Latest / UK Column Radio / UK Column News - 6th February 2026

Transcript

UK Column News - 6th February 2026 · UK Column Radio

0:08
Good afternoon, today is Friday the 6th of February 2026, just
0:13
after 1:00. Welcome to UK column News.
0:16
I'm your host Brian Gerrish, Delighted to have Patrick
0:19
Henningson with me in the studio.
0:21
Great to be with you, Brian. Momentous times, Patrick, and we
0:26
are delighted to also have Basil Valentine, journalist and
0:30
political analyst, with us as a guest today.
0:34
My goodness, things are moving. We may have blue skies and
0:38
sunshine in Plymouth, England, but storm clouds in the Middle
0:42
East, Patrick, which we'll be coming onto in in a in a couple
0:46
of moments. But for today's news, really
0:49
packed. Patrick's going to have a look
0:51
at that latest with Iran. He's also going to be having a
0:55
look at the breakdown in Russian, Russia, US nuclear
0:59
treaties. We're going to be digging into
1:02
Epstein revelations, having a look at that famous bad not clip
1:07
where she's challenging a very weak stormer about what he knew.
1:11
We're going to be looking at Christopher Steele's comments to
1:14
do with Epstein and what's revealed in those comments,
1:17
including us bringing back a little bit of UK column news
1:21
from 2018 breakdown in UK security vetting system, which
1:28
is not being talked about at all.
1:30
That UK Collins going to bring that to the surface.
1:33
And we're also going to be having a look at the power of
1:35
Israel as it lobbies through government and civil service.
1:41
And finally, Pat, you're going to end on the Filton 6 and
1:45
what's been happening now with jury trolls.
1:47
Very clear, jury trolls are under threat.
1:50
An incredible result and we'll talk about that in the
1:53
second-half of the program. But let's just go to the the
1:57
major item here. We'll bring this up on screen.
2:01
Donald Trump is threatening to wage war against Iran,
2:06
threatening to attack Iran. We're going to call this Trump's
2:09
latest war. We hope that that's not the
2:11
case. But, Brian, all the heavy assets
2:14
are being moved. More military equipment has been
2:16
moved into the Persian Gulf, into the Middle East.
2:19
One can only draw the conclusion here that the United States is
2:22
preparing for an unprovoked unilateral strike on Iran.
2:27
That's the only conclusion. No doubt about it.
2:31
And the sheer scale and size of these assets and the cost and
2:35
that they're not going to be moved for nothing.
2:37
So yeah, I think it's looking very dangerous.
2:39
We have another telltale sign here.
2:41
I'm going to go to this is the virtual embassy of Iran.
2:43
Obviously the US doesn't have a diplomatic presence in Tehran.
2:48
And the security alert was posted yesterday evening.
2:52
And this is what they're saying right here.
2:54
Increased measures, Rd. closures, public transportation
2:57
disruptions. Leave Iran now if you are AUS
3:00
citizen, have a plan for departing, flight cancellations,
3:04
disruptions, planes grounded. If you cannot leave, find a
3:08
secure location within your residence or safe building.
3:12
Have a supply of food, water, medications and other central
3:17
items. Avoid demonstrations, keep a low
3:19
profile. Stay away of your surrounds.
3:21
I mean, Brian, I really, I don't know what to say at this point.
3:25
I've never seen this telegraphing of a war without
3:29
any actual reason for going to war.
3:31
No clear statement. Yeah, nothing.
3:34
It's. To to me, this all fits the
3:36
pattern of it's a psychological war in the first instance
3:40
against people living in the West.
3:42
And of course the fact that this all gets pumped out on X very
3:47
often as opposed to coming through proper channels.
3:50
This is all ramping up the fear so that people's minds can't
3:54
really cope with what's happening.
3:56
Is it? Is the war coming, war with
3:58
Iran? Is that the issue or is it
4:00
Epstein? This is just going to become a a
4:02
jumble in their head. That's a legitimate speculation
4:06
as well, which we'll talk about in a minute.
4:08
But this could be leverage for negotiations.
4:11
But the last two rounds of negotiations the United States
4:14
have had have featured a sneak attack either by the US or by
4:18
the Israelis. So I really wouldn't trust any
4:21
negotiations. I'm sure the Iranians aren't
4:23
that naive at this point here. But this is what the influencers
4:27
on Twitter. This is Mark Levine who's on Fox
4:30
News. It's time to attack Iran.
4:33
If we can't get our military assets fully in place in a 5
4:36
weeks to attack Iran, a regime with virtually no Navy or Air
4:40
Force, or a massive and massive internal unrest, then we have a
4:44
serious problem. After all, we're not talking
4:47
about China or Russia. I mean, the war mongering,
4:50
Brian, is completely off the charts.
4:52
And why this is disturbing, ladies and gentlemen, is because
4:55
of this. And this is very much related.
4:58
And we're taking an article from RT.
4:59
So privilege for UK viewers. We get to show you some a
5:03
Russian website here which is banned in the UK.
5:06
Trump's commenting on the fact that the New START treaty
5:09
expired yesterday. Did you know about that?
5:11
The last remaining nuclear non proliferation arms control
5:15
treaty between the United States and Russia expired yesterday.
5:18
Donald Trump did not send through a a proposal for an
5:22
extension after repeated requests by Moscow.
5:26
But here's what Trump has to say.
5:27
In typical Trump fashion, he dismissed the New START nuclear
5:31
reduction treaty between Moscow and Washington as a very badly
5:36
negotiated deal and calling instead for US nuclear experts
5:41
to begin work on a completely new agreement.
5:44
Obviously, Trump says we'll work on that and then we'll give it
5:46
to the Russians. And if they don't like it, we
5:48
may threaten them. I don't know.
5:51
But this is how diplomacy is going on this from this
5:56
presidency here. And here's here's what he says
5:59
here. He's basically saying this was a
6:01
terrible deal, a badly negotiated deal by the United
6:04
States that aside from everything else is being grossly
6:07
violated. That's not technically true.
6:10
The United States have have allowed this agreement to to
6:14
lapse. That's absolutely correct that
6:16
America has not responded to the point the Russians have given up
6:20
and it's it's lapse. So, and he's not only that, he's
6:23
throwing subsequent US presidents under the bus,
6:27
including Ronald Reagan and others.
6:30
So, I mean, it's just, it's just disrespectful.
6:34
And I, I really have lost any hope and quite frankly, any
6:39
respect for what this president's world views are, if
6:43
he has any. It's hard to discern what his
6:46
views are. But this is the concern, folks.
6:48
All, all, all the risk levels are right through the roof at
6:52
the moment, Brian. We have flashpoints. the United
6:55
States are threatening Iran. We've got a serious situation in
6:58
Ukraine. And we also have the situation
7:01
in in Gaza, Israel, as well as Taiwan.
7:04
We haven't got there yet. But I mean, now people are
7:07
talking about tactical nukes, they're talking about strategic
7:10
nukes, as if you can win that type of a war.
7:14
Absolutely. But as the pressure rises of
7:16
regimes, governments become ever more unpredictable.
7:21
What they're going to do when they're under real stress, it's
7:24
a very dangerous time being provoked.
7:26
And from the US point of view, it's kind of about this.
7:29
We are literally sending our military to war for our ally,
7:33
the state of Israel. Is that is it worth it?
7:36
Is World War 3 worth it? I don't know.
7:39
I don't think so. I think many would agree with
7:40
me. And Donald Trump's poll numbers,
7:42
Brian, are just cratering right now.
7:45
And maybe he thinks that this is going to improve his pole
7:48
position and I don't. Think he cares, Patrick, but
7:51
we'll save that some discussion, guys.
7:53
Call him extra. Yes, So this is the big story.
7:58
This Brian, of course is just saturating the headlines on both
8:02
sides of the Atlantic, the Epstein e-mail dump here.
8:06
And I just want to quickly, well, I want to get Basil's
8:09
comment and yours as well, Brian here.
8:11
But there's been some revelations here, obviously,
8:13
these high profile people that denied having any relationship
8:17
with Epstein or, you know, going to the island.
8:19
Well, Elon Musk was begging to go to the island here.
8:22
What days are the wildest parties, Jeff?
8:24
He says in this e-mail and he's talking about Trump having
8:27
parties at Mar a Lago called Calendar Girl parties where
8:31
Jeffrey Epstein would bring children and Trump would auction
8:34
them off. Now, this has been corroborated
8:36
by different people, OK, that these types of parties exist.
8:40
That's just one example that's in Politico.
8:43
And then there's this one here. This is a series which was done
8:46
by Freddie Ponton. It's a 21st century.
8:48
You are Bill Gates and Epstein. Epstein was right in the middle
8:52
of the pandemic, Brian. Surprise, surprise vaccine slush
8:55
funds with Bill Gates. Walking in and out of Parliament
8:59
here in the UK. So it's completely thick like
9:02
thieves, these people here. And here we go, Tom, Barack,
9:06
this is Trump's main foreign policy piece in the Middle East.
9:10
544 mentions he was one of Epstein's fixers.
9:15
He's a billionaire financier. He's running foreign policy in
9:18
Israel and Lebanon for Trump with Ehud Barack in the frame as
9:23
well. And of course Howard Lutnick.
9:25
This is Trump's quote handler in the White House, the commerce
9:28
secretary, former head of Cantor Fitzgerald Bank here.
9:33
He denied knowing Epstein Bryant but that the emails say
9:36
something different. Family holiday on the Saint
9:39
James Island with the wife and the kids.
9:41
I can't imagine a wholesome family retreat that could top
9:45
that in the Caribbean. But there we.
9:48
Where he's apologized and there'll be so many of them.
9:50
I think it's the family and all the.
9:54
Connections are unbelievable, including Sarah Ferguson, former
9:57
Duchess of York, Ghilane Maxwell and a whole host of socialites
10:02
here. So we've done deep dives and
10:05
great work here by this journalist Freddie Ponton on
10:08
this, these stories. So go to 21st century.
10:10
The links are in the show notes. Those are all deep dives into
10:14
the Epstein emails here. But over to the UK, Brian and
10:18
all. I'll tee this off for you.
10:20
This is what the European and the UK media we're running with
10:23
this week. Nothing about Israel, it's all
10:25
about Russia. Epstein might have been working
10:29
for the KGB and this was all a Russian ruse, according to
10:33
Andrew Marr at LBC. And the Telegraph of course were
10:37
running hard on this and Velt in Germany.
10:40
As well, but Nigel Farage included.
10:43
No mention of Israel in any of these.
10:45
Reports just completely. Plus we get Basil just to
10:49
comment on this. What Basil?
10:51
What's your take on the emerging stories over Epstein at the
10:55
moment? Good day, gentlemen.
10:58
Well, the first thing to note is, given that we know that the
11:02
UK national security state is the prime driver of the enmity
11:06
towards Russia, then Andrew Marr coming out and with this
11:10
nonsense about Epstein being a Russian spy simply flags to me
11:15
that he himself is very likely an asset of the UK national
11:18
security state, as are the newspapers that have been
11:21
running with it. That's all that does really, not
11:23
to be taken seriously or given any credence at all.
11:26
As for Donald Trump, he's asking everybody to move on.
11:30
I'm not surprised really. The Calendar Girls revelation
11:33
alone 30-40 years ago would have been enough to force him to
11:37
resign. You know, Mandelson's
11:40
involvement with Epstein was no deeper than Donald Trump's.
11:44
Their relationship goes all the way back to New York real estate
11:47
in the late 1980s. Trump recommending Epstein as a
11:51
great guy, so I'm surprised there isn't more pressure on him
11:56
in the US. Here in the UK, of course,
12:00
Mandelson's already gone and it looks like either Starmer or
12:05
McSweeney are going to have to follow him out of the door at
12:09
Labour. MPs now rounding on the Prime
12:11
Minister, saying it's not a question of if but when he too
12:16
is forced to resign for catastrophic lapse of judgement.
12:20
Thank, thank you, Basil. And we're going to go deeper
12:22
into that Starmer and Morgan McSweeney scandal with Epstein
12:27
in just a few moments, Brian. But over to to the UK on this
12:30
story. Yeah, well, let's just a little
12:32
reminder of Badenoop from the Conservatives challenging Keir
12:36
Starmer in parliament a couple of days ago.
12:40
But let's listen to what she said, and let's listen to
12:43
Starmer's answer again. Mr. Speaker, I asked the Prime
12:48
Minister a very specific question.
12:51
Did he know that Mandelson had continued his friendship with
12:55
Epstein after the conviction? He says if he knew then what he
12:59
knows now. But he did know.
13:01
In January 2024, a journalist from the Financial Times
13:05
informed the Prime Minister that Mandelson had stayed in
13:09
Epstein's house even after that conviction for child
13:13
prostitution. So did the Prime Minister
13:16
conveniently forget this fact, or did he decide it was a risk
13:21
worth taking? Prime.
13:23
Minister. Mr. Speaker, as the House would
13:27
expect, we went through a process.
13:30
There was, there was a there was a due diligence exercise and
13:36
then there was security vetting by the security services.
13:43
What was not known was the depth, the sheer depth and
13:47
extent of the relationship. He lied about that to everyone
13:53
for years. A new information was published
13:56
in September showing the relationship was materially
14:00
different to what we've been led to believe.
14:04
When the new information came to light, I sacked him.
14:07
But we did go through a due diligence exercise.
14:10
The points, the points that are being put to me, were dealt with
14:14
within that exercise in response to the Humble Address this
14:19
afternoon. I intend to make sure that all
14:22
of the material is published. Mr., Mr. Mr. Speaker, the only
14:30
exemptions, our national security, prejudice national
14:34
security. Thy my first duty is obviously
14:37
to keep this country safe. And when we drafted humble
14:40
addresses, we always put an exemption for national security,
14:43
but also anything will prejudice international relations.
14:47
Mr. Speaker, you in the House will appreciate that in the
14:51
course of discussions, country to country, there are very
14:53
sensitive issues of security, intelligence and trade which
14:59
cannot be disclosed without compromising the relationship
15:02
between the two countries or a third country.
15:05
Mr. Speaker, so I can be totally open with the House.
15:11
I, I should also disclose that the Metropolitan Police have
15:15
been in touch with my office this morning to raise issues
15:20
about anything that would prejudice their investigations.
15:23
We're in discussion with them about that and I hope to be able
15:26
to update the house. But I do think I should make
15:28
that clear to the House at this point, because those discussions
15:31
are ongoing. Well, there we are, Mandelson
15:37
lied. We didn't know.
15:38
We had a process, but that didn't work.
15:41
But I'm looking after the national security of the country
15:44
and so I'm not going to be able to tell you much because it's
15:47
all to do with keeping you safe. And I can't tell you much anyway
15:51
because we've now got the police involved, presumably the very
15:54
police force that failed to investigate all of the Epstein
15:58
documents in the 1st place from this side of the pond, from the
16:02
UK. So that was setting the scene.
16:06
So he didn't know, nobody knew. Let's have a look at what
16:09
Christopher Steele had to say with LBC News.
16:13
Now this man's got a checkered background, but nevertheless he
16:16
was there in the job as an MI 6 spook and let's have a look at
16:20
some of the things he said. My sources in America tell me
16:23
that the American government, the American intelligence
16:26
services assessment was that Epstein was recruited as early
16:30
as the 1970s when he was a young man by Russian organised crime
16:35
figures in New York, and that his information was being used,
16:39
his operation techniques were being used.
16:41
From that point onwards, nobody knew, but we did know it was
16:45
going on since the 1970s. And Christopher Steele
16:49
continued. One of the interesting aspects
16:52
of this is that if the American security services knew that this
16:56
was initially a Russian operation, was a continuing
17:00
Russian operation over the years, why did they let it run
17:03
so long? I find this mysterious.
17:06
I think other intelligence services were also involved.
17:09
Israelis almost certainly. Patrick.
17:12
Oh my goodness, even Christopher Steele has been forced to admit
17:17
there's an Israeli hand in this whole saga.
17:20
A slight turn of phrase there, if you noticed, Brian, when you
17:23
when you talk about New York and Russian organized crime, you're
17:26
talking about Jewish organized crime, Russian Jewish organized
17:31
crime as well. Christopher Steele conveniently
17:34
left that very key detail out of there and it has a massive
17:37
overlap with Israel and Israeli interests and Israeli organized
17:42
crime as well. Just saying, Chris, you've left
17:46
out a little key detail there. In those quotes, Patrick, to be
17:49
precise, those are our quotes from what he said.
17:52
He had more to say, but we've taken that, but absolutely take
17:55
that point. Now he went on to talk about
17:58
compromat, compromising material.
18:00
So let's put this on screen hopefully.
18:03
Where is it? There we are.
18:04
The value of the compromat that was being gathered must have
18:08
been so great that it was attractive to more than just
18:12
Russian intelligence services. So there is he he's back on the
18:16
scheme that the the the line that it was the Russians,
18:20
although he has mentioned Israel in the background and this is
18:25
the bit where it now starts to get interesting because he said
18:28
with regard to compromat, I think it's quite likely he's
18:34
sorry he thinks that the kompromat is quite likely,
18:37
although he suspects that some of these files have been
18:40
destroyed. So we should be asking who
18:42
authorised the destruction of files showing kompromat on top
18:47
level Western British politicians and others.
18:50
What were our special intelligence services MI5MI6
18:55
What have they been doing since the 1970s?
18:58
Well, apparently they didn't know.
19:00
And if we bring Mr. Steele back on screen again and pop this
19:05
one, he, he's saying very strongly that he would argue
19:09
that this goes back to the 1970s.
19:13
And of course, we'll remind the audience that Keir Starmer told
19:16
Parliament that nobody really knew.
19:19
Now, let's put some of this into a deeper context and we go back
19:22
to AUK column news from 2018 where Mike Robinson was talking
19:29
to Alex Thompson himself, formerly of GCHQ, about
19:34
Christopher Steele and this Christopher Steele saga.
19:38
Let's have a look at this news clip.
19:42
This is the Washington Post and the hero is hero or hard gun.
19:45
This is from a couple of days ago how a British former spy
19:48
became a flashpoint in the Russia investigation.
19:51
This is over Russiagate in the United States and Christopher
19:55
Steele on screen there. Now I kept this back for the
19:59
next time Alex was on, but basically this this article is
20:06
suggesting is demonstrating links between Christopher Steele
20:11
and. Richard Dearlove, which really I
20:15
thought Alex was, was a this is something that I haven't heard
20:19
in in discussion of Russia gate before that in fact, Steele was
20:22
working with with other people, including his former boss at MI
20:27
6. No longer at MI 6 himself, of
20:30
course, but this seems to imply a much greater British interest
20:36
in undermining Trump than we were otherwise aware of.
20:42
And then the question has to be who did interfere, if anybody,
20:47
in the in the 2016 general election in the United States
20:51
wasn't the Russians, or in fact wasn't the British?
20:55
I don't know if you have any thoughts on this.
20:58
Well, just to keep it brief, Mike, I would say that the long
21:01
term people analysing this in the States, like Lyndon Larouche
21:04
and his organization have been vindicated Here.
21:07
The Brits are the evil geniuses. The duo who talk as Able Danger,
21:12
David Hawkins and Field McConnell have been vindicated.
21:16
Their analysis is exactly the same and has now been
21:18
mainstreamed by Lionel Nation and American intelligence media,
21:22
reaching hundreds of thousands at a time, if not millions.
21:25
America's waking up to this. We've been in this game since
21:28
the 16th century. We, together with the powers
21:31
that be in Rome at that time, basically planned the creation
21:33
of America, and we were not. We were determined not to let it
21:36
go over the trifling matter of a Revolutionary War.
21:40
Steele, I can now see his whole command chain involved.
21:44
The one man immediately above him I'm not allowed to name
21:46
because he hasn't been avowed publicly.
21:49
And not that I've seen anyway, but Steele, boss of boss was
21:52
Nigel Inkster and the boss of that was Sir Richard Dearlove.
21:56
So in the mid 2000s, ten years ago or 12 years ago, that entire
22:00
command chain from C, the head of the code name for the head of
22:03
MI 6, right down to Steele was involved in touting the idea of
22:08
the Russian threat and of course the Iraqi threat to the
22:11
Americans. We took or we, I say we, a
22:13
clique at MI Six took the lead in that.
22:16
And don't think that it's MI 6 institutionally that's to blame
22:18
because these were not popular officers within MI 6 at the
22:20
time. I can tell you that this was a
22:23
small clique that basically suborns and and subverted the
22:27
constitution of both Britain and America.
22:30
They've now gone their various ways.
22:31
Inkster is doing their various things like trying to start wars
22:34
in Russia and North Korea, his old trade and trying to get into
22:38
parliament to do that. Now Dearlove is obviously
22:41
touting himself as an anti Trump Steel has gone to ground because
22:45
there's there's possibly threats to his life and he may find
22:47
himself appearing before a grand jury in the US or even worse.
22:51
It doesn't look good and the Russians have got very little
22:54
indeed to do with this. So sorry, just Alex, just one
22:57
final point, just going back to this article for a second.
23:00
It says that Dear Love said that he advised Steele and Steele's
23:04
colleague Burroughs to work discreetly with a top British
23:08
government official on the end at this point to pass along
23:11
information to the FBI. So this seems to be a bit more
23:16
than people working independently of their
23:19
organizations if they're actually involving allegedly top
23:23
British government officials in this.
23:27
Yes, this is coordinated, and the only place it can be
23:29
coordinated is #70 Whitehall, the headquarters of the Cabinet
23:33
Office. That's always been where the
23:34
deepest actors have been. Again, the not the entire
23:37
Cabinet Office assessment staff. They're a very upright body,
23:40
certainly where in my time when I was dealing with them on a
23:43
monthly basis, if not weekly. But that's where the people who
23:46
control both both number 10s of the Prime Minister's Department
23:49
and the Foreign Office and the MI 6 reside Cabinet Office, and
23:52
probably someone very senior there would be the unnamed
23:54
senior official who would talk to the Department of Justice.
23:59
So interesting Alex's take at the time.
24:02
Not the Russians, but we've got Britain in here.
24:05
We definitely know we've got Israeli interests.
24:08
It's a mucky scene. I'm just guessing, could, could
24:11
that person have been marked said?
24:13
Well, I don't know, I'm just a wild guess.
24:15
Just a wild. Guess one of many potential
24:17
candidates indeed of there, but yeah.
24:21
Right, OK, so I'm going to follow this up with who else has
24:24
been blaming Putin despite this sort of analysis at the
24:27
background. In the background we've just
24:29
said, well, none other than Nigel Farage.
24:31
And I've taken a little clip that somebody kindly sent into
24:35
the UK column. So let's have a listen to
24:37
Nigel's view. This is a potential breach of
24:43
the Official Secrets Act. It involves the Royal family, it
24:47
involves senior members of government and who knows behind
24:52
it all. Maybe even Epstein could have
24:55
been working for the Putin regime.
24:58
I believe that this is bigger than perfumer.
25:03
Bigger than Perfumo? Well, I think he's right.
25:05
But of course the Perfumo case itself, exceptionally dirty and
25:10
innocent people were absolutely destroyed in order to protect
25:14
the British state from those accusations of good time girls.
25:18
But let's follow through on the subject of compromising
25:21
material, which is what Epstein would be doing.
25:24
He'd be sucking senior politicians, very powerful
25:27
politicians and others into a web where they could be filmed,
25:31
watched and and then blackmail through compromising material.
25:36
And people who think this can't happen, let's listen.
25:39
Well, let's first of all have a look at this gentleman.
25:41
He was the Tory whip way back in the 70s.
25:46
This is Tim Fortescue and he's describing within the
25:50
Conservative Party how they obtain compromising material
25:55
compromise on on MPs in order to blackmail and pressure
26:00
pressurise MPs into following party orders, particularly on
26:05
voting, but also other matters. Now this is ABBC clip.
26:09
So the BBC in putting this clip out when it did, was clearly
26:14
acknowledging the use of blackmail around small boys
26:19
within Westminster and the Conservative Party.
26:22
Let's listen to the clip. Anyone with any sense who was in
26:26
trouble would come to the whips and and tell them the truth and
26:30
say now this, I'm in a jam, can you help?
26:33
It might be dead. It might be scandal involving
26:39
small boys or any kind of scandal which a member seemed
26:47
likely to be mixed up in. They'd come and ask if we could
26:50
help and if we could, we did. And we would do everything we
26:54
can because we would store up brownie points.
27:01
If, I mean, that sounds a pretty, pretty nasty reason, but
27:05
it's one of the reasons is if we can get a chap out of trouble,
27:08
then you'll you'll do as we ask forever more.
27:13
So I'll add to that clip that what Tim Fortescue had to say
27:17
happening inside the Conservative, Conservative Party
27:20
absolutely being done by whips inside the Labour Party, the use
27:24
of compromising material to blackmail people into other
27:29
acts, including unlawful acts. It's in our faces.
27:34
So we shouldn't be surprised that Epstein has been recruited
27:37
to do this on a truly massive scale.
27:40
And, Brian, what we're going to do right now is put some meat on
27:43
the bones of what you have just built for us with those historic
27:48
examples politically here. Let's go back to the present day
27:51
now, bring things back to the present.
27:54
And let's put the Mandelson scandal really into the frame
27:57
here. And I just want to give a shout
27:59
out. This is absolutely stunning
28:00
journalism by Jodie McIntyre for the Electronic Intifada here.
28:05
Morgan McSweeney. This is the chief of staff of
28:08
Keir Starmer, the man running Britain and his ties to Israel.
28:12
And here's the bottom line. And we'll get into the details
28:15
of this which are quite uncomfortable.
28:18
I'll just warn you in advance. It is impossible to understand
28:21
the slavish pro Israel stance adopted by Keir Starmer and this
28:25
Labour Party in recent years without understanding Morgan
28:29
McSweeney here. And this is also the thrust of
28:33
where we're taking this. The mainstream media's focus has
28:35
been on how he illegally hit donations to Labor together.
28:39
This was the big bundling fundraising organization that
28:42
helped Keir Starmer achieve his leadership victory, Brian,
28:47
earlier. And while he was director of
28:49
that organization, the one that was credited with propelling
28:53
Keir Starmer into leadership of the party.
28:55
So he is really the architect of Starmer and the new new Labor,
29:00
as some people like to call it here.
29:02
Yet most journalists have missed altogether, either deliberately
29:05
or negligently, a key thread that McSweeney story, the
29:09
historic relationship with pro Israeli lobbyists, politicians
29:13
and financers here. And this is all outlined in this
29:16
book by Paul Holden, which is selling like hotcakes at the
29:19
moment because of this scandal. It's called fraud.
29:22
And this book, Brian, has already led to two resignations
29:25
already. And it could be, but maybe lead
29:29
to the resignation of the Prime Minister.
29:30
We don't know. But the details in here are
29:32
absolutely stunning. It's gotten quite stark reviews
29:35
from some top journalists as well.
29:38
And it'll probably be banned by Amazon in two course here.
29:43
Yeah, but let's, let's take a look at this here.
29:46
And so according to the Jerusalem Post, Mick Sweeney was
29:49
indoctrinated into the radical Zionist ideology while living on
29:53
a kibbutz as a teenager in occupied Palestine.
29:57
This would have been in the early 90s, where he became
30:00
closely acquainted with Shomer Hotzar, a Zionist settler
30:05
organization founded in Austria, Hungary in 1913.
30:10
This is the extreme of the extremists, by the way, and.
30:13
This is the reframing of people so that they can be placed back
30:17
in their own countries to do the bidding of a foreign power, in
30:20
this case Israel. Certainly this what it looks
30:23
like here. So it it really answers a lot of
30:25
questions as to the sort of unflinching loyalty and so forth
30:29
here. But take a look at this now.
30:30
Let's put the characters together.
30:33
Here is Keir Starmer, Morgan McSweeney.
30:36
And right now we're looking at. While researching this article,
30:39
a former Labor volunteer, Simon contacted the author Jodie
30:43
McIntyre. Brian listened closely and spoke
30:47
of conditions of anonymity. Simon claimed that McSweeney was
30:49
deliberately inserted into the party and later became Keir
30:53
Starmer's handler, presenting compromising material to keep
30:59
him quote in line. Now, isn't that exactly what the
31:02
Fortescue quipped? It's.
31:04
Amazing coincidence. Amazing coincidence.
31:07
Yeah. So we have it at whip level now
31:10
we've got it at international level, the 2GO hand in hand.
31:14
It's it's stunning, but it gets better believe it or not, if
31:17
that's even power gets worse depending on which we're looking
31:20
at star Starmer's argue arguably gone further than any previous
31:23
labour leader in pushing an extreme pro Israeli narrative in
31:28
the British political sphere, once announcing that he supports
31:31
the quote Zionism without qualification strong words by a
31:36
Prime Minister that's supposed to be more objective when it
31:38
comes to these ideological matters.
31:40
Now, let's bring Peter Mandelson into the frame, Mandy as he is
31:45
known during his years with Tony Blair.
31:47
And let's just remind ourselves what the press was saying,
31:50
Brian, in September of 2025, just a few months ago.
31:55
And this is what they said. The Independent put the claims
31:58
that Keir Starmer had pushed through Lord Mandelson's
32:00
appointment despite not clearing MI 6 vetting.
32:04
A spokesperson said the vetting was done by, as you said, Brian,
32:07
the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Cabinet Office in
32:10
the, quote, normal way. So.
32:13
So that's not what the Prime Minister said in the House of
32:17
Commons during that initial clip with.
32:19
Shaking hands. No, he was in.
32:21
He was in very shaky grounds there because he couldn't tell
32:24
the real truth. But as we'll see in a minute,
32:26
the whole of the UK's vetting system effectively collapsed at
32:30
one point and had to be rebuilt within the Cabinet Office by
32:35
outside agency help. So this is very, very dangerous
32:40
attack on national security. And then we're of course the
32:44
pyramid isn't complete with that man at the top right here who
32:49
Odell is micromanaging a lot of what we're seeing or what we
32:52
have been seeing for the last two decades on this.
32:54
But McSweeney joined the Labour Party in 97 and 2001 was set to
33:00
work on Excalibur. This was a database established
33:03
by Peter Mandelson, who was the architect of New Labour and the
33:08
project to remodel the party into its neoliberal image.
33:12
But look at this. This is where it gets
33:14
interesting. According to ABBC report,
33:17
Excalibur rivaled MI 5, Britain's domestic spy agency in
33:22
the information that it held on anybody and everybody, friend or
33:27
foe, and Mandelson's headquarters became the quote
33:30
became since synonymous with spin doctor and control
33:35
freakery. So that's a spy agency within
33:37
the party to collect compromat. Once again, validating what
33:42
Fortescue said during that BBC reporting, validating what Simon
33:46
has told Jody McIntyre, a source for this article.
33:50
It it, Brian, it's, it's kind of undeniable what we're looking at
33:53
here. It's it's undeniable because
33:55
there are so many pieces coming together and the probability of
33:59
them all being sheer coincidence.
34:01
It's just off the scale. This is orchestrated and this,
34:06
it's subversion is the correct term for it as operated right
34:10
the way alongside government controlling people, but also
34:14
through government itself. Not just this government, a
34:17
foreign another government, as Christopher Steele alluded to, a
34:21
third party and the state of Israel may have access to all of
34:25
this material. Well, we can, we can see this
34:28
with with Francis Maude's announcement many years ago
34:31
where he was calmly saying that Israel and Israel's Security
34:36
Unit 8200 would be working alongside GCHQ, alongside
34:42
intelligence services in UK and alongside universities as well
34:46
as the political parties. It's all been declared.
34:50
It's hidden in plain sight. It's simply putting these pieces
34:53
together now. So, so now bear in mind what
34:56
we've just showed you, ladies and gentlemen.
34:58
Now put Jeffrey Epstein in the frame next to Peter Mandelson, 2
35:02
best friends, two chums hanging out, go shopping together, spend
35:06
time at each other's homes and so forth.
35:09
And we have a very disturbing picture here.
35:11
And I don't need to tell people what else is going on in that.
35:15
But I want to bring in Basil Valentine here.
35:17
Basil, based on what you've just seen, what we've just showed
35:20
you, and I know you've looked at these reports as well, I want to
35:24
get your your thoughts on all this.
35:27
Well first of all, fascinating that Tim Fortescue talks about
35:32
Conservative MPs having an issue with little boys as a plurality,
35:36
as if there may well have been more than one of them.
35:39
Certainly not just a single case up to date.
35:42
Now Morgan McSweeney, well he started in the Labour Party as a
35:46
receptionist believe it or not, coming over from Ireland with a
35:49
very modest degree, so his rise within the party ranks to become
35:54
the guy effectively running the show has been quite meteoric. 1
35:59
Labour insider described Starmer himself as not driving the
36:02
train, but just simply being at the front of a DLR Docklands
36:06
Light Railway, which is a driverless train.
36:10
We can see from what you've what you've shown us the cesspit that
36:15
British political life is currently engulfed by.
36:19
And unless there's major reform, I mean, whatever happens to
36:24
Starmer and McSweeney, the structures in place will remain,
36:30
unfortunately, without, you know, some drastic action, some
36:35
major surgery on the body politic.
36:37
Yeah. And, and Basil, can I, can I add
36:41
to that? The key thing is that people
36:43
have to see what's happening for what it really is.
36:46
This is not cock up. This is not a failure of the
36:49
system. This is the orchestrated
36:52
infiltration and breakdown of our political system on a vast
36:57
scale. It is increasingly easy to see,
37:00
and this requires, as you say, it to be cut out.
37:04
It's got to be identified for what it is, which is subversion.
37:08
That's the correct terminology. It's resulted in treason.
37:12
And interesting to see that words now cropping up certainly
37:15
in newer media channels in relation to what we're seeing
37:19
happening. That subversion and that treason
37:22
has got to be dealt with very severely if we're going to cut
37:25
this out and then be in a position to rebuild the body
37:29
politic that you've you've just mentioned.
37:31
That's that's my personal opinion.
37:34
Very, very interestingly, the very first piece of legislation
37:38
that the Blair government introduced after election in
37:41
1997, after 18 years 8 of power out of power, was to repeal the
37:48
Treason Act to remove the death penalty, the very first thing
37:51
they did after 18 years in opposition.
37:55
Yeah, interesting. Just a coincidence spiral.
37:57
Just a coincidence. So another revelation with the
38:00
Epstein emails is that we we found out how Jeffrey Epstein
38:04
became a member of the Trilateral Commission.
38:07
Now this is interesting. And again, we're going to rewind
38:09
the clock just a little bit here and we'll bring this up on
38:12
screen. And this is what Matt Kennard is
38:15
saying here. Keir Starmer himself joined the
38:17
CIA linked Trilateral Commission while serving as Corbin's shadow
38:22
Brexit secretary. If we remember correctly, he did
38:25
not inform Jeremy Corbyn of his membership to this organization,
38:30
the Trilateral Commission, of which Jeffrey Epstein was also a
38:34
member. It's by invitation only.
38:37
Starmer served alongside 2EX heads of the CIA.
38:40
Ex CIA director said in 2019 quote, we will do our level best
38:45
to stop Jeremy Corbyn. Jeffrey Epstein was also a
38:49
member here and we'll just remind people there it is.
38:52
Keir Starmer, a vaunted member of the Bilateral Commission and
38:56
the timing of Epstein joining and Starmer joining were around
39:00
the same time. And one one has to also ask the
39:04
question, Brian, is that the purging of the Labour Party of
39:07
so many of its members, including its leader was was
39:11
Starmer not kind of rewarded potentially for his work by this
39:16
is a billionaire club extraordinaire?
39:18
To be a member here gives you access to all sorts of financial
39:21
opportunities. So it is the elite of the elite
39:24
club headed by David Rockefeller, I believe at the
39:27
time, yes. So legitimate questions.
39:30
We we just say if the compromat is for the big stick, that's the
39:34
blackmail, the dirt on individuals or MPs in order to
39:38
wield the big stick to get them to do what what is required.
39:42
Rewarding with money sometimes or positions of power and
39:46
influence is the other side. That's the Karras if you like to
39:50
get people to do the bidding. Well, let's get deeper into
39:54
events now and actually have a look at UKF vetting system and
40:00
as the BBC correctly identified, 2 stage process and.
40:08
Keir Starmer was intimating due diligence had had been carried
40:12
out, so he said on Mandelson, a check carried out by a team at
40:17
the Cabinet Office on behalf of Downing Street.
40:20
But the second part of this is deeper and more serious security
40:24
vetting. This is the really detailed
40:28
developed vetting DV, as it's called when the state goes into
40:34
the heart of somebody's personal and private information in order
40:38
to understand whether they are a security risk to the state.
40:43
Now, having talked about that security risks to the UK state,
40:50
let's have a look at a video from UK's vetting system itself.
40:56
It is a cartoon. Let's watch this.
41:02
Vetting establishes a trust between employers and their
41:05
staff for roles where national security concerns are a
41:08
consideration. It is a thorough check of your
41:11
life, which can be lengthy and at times may feel intrusive, but
41:15
it is a crucial national security process.
41:21
As part of your role, you may need access to sensitive
41:24
information, assets or equipment and it's vital we do everything
41:28
we can to keep them secure. To ensure we place sensitive
41:33
government information in trusted hands, we carry out a
41:36
series of background checks across many areas of your life.
41:40
This can take the form of questionnaires, confidential
41:43
conversations and character references For higher levels of
41:47
clearance. It will also involve a whole
41:49
life interview that can take between two and five hours to
41:53
complete. It's personal, yes, but we
41:58
invest in our teams to ensure they are culturally aware and
42:01
sensitive to difficult topics. We understand that nobody's
42:05
stories are the same and provide you with a safe space to discuss
42:09
your life. Our teams are not employed to
42:12
make moral judgements. We want anyone to feel able to
42:19
apply for a security related role or clearance regardless of
42:23
their background, circumstances or lifestyle.
42:27
You'll be asked to provide information on your family,
42:29
employment history, where you've lived and any criminal
42:33
convictions. You may be asked about your
42:35
financial situation, relationships and life
42:39
experiences to help us get a better understanding of you as
42:42
an individual. Every aspect of the process is
42:46
objective, professional and non judge mental.
42:50
There are no right or wrong answers and you can always ask
42:53
why we need information. It can take some time until a
42:59
decision is made, but this does not necessarily mean you won't
43:02
be granted clearance. Every case is individual and has
43:06
to go through a number of checks, and you can rest assured
43:09
that all the information we collect from you during the
43:11
process is held in the strictest confidence.
43:14
It isn't shared with anyone outside of the vetting
43:17
community. For more information, search
43:20
UKSV on gov.uk. Now just say apologies to UK
43:27
column news audience because I should have said before that
43:30
video played that I had inserted some flags at some of the things
43:34
said in there. But let's remember we're dealing
43:36
with very important national security, protecting the nation,
43:41
and the UK's vetting office produces a childish cartoon in
43:46
which they say that it's really about being culturally aware.
43:50
This is not about security defending the nation state and
43:54
every man, woman and child in the country.
43:57
They're not going to make any moral judgements.
43:59
We don't want morality to get into it because if there's no
44:02
morality, then what Epstein got up to is perfectly acceptable.
44:06
What's all the fuss about? And the third thing is that the
44:09
vetting process is going to be non judge mental.
44:12
So whatever you do, we're not going to judge you so you can
44:16
carry on doing it and help breakdown the country.
44:19
Now you're probably wondering what sort of crazy personal
44:23
system could introduce such a vetting system in UK as the one
44:27
you've just seen. Well, if we go to civil service
44:30
world, I found some very interesting articles.
44:33
Here's a vetting better how we turned around the UK vetting
44:39
service. And what this very good article
44:41
is talking about is the fact that UK security vetting system
44:46
was utterly destroyed a few years ago and it was described
44:50
as a failing beleaguered service.
44:52
And if we have a look at some of the additional comments around
44:58
other reports, so this is a National Audit Office report
45:02
which acknowledged a history of under resourcing and legacy
45:05
issues of the vetting system, which was formed in 2017 from
45:10
MOD and FCDO services. And this is where you can see
45:15
the serious action of vetting people that they are safe to be
45:19
in positions of power is taken away from the Ministry of
45:23
Defence and indeed their Foreign and Common Commonwealth and
45:27
Development Office. And it's it's brought into the
45:32
heart of the civil service and the Cabinet Office.
45:34
And if we put that on backup on screen, I'll just give you a
45:37
little bit more here because it says the UK vetting service
45:42
moved out of mud into the Cabinet Office Government
45:45
Security group in 2020 just as COVID hit.
45:49
Oh dear, Patrick. It was that nasty COVID bug.
45:53
It destroyed our ability to actually check people out as to
45:58
whether they were safe or not. The gift of it's on giving.
46:03
Absolutely. So I'm just going to label that
46:05
one over the top. Is this accidental breakdown?
46:09
No, this is orchestrated breakdown.
46:12
And if we go on to civil service world here, there was another
46:17
article, which I'm not going to go into because we don't have
46:20
time, but they identified back in January 2023 that vetting
46:25
service failures were putting national security work at risk.
46:31
So there's no cock up here. This is a conspiracy to destroy
46:36
the system, protect the country. And let's put a name in here.
46:40
Patricia Dracorn is the chief executive of the Vetting unit, a
46:45
very interesting lady because previously she was working with
46:49
Ofgem and her achievements including transforming E serve,
46:53
embracing digital techniques, efficiency and effectiveness,
46:58
increasing assurance and risk management.
47:01
I'm not even going to read the rest because let's put a flag on
47:04
this one. This is how the whole system has
47:07
been ripped apart to make it so easy for people like Mandelson
47:12
and others to come through the system.
47:14
It's breathtaking, Patrick, when you get into this stuff.
47:17
Yeah, that should be the discussion right now.
47:19
Right now is is the system that produced this situation, but it
47:23
won't get addressed. It will in UK column extra, so
47:27
let's let's be positive on that one.
47:29
Now let's just take a a few minutes break here.
47:31
A huge thank you to our audience and UK column members as always.
47:37
And we'd like to say to our wider audience, if you've never
47:40
been to the UK column website, go there.
47:43
It's a 20 year resource of news and articles, fantastic
47:48
information and if you click on the famous click here line, you
47:54
can sign up as a member for monthly subscription and annual
47:59
or a lifetime member. And it's people who are helping
48:02
to pay for UK column. We're a joint team.
48:05
We can only do this with your financial support.
48:09
Now coming up, we've got German warfare tonight at 7:00 PM World
48:13
War Three and what to do about it.
48:15
Amazing coincidence with the timing of that one with today's
48:19
news about Iran, Patrick. And we've also got more of 1000
48:24
words coming up. And on Sunday, it's going to be
48:28
Andrew Bridgens turn. Now we should have a little
48:31
video clip here if we can just play it to get an idea of what
48:35
it's like to be in the chair as the artist sketches you out.
48:39
Jake the artist. I was told that there was no
48:42
link between lock downs and and suicide rates.
48:46
They weren't worried about killing granny, civil servants
48:50
and young advisors. All just standing there, not
48:53
mass, not socially distanced, watching it all.
48:56
He said it was an absolute pantomide.
48:58
Boris Johnson could not have had COVID.
49:00
And I've I've just got this thing.
49:01
I can't stand anyone doing anything to children.
49:03
And here, why are you willing to die on that hill?
49:05
Because that's the hill you're killing my people on.
49:07
I know he's sold his soul to the devil and he is not.
49:11
He's not what he purports to be. A lot of truce coming out in the
49:16
in, in that as as the painting gets made.
49:20
So encouraged people to go and have a look at that.
49:22
But let's come back onto the subject of the Epstein case and
49:27
Mandelson. Now, one of the things that
49:30
British press have got very excited about this is the
49:32
Guardian is that MPs agree to release Mandelson papers to
49:39
Parliament's intelligence committee.
49:41
This is all in action at the moment.
49:43
So this isn't the real news, but the real news is when we dig
49:47
into who's now going to be vetting the Epstein papers
49:52
themselves. And I'll just remind people that
49:55
many, many good media sources have been warning and warning
50:00
about the power of Israeli lobby in UK matters politic.
50:05
And here we've got an article talking about millions flowing
50:09
from Israeli lobbies to fund 1/4 of UKMPS.
50:15
Now people can go and see this report themselves, but these
50:17
statistics very important. 180 of 6, 650 MPs in Britain's last
50:23
parliament received funding from pro Israeli lobby groups.
50:27
What sort of groups are we talking about?
50:30
Well, these are some of the ones listed in the excellent work by
50:34
Declassified UK Conservative Friends of Israel, Labour,
50:38
Friends of Israel, Lib Dems, Friends of Israel.
50:41
We've got El Net, UK, Australia, Israeli Cultural Exchange,
50:46
National Jewish Assembly, Henry Jackson Society often comes up
50:52
Patrick and Elbit Systems when we're into weapons supplies.
50:57
And Israeli the largest Israeli arms firm is what plowing money
51:01
into UK political campaigns. Well, quite often small amounts
51:07
or visits, but it's it's all influence and what happens in
51:12
those visits. Does anybody really know what
51:15
goes on? And then of course, when you've
51:17
taken the shekel and you've done the bidding, then all of a
51:21
sudden favours are asked and you're not quite representing
51:24
your constituents anymore. And just quickly bring that list
51:27
back up on screen. I was surprised to see IPAC is
51:31
involved in British politics. I thought that was an American
51:34
Israeli lobby organization. I guess they're busy on this
51:37
side of the. Shades of Grey, Patrick.
51:39
It's all very smoky now. Declassified did some really
51:42
excellent work on this. Because they produced a
51:45
database. I'm just going to let this run
51:48
on screen. I can't take you through all the
51:50
names, but you will see this is an an overview of some of the
51:56
penetration of Israel, getting at our MPs influence, possibly
52:02
changing policies, possibly getting them to do dirty.
52:06
Well, we just do not know. We're not suggesting that any of
52:09
these MPs have done anything wrong.
52:12
What we are pointing out is that it's very difficult to see what
52:16
is actually happening through and under this Israeli
52:19
influence. And as you can see on screen,
52:22
the list goes on and on. Now, if we jump back to the
52:25
Intelligence and Security Committee, parliament, who are
52:29
now going to be the people who are going to be looking at the
52:32
Epstein files in the first instance to make sure that
52:35
there's no matters of national security.
52:38
We have to ask, will any of them be concerned whether there's any
52:42
material which puts Israel in a bad light?
52:45
And one of the things that we have to do is flag up members of
52:49
this committee that are actually listed on that declassified
52:53
database that I've just shown you.
52:55
And as we popping up on the screen, yes, there are some of
52:58
this committee. So do they have a problem with
53:01
conflict of interest or vested interest?
53:04
We don't know because it appears that it's simply the UK column
53:08
asking this pertinent question. At the moment, Well, in the old
53:11
days, Brian, wouldn't you recuse yourself from the committee if
53:14
you were receiving any type of support, financial or whatever?
53:20
I mean that would be the normal thing to do in the past I would
53:23
imagine. That's what an upstanding
53:25
individual would do. But of course, if that
53:27
upstanding individual is also in the whips black book, it could
53:30
be the whip saying stay in position if we just end this
53:35
little segment here, bring on the last three members and we
53:40
can do the same thing again because we can flag up Derek
53:43
Twigg here as being listed on that declassified database.
53:47
Now, I'm going to stress here, we're not saying that any of
53:51
these men and women have done anything wrong.
53:54
The key point is we simply do not know what the power is of
53:59
the Israeli lobby to interfere with even the working of the
54:02
Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament.
54:07
And we're going to say that you, the UK public, is presented with
54:11
what can only be described as an opaque picture of loyalty and
54:15
interests. And just to finish this segment
54:18
off for coming back to you, Patrick, if you've never been on
54:22
the UK column website, go on to it and go into the research bar,
54:28
the little magnifying glass and search because this is 20 years
54:33
of deep research by all of us. And I think most people will be
54:38
amazed at how much information comes up on particular topics.
54:43
Over to you, Patrick. Yeah, that brings back some
54:46
memories. That photo there we can.
54:47
The integrity initiative. Initiative in an old abandoned
54:51
mill that was quite something. Now the so that we've reported
54:54
on the Filton 6 trials that were going on, Brian, and they're so
54:58
important in terms of legal precedent on this issue.
55:01
And so I want to give an update on this.
55:04
It's extraordinary what's happened this week and we can
55:07
give an update. It's very positive on a certain
55:09
level of Palestine action, Filton 6, acquitted, acquitted
55:14
just about of all charges. And we're going to bring Basil
55:17
Valentine in for a moment here. And Craig Murray has broken down
55:21
the really salient points as he often does.
55:24
But he's saying the Filton acquittals demolished Starmer
55:28
and Cooper lies about Palestine action.
55:31
Now I want to bring Basil Valentine back in.
55:33
Basil, give us an update on what's happened with this right
55:39
now regarding the Filton 6. And also, Murray's made some
55:44
pretty powerful points as well. But just bring us up to date on
55:48
this, this extraordinary, this result.
55:51
Well, the first thing to say, Patrick, is that it's a win not
55:54
just for the defendants but for British justice, such as it is a
55:59
win for the jury trial system. Because I think it's fair to say
56:03
that had Mr. Justice Johnson been the sole arbiter in this
56:08
case, there is every chance they would have been found guilty.
56:12
And the charge on which they were all acquitted, aggravated
56:16
burglary is a particularly serious charge.
56:21
It's not just the stealing or damaging of property.
56:26
The aggravation aspect relates to intent to harm people and
56:32
that they took the weapons into the they took the sledgehammers
56:36
into the Elbit factory in order to hit people with them.
56:40
That was very much an overcharge by the UK government.
56:45
There was no evidence that that was their intention.
56:48
All the evidence points to the fact that they were using the
56:50
sledgehammers simply to damage property.
56:54
So the fact that they were all cleared on that charge is a big
56:58
win, certainly in terms of the judicial review.
57:03
Craig makes the point that this really does drive a coach and
57:07
horses through any attempt to demonise them as terrorists.
57:12
Criminal damage and terrorism are not the same thing at all.
57:17
Five of the six were released. At the sixth, Samuel Corner is
57:23
still on remand pending a retrial on the charge of
57:27
grievous bodily harm. That this pertains to the spinal
57:31
injuries sustained by a policewoman now it's doubtful
57:36
whether or not it actually qualifies as grievous bodily
57:39
harm. RRI scans and X-rays of her back
57:44
indicated a possible hairline factor of the wing of one of the
57:49
vertebrae. She suffered no damage to the
57:50
spinal cord and it's an injury from which we understand she was
57:55
able to make a full recovery in in a couple of months.
57:58
So he unfortunately is still being held in harsh conditions
58:04
and a further application for bail will no doubt be made.
58:07
The government and the Crown Prosecution, ServiceNow are
58:11
asking for time to decide whether to seek a retrial on the
58:15
other charges, those of violent disorder and criminal damage.
58:22
They may decide to drop them, of course.
58:24
There is 18 other defendants also awaiting trial or more
58:29
likely, I'm afraid to say they will continue with the
58:32
prosecutions. But even if they succeed in
58:35
getting convictions on charges of criminal damage and violent
58:39
disorder, that falls a long, long way short of the threshold
58:43
for anything that could be defined as terrorism.
58:47
So whether or not the three person panel now undertaking the
58:53
judicial review of the prescription of Palestine action
58:56
take these verdicts into account, that remains to be
58:59
seen. And still a long, long way to go
59:02
on all this, of course. Thanks and and Basil, I just
59:06
wanted to remind us, our audience as well and get your
59:10
comment in a moment. But there was a there's attempt
59:13
by this judge to strong arm the jury on this and we'll bring
59:18
this up on screen. Just to remind you we reported
59:20
this a couple weeks ago. This excellent commentary by
59:22
Jonathan Cook here. Barrister's powerful speech at
59:25
Filton trial reminds jury of its right to defy the judge.
59:30
And this is what happened at one point in the trial.
59:33
Jury member sent a note to the judge, Mr. Justice Johnson,
59:37
asking this very question. Quote.
59:39
If we decide that they, the defendants, genuinely believe
59:43
that they were performing life saving action and were morally
59:46
compelled to destroy weapons they believed were going to be
59:50
used to kill civilians and what they believed to be an illegal
59:53
genocide, what or sorry, would that amount to a lawful excuse?
59:59
This is the question posed by the jury.
1:00:02
To the judge and the judge who repeatedly stifled efforts by
1:00:07
the defense to air evidence of Elbit Systems involvement in the
1:00:10
genocide, answered that the jury must not take into account such
1:00:14
lawful excuse, quote UN quote. In his words, there is no
1:00:18
evidence in this case of anything that is capable in law
1:00:22
of amounting to a lawful excuse. So that is not something that
1:00:27
you need to consider, says the judge.
1:00:30
To the jury and the reaction from there barristers giving
1:00:34
what many describe is a historic speech on this issue here and
1:00:39
there is Rajiv Menon. He is a King's counselor
1:00:44
defending the Filton 6. Menon makes a rousing defense of
1:00:49
the rights of juries to reject judicial interference and of
1:00:53
their right to make up their own minds both on guilt and on
1:00:57
factors that might mitigate guilt.
1:00:59
And he does so at the very moment when Starmer and his as
1:01:03
ministers are seeking to eradicate the principle of jury
1:01:07
trials. And that includes the justice
1:01:10
minister David Lammy, who's and and Justice Levinson's are
1:01:15
deeply involved in this. And so this is the the details
1:01:20
of that speech. But Brian, bottom line, he's
1:01:21
invoking 1670 here. William Penn and William Mead.
1:01:26
And this is so these these men were preaching in the street and
1:01:30
you weren't allowed to preach to groups of people in the street.
1:01:33
So they they were tried technically they broke the law.
1:01:38
The jury said, we don't think any crime has been committed.
1:01:42
So the jury found them not guilty.
1:01:44
The judge then put the jury in prison on bread and water and
1:01:48
said, I'm not going to let you out till you make the right
1:01:51
decision. But the jury strong enough to
1:01:53
stay in prison. And eventually when they were
1:01:57
brought back into court, they'd made the case powerful enough
1:02:01
that the the jury's decision of not guilty stood.
1:02:06
And this is such a landmark case because it shows the power of
1:02:09
the jury to make moral decisions in court.
1:02:14
Whatever the law says they can, they can counter bad law in
1:02:19
court. And this is a classic case of a
1:02:21
jury trying, sorry, of a judge trying to bully direct that jury
1:02:28
into finding a verdict which the government clearly wanted.
1:02:33
So the I believe the barrister is Pakistani origin.
1:02:38
What an amazing man because he has absolutely put the huge
1:02:42
common, common, common law rock in the pond.
1:02:48
And Leveson, of course, in his latest reports, is trying to get
1:02:51
rid of juries. Why?
1:02:53
Because that gives the sole power to the judge in a court.
1:02:57
So this is a major, major decision here that's come out of
1:03:01
the school. Because that that issue of jury
1:03:03
nullification, Brian, this is one of the foundational blocks
1:03:07
of the modern democratic society.
1:03:10
And when you take that away, you you take away 800 years really
1:03:14
of hard fought efforts by subsequent generations.
1:03:18
Patrick, you leave people with no defence.
1:03:21
As as many people in the UK column news audience will know,
1:03:26
I have thought on behalf of largely mothers, but sometimes
1:03:30
it's been fathers that have had their children taken away
1:03:34
through the family court system. And of course what is so heinous
1:03:38
in those cases is that mums and dads are in court facing the
1:03:44
judge and a whole range of experts ranged against the mums
1:03:48
and dads. No jury, no press, this is a
1:03:52
star chamber, it's a secret court.
1:03:55
And it's clear that the, the changes of recommendations
1:04:00
coming out of Leveson's reports about the, about courts in the
1:04:05
future and AI and no juries, this is designed to put power
1:04:11
solely in the hands of appointed and elected judges.
1:04:16
Very, very dangerous. So this barrister should be
1:04:19
getting a million emails of thanks from people around the
1:04:23
country for his bravery in challenging a judge in court.
1:04:28
I I think that takes amazing courage in the in this day and
1:04:33
age, Patrick. Holding the line for English
1:04:35
common law and and and just for those who are interested in this
1:04:38
historically, you can buy this very short book, but very
1:04:42
important, I think thing that you should have on your library
1:04:45
shelf in your living room. The trial of William Penn and
1:04:47
William Mead for causing a Talmud at the sessions held at
1:04:51
the Old Bailey. So again, this is so important
1:04:54
in terms of history, Brian, and people don't realize that to
1:04:57
remove this, to remove jury trials, which they're attempting
1:05:01
to do this government, this is a huge step backwards for Western
1:05:06
civilization. It's it's a massive step
1:05:08
backwards. Well, it's, it's a step
1:05:11
backwards, Patrick, but it's also a sidestep because it takes
1:05:14
us from common law people being innocent until proven guilty by
1:05:21
a, a jury of their peers to the fact that essentially you're
1:05:25
guilty until you can prove your innocence in front of an
1:05:29
appointed judge. The the European system or large
1:05:33
parts of Europe anyway. So this, this is really
1:05:36
incredible. Should we bring Basil back in?
1:05:40
Basil. This is truly amazing, isn't it?
1:05:43
And many more people in this country should be delving in
1:05:47
researching this particular case to understand the significance
1:05:52
of what's happened here. Yes, the right of juries to make
1:05:57
moral judgements is arguably the single most important bulwark in
1:06:02
the unwritten British constitution against tyranny.
1:06:06
That's the thing, if governments appoint judges, and judges are
1:06:11
then the sole arbiters of justice, then particularly when
1:06:15
you have governments as shall we say, morally bankrupt as the
1:06:20
present one, then you are on the path to tyranny.
1:06:24
It's worth pointing out that in this case the defendants were
1:06:28
not allowed by the judge to say why they had carried out the
1:06:33
action that they did. Think about that when on the
1:06:36
stand they were forbidden to say we did this, I did this because
1:06:41
XYZ. Absolutely extraordinary.
1:06:45
So what would have happened had the jury not been there and had
1:06:48
that courageous barrister not made the speech he did?
1:06:51
Who knows? Yeah, exactly.
1:06:54
Yeah, it would have been an illusion of justice indeed at
1:06:56
that point. Thank you, Basil Valentine.
1:06:58
More about this in Extra. I'm sure the discussion will
1:07:01
spill over there. Indeed.
1:07:02
Well, we've come to a close for today's UK Column news.
1:07:06
So Patrick, thank you very much for joining me.
1:07:08
Basil Valentine, thank you for UK column members.
1:07:12
We will have UK column extra in a few moments for our worldwide
1:07:16
audience. Huge thanks for joining us
1:07:18
today. Spread the word, spread the
1:07:21
information we've given. Be kind to your fellow man and
1:07:25
woman. And my last comment is we're
1:07:28
delighted that UK column team are indeed back from China.
1:07:32
Very long flights in the last 24 hours and some of the team back
1:07:37
in the studio today to help us get this production out.
1:07:40
So good news all round. Stay posted.
1:07:44
We'll be back for UK column news 1:00 on Monday.
1:07:47
UK column extra in a few moments.
1:07:50
See you then. Bye bye.