Latest / UK Column Radio / UK Column News - 13th August 2025

Transcript

UK Column News - 13th August 2025 · UK Column Radio

0:08
Good afternoon. It's just gone. 1:00 on
0:11
Wednesday the 13th of August 2025.
0:13
Welcome to UK column News. I'm your host, Charles Mallett.
0:17
I'm joined by a returned Mike Robinson.
0:20
Welcome to the programme, Mike. Thank you.
0:22
And via live link we have Patrick Henningson and Sandy
0:25
Adams. So welcome to the programme
0:27
both. Now as always, a lot to fit into
0:30
the programme, but we'll be dealing with the issues relating
0:33
to the changes in the criminal justice system, looking at how
0:37
the sky is to become further infested with drones, all in the
0:41
name of progress of course. A further and detailed look at
0:44
the latest with regard to the Online Safety Act 2023, as well
0:48
as an update on the situation in Lebanon and following Friday's
0:54
news, the latest on the Putin, Trump will they won't they
0:57
situation as well as sources of funding for the wokery pervading
1:04
the country. In addition, we will look at the
1:08
push for vaccination for all animals everywhere, for
1:11
everything and indeed plans for another proposed gigafactory.
1:15
But what we're going to start with today is the latest
1:18
situation from Gaza and indeed the killing of several Al
1:22
Jazeera journalists by the IDF, for which we will go straight to
1:27
Patrick Henningsen. Patrick.
1:30
You know, this is a a very important story.
1:32
Certainly it's nothing new. We've been watching journalists
1:35
being killed in Gaza for the last almost going on two years
1:38
now. Won't be long till October 2025
1:41
rolls around. But just to look at the Al
1:44
Jazeera report, Taj on this, obviously they were talking
1:47
about their journalist, their media team members here, Anas Al
1:51
Sharif, very highly regarded award winning journalist was
1:55
killed as well as I think in total, technically 5 journalists
1:59
and two other people were in this strike.
2:01
They were in a tent set up outside Al Shifa Hospital, which
2:05
had already been bombed and occupied and attacked by the
2:08
Israelis numerous times since October 7th.
2:12
And this, there's something about this story that has really
2:16
captured, I think, the attention of people in the West, as public
2:21
opinion is already shifting against Israel, where the
2:24
Western mainstream is starting to acknowledge that there's
2:27
something going on here that is historic and needs to be brought
2:32
to an end as quickly as possible.
2:34
We're talking about the violence, the killing, and what
2:36
can only be described according to international courts of
2:39
justice and others, as a genocide.
2:41
But here's a video posted by Anise and his team just before,
2:47
you know, just hours or days before they were killed by the
2:52
Israelis in this strike. But we'll roll this video and
2:55
and listen to what he says the. It may have been an older video
3:31
previously around the time of the alleged short, short lived
3:35
ceasefire, but the they're clearly marked as press and and
3:39
what we're seeing in the reporting now, we'll show you
3:42
evidence to that effect that they were targeted.
3:46
And there were warnings from the committee to protect journalists
3:50
as well as from other organisations, including the U
3:53
NS own rapporteur on this particular issue.
3:57
So there were multiple Reporters Without Borders, other
4:00
organisations that the Israel, the Israelis were running a
4:03
smear campaign against Denise, branding him as Hamas, as a
4:07
Hamas journalist and so forth. So they're basically justifying
4:10
the killing of this journalist. Now let's look at the New York
4:13
Times coverage on this. And this is important to point
4:16
out how they frame this year. And if we look at what, what,
4:20
what to know about Al Jazeera, the broadcaster targeted by
4:22
Israel. And, and if we just look at the
4:25
author on this, and this isn't just in this case, this is
4:28
really for the New York Times across the board, Efrat Livni
4:33
for cut her teeth with the Jerusalem Report, an absolute
4:38
partisan on this issue and how she's framing it is, you know,
4:43
is, is basically Al Jazeera is having to defend themselves in
4:46
the opening paragraphs of this report.
4:49
Al Jazeera said the strike killed five of its journalists
4:51
and denied Israeli claims that its reporters have ties to
4:55
Hamas. And and she goes on to to
4:57
basically it's almost like has to make the case to defend.
5:00
Al Jazeera needs to vindicate itself and prove that it's not
5:05
these reporters aren't terrorists or affiliated with
5:08
terrorists. It's unbelievable.
5:09
And we'll show you what happens when you put the shoe on the
5:12
other foot. But here, here is the numbers.
5:15
And if you look at this, Israel's killing more
5:18
journalists than any time ever in history.
5:21
These are this is from Brown University, Ivy League school in
5:24
the United States. Look at all those wars first
5:27
from right, from the left hand side, World War One and two, I
5:30
think less than 100 journalists. Korean War in 1950 to 53 or you
5:36
know, less than 30. Vietnam slightly more, you know,
5:40
60-70 than Yugoslavia, a little bit less, 40 something.
5:44
Afghanistan up towards 70 you could say.
5:47
Ukraine minuscule, they're less, you know, less than 30.
5:52
And then we have Gaza 2023 to 2020, five, 238 plus that
5:58
doesn't count. Cameraman, in some cases,
6:01
drivers, people who are in support teams to the
6:04
journalists. And mind you, no Western
6:06
journalists are allowed to report in there.
6:09
So what's actually going on here?
6:11
Israel is preparing a ground invasion into Gaza.
6:15
They do not want anybody documenting what is about to
6:18
happen. But this has been the policy
6:20
straight through. They don't even let their own
6:22
journalists in there, by the way.
6:24
And so now they're killing all of the stringers that work for
6:28
global mainstream media as they have with UN workers and so
6:32
forth. So that that that seems to be
6:34
what the policy is here. Now, let's look at this piece by
6:37
Jonathan Cook. And this is just a stunning
6:39
piece of journalism by, by by Jonathan who who we've remarked
6:43
before, award winning journalist, OK, the BBC helped
6:47
kill Anas Al Sharif. It's reporting will kill more
6:52
journalists. And the point here, let's let's,
6:54
let's look at what's said here by the BBC, OK?
6:59
This is what they're saying they're positing in the report.
7:02
There's a question of proportionality says the beep is
7:06
just, is it justified to kill 5 journalists when you were only
7:10
targeting one? Think about that for a minute.
7:13
The way this is being framed is so insidious by the BBC.
7:18
And here's what Jonathan Cook says in his analysis.
7:21
This is just a brilliant article, by the way, and I
7:25
encourage everybody to go read it.
7:26
But he said, imagine that Israel finally allows Western
7:30
journalists into Gaza after blocking their entry for nearly
7:33
two years. A team of five familiar BBC
7:37
faces covering the region set up shop in Gaza and work out of an
7:42
improvised studio inside the enclave, like a tent at Al Shifa
7:47
hospital in this case. And he goes on.
7:51
And then news breaks that their studio had been hit by an
7:55
Israeli strike and all 5 killed. Jeremy Bowen, Lisa Doucette,
8:01
Yolande Nell, Lucy Williamson and John Donnison, the author of
8:07
this particular piece that Cook is critiquing.
8:10
Now just imagine the uproar. What would be the reaction from
8:15
the West? And here, here's what the
8:18
reaction would be. So is Jonathan Cook saying.
8:20
In short, the British government and a servile BBC that
8:24
regurgitates its positions have the blood of Al Sharif and
8:30
Gaza's other journalists directly on their hands.
8:32
They helped kill him, and in reporting his murder, they're
8:36
ensuring that more journalists in Gaza will be murdered in the
8:40
days, weeks and months to come. And the analysis goes on to just
8:45
show how insidious this terrorist label can be that's
8:48
just applied so arbitrarily by Israel and by extension by the
8:53
British and the US and European governments to basically justify
8:58
killing pretty much anybody that is insinuated as being connected
9:02
to Hamas. You have to remember Hamas is
9:04
the elected government. They're they're in charge of the
9:07
administration of Gaza from the beginning of this crisis.
9:10
So anybody that used to be a press officer for the Hamas
9:13
government prior to October 7th, OK.
9:16
It's and he makes the argument this would be no different if
9:19
Britain is implicated in war crimes in assisting Israel in
9:22
the genocide. Then all the BBC people that
9:25
work for a state broadcaster for a government that's simply
9:28
implicated in in a major war crime.
9:31
Then what are they at that point?
9:33
Are they terrorists as well? Or the BBC could, could somebody
9:36
say, well, they're, they're they're linked to the British
9:39
government there and British government's guilty of genocide
9:42
or a go. The journalists are, you know,
9:43
fair game. That's the argument Cook's
9:45
making. And it's quite a it's quite a
9:48
shocking and compelling argument.
9:49
And again, just just to go back to the article here, go to
9:53
Jonathan Cook's sub stack and do subscribe.
9:56
I'm a subscriber to Jonathan and, and, and read this.
10:00
This is just an amazing piece. He does amazing work.
10:04
But this is just something else. Now look at this, OK, this is
10:08
the national in Scotland, UK spy plane over Gaza as Israel killed
10:13
journalists. So the the implication here is,
10:16
is, is the UK government involved in their overflights
10:19
which take off from RAF Equatorial in Cyprus and then
10:23
supplying all the information and data over to Israel?
10:28
We know about the Lavender AI applications and how they're
10:32
used to track and target individuals, including
10:34
journalists. Is that what happened here?
10:36
Well, here's Matt Kennard and he's been reporting on this and
10:39
done excellent work on this particular subject here on X UK
10:43
government never wanted you to see this.
10:45
They spent 20 months concealing flight paths of RAF spy missions
10:50
over Gaza on behalf of Israel, but they recently contracted it
10:54
out to AUS company. The new pilot soon forgot to
10:58
turn off his transponder. The evidence for a war crimes
11:03
trial right here. And that's it folks.
11:06
I mean, there's enough evidence here to lodge a serious legal
11:12
challenge on this basis to all these governments, particularly
11:15
the US and the UK on this issue. And, and we, we've compiled a
11:22
lot of the documentation of this, including PDF documents
11:26
and so forth. So if you want a deep dive, go
11:28
to 21st century y.com and ask Al Sharif.
11:31
Unyielding voice for Palestinian justice will not be silenced.
11:36
And that's up there on our website.
11:38
So I do encourage people to go there for more details.
11:42
And, and I hope this is the, this is one of those stories
11:44
that's going to change people's attitudes on this who've been on
11:48
the fence on this issue. Let.
11:50
Let's hope so. Yeah, Patrick, thank you for
11:53
that. And I just want to briefly
11:56
demonstrate the sheer hypocrisy of the UK regime, particularly
12:00
if it as you suggest and as others are suggesting, they were
12:05
directly involved in this operation.
12:08
So let me just bring this on screen because when it was set
12:14
up by a previous, although sorry, it was set up by a
12:17
previous regime. Sorry.
12:19
Let's go back. The National Committees for the
12:22
Safety of Journalists, Sorry, I'm getting this wrong at the
12:25
moment. Let's here we go.
12:28
The National Committee for the Safety of Journalists, I should
12:31
say, still exists. It's currently headed up by Jess
12:34
Phillips MP, Minister for Safeguarding and Violence
12:37
against women and girls in the Home Office.
12:40
And yes, OK, I hear you all saying, but that's only for the
12:43
protection of UK journalists and there's a certain amount of
12:47
hypocrisy and that in itself. But if we head over here, you
12:51
got a sneak preview of it to the House of Lords Library.
12:55
We can talk about the Media Freedom Coalition, also set up
12:58
by the UK government. And it is a part of a group of
13:05
51 countries that the British regime LED, which advocates for
13:10
media freedom, the safety of journalists and holding,
13:13
specifically holding those who harm journalists to account.
13:17
So is the UK going to hold itself to account here?
13:19
I don't think so. Israel's not part of the media
13:22
freedom coalition as we might expect, but the UK is absolutely
13:27
still a member. So, Patrick, very briefly, I
13:31
mean, what are your thoughts on that?
13:33
Well, first of all, the Media Freedom Coalition, I think this
13:36
was promoted by at the Time Lord Ahmed from not mistaken a few
13:39
years ago, Amal Clooney. This is when Jeremy Hunt, I
13:43
believe, was the secretary at the time.
13:46
And they did this while Julian Assange was incarcerated in a in
13:50
a maximum security prison. Belmarsh, that one of the
13:54
world's most decorated journalists was being held
13:57
without any charge, basically without any legal due process
14:03
arbitrarily and eventually got out.
14:05
But that's when they launched that.
14:07
While they put as they locked up Assange, they launched the Media
14:11
Freedom campaign. And I spoke about that publicly
14:14
at the time and others did as well, just to point out the
14:17
sheer hypocrisy of it. Talk about a double standard.
14:20
It's not even worth commenting on.
14:23
So, I mean, you just have to look at the record of these
14:27
governments who are pushing these.
14:29
These are just public relations, you know, things to put out to
14:32
make it look like they're friendly to the press.
14:34
But in at the end of the day, when it comes to national
14:36
security and hardcore geopolitics, all this stuff goes
14:40
right out the window. Yeah.
14:42
And Charles, you know, anybody that's in the British media that
14:46
thinks that if they're abroad, they're in any way, so they're
14:48
any way safe. They're naive.
14:50
They are. Although I think another thing
14:52
that's worth pointing out, following on from what Jonathan
14:54
Cook's been saying, which is absolutely right to to bring out
14:57
is the incredible inconsistency with what was happening in
14:59
Syria. In particular, Jeremy Bowen's
15:01
sort of glad handing of Jelani Al Sharar, who of course until
15:06
that point was reckoned to be the head of a terrorist
15:08
organisation, yet the BBC were there actively promoting him.
15:12
So that the the inconsistencies and the hypocrisy just is, is
15:15
really boundless. But as you say, Patrick, one
15:18
would hope it would be a turning point.
15:19
But I mean, how many times we said that before?
15:22
Indeed. Yeah, now what we will do is
15:25
come back to these shores and look at the subject of Home
15:28
Affairs and the criminal justice system because the past couple
15:32
of weeks has seen a deluge of edicts, so called policy changes
15:36
and the obvious deployment of smokes and mirrors.
15:38
Consultation is out on updating the operations and response
15:42
guidance for police and it runs until the 14th of October.
15:46
And I thought I would just draw your attention to the fact that
15:48
it includes terrorist attacks, severe weather emergencies and
15:53
major public events where something has gone wrong.
15:57
Now, in an effort to deal with situations that might be
16:01
perceived to have gone wrong or are about to go wrong, the Home
16:04
Secretary has been busy announcing the roll out of 10
16:08
new vans for seven new police forces that are going to be
16:11
carrying out live facial recognition.
16:14
Now she talks about it like there's absolutely nothing wrong
16:16
with this and there are no consequences.
16:18
But of course there absolutely are.
16:20
It was been described in in the statement that they will operate
16:24
according to strict rules which ensure that they are only
16:27
deployed when there is specific intelligence and the College of
16:31
Policing has guidance on how the technology should be used.
16:34
I would put it that on the balance of probability, it's
16:37
very unlikely to turn out that way.
16:40
The College of Policing guidance on live facial recognition
16:43
states that each face that is found is mapped by software
16:48
taking measurements of facial features, such as the distance
16:51
between the eyes and the length of the jawline to create a
16:54
unique set of biometric data. So there's no ambiguity.
16:57
This absolutely does represent a harvesting of harvesting process
17:02
of metric data. Now at this point, therefore, I
17:06
would point you towards the Information Commissioner because
17:10
it is pointed out on his website that you may make a subject
17:14
access request and I quote the right of access alter also
17:18
entitles the requester to a copy of their personal information
17:24
when you use biometric recognition systems.
17:26
So this is the deployer of the facial recognition system.
17:29
This includes personal information such as a biometric
17:33
sample, as well as any biometric data such as a biometric
17:36
template. So the system I would say, as it
17:40
currently stands, would be unable to cope with a large
17:43
volume of subject access requests.
17:45
And there'll be a link to all of this in the show notes.
17:47
So I think from a journalistic perspective, UK could be very
17:51
interested in any reports that might come in of the way in
17:54
which subject access requests that you might put in concerning
17:58
live facial recognition are dealt with.
18:00
And this could be a considerable method by which the system can
18:05
be challenged. Now, on a very much related
18:07
note, there's been a change put forward by Ministry of Justice
18:12
and they're describing it as to restrict sex offenders from
18:16
entering geographical zones. Now this is in effect
18:20
geofencing, which is the process of monitoring an individual by
18:23
GPS to ensure that they do not move on the bounds of such an
18:26
area. But it seems from what they're
18:27
saying these areas could be made to be very small, which of
18:30
course conditions people into considering that justice has
18:33
never really been served. And I would say that it looks
18:36
like it's normalising confinement by these sorts of
18:40
remote systems. Linked again to this and tied
18:45
into the ever quoted plan for change is the much vaunted plan
18:49
to deport immediately. But This is why I refer to smoke
18:52
and mirrors because section 32 of the Border 2007 deals with
18:57
exactly this issue, deportation of foreign criminals.
19:00
And subsections four and five talk about the purpose of, for
19:03
the purpose of the Immigration Act 1971.
19:06
The deportation of a foreign criminal is conducive to the
19:09
public good and the Secretary of State must make a deportation
19:13
order in respect of a foreign criminal.
19:15
So this is something that's being dressed up as a new policy
19:18
or new bit of law. In fact, it's not.
19:20
It's a failure to act on the law that was already in place.
19:23
Now a statement also on deportation, pointing to what
19:28
the immigration white Paper will do, As though this really is a
19:33
silver bullet by Shabana Mahmoud.
19:36
And again, using disingenuous language every time as they've
19:41
sort of made it up in the 1st place.
19:42
But to harness or to continue to harness the emotive subject of
19:46
racial and ethnic tensions, the National Police Chiefs Council
19:51
have put out guidance saying that they're going to consider
19:53
disclosing the ethnicity and nationality of suspects when
19:57
they are charged in high profile and sensitive investigations.
20:00
Now this of course relates back to the events immediately after
20:04
the attacks in Southport last year, at which point it was
20:09
deemed that it could have been expedient to peace had the
20:12
police actually put details out in relation to ethnicity.
20:17
Of course, this is being misreported because we're only
20:20
talking about this happening at the point of charge, and indeed
20:24
police still retain control of. Decision making process that
20:27
there's every chance that it continue, it could continue to
20:30
be carried out in such a way that absolutely does fuel the
20:34
fire for what they're calling disinformation.
20:37
Now with Palestine Action arrests in mind, I've just draw
20:41
attention to the Crime and Policing Bill which is currently
20:44
going through Houses of Parliament now.
20:47
And section 10 of course talks about the offence of trespassing
20:51
with the intent to to conduct a criminal offence which would
20:55
carry a sentence, a maximum sentence of only three months.
20:58
Now, hypothetically speaking, had the Palestine Action Bryce
21:01
Norton activists been stopped short of painting the aircraft
21:05
that they did subsequently paint, they would not be a
21:08
prescribed organisation today. So I would say it presents an
21:11
obvious issue when considering the different outcomes and it
21:14
would look as though it would open the door to pressure on
21:16
police to allow an intended crime to go ahead because the
21:20
consequences would be more severe.
21:22
And just as a closing note, just to point you towards the what's
21:27
called the AI plan for justice. And here we have the issue of
21:31
pre crime absolutely writ large, which is saying that they're
21:35
going to be driving the responsible adoption of AI to
21:38
enable people to deliver world leading public services.
21:41
What they really mean is just handing over control of
21:43
absolutely everything to a computer and not experiencing
21:46
any comeback. They talk about a violent
21:48
predictor, analysing different factors.
21:51
This is concerning violence in prisons.
21:53
So in effect just handing all responsibility, all control to
21:57
the system and indeed it covers the wider justice system.
22:01
But of course, the main point to fall out of it is that whilst it
22:04
says that it's not going to take away from what judges do as
22:08
people and indeed cites several other bodies, prosecutors and
22:13
whatnot, It does not make any reference to juries, of course.
22:17
So I will wrap that up there. And now we are going to go to
22:23
Sandy on what might be perceived as a slightly related issue,
22:27
which is that of drones. Yes, it, it certainly is related
22:32
and also with facial recognition and GDPR and everything else
22:36
that goes with all the stuff you've been talking about.
22:40
Because Pricewaterhouse Cooper have published their 3.0 Skies
22:45
without limits. They they had a 2.0 in 2023 and
22:51
this paints a picture of drones that are ready to transform the
22:54
UK economy. Price for tyres Cooper aiming to
22:58
have 900,000 of the skies by 20-30.
23:04
I think they're behind, to be honest with their with their
23:06
predictions, but nevertheless, that's, that's their intention
23:10
and it's paving the way for unprecedented surveillance along
23:14
with it. So we, you know, it's powered by
23:17
advanced AI and it's quietly eroding our privacy protections.
23:22
The Civil Aviation Authority are making provision for this for
23:27
drone flight up to about 500 feet.
23:29
I think it's 4 to 500 feet. And Amazon have now got
23:33
contracts to do their deliveries with drones.
23:35
So that's going to knock out a whole load of delivery drivers
23:39
and jobs in the UK. And they say that this is going
23:42
to promote jobs. I, I can't see it somehow.
23:45
Price Waterhouse Cooper's latest study shows major break
23:49
breakthroughs. Drones are now flying beyond
23:51
visual of sight for many monitoring purposes.
23:55
Agricultural drones are spraying crops and mapping farmland and
24:00
promoting agrotech. And they're, they're being used
24:03
in, in surveying and all sorts of things, which I, you know, I
24:06
think there's a valid use for drones.
24:09
I'm not saying there isn't. But the, the, the issue is
24:12
there's a, it's the quantity of them and that they will be
24:16
surveilling us at the same time. So, you know, for industry, it
24:22
may be a, you know, progress, but for the people, it could be
24:26
a big red flag. Every one of these Jones can be
24:29
fitted with high resolution cameras, thermal sensors and
24:32
even facial AI recognition. Once that infrastructure's in
24:37
the air, it's only a matter of time before it's used to track
24:40
people, which I'm sure it will be.
24:43
And there's obviously the the GDDPR question, which is the U
24:47
KS main data protective law. It comes under pressure because
24:51
in theory GDPR says that you can't collect personal data
24:56
without consent or a clear legal basis.
24:59
But in practise, drones can gather all this information
25:02
without you even knowing what's going on.
25:06
So faces on a streetcar, number plates, movements linked to home
25:09
addresses. Combine that with AI and drones,
25:13
you know you, they see you and they can identify you and they
25:17
can predict your behaviour and cross reference you with other
25:21
databases. So, you know, the the AIG level
25:26
analysis drones become mobile data harvesters in effect.
25:30
So, you know, we've got there are issues here with the drones.
25:35
You know, it it reports and celebrates growing public
25:38
acceptance. This this paper does saying over
25:41
70% of industry stakeholders now see the perception as green.
25:47
But the more we normalise these drones it the easier it becomes
25:51
for governments and corporations to run permanent aerial
25:55
surveillance. That's the problem.
25:57
And I, I think that really, you know, we're not far from a, a
26:01
scenario where drones linked to AI command centres can track
26:05
individuals in, in real time. So the industry says drones can
26:09
deliver medicines faster, inspect power line safely and
26:12
monitor the environment more effectively.
26:15
But once, once it's all in place, they could become part of
26:21
an always on surveillance grid, which is really worrying.
26:24
So that's it really. They're, they're developing them
26:28
at breakneck spree speed. And before the drones make that
26:32
decision for us, you know, are we going to do something about
26:35
it? Thank.
26:37
You again subject access requests.
26:40
That seems to be a reasonable option for completely helping
26:44
deal with this. Yeah, if one can work out where
26:46
to direct them, of course. And I think the other, the other
26:48
thing to point out, which I referred to a few months ago was
26:51
if we're to be told about the threat of drain swarms on the
26:54
continent, how are we to perceive whether or not a drone
26:57
is friendly or a threat? And I think that might be coming
27:02
into play now whether or not you're a member of UK column.
27:05
I hope that you are making best use of the website, but if
27:07
you're not, we'll have a quick look at where you can go to find
27:10
out what you need. And indeed, at the top right of
27:13
the homepage is a search function, which I would
27:16
encourage you to use. I would also make sure that you
27:18
use the sections and indeed take a look at the comment because
27:21
there is absolutely enormous amounts of information there and
27:25
a great place to start whatever it is you might be researching.
27:28
If you are not yet a member, but then please consider joining us
27:32
on the front page is a great big button saying click here and
27:34
we'd love to have you on board as a monthly, a annual or indeed
27:38
a lifetime member. Now in terms of what's going out
27:42
in the near future, we've got Germ talking to Carl Zarr who
27:46
you will be familiar with. That's on at 7:00 this evening.
27:48
And then, Sandy, just a quick bit on Peter Taylor, who you've
27:51
just recorded an interview with. Yes, Peter Taylor was, he was
27:57
aun environmental scientist and he, he realised whilst he was
28:02
working for many, many years, he, he, he was in the ecology
28:06
movement. He realised that there was a
28:08
different agenda coming in and he realised that that climate
28:11
change was an issue and he wrote a book called Chill and he was
28:15
vilified for it. So it's his story really of, of
28:19
of what happened after he wrote the book.
28:21
Chill. Super.
28:22
Thank you very much. And that's going out at 1:00
28:24
tomorrow on the UK Column website.
28:25
Now coming up, we've got the Hope Freedom Festival, which UK
28:29
Column will be at. So please make sure you get
28:31
tickets there and use the discount code UKC 2 zero.
28:35
And then Patrick, very briefly on the Rebel tent this year.
28:40
Yeah, this is going to be a a powerful line up, a beautiful
28:44
days festival just outside Exeter.
28:46
That's this weekend, Friday, Saturday, Sunday.
28:48
And Craig Murray, David Miller, myself moderating some of the
28:53
panels, Matt Canner, Yard Loki, Chris Williamson, ASA Winstanley
28:57
and of course Jackie Walker and Zara Sultana from the new
29:01
political party with Jeremy Corbyn.
29:03
So it's going to be amazing Rebel Tent this year at
29:07
Beautiful Days. So if anybody's going to be at
29:10
the festival, of which they'll be many, come up on the top of
29:12
the hill and check us out. And if there's any tickets left,
29:16
just get in touch with their website and see if there's any
29:18
availability. But should be pretty powerful.
29:21
Fantastic. Thanks Patrick.
29:23
So do get along to that if you can.
29:24
And then a reminder that our the first speaker we've announced is
29:27
Andrew Wakefield for our on location event in York Saturday
29:31
the 18th of October. There are tickets left, so
29:33
please don't delay, but also remember that you will have the
29:37
access to the pro the film, Andrew Wakefield's film Protocol
29:40
7. Should you buy a ticket, There
29:42
are only 150 tickets left for the in person event, but plenty
29:47
obviously on the live stream. So please make sure that you do
29:50
consider joining us for that. We'd we'd absolutely love to see
29:53
you and it will be a phenomenal event.
29:55
Now I said that we're going to be looking at online safety, so
29:58
I'm going to hand over to Mike for the latest on that and
30:01
indeed the ACT concerning it. Thank you, Charles Wright.
30:04
So on the 22nd and 23rd of July, the High Court in London heard a
30:10
legal challenge brought by the Wikimedia Foundation against the
30:13
Categorisation Regulation of regulations of the Online Safety
30:17
Act. Now the Wikimedia Foundation
30:19
says it shares the UK government's commitment to
30:22
promoting online environments where everyone can safely
30:25
participate. But they're complaining that
30:28
that the fact that they are likely to be made a so called
30:30
category one organisation under the ACT and that would quote
30:35
undermine the privacy and safety of Wikipedia's volunteer
30:39
contributors, expose the encyclopaedia to manipulation
30:42
and vandalism, and divert essential resources from
30:46
protecting people and improving Wikipedia.
30:48
For example, they say, the Foundation would be required to
30:53
verify the identity of many Wikipedia contributors,
30:57
undermining the privacy that is central to keeping Wikipedia
31:01
volunteers safe. In addition to being able to
31:04
accept being exceptionally burdensome.
31:07
Burdensome. This requirement, which requires
31:09
just one of several category One demands that would expose
31:13
contributors to data breaches, stalking, lawsuits, or even
31:16
imprisonment by authoritarian regimes.
31:19
So in other words, they're not happy that the age verification
31:23
requirements would expose the identity of Phillip Cross.
31:26
Perhaps, and I want to be clear here, as much as I believe that
31:31
Wikipedia is completely compromised and is as far from
31:34
an objective as it can get, they are correct to raise these
31:38
concerns. And I would very much like to
31:41
know the identity of Philip Cross as much as anyone else
31:44
who's been on the receiving end of his propaganda.
31:47
But they were absolutely correct to take this to court.
31:50
So I'm certain that everyone, or sorry, I'll rephrase that, I'm
31:55
certain that very few will be surprised that on Monday this
31:59
week, the High Court dismissed the Wikimedia Foundation's court
32:06
case. And but not without caveats,
32:10
because according to the statement from the Wikimedia
32:12
Front Foundation, the judge recognised the significant value
32:18
of Wikipedia as safety. It's safety for users, as well
32:23
as the damages that wrongly assigned Online Safety Act
32:26
categorizations and duties would have on the human rights of
32:30
Wikipedia's volunteer contributors, they say.
32:33
The court stressed. They say that it does not give
32:36
Ofcom the step the and the Secretary of State a green green
32:40
light to implement a regime that would significantly impede
32:43
Wikipedia's operations. And they said that they could
32:47
face legal repercussions if they fail to protect Wikipedia and
32:51
the rights of its users. In order to achieve that
32:55
outcome, the judge suggested that Ofcom may need to find
32:58
particularly flexible interpretation of the rules in
33:01
question, or that the rules themselves may need amendment in
33:04
Parliament. Now, we should know that the
33:08
first category categorization decisions from Ofcom are
33:11
expected later in the summer. So this is not a done deal yet,
33:14
and perhaps this court case will still have an effect on that
33:18
decision. But of course, the justification
33:21
for all this is keeping children safe.
33:25
This is a lie which gov.uk repeats for everything that it's
33:29
doing. And my question then is why are
33:32
they talking about this approach when the bigger risk to children
33:36
is adults accessing sites and children and those adults posing
33:41
as children themselves? Just to reinforce this, the
33:44
National Crime Agency estimates that there are between 550,000
33:49
and 850,000 people in the UK who pose a sexual risk to children
33:54
as of 2024. And so I want to then highlight
33:59
the US based National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children
34:04
because they have recently published their latest cyber tip
34:08
line report covering up to 2024. And they noted that last year
34:14
they received 400, sorry, 546,000 reports from tech firms
34:19
of adults across the world soliciting children.
34:23
That's a 192% increase from 2023.
34:26
And I think that's probably more to do with the fact that these
34:28
are being reported much more often more than anything else.
34:31
And it's probably the tip of the iceberg.
34:33
Now around 9600 of these reports came from the UK in the first
34:40
six months of 2024 with Snap Snapchat reporting far more
34:45
concerning material to this organisation than the other
34:48
platforms. And this is, as I say, the tip
34:52
of an iceberg since it's this is only covering incidents that are
34:56
reported and not incident incidences that have gone past
35:01
being unreported. And yet Ofcom apparently doesn't
35:04
see this as an urgent priority. And in a statement to me from
35:08
Ofcom, their media team explained that quotes the use of
35:12
age assurance should also make it harder for adults to pose as
35:15
children, given age cheques must be highly effective at
35:18
determining whether a user is an adult or a child.
35:21
That's disingenuous because later on in the same statement,
35:25
they go on to say our approach to highly effective age
35:28
assurance is that services should treat users as a child
35:32
and apply the the default protections unless they've gone
35:35
through an age check and been determined to be over 18.
35:38
And I mean, I shouldn't be the only one that sees disparity
35:42
here. All of Ofcom's rhetoric on this,
35:44
including at the recent age assurance live event, which they
35:47
ran, is about verifying that people are over 18, not under.
35:51
And they claim so. They're suggesting that in doing
35:55
that they can protect children that are under 18.
35:57
It doesn't work that way because mostly platforms are checking
36:01
for being over 18. They're not checking people that
36:04
are are supposedly under 18 and they're not asking people on
36:07
child oriented websites. They're not asking children to
36:10
verify their age that they are under 18.
36:12
That's not part of the the current programme.
36:15
So anyway, they claim to have anti grooming measures in place
36:19
and but as the NCMEC report demonstrated, if those measures
36:25
exist at all, they're highly ineffective.
36:28
But don't worry, Ofcom is quotes currently consulting on further
36:32
strengthening these anti grooming measures by proposing
36:35
that platforms should you just reuse robust AIDS cheques to
36:38
underpin measures they take to protect children from grooming.
36:42
End Quote. So I'm just going to say it
36:44
again, the Online Safety Act, the entire regime needs to be
36:47
repealed and Ofcom needs to be disbanded.
36:51
And we're glad to see that the petition is now up to 518,656 as
36:57
of 10:00 this morning. It's slowing down, but we did.
37:01
We need to keep the momentum up in this.
37:03
The whole issue needs to go back to Square 1A.
37:06
New conversation needs to happen, Charles, around this
37:10
whole censorship industrial complex, which has been built.
37:15
And then just to end this segment, Speaking of digital ID,
37:18
because that's basically what we've been speaking about,
37:20
Companies House, which hasn't given a damn about the accuracy
37:24
of their database records in the last 180 years, has suddenly
37:28
decided to demand ID verification for all company
37:31
directors. And Charles, my question is, why
37:34
now? Quite.
37:35
Yeah. Well, I mean, you know the
37:37
question that can be applied to absolutely all these things that
37:40
are demanding similar. It's absolutely nothing to do
37:42
with the requirement for company directors, that's for sure.
37:46
But no, I think I mean, very good point there with the
37:48
specifically with regard to the, you know, all the organisations
37:50
that are affected by the Online Safety Act and Wikipedia in
37:53
particular 91 comes to mind. And there's just this absolute
37:56
failure for people to recognise that it does actually present a
37:58
threat to everybody, regardless of your position on the
38:01
spectrum. Let's say now something we'll
38:04
talk about an extra I'm sure Patrick, we said that we would
38:08
give an update on the situation in Lebanon and we'll we'll go to
38:13
you now for your, your take on the latest there.
38:17
Sure. And we, what we believe is just
38:21
from what's been happening politically, Lebanon is on the
38:24
cusp of exploding and right now tremendous threat of a civil war
38:30
breaking out. And I say civil war in sort of
38:34
quotes because the last protracted civil war, so called
38:37
civil war in Lebanon was really orchestrated by external powers,
38:41
namely the United States and Israel.
38:44
And so I think we can more or less expect the same thing here.
38:47
What you need to understand about this is that the US is, is
38:52
trying to pose a Hobson's choice to Lebanon that it's, it's
38:57
either disarm Hezbollah, OK, And obviously they're doing this on
39:00
the behest of Israel or face a bloody civil war.
39:05
So those are the two choices that the US is trying to through
39:09
their operatives in in government and so forth and with
39:13
all of their diplomatic power. So that's, that's what's
39:16
happening. And The Who, who will take
39:18
advantage of of this situation. Jolani regime in Syria are
39:24
poised to move into the north of Lebanon.
39:27
And then we have Israel poised to perhaps, you know, do a
39:32
scorched earth campaign in South Lebanon and invade again and
39:36
look at what they've done to Gaza.
39:37
So you can imagine any threats of Hezbollah in this
39:41
neighbourhood or that village or whatever and you and they would
39:44
have full justification to bomb it into the stone ages.
39:48
And so you could have a repeat of the previous Lebanese quote,
39:51
civil war. But this would be a much more
39:54
violent and much more intense. And the United States has just
39:57
built a fortress on the hill north of Beirut, an embassy the
40:00
likes of which no one has ever seen before.
40:02
And why have they done that? Why?
40:04
Why is that facility in place? It's right in a pro American
40:07
stronghold north of Beirut. So they that's their fall back
40:10
plan is a civil war in Lebanon. And by doing that to end any
40:16
armed resistance in the vicinity of Israel.
40:19
So just wanted to point that out now that the the brainchild
40:22
behind this the the emissary agree, if you will, from
40:25
Washington is Tom Barack. He was originally appointed as
40:28
ambassador to Turkey, but he's really the kind of wit cough
40:32
with a brain in in the background, but very nefarious.
40:35
He is of of Lebanese background, we're told.
40:38
But what he is trying to orchestrate here is so
40:41
insidious. So I mean, do keep an eye on
40:43
this situation. There's more to be said, of
40:46
course, with more time, perhaps another programme.
40:50
Patrick, just very briefly, I mean, do you see this being run
40:54
in a similar way that the so called civil war in Syria was?
41:01
Very different, very different. The the factions are much more
41:04
hardened. You know, after the last civil
41:06
war. What you have is a collection of
41:07
warlords that have their own sort of fiefdoms, the Lebanese
41:11
Forces, Christian Marianites, the Amal Hezbollah and all these
41:16
different groups have have have kind of the Druze have a kind of
41:19
power sharing agreement where the central government's very
41:22
weak in Lebanon as a result. And so you will see in more
41:26
intense sectarian fighting, but you'll have a more, much more
41:30
intense military strikes by Israel.
41:33
The United States will be involved militarily as well.
41:36
And then Jolani and the Wahhabist Wahhabis moving in to
41:40
Lebanon in the north. I mean, they really want to set
41:43
people against each other along Sunni, Shiite and Christian
41:46
lines, pro US, anti US, pro Israeli, anti Israeli.
41:50
So it, it, it has the potential to be really, really a, a
41:54
bloodbath. And but it it is may take a
41:57
while to percolate 6 to 6 to 12 months even.
42:00
But the odds of Hezbollah disarming, I'm not sure if they
42:03
want to after seeing what's happened when other people have
42:07
disarmed or after what happened to Syria.
42:09
As you say, Mike, in that sense, it would be similar.
42:14
They, they took out all of Syria's military installations
42:16
in 72 hours when Jelani took over in Damascus in December of
42:21
2024. So what, what?
42:23
What would save the Hezbollah in South Lebanon from the wrath of
42:27
Israel in the US if they disarmed?
42:29
Nobody would. Or the wrath of Jelani and his
42:32
Wahhabi ISIS. You know, brigades coming over
42:36
the border, nothing to save them from a massacre.
42:39
So. Yeah.
42:42
Thanks, Patrick. Again, of course, the United
42:44
States and Russia very much implicated throughout with
42:46
everything you're referring to in Syria.
42:48
And you were talking about Trump and Putin with regard to Ukraine
42:52
on Friday. What's the update on that?
42:55
Well, the big meeting supposedly on Friday and what, what you
43:00
need to pay attention to here is the fact that while this is
43:04
gaining headlines, OK, what what has actually changed where,
43:08
where, what, what, what new policies have the US
43:11
articulated? Have you heard anything from the
43:13
Trump administration? Anything new, any better insight
43:17
or understanding of this issue, the causes of the conflict?
43:20
You hear nothing. So I, I think you can expect
43:22
that there's going to be no breakthroughs.
43:24
Russia doesn't doesn't have to make any concessions.
43:27
I don't believe they will. the United States has no leverage.
43:31
So the US is buying time. The question is, what are they
43:34
buying time for? Another sneak attack, perhaps
43:38
like with the Istanbul negotiations just a few months
43:41
ago, a sneak attack that came and, and Trump can't guarantee
43:47
he can't guarantee Zelensky is going to sign on to any deal and
43:51
the hard right in Ukraine. He can't guarantee the Europeans
43:54
are going to abide by any agreements, even in principle,
43:59
nor the UK, the UK and Europe, they, they have other plans for
44:03
Ukraine. So does the Lenski.
44:04
They want to keep this conflict going, that's clear.
44:07
So what's going to be achieved in Alaska?
44:09
My prediction is very little, But what's Russia doing?
44:13
Russia is potentially playing the US in their by their own
44:19
game, in a game of chess that Trump may very well find himself
44:23
checkmated by default because Russia is in the ascendancy
44:27
militarily on the ground. They're making advances and they
44:30
could easily throw the Ukrainian political situation into chaos
44:34
by playing along with this Trump gambit.
44:38
And so Trump might think he's getting something out of this,
44:42
some movement towards, you know, better ratings for resolving
44:46
Ukrainian conflict. But Russia could very well be
44:50
sending the Ukrainian and the the US political position into a
44:53
tailspin here, and we'll be there to mop up the mess the way
44:57
that they see fit. So we'll see what happens.
45:02
Thanks very much, Patrick, and we'll see how that plays out.
45:05
Jane, also very much worth pointing out, there can be no
45:08
guarantees, no switching subject.
45:11
You're all you're able to bring to mind whether you're listening
45:14
or watching various woke policies.
45:17
But the persistent question is where does the funding come
45:20
from? And Sandy is going to be dealing
45:22
with some of this, I know. Thank you.
45:25
Thank you, Charles. Yes, I mean, I've been looking
45:28
into this as, as have others and I'll mention them later on
45:32
because they have to be credited for some of this research.
45:35
But it would seem that the, the UK, our taxpayer is funding some
45:40
of some of the woke NGOs and charities that are, that are,
45:44
are, are, are literally, I mean, I, you know, I'm looking at it
45:49
as ideological subversion. I mean, it's, you can't describe
45:53
it as anything less. So one of the main NGOs in this
45:57
is, is the UK Research and Innovation.
46:01
And underneath them are nine other NGOs and charities that,
46:06
that, that they feed into and, and are receiving government
46:10
funding and charitable funding. But it's all a little bit
46:14
woolly. We know that it is is taxpayer
46:16
funding but and, and, and how much is is charitable funding
46:21
we're not sure, but certainly things like the Arts Council of
46:25
England and Soho Theatre. The funding level of the Arts
46:28
Council England distributes around 445,000,000 a year with
46:34
Soho Theatre receiving 2 million and they they put on theatre
46:40
performances like 52 monologues for young transsexuals and it
46:45
shows them urging the audience members to check their privilege
46:50
at the door. As you know this is this is
46:54
quite controversial really. And then you've got to academic
46:57
and cultural research 811,000 for a study on the
47:03
sustainability of Romany gypsy lifestyle. 1.5 million for
47:07
research into white centricity of folk music, multiple other
47:12
grants such as coloniality studies and feminist rituals,
47:17
witches casting spells and porcelain as a critique of white
47:21
supremacy. Those are all flagged for
47:25
taxpayer funding. And, you know, we've, we've got
47:28
to, to look at this and, and I've got a, a slide here of the
47:32
direct, you know, it's, it's diverse Diversity, equity and
47:35
inclusion, of course, is all part of the mix.
47:38
And they've got these sort of memes of, of how they, how they
47:42
feel that, you know, they need to promote all this stuff and
47:47
it's very niche. I mean, I'm, I'm going to go
47:49
into how niche it is and it gets very, very niche, I can assure
47:52
you. Now we're looking at the, the,
47:55
this one, which is the gay porn. It's the Europe that gay porn
48:00
built 1945 to 2000. Now this man, he's he, he's got
48:06
a research project. He received funding from the
48:09
Arts and Arts and Humanities Research Council, which is under
48:12
the UK Research Council and he he got funding for eight nearly
48:20
nearly 1,000,000. It's 841,830 lbs.
48:25
And he says I'm a queer cultural theorist of of the body.
48:30
My research draws from queer studies and media studies,
48:33
visual culture and cultural studies to investigate the ways
48:37
in which the queer body has been produced, policed and contested
48:42
as political, political site of creative and effective sexual
48:47
world making in modern and contemporary cultures.
48:51
Now, if that isn't a bit of a word salad, I don't know what
48:54
is, but he received a heck of a lot of money to go and and study
48:59
this in in Holland. He's currently the honorary
49:02
professor in Art History and Visual Culture at the University
49:05
of Exeter and Professor of Gender Studies and chair of Sex,
49:09
Media and Sex Cultures at Lingnoping University in Sweden.
49:15
And his monograph is Bareback porn, Porous masculinities,
49:19
Queer futures, and the Ethics of gay pig, gay pig masculinities,
49:25
whatever that is, I've no idea and I don't really want to know,
49:29
to be honest. So all of this is, is, is, is
49:34
coming out of, of, of funding. And do the British taxpayers
49:38
know about this? And would they agree with it if
49:41
they did? And they've got things like
49:44
pregnant men and international exploration of trans male.
49:48
This academic project, listed via the UK's Research councils,
49:52
explores how laws and policies affect the health and needs and
49:55
experiences of trans men, especially around pregnancy,
49:58
healthcare interactions and reproductive decisions.
50:04
So we're looking at a lot of money here that's, that's
50:07
sloshing around. And those, those NGOs that are
50:12
underneath the UK Research Institute, apparently it's about
50:15
900,000 of them. You know, 900 million is, is, is
50:22
going into these projects now. We've also got the Galatea, the
50:27
Galatea Theatre production, which was John Lily's play in
50:32
LBGTQ focus performance, which was again, it was a council
50:39
funded, Arts Council funded project, the Diversalariums and
50:44
it's centering on marginalised communities in the contemporary
50:47
performance of early modern plays, focusing on Shakespeare
50:53
being a little bit too white and well not they said pale and
50:58
male, I think they called it. And this is what the Emma
51:02
Franklin who is the she was the director of Galatea.
51:06
She says as LBGTQ people, our histories are often erased or
51:10
confounded to fit the narrative of sif sis normalised
51:14
patriarchal society. A play like Galatea should
51:17
radically alter our attitude towards queer identity today.
51:22
Now you know, this isn't, you know, this isn't designed to to
51:28
trans bash or gay bash, but we have to look at how niche this
51:33
is and how how much people would actually agree to all this.
51:37
Now, somebody who's doing a lot of research into this is a lady
51:39
called Charlotte Gill. Now I'm going to to to mention
51:43
her because she has done a big deep dive into it.
51:46
Do go to her sub SEC and support her.
51:49
She's and she says there's lots of them, but they're the main
51:53
the charities and the main drivers of open borders.
51:56
There's lots of them and they're incestuous and self
51:58
perpetuating. Private and state funds are
52:01
problems. Some charities end up directly
52:04
receiving taxpayer funding, EG being funded by taxpayer funded
52:08
charities. It's a racket and I think this
52:11
really doesn't deserve scrutiny. And we've got also another,
52:17
another sub stacker is Lewis Blackpool and he's doing a big
52:23
deep dive. He's done lots of fo is into,
52:27
into things like the Paul Hamlin Foundation, which is a, which is
52:32
a taxpayer funding. And they, they sort of mingle
52:35
with hope not hate. And he's put in loads of FO is
52:39
into who is funding the, the, the, the Home Office bringing in
52:45
of, of migrants. And I think that's really worth
52:47
looking at. He's, he's doing a lot of work
52:49
and I'd like to cite him as well because he's spending a lot of
52:53
time doing that. And, and he's looked and he's
52:55
found all these different, if we take get the next slide, yeah,
53:00
he's found, I think it's about 14 different charities that are
53:04
funding the the whole migration project and they all need
53:10
scrutinising and looking at. Yeah, um, and yes, we're, we're
53:15
looking at the, the UN refugee agency, the migrant help and
53:19
cities of sanctuary. And I'm not saying that migrants
53:22
shouldn't get help, they should. But at the moment it's volume
53:26
and, and, and speed that's coming through.
53:29
And we have to look at the, the, this ideological subversion
53:33
that's going on because they, they all both UKRI and sanctuary
53:39
cities. Look, they use our theory of
53:43
change and it, they, it's a change agent sort of model.
53:48
And what I really would like to, to, to link it up to is the fact
53:52
that, you know, it, this all goes back to the Frankfurt
53:55
School and the Jewish intellectuals who made the 19,
53:58
you know, made the 1960s. And I'd like to quote Yuri
54:01
Besnamanov, who was the most amazing guy.
54:06
I don't think he's, he's not alive anymore.
54:07
But anyway, he was a he was a former KGB spy, but he spoke
54:11
lots of words of wisdom and also warning.
54:15
Ideological subversions are a process which is legitimate,
54:20
open and overt. If I could have that up game,
54:24
that slide. Because, yeah, it takes 15 to 20
54:31
years to demoralise a nation. The important thing is to keep
54:34
them in a state of ignorance. Once society is demoralised,
54:38
facts no longer matter to them. And I have to agree with him.
54:42
And, you know, are we paying for for our own demise?
54:45
And I think it needs scrutiny, definitely.
54:49
Absolutely. Right, Sandy, it does.
54:50
And thank you very much for that.
54:51
Patrick, if I may just invite you to comment quickly,
54:54
particularly given the remarks of Yuri Besmanov quoted there.
54:59
Well, I mean, it's that's a famous viral video that he did
55:03
on television in the 19 early 1980s.
55:06
I think like that. I think it's important to point
55:08
out Yuri Besmanov also worked. He did anti Soviet propaganda
55:12
for the CIA. So you also have to look at it
55:15
in that context is what he said. You know, it, it's been
55:19
repurposed in today's, you know, I guess alternative media Meilu
55:24
as anti globalist or something like that.
55:27
But what he did the work he did with the Canadian government via
55:31
the CIA and for the CIA, the CIA exfiltrated him by the way, from
55:35
the Soviet Union as a quote defector.
55:38
But he did a lot of things for America in this sort of service
55:41
of propaganda. That's that was more or less his
55:44
career function for a long time, as well as being a a member of
55:48
the John Birch Society. So and just pointing that out
55:52
just to contextualise him and you know the statements he's
55:57
making at the time. Thanks, Patrick.
56:00
Yeah, point very much worth making and also if if anyone
56:03
hasn't seen any of the the interview that President of did
56:06
give, it's widely available on all the video platforms.
56:08
So do do look that up. Now I'm sticking with the theme
56:11
of investment and how it coincides with fear.
56:13
I am going to talk a little bit about Blue Tongue, about which
56:17
there are increasing amounts coming from the Animal Plant
56:21
Health Agency and Defra. And particularly they've just
56:23
sent out an email to their stakeholders talking about
56:26
important changes to the restrictions in place in Wales.
56:30
Now specifically this is talking about vaccinated animals with
56:35
the BTV 3 serotype having been able, or at least granted the
56:40
ability to attend English markets within 20 kilometres of
56:43
the Welsh order. They're also keen to point out
56:46
that, quote, contrary to popular belief, where animals test
56:48
positive for BTV 3, neither the premises or the animal are put
56:53
under restrictions, so keepers are urged to report suspicion
56:57
immediately. I'll go on to explain why I
57:00
think that is. Now the the narrative is tightly
57:03
controlled when it comes to the emergence of disease and indeed
57:06
the government have just republished the guidance on how
57:09
infected infections emerge, giving you absolutely no room to
57:13
doubt that between 60 and 80% of emerging infections are derived
57:17
from animal sources. We must fear the animals and
57:20
that these infections have been emerging for thousands of years
57:22
as interactions between humans, animals and their environments
57:25
have increased and change. So bear that in mind.
57:28
Also bear that in mind when considering the Perbrite
57:32
Institute, which of course is where an awful lot of this leads
57:35
back to and it's very close relationship with not just the
57:37
Animal and Plant Health Agency, but as shown on screen, the Bill
57:40
and Melinda Gates Foundation. And I will just walk you through
57:43
the steps for investment yielding dividends.
57:47
We see here from the Perbrite Institute that they've had a
57:52
vaccine, veterinary vaccine, innovation and manufacturing to
57:55
improve animal health. Now, what they're really talking
57:57
about is being supported by the Gates Foundation.
57:59
This goes back to 2023. And to make it absolutely clear
58:05
how the corruption in this particular story runs, we're
58:08
just going to listen to a clip of Bill Gates speaking about
58:11
this. I have played it before but it's
58:12
always worth a listen. Invested $10 billion in
58:16
vaccinations over the last two decades and you figured out the
58:19
return on investment for that, And it kind of stunned me.
58:21
Can you walk us through the math?
58:23
Well, it's pretty. Impressive that when you take
58:26
these vaccines, get them to be very inexpensive by making big
58:31
volume commitments. Have that right relationship
58:33
with the private sector. Get the delivery system.
58:37
So they're really getting the coverage out there.
58:39
You literally saved millions of lives.
58:42
And 20 years ago when we created these new multilateral
58:45
organisations, Gabi for the vaccines, Global Fund for HIV,
58:50
TB and Malaria, we didn't know they'd be successful.
58:53
They've gone through lots of challenges about making sure the
58:56
money gets there, making sure the efficiency is right.
59:00
But as we look at upcoming replenishments for those, and
59:04
we've got so much distractions politically that the
59:08
international needs like this could get eclipsed if we're not
59:13
careful. You know, we see a phenomenal
59:16
track record. It's been 100 billion overall
59:19
that the world's put in. Our foundation is a bit more
59:23
than 10 billion, but we feel there's been over a 20 to 1
59:27
return. So if you just look at the
59:29
economic benefits, that's a pretty strong number compared to
59:33
anything else. Here we are 21 return and a
59:39
great big grin. As you said it, as I said prior
59:42
to the clip, corruption, there's absolutely no other word that
59:44
should be used to describe it. And of course we go to 2024 to
59:47
see what happens if we've got the Purbright Institute talking
59:50
about accelerating global vaccine development.
59:52
Now the most recent update within the last week is that
59:55
there's now a partnership to advance mRNA vaccines for
59:59
livestock. And again, I I point you towards
1:00:01
the fact that there are of course many more vaccines given
1:00:04
to animals than there are humans.
1:00:06
Now, part of the problem people like.
1:00:07
Ian Brown who of course has a relationship not just with Herb
1:00:11
Rice Institute, but formerly worked for APHA and indeed he
1:00:15
has been involved with the World Animal Health Organisation and
1:00:20
indeed the Food and Agriculture Organisation, both of which are
1:00:24
funded by by GATE. So that there is absolute cross
1:00:27
pollination and the site Weybridge and Purbright are only
1:00:30
12 miles apart. So absolutely hand in glove one
1:00:33
might say. Now this, as I said, does shift
1:00:38
the focus away from slaughter on suspicion and I point you
1:00:42
towards the vaccine guidance and in particular the market
1:00:46
authorization. Just a reminder that these
1:00:47
vaccines were authorised under exceptional circumstances.
1:00:51
So of course we're moving away from slaughter on suspicion
1:00:53
because we are able to vaccinate everything and it's a driver of
1:00:57
great profits and of course comes with much greater element
1:01:00
of control and surveillance. Now on a related note, in terms
1:01:04
of the lack of due care and attention, I would just point
1:01:08
you to some of the scaremongering that's going on
1:01:09
from the BBC and indeed the government about chikungunya
1:01:13
supposedly delivered by mosquitoes.
1:01:15
And indeed a warning just now that they've had to withdraw a
1:01:19
vaccine following very rare fatal reactions, which will
1:01:23
sound very familiar. But don't worry because the
1:01:26
vaccine will be available on the UK market from the 18th of June
1:01:30
2025 S never mind those very rare fatal reactions.
1:01:34
Is there any need to worry? And indeed are people going to
1:01:36
talk it up? This is the European Centre for
1:01:38
Disease Prevention and Control, which talks about 90 related
1:01:42
deaths across the worldwide reporting system for
1:01:46
chikungunya. But of course, given those
1:01:50
statistics, why on earth would anyone be considering taking a
1:01:52
pharmaceutical product against it now related to this in that
1:01:56
mosquitoes are reckoned to breed in areas of stagnant water.
1:02:01
The National Drought Group talking about addressing
1:02:04
nationally significant water shortfall and they've got a
1:02:07
piece on how to save water at home.
1:02:10
I made reference to this becoming possibly jeopardised
1:02:13
given that the colonial administrations have indeed
1:02:16
prohibited people from collecting water decades ago.
1:02:19
And indeed the Chinese authorities reported to be doing
1:02:21
the same thing. But what you can do to save
1:02:25
water is to delete all the emails and pictures and that is
1:02:29
absolutely true. This is off the government
1:02:31
website this morning under the It's your fault again heading.
1:02:35
So that's the that's the direction that we seem to be
1:02:37
going in. But we're building data centres.
1:02:40
We are, we are building data centres as reported on many,
1:02:42
many times and I'm pleased to say that Sandy now is able to
1:02:46
direct us towards a project in Somerset that seems to be
1:02:49
underway at the moment. Sandy.
1:02:52
Yes, I mean, it's been, it's been built for for the last two
1:02:55
years or three years actually, I think it, it started quite a
1:02:59
while ago and it's called gravity and it's a smart campus.
1:03:03
It's a major giga factory and they want to create a battery,
1:03:09
you know, sort of it's a battery factory.
1:03:12
And I'm going to link it also into the mining the, the
1:03:17
Cornwall mining company, the lithium mining company, because
1:03:21
the lithium for this gigafactory is going to be coming mainly
1:03:24
from Cornwall, obviously from abroad as well.
1:03:26
But they're getting the Cornwall mining sorted.
1:03:30
So it's it's quite, it's quite interesting.
1:03:33
So let's run that that video about this giga.
1:03:36
It's like a smart city. Yeah, if we can run that please.
1:03:40
Oh, OK then next. Yeah.
1:03:44
That is it, you know, No batteries, no transition, no
1:03:47
lithium, no batteries. All our modern devices, electric
1:03:56
cars, laptops, mobile phones all need batteries.
1:04:01
Lithium batteries. At the moment the UK imports
1:04:08
100% of it's lithium. Here in the UK, and particularly
1:04:15
here in Cornwall, we have the capacity to produce 50,000
1:04:19
tonnes of lithium carbonate equivalent every year, which is
1:04:23
more than half of what the UK needs.
1:04:25
We're not actually extracting the lithium that exists here on
1:04:28
our doorstep, we're importing it and that needs to change.
1:04:37
Cornish Lithium have the objective of producing lithium
1:04:41
in a sustainable fashion. We have two ways of doing it.
1:04:44
One is repurposing what's already there at an existing
1:04:47
China clay quarry and the other is to extract lithium from
1:04:51
geothermal waters. We have a revolutionary way of
1:04:57
extracting lithium. We've managed to achieve what
1:04:59
we've achieved because we've got a world class team and cutting
1:05:03
edge technology. Every tonne that we can produce
1:05:08
here down in Cornwall, it means we're displacing A tonne that
1:05:11
would otherwise need to be imported.
1:05:13
Cornish Lithium is putting Cornwall on the map for lithium
1:05:16
extraction. We are leading a modern day
1:05:19
renaissance of Cornwall's 4000 year history of extracting
1:05:24
minerals to develop a product which is essential to the energy
1:05:27
transition. Yes, that's the Cornish Lithium
1:05:36
mining company and prior to that it was the tin and copper mining
1:05:40
company. So it does seem interesting that
1:05:44
that oil, gas and coal bad lithium is really good, even
1:05:50
though it's highly toxic. And in order to get this lithium
1:05:53
to the Giga factory in in Somerset, in Bridgewater,
1:05:59
they're going to have to cross 3 counties with it to get it
1:06:02
there. So there, I'm sure there are
1:06:04
safety concerns with that. So if we can look at the gravity
1:06:08
video now, which is the smart city that they're building in
1:06:11
Bridgewater? Yeah, Sandy, you need to, you
1:06:16
need to explain this because. Oh, right, OK, sorry.
1:06:20
Yeah, it's anyway, here it is. It's Bridgewater in its
1:06:23
proximity to Bristol and Exeter International Airports.
1:06:26
Now they've already expanded Bristol Airport hugely and
1:06:31
they've they're going to put a railway into this site.
1:06:34
It's just like a smart city with massive connectivity.
1:06:39
It's 616 acres of Somerset countryside and here it, here it
1:06:45
is, it's, it's got marketing suites, it's got people can live
1:06:48
there, they work there, there's gyms, there's nurseries, there's
1:06:53
just about everything you could want.
1:06:55
And there's the train that takes you in from London or wherever
1:07:00
you have to come from. Or it could be another country.
1:07:03
And local development is 1.1 million at the moment and
1:07:08
they're going to create 7500 jobs.
1:07:11
And they've got dark fibre connectivity, opportunities for
1:07:16
sustainable transport. Everything is electric and
1:07:20
probably automated. And nobody, yeah, nobody's kind
1:07:25
of driving these things. And it's a it is a complete
1:07:30
smart city that's been built on the doorstep here.
1:07:33
So what, what will happen? They're way behind their their
1:07:38
scheduled dates of completion. So maybe it'll never happen, but
1:07:44
it's it's in the making. Thank you very much, Sandy.
1:07:49
And of course, an energy transition that nobody has yet
1:07:52
sufficiently justified. But we'll talk about that more,
1:07:55
not just an extra, but forever after.
1:07:57
I dare say no, just to give you a short teaser.
1:08:00
We'll hope you're going to hang around for extra.
1:08:01
But Wilsey reports this time from a Freedom Festival in
1:08:05
Lesters, which is a very quick look at a clip of that.
1:08:07
And we'll play more in extra I want.
1:08:27
To. Love you baby.
1:08:36
There are some more more to come there on Extra.
1:08:39
Now we're just going to close out the programme by reminding
1:08:41
you that although we at UK Column do take every care to get
1:08:45
everything absolutely right, sometimes it doesn't quite go
1:08:48
according to plan. So what we're going to do is
1:08:49
cast our eyes back to a year ago and see how the news programme
1:08:54
began as it was then. Yeah, I don't even know what the
1:08:58
bloody day is now. 14th Get it wrong, we can.
1:09:02
Not yet. 14th. Yeah, all day.
1:09:07
All right, good afternoon. Today is the 14th of October
1:09:12
2024. We are 20 minutes past one and
1:09:17
welcome to this special edition of UK called News.
1:09:21
We had some technical problems. Right.
1:09:23
Hang on, it's August. You said October.
1:09:26
Sorry, I think that just might be 11 confusion too far.
1:09:35
That's the technical issue. We've we've shot, we've shot
1:09:38
into the future by too much that's really trying to get
1:09:41
back. Let's just go and straight
1:09:48
myself. Oh, God, this isn't.
1:09:50
We should absolutely play this bit good, right?
1:09:55
I didn't even spot it. Yeah.
1:09:57
Well done. So just to clarify, we should
1:10:02
point out that was that was what happened this news programme one
1:10:06
year ago, yes, when I went on holiday.
1:10:08
OK, yes, point, point taken. Absolutely right.
1:10:12
Anyway, what I will say is thank you very much to Mike for
1:10:15
bringing the studio with me. Thank you to Patrick and to
1:10:18
Sandy for joining. I'm sorry we have run over, but
1:10:20
Please remember that we have got the interview with Carl Czar
1:10:23
going out the German warfare platform tonight and indeed
1:10:26
Sandy's interview with Peter Taylor at 1:00 tomorrow.
1:10:29
So if you are able to join us for extra in a few minutes as a
1:10:32
member, please do so. Otherwise we will look forward
1:10:34
to seeing you at 1:00 on Friday. Thanks very much.
1:10:38
Bye bye. Bye.