share our
29:19
material because of course your help to get around the
29:22
censorship regime is vital as well.
29:26
We need to say a massive thank you to everybody who's bought
29:29
tickets for York because of course, that is now sold out.
29:34
So no more tickets, physical tickets available, although
29:37
there might be 1 comes on. So we'll let you, we'll let you
29:40
know about that. There may be 1 new ticket
29:42
available very, very soon, but if you aren't able to get there
29:45
physically, then please do consider joining us on the live
29:49
stream. Those tickets are available now
29:52
and it's going to be a fantastic day.
29:54
You're not going to miss anything if you join us on the
29:58
live stream. So if you possibly can, please
30:00
do. OK, Let's move on then to the
30:05
situation in the United States over the last couple of days
30:08
with Charlie Kirk, because, well, obviously his body has now
30:12
been brought home and well, apparently with full state
30:17
honours to some degree, Patrick, because, well, who's that at the
30:21
front of the coffin there? It's like the vice president, JD
30:24
Vance it. Is indeed so he's he was very
30:29
keen to be seen at the front of the coffin putting it on,
30:31
helping to load it onto the plane.
30:33
And. But what I'm particularly
30:36
concerned about really is the rhetoric that's coming out
30:39
around this. But before we get on to that,
30:42
let's just look at some of the BBC coverage of this.
30:44
So the shootings there, there had been two previous suspects
30:49
which were who were considered persons of interest by the FBI,
30:52
but have been released again, there's now this new video has
30:55
appeared and new photographs have appeared.
30:58
So here's the BBC footage of it. And I just wanted to to look at
31:02
some of the photographs here. So there's there's one of them,
31:05
the most recent images released in search for the gunman.
31:08
There's another one. There's a third one.
31:13
There seems to be something missing there.
31:14
Patrick, can you see what it is? Well, beside the fact that the
31:17
images they've chosen don't have the face in it, I'm sure there's
31:20
plenty of other images that have the face.
31:22
They they're not showing the face.
31:24
That's one thing I noticed. But there's another thing.
31:26
If this is the shooter, wouldn't he be carrying the weapon?
31:30
Well, indeed so. So there doesn't seem to be a
31:33
gun. And this is this is very
31:35
strange. Even in the video clip that they
31:37
released of of someone in black jumping off the roof of the
31:42
building and running across the street towards the little wooded
31:46
area where allegedly the firearm was found.
31:49
Doesn't seem to be carrying a firearm.
31:51
He seemed to be carrying the backpack that that you that we
31:54
saw on on that image there, but he didn't seem to be carrying a
31:57
firearm. So it could be very confusing.
32:00
It could be in the backpack. It could if it was a multi piece
32:03
disassembly. Which it wasn't.
32:05
Which it wasn't. It wasn't.
32:07
That's the only option I can think of there.
32:09
Otherwise, it's a big gaping hole in the story.
32:12
Well, it seems to me at the moment, but in the meantime, the
32:15
thing that really struck me was the language being used on
32:19
social media. So let's just look at some of
32:21
the examples of it. This is somebody saying
32:25
Philadelphia school teacher on the left.
32:28
I need my my detectives to find out who this scumbag is and get
32:31
him fired because the guy is wearing AT shirt that says is he
32:35
dead yet? Now whether that is a legitimate
32:38
photograph or not, I don't know. But the but the, the, the point
32:40
here is the, the vitriol that is coming out from people that are
32:45
pro Charlie Kirk and people that are clearly anti Charlie Kirk.
32:49
It's just off the charts. If we move on here, another
32:52
scumbag here talking about Florida Democrat Steve Cody
32:56
marks Charlie Kirk's death. There's I saw a huge amount of
33:00
mocking of the thing. There's no question that that
33:03
was going on. It's the way that people are
33:05
being radicalized here, which I think is of major concern.
33:08
The patriots and tick Tock are old are taking all scumbag
33:11
Democrats on tick tick tock down.
33:14
So we got to start to see stronger language here taking
33:16
people down. And then we see the scumbag.
33:19
Sorry, we're surrounded by pure evil.
33:21
This scumbag is laughing and celebrating the assassination of
33:24
Charlie Cook Kirk. Sorry, we're at war and whether
33:28
we like it or not. So we're now getting the war
33:30
narrative here. But it's not just people on
33:33
social media that are using very, very strong language.
33:37
And in fact, a, a, a well known voice in the alternative media
33:43
scene in the UK is speaking out against one particular person in
33:47
the United States, and that is David Icke talking about Alex
33:52
Jones and really being quite critical of Alex Jones's
33:57
coverage. This just one, this is his pen
33:59
tweet today. David Icke's pen tweet today
34:01
featuring one of Alex Jones tweets, but this one is quite
34:05
stronger. You know, alternative media RIP
34:09
is what David Icke is saying. So look, I just wanted to to
34:12
very briefly, Patrick, play a little bit of some of what Alex
34:18
Jones has been saying in the last day or two and just have a
34:21
listen to this and then we can have a chat about it.
34:25
The Democrats just killed Charlie Kirk today.
34:28
They're desperate. They're losing.
34:29
They want to intimidate you and me and everybody else.
34:32
And the left is everywhere celebrating him.
34:35
They're so happy. They had witches in groups
34:38
cursing him in the week before. They had people in Utah
34:41
releasing a song a month ago about killing him.
34:43
We'll get to all of that. But the reason it's a shot heard
34:46
around the world is he came out a few days ago with the murder
34:50
of the Ukrainian 23 year old refugee and the left trying to
34:54
cover up. It was racially motivated.
34:56
The killer says. I got that white girl and they
34:59
said he's the bad guy, he's the fascist, he's Hitler.
35:03
So Charlie Kirk will live forever and God bless his family
35:07
and everything he's done. But the left everywhere,
35:11
literally celebrating this just shows you how sick these people
35:14
are. They want you dead because
35:17
you're not a Satanist, you're not a pedophile, you're not a
35:20
globalist, and they're not going to stop.
35:22
So you can't roll over the political correctness.
35:24
You can't hope they just go away.
35:26
You've got to stand up against them culturally, economically,
35:30
spiritually. Right now, he went on to then
35:34
say people need to stand for office to counteract the left.
35:39
But the, the, the language that's being used here, call it
35:43
basically blanket calling all, everybody on the left, Satanists
35:48
and paedophiles, that they're all out to kill anybody on the
35:52
right. This is really dangerous
35:54
language in my opinion. And you know, all that is going
35:57
to do is drive people further and further to the extremes.
36:02
You know, I, I think in the UK and the United States in
36:06
particular at the moment, we're seeing a massive effort to pit
36:10
people against each other, Patrick, to the point of
36:13
significant violence. And I think that that it's a
36:16
really dangerous situation, situation at the building.
36:19
It is no matter what you think about the Charlie Kirk's
36:22
killing, which you know is disgraceful in and of itself.
36:27
Well, first of all, the, the, you know, the, the accusation
36:31
from the right and from Alex Jones is that the left is
36:34
radicalized, woke ISM is out of control, but they are themselves
36:38
radicalizing. The reaction to woke ISM, anti
36:42
woke ISM has become radicalized and Alex is dog whistling to go
36:46
out and fight and then he's saying, but do it peacefully,
36:49
you know, kind of thing. But he is obviously dog
36:51
whistling there. So they they're both sides have
36:53
been radicalized and this is not by accident.
36:57
And the right is basically claiming to be the victim.
37:00
They're so they're trying to repurpose these events.
37:03
We'll talk about the Ukrainian refugee stabbing in a moment.
37:06
But when you look at this is interesting because, you know,
37:09
whatever, whatever you, there's no proof that the left is behind
37:13
the shooting. And a lot of the accounts that
37:16
are gloating that you showed about Charlie Kirk's death are
37:19
anonymous accounts. The biggest, some of the biggest
37:22
anonymous accounts on X. These are people that are so
37:25
cowardly they can't even put their name on their account.
37:27
And then they're the ones rallying up and amping up.
37:30
And Elon also boosts some of these accounts as well if they
37:34
happen to agree with with Elon as well.
37:36
So. Can I, can I just make a point
37:38
on this briefly because, you know, Alex Jones has lost
37:43
significantly because of his claims about a certain shooter
37:48
event, school shooting event, Sandy Hook, right?
37:51
In which where he was saying that the story from the
37:55
mainstream press and from the FBI and so on was fake.
38:00
In this case, if if a story comes out saying that the left
38:04
was responsible or a representative of somebody who
38:07
considered themselves on the left or.
38:09
Trans shooter or something? Right.
38:10
If that, if that is the statement from the FBI or from
38:13
the mainstream press, what will Alex Jones say at that point?
38:16
Will he will he say that that's also fake, or will he say that
38:19
that's real? Well, the trend on the right is
38:21
they'll go with whatever story happens to align with their own
38:24
political bent on this. So they would he would say that
38:28
the official story is true. So again, it's it's baffling
38:31
that people that, you know, like know about false flag attacks,
38:34
who pioneered educating people on false flag attacks will then
38:39
jump to a run with a political narrative that's basically, you
38:43
know, incendiary. So let's let's just look at some
38:46
of them, the media coverage on this mic, because I think it's
38:49
interesting here, we'll bring this up on screen.
38:51
This is the blaze, the whole front page, It's Charlie Kirk.
38:54
Charlie Kirk. This is at least 20 or 30
38:56
stories. This is Glenn Beck's media
38:58
outlet here. Charlie, why the Charlie Kirk
39:00
assassination will change us in ways this generation has never
39:04
seen. How on earth can you make such a
39:06
statement when you don't even know who the shooter is yet?
39:10
OK. And so and on and on it goes.
39:13
And this is a little more radical here.
39:15
We'll look at this from the California Globe.
39:17
It's a conservative website, or at least the writer is by the
39:21
looks of it. Charlie Kirk will blow this
39:23
headline up here. Look at what this says a little
39:26
bit little bit bigger there. Charlie Kirk has fallen a martyr
39:30
for American patriotism. Well, we don't know why he's
39:33
fallen. We don't know who shot him.
39:35
That's those are important details, right?
39:38
You'd want to know who the murderer is, what the motivation
39:40
is. Then you can work out whether
39:43
he, you know, fell for American values or not.
39:46
So I mean, these are just typical reactions here.
39:49
But the the main point Mike here is that what is that what is
39:53
going to be the state reaction to this?
39:55
What, when you're weaponizing all of these left, right and
39:59
political polarizing angles on this, which everybody is doing
40:03
OK, The state and the security state have moved in very
40:07
aggressively on this. So this is Aaron Cohen, who is
40:11
on Fox all the time, is security expert, who I think is an
40:15
Israeli. As well, and this is his
40:18
reaction, of course, he's on full rotation on Fox pushing
40:22
basically this watch. Cameras part part of your your
40:26
whole gig, Aaron Cohen, is to make sure that you know what's
40:29
going on here. Could this guy be profiled?
40:31
What's the next step for investigators looking at this?
40:34
Well, so there's there's, there's very good technical
40:37
tools that have fallen into local law enforcement's lab.
40:41
There's flock systems for cameras which allow license
40:44
plates to be read. I'm sure that the Provo Police
40:49
Department. Who?
40:51
I I recently spoke to about Gideon not long ago Trace.
40:54
We kicked him out an alert. I guaranteed them and I actually
40:57
made contact with them quietly to let them know that we were.
41:00
Going to be ramping. Up the system for any additional
41:04
attacks or copycat attacks out there and shot that out to 20
41:09
more agencies who are on the pilot.
41:10
So there's a flock system which allows.
41:13
Those those cameras are essentially placed around
41:14
counties and around cities. They can read license plates.
41:17
They don't monitor people's name and personal information like
41:20
they just they literally will get you a license plate.
41:23
So if this individual jumped into.
41:25
A car, which he likely did, that'll get dropped into the
41:28
investigation. Once they get a make on that, if
41:29
possible, they can then start picking cell phone towers to try
41:33
and track down cell phones that'll get thrown into the mix
41:35
as they start closing in on the investigation.
41:38
But really, I think the biggest concern now is hunting down this
41:43
shooter. Could be a collapsed AR, could
41:45
have other pistols and weapons, could be, who knows, getting
41:49
this guy in handcuffs and arrested.
41:52
Everything else will fall into place afterwards.
41:54
But there's an active threat out there and he needs to be.
41:59
So he's not being correct there. Israel does gather personal data
42:05
and attach it to a facial recognition.
42:08
And they're using this, they're pioneering this in Gaza against
42:11
for, for killing civilians, basically.
42:13
So there's the Israeli security experts.
42:15
So they're going to all these Israeli experts on U.S. media to
42:20
to empower the state, the Trump administration to crack down on,
42:23
you know, potential threats, potential threats.
42:26
So where's this going to end? Well, here's Marco Rubio, take a
42:29
look at this. So in Thomas Fassie, great
42:33
journalist here in in Italy, this is how it starts, the new
42:36
Patriot Act breaking Marco Rubio's State Department will
42:39
ban any foreigner from entering the United States who, quote,
42:43
celebrated the assassination of Charlie Kirk on social media
42:47
using AI tools, presumably. And this was announced and
42:51
confirmed there. So I mean, you, you do get these
42:53
sort of reactions as a result of what's happening.
42:57
And I don't know where exactly this is going to head in in the
43:02
long run, but let's take a look at what rallies are looking like
43:06
and will continue to look like. Look at the security perimeters
43:10
around political events now in the United States.
43:14
And again, we see a lot of this as well.
43:16
But inside you basically what's this is it's this is hardening
43:20
the echo chamber politically. And this is what's happening.
43:23
The polarization in America is increasing.
43:27
Trump rallies are sort of resembling sort of cult kind of
43:32
evangelical revivals. And people are becoming more and
43:36
more balkanized in their political corners here.
43:39
And, you know, I look at a film like V for Vendetta in 2005.
43:44
And just coincidentally, they they merged the cross of Saint
43:48
George there with, I think a Norse symbol as well.
43:53
And this was the party of the Lord Chancellor there and V for
43:55
Vendetta. But you know, you look at those
43:58
science fiction depictions of the future and I have to ask
44:01
legitimately, you know, we're not far off actually, if you
44:05
look at some of the the symbolism that's going on around
44:08
this. And this was and V for Vendetta,
44:10
that was a race based party. I think it was Norse Fire was
44:13
the name of the party, of course, famously played by I
44:17
think it was John Hurt. I believe the actor.
44:21
I can't remember. I think it was who was in 1980,
44:23
Orwell's 1984, Yes, right. So, but but here's the other
44:27
question. This was clearly a professional
44:30
hit. I cannot look at this event with
44:32
Charlie Kirk, Mike and say this is not a professional hit from a
44:36
distance. Sneaks onto a roof, long range
44:38
rifle, perfect shot hitting the artery on the side of the neck.
44:43
I mean, in that same Israeli security expert we had on Aaron
44:47
Cohen, he was in the segment before that.
44:49
We didn't have time to show it saying he got lucky, the shooter
44:52
got lucky. Nothing to see here.
44:54
He was just probably a radical leftist or what.
44:56
I don't know what the explanation on Fox was, but
44:58
that's basically his shtick. But this was a professional hit.
45:01
They don't have the shooter. He didn't post the manifesto on
45:04
4 Chan. So.
45:06
So if it was a professional hit, who hires professional hitmen?
45:10
State actors, governments, which government and state actor has
45:15
logged in the most amount of political assassinations in the
45:18
last few years? It has to be Israel.
45:21
So here's James Lee, who is a major influencer on social
45:24
media. And he reminds us of this
45:27
pattern, this change in Charlie Kirk's rhetoric just over the
45:30
last two months and what that might mean in terms of could
45:35
Charlie Kirk have fallen foul with powers well above even his
45:39
pay grade? Listen to this.
45:42
This is a source that I trust very much, and this is coming
45:44
from the top levels of government.
45:47
And they were having dinner with people, senators in the Senate
45:51
Foreign Intelligence Committee. They are not openly saying this
45:54
at this point, of course not. But in private conversation,
45:57
they're saying, hey, this looks like potentially Israel is
45:59
behind this. Wow.
46:00
And then in terms of getting to the actual evidence itself, a
46:03
very close friend of Charlie Kirk's put put out there.
46:05
Charlie didn't want to put out this tweet himself, but he told
46:07
a friend to put it out on the Internet and said, hey, if I go
46:09
against Israel, I think they will kill me.
46:11
And when, when did he say this? This was August 13th, so less
46:15
than a month ago. I can see Charlie over the last
46:18
few months sort of taking new information and have his mind
46:22
shift a little bit, right? He used to be an Israeli
46:24
loyalist. Then he starts to sort of mildly
46:27
criticize Israel and that, hey, I don't think, you know, we
46:30
shouldn't be allowed as an American to question the acts of
46:32
the foreign government. I have text messages, Megan,
46:35
calling me an anti Semite. I have less ability sometimes
46:39
online to criticize the Israeli government about backlash than
46:43
actual Israelis do. And that's really, really weird,
46:47
isn't it, Megan? And he publicly said hey, maybe
46:50
Epstein was Mossad. He certainly had a lot of
46:52
connections to Israeli ex prime ministers.
46:55
And there's also this clip where he questions how October 7th
47:00
happened. Was there a stand down order?
47:03
Six hours? I don't believe it.
47:05
Israel's the size of New Jersey when I took a helicopter ride
47:09
from Jerusalem to the Gaza border.
47:11
It's 45. Minutes.
47:13
Six hours. They're live streaming the
47:15
killing of Jews. Was that somebody in the
47:18
government say stand up? That is a legitimate non
47:21
conspiracy question. I mean, this is a big problem
47:25
for Israel. Charlie Kirk was maybe the most
47:27
influential figure on the right, especially with people under the
47:31
age of. 30. And when you start to have
47:34
somebody that influential as a conservative is say, hey, we
47:38
need to maybe reassess this relationship, there's something
47:40
weird going on. This is a warning to people in
47:43
the media to say, hey, you need to stop this right now because
47:47
you could be next. So Charlie Kirk is one of the
47:49
most influential conservative for the for the 18 to 40 age
47:53
group, probably one of the most influential conservative voices
47:57
or advocates in the country. So for him to change path even a
48:01
little bit on the Israel issue, on the Gaza issue is huge.
48:06
And then this happens and Netanyahu takes advantage, Rabbi
48:09
Shmuley takes advantage. They're all basically drifting
48:12
off the back of this tragedy, OK?
48:15
And that in itself is strange. OK, but but let's just finish
48:19
this off then with with this question of the Ukrainian girl
48:23
and and the murder of the Ukrainian girl.
48:24
And was that actually a race related incident?
48:28
Well, this this was earlier, just a few days before.
48:30
And then this happens. Fatal stabbing of a of a
48:34
Ukrainian refugee blonde, good looking white as as as she's
48:38
been portrayed by the right wing media and she was killed by this
48:43
black man in North Carolina on a train.
48:46
Clearly this person had mental issues like so many other people
48:50
who do random killings on the street.
48:52
But immediately it got branded by the media on the right wing
48:56
media as a racially motivated. I think even Alex Jones said it
48:59
was racially motivated According to him.
49:01
But we don't know that for certain.
49:02
But then there's the federal reaction here.
49:05
We'll bring this up on screen. He's going to be charged much
49:07
with the federal crime. So this plays into the troops on
49:10
the street using federal assets for law enforcement here because
49:14
it was on a mass transit thing being charged with the federal
49:18
crime. And then we'll go back to that
49:20
original video. Yeah, this one.
49:22
And so how how the right wing media is totally trying to spin
49:25
up a race, a race war on the back of this watch.
49:31
But because it's race related and it makes white people look
49:36
bad, it's got a lead. If it leads, it bleeds.
49:41
If it bleeds, it leads. If a black bleeds, it leads.
49:48
I didn't want that same. Energy all the way around.
49:50
Then if we, if we must talk about it, I want that same
49:52
energy all the way around. So these are the same people
49:57
that lost their minds over George Floyd, pushing that
50:00
narrative like it was a. Lynching when the facts scream
50:03
suicide. But they have.
50:06
When the facts claim suicide, there was no suicide with the
50:09
George Floyd thing anyway. We'll put that aside.
50:11
But that was a typical podcaster in America basically saying,
50:15
well, if if what they did during George Floyd by making it about
50:19
race is wrong, then we're going to be wrong and make it about
50:22
race. SO2 wrongs don't make a right.
50:24
Now I covered the George Floyd story in depth.
50:27
We also shared some of that on this program at the time there,
50:30
there there was no evidence of any racial motivation by Derek
50:34
Chauvin. It didn't come up in the trial,
50:36
The prosecution didn't. None of that stuck.
50:39
So there was nothing there. And likewise here, what we have
50:43
is a clearly a mentally ill psychotic person who has
50:48
randomly killed this Ukrainian refugee and it's been
50:52
immediately branded as a as a race incident to stoke up a race
50:56
war. Everybody in the media is so
50:59
anxious to pit white against black, Christian against Muslim.
51:03
They just won't stop until they see blood on the streets.
51:06
That's my the only conclusion I can make here.
51:09
You if it's not about race with George Floyd, because there's no
51:12
evidence. There's no evidence that it is
51:14
here. Not any real evidence,
51:16
compelling evidence. Why can't it just be a crime?
51:20
Why can't it just be a murder? Why do we have to attach race to
51:24
it or religion? Because we're being plagued.
51:28
Yeah, and, and that's the problem.
51:30
And that's the thing people really need to step back and
51:33
take a deep breath about. And the other thing is with
51:36
Charlie Kirk, Last thing I'll say, Mike, it's important.
51:39
You know, I, even though I disagree with Charlie Kirk,
51:42
especially on the issue of Gaza and some of the crazy things
51:44
Charlie Kirk has said over the years, it's not, it's not
51:49
permissible or it's it to to, you know, shoot or try to kill
51:55
somebody you disagree politically with.
51:57
And that goes for all the radical leftist as well.
51:59
And that also goes for the people on the right with their
52:02
political enemies. I mean, we cannot get to a point
52:05
in society where we cannot have a political conversation that
52:09
must be settled at the barrel of the gun or the end of a fist.
52:12
We're very, very close to being at that point.
52:14
And we're being pushed towards that point and, and you people
52:17
need to step back and think, are you being pushed to that point?
52:22
And if so, do you know who's pushing you?
52:24
It's an important question. You got to stop, pause and think
52:27
about that. Mark, let's come back on to the
52:31
issue then of American troops potentially being deployed
52:34
domestically and what's your thoughts on this and whether
52:38
that actually has any support within the American population?
52:45
Well, the the background to this is very important in the
52:49
immediate wake of the Civil War. It really wasn't a civil war in
52:53
the strict sense, but what they call the War between the States.
52:56
The north, of course, were the victors, and during
52:58
Reconstruction federal troops were used in ways that were more
53:03
along the lines of policing functions and there were
53:06
considerable abuses. So in 1878, the Posse Comitatus
53:10
Act was drafted to limit, at least limit the use of the army
53:16
in domestic law enforcement. And now the Chicago Council on
53:20
Global Affairs, which I watch pretty closely along with
53:23
Chatham House CFR, they're birds of a feather.
53:25
They came out with a September 4th survey here that we can show
53:29
that on the screen Americans oppose overall, they're saying
53:34
domestic use of U.S. troops. And we can go on from there and
53:38
show the subsequent slides. They're very brief.
53:41
These are some recent headlines I showed last week when I
53:44
touched on this issue. Axios reported that there was a
53:48
federal ruling that could restrict Trump on potential San
53:51
Francisco troop deployment. And Chicago Tribune reported As
53:56
Trump threatens more Guard troops in U.S. cities, including
53:59
Chicago and Baltimore. Here's what the law allows.
54:03
And this next one gives a very brief summation of what this is
54:07
about. Recent weeks.
54:09
This is from the Chicago Council survey.
54:11
Recent weeks have seen an escalation in the use of troops
54:14
for domestic operations to a degree not seen in recent memory
54:18
in DC. President Trump has commissioned
54:21
DC's police, deployed immigration agents and asked
54:25
states to lend their National Guard forces to the nation's
54:28
capital, urging a crime crackdown.
54:31
I abridge this text a little bit, and then I emphasized here
54:34
whether U.S. troops should be used domestically has gone from
54:38
a theoretical question to a practical one.
54:41
Quote, UN quote. And that's according to some of
54:43
the narrative in this Chicago Council survey.
54:47
From there, this is 1 slide. I only used one graph here and I
54:52
can explain it. Let's put that up.
54:54
The the top one is those who favor it.
54:58
And of all those surveyed, 29% favor using U.S. troops for law
55:04
enforcement to whatever degree they call it protest
55:08
suppression. Sometimes that may be true.
55:09
Sometimes they're guarding federal property or guarding ICE
55:13
agents. It's a mixture of things.
55:15
But of those that favor the use of troops in this way, 52% were
55:19
Republicans. That's the long red line on top,
55:22
17% Democrats and 23% independents.
55:26
Those who oppose it were 70%, seven, zero, 70% of those
55:32
surveyed. And of those 70 percent, 47%
55:35
Republicans, 83% Democrats and 76% independents.
55:41
Interestingly enough, among those that favor or oppose these
55:45
troop deployments, the Republican reading is close to
55:48
equal on both sides. And in other words, almost half
55:52
the Republicans oppose and half support this use of troops.
55:56
I'll mention that yesterday I managed to get together with a
56:00
friend that worked on the border to protect private ranchers land
56:06
from illegal immigration from from illegal border crossings
56:10
out near Eagle Pass, TX on the other side of Laredo from where
56:14
I'm at. And I asked him about this and
56:17
he felt that the troop, the troop deployments, though he
56:21
hopes they don't last long, were necessary to protect mainly
56:24
federal property and protect ICE agents from violence.
56:28
Although he had some questions maybe about protest suppression,
56:32
things like that. The the conversation kind of
56:34
ended there. He used to help apprehend
56:38
illegal crossings when he worked for these private ranchers.
56:40
That's what he was hired to do two or three years ago.
56:43
So he has a pretty unique view on this.
56:45
He actually was in the Rio Grande River itself getting wet
56:49
and getting very directly involved in this.
56:51
And one other thing I'll mention is he said that a lot of Texas
56:54
Governor Greg Abbott's efforts to quell illegal crossings were
56:58
largely greatly exaggerated. And actually under under the
57:04
guise of being a strong border enforcement governor, what what
57:08
Abbott was actually doing was allowing more illegals.
57:10
And therefore the numbers got tremendously high in terms of
57:14
how many illegals are in the states.
57:16
And according to the guy I talked to last night, with such
57:19
high numbers of people having crossed during the Biden years,
57:22
1010s of thousands a month, that he felt the troops, the troop
57:27
deployments were at least necessary because they have to
57:29
make up for lost time because so many people were allowed to
57:33
enter the country illegally. Now very few are entering the
57:36
country illegally. And he hopes the troop
57:39
deployments again, don't last long, but he feels they're
57:42
necessary to bring the numbers down to get enough deportations
57:46
and to enforce the border laws the way that Trump announced it.
57:50
So that was his more or less pro Trump view on it.
57:52
On the other hand, when does it end?
57:55
Because in principle, using the troops for for domestic law
57:59
enforcement can become a very slippery slope very quickly.
58:02
Very unfortunate things can happen and abuses can soon
58:06
follow. And that's what brought about
58:08
the Posse Combat Tatus Act to begin with.
58:10
So there's some things that remain to be seen the the troop
58:14
deployments have been largely just LA and DC so far.
58:17
Apparently Baltimore and Chicago have not happened yet.
58:21
So there there are some things that remain to be seen in terms
58:23
of the scope of this thing. But these are some of the points
58:26
that I gather these these are some of the key observations at
58:29
this point. Yeah, sorry, Mark, Thank you.
58:32
Thank you for that. Now back in the UK then, well,
58:36
for a lot of years now, I've been following the accusations
58:41
against people, people ending up in prison in this country,
58:44
falsely accused of various things.
58:46
A lot of years ago, it must have been about 2012 or 2013, I was
58:50
visiting somebody in Strangeways Prison in Manchester.
58:54
And one of the points that he made to me during that visit was
58:58
that there were a ton of people in that prison, one of the worst
59:01
presidents in the country, who were there on indeterminate
59:04
sentences with no release date. But the only thing that they
59:07
needed to do in order to get a release date was to admit their
59:10
guilt. But they would not do that.
59:13
So why am I mentioning this? Yesterday was falsely accused
59:16
day, and Will Coleshill was at the Royal Coach of Justice to
59:21
report on that for us. So let's just have a look at
59:24
that. Hello, this is Will Coleshill
59:27
reporting for UK column. And today I'm down at the Royal
59:29
Courts of Justice talking to people on international Falsely
59:31
Accused Day, talking to people about miscarriages of justice
59:35
and how our justice system is broken.
59:38
Yeah, this is the Falsely Accused day outside the Royal
59:41
Courts of Justice and it's to bring together lots of
59:45
organisations who who either claim to have been falsely
59:48
accused and who represent different parts of that
59:51
community, I suppose. Hello gents.
59:53
May I ask what brings you down here today?
59:56
Well, it's interesting the Jeremy Bamba case because he's
59:58
the same age as me and I followed it for since I remember
1:00:01
the case when I was in my early 20s and here, here I am.
1:00:06
He's still in jail for and there's some of the evidence was
1:00:09
produced. It's been a fast this sounds
1:00:11
farcical to me. So I've got Lucy that be today.
1:00:14
Well, Lucy was found guilty and sentenced to to all of 15 whole
1:00:18
life orders. Our case is in the hands of the
1:00:21
CCRC at the moment for review and we're just hoping for a
1:00:25
referral back to the Court of Appeal as soon as possible
1:00:27
because she's in the primaries of her life and they're
1:00:29
dwindling away. So my name is Mike Thompson.
1:00:32
I am founder and director of Falsely Accused Network.
1:00:34
We support anyone falsely accused of domestic abuse in
1:00:37
England and Wales and I'm here today to show strength and
1:00:40
solidarity with the falsely accused and the other
1:00:42
organisations here today. We just want people to know that
1:00:45
there is a lot of injustice out there.
1:00:47
The the system is not a great system at the moment, needs a
1:00:51
lot of work doing. They fail a lot of people and
1:00:55
yeah, continue to do so. It's very common for a man who's
1:00:57
been falsely accused to go through post traumatic stress
1:01:00
disorder. They can enter deep phases of
1:01:03
depression, anger, mood swings, and unfortunately some of sort
1:01:08
of the ultimate action you can never, ever get back the the
1:01:11
last time. And it isn't just the person
1:01:13
affected it, it's families as well.
1:01:16
You know, it's got massive effect on people's families and,
1:01:18
you know, careers, pensions, you know, it's a financial impact as
1:01:22
well. My mum was a sub post office
1:01:24
worker. They wanted her to take on this
1:01:27
new equipment, the Horizon equipment.
1:01:29
And she said, no, you know, I can't learn computers, blah,
1:01:31
blah. Should if they forced me to do
1:01:32
that, I will shut the post office.
1:01:33
And she did. So had she not shut the sub post
1:01:36
office, we could have been, you know, our family could have been
1:01:38
wrapped up in that. So it literally can happen to
1:01:40
anyone. Have you seen what's been
1:01:41
happening to the MP who exposed it, Andrew Bridgen?
1:01:45
Yes, yeah, they will belittle him as they do to, you know, a,
1:01:50
a lot of these people that, that expose it, they, they do what
1:01:53
they can to try and trash their name.
1:01:55
And what specific changes do we really need within the courts?
1:01:58
You know, the use of circumstance and scientific
1:01:59
evidence has got to improve. I think juries need to be better
1:02:03
informed when they make decisions, especially like
1:02:06
medical, medical cases. They've got to be better
1:02:09
informed and it's got to be balanced as well.
1:02:13
You know, you can't just have a strong prosecution.
1:02:15
It's got to be, it's got to be fair.
1:02:16
Because when you've got one person arguing for the
1:02:19
prosecution and nobody for the defence, who is The Who is the
1:02:22
jury going to believe? If there's no, if there's no
1:02:25
contest, who are they going to believe?
1:02:26
I believe the victim policy introduced by Keir Starmer when
1:02:29
he was from prosecution services inverted the principle of
1:02:32
innocent and in law. And, and everybody here has had
1:02:37
a experience of that and they're here to stridently fight it and,
1:02:41
and to and to point out to Starmer and his people where
1:02:44
they're going wrong. They know they're going wrong
1:02:45
and we have to do something visible now and again like this.
1:02:48
What's particularly broken is the presumption of innocence.
1:02:51
Second, a woman makes an allegation against the man, he's
1:02:54
automatically seen as guilty and treated like a criminal before
1:02:58
anything's any evidence has been reviewed or any trial.
1:03:01
And that's got to stop when there is a miscarriage of
1:03:04
justice that they should be a lot easier and quicker to get to
1:03:07
the get it in front of the back in court or whatever needs to be
1:03:10
done. What about jury unanimity?
1:03:13
Jury unanimity it's a real problem when you have the
1:03:15
majority verdicts As for example in Lucy let me original trial
1:03:20
and in Andy Malkinson released a couple of years ago, exonerated
1:03:22
a couple of years ago. Those were majority verdicts.
1:03:24
There were two people in both of those juries who are two or
1:03:28
about that number who didn't agree that the person was
1:03:30
guilty. And imagine how they felt when
1:03:31
they went home. That's a, it's an, it's a
1:03:34
aberrance of justice. The, the Trochuria.
1:03:36
I was on what a majority, A majority, A unanimous verdict.
1:03:39
And I think that's a good thing. I mean, after all the law says
1:03:42
has to be beyond reasonable doubt.
1:03:43
Well, if the two people disagree, there's some doubt
1:03:46
there, that's for sure. I think, you know, 1:50 is still
1:03:49
not enough, you know, But when you're talking about whole life
1:03:52
sentences, you know, mistakes do happen.
1:03:54
It's been proven. You look at Andrew Malkinson,
1:03:58
Peter Sullivan this year, Stefano Kishko from years back,
1:04:01
you know, you've got to be sure than sure.
1:04:03
What do you think about what's going on with all of these
1:04:05
district judges who aren't volunteers like magistrates and
1:04:08
as your state employees and can lock people up for six months.
1:04:13
These judges have a have a tendency to be trained in
1:04:16
certain new culture crimes, new allegations of that.
1:04:20
And we'll follow that rather than and the pressure on those
1:04:24
people to protect to follow conviction targets.
1:04:26
It's just like it is on the police until they start doing it
1:04:29
with the principle of British law as we're all used to it.
1:04:32
We're screwed because they're just they are woke indentured
1:04:36
for want of a better term, you know.
1:04:38
Well, I think all things the best.
1:04:40
I think the whole thing is the complete best and it all needs
1:04:41
overhauled. It's absolutely shocking the
1:04:44
state of it now, you know, and it's only going to get worse.
1:04:47
So do you think we've got a 2 tier justice system then?
1:04:50
Yeah, I'd say it's a multi tier justice system because I know
1:04:53
what the two tier can apply to in certain intersectionalities
1:04:57
with race and immigration, that sort of thing.
1:05:00
And then there's sexism going on, misandry, misogyny,
1:05:03
everything. All these different competing
1:05:05
identity groups, all that needs to be chucked in the bin and get
1:05:07
back to the presumption of innocence and law for everybody
1:05:10
in that country. Well, that sounds good to me.
1:05:12
Where can people find out more? I think go to go to
1:05:16
empoweringtheinnocent.com. In it on a Google search,
1:05:18
they'll find all of the empowering, the innocent things
1:05:20
under there. Yeah.
1:05:22
So it's been an interesting day today down here at the High
1:05:24
Court. You've had a lot of people
1:05:25
talking about the failures of the justice system.
1:05:27
I've experienced it. I'm sure a lot of people have
1:05:29
experienced it in recent years, whether it's from the
1:05:31
postmasters to all of the men falsely accused of domestic
1:05:33
violence, to people put in prison for murders that they may
1:05:35
not have committed. This is Will Coleshill reporting
1:05:39
for UK column. Thank you and thanks to Will for
1:05:48
that. Very good report, yes.
1:05:51
OK, Patrick, let's just very quickly because we're well over
1:05:55
time here, just very quickly and with with what?
1:05:58
Well, we were going to do a feel good segment because that went
1:06:01
over really well last time with John Bolton there.
1:06:04
But we're going to do an educational segment, I think
1:06:06
more of a cultural heritage educational segment here.
1:06:10
So we'll bring this up on screen, as you know, tomorrow,
1:06:13
September 13th, that's the big free speech rally led by Tommy
1:06:17
Robinson here. As you can see, a lot of the
1:06:19
opposition media are jumping on there on the what's on section
1:06:22
here, full route of Tommy Robinson's huge quote, free
1:06:25
speech rally through the capital in London.
1:06:27
Tommy says a millionaire going to show up.
1:06:29
It's going to be a million man March for free speech, I guess.
1:06:34
So that's exciting here. But what what we want to point
1:06:37
out is, is the symbolism, especially of the the English
1:06:41
flag here. And as you know, Tommy likes to
1:06:43
adorn himself in the cross of Saint George.
1:06:46
This is one of his big calling cards ever since the days of the
1:06:49
EDL here. This is an old photo hear from
1:06:52
back in the day. Tommy is the head of the English
1:06:54
Defense League. So you'll often see St.
1:06:57
George's flying when you see Tommy in public and at rallies
1:07:02
and so forth here. So but then there's a whole
1:07:05
conversation about about Saint George himself.
1:07:08
This is the Patriot St. of England.
1:07:10
This is what the cross of Saint George represents.
1:07:12
Why is Saint George the patron St. of England and what was his
1:07:17
nationality? That's an interesting question.
1:07:19
I always thought growing up that Saint George was English, and
1:07:22
then he left England with Richard the Lionheart fight in
1:07:25
the Crusades, you know, and the rest is history.
1:07:28
Sean Connery and Orlando Bloom and the Kingdom, Kingdom of
1:07:31
Heaven and so forth. But that's not actually the case
1:07:34
here. We just did a little bit of
1:07:36
digging and some people might be surprised, not least of all
1:07:39
Tommy himself here at the nationality of Saint George.
1:07:43
It turns out Saint George, his father was a Turk and his mother
1:07:48
was Palestinian. So Saint George is effectively
1:07:53
Palestinian. He, he, he lived most of his
1:07:55
adult life in Palestine. He fought against the oppressors
1:07:59
in Palestine. He's venerated to this day by
1:08:02
the Palestinians. There's a church, a Chapel,
1:08:05
historic Chapel in his name as well.
1:08:08
So he's highly regarded by Palestinians, Christian
1:08:12
Palestinians specifically, as a kind of hero figure here.
1:08:16
So I mean, I hate to break it to you, Mike and everybody here,
1:08:20
it's not such a bad thing depending on what side of the
1:08:22
issue on, but you know, Saint George was a Palestinian.
1:08:27
Well, maybe Tommy will add the other flag alongside of the
1:08:32
cross of Saint George. I don't think he will, but then
1:08:35
again, isn't it interesting though?
1:08:37
History is bizarre. History can be bizarre.
1:08:40
It's so strange, it's so strange, but we thought we'd
1:08:43
share that with you and, you know, go ahead and talk about
1:08:46
that at the pub. I think that would be a nice
1:08:47
icebreaker for a conversation at the dinner table or whatever.
1:08:52
Saint George, Father was a Turk, mother was a Palestinian.
1:08:56
I'll leave it there. We got to leave it there for
1:08:59
today. Thank you to Mark and Patrick
1:09:01
and everybody that's watched. We'll be back in a couple of
1:09:03
minutes for some extra. We'll see you then.
1:09:06
Bye bye.