Latest / UK Column Radio / UK Column News - 30th June 2025

Transcript

UK Column News - 30th June 2025 · UK Column Radio

0:07
Well, hello. And it's really wonderful to be
0:11
back at this tremendous event. And I'd also like to say a big
0:14
thank you to everybody that's in the marquee this morning.
0:19
It's wonderful to see you. And I think we're going to have
0:23
a very interesting little news slot today because there's
0:26
clearly some interesting things happening in the world.
0:30
But I should start off by saying good morning, today is the 29th
0:36
of June. It is 1115.
0:38
Welcome to UK column news. My name is Brian Gerrish.
0:43
I'm your host and I have with me Mike Robinson.
0:46
I have Patrick Henningson, I have Charles Mallett and
0:50
somewhere she's disappeared is Sandy Adams.
0:53
So a big I think we're allowed a round of applause today for all
0:57
the effort. Now I've got to be very careful
1:05
because we've only got a 50 minute slot.
1:08
We've always got a lot to talk about, so I have to be careful I
1:11
don't chew up my slot with too much chat to you, but I think a
1:16
little bit is necessary. You will notice I'm wearing a
1:19
tie. Now, this is out of great
1:22
respect to all of you, but it's also a little bit of a joke
1:26
that's been going on for a number of years because Ian
1:31
Crane from Alternative View, who used to put on fantastic events,
1:36
would always tell me off for wearing a tie because he said it
1:38
was a sign of being held as a puppet by the establishment.
1:44
And I said, yes, that's true. But on the other hand, if you
1:47
want to win people over, sometimes it's happy to just
1:50
reflect a little bit about how they are.
1:53
So I stayed wearing a tie because a big target for us is
1:58
to get into the professions in order to convince people who are
2:03
basically, they think they're doing good jobs, maybe as a
2:06
doctor or maybe inside the police or maybe inside the legal
2:10
circles. Can we win them over?
2:13
And I believe that sometimes if you look right, people will talk
2:17
to you. So I decided today standards
2:21
matter and I'd, I'd put on a tie.
2:27
So really it's, it's a bit of fun and it's out of respect to
2:32
you now. I the festival is utterly
2:35
brilliant. It's been lovely to chat to
2:37
everybody. We've had some really deep
2:40
conversations. We've done some little
2:42
recordings, we've heard some personal stories, we've heard
2:47
sad things and we've heard happy things as usual.
2:50
But our interaction with you guys has been really, really
2:53
exciting. The only thing I've been
2:55
slightly disappointed at is that although I've been all around
3:00
the camp, I have not found Marianna Spring and and I think
3:08
it's pretty poor that once again, she's not given us the
3:12
courtesy of turning up to have a proper debate about what's going
3:16
on in the world. So I think before I just do my
3:20
quick new slot, it would be appropriate to do a substantial
3:24
Boo for the BBC. Shall we do that Boo?
3:32
OK, right now I'm going to start off with a little picture.
3:40
And the caption, if you can't read it, is no better place than
3:44
a church hall. And what's the significance of
3:47
this picture? Well, earlier in the week I was
3:50
able to go to a a public meeting.
3:53
It was called Big Community and it was held in this little
3:57
church hall. And the subject was about the
4:01
future expansion of Plymouth. So more or less, well, for a lot
4:05
of people out of the blue, what's what's come out is that
4:10
there's going to be substantial changes to the way local
4:13
government works. But don't worry because your
4:17
opinion counts. OK, So this is where it took
4:22
place. There was limited space inside.
4:26
And the Plymouth City Council team who were present said to
4:29
me, well, this was the the only place we could get.
4:33
And so the numbers that can take place in the big conversation
4:38
are small. So if we take a look inside,
4:43
I've blinked out faces because I didn't think it was fair to put
4:47
up some of the local people. But what's taking place is that
4:51
they're sat at tables and at each table there are two
4:56
facilitators from the local council.
4:59
And what those facilitators were doing, using a sheet which said
5:04
official sensitive, was guiding the conversation from those
5:11
local people. And what Plymouth City Council
5:14
wanted was the local people in this particular parish.
5:18
But there are others to tell Plymouth City Council what they
5:23
wanted out of life. What do they expect with bus
5:26
service? What were the health provisions
5:28
like? What was schooling like?
5:31
And then Plymouth City Council's taking this information to put
5:34
it into their proposal to government that they are going
5:38
to take over the peripheral parishes around Plymouth in
5:44
order to increase the population of Plymouth as a city from about
5:49
260,000 to 300,000. Now I found this a very
5:56
interesting exercise because what did all the what the local
5:59
people want to do? They wanted to talk to the
6:01
council in order to find out what the council's plans were.
6:05
What are you thinking as a council?
6:07
Do you want to take over our rural areas?
6:10
Do you want to concrete it over? And of course, they never got an
6:15
answer because the facilitators always try to drag the
6:19
conversation, the big conversation back to where the
6:23
where the City Council wanted it to go.
6:26
So this is real news because this only happened in the last
6:30
couple of days. But the reason this is so
6:33
significant is it demonstrates the new control techniques which
6:38
the government is using in order to give you a voice at local
6:44
level, but to control what your voice says.
6:49
So this was I, I was immersed in stuff I've been reading about
6:56
and I decided that I should ask some questions.
6:59
And I, the the chief executive was there, Tracy and I went to
7:03
speak to her separately. I didn't speak in front of the
7:07
audience, but I said I don't think you've been very honest
7:10
because you're not telling the people what your plans are.
7:14
And of course, during the evening when I was able to speak
7:18
to some more of the organisers, what rapidly came out is they're
7:23
not thinking about 300,000, they're thinking about 350,000.
7:29
They're thinking about 500,000 by 2070.
7:35
And when I hear a City Council talking about its need to expand
7:42
on that scale, to me this is Soviet policy.
7:46
This is how the five year and the greater plans in the Soviet
7:49
Union were compiled. So although this event was
7:52
labelled as devolution, what you're actually seeing is
7:57
control coming down to the lowest level.
8:01
Now, I just put a positive in here because when I started to
8:04
challenge and there were many of the people there who were
8:08
starting to challenge the whole setup and the whole questioning,
8:12
the City Council became very nervous.
8:15
And in fact, the chief executive was clearly very stressed that I
8:19
was there. And there may be reasons for
8:23
that, but tough, I live there. So a good message for all of you
8:29
is if you ever think that you as an individual or a small
8:35
community within a parish council, if you ever think you
8:38
don't matter, you absolutely do matter.
8:42
They are terrified of ordinary people standing up to be
8:47
counted. And one of the key things you
8:49
can say is no. So even though this is a massive
8:54
plan, let's just bring it up on the screen.
8:56
This is the minister, Jim McMahon, who was minister of
9:00
State, Housing, Communities and local government.
9:05
He's one of the guys behind it. Even though they say this is
9:08
about devolution, this is making people have more power at the
9:13
local level, what it is actually doing is bringing control to the
9:17
local level. So the government says strategic
9:22
oversight of English local and regional government structures.
9:25
It talks about local government finance because all of the city
9:30
councils and the big unitary authorities are bankrupt or
9:34
close to it. And it's also talking about
9:38
combined authorities with mayors.
9:41
And if you follow this policy through, when Ben Rubin on the
9:45
UK columns been doing some really fantastic stuff on this,
9:48
he is describing the parallel of parallel system of government
9:53
that is already set up. It's not being considered, it's
9:57
in place. And this is going to involve big
10:01
communities manipulated, as I've shown you, making policy while
10:07
actually supporting government policy instead of any form of
10:11
representation through a parish council to a District Council to
10:16
a County Council. All that is going and this new
10:21
control mechanism is coming in. So the village hall is reality,
10:25
which I've shown you, but these are the sorts of people driving
10:29
the policy, local government reorganisation policy and
10:33
programme updates. So I'm going to encourage you
10:36
all to get on the Internet, go to gov.uk and see and read what
10:42
it's talking about because I'm going to suggest we need to stop
10:46
this and very quickly because of the power that they are going to
10:51
exert down to community level. So this is a bit more of the the
10:55
background. I'm saying that devolution
10:58
equals greater control. And I don't think I'm too far
11:01
away. And and how is it sold to
11:04
people? Well, it's a vision often comes
11:08
up, doesn't it? We have a vision for a simpler
11:12
local government structures. So it's all sold on positives.
11:17
We are introducing a new system of government.
11:20
It's simpler, you can trust it. It's going to make cost savings.
11:25
And this means that that money can be spent on looking after
11:29
elderly people. It's all sold on Utopia in the
11:34
future, but the mechanics of it is very, very deep.
11:39
So I'm probably there for time. And I know that was a very quick
11:44
UK column slot, but I want to just really reinforce with you
11:50
that if you're somebody who realises there's something
11:53
really nasty building itself in this country, we're losing,
11:58
we're losing freedoms, we're losing free speech.
12:01
We're we've got ID cards, we've got this control structure
12:05
coming in. The thing they are most
12:08
frightened of is people at local level just saying no.
12:14
And parish councils often mocked because of the vicar of Dibley
12:18
and all that. Actually, parish councils, when
12:23
they stick their heels in can make big waves and if we get
12:27
enough local people doing it, this will start to shake because
12:32
the big conversation had to come to the parish council level for
12:37
them to get this legitimacy for them to do what they want to do,
12:42
which is a Soviet style system of government.
12:46
I'm going to end there. Who is going to come on?
12:50
Mike, Thank you very much. And I'm not wearing a tie
13:00
because for some people it doesn't help.
13:07
Yesterday was Armed Forces Day. Did everybody know that Armed
13:12
Forces Day comes at the end of Armed Forces Week, which is.
13:15
But anyway, John Healey there was very excited about it.
13:19
I was interested in the language used in this tweet today the
13:22
nation unites do feel united around the war agenda and so on.
13:26
Are you you all? Yes.
13:29
And this is going to make Britain secure at home and
13:32
abroad. And the reason I thought that
13:35
language is significant is because if you've been watching
13:38
the UK column for a while, you'll know that a number of
13:41
years ago in one of the defence papers that the government
13:46
published, I can't remember which one, they talked about the
13:49
integrated operating concept. And this was very much
13:52
presenting the idea that it's no longer home, is no longer
13:56
perceived as a safe place. It is just as dangerous as being
14:00
abroad for the military. And this is because government
14:03
is recognising that what they're doing is garnering a certain
14:08
amount of opposition and, and they're they're increasingly
14:11
concerned about the, the degree of opposition and how that might
14:14
express itself in the in the future.
14:17
So being secure at home and abroad is something that I think
14:21
we should take a positive message from because government
14:24
is feeling insecure at home and that is for good reason.
14:30
But oh sorry, that should have played.
14:34
Why is it not playing well anyway, there was a video clip
14:37
here which unfortunately doesn't look like it's going to play,
14:39
but it was very impressive. It was very impressive because
14:42
the this is was a piece of Ministry of Defence propaganda.
14:45
It was very impressive because at the end they showed the Red
14:47
Arrows and the Red Arrows are still being presented as being
14:51
some kind of great sort of what's the, what's the, the
14:56
word, the, the representative of the British military and so on.
15:01
This is the Red Arrows that can barely put 9 aircraft in the sky
15:04
at the moment because because they're all end of, you know,
15:08
off their shelf life, They're all end of service.
15:10
And, and they're having to, they're having to, to take parts
15:13
from operational aircraft to try and keep the Red Arrows flying.
15:16
And in fact, the Red Arrows are likely to be gone in the next
15:19
couple of years. Now we saw headlines in the last
15:21
few weeks about the potential of this Russian designed aircraft
15:26
being used for the Red Arrows in the naughty distant future.
15:30
I'll leave it there right now. Let's change topics a little bit
15:35
because Ed Miliband was pushing this out what dates a couple of
15:38
days ago. Then we're determined to make
15:41
the UK the sustainable finance capital of the world, right?
15:46
The net zero, the net zero agenda is collapsing around our
15:49
feet, but they're still determined to try to push this.
15:52
Now the question in my mind was why?
15:54
Why? Why is he announcing this now,
15:56
plans for the UK to become sustainable finance capital
16:00
capital of the world? There's the sort of main graphic
16:03
there with lots of pound signs as if that gives it value.
16:09
This is what it's about. This is if you look in the top
16:12
left hand, I realise it's small, but if you look at the top left
16:14
hand corner there, that's the City of London Corporation logo
16:19
and it it's the global city apparently.
16:23
And this this report Scaling Transition Finance came out I
16:27
think in December last year. And it basically is recognising
16:32
the fact that if you remember back to COP 26 and the Prince
16:36
Charles was part of that, of course, now King, but the main
16:40
man was Mark Carney, the carnage Carney, sorry, who of course is
16:45
the current Canadian Prime Minister.
16:47
And he promoted this sustainable finance initiative called G
16:51
fans. The G stood for Glasgow because
16:53
it was that's where COP 26 was since the start of the year,
16:56
because Trump has something to do with this.
16:58
But this process began before that it it was already starting
17:01
to collapse under its own own weight with with financial
17:04
institutions leaving and really not interested in it whatsoever.
17:07
So this is an act of desperation on behalf of the City of London
17:11
and the British government to try to reinvigorate this idea of
17:16
net zero finance because it really it's just a, a, a finance
17:19
game. It's, it's not really about, as
17:22
everybody will be aware in this, in this room, it's not really
17:24
about climate change and, and carbon dioxide and this kind of
17:28
nonsense. It's, it's just about money.
17:31
And so again, we should be taking positives out of this
17:34
because their, their scheme isn't working, it's collapsing
17:38
and they're trying to step in and, and fix the thing.
17:42
And so I just wanted to bring that one forward as well, right.
17:47
Yesterday, Kate Shamrani in her talk, if you were listening, was
17:52
talking about organ transplants and and the sort of the way that
17:57
the organ transplant industry has been gone.
17:59
So this is a bit of a darker segment, this bit.
18:02
But I just wanted to to say to everybody, if you haven't read
18:05
this article called No Time to Die by Doctor Mike Williams on
18:10
the UK column website, do have a look at it.
18:12
Because it, it basically is covering much of what Kate was
18:15
talking about yesterday. And the fact that really
18:19
recommending that if you aren't comfortable with the situation
18:22
with organ donations, it it, it would be good.
18:25
And it's never too late to opt out of that.
18:27
Now there is a website for this, an organ donation website
18:31
registering your decision about whether to opt out.
18:34
Now. I just also wanted to make the
18:37
point here that of course, if you remember back to the
18:40
covidocracy, the Coronavirus Act, there was another opt out
18:48
that's available to us, to us through the NHS is, is the
18:51
ability to opt out of data sharing and so on.
18:54
But under the Coronavirus Act, because it was supposedly
18:57
emergency legislation, that opt out was effectively suspended.
19:02
So, so just if you feel like opting out of this, opt out of
19:06
it. But just keep in mind that we
19:09
may need to keep, be aware of what government is doing and
19:12
make sure that we, we maintain that opt out and that, that
19:16
there's no attempt at any point in the future to sort of, well,
19:19
actually, we, we need this because the point, the point
19:21
that Kate was making at her presentation yesterday was that
19:25
much of the organs that are taken from people are being used
19:29
for scientific research in inverted commas.
19:32
And they're not always being used for the benefit of others.
19:35
So whether you're prepared to make that decision to, to, to
19:38
donate organs on the basis of, of doing something which is good
19:42
and for somebody else, that's not always the case.
19:45
So just keep that in mind. I'm just sorry, Patrick's here.
19:50
Let me just see, I think maybe. Oh, right.
19:55
And then just finally, as you know, we've been fighting
19:58
YouTube for quite some time, right?
20:01
And just for anybody that hasn't isn't aware, we got kicked off
20:05
YouTube in 2021 for covering a story of a man who was injured
20:11
by the coronavirus vaccines and was very seriously ill in
20:16
hospital. And YouTube decided that was
20:20
just a step too far. They kicked us off.
20:23
They, the Daily Mail then covered the same story about
20:26
four weeks later with no consequences whatsoever.
20:30
And and then we've sort of been in this fight with YouTube ever
20:33
since. Now we are in the process of
20:37
doing some work legally on this and we're not going to say any
20:41
more about that at the moment, but I just wanted to to bring
20:43
you up to date with where we are with YouTube because this is
20:46
fascinating. I used the same account that our
20:50
YouTube channel had been on to set up a, a, a new channel,
20:56
which was just about serious. So it wasn't anything to do with
20:58
with medical things and so on. And we had about four videos on
21:03
that. It was taken down.
21:07
And this I just wanted to show you what they sent me because it
21:09
says here, hi Mike. We've reviewed your content and
21:12
found it severe or repeated violations of a community
21:15
guidelines. It didn't specify which
21:17
community guidelines were alleged to have broken in this
21:19
case. Because of this, we have removed
21:21
your channel from YouTube. We know this is probably very
21:25
upsetting news. They're always worried that
21:27
you're upset by this, right? But it's our job to make sure
21:30
that YouTube is a safe place for all.
21:32
If we think the channel's severe, and you know, I'm not
21:35
going to even bother with the rest of that.
21:36
But if it's the next, if it's the next paragraph that really
21:39
got me. Your existing YouTube channels,
21:42
new channels you create or acquire, and channels in which
21:46
you are repeatedly or prominently featured will be
21:49
terminated if you circumvent a strike, restriction or previous
21:53
termination. So in other words, if another
21:56
channel decides to feature the UK column, their channel will be
22:00
shut down. This is this is quite, this is a
22:04
step beyond what we've seen before.
22:05
Now, this is quite ironic because YouTube has allegedly,
22:09
they say, moved back on the restrictions.
22:13
And in fact, they they released a statement a few weeks ago
22:17
saying that that particularly with regard to health
22:19
information, that they were going to just not be quite as
22:22
draconian as they have been in the past.
22:23
It's nonsense. It's just going on as as hard.
22:27
In fact, it's worse situation than it's ever been.
22:29
So anyway, we are taking the fight to YouTube and that is
22:34
something that we'll be speaking publicly about much more in the
22:37
not too distant future. So keep an eye on that.
22:40
I think that is me. Yes, it is.
22:43
So now let's over to Charles then.
22:54
We are totally delighted that you are here, not just because
22:58
you've come to see us and we can talk to you and look you in the
23:01
eye, but also because this is one in the eye for the state who
23:04
would far prefer that we weren't doing this and weren't talking
23:07
to each other. And that goes for all of you lot
23:09
at home as well. Now you've answered my first
23:12
question, which was going to be about attendance at last year's
23:15
festival. I know the answer to that one.
23:16
So my next question is going to be, are you a member of the
23:21
commercial media here to report about this event?
23:24
This is your chance to answer that question honestly and
23:28
display some sense of integrity. Is anybody here falling into
23:32
that category and going to put their hand up?
23:34
They are being asked by UK column.
23:36
OK, we'll have that as a no. And the reason I ask is because
23:40
last year, rather tantalisingly, we can't see it, but I can have
23:43
a grand reveal in just a second. There was a piece in the Times
23:48
immediately succeeding this event which described it as
23:53
Glastonbury for conspiracy theorists.
23:55
I'm not quite sure who comes out of that worse, but it it was
24:00
written by some, some young. Oh, hang on.
24:06
Oh, gosh, OK, there is a gremlin.
24:10
That's a that is a terrific pity.
24:11
But anyway, oh, I see some something totally different's
24:15
come so that's nice. But the the point of it was that
24:19
somebody came here last year to write about this event in a very
24:23
obviously defamatory. There we go, this man here.
24:26
Now you may have seen him last year, but you might not have
24:31
recognised him. We've had our in house artist
24:35
draw up an impression of what we think he looked like last year.
24:39
As I say, we can't be totally sure, but the point is that he
24:43
didn't have the backbone to just come and talk to people and tell
24:48
them that he was a Times journalist.
24:50
Instead, he he wanted to snipe from the sidelines.
24:55
And this is inconsistent with some of the messaging that comes
24:58
out from the mainstream. And I take you back to a that
25:02
you can't probably tell from the tone, but it is a, a very
25:05
cleverly multicultural photograph of a couple who are
25:09
having difficulty talking about what they're describing as
25:12
theories and how we should all really be friends.
25:14
And if that's the case, then why can't people come and talk
25:17
openly about the things that they do actually want to talk
25:20
about? And of course, it's a rhetorical
25:22
question because I know the answer.
25:24
And that is in order to be able to create division and suggest
25:27
that there are people out there who are deliberately trying to
25:30
damage society. Now, Brian's already referred to
25:34
the Soviet Union. I'm going to take you back 101
25:37
years to the Criminal Code of the then Soviet Union in 1924
25:41
and their efforts to crush dissent.
25:44
And the specific word used in the Criminal Code then was that
25:49
the term counter revolutionary is applied to any act committed
25:53
with the intention of overthrowing, undermining or
25:56
weakening the authority of the workers and peasants.
25:59
Government founded on the Constitution of the Russian
26:02
Socialist Federative Soviet Republic.
26:05
Well, where do we think Michael Gove went when he was redrawing
26:10
the new definition of extremism in 2024, exactly 100 years
26:14
later? Extremism is the promotion or
26:16
advancement of an ideology based on violence, hatred or
26:19
intolerance that aims to undermine, overturn or replace
26:23
the UK system of liberal parliamentary democracy and
26:26
democratic rights. OK, it's not word for word, but
26:29
that could be a transliteration issue from Russian.
26:32
So we can't be entirely sure, but the point is that here we
26:35
are again and in actual fact the there there is no concerted
26:40
effort by any media or government organisation to bring
26:43
people together. They instead absolutely want to
26:47
separate them. And yet here we have Dan Jarvis,
26:50
the man who brought in the Foreign Interference
26:52
Registration Scheme and is always banging the drum in his
26:55
role as Minister for National Security, to suggest that we are
26:59
at threat. But of course now as has been
27:02
brought out by both Brian and Mike, not from without, from
27:06
within, and I spoke about this last week, the national Security
27:11
strategy which has been produced alongside the SDR and it's
27:14
effectively the civvy version of it.
27:17
But in addition to all the things that it does mention, it
27:20
is very clear to make it the case that the extremist
27:24
ideologies are on the rise within this country.
27:27
And when we look at this plan for a whole nation approach to
27:31
national security and entering into a state of war, part of
27:35
that war is to be with these so called extremists who hold
27:39
conspiracy theories. So this is very, very obvious.
27:43
Now tomorrow in Parliament, or rather as the news goes out
27:48
today, Monday, let's say, the Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper
27:51
will be laying before Parliament to draught prescription order
27:54
against Palestine action. And I just want to run quickly
27:58
through the consistency of this on a point of law and whether or
28:02
not Parliament or indeed the Home Office should be engaging
28:04
in such a thing. This relates to action taken at
28:08
Bryce Norton Airfield on the 20th of June where a couple of
28:12
aircraft had paint put into their engines and and therefore
28:15
that's been regarded by the Home Secretary as serious criminal
28:19
damage. Now we have to look at the
28:22
Terrorism Act 2000 to understand how any of this is able to make
28:25
sense and frequently it doesn't. And the reason for that is that
28:28
the language is sufficiently vague for anybody to manipulate
28:32
and wield it in a way that gives them the desired outcome.
28:36
So I would just remind you that Section 1, which defines
28:39
terrorism, speaks about actions or threats that are designed to
28:44
influence government brackets with an amendment from 2006
28:50
including international governmental organisations.
28:54
Interesting to change that language in 2006, but it goes on
28:59
to say, notably, that this may include intimidating the public
29:04
or a section of the public, something the government does on
29:07
a daily basis, so that mustn't be forgotten in it, however,
29:11
prescription happens under Section 3 of the Act and there
29:16
therefore are a number of criteria that have to be
29:18
satisfied. And just to articulate the point
29:20
about how legislation is corrupted, the clause that she's
29:25
aiming to use here is serious criminal damage.
29:29
Now you will have all seen many a video over the last five years
29:33
of somebody wearing high viz handcuffs and a walkie talkie
29:37
saying to somebody if you do that again I'll arrest you.
29:41
So has the threshold been met or not?
29:44
How many points of law can you see that, say, at the sixth time
29:50
of serious criminal damage, the offence is complete?
29:55
That does not exist. So this is entirely a political
29:59
decision and that could not be made more clear by the campaign
30:03
that Palestine Action have been running over the last four
30:07
years, which I think I will be able to display for you if I
30:13
press once more. Maybe not.
30:16
But anyway, I think in your mind's eye, yes, here we go.
30:18
So, so this is the the front page of their website and I'm
30:21
not going to dwell on exactly what it is they've done.
30:23
It's not it's not really entirely central to what I'm
30:25
talking about. What I'm really talking about is
30:26
the way in which the government is able to seize upon an action
30:30
like this and do what it wants to do regardless of the
30:34
circumstances that are in fact laid before them.
30:38
Now the reason this is so relevant is that in the most
30:42
recent edition of Soldier magazine, the laws of armed
30:44
conflict are are called into question.
30:47
And so if Palestine action can't call the laws of armed conflict
30:51
into question and yet the British Army can, what the heck
30:55
is going on? And here we talk about AI
30:57
breaking the law. This is with specific reference
30:59
to what are called suicide drones, which are non manned
31:04
vehicles that make their own minds up about who they kill.
31:08
Now, there's a very, very obvious problem with that, which
31:11
I'm sure I don't need to articulate for anybody here in
31:13
this tent or at home, wherever they may be in the world.
31:17
The point is that this is a complete discrepancy and an
31:20
inconsistency where the official state sanctioned body of the
31:25
military is allowed to talk about this, but nobody else is,
31:28
and that plainly is wrong. Specifically, we're talking
31:31
about the Red Dragon capability produced by Aerovironment of the
31:34
United States, which as I say, is an autonomous suicide drone
31:39
capability. It should be very, very clear to
31:42
anybody hearing those words that that is not something that can
31:45
possibly conform to international humanitarian law
31:48
or the laws of armed conflict. Now, I will just wrap up when
31:53
the slide changes, which might do some.
31:58
Oh yeah, here we go. So, so, so just to right.
32:01
OK, we've skipped on but but you know who these goons are?
32:05
Alastair Campbell and Rory Stewart, formerly Secret
32:09
Intelligence Service and an MP. But just to highlight how this
32:14
legislation is so terribly badly and most obviously manipulated
32:19
for political gain, we've talked about the prescription of
32:23
Palestine action. Now, if once a group is
32:26
prescribed, to support that group in any way or act for the
32:30
benefit of that group is to commit an offence under the
32:34
Terrorism Act 2000. That's very, very clear and
32:37
Section 12 says very plainly a person commits an offence if he
32:41
arranges, manages or assists in arranging or managing a meeting
32:45
which he knows is to support a prescribed organisation.
32:49
Now the photograph, which I will OK, which Mike is just going to
32:55
put on screen now, is initially a sort of montage put out by
33:00
Alastair Campbell, but the centrepiece is Al Jilani as he
33:04
was Al Sharadi. Well, now let's say President of
33:08
Syria talking to Alastair Campbell and Rory Stewart for
33:12
their podcast, which was very, very widely promoted to a large
33:15
audience and quite clearly does promote A prescribed
33:20
organisation, Al Qaeda when 1 looks at where Gilani has come
33:25
from and indeed has been described until very, very
33:28
recently. So it's quite clearly a
33:30
contravention of the act, of Section 12 of the ACT.
33:34
So I just wanted to make the point that there is a direct
33:39
thread that runs from a gathering at an event like this
33:42
where you can be described as a conspiracy theorist, which in
33:47
one small step turns you into an extremist, which turns you into
33:52
a terrorist. And then you are subject to the
33:55
provisions of the Terrorism Act 2000.
33:58
If the Home Secretary decides that that fits the particular
34:01
agenda and the particular route that she wants to go down.
34:04
My question, I suppose to conclude by is we'll ask
34:08
Alastair Campbell and Rory Stewart interview Palestine
34:11
Action once they've been prescribed.
34:13
And if they do, what will happen?
34:16
Thank you very much. How you guys doing?
34:19
Good. I just to add to what Charles
34:22
said, very important conversation.
34:24
A prescribed terrorist organisation.
34:26
There is no objective definition for terrorism.
34:29
The designation is a political designation because not all
34:32
countries around the world are designating this group, that
34:36
group, that group as terrorists. But whoever is against US or
34:40
British or NATO foreign policy, it will be prescribed as a
34:44
terrorist organisation. Or whoever is opposing Israel in
34:49
the Middle East will be proscribed as a terrorist
34:51
organisation. Any National Liberation movement
34:54
that opposes the US or its allies will be proscribed as a
34:58
terrorist organisation. That's the rules of the game.
35:01
So it's not a level playing field.
35:04
Just want to put that up another another group that's been talked
35:09
about that should be proscribed. Very dangerous group.
35:13
You guys should be aware of this.
35:15
A hip hop band from Northern Ireland called Kneecap.
35:20
They're talking, they said the righteous indignation about this
35:24
band, the how dare they, how dare they shout Free Palestine
35:30
at their concerts. And you know what?
35:33
The BBC really stuck their foot in it.
35:36
They decided they're not going to cover Kneecap's performance
35:39
at Glastonbury. And what happens when you do
35:42
that, when you censor an artist, it just blows up to galactic
35:47
levels. And that's what happened.
35:49
First it was Sharon Osbourne, then it's the BBC and Kneecap
35:53
just gets more and more popular. The gigs are getting sold out
35:57
and the minute they're announced and getting cancelled and sold
36:00
out and cancelled. And so you think about this,
36:03
it's incredible. And other artists at Glastonbury
36:06
this year stepped up when they heard that kneecap wasn't going
36:10
to be allowed to be broadcast. They all did their own free
36:14
Palestine or protest and support.
36:21
And our politicians are horrified they have taken to
36:26
social media. We condemn this extremism and
36:30
hateful calls for the ethnic cleansing of Israelis and
36:34
etcetera. I mean, the irony of it is just
36:37
dripping and, and a level that you can't possibly imagine.
36:40
But here's the point, OK, here's the point.
36:43
Why? They're horrified that the
36:45
establishments horrified, the music industry's horrified.
36:49
They've tried to cancel these these types of artists and they
36:52
have been successful at doing that for the last couple of
36:55
decades. They're horrified that the
36:58
artists are starting to do what artists were meant to do, which
37:03
is to reflect what's going on in society, in the world, The
37:08
corporate structure, the music industry in collusion with
37:12
corporations, broadcasters, media, government, They've all
37:15
been successful in turning the so called music industry into a
37:20
basically a corporate conveyor belt of sort of low grade
37:23
disposable commodity products or music they call it.
37:28
So now they're freaking out. They're freaking out because
37:32
some artist is actually doing that, you know, and Nina Simone,
37:35
Nina Simone, a great, great artist, great singer, a legend.
37:39
She, she, she wrote the first protest song.
37:42
It was called Mississippi. Goddamn.
37:44
That was the first quote, viral protest song.
37:48
And a lot was going on in America at the time of the civil
37:51
rights movement, the Vietnam War, lots of things post World
37:56
War 2. You know, America was in serious
37:59
tumultuous times back then socially and economically and
38:03
and that that led that paved the way for Bob Dylan and all these
38:06
other sort of artist, Crosby Stills and Nash, conscious arts,
38:10
Buffalo Springfield, Woodstock, etcetera, etcetera.
38:14
And she said that is the job of the artist.
38:17
I saw an old interview of hers. I posted it on my ex account
38:21
said that's the job of artist. Artist must reflect what's
38:25
happening at that moment in the world.
38:29
That's what they're there for. But they've managed to crush
38:32
that. And then along comes these these
38:35
kind of guys with hoodies and, you know, wearing, you know,
38:38
knitted mask and whatnot and basically standing up for what
38:43
what the International Courts of Justice and what the
38:46
International Criminal Court and most UN member states are
38:50
calling a genocide right now in Gaza.
38:54
OK. They're all they're doing is
38:56
these are people that are working class kids standing up.
38:59
And guess what? The response is amazing.
39:02
The people are are responding to it because that's what the
39:05
people, that's what the people feel.
39:07
That's what the people believe. And the establishment doesn't
39:10
know what to do. They're at their wits end.
39:12
The whole facade is falling to pieces.
39:16
And so I think, I think this is a real important moment right
39:19
now. We're starting to see the
39:20
disintegration of this control structure, of this thought
39:25
structure. And I'll leave you, I'll leave
39:28
you with this. I was in the barbershop, old
39:32
barbershop in Plymouth, I think it was on Thursday, just a few
39:36
days ago. And you know, as you do, all the
39:39
guys are waiting on the sofa. There's three chairs running.
39:42
There's about 15 people in there and they always have Radio 1
39:46
blaring. You notice that always.
39:48
And at the salon as well and radio one's blaring and you
39:51
heard some music, it was some song or whatever.
39:53
And then they do these PS as these sort of vapid, kind of
39:58
anodyne PS as in the middle. And he said what would it was a
40:01
female voice, that really good RPBBC, female, middle aged,
40:07
trusted voice. He said.
40:09
What would it be like if conflict came to British shores?
40:13
It's not something people think about much.
40:15
Are you prepared? We'll be discussing this on
40:18
Radio 1, whatever the show was this afternoon.
40:21
What? When Britain, when war comes to
40:23
British shores. And Are you ready for that?
40:26
That's mainline BBC Radio. That's about as mainline as you
40:30
get, right? And I was just like, wow, wow,
40:34
we have arrived. Oceana is at war with East Asia.
40:38
Oceana has always been at war with East Asia, and I was just
40:42
that moment like who who wants to invade Britain?
40:46
It's is it the the French? Maybe I don't know.
40:53
Is it too? What is it?
40:54
The Dutch? Maybe, I don't know, but maybe
40:57
the Vikings, maybe it's the scant, the Norwegians don't
40:59
trust the Norwegians. We yeah, I'll wrap it up.
41:03
So so that that's something I think, you know, this is very
41:06
real. This is very real.
41:08
They're really going into hyperdrive on the psychological
41:11
operations. Thank you for that.
41:16
Yeah, we'll thank you. OK.
41:20
I will yield my time to the next speaker.
41:23
Thank you very much. Right.
41:32
I just wanted to finish off before we do take a couple of
41:35
questions. I just wanted to finish off with
41:37
a bit of good news, and that was somebody sent me that.
41:40
Well, Richard sent me this yesterday, an email saying that
41:45
he and some people had been out in Stroud yesterday and had in 3
41:50
1/4 hours distributed 400 light newspapers and that people were
41:53
accepting them with happily accepting them.
41:56
They weren't. OK.
42:05
OK. I've just been told that was
42:07
misinformation. In fact, they were in
42:10
Cheltenham, right? So, so, so, so Richard is from
42:15
Stroud, but he was in Cheltenham.
42:16
OK. So let's just clarify that.
42:17
Thank you. Thank you, Charles.
42:19
OK. So unlike others, we do correct
42:21
our mistakes. OK.
42:25
So we'll leave it there. Anybody got any questions?
42:30
No questions. What a good job we've done.
42:35
OK, lady there. Hello, yeah here we go.
42:41
Not so much a question, just some information share for
42:43
everybody. I've only just learnt this
42:45
recently. You can't if if you opt out for
42:48
organ donation on the government websites, you also have to
42:53
submit your driving licence back to the DVLA because you've got
42:57
code 115 on your driving licence and it means you're
43:01
automatically going to donate your organs anyway.
43:03
So you have to send it back to the DVLA with a letter stating
43:07
that you want to be removed from the organ donation system and
43:12
they'll send you a new one. Thank you.
43:19
Can can I just respond to that one to say thank you for for
43:23
telling us that a classic example of how devious the
43:28
government is, right. But you've picked it up and this
43:32
is where when the backlash starts from the ground up, can
43:36
we now get pick a Figure 10 million people sending their
43:40
driving licences back. If we can do this, the system
43:45
shudders because they can't introduce the Soviet, as we're
43:50
going to call it, unless each and everyone of you acquiesce to
43:55
that system. So brilliant research.
43:59
Let's start the wave. I will be sending my driving
44:02
licence back because apparently when I switch from, hate to
44:06
mention this, from 69 to 70, I could only hold my driving
44:11
licence for three years before having to reapply.
44:14
So the government decides when you get to 69, what they're
44:17
actually telling you is that you're no longer capable.
44:20
That's what's happening. OK.
44:23
Another question. Yes.
44:26
So all these people that are coming over the border with no
44:29
border control, a lot of people in the UK don't really realise
44:33
it. So as activists, I mean, is that
44:37
what would you suggest we can do to highlight that that our
44:40
country is being invaded, that the border control is not there?
44:44
Is it? As it should be.
44:46
Well, I'm going to disagree. The borders control is there as
44:50
they want it to be. And it's it, right?
44:53
We go back to Peter Sutherland, who was the UN ambassador for
44:57
mass migration. He's died a couple of years ago,
45:00
a few years ago, but he was on public record as saying we need
45:04
more mass migration to break down the homogeneity of the
45:08
nation state, right? So the victims are everybody.
45:12
The victims are the migrants who get uprooted in their own
45:15
country. And most of them do look for a
45:18
better life and then the trafficking during their
45:21
migration streams and then they come into this country and that
45:26
creates all sorts of problems. I'll make a comment with Patrick
45:30
as well. You may not know this, but if
45:34
you are travelling from Holyhead to Dublin, you are required to
45:39
bring a passport because often they'll have passport control at
45:43
Dublin Port. If you're travelling from Dublin
45:45
to Holyhead, there's no such thing right now.
45:48
The Common Travel Area is something that existed before
45:50
the EU and whatnot between Britain and Ireland means that
45:54
that we are supposed to have freedom of travel, freedom to
45:56
work in in each other's jurisdictions and so on.
45:58
But that only applies in One Direction.
46:01
Apparently that's related to the EU, so just wanted to mention
46:05
that. And I want to just remind people
46:08
on this immigration issue, the biggest immigration flows into
46:12
Europe from sub Saharan Africa, via Libya, from Central Asia,
46:18
via Afghanistan and Uzbekistan, via from Syria, via Lesbos in
46:24
Greece. These are the biggest flows of
46:27
migrants into Europe in the last I would say and Albania and
46:30
Kosovo after that little war in the Balkans in 1999.
46:35
All of those are NATO military interventions.
46:40
Those are all a direct result of the foreign policy of Britain
46:43
and the European States and America.
46:46
All of the migrant flows, all of them so and you know, you have
46:51
Afghans in your community. Well, the people who are
46:54
protesting, those are the same people are saying support our
46:56
troops fighting the Taliban, 25 years of occupation in
47:01
Afghanistan. You can't have it both ways, so
47:04
you have to understand where that comes from.
47:06
If no one talks about the connection between foreign
47:09
policy, NATO membership and migrant flows much, don't expect
47:14
Nigel Farage to ever bring that up.
47:17
But that's the real conversation, that's the adult
47:21
conversation. They're having a childish
47:23
conversation to manipulate people, to get people scared, to
47:27
pit people against each other by race, religion.
47:30
That's what's actually going on. So we have the power to to
47:39
pressure your government, but you're you have to ask the right
47:41
questions. You have to ask the right
47:44
questions. I've I've been successful in
47:46
putting that point out to some European governments.
47:50
OK, it's possible, but you have to work at it.
47:53
If you're asking the wrong questions, you're not going to
47:55
get the right answers. Thank you.
47:57
OK. I'm fine.
48:02
So can I, Can I just add to that?
48:05
At the end of the day, the people who are in this country
48:08
are here. We have to work together to deal
48:11
with the people who created the problem in the 1st place.
48:14
This is critical and truth and exposure of what they're
48:18
actually doing is a really powerful weapon.
48:21
Talking about rubber boats does not talk about the issue because
48:25
the bulk of the people are coming in through approved
48:28
legislation and that was deliberate.
48:31
So don't focus on the strangers, focus on the people who created
48:37
the problem in the 1st place because we need to stick
48:41
together. OK.
48:43
Thank you very much. Well, ladies and gentlemen, it's
48:47
so great to have people like this because that can speak
48:49
actual common sense, so. Let's give it up the UK.
48:53
Column.