Latest / UK Column Radio / UK Column News — 28th September 2026

Transcript

UK Column News — 28th September 2026 · UK Column Radio

0:08
Speaker 1: Good afternoon. It's Monday, the 20th of September, 2026, just
0:11
Speaker 1: after one o'clock. Welcome to UK Column News. I'm your host,
0:14
Speaker 1: Mike Robinson. Joining me in the studio today is Brian Gerrish.
0:17
Speaker 1: Welcome to the program, Brian. Pleasure to be here. Well,
0:20
Speaker 1: and we're also, surprise, joined by Charles Mallett by VideoLink
0:24
Speaker 1: as well. Now, later in the program, we'll be reporting
0:27
Speaker 1: on Rogue AI and asking if it's really a weapon
0:29
Speaker 1: of mass destruction. We'll also look at Britain's drive for
0:33
Speaker 1: war on space, the latest from Ukraine and Yemen, and
0:36
Speaker 1: we'll also have news on the prosecution of a longtime
0:39
Speaker 1: UK column colleague. But of course, we're going to start
0:43
Speaker 1: today with RAF Fairford and the so-called major incident at Fairford,
0:48
Speaker 1: which everyone will know about by now. So let's just
0:51
Speaker 1: bring this on screen because this is the image that...
0:54
Speaker 1: or at least one image that's doing the rounds at
0:56
Speaker 1: the moment, along with the footage of the bomb disposal
1:00
Speaker 1: robot going at these vans. But I thought we should
1:04
Speaker 1: just take a look at a timeline of events here,
1:08
Speaker 1: because this all started apparently at quarter to one in
1:12
Speaker 1: the morning. Yesterday morning, police received a call about three
1:15
Speaker 1: suspicious vehicles traveling towards RAF Fairford. Allegedly, shortly after that,
1:23
Speaker 1: No time given, five men were arrested in a village
1:26
Speaker 1: called Welford under the Explosives Act. They were later further
1:30
Speaker 1: arrested on suspicion of preparing a terrorist act. But it
1:33
Speaker 1: wasn't until 7am that Welford residents were evacuated. And this
1:39
Speaker 1: information has come from an account given to mainstream media
1:42
Speaker 1: by a resident of the village. Police haven't stated a time.
1:46
Speaker 1: And then another time not quite given on Sunday morning,
1:49
Speaker 1: Gloucestershire Police said properties were being evacuated in the Army's
1:52
Speaker 1: bomb disposal team was examining vehicles. They didn't say that
1:57
Speaker 1: explosives had been found. And then around five o'clock in
2:01
Speaker 1: the evening, again, the exact time not quite known, Donald
2:05
Speaker 1: Trump spoke to reporters at a PGA golf event in
2:08
Speaker 1: Illinois saying that the suspects were looking to do big damage.
2:13
Speaker 1: We'll come on to that again in a second. Just
2:15
Speaker 1: take that off again, William, please. And also at around
2:18
Speaker 1: five o'clock, the National published It's UK police find explosives headline.
2:23
Speaker 1: And the police, as I say, had not said that
2:25
Speaker 1: at the time. And as far as I know, they
2:27
Speaker 1: still haven't said that. Then Rolling Out reported that no
2:31
Speaker 1: one had been charged and that men had not been named.
2:34
Speaker 1: That was later in the evening. And then as far
2:38
Speaker 1: as I'm aware, before we came on the news program,
2:40
Speaker 1: police made no statement confirming explosives. They haven't actually confirmed
2:45
Speaker 1: the target. They haven't confirmed the suspect's identities. And they
2:49
Speaker 1: haven't confirmed an Iran link because of course that of
2:51
Speaker 1: course is doing the rounds at the moment that Iran
2:54
Speaker 1: may have been possible with this. Gloucester police has said
2:58
Speaker 1: nothing about the event on the front page of their website.
3:01
Speaker 1: In fact, the only banner headline they've got there at
3:03
Speaker 1: the very top is they think it's much more important
3:05
Speaker 1: to know that they're doing maintenance on their website at
3:08
Speaker 1: the moment. And they didn't publish anything on their website
3:12
Speaker 1: or on their Facebook account until 8.18 a.m. yesterday. and
3:16
Speaker 1: nothing on their Facebook account until around 10 a.m. yesterday.
3:20
Speaker 1: So they clearly weren't that concerned, yet they claim to
3:23
Speaker 1: have plans in place for dealing with exactly this kind
3:26
Speaker 1: of incident. So then we have the statement from the
3:31
Speaker 1: farmer covered by the BBC here on the BBC's live page,
3:36
Speaker 1: who said that she saw a large group of hooded
3:38
Speaker 1: and masked men lingering near a tree line. So this
3:42
Speaker 1: seems to be not quite the same as the earlier
3:45
Speaker 1: statements about seeing vans driving towards RAF Fairford. She also said,
3:51
Speaker 1: according to the BBC, when they saw me, they ran
3:53
Speaker 1: ahead of me, some into the field and some towards
3:56
Speaker 1: the neighbouring village. I then realised that something highly unusual
3:59
Speaker 1: was taking place. She said, and this is also strange
4:03
Speaker 1: in my opinion, she said she immediately called the Ministry
4:06
Speaker 1: of Defence, but the phone rang out, so it wasn't answered.
4:10
Speaker 1: And then her instincts told her to call 999. And
4:13
Speaker 1: they quote her then as saying, within 10 minutes, the
4:16
Speaker 1: village was full of armed police. I think it was
4:18
Speaker 1: pure luck that I arrived in the village at a
4:21
Speaker 1: similar time to the vans. And she went on to say,
4:23
Speaker 1: I'm absolutely staggered that it was left to me as
4:25
Speaker 1: a member of the public to see and report this.
4:28
Speaker 1: I believe that my 999 call foiled whatever plans they had.
4:32
Speaker 1: So keep that in mind as we go on here.
4:35
Speaker 1: But Brian, the BBC had some other magic to give
4:38
Speaker 1: us here.
4:40
Speaker 2: Uh well yes i i was very interested in reading
4:43
Speaker 2: the bbc article if we put that one up on
4:45
Speaker 2: screen um this uh image was a key anchor uh
4:50
Speaker 2: in the article um you can see basically a little
4:54
Speaker 2: bit of track and hedgerows um and then you've got
4:58
Speaker 2: um four five men on the ground naked from the
5:03
Speaker 2: waist up um but the uh Caption for the image
5:08
Speaker 2: says this image was circulated following the arrest of five
5:12
Speaker 2: men near RAF Fairford.
5:14
Speaker 1: So was it circulated by? Well, doesn't say.
5:18
Speaker 2: Well, the BBC. But we put that up on screen.
5:23
Speaker 2: This was the key bit that the BBC was using
5:25
Speaker 2: this very blurred, supplied image to anchor its Fairford terror story.
5:31
Speaker 2: And if we get into the main article. We can
5:34
Speaker 2: just do this, an image purporting to show the moment
5:38
Speaker 2: five men were arrested. So the five men were arrested
5:41
Speaker 2: naked from the waist up, apparently. It showed detained men
5:46
Speaker 2: in Welford about 350 meters from runway access. Now, they
5:51
Speaker 2: put the meters into feet, 1,148 feet, which I find
5:57
Speaker 2: rather bizarre because it's an approximate position. But nevertheless, it's there.
6:03
Speaker 2: And then this is the key bit. The BBC has
6:05
Speaker 2: been unable to verify the original source, but BBC verifiers
6:10
Speaker 2: geolocated the image and confirmed it appeared to be authentic.
6:18
Speaker 2: So there's an image with nothing to identify where it
6:23
Speaker 2: was because you've only got a tiny bit of hedgerow,
6:26
Speaker 2: but apparently the BBC know where it was. They don't
6:29
Speaker 2: know who gave them the photo. Now, My feeling is
6:33
Speaker 2: that the photo was provided to them, either by the
6:35
Speaker 2: police or indeed the intelligence services, and the BBC have
6:40
Speaker 2: simply taken up on this. But at the end of
6:43
Speaker 2: the day, whatever BBC Verify has done, authentic, it's an
6:47
Speaker 2: authentic picture of what? The public has no idea. So
6:53
Speaker 2: I just find this incredible that one blurry, blurred out
6:57
Speaker 2: picture is used to anchor the whole event with the BBC,
7:02
Speaker 2: but really there's no evidence there at all about anything.
7:05
Speaker 1: Absolutely. And then we have the Trump statement. So let's
7:07
Speaker 1: come on to that for a second. So if we
7:09
Speaker 1: bring him on screen, because he said the men had
7:12
Speaker 1: been under view for a long time. He described the
7:15
Speaker 1: men's intentions as big damage. And this was all while
7:19
Speaker 1: the army was still examining the vans. And before the
7:21
Speaker 1: UK police had said anything about what the vans contained.
7:25
Speaker 1: And in fact, as I say, they still haven't. But
7:27
Speaker 1: here's the thing. Quotes Trump varies between outlets. So the
7:32
Speaker 1: same remark was reported in different ways. So big damage
7:37
Speaker 1: to our ports is what some reported it as. And
7:41
Speaker 1: so that implies that actually did Trump even know where
7:43
Speaker 1: the event had happened? Others just said big damage. GB
7:48
Speaker 1: News said that the people were looking to do big damage.
7:52
Speaker 1: So it's very strange. And the fact that Trump's uh
7:56
Speaker 1: comments don't manage the police account because he was suggesting
8:00
Speaker 1: that the men were under long-running surveillance but the the
8:03
Speaker 1: narrative in the press is that it was all down
8:05
Speaker 1: to this one woman farmer and making and the police
8:09
Speaker 1: no no it was all down to one woman farmer
8:11
Speaker 1: making a 999 call that that triggered all this whereas
8:15
Speaker 1: trump's suggesting that these people were being followed for a
8:18
Speaker 1: very long time so which was it that you know
8:20
Speaker 1: it's just absolutely full of holes this story um But Charles,
8:26
Speaker 1: because these guys were initially arrested allegedly under the Explosives Act,
8:31
Speaker 1: just tell us about that.
8:35
Speaker 3: Good afternoon, Mike, Brian and everybody listening and watching. I
8:39
Speaker 3: think there are so many inconsistencies in this story, if
8:42
Speaker 3: we are to take it at face value. It is
8:43
Speaker 3: completely remarkable that it's ever seen the light of day.
8:46
Speaker 3: But as you say, the arrests were made under the
8:47
Speaker 3: Explosives Act, which goes back to 1875. Now, whether Richard
8:51
Speaker 3: O'Connor actually misspoke in speaking about the arrests under this
8:55
Speaker 3: piece of legislation is not quite clear because, of course,
8:58
Speaker 3: almost all of it has been repealed by subsequent legislation,
9:02
Speaker 3: although rather amusingly, the sale of explosives on the highway
9:07
Speaker 3: is one of the provisions that still remains on statute,
9:11
Speaker 3: as indeed does the selling of.
9:12
Speaker 1: Explosives to children.
9:14
Speaker 3: So I suppose it is possible that there were things
9:16
Speaker 3: going on that we don't yet know about. I think
9:19
Speaker 3: in terms of the photography and the way in which
9:22
Speaker 3: Brian describes that photograph, the other very obvious point to
9:26
Speaker 3: make is, well, why on earth were they only stripped
9:28
Speaker 3: to the waist? If it was necessary to search them
9:30
Speaker 3: to that degree, what was it that suggested to police
9:33
Speaker 3: that there could be no possible hidden the items below
9:38
Speaker 3: the waistline and, of course, who indeed did leak the photograph.
9:44
Speaker 3: I think the other point to make is one to
9:47
Speaker 3: do with interagency cooperation, because who did actually have the
9:52
Speaker 3: lead on this? Was it Gloucestershire Police, Gloucestershire Constabulary? Was
9:56
Speaker 3: it MOD Police? Was it the United States Visiting Forces?
10:00
Speaker 4: Police?
10:00
Speaker 3: And then, indeed, the Army, of course, were involved with EOD,
10:04
Speaker 3: Explosive Ordnance Disposal. So command and control for this incident
10:09
Speaker 3: seems to have been completely isolated. extraordinary in so many ways.
10:14
Speaker 3: And also, given the timeline that Mike's presented, how is
10:17
Speaker 3: it that this incident became less controlled as time went by?
10:22
Speaker 3: Why was it that at seven or eight o'clock or
10:24
Speaker 3: even later in the morning, it appeared to be more
10:27
Speaker 3: dangerous to the local residents than it had been at
10:29
Speaker 3: the outset. So taken at face value, there's very little
10:32
Speaker 3: of this that actually makes sense. Now, what I want
10:34
Speaker 3: to do is just point back to the 18th of
10:36
Speaker 3: March of this year and to what UK Column News
10:40
Speaker 3: was suggesting that has actually come to fruition. But the
10:46
Speaker 3: question is, are they being that vigilant? And in my
10:49
Speaker 3: personal experience from last week, I would say not at all.
10:52
Speaker 3: But also, this raises the very real issue of the
10:55
Speaker 3: safety and security of the UK civilian population in the area,
10:59
Speaker 3: and in particular, the proximity to the fence. I referred
11:02
Speaker 3: to this in my report from last week. And I've
11:06
Speaker 3: just got an ordnance survey map here showing, just outside
11:09
Speaker 3: the village of Marston Maisie, the less than 300 metres
11:12
Speaker 3: between the JDAM bombs being loaded and inhabited residences. And
11:18
Speaker 3: the question really is, is this endangering British lives? Maybe
11:21
Speaker 3: not necessarily simply the loading of ordnance, but also the
11:25
Speaker 3: fact that Fairford and other places are being turned into
11:29
Speaker 3: a target, if indeed we go along with the narrative
11:31
Speaker 3: being propagated by MI5, which is that there is a
11:34
Speaker 3: constant threat from the Iranian state.
11:41
Speaker 1: And here we are.
11:42
Speaker 3: That is exactly what appears to have been used. So
11:46
Speaker 3: to a certain extent, it doesn't actually matter what happened.
11:49
Speaker 3: And of course, the arrest and the report of a
11:52
Speaker 3: controlled explosion doesn't in fact suggest that there were any
11:55
Speaker 3: explosives present at all. And the idea that there's been
11:58
Speaker 3: a further arrest under the Terrorism Act 2006, Section 5, again,
12:04
Speaker 3: it's not actually suggested that there was anything going on.
12:07
Speaker 3: This incident could have been entirely unrelated. And exactly as
12:10
Speaker 3: Mike says, if these people were being watched, what an
12:12
Speaker 3: extraordinary time to stop watching them. Now, in terms of
12:17
Speaker 3: what the public is supposed to take from this, I
12:19
Speaker 3: would point back to the government's messaging on it. And
12:21
Speaker 3: we'll just put a graph on screen which shows how
12:24
Speaker 3: very easily... the public's imagination can be manipulated because, of course,
12:29
Speaker 3: we see on the right the recent graph put out
12:32
Speaker 3: to show arrests for terrorist-related activity. And, of course, an
12:36
Speaker 3: enormous spike, but that is accounted for by the prescription
12:39
Speaker 3: of Palestine Action and the activity that has been in
12:42
Speaker 3: response to that. Now, what we're supposed to take away
12:46
Speaker 3: in terms of the propaganda effect, and indeed the public
12:49
Speaker 3: are now left in a situation where they're supposed to
12:52
Speaker 3: perhaps have apparent sympathy for those bombing Iran from Fairford
12:59
Speaker 3: using the explosive ordnance that, of course, has been absolutely
13:02
Speaker 3: on the doorstep and within a danger area to the
13:05
Speaker 3: civilian population. But somehow that didn't matter and indeed still doesn't,
13:10
Speaker 3: although the possible proximity is of other explosive ordnance does matter.
13:15
Speaker 3: But the public is now apparently supposed to have sympathy
13:17
Speaker 3: for those who are bombing Iran at the behest of Israel.
13:23
Speaker 3: And as the BBC asked Friday just over a week
13:26
Speaker 3: ago and pointed out on the news programme on Friday,
13:30
Speaker 3: war may be coming, are we psychologically ready? I think
13:33
Speaker 3: what this incident does is to point very strongly towards
13:37
Speaker 3: the fact that we should be considering that the public
13:40
Speaker 3: are being pushed closer and closer towards this stage, but
13:44
Speaker 3: also this appears to be an absolutely direct vindication of
13:47
Speaker 3: the National Security State Threats Act 2026, and this idea
13:51
Speaker 3: that somehow Iran absolutely was presenting a threat. And this
13:55
Speaker 3: opens the door to the wider legislation that Lord Cameron
13:57
Speaker 3: of Lockheel was speaking about in the House of Lords
14:00
Speaker 3: as this legislation was being pushed for royal assent.
14:05
Speaker 1: Somebody in the chat box, Charles, said, I smell odour Skripal.
14:09
Speaker 1: And I have to say, I find that quite an
14:13
Speaker 1: astute comment because this looks to me like exactly the
14:16
Speaker 1: same type of operation. And my question is, what did
14:24
Speaker 1: this woman, the farmer, do if she is real and
14:28
Speaker 1: this is a real person who made a real telephone call?
14:31
Speaker 1: Did she, in fact... discover something that she wasn't supposed
14:35
Speaker 1: to see, and that everything that we've seen happen overnight
14:38
Speaker 1: is therefore a reaction to the fact that a member
14:40
Speaker 1: of the public saw something that they weren't supposed to see.
14:43
Speaker 3: Yeah, and I think that that's exactly the other side
14:47
Speaker 3: of the coin that we at UK Column would absolutely
14:50
Speaker 3: always look at. Obviously, what we're dealing with at the
14:51
Speaker 3: moment is things taken as presented at face value, but
14:55
Speaker 3: this is exactly how it should be looked at. And
14:56
Speaker 3: of course, one thing that has come through are local
14:59
Speaker 3: reports of the apparent ramping up, for want of a
15:03
Speaker 3: better phrase, of security around the airfield. Now, I was
15:07
Speaker 3: stopped by MOD police there some months ago, but the
15:11
Speaker 3: response time was pathetic, frankly. And actually, it was only
15:14
Speaker 3: because I had gone back, retraced my steps towards the
15:17
Speaker 3: main gate in order to get some more footage that
15:19
Speaker 3: they even caught up with me in the first place.
15:21
Speaker 3: So the idea that this could have happened within that
15:24
Speaker 3: given timeframe, the response was within 10 minutes and all
15:27
Speaker 3: the rest of it, is, I would say, enormously improbable.
15:32
Speaker 3: And also, what are we to believe from the fact
15:36
Speaker 3: that there were three apparently empty vans? Was this in
15:40
Speaker 3: some way just for the optics, I think that absolutely
15:45
Speaker 3: cannot be dismissed. And in a way, I would say
15:49
Speaker 3: one critical point to take away is that even if
15:51
Speaker 3: we never find out, in actual fact, it doesn't really
15:54
Speaker 3: matter because it is what is going to be made
15:57
Speaker 3: of this. And for West Streeting to say that the
16:00
Speaker 3: member of the public only has a partial view of
16:02
Speaker 3: it indicates very strongly that this is going to be
16:04
Speaker 3: capitalised on and to do all those things that we've
16:08
Speaker 3: been talking about for such a long time. As to
16:10
Speaker 3: whether the farmer exists or is a farmer or exactly
16:13
Speaker 3: what story is that i would encourage people to go
16:15
Speaker 3: and listen to her appearance on the today program this
16:19
Speaker 3: morning because if she does not also have a background
16:24
Speaker 3: in acting i would be very surprised the way in
16:26
Speaker 3: which she delivers that story is completely extraordinary.
16:30
Speaker 2: Can i i just say the other bit which i
16:33
Speaker 2: find so strange is this business that her first instinct
16:37
Speaker 2: was to telephone the ministry ministry defense yes Perhaps you
16:43
Speaker 2: can answer this. Is there some emergency number for people
16:46
Speaker 2: to use who live close to Fairford? Is there some
16:52
Speaker 2: MOD leaflet which says if you see something, you should
16:57
Speaker 2: be calling the Ministry of Defence? I find that very
17:00
Speaker 2: hard to believe.
17:03
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean, that is an absolutely excellent question.
17:06
Speaker 4: Two things.
17:07
Speaker 3: First of all, MOD police have responsibility inside the fence,
17:12
Speaker 3: but not outside. So they're, in effect, outside of their jurisdiction,
17:17
Speaker 3: and that belongs to Gloucestershire Constabulary. But also, there is
17:21
Speaker 3: no emergency line for MOD police. There is a non-emergency line.
17:26
Speaker 3: And if it is the case that you bring it,
17:28
Speaker 3: if there were phone calls made, then it would have
17:32
Speaker 3: rung out. Now, why, as a member of the public,
17:36
Speaker 3: if you consider it to be an emergency, you fiddle
17:39
Speaker 3: about looking at these police the number rather than just
17:43
Speaker 3: calling 999 and assume that they would be able to
17:45
Speaker 3: best divert or direct the call. Again, another piece of
17:49
Speaker 3: the so-called official narrative or taking things at face value
17:52
Speaker 3: that absolutely makes no sense whatsoever. But no, the suggestion
17:57
Speaker 3: that people in the area would be so well briefed
17:59
Speaker 3: as to know that they should call MOD police is
18:01
Speaker 3: absolutely not credible.
18:03
Speaker 1: Yeah, and on this 10 minutes, they arrived within 10
18:07
Speaker 1: minutes thing, and you're suggesting, based on your personal experience
18:10
Speaker 1: of being around Fairford, that that's unlikely. But as a
18:17
Speaker 1: matter of interest, where is the nearest police presence? Where
18:20
Speaker 1: would they be based? Where's the nearest police station that
18:23
Speaker 1: they could have been coming from? And would that have
18:26
Speaker 1: been within 10 minutes, even if they'd had notifications?
18:32
Speaker 3: Well, I mean, technically at that time of day to
18:34
Speaker 3: come from Cirencester, if you put your foot down, if
18:37
Speaker 3: you're response, you know, if you are response qualified as
18:41
Speaker 3: a driver, yes, you would absolutely be able to get
18:42
Speaker 3: there within that timeframe. But the point is that that
18:45
Speaker 3: capability is not held at Cirencester. So the idea that
18:50
Speaker 3: there was no pre-planning, that there was no forewarning, and
18:53
Speaker 3: yet we had a response from, as far as we're aware,
18:57
Speaker 3: not just the MOD police who would have been on site,
19:03
Speaker 3: but only in a very small quantity of personnel, usually
19:07
Speaker 3: just one vehicle with two people. But the idea that
19:10
Speaker 3: the constabulary themselves would have been able to respond with
19:13
Speaker 3: the appropriate personnel, and at this stage that would be
19:19
Speaker 3: for at least firearms officers, is not, again, is absolutely
19:23
Speaker 3: not credible. So any further capability would have had to
19:27
Speaker 3: come from Gloucester to get there in 10 minutes is
19:29
Speaker 3: simply not possible, no.
19:32
Speaker 1: Yes, indeed.
19:32
Speaker 2: So the story is just full of holes. The story
19:35
Speaker 2: is full of holes. And the BBC says in its
19:38
Speaker 2: article point blank that the intelligence services weren't involved in
19:45
Speaker 2: any way. This was simply a police operation. So if
19:49
Speaker 2: they weren't involved... involved, what are they saying? That they
19:52
Speaker 2: didn't know it was going to happen or they knew
19:54
Speaker 2: it was going to happen and allowed it to happen.
19:57
Speaker 2: The more you dig into it, the more questions come
19:59
Speaker 2: to the surface. But as somebody in our chat box
20:02
Speaker 2: has said, the whole thing is designed to create more
20:06
Speaker 2: fear and uncertainty in the public.
20:09
Speaker 5: Well yes but but uh i i suspect that it
20:12
Speaker 5: is also uh we are absolutely going to be uh
20:16
Speaker 5: bombarded with um around this around that over the next
20:20
Speaker 5: uh a few days and weeks well look uh brian
20:23
Speaker 5: let's let's move on then because these are not the
20:26
Speaker 5: only war drums that are being uh buying banged at
20:29
Speaker 5: the moment.
20:30
Speaker 2: No absolutely not well you've chosen this image here from
20:34
Speaker 2: the bbc again and uh When we go on to
20:38
Speaker 2: the Ministry of Defence X account, which is worth following
20:41
Speaker 2: because it is so unbelievably bad, it is crass. But
20:46
Speaker 2: what do we find video after video where they are
20:49
Speaker 2: targeting youth as military cadets, but especially they're going for girls.
20:56
Speaker 2: If I just bring this little clip up on screen,
21:00
Speaker 2: it is to the sound of... thudding drums, which is
21:06
Speaker 2: why I chose drums of war. But as you go
21:09
Speaker 2: through these happy young people, the majority of them overwhelmingly
21:13
Speaker 2: are girls. And what it is busy saying is that, yep,
21:18
Speaker 2: get involved with the military and you're going to have
21:21
Speaker 2: a wonderful life of enjoyment, fun, playing on the river.
21:26
Speaker 2: This is so callous. I find it very disturbing. And
21:31
Speaker 2: here we've got seven days to go to the National
21:34
Speaker 2: cadets weak. But it's very interesting that they're targeting girls
21:40
Speaker 2: in the same way that in Ukraine, there is now
21:43
Speaker 2: a very, very strong push, not only through Zelensky's government,
21:48
Speaker 2: but back by the West itself to get females fully
21:52
Speaker 2: mobilized and onto the battlefield. So previously or up until now,
21:58
Speaker 2: women in Ukraine have been doing a very limited amount
22:01
Speaker 2: of fighting on the battlefield. They've certainly been doing drone operations.
22:06
Speaker 2: But now the drive is to get women fully integrated
22:09
Speaker 2: into the military teams, largely because of the lack of
22:12
Speaker 2: numbers on the battlefield. But of course, the West, including
22:16
Speaker 2: the UK, are helping to promote this agenda of getting women,
22:21
Speaker 2: and I'm deliberately going to say mothers, onto the battlefield
22:25
Speaker 2: where they are going to die or at least be maimed.
22:28
Speaker 2: And here in UK, we're seeing the Ministry of Defence
22:32
Speaker 2: target young people, to get them hyped up with the
22:35
Speaker 2: idea that going to join the UK military forces in
22:40
Speaker 2: the present circumstances is a fun thing to do. And
22:44
Speaker 2: on top of that, I'd just like to draw people's
22:47
Speaker 2: attention to this post by the Ministry of Defence. It says,
22:51
Speaker 2: commemorating 86 years since the Battle of Britain at Westminster
22:56
Speaker 2: Abbey today, we'll never forget those who died defending our
23:00
Speaker 2: nation and its values. Well, of course, we've reported on
23:04
Speaker 2: the UK column a couple of weeks ago, the fact
23:07
Speaker 2: that we've now got Church of England churches being used
23:12
Speaker 2: for raves. And the MOD knows this. So I look
23:16
Speaker 2: at this tweet. Is this almost taking the mickey out
23:20
Speaker 2: of veterans that died in the Battle of Britain? Because
23:23
Speaker 2: the values that they died for are being destroyed by
23:27
Speaker 2: this present government with its policies running through the Ministry
23:31
Speaker 2: of Defence itself. And if I also bring this one
23:35
Speaker 2: up from that ex-account, here we've got West Streeting on camera.
23:41
Speaker 2: And what's it talking about? Well, nearly 1 million young
23:44
Speaker 2: people in the UK are not in education, employment or training.
23:49
Speaker 2: Defence offers more apprenticeships and work experience than almost any
23:54
Speaker 2: other industry. And by 2035, we will offer opportunities and
23:59
Speaker 2: good jobs for 50,000 young people every single year. What
24:06
Speaker 2: is this? Is this the Labour Party's version of Hitler
24:09
Speaker 2: Youth that they're now working towards, that everybody's going to
24:13
Speaker 2: be involved in the state's drums for war, and you're
24:19
Speaker 2: not really doing anything unless you're caught up in the
24:23
Speaker 2: employment circle around defence? I find it very worrying, Mike,
24:28
Speaker 2: that this is coming out with such a in such
24:31
Speaker 2: a gung-ho way. And I just hope the young people
24:35
Speaker 2: are smart enough not to see through this.
24:38
Speaker 1: Well, let's see. Let's see who might be smart enough
24:40
Speaker 1: to read through this, because, of course, this is the
24:44
Speaker 1: Labour Party conference happening this week, and Ed Miliband was speaking. And, well,
24:50
Speaker 1: thanks to William for including this, but let's just listen
24:53
Speaker 1: to what he had to say.
24:55
Speaker 6: Come to this conference today to tell you that it's
24:58
Speaker 6: time to roll up our sleeves all over again. Because
25:01
Speaker 6: once again, the world order needs rebuilding anew. We need
25:06
Speaker 6: to be honest about the world we confront. War has
25:09
Speaker 6: returned to Europe. Democratic norms are under threat as they
25:13
Speaker 6: haven't been for generations. The international rule of law is
25:17
Speaker 6: being brazenly flouted. New threats have emerged from the climate
25:21
Speaker 6: crisis to AI. There is only one response to these challenges.
25:27
Speaker 6: To fight for our values. The values my parents saw
25:31
Speaker 6: in Britain. Values which today are more important than ever.
25:35
Speaker 6: Fighting for those values of democracy, the rule of law,
25:40
Speaker 6: protection for rights and freedoms is essential to tackle injustice
25:44
Speaker 6: and suffering. But hear me well when I say this.
25:49
Speaker 6: It is also the only way to fight for our
25:53
Speaker 6: interests because it is the real route to stability in
25:56
Speaker 6: the world and therefore peace and prosperity.
26:01
Speaker 1: Charles, sorry, I'm just going to completely hijack Charles here
26:04
Speaker 1: because I know he hasn't seen that. But I just
26:07
Speaker 1: want to get your reaction to it off the cuff,
26:10
Speaker 1: so to speak.
26:13
Speaker 3: Well, I think off the cuff, I would give credit
26:14
Speaker 3: to his speechwriter because it's certainly evergreen. He can trot
26:18
Speaker 3: that out every single year for the next however long
26:21
Speaker 3: this party clings to power. I mean, it's absolutely, totally
26:25
Speaker 3: and utterly generic and meaningless at the same time. And
26:28
Speaker 3: I couldn't help but notice the almost embarrassment with which
26:31
Speaker 3: they wrote the word hope behind him and then in
26:34
Speaker 3: even smaller text again. And there's something that sort of
26:38
Speaker 3: jars slightly about hope again, as though it didn't really
26:41
Speaker 3: work first time, but we'll have another bash.
26:44
Speaker 2: Well, my laughter said it all. Just disgusting presentation by
26:50
Speaker 2: Marxist Miliband. We shouldn't forget this. And basically, we need
26:54
Speaker 2: more war in order to ensure peace. And I really
26:59
Speaker 2: hope that no young person in the United Kingdom in
27:02
Speaker 2: 2026 is going to go to war for Miliband or
27:07
Speaker 2: any of his colleagues or any of his political principles.
27:11
Speaker 2: These are the people. that are fermenting war. And if
27:15
Speaker 2: we're going to stop that war, we've got to deal
27:17
Speaker 2: with this type of political elite. I just find it appalling, Mike.
27:21
Speaker 1: Well, absolutely. I take your point, Charles, but at the
27:24
Speaker 1: same time, he was hurling out all these accusations against all,
27:29
Speaker 1: you know, he didn't name anybody specifically, but he was
27:31
Speaker 1: hurling them in all directions when in fact it's him
27:35
Speaker 1: and his regime that that is absolutely doing all those things.
27:40
Speaker 1: They don't give a damn about the rule of law.
27:42
Speaker 1: They haven't done for quite some time, just to give
27:44
Speaker 1: one example. And the day Ed Miliband knows anything about
27:48
Speaker 1: British values is the day we can just close the
27:52
Speaker 1: UK column and go do something else instead, because that's
27:55
Speaker 1: never going to happen. Exactly. So yes, anyway, let's move
28:01
Speaker 1: on then. If you like what the UK column does,
28:04
Speaker 1: we do need your ongoing support. Please have a look
28:06
Speaker 1: at the website and find out all about how you
28:09
Speaker 1: can help us you can make a donation now you
28:12
Speaker 1: can join as a member and of course if you
28:13
Speaker 1: join as a member that gives you access to members
28:15
Speaker 1: only content such as uk column news extra thank you
28:19
Speaker 1: once again to everyone that is contributing in this way
28:23
Speaker 1: if you can't contribute financially do share our material online
28:28
Speaker 1: or pick up a copy of the column our magazine
28:31
Speaker 1: issues issue three is out at the moment and it
28:35
Speaker 1: is well worth the effort to get a copy And
28:38
Speaker 1: maybe you could pick up two and give someone else
28:41
Speaker 1: a copy as well. 7 p.m. tonight, Germ is back.
28:45
Speaker 1: Charles and I recorded this this morning. And he's asking,
28:48
Speaker 1: is paying for air the new normal? Well, maybe not air,
28:52
Speaker 1: but a number of other things we talked about today.
28:54
Speaker 1: And at nine, Carl is talking about Trump and she's
28:59
Speaker 1: visited the United States last week. And if you're a
29:03
Speaker 1: UK column member, episode three of... thousand words podcast with
29:08
Speaker 1: mark plane from not on the babe or not the
29:10
Speaker 1: babe is uh is on at 7 p.m on sunday
29:14
Speaker 1: join us for that okay let's uh move on then
29:18
Speaker 1: to uh ai because of course as milliband hinted at
29:22
Speaker 1: there um the perception is that ai is some kind
29:24
Speaker 1: of weapon of mass destruction or has the potential to
29:27
Speaker 1: be um So on Thursday, the legacy media was full
29:33
Speaker 1: of this story, which was yet another incident of AI
29:37
Speaker 1: apparently going rogue. This time it was... an open AI
29:41
Speaker 1: agent breaking into the Australian government health portal known as Medicare. Now,
29:45
Speaker 1: the BBC tried to convince us all that the story
29:50
Speaker 1: was important enough for them to run a live reporting
29:53
Speaker 1: page on it last week. And on the same day,
29:56
Speaker 1: Wes Streeting was on the Radio 4 Today program making
30:00
Speaker 1: comments like this.
30:03
Speaker 7: And we've also got the other end of the spectrum,
30:05
Speaker 7: which I'll now look at as defense secretary through a
30:07
Speaker 7: security lens, which is the threat. And we saw that
30:11
Speaker 7: laid bare by some of the biggest brains and tech
30:15
Speaker 7: titans in the business, warning of the existential threat of
30:20
Speaker 7: AI as a potential weapon of mass destruction.
30:23
Speaker 1: Okay, so this.
30:29
Speaker 1: Threat of a weapon of mass destruction is just something
30:31
Speaker 1: which is being repeated and repeated because they want to
30:35
Speaker 1: convince us we're all going to die because AI is
30:37
Speaker 1: just the latest thing that's going to kill us all
30:39
Speaker 1: in our beds. And I'm going to say to that
30:42
Speaker 1: one word, really? Let's look at the reality. So on
30:48
Speaker 1: the 23rd of September, Australia's Prime Minister Albanese announced that
30:52
Speaker 1: a computer program built by OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT,
30:56
Speaker 1: had broken into the government website in June. The website
31:00
Speaker 1: that he's talking about publishes statistics about Medicare, which is
31:04
Speaker 1: Australia's public health system. And as you can see on screen,
31:08
Speaker 1: this is just one example of a whole host of
31:12
Speaker 1: alleged rogue AI incidents that have happened over the past
31:16
Speaker 1: year or so. What had actually happened with respect to
31:22
Speaker 1: the Australian situation was that OpenAI had asked its chatbot
31:27
Speaker 1: to look up figures on medicine spending as part of
31:30
Speaker 1: an internal test. And when the Australian website blocked the
31:34
Speaker 1: AI bot, it found a way around the block. OpenAI
31:39
Speaker 1: had noticed that this had happened because this task was
31:42
Speaker 1: given back in July. OpenAI noticed that it had happened
31:46
Speaker 1: in August. They didn't tell the Australian government until September.
31:50
Speaker 1: And only then, by emailing a general email address, Albanese
31:54
Speaker 1: said that this was unacceptable. And he has set up
31:57
Speaker 1: a review involving Australia's cybersecurity agency. And then his deputy
32:02
Speaker 1: described the damage as relatively minor. And the website hasn't
32:05
Speaker 1: been back up since. But as I say, Australia, the
32:08
Speaker 1: latest in a whole range of them, because OpenAI had
32:12
Speaker 1: previously announced that two of its AI programs had escaped
32:16
Speaker 1: from a supposedly secure test area and broken into hugging faces,
32:21
Speaker 1: everybody will know. And that's a company that hosts AI
32:25
Speaker 1: tools online. At the time, these AI programs were trying
32:30
Speaker 1: to steal answers to the test they had been set
32:33
Speaker 1: by OpenAI and so on. So a whole host of
32:40
Speaker 1: these things having happened, but the key point to realize
32:42
Speaker 1: is that this wasn't some kind of autonomous decision that
32:45
Speaker 1: was being made by AI chatbots. This was instructions given
32:52
Speaker 1: to an AI program and the AI program going out
32:56
Speaker 1: and finding a way to follow the instructions that they
33:00
Speaker 1: were given. And also in the case of the Australian hack,
33:03
Speaker 1: as it was being described, of course, there was no
33:07
Speaker 1: hack involved whatsoever. And that is the key thing that
33:13
Speaker 1: we've got to recognize here. There was no hacking done
33:15
Speaker 1: in any of these. Now that timeline graphic that you
33:18
Speaker 1: saw on screen, we'll just bring it on for one
33:20
Speaker 1: more second, was from a company called Transluce. which is
33:24
Speaker 1: an independent nonprofit research group, and they carried out their
33:28
Speaker 1: own investigation. And so they basically have confirmed that really
33:35
Speaker 1: there were no major, there's nothing really to write home
33:39
Speaker 1: about here. There were three failed break-in attempts, one that
33:43
Speaker 1: they highlight in the report, one against an American data website,
33:47
Speaker 1: a US university's online library, and the Australian incident. And
33:52
Speaker 1: they make the point that these were everyday tasks. The
33:54
Speaker 1: programs were not trying to cause harm. They were hunting
33:58
Speaker 1: for obscure statistics, but they weren't doing anything unlikely or unusual.
34:07
Speaker 1: So the bottom line here is this is being presented
34:12
Speaker 1: as yet another threat to our lives, an existential threat
34:15
Speaker 1: to humanity. And there are a number of motivations for this.
34:19
Speaker 1: The AI companies themselves are keen to make this implication because,
34:25
Speaker 1: of course, it implies that they're doing something particularly special
34:28
Speaker 1: and potentially dangerous. It's something that's sellable to investors, and
34:33
Speaker 1: so that helps get in the money. But governments and
34:37
Speaker 1: the media have their own motivations for pushing this narrative,
34:41
Speaker 1: which is even more dangerous, potentially, because it is reinforcing
34:46
Speaker 1: the fear in people and effectively making people feel that
34:50
Speaker 1: there's nothing they can do about events that are going
34:52
Speaker 1: on around them. My message here is it's mostly nonsense.
34:57
Speaker 1: And in fact, if you look at the kind of
35:00
Speaker 1: psychological operation that was done with respect to COVID, there
35:05
Speaker 1: are many parallels to be drawn here.
35:06
Speaker 2: Well, that came into my head as you were speaking, Mike,
35:09
Speaker 2: and I think this is absolutely right. Time and again,
35:12
Speaker 2: we're seeing things reported by the government with or without
35:17
Speaker 2: the legacy media, as you call it. And what is
35:21
Speaker 2: it designed to do? It's designed to make people fearful
35:25
Speaker 2: of something. This ups the anxiety. And then you've got
35:28
Speaker 2: a population which is even more susceptible to the next
35:32
Speaker 2: load of misinformation or disinformation from the BBC, for example.
35:37
Speaker 2: And so it ramps up. What's needed is a period
35:41
Speaker 2: of absolute calm, so that there's accurate reporting on what's
35:46
Speaker 2: going on. But I suggest that's not going to happen
35:49
Speaker 2: because the government wants the population in an agitated and
35:54
Speaker 2: therefore easier to control state.
35:56
Speaker 1: Well, there are voices out there of reason. Transluce is one.
36:00
Speaker 1: There are other blog posts on this with people just
36:04
Speaker 1: calling for a little bit of sanity on it. But
36:07
Speaker 1: of course, none of those ever get any kind of traction.
36:09
Speaker 1: And airtime.
36:10
Speaker 8: Yes.
36:11
Speaker 1: Let's, Brian, move on to Ukraine.
36:14
Speaker 2: Well, yes, I feel it's important that we keep an
36:17
Speaker 2: eye on Ukraine. And it's not just on the war.
36:21
Speaker 2: It's actually the suffering of the Ukrainians themselves. And it's
36:24
Speaker 2: clear that really there is absolutely no compassion in the
36:28
Speaker 2: Western political elite for Ukrainians. They're simply a tool to
36:33
Speaker 2: be used to attack and kill more Russians, as we're hearing.
36:39
Speaker 2: So I've just got one little video clip here of
36:42
Speaker 2: a drone attack. There's a Russian drone attack on Kiev
36:46
Speaker 2: during daylight hours. But you get a feeling for the
36:50
Speaker 2: sheer horror that these attacks cause, even though Russia is
36:56
Speaker 2: making very specific attacks on either military or strategic infrastructure
37:03
Speaker 2: targets rather than purely civilian targets. But let's play this
37:07
Speaker 2: little clip.
37:18
Speaker 8: Wow!
37:21
Speaker 7: Wow!
37:21
Speaker 2: Wow!
37:22
Speaker 4: Wow!
37:26
Speaker 7: Wow!
37:26
Speaker 9: Wow!
37:41
Speaker 2: Well, we can't understand what she was saying, but you
37:45
Speaker 2: can hear the distress in one woman in particular. And
37:48
Speaker 2: of course, these attacks are going on now 24 hours
37:52
Speaker 2: a day, day and night, as Russia keeps up the
37:55
Speaker 2: pressure on taking out strategic infrastructure for the Ukrainians, particularly
38:01
Speaker 2: the energy sector, so that we know Ukraine is going
38:05
Speaker 2: to be entering another winter unable to heat both domestic
38:11
Speaker 2: and work facilities, and indeed unable quite often to provide
38:17
Speaker 2: electricity for lighting and other essential needs. So this is
38:21
Speaker 2: the state of it. But UK's Labour Party wants war
38:27
Speaker 2: and more war because the aim is to destroy Russia.
38:33
Speaker 2: It's not to protect Ukrainians. And I just want to
38:36
Speaker 2: remind people, of course, that The snatch squads are on
38:39
Speaker 2: the streets. And this should just play in the clip here.
38:43
Speaker 2: And people being dragged into vehicles. Now, this particular clip,
38:48
Speaker 2: the man is being taken into a vehicle by, I
38:51
Speaker 2: believe it's police as opposed to men in military uniforms.
38:56
Speaker 2: But this was posted on a social media site as,
38:59
Speaker 2: in fact, another person. arrest or grabbing of a person
39:04
Speaker 2: in order to take them to the front. And I
39:08
Speaker 2: just make the point that we've got Andy Burnham and
39:11
Speaker 2: his government pouring more billions into Ukraine, which is acknowledged
39:16
Speaker 2: on the international stage as being utterly corrupt. What is
39:21
Speaker 2: it when you take public money, Mike, and you send
39:25
Speaker 2: it off to be used for criminal purposes? To me,
39:28
Speaker 2: that would be treason or it certainly malfeasance in public office.
39:33
Speaker 2: But Andy Burnham is now leader of the gang with this.
39:37
Speaker 2: This is another clip which we'll just put up on
39:40
Speaker 2: the screen. I'm going to make the same comment because
39:42
Speaker 2: it's the same event going on, except that we've got
39:46
Speaker 2: the snatch squads taking a woman. who's clearly very, very distressed.
39:52
Speaker 2: And this fits, as I reported earlier in today's news,
39:55
Speaker 2: with the fact that Ukraine, backed by the United Kingdom
39:59
Speaker 2: and the West and the US, are desperate now to
40:03
Speaker 2: get more women onto the battlefield because there's now a
40:06
Speaker 2: shortage of men due to the killing and the general carnage.
40:11
Speaker 2: So what do we say to Andy Burnham? Same old,
40:16
Speaker 2: isn't it, of all the Labour top people. But what's more,
40:21
Speaker 2: we've got the attack on Ukraine society itself. This is
40:25
Speaker 2: another post from social media where it's talking about military
40:31
Speaker 2: people who are now absolutely caught up in the gay agenda,
40:36
Speaker 2: actually protesting that they're being badly treated by comrades in
40:42
Speaker 2: the military in Ukraine, even before Russian soldiers have apparently
40:46
Speaker 2: got a chance to do something with them. So it's
40:49
Speaker 2: quite clear that Ukrainian society absolutely being destroyed, traditional Ukrainian
40:55
Speaker 2: values being ripped apart, all so that Ukraine can adopt
41:01
Speaker 2: the new pan-Western liberalist agenda again. And of course, ultimately
41:06
Speaker 2: be subsumed into the EU. Now, on top of all that,
41:11
Speaker 2: we've got the fact that British servicemen are being killed
41:16
Speaker 2: in Ukraine. So again, on Ministry of Defence X, they
41:21
Speaker 2: had this posting. It's with deep regret that we must
41:24
Speaker 2: announce that a member of the UK on forces died
41:27
Speaker 2: in a road traffic incident in Ukraine on Saturday, the
41:32
Speaker 2: 12th of September. So this is the unfortunate major concern,
41:37
Speaker 2: Paul Wilkes. But the MOD's policy is that this was
41:42
Speaker 2: another tragic accident. And it follows reports in December 2025
41:48
Speaker 2: of Lance Corporal Hooley, who apparently died while he was
41:55
Speaker 2: watching or observing a defensive operation by the Ukrainian military.
42:01
Speaker 2: So do we believe these statements, road traffic accident, and
42:08
Speaker 2: the British military were there simply observing defensive actions from Ukrainians?
42:14
Speaker 2: It seems very unlikely to me. And of course, we
42:18
Speaker 2: recently had retired Commodore Jeremy saying that he is hearing
42:23
Speaker 2: that there could be as many as 50 UK dead
42:27
Speaker 2: military personnel And that suggested total would fit the fact
42:35
Speaker 2: that UK military are absolutely involved in frontline operations with
42:40
Speaker 2: the Ukrainians. The idea that they're simply some sort of
42:44
Speaker 2: innocent observers behind the front lines seems to me to
42:48
Speaker 2: be particularly unlikely. So the Ukrainians suffering, British military clearly
42:54
Speaker 2: engaged in the fighting, or the government wants to keep
42:56
Speaker 2: denying this in the UK. And then we've got the
43:00
Speaker 2: propaganda rhetoric being ramped up. And here we've got Alicia Kearns,
43:05
Speaker 2: a conservative MP, who is being mocked on social websites
43:11
Speaker 2: overseas due to her statements. And what has she actually
43:15
Speaker 2: been talking about? Well, we could call it anti-Russian propaganda,
43:20
Speaker 2: but let's hear what she's had to say in her
43:24
Speaker 2: own words.
43:27
Speaker 9: In Ukraine, rape and sexual torture by Russian forces against women,
43:31
Speaker 9: men and children is industrialised. Let us remember the intercepted
43:35
Speaker 9: phone call of a Russian woman, Olga Bykovskaya, telling her husband,
43:40
Speaker 9: while laughing, to go and rape Ukrainian women, but not
43:45
Speaker 9: to tell her about it.
43:48
Speaker 2: I just find this astonishing, or perhaps I don't. Mike
43:51
Speaker 2: is going back to the First World War and German
43:53
Speaker 2: soldiers eating babies, but this is the level of rhetoric
43:57
Speaker 2: we need from elected MPs in order to keep this
44:01
Speaker 2: war going. Now, a few days ago, there was a
44:04
Speaker 2: really excellent discussion hosted by Fiorella Isabel with Vanessa Bealey.
44:11
Speaker 2: And the main guest was the journalist, journalist John Helmer.
44:17
Speaker 2: And John Helmer was talking about what Russia is really
44:20
Speaker 2: facing and saying effectively why it is doing such an
44:25
Speaker 2: amazing job in Ukraine. because it has got war on
44:29
Speaker 2: other fronts to keep watching and to keep defending. So
44:34
Speaker 2: let's hear what John Helmer had to say as part
44:36
Speaker 2: of that discussion.
44:40
Speaker 10: Russia's fighting half the world. I mean, Russia is fighting
44:45
Speaker 10: now not only the United States, but the entire Western alliance,
44:50
Speaker 10: including the Japanese and all the outliers like New Zealand, Australia,
44:55
Speaker 10: and so on. Fighting the rest of the world is
45:00
Speaker 10: what the Soviet Union was doing when it had more
45:03
Speaker 10: allies since the end of 1945. And arguably, the war
45:07
Speaker 10: against Russia is 100 years old. It's since the communist revolution,
45:13
Speaker 10: the Bolshevik revolution of 1917. Now, once you see the
45:19
Speaker 10: war is that long and the roots of the conflict
45:23
Speaker 10: that long and and others might put it back into
45:26
Speaker 10: the Crimean War of the Allies to save the Ottomans
45:31
Speaker 10: against the Russian Empire in the 1850s.
45:35
Speaker 8: Once you see it as that long, it's at least
45:40
Speaker 8: explicable that no matter how many operations and tactical initiatives
45:46
Speaker 8: you take on one battlefield, you've still got all the
45:49
Speaker 8: other battlefields to fight, right?
45:51
Speaker 10: You've got the southern front. as Vanessa knows very well,
45:55
Speaker 10: better than me, in Syria, in Lebanon, especially in Iran
46:02
Speaker 10: and the Persian Gulf and now Yemen and so on.
46:05
Speaker 10: You've got this, let's call that from Russian point of view,
46:08
Speaker 10: the southern front. On the eastern front, you're fighting the
46:12
Speaker 10: remilitarization of Japan, yeah, and with China and with North Korea,
46:19
Speaker 10: to be sure, and their powerful allies, to be sure.
46:22
Speaker 10: but that's the Eastern Front. You've got the Northern Front,
46:26
Speaker 10: in which Trump aims to remilitarize the entire Arctic Circle
46:31
Speaker 10: from Greenland. Well, let's start Norway, Finland, Sweden, Greenland, sorry,
46:39
Speaker 10: left out Denmark, excluded Denmark from Greenland, and go all
46:43
Speaker 10: the way over to Canada, and then add in the
46:46
Speaker 10: Golden Dome above it all. You've got the Northern Front.
46:50
Speaker 10: So in that world conflict. It's very uncomfortable for a
46:57
Speaker 10: non-Soviet ruler of Russia to say, we've got to have
47:05
Speaker 10: a pause to reorganize our abilities to fight all these fronts.
47:12
Speaker 2: So the main issue there is, of course, that the
47:15
Speaker 2: new world order, the world regime, wants Russia destroyed. It
47:20
Speaker 2: has to destroy Russia in order to bring in a
47:22
Speaker 2: one world system of government. Very interesting discussion. We'll make
47:26
Speaker 2: sure details are in the UK column link and encourage
47:30
Speaker 2: people to go and hear the full discussion between those three.
47:35
Speaker 1: Yes. Now, obviously last week we were talking about the
47:38
Speaker 1: UN General Assembly. Well, that is a gift that keeps
47:40
Speaker 1: on giving this year, apparently. So it's normally a pretty
47:43
Speaker 1: forgettable event. But everyone is banging the war drums this year.
47:48
Speaker 1: And one name we didn't mention last week was President
47:51
Speaker 1: of the European Council, Antonio Costa, who used his speech
47:56
Speaker 1: to push Mark Carney's latest scheme, the Partners for Multilateralism,
48:01
Speaker 1: also known as P4M. And he was inviting all nations
48:05
Speaker 1: to sign on to its declaration. Let's just have a
48:08
Speaker 1: listen to a little bit of what he said.
48:10
Speaker 4: The truth is, when we act together, Multilateralism delivers for
48:17
Speaker 4: people and it is why this week the United Union,
48:23
Speaker 4: the European Union has launched together with Australia, Barbados, Brazil, Canada,
48:29
Speaker 4: India and Kenya the P4M, Partners for Multilateralism, International Law,
48:36
Speaker 4: Peace and Prosperity. Our initiative aims to be an open
48:42
Speaker 4: platform for partners from all parts of the world who
48:46
Speaker 4: are ready to defend common principles and work towards practical solutions.
48:54
Speaker 1: Well, he went on to talk about coalition building, practical cooperation,
48:59
Speaker 1: supporting the work of the United Nations and all the
49:01
Speaker 1: other multilateral formats. He said it would help build bridges
49:05
Speaker 1: across various across regions, contribute to advancing the reform and
49:08
Speaker 1: modernization of the United Nations in a multilateral system, help
49:12
Speaker 1: to turn shared commitments into concrete action. And then he said,
49:16
Speaker 1: I invite all the nations in the chamber to join
49:18
Speaker 1: this initiative and endorse the P4M declaration. So his statement
49:23
Speaker 1: was so generic, actually, that who could disagree with it?
49:27
Speaker 1: But the first concrete case he wanted to raise wasn't
49:33
Speaker 1: that the P4M should oppose NATO's preparations for war with
49:38
Speaker 1: Russia or to oppose Benjamin Netanyahu's genocide in Palestine or
49:44
Speaker 1: the US-Israeli war against Iran. Instead, he repeated the NATO
49:49
Speaker 1: narrative that Russia-Ukraine conflict was, quote, a war chosen by
49:53
Speaker 1: Russia and that Russia is the one carrying out a, quote,
49:56
Speaker 1: dangerous escalation and threatening the security of several European Union
50:01
Speaker 1: member states. So he demanded that the international community does
50:05
Speaker 1: its utmost using all tools available to stop Russia. And
50:10
Speaker 1: as far as the Middle East, he was using language
50:12
Speaker 1: like we regret and that the EU supports all of
50:17
Speaker 1: the efforts to find a solution, blah, blah. But anyway,
50:21
Speaker 1: the point is that this is about bringing countries together
50:25
Speaker 1: as a sort of global coalition of the willing, expanding
50:29
Speaker 1: on what the UK has already done in order to
50:32
Speaker 1: point the guns at uh ukraine and just although he
50:36
Speaker 1: was claiming that this was a a european union it's
50:40
Speaker 1: actually driven by mark carney who will just bring on
50:43
Speaker 1: screen here for one second who's doing this in parallel
50:46
Speaker 1: with his efforts to get the global defense bank running
50:49
Speaker 1: which of course is designed to fund the forthcoming war
50:51
Speaker 1: with russia and eventually china later on uh so you
50:55
Speaker 1: know It's just despicable what these people are doing.
50:57
Speaker 2: All we've got to do is sit back and allow
50:59
Speaker 2: them to build this fine system, Mike, and we'll have
51:02
Speaker 2: peace and prosperity and welfare. Clearly, we should trust them
51:06
Speaker 2: or not.
51:07
Speaker 1: Or not, yes. But it gets better because more propaganda, Brian.
51:12
Speaker 2: Well, yes, I have to cover this really because it's
51:15
Speaker 2: been interesting for me at least to see how vague
51:19
Speaker 2: the BBC has been on its Yemen reporting as the
51:22
Speaker 2: Houthis have taken significant ground against all the odds, really.
51:28
Speaker 2: The BBC has had minimal reporting. And now suddenly, they've
51:33
Speaker 2: realized that things are looking bad in Yemen, as far
51:36
Speaker 2: as the BBC is concerned. And so this little article
51:40
Speaker 2: popped up. And we've got a journalist here. And I
51:45
Speaker 2: just looked at the picture. And I thought, my goodness,
51:49
Speaker 2: she's got a hard hat on. But she's very well
51:52
Speaker 2: presented the nails are long and manicured and clean and
51:56
Speaker 2: the clothing is very, very clean. What has she been
52:00
Speaker 2: up to? Well, let's have a look at this video
52:02
Speaker 2: clip that the BBC is very proud of because it
52:05
Speaker 2: shows them right up on the, what do we call it,
52:10
Speaker 2: the front in Yemen.
52:13
Speaker 11: The Houthis are based just behind this mountain and the drone,
52:19
Speaker 11: is this a Houthi drone or a government drone?
52:21
Speaker 4: Hit the deck, hit the deck.
52:27
Speaker 11: We can hear a drone above and we've been told
52:29
Speaker 11: that it's a Houthi drone so we're just taking cover
52:32
Speaker 11: on the roadside. We're trying to get out of here
52:39
Speaker 11: as quickly as possible. We could hear a Houthi drone
52:42
Speaker 11: buzzing above and the shooting beginning. We're on the front
52:45
Speaker 11: line in an escalating war here in Yemen. We're travelling
52:49
Speaker 11: with Saudi-backed pro-government forces as they battle to push back
52:53
Speaker 11: Houthi fighters. They swept down the coast of the Red
52:57
Speaker 11: Sea earlier this month, taking control of a key shipping
53:00
Speaker 11: choke point.
53:16
Speaker 1: So even though she had to hit the deck, she
53:18
Speaker 1: clearly didn't break a nail there, Brian?
53:20
Speaker 2: Well, she's been traveling in a vehicle in very dusty conditions,
53:24
Speaker 2: but she's immaculately turned out. Somebody announces a drone when
53:29
Speaker 2: that happens in Ukraine. You hear the stress and the
53:33
Speaker 2: panic in the troops or the civilians, both sides of
53:36
Speaker 2: the lines, Russia and Ukraine. But she calmly says, well,
53:40
Speaker 2: whose is it? There's no attempt to film the drone.
53:45
Speaker 2: And then apparently we've got to hit the dirt. There's
53:48
Speaker 2: no dirt on her. And the next minute we're leaving
53:52
Speaker 2: the area with no recordings of the gunshots that she
53:55
Speaker 2: said have just started. And she's into an interview as
54:01
Speaker 2: clean and well turned out as in the beginning.
54:05
Speaker 1: I look at this.
54:05
Speaker 2: I got several questions over this video clip. Where is
54:10
Speaker 2: the mountain is the first one because she points and
54:12
Speaker 2: you think that she's pointing at the sort of low
54:15
Speaker 2: rise a few hundred yards away. But later when they're
54:19
Speaker 2: in the car, you get a glimpse of the mountains,
54:21
Speaker 2: which are clearly 10, 15 miles away. So was she
54:26
Speaker 2: on the front lines? I suspect not. And where was
54:30
Speaker 2: the drone? No attempt to film it. You don't hear it,
54:33
Speaker 2: which is what you usually do both in Ukraine and
54:36
Speaker 2: the Lebanon. And where is... Now, while Al-Meghafi's makeup, sorry,
54:44
Speaker 2: why is her makeup perfect and her clothes so clean
54:47
Speaker 2: when she's apparently been reporting from frontline in a very
54:52
Speaker 2: arid district? To me, there is something very wrong with
54:55
Speaker 2: this report.
54:56
Speaker 1: Yes, indeed. Now, we're just going to skip forward a
54:59
Speaker 1: little bit here. And Brian, finish with Martin Brighton, a
55:07
Speaker 1: UK column colleague who has been on the receiving end
55:09
Speaker 1: of quite a lot of police interest in the last
55:12
Speaker 1: year or two?
55:13
Speaker 2: Well, over 20 years, probably, Mike. We just put this
55:17
Speaker 2: on screen because I interviewed Martin Brighton back in July,
55:21
Speaker 2: at the end of July. And we'll make sure there's
55:24
Speaker 2: a link for this in the notes so that people
55:26
Speaker 2: can see it. Martin done fantastic work exposing corruption, mainly
55:31
Speaker 2: in Sheffield City Council, hundreds of millions of pounds. Ever
55:35
Speaker 2: since that work and the fact that he later started
55:39
Speaker 2: Sea Connections, between the fraud and corruption in the Labour
55:43
Speaker 2: Party in Sheffield and other major cities and the cover-up
55:47
Speaker 2: of the abuse of children. He's had the police, South
55:51
Speaker 2: Yorkshire police, on his back. They raided his home. They
55:55
Speaker 2: took all of his computer and his phones, all of
55:58
Speaker 2: his electronic devices. But a couple of days ago, we
56:03
Speaker 2: are pleased to say that actually after 15 months of
56:08
Speaker 2: South Yorkshire police dropped the case against Martin. They'd been
56:12
Speaker 2: insinuating that he had inappropriate material on his computer. Remember,
56:19
Speaker 2: of course, that it was Martin who was digging into
56:22
Speaker 2: the cover up of the abuse of children by the establishment.
56:26
Speaker 2: That includes not only city authorities, but it also includes
56:31
Speaker 2: police themselves. What do they do? False accusation is made
56:35
Speaker 2: against him. he's arrested, questioned, and all of his evidence
56:42
Speaker 2: is taken. Now, the case has been dropped, and knowing Martin,
56:45
Speaker 2: I'm very sure that he's going to be having more
56:48
Speaker 2: than his five penny worth against the police and the
56:52
Speaker 2: city authorities themselves. But this just shows the brutality within
56:58
Speaker 2: the Labour Party administration when people start to ask the
57:02
Speaker 2: wrong questions about why the Labour Party And city authorities
57:08
Speaker 2: have been involved in covering up the abuse of children.
57:11
Speaker 2: So is this a positive report I'm making?
57:14
Speaker 1: Well, it is.
57:16
Speaker 2: But of course, it demonstrates that we can't trust local
57:19
Speaker 2: authorities or the police or indeed the Labour Party.
57:23
Speaker 1: Indeed. No, absolutely. You wanted to finish off just with
57:27
Speaker 1: a thank you.
57:27
Speaker 2: I did, because we are delighted to say, I'm just
57:31
Speaker 2: going to hold them up. We've had a wonderful selection
57:34
Speaker 2: of cards coming in.
57:35
Speaker 1: None of them are green.
57:38
Speaker 2: No, we're OK, I think, Mike, of cards coming into
57:41
Speaker 2: the UK column to thank us for the 20th anniversary.
57:47
Speaker 2: celebration and conference in the Crowne Plaza Hotel in Plymouth.
57:52
Speaker 2: People over the moon, they really, really enjoyed themselves. Quite
57:57
Speaker 2: a few of the people who sent back their questionnaires
58:00
Speaker 2: have said, could we do three a year in different locations? Well,
58:05
Speaker 2: that's an interesting ask. We'll be having a discussion about that.
58:10
Speaker 2: The key thing is that so many people really enjoyed themselves.
58:14
Speaker 2: And it was not only the speeches, it was being
58:18
Speaker 2: together with other people to talk about current issues in
58:22
Speaker 2: such a friendly, welcoming environment. So thank you very much
58:26
Speaker 2: for the thank you cards. And I'd also say a
58:29
Speaker 2: huge thank you to the gentleman that sent me an
58:33
Speaker 2: emergency can of sardines. This is as a result of
58:37
Speaker 2: the UK column reporting on the increase in prices of
58:40
Speaker 2: sardines in the supermarkets. I'll just say very gently, I
58:44
Speaker 2: did notice sunflower oil, but they are very much appreciated nonetheless.
58:49
Speaker 1: Absolutely. And I'll just mention and say thank you to
58:52
Speaker 1: the guest at the conference who sent his watch to
58:57
Speaker 1: me to have a look at repairing it. That has
59:02
Speaker 1: been received safely, so it'll be back to you as
59:05
Speaker 1: soon as possible. And if anybody wants to know what
59:07
Speaker 1: I'm talking about, you need to get a access to
59:10
Speaker 1: the live stream and have a look at my presentation
59:13
Speaker 1: so it's still possible to do that if you'd like
59:16
Speaker 1: to but I guess we've got to leave it there
59:19
Speaker 1: for today Brian and say thank you very much to
59:22
Speaker 1: Charles for joining us we'll obviously keep everybody posted on
59:26
Speaker 1: updates on the RAF Fairford issue We'll be back on
59:30
Speaker 1: Wednesday's program. And I believe Sushant Bhakti will be joining
59:34
Speaker 1: us on Wednesday as well. So do join us at
59:37
Speaker 1: 1 p.m. Don't forget interviews tonight. If you're a UK
59:40
Speaker 1: column member, stick around for extra. And we'll see you
59:44
Speaker 1: at 1 p.m. as usual on Wednesday.
59:46
Speaker 8: Bye-bye.
59:47
Speaker 1: Okay, bye-bye.