Good afternoon, Today is Monday the 19th of January 2026.
It's just after 1:00. Welcome to UK column News.
I'm your host Brian Garish. Delighted to have Ben Rubin with
me in the studio. Delighted to be here, Brian.
Delighted to be here. Now we understand that today is
Blue Monday and can you explain that what that is exactly Ben?
It's all just so awful and depressing because Christmas is
gone, New Year's gone. You haven't been paid in weeks.
The world's going to hell in a handbasket.
It's still dark in the evening. It's.
Still dark. It is getting lighter though.
I've noticed this is true. So we, we just thought we'd
recognise Blue Monday. But we're going to say for the
UK column news team today, we're not in a a blue mood.
We are absolutely going to get stuck into what's happening in
the world, why we all need to know about it and why when we
know what's happening we feel better and that allows us to do
things. So don't wallow and be
depressed. We're going to try and take you
through some of the mayhem happening in the world and lead
you into a better place. So there we are.
Now we're we're going to be having a look at who's running
the government. We're going to be looking at
initially with a little bit of public pushback.
And one of the places that we can see this is on social media,
but we're going to have a del a deeper dive into the change in
UK politics because U KS political democratic
constitutional system is being hollowed out from the inside as
we speak. We're going to be looking at the
global public private partnership.
Ben will be digging into Mr. Rockefeller and his very wealthy
team that can influence not just national politics, but politics
on a global scale. We're going to be looking at the
big one of the big organisations that's got tremendous clout on
the world's political stage, and that's the Trilateral
Commission. And we're going to think about
Ukraine, Greenland. We're going to think about
Ukraine in a little bit of a different way to just start to
get people breaking out of the straitjacket mould of of course
the BB CS propaganda reporting. And lastly, we're going to end
on a bit of AI. So when are we going to start
Ben? Reasons to be cheerful, Brian,
thank you. I know Christmas is gone, New
Year's over, but the World Economic Forum starts today in
Davos. The self-proclaimed elites of
international banking, industry and politics ascend to the Swiss
Canton of Davos for the 26th edition of the World Economic
Forum. I'm excited.
Brian is definitely excited, I can tell.
But who's most excited of all is Keir Starmer.
Let's just ask you quickly you have to choose now between Davos
or Westminster. Davos.
Why? Because Westminster is too
constrained and you know, it's closed and we're not having
meaning. Once you get out of Westminster,
whether it's Davos or anywhere else, you actually engage with
people that you can see working with in the future.
Westminster just as a tribal shouting play.
Well, he's so full of it, Ben, isn't it?
But he's, he's telling the nation your government no longer
matters. Westminster doesn't matter.
I'm only going to do business on an international platform.
And of course in that international platform today, in
2026, we've got complete mayhem with possible, amongst other
things, possible breakdown of NATO.
So out of the frying pan into the fire, I think.
Yes, absolutely. He loves Davos, Starmer loves
Davos, he hates Westminster. I can understand why he can't be
a particularly comfortable place for him at the moment.
He doesn't. He's not getting a lot of good
press from anybody and he he's not confirmed to go to Davos,
although I'm pretty sure he will be going because there are calls
for the need to hammer out a Ukraine peace deal.
So apparently he will be attending.
It is, it is assumed. But I would just say it's a good
job. We do actually have some real
red blooded patriots in this country ready to stand up for
the British people against these nefarious international powers.
Who do? I mean, of course it's Nigel
Farage. He's been very vocal about Davos
over the years. Just this little quote here.
What's happened to us over the over the course of the last 50
years is we've decided nation states don't matter.
We've decided national democracy doesn't matter because we can
decide all of this in ski resorts in Switzerland.
Isn't it wonderful? Well, it would be wonderful if
Mr. Farage was to get stuck in and start to do something about
it by talking about this issue full time.
But of course his problem is he's locked into Trump and Trump
now seems to be out of control even against the background of
the rules based international order.
So I think there's a lot that we can be, we should be demanding
from Nigel Farage if he is really on the game of cleaning
up politics from these very powerful global influencers.
Yes, he has. Well, he's spoken about it a
lot, right? So, you know, got this quote
here. He's also described the World
Economic Forum as a smug and conspiratorial meeting of
enemies of the nation states. He accused Keir Starmer in 2023
of being a full on globalist, hanging out with his mates at
the World Economic Forum. But shock horror, Nigel's going
So despite all of that, he's actually going to attend the
Davos conference that he derided as a jaunt for globalists.
To appear, He's actually appearing at the conference.
Yes, he's going. Yeah, he's going to the
conference. I don't know if he's going to be
on stage, but he's certainly going to be there.
And to be there you've got to be invited.
And that means the club, the club that's in control of the
world world's politicians, has now got its sights on Nigel
Farage. And of course he'd be the
perfect man to win the election, get into post, but he too would
then be in bed with the people who really hold the power.
That's how it seems to me. Yeah, it's almost as if we can't
believe anything he says. True.
We'll talk about that a bit more in the UK.
Call them extra today. OK, well luckily there is some
good news amongst all of this, which is that people seem to be
getting wise to the scam. Now.
I've been following the World Economic Forum Facebook page
over the past couple of weeks and obviously it's just started
today, so there's nothing for us to report on particularly.
We'll talk about this a lot more next week, but I've really
rather enjoyed the public response to every single post on
the Facebook page of the World Economic Forum.
Just a few examples from this post.
The meeting of the Bond villains and global overlords.
Another socialist gathering. Imagine being one.
Psychopaths actually attending this and looking at yourself in
the mirror afterwards. Traitors of humanity calling
themselves leaders while no one elected them.
Installed, not elected. The people will take the power
back. Absolutely indicative of every
single comment. There is no no support for this
organization at all on social media.
And I love that final point. The people will take the power
back, which is ultimately the thing that they're all
particularly concerned about. Let's just listen to this final
little clip from Neri Woods at the World Economic Forum.
You know, I believe it was 2022. The good news is the elites
across the world trust each other more and more so we can
come together and design and do beautiful things together.
The bad news is that in every single country they were
polling, the majority of people trusted that elite less.
So we can lead, but if people aren't following, we're not
going to to get to where we want to go.
Well, a classic happiness clip there because she's telling you
these people are really worried because ordinary people are on
to them. Now, if that's more on the
global platform, let's have a look at defence HQ, which is the
Ministry of Defence here in UK was very own X or Twitter page.
Let's have a look at this appalling clip on the UK and
correct and Ukraine. I'll talk through some of it,
but I wanted you to just hear the music.
So for those of you just listening in, basically a very
smooth little video clip about the partnership with Ukraine.
You could see very clean troops in trenches, you could see
industry at work producing military products basically, and
the whole thing set to this very soothing music.
You'll hear more of that type of music in another report in
today's UK column News. But essentially UK can't even
get its own defence sorted out and yet we are now locked in to
100 years with Ukraine. Now, as Ben has just
demonstrated, the public and UK are on to that.
So if we just pop this one up on screen, this is a little video
clip of the comments and about 380 deep state regime change.
We've got committed to defending the most corrupt regime in the
EU. Mod, I believe you and Healy
have lost the plot effectively. And so it goes on.
Once we get down to the bottom, we're going to be seeing some of
the images. Deport terror, import terror.
So a cynical response to this and the amount of money, £22
billion that's gone into corrupt regime.
If you go through these comments, it's obvious that
people see through the pure propaganda.
And if we just pop this horrible picture up on screen, we've got
Healy the man here and he's sitting next to the defence
minister Umarov from Ukraine. But it's the expression on
Healy's face. Are these two in some form of
very special relationship? Because it's, it's definitely a
look of love. But let's just think about this
because basically we've got a corrupted national flag, EU KS
flag being corrupted in the background.
And I couldn't resist a little bit of naughtiness here.
Darling, you look so manly with that number one cut and a beard.
What is going on here? This is nothing to do with
sorting out the defence of the UK, which is described as
hollowed out. And that's quite right, pouring
money into Ukraine and a love affair going on in front of the
public. But all the comments from people
coming in are absolutely calling it out now what's happening in
UK. If you think our country is
being run from Westminster, then think again.
A number of people have said with regard to analysis, both
myself and Ben, we sort of get where you're going, but we can't
really ground it. What are you talking about?
Well, what we're talking about is the fact that Westminster
effectively has been taken over by very powerful organisations
and funders. And we're just going to give you
a demonstration today to show why this is true and how it
needs to be dealt with if this country is going to survive.
So let's start off with the Institute for Government and the
headline I'm going to bring up here is in the small print on
the photograph of the well, how do we describe these people?
They will look particularly wealthy and happy with their
glasses of champagne and fruit juice.
But basically it's it's talking about thought leadership and
engagement with policy makers. But of course, none of these
people have actually been elected.
And if we go deeper into the Institute of Government now,
back in 2024, they were talking about power with purpose, the
final report of the Commission on the Centre of Government, the
centre of government being effectively the heart of
government, which the Institute for Government says is not
working. Let's have a look at this video
clip where they themselves explain what they've been up to.
As you walk down Whitehall, you pass the Cabinet Office, Downing
St. the Treasury. It's from these departments,
these offices that the centre of British government operates.
It's from here that the Prime Minister directs the nation.
The UK is facing huge challenges.
Stagnant economic growth, huge technological change, probably
the infrastructure, failing public services and ageing
population, climate change and global instability.
We need a centre that can enable the UK to meet these challenges.
Successive Prime ministers have discovered the problems at the
centre have inhibited their ability to deliver on their
priorities. The centre of government isn't
fit to meet the challenges that faced the UK in the 21st
century. So that's why a year ago the
Institute for Government and I set up the Commission on the
Centre to examine the problems at the very centre of British
government and to make recommendations.
Over the last year we have spoken to those who've worked at
the heart of Downing St. For the the Cabinet Office as
well as the Treasury and we've been looking at why the centre
is not working as well as it needs to.
The Centre isn't strategic, with governments usually failing to
define their priorities. They get into micromanagement
and sometimes develop a bunker mentality.
And it's unbalanced, with a powerful treasury often left to
fill the strategic vacuum created by an underpowered #10
and a Cabinet Office with an ever growing list of
responsibilities. This can and must be rectified.
So, having identified the problems, the Commission has
made seven key proposals to solve them.
The government should agree it's priorities at the start of the
Parliament and announce them as part of the modernized King's
Speech to set a clear direction for departments and other parts
of government to follow. The Prime Minister should
appoint an executive Cabinet committee made-up of just a few
key ministers to help them make the most important strategic
decisions. The Prime Minister should
appoint a senior First Secretary of State with responsibility for
delivering the government's priorities and ministerial
responsibility for the civil service, freeing up the Prime
Minister to retain a more strategic long term view.
The Cabinet Office and #10 should be restructured into a
Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet and a separate
department for the Civil Service to strengthen support for the
Prime Minister and more effectively coordinate and
reform the civil Service. There should be a new statute
for the Civil Service and Civil Service Board to hold its
leadership accountable for delivery.
The roles of Cabinet Secretary accountable to the Prime
Minister and Head of the Civil Service accountable to the First
Secretary should be filled separately to give the Civil
Service the leadership it deserves.
The priorities for government should be fully reflected in a
new shared strategy, budget and performance management process
owned collectively at the centre of government to better
coordinate, budget for and deliver long term and cross
cutting priorities. We cannot have the Centre
continuing to fail to give the nation, the leadership and the
Prime Minister the support that they need.
By this time next year we will have had a general election.
Whoever wins and forms the next government should implement our
reforms without delay. So a lot of information in that
little video clip, very important for the UK column, for
the UK public to see it and for the UK column to dive into what
these people are actually talking about.
But very calmly, this lady's talking to Cameron, saying our
plans, our policies should be implemented and the trouble with
the country at the moment, we often hear broken Britain.
It has been broken, It hasn't broken by accident.
She names previous prime ministers but suggests that
really they couldn't do their job.
Was it not the case that those prime ministers were so useless
that they could not do the job in the country, including
reorganising their own systems to allow them to do the job?
It's to me this is quite incredible.
And and this idea that all you need to do is centralise power
and then that will allow you to fix everything and make
everything happen as you want it to happen, right?
This doesn't work. Right.
And we have an organization, the Institute of Government, which
has simply appointed itself in the position of changing the
government in the way it thinks it should be changed.
So if we have a little look at the Institute itself, of course,
a key bit is to have a look at some of the small texts.
So it says our work covers comment, analysis and a variety
of topics from Parliament, the constitution and civil service
to public services and public finances.
This organization is buried at the heart of government.
It goes on to say since before the 2010 election, we've also
undertaken preparation for government work with opposition
parties in the run up to the elections.
So they're declaring that they are manipulating the parties
themselves in order to help them get in power.
And we can be very sure that once those manipulated parties
are in power is going to be the institute of government that's
going to be controlling them. But relax, all their work is
confidential. Of course it is, because if the
public really knew what this organization was doing, there
would be a huge outcry. And quite rightly.
Now remember that the Institute of Government is just one
organization doing this type of work in and around government.
And This is why the lid needs to come off the complete,
deliberate hollowing out of government by some very powerful
people. Now the Institute of
Government's got another layer, the Institute for Government
Academy. Apparently it helps those
outside government to engage with it.
Think about what that means. It means that people who were
not elected to be in government are going are being given
specially privileged positions in order to interfere with the
workings of government itself. We could call it lobbying, or we
could call it a desperate attempt to get big contracts, or
it could be changing government policies so that their policies
helps the political and corporate agenda of these think
tanks which are in and around government.
So essentially we're losing control of government because
the idea that elected, elected politicians running the country
is clearly nonsense. Now, who runs the show?
Well, of course, the funders really running the show and what
we see if we have a look at more of the small print, is that the
Institute Institute is saying that most of the funding each
year comes from the Gatsby Charitable Foundation set up by
David Sainsbury to realise his charitable objectives.
Not the objectives of the country, but his private
charitable objectives, and the Institute of Government itself
was set up by David Sainsbury with the purpose of making
government more effective, presumably in his image.
To what? Give them greater powers to
supermarkets for even bigger profits in the country or indeed
to expand overseas. Ukraine, I don't know, but it's.
Yeah, I mean it's. Possibility.
It's it's capital in the city generally.
So Gatsby, when one of the big partnerships that they
established back in 2015, I think it was, was with the
Council for Inclusive Capitalism, which is Linda
Rothschild's vehicle for the exactly the same thing we're
talking about. Yeah.
So if we if we have Lord Sainsbury's working with these
organisations, the Institute of Government, Gatsby in order to
change government itself, we should remember that as reported
by the Mirror here, that basically Lord Sainsbury is the
man who is funding the Labour Party itself.
So this is a very interesting article and I flagged up here
that Dorset, I, no idea who this is, but quite rightly this
member of the public is pointing out the hypocrisy that Lord
Sainsbury is pumping money into government and then working in
and outside government to change government policy the way he
wants. What do we describe this as in
some people would say it was corrupt.
Whether it's corrupt or not, the UK column can't say.
But certainly a lot of questions here about vested interests.
Now, what sort of policies are they following?
Well, if we have a little look at the Saints, Sainsbury's
Welcome Trust Centre, this is one part of the work that
they're involved in and I've entitled it.
From politics to brains, sorry. From politics to brains to
behaviour. Let's have a look at the video.
I am Tom Mercyk Flogel and I'm the director of the Sainsbury
Welcome Center for Neural Circuits and Behavior.
The mission of Sainsbury Welcome Center is to understand how
complex behavior arises from biological matter.
How does the brain generate perception?
How does the brain generate plans?
How does it set goals? How does it make decisions?
Different labs at the SWC are looking at these component
processes and either describing them mathematically or indeed
doing experiments to see where those computations are taking
place in the brain. My name is Andon.
I am a group leader at Sainsbury Welcome Centre.
My lab focused on studying the neural circuit mechanism
underlying flexible decision making, understanding how we
shift decision preferences as a function of different internal
states, who we are, what our history is, what we're thinking
right now in a world that could be uncertain or dynamically
changing, or sometimes even in a multi agent social context.
Encourage all of the UK column viewers to look at the show
notes to find that little video clip.
Really horrifying what these people are into as a subject
matter, but also when you look at them and you say what are
their real intentions. Is some of these, sorry, is some
of the techniques to change the way that people think and
behave? Is that going to be brought back
through Lord Sainsbury into the Institute of Government in order
to change the way the politicians and civil servants
behave to make them adhere to the sorts of policies that he,
he and his support team want? That seems to be the reality.
But the idea that we have our elections elect MPs, those MPs
are then creating the policies in the best interest of this
country. Complete nonsense.
And I've got to say here, and of course Nigel Farage is aware of
some, not all, because he's not well informed on many aspects of
what we're talking about. But if he were to understand
what's really happening, he should be in a prime place to
actually expose what is happening Now the government is
worried that people are beginning to see what is under
the stone. And of course, the most fertile,
fertile minds are young people. So we shouldn't be surprised
that the BBC is reporting that more than 60 Labour MPs are
urging the Prime Minister to ban social media from under
sixteens. And of course this follows on
from what's happened in Australia.
But what we can be sure about is that the government, it will
only be government approved news which will be considered
suitable for youngsters. We don't want intelligent young
teenagers working out for themselves the propaganda and
the lies that are coming through mainstream politics in UK.
So if that's a dive into one organization which is there
manipulating at the heart of government.
Over to you, Ben, for the really big players.
Thanks, Brian. That was fascinating.
I've been looking at Gatsby and the Institute for Government for
a little while, but I hadn't seen that film.
And what's really interesting to me is that after the general
election that she referenced, I'm guessing that was from 23 or
20, early 24, after the election, Georgia Gould went
into the Cabinet Office and was immediately talking about the
transformation of the centre. So using exactly the same
terminology. And also all of that brain
science stuff that they're investing in, you know, that's,
that's some weapons grade grade propaganda stuff.
This is the mindspace right that they're talking about.
Indeed, the Cabinet Office document from 20. 2010. 2010
Mindspace where the government boasted it could change the way
people think and behave and the public, the people, would not
know this had happened. Very, very dangerous, malicious
application of political psychology.
Yeah, absolutely. And it's not just happening in
the UK, it's happening internationally.
Globally in fact, actually. And I'm going to kick things off
in this section with this quote from David Rockefeller.
Some even believe we, the Rockefeller family, a part of
the secret cabal working against the best interests of the United
States, characterising my family and me as nationalists and of
conspiring with others around the world to build a more
integrated global political and economic structure.
One world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand
guilty. And I am proud of it.
That's the statement. These people don't have any
shame because they're immensely wealthy and powerful.
The only thing that matters is what they want.
And he is proud of it. I'm sure in his head he's very
proud of himself. Absolutely, yeah.
And that's from his own autobiography, by the way,
that's published in his memoirs called Memoirs, came out in
2002. People call this conspiracy
theorist. There's no need.
He's literally just described exactly what we're talking
about. He's admitted to it.
And ultimately for me, that amounts to a global coup d'etat,
the destruction of the nation state system and the replacement
with a single integrated global political and economic structure
as described by David Rockefeller.
Now David Rockefeller is dead. He died a few years ago.
That his vision and his work lives on through organisations
such as Democracy. Next tagline.
Another democratic future is possible.
We talked about this organization a lot over the past
couple of years. It is backed by the Rockefeller
Foundation, hence the link. Also, the one project Open
Society Foundations, which is George Soros's vehicle for
investing in this kind of activity, and the National
Endowment for Democracy, which Patrick spoke about on Friday,
actually, which is essentially ACIA Front for funding regime
change operations in countries around the world.
They're interested in democracy. It's run by this lady.
This is Claudia Chalice. She's the founder and chief
executive. I like to call her Twinkle Toes,
the baby faced assassin. Look at that face.
No, but a butter wouldn't melt. Exactly.
These are the people they send, you know, to, to, to, to tear
down your, your, your, your social, economic, political
structures and replace them with something that works for the
international supposed elites, right.
This is the type of people that we're dealing with.
She's also she's she's got a lot of connections.
Claudia Chalice, But she's also a senior adviser to MIT, where
artificial intelligence was essentially founded.
A lot of the early R&D work around artificial intelligence
was done at MIT. The Massachusetts Institute for
Technology, the guy that runs MIT, Mark Gorenberg, recently
described AI as being used to optimise for a better world.
That's what they see AI as being for, to optimise for a better
world as defined by these think tanks and the philanthropy,
supposedly philanthropic powers that fund them.
Ultimately, she's also in at the UN.
She's part of the UN Democracy Fund, one of a tiny handful of
outside investors that are plowing money into these kinds
of democratic transformation processes all around the world.
And the UN itself was actually built on landed the the
headquarters in the in New York was built on land that was
donated by the Rockefeller family.
It's intimately linked into every single component part of
global governance via the United Nations, the Rockefeller family,
and the Foundation is chalice. Back to Claudia.
She's apparently dead against populism, so she wrote this
book, The Populist Signal. Why Politics and democracy Need
to Change. This came out in 2015, published
by Policy Network, where she was working at the time.
Policy Network was set up by Peter Mandelson, so she went
there for her early training and it tells you quite a bit about
Chalice and, and her background and the types of people she she
likes hanging around with. And this was about pushing back
against these emerging ideas of scepticism and distrust of the
the establishment. And the book contends that
populism is a warning signal that we need to revisit our
approaches to governance and representation.
So apparently populism is only you just need more government
that'll fix everything. Essentially what she's saying
now, I don't think she really understands what populism means.
Because if you define populism, according to the guy that coined
the term, it's the idea that society is separated into two
groups at odds with one another, the pure people and the corrupt
elite. And I think that she actually is
part of the corrupt elite, whether she realises it or not.
And she might not. I think she's part of the
corrupt elites. I don't think she really
understands what populism is, even though she's built a large
part of her career around it. And I also don't think she
really understands what democracy is.
Interestingly, predicated on the idea of one man, one vote.
Let's have a little listen to this clip.
There's been a notion that legitimacy has been equated to
how many numbers and how many people are participating, based
on the lens through which we tend to view it through our
existing electoral and representative institutions of
what we think about as democracy today.
But there's no reason to think that the only thing from which
legitimacy stems from is numbers, so.
But democracy is not about numbers, it's about a process
that she controls, that she's happy with, and the outcome and
the decision that she likes. But it is a signal that they
are, it is a signal again, Ben, that they are worried that there
is pushback wherever they see pushback labeled as populism,
they're worried about this. So Blue Monday, today, lots of
good news when you really pay attention to what these people
are talking about, the progress of their plans because they are
running behind the clock. Absolutely they are and they're
really pushing ahead at the moment and they're trying to
scale right. So last week they introduced
this new paper. So they ran a, a, a launch live
stream or provide a link. You can go and watch it and hear
what they have to say. It was about this thing here,
scaling Democratic innovations new paper.
They've they've delivered, which in its opening statement says
citizens assemblies, these are the democratic innovations
they're talking about, right sortie and citizens assemblies,
stage managed pseudo democratic processes that are designed to
deliver an outcome do not spread themselves.
Behind every successful scaling story sits a constellation of
organisations doing the essential, often invisible work
of building capacity, establishing networks,
advocating with decision makers and ensuring quality standards.
And they call these scaling catalysts.
So these are these micro organisations in countries
around the world who are working to the same agenda as democracy
next. And all of the vested interests
that we describe pulling the strings from behind the scenes
in order to bring these new pseudo democratic systems into
place and and to get rid of the existing political structures
ultimately, right? And they see this playing out in
a number of different ways. These are the five frontiers
that they see that need to be moved towards.
So introducing deliberative technology.
So this is AI essentially. They want the whole thing to run
on AI rails so that it can be controlled centrally.
And in fact, people like Peter Thiel spoken a lot recently
about the the idea that democracy could actually just be
replaced with technology and something we'll come back to
again shortly. They want to focus on education.
So building deliberative muscles from a young age, getting kids
into this and and believing that they have a right to be part of
these processes. So that they're, they're
desperate, desperate to get youngsters into their system or
at the same time we're going to pass laws to make sure that
youngsters don't get any information which is clear of
their system on social media reports, UK column news, other,
other channels which are putting out really good quality
information. We don't want youngsters
watching any of that. We're going to censor them to
their 16 because by the time they're 16, these people believe
that they will have captured the minds of youngsters.
That's the way I see it. Yeah, because they're in the
classrooms and they're already doing this, by the way.
It's not sort of tentative stuff they might want to do in the
future. It's already happening.
It's happening in this country. And Brian just mentioned
legislation. They want to build legal
frameworks encoding participation as a civic
service, right? It's similar to jury duty
essentially. And if you get selected, you
have to do it, yes. You don't have any choice about
the matter. They want to build bigger
communities of people scaling this stuff across all, all the
nations of the earth ultimately. And they want to build a public
communication brackets propaganda programme in order to
get people to buy into this whole agenda.
Ultimately. This is heavily linked into
things like the Fabian Society. So we can see here Chalice
talking at the launch of the Bloomberg LSE event back in
October. I think it was the London School
of Economics, which was founded by the Fabian Society.
This event was obviously attended by Sidney Khan,
supposedly Mayor of London, but actually he probably prefers
just being called the President of the C40 Cities and also a
former executive committee member of the Fabian Society.
Complete internationalist. He's not interested in a
national UK with with all the different types of people that
live in UK at the moment. This is an internationalist
brain. He's thinking on a global scale,
not helping people in his locality.
Absolutely no. He detests the nation state, I
believe, I would say can't. And, and and he's building this
into the physical infrastructure of of City Hall, for example.
So this is the new City Hall building that he's moved into.
So they had that thing down by Tower Bridge.
They're only in it for 20 years and now he's up sticks and he's
gone up into the down to the Docklands and they're literally
architected and designed this place to enable these democratic
or these these innovative democratic processes.
Deliberation will bring in 30 people and we'll talk to them
and we'll pretend that that tells us something about what
should be put forward in terms of policy for the whole
population, right? So this is actually playing out
as we speak and there's demands for more of it across the civil
service. So this is from civil service
world couple of years ago now, but the idea that citizens
assemblies are being demanded by the public.
And you can see the banner on the left hand side there,
citizens assemblies. Now that's an Extinction
Rebellion banner. Who funds extinction rebellion?
George Soros does, and so the demand is coming from the person
who's promoting the policy. See how that works?
Well, yes, because I think that the Lord Sainsbury's got an
element of this. I would I would tend to agree.
Being done on a national scale instead of an international
scale, but it's the same principle.
Exactly the same thing. And then when you just get that
back up quickly there, the Sue Gray, former chief of staff to
to Keir Starmer, she wasn't in position for that long basically
saying that Labour will introduce citizens assemblies
and actually the big push which is to replace the House of Lords
with a House of citizens, right? So this is total constitutional
restructuring around these democratic, new democratic
processes. Correct.
And for the audience, think about so it's Labour saying that
they would introduce Citizens Assembly, but we've already seen
that the Institute of Government is working in, through and
around government and advising the political parties before
they are elected as to how they should work and what the policy
is. So are we looking at Labour
Party policy? I'm going to suggest not just my
personal opinion, we are highly likely to be seen the Institute
of Government Policy and that policy has been created by
immensely wealthy and powerful people who've never been near
the democratic system. When you know where to look,
this is all in plain sight. And of course what we need is
more people to talk about it, including the likes of Nigel
Farage and the Reform Party, who at the moment are buried in the
weeds of rubber boats without telling the population the UK
what they really need to know. Absolutely, and one of the main
places that this is being trialled and will ultimately be
scaled from is from the cultural sector.
And we've got a clip here of a citizens assembly which took
place at the Museum of Birmingham, I believe it was
last year. It's nice to have the same
what's happening in the city. I'm hoping we can make a
positive change for Birmingham. It's nice to be a part of
something like this and feel like we're being listened to.
We. Can make a little bit of a
contribution to the solution. It's important we get that
right. I talked to other museum
directors about what we're doing, and I can see a look in
their eye. Really.
I wouldn't do that in a million years.
Your Birmingham residence. This is your museum, your
collection. You decide I'm the Displanx.
I would say the short answer is we do.
We do decide. The sessions just followed a
nice structure where it just starts from the people ground
up, builds up to what we want from the museums.
The regular people are going to be the people that come here.
So it's really important that they have a space to voice
things that they don't like and probably more importantly,
things that they do like and want to see more of so that we
can tailor the experience and then just get more people
through the doors. We think that the museums
deserve to be busier and better, and this is one of our first
attempts at doing that. So we sent out invitations to
5000 people and through a process called sortition, we
ended up selecting 25 people who represent different demographics
of a city to really genuinely find out what people think about
museums. So 5000 people out of a, it's
the second city, 3,000,000 population, 5000 people invited,
25 selected. And this gives you a sense of
how undemocratic these innovative democratic processes
are. And what you're seeing there,
particularly in the cultural sector, is the enforcement of a
multicultural perspective and the rewriting of the history of
Birmingham in this instance. But you can see how that can
then be expanded out across the whole of the country as well.
So Birmingham as it was, it's Birmingham as the international
elites wanted to be in the future, which is a completely
different thing. And we talked a bit about some
of the institutional powers behind this.
I'm going to Chuck a few more names and logos on the left hand
side as well. Eric Schmidt, former chief
executive of Google, on the steering committee at the
Bilderberg meeting, set up something called the
International Strategy Forum, of which Claudia Chalice is a
fellow. She's been a fellow there for 12
months. That is run by this guy Jared
Curran, who is, amongst other things, the president of global
affairs and partner at Goldman Sachs.
And in fact, let's just have a a bit more of a closer look at
Jared Cohen because he's a very, very interesting fella.
I said he's a Goldman Sachs. He's also an adjunct senior
fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.
He's a member of the Trilateral Commission, which Brian's going
to talk again about in a moment. And then before that, he was the
founder and chief executive of something called Jigsaw at
Google, which was its intelligence operation, which
was working on regime, regime change operations in places like
Syria and Ukraine back in 2014. He was before that at the US
State Department as an advisor. It's Condoleezza Rice and also
Hillary Clinton. So that's Republican and
Democrat administrations. He was advising as a pure play
uniparty type guy. And he was also a Rhodes Scholar
as well, which is basically a finishing school for the global
establishment. And these are the people who are
running what I would say is a global coup d'etat.
I think that's that's obviously reasonable to say that certainly
it is not the UK government which is running UK.
Keir Starmer told the truth. He's working for Davos.
He's not interested in the people in this country.
Now the Trilateral Commission mentioned, let's just bring them
up on on screen. If you don't know about this
organization, you need to know about it.
This is a recent report that from the Commission itself, they
created a task force on global capitalism in transition.
So what they're telling you is that they are not happy with the
existing system of capitalism. We don't want free trade between
countries where it's the the creation of wealth and it's the
entrepreneur. Sorry.
It's the entrepreneurship of people in countries that creates
the business, creates the export.
No, this is all controlled by immensely people, immensely
powerful people, very wealthy through the Internet, national
banking system, which of course controls all the finance and the
equity. They are going to change
capitalism into their model. And if you get into the details
of this, you will find that you are right back with the type of
agenda that Ben has just been talking about.
So if we just have a little look at this one, one of many images
and comments coming up on social media because people are so
upset about what Trump has declared he wants to do with
Greenland. So the key point here is a
question, Is Trump as the president of the United States
acting as an individual or is he working for other people?
Now I'm going to say if you look at the deep strategic policy of
the Trilateral Commission, the world is to be forced into three
blocks. The Americas, that includes
North and South America, the Europe, the European system,
which also includes Africa and Asia.
Those are the three key blocks. And if you look at the politics
that Trump is unleashing at the moment, you could say he's
creating a mayhem which is making the formation of these
big centralized blocks even easier.
So just a thought, but have a look at it now this Greenland
has produced a backlash. Let's just have a look at this
video clip here. The interesting thing is the
soft music. Do you remember Defence HQ at
the beginning of the UK column news today?
We had this very soft music as a background to what could beat
violence and military operation. Let's have a look at this clip.
There are no pressing security threats to Greenland, but we
share real concern about Arctic security going forward as the
climate changes, as the sea ice retreats, as shipping routes
change. There are legitimate reasons for
us to explore ways to invest better in Arctic security
broadly, both in the American Arctic and in our NATO partners
and allies. As an original NATO ally,
Denmark has been a tremendous partner for us in security and
that relationship is rooted in a deeply shared values, values of
democracy, of self determination, and of respect
for territorial integrity. We seek to find a way forward
through this moment that reinforces the 225 year old
partnership and alliance between the people of the Kingdom of
Denmark and the United States. So interesting words from
Senator Coons there. Seems to me he's using very,
very conciliatory language, almost a back step away from the
intensely hard line from Trump. And what's produced that change?
Well, if we have a look at the next video clip, part of it is
the fact that ordinary people are making it perfectly clear
they're not happy. Let's have a look at this
protest in in in Greenland itself.
OK, we we seem to have a little bit of a problem on that clip.
We'll try and get that into UK column extra.
But essentially that was showing the number of people
demonstrating in Greenland and Denmark against Trump's
intention to take over, to take over Greenland itself.
OK, well if we move on, we have to say a huge thank you to
everybody who's been supporting UK column.
We are funded by our members and people who donate to us.
We can only do what we do with your financial support.
So if you're one of the members or donators or you're making
purchases through our shop, a huge thank you to you.
If you're watching from UK or overseas and you're not yet a
member, then do go to the website and press that magic
Click here button highlighted by our famous yellow arrow to join
in the UK column. Become a monthly member or make
an annual donation or join up with an annual.
Sorry, join up with a lifetime membership because it's your
financial support that keeps us going.
Now, aside from all the news and information on the UK Common
website, of course, tonight at 7:00 PM we've got germ warfare
going out, plumbing, not vaccines and decreased
mortality. And I'm sure that's going to be
another interesting episode. And here we've got Silk and
Steel podcast going out tonight at 9:00 PM and we're having a
look at inside Venezuela after Maduros kidnapping.
So absolutely on the button talks and I would encourage
people to go and have a look at that.
Now let's put Ukraine in a little bit of context with the
with the idea that the President of the United States is not just
a man who can act on his own, He can only do what he does with
the support of these very powerful international
organisations. So that turbulence is always a
good thing. Got some very interesting
effects happening in the studio around me at the moment.
But let's go through this. And this one was pointed out to
me that the United States through a presidential decree,
has just decided that it's going to withdraw from a lot of
international organisations, conventions and treaties that
are, quote, contrary to the interests of the United States.
Now, what is so interesting about this very comprehensive
list? We can't show it all in today's
news, but it demonstrates the number of non government
organisations and overseas organisations, including the UN
that are dragging nation states into the weeds of a globalist
agenda. Now, Trump has said he's
withdrawing and one and one of the ones he's withdrawing from
here is, is a, is the science and technology Centre in
Ukraine. Now, what is the significance of
this? Well, for the Russians, this
would be very significant because they accused this
organization of having worked with the bio labs as a, as an
offensive operation against Russia.
I'm going to say that's not proven, but it's a very strong
Russian claim. If we look at this
organization's own report, here's the annual report 2024.
If you're worried, worried about the look of the dog, this is a
dog trained to sniff out mines and explosives, so a working
dog, which is why it's got eye protection on there.
But in this report, of course, we can very quickly go and see
who the funding is from the two big players with United States
and the European Union. But also there you can see
Canada at 6% and the United Kingdom at 1.6% and 4.1% from
the Kingdom of Norway. Now, who in UK is putting in
money? Well, it's the Department for
Energy Security and Net 0. So we haven't sorted out energy
security in UK, if we even believe in that term.
But this organization pumping money into Ukraine and the
Americans now saying, well, we're pulling out of this
organization. And this is an organization that
has basically swallowed nearly half a billion in since it's
inception, which I think is going back to about 1993, if I
remember correctly. So Trump absolutely pulling out
of this organization clearly now slowing down military supplies
to Ukraine. Is this because he knows that
America is not capable of dealing with Russia and China?
And at the moment, the fear factor with the Americans is
China. And so he's shifting target not
because of his own policy or just the fact that we've got
very powerful global corporate people whispering in his ear.
As reported in UK column News on Friday.
We've also got organisations like the Trilateral Commission
clearly influencing the American administration in order to say
what it should and should not be doing in the world Now, in the
same manner as America. Under the Trilateral, we've got
the European Union system where instead of the nation states
we're grouping up to produce 1 cohesive European superstate.
We should remember this phrase. I've cheated slightly here.
It should be Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals.
But in fact many, many casual commentators have changed this
to the European Union, from the Atlantic to the Urals.
Now, the significance of the map on screen is that of course the
Urals are well to the east of Western Russia and therefore
Europe. To say it is going to run Europe
from the Atlantic to the EUR means that Russia must be
fragmented and absorbed into the EU.
Let's just have a look at this very informal, very informal,
but informative clip talking about this aspect.
Have you ever wondered where Europe ends and Asia begins and
vice versa? It looks like 1 continuous
landmass with no clear physical break between the two
continents. The boundary starts in the
Arctic Ocean, runs S along the Crest of the Ural Mountains, and
then follows the Ural River to the Caspian Sea.
West of this line are countries considered European, while east
of it are countries considered Asian.
This divide exists even though Russia is 1 continuous landmass
spanning both continents. OK, so little bit of information
there. Let's have a look at the next
clip where we've got Macron and Putin talking about this very
subject of of a Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals.
Most of the President supported the Lisbon of Vladivostok.
So for the non French speakers, essentially what was happening,
Macron was talking about an EU from the Atlantic to the Urals
and Putin cut back in and and said, well, basically he was
talking about a Lent, he was talking about an EU from Lisbon
through to Vladivostok. Ultimately, and this is this is
one of the key things is that the European power project has
always been about taking land as far as the EUR.
And that means that either EU, either the Russian, either
Russia does as it's told and joins the EU, or else it's got
to be subjugated and broken apart in order to be forced into
the European Union. Now why, why do I say this?
Well, this is 1 report. This is from Russia in Global
affairs back in 2007. And we've got an article here on
Yuri Duvenin, Ambassador Extraordinary of the Russian
Federation. And in 1990, four, 1999, he was
deputy foreign minister of the Russian Federation.
There's a little bit of text here and comment.
Let's have a look at it. So initially he said he was an
assistant to the head of the ministry's first European
department. I specialized mainly in French
affairs. So while I was on my way to
Khosbets office I thought we would discuss them and we really
did. Apparently Khrushchev just
called, I heard as soon as I entered the office.
He's enraged quote over Charles de Gaulle's statement about a
Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals.
He has given instructions to urgently clear it up with the
French what their president meant.
This is this is Khrushchev saying that he wants it cleared
up, to clear it up with the French what their president
meant, expressing ideas like that.
What if he is hatching plans to break up the Soviet Union?
So the assignment is urgent. Take a seat and we will prepare
the text of a letter of enquiry. It should be noted that the
slogan of building a Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals had
been launched by de Gaulle long before September 1962.
Moreover, de Gaulle created it and repeated it so often that
these words became a catch word, a kind of credo for French
policy in Europe and even more than in Europe, sorry, in
Europe, and even more than in Europe, as the de Gaulle put
emphasis, as de Gaulle put emphasis on them, even during
his stay in the United States. Of course, Soviet diplomats and
state and statesman had heard those words on many occasions
without giving much thought, though, to what they could mean
or how they could be interpreted.
Now, the key point that I'm making here is that for the
Russians at that time, they saw the statement as an implied or
actual threat to the cohesiveness of the Soviet
Union. And surprisingly, or maybe not
surprisingly, since that time we've witnessed the breakup of
the Soviet Union. And now in 2022 onwards, 24
onwards, we've got many people calling for the breakup.
Of the Russian Federation in order to save Ukraine, but also
in order to allow not only the EU but NATO to expand eastwards.
Is this just the policy coming out of the European Union?
I would suggest not because this again fully meets the trilateral
policy. So we're not dealing in a self
functioning European Union. We're also dealing in a European
Union under the control of trilateral Davos power in order
to get this globalist agenda in place.
So just take us on from there, Ben, into the subject of AI,
because of course AI is seen as one of the key weapons by the
globalist system in order to subjugate not only nation
states, but also the individual in the street.
Indeed it is. And you've just thrown an
additional talking point for me into the mix there, Brian, which
we'll come back to in a minute. But for now, let's just have a
look at in in on this day of Davos, the first day of Davos,
World Economic Forum 2026. Let's have a listen to a senior
partner from EY, one of the World Economic Forum strategic
partners, My old boss, in fact, Rahul Gautam, talking about what
he calls multimodal AI and its use in the media industry.
I'll turn an example in as well and stay on the positive train
here because I do think at the end of the day, this will all be
a net gain for the industry that we were doing real work with a
client who had a Eureka moment on the revenue side of what
could AI do for our business and for the IP we have invested in
building. And the exam question was, can
we build a multimodal model that will take a piece of content
that we've already developed and turn it into a different piece
of IP and content that we can then go and use for other
commercial purposes. So to make it very specific, we
built an animated film. The target for this film is 3 or
4 major western oriented countries.
The exam question is, would this play in other markets?
As we all know, animation is super expensive.
So the idea of localizing that content in advance of knowing
whether it was going to work too high held the climb.
So we're going to build it for our traditional audiences.
Well, in this case, let's load the film into a multimodal model
and have it create 7 graphic novels of the exact same IP, but
now in a graphic novel format. Let's then load it into another
model that localizes that content into other geographies
and languages, which is a far easier task than doing that with
animated content. So now all of a sudden off of a
base piece of IP that I developed with my traditional
workflows, I developed entirely new pieces of IP that I can
both, you know, generate revenue within the market I can use to
test the efficacy of my IP in other markets and help to build
the case to maybe create this film or localize it with a much
higher degree of confidence that it's going to be successful.
And if it works, maybe now I'm thinking about doing TV series
off of it. Maybe I'm looking at entirely
different forms of shoulder content and IP.
And I'm fundamentally now rewiring the economics of the
business because the revenue upside and the value of a base
piece of IP is fundamentally different than it would have
been pre IP. Rahul, I've got to tell you, I'm
really sorry to say that our chat box was not impressed with
your presentation there. But this is how these people
speak, by the way, and I'm fluent in that stuff.
I know exactly what he was talking about.
But essentially the point of that was they're working with a
media business, which may or may not be Disney, right?
I think it might be, but he doesn't actually say and he's
not allowed to say. In fact, because of client
confidentiality, they've created a cartoon, a piece of
intellectual property IP. It's what he mentioned that term
a few times. And that's been designed to
target 3 or 4 Western countries and they want to sell this in
other countries that aren't Western countries.
And instead of repurposing that, that cartoon, recreating it, re
scripting it, maybe thinking of doing something completely
different because that would be difficult and expensive and
would need people and all that kind of stuff.
You'd have to pay them their wages and all that.
Well, that's stuff you don't really want to do when you're a
big multinational corporation. You want to hold on to your
money, they'll just put it into the computer and the computer
will repurpose it and it will think about how it can
reposition it culturally to make it more relevant to new markets
that you can then sell it into. And what's the net outcome of
all of this? Well, it destroys the creative
opportunity, right? So actually making cartoons used
to be a a really creative endeavour and people would love
doing that. They'd enjoy doing that.
It's vocational, it's fun in a lot of ways and we're going to
now get rid of that. That will all be done in the
computer and your job will be to sell the thing that we've
produced. It will keep more money, as I've
kind of alluded to already in the bank account of the
multinational corporation and not allow for opportunities for
people to earn right. Really importantly, and this is
a big part of the destruction of the economic system in this
country and elsewhere that we've seen over the past 30-40, fifty
years have been driven by automation and AI is
accelerating that process. And then importantly, to come
back to what you were just talking about a moment ago,
Brian, you're going to destroy the national culture in these
countries that you're going into, because what you're saying
is you right need your own culture.
We're here, here's some culture. We've repurposed it to an
approximation of what we think that you might like.
And you can just have that instead.
And that goes to breakdown and homogenise nations in terms of
their cultural differences to make them easier to to lump
together into these huge administrative blocks that
they're driving it towards, you know, so there's a political and
an economic component to that as well.
Indeed, a lot more we can talk about, but we're out of times
for today's UK column news. Lots of questions coming in our
chat boxes with NATO, the breakup and NATO, what's
happening in Greenland. We are, we are.
We'll be back in a few minutes. The UK column extra and we'll
try and deal with some of those topics.
We'll at least discuss and talk through those important topics.
But that's it for today's UK column news.
Ben, thank you very much for joining me.
Huge thank you to our audience and an even bigger thank you to
everybody supporting UK column financially because we are here
because of your kindness and generosity.
So if you're not a member, do join us.
OK, that's it. We'll be back at the same time,
1:00 on Wednesday. Bye bye.