Good afternoon. It's Wednesday the 28th of May
2025, just after 1:00. Welcome to UK column News.
I'm your host Mike Robinson. Joining me today is my host
Charles Mallett. He'll be talking about food, bio
security, censorship from the UK Ministry of Defence, Starlink's
expansion plans. We're also joined by researcher
and activist Sandy Adams. She'll be discussing recent
attempts to brainwash the people of Glastonbury and to turn the
town into a World Heritage site. And also with us is journalist
and peace campaigner Vanessa Bailey, who's going to give
latest analysis of the situation in Gaza as well as the ongoing
rebranding of terrorists in Syria and particularly Gilani.
Now I'm going to a little bit on online safety shortly, but let's
get started with King Charles in Canada yesterday because he was
in Canada yesterday for a quick visit to deliver the so called
speech from the throne. The Carney regime rolled out the
red carpet and brought the carriage and throne out of
mothballs to host the King, who was mainly there apparently as a
reaction to Donald Trump's demands on Canada.
Now reasserting Canada's sovereignty is how many were
putting it in their coverage of it.
The Speech from the Throne is the equivalent of The King's
Speech here in the UK and it represents the state opening of
Parliament. And in Canada it's normally
delivered by the Lieutenant Governor of Quebec.
But as with The King's Speech here, the words aren't written
by the King, they're written on his behalf and or certainly
sorry, on behalf of the ruling regime, probably by a team of
civil servants. But it's interesting we never
actually get to know who writes the actual words.
So let's however listen to the first few words out of Charles
mouth when he delivered the speech yesterday.
Honourable senators, members of the House of Commons, it is with
a deep sense of pride and pleasure that my wife and I join
you here today. As we witness Canadians coming
together in a renewed sense of national pride, unity and hope.
I would like to acknowledge that we are gathered on the unseeded
territory of the Algonquin and the Shinar Beg people.
This land acknowledgement is a recognition of shared history as
a nation. While continuing to deepen my
own understanding, it is my great hope that in each of your
communities and collectively as a country, a path is found
toward truth and reconciliation in both word and deed.
No, that's very interesting that he was asked to say those words
and perhaps embarrassing that he was asked to say those words
because the British royal family has questions to answer over the
treatment of indigenous children there.
In 2022 when Charles visited Canada as Prince of Wales, he
was reminded by Rozanne Archibald, the national chief of
the Assembly of First Nations, of the so called national
scandal. I'd say it's much stronger that
that national scandal doesn't go strong enough for this.
Of thousands of indigenous children who died or were abused
in the residential school system from the 19th century until as
late as the 1970s. Now in 2021, hundreds of human
remains were discovered at former church run schools and
these were all Anglican church run schools.
And as King Charles is Supreme Governor, and despite the excuse
of being of this being a largely ceremonial role, he carries the
can effectively. So because the role, as I say,
is described as largely ceremonial, there's no sorry.
There's an acknowledgement of at least part of the role.
So I've completely messed that up.
I've lost my thread there. But anyway, during that 22
visit, 20/22 visit, Charles said we must find new ways to come to
terms with the darker and more difficult aspects of the past,
acknowledging, reconciling and striving to do better.
And some of the same type of language being used in the in
the Speech from the Throne then. But there's no apology.
There's no apology then and no apology since, so if there's to
be a renewed relationship with Indigenous peoples in Canada,
maybe that would be a good place to start.
But we should not forget that the abuse doesn't end with
Indigenous people, even the elites have been on the
receiving end of it in Canada. And Prince Andrew's quote dear
friend Father Keith Gleed, A paedophile and Anglican priest
who served as chaplain at the elite Lakefield College school
between 1974 and 1980, is this is something else that needs to
be discussed. And Andrew himself met at
Lakefield. They remained such good friends
that Andrew invited the Reverend to both his 21st birthday party
and to his wedding to Sarah Ferguson.
And shortly before Glee died of cancer in 2021, Andrew travelled
to his hospital bed to say goodbye.
And this was described at the time as surely a testament of
true friendship. So then of course, there's the
issue of 100,000 children sent to Canada from UK orphanages to
service farm workers and domestic servants.
And well, you may ask, what's this got to do with Charles?
Well, Bernardo's was responsible for much of the child
trafficking at the time. And as the current patron, we'll
just bring her on screen. If we look at who the current
patron is, it is of course Queen Camilla and before her, Queen
Elizabeth. The royal family continues to
occupy the monarchy, Charles. They continue to remain silent
on the criminal actions effectively being done in their
names. If they're prepared to be
patrons for these types of things or they're prepared to
considers certain people to be friends and so on.
And I would, Charles, say that this silence has to be taken as
consent at the very least, if not complicity.
And there really there should be accountability.
I don't know what your thoughts would be.
Well, I think the, the significance of the apology in
the, in the sort of wider context has been devalued over
the last few decades because people have been climbing over
each other to apologise for things that they absolutely
definitely did have nothing to do with.
In that they were usually usually very much politicised
and relating to a period in history they could not possibly
have influenced. But here we're talking about
something completely different, something that did directly
involve the people that you have just been speaking about.
And I think that that's one part.
I think the other part is the reference to a role being
ceremonial. Well, one might say, and we
talked about this earlier, that the, the role of monarch is, is
largely A ceremonial 1 yet now. And yet it's beyond doubt that
that the royal family, particularly the king, does
continue to have and pushes for a great deal of influence in the
lives of those that are certainly within this country
and in overseas territory. So it it does seem like a a
question of wanting to have it both ways, which I think is is
highly inappropriate for a better word.
Yes, OK, well let's move on to farming and bio security then.
And just a few days ago the UK government announced that from
the 1st of July, farmers will be able to move animals around
England without a blue tongue licence.
Is that is that exactly what's going on?
That is what's going on. And the way I think I would put
it is that the the bio security state as we've come to know it
is evolving and we see this tweet here from APHA who are
moving into a state of complete control via the inherent
corruption of the system which underpins it.
And it's possible to track this shift from killing everything
that the slaughter on suspicion policy to vaccinating
everything. And the APHA continues to assume
more and more control over the outcomes for livestock.
As you say here tweeting about the restriction of the blue
tongue zone covering all of England.
Of course, agricultural policy now being a devolved matter.
This means that what what are called movement tests will not
be required. Now, in an email to WHO they're
calling stakeholders, it's made perfectly clear that the reason
for this is an expectation that one of 3 vaccinations will be
used on animals deemed susceptible.
And here we see an encouragement to discuss vaccination with your
vet as though there may be more than one outcome from such a
discussion. Now all available vaccines are
authorised on an emergency basis according to the Veterinary
Medicines Regulations 2013. And to better understand what
happens if one does follow the science, it's schedule 4 that
contains key detail. And they say that an animal may
be treated with any one of these things in order to avoid
unacceptable suffering. So effectively, this is where
vaccine doesn't already exist. They may use a product for
another species or for another condition in the same species.
They may use a human medical product authorised in the United
Kingdom. They may use a product
authorised in any other country for use in any food producing
animal species. Or they may even use a product
produced extemporaneously by a pharmacist, a veterinary surgeon
or a person holding a manufacturing authorisation.
In other words, for that last one, someone who's basically
guessing with absolutely no research and no preparation.
So one might think that with goal posts that far apart, it's
little wonder that investment in vaccines has increased so
significantly in recent years. And this is what Bill Gates had
to say about his own involvement.
Invested $10 billion in vaccinations over the last two
decades and you figured out the return on investment for that,
And it kind of stunned me. Can you walk us through the
math? Well, it's pretty impressive
that when you take these vaccines, get them to be very
inexpensive by making big volume commitments, have that right
relationship with the private sector.
Get the delivery system. So they're really getting the
coverage out there. You literally saved millions of
lives and 20 years ago when we created these new multilateral
organisations, Gabi for the vaccines, Global Fund for HIV,
TB and Malaria, we didn't know they'd be successful.
They've gone through lots of challenges about making sure the
money gets there, making sure the efficiency is right.
But as we look at upcoming replenishments for those and
we've got so much distractions politically that the
international needs like this could.
Get eclipsed if we're not careful, you know, we see a
phenomenal track record. It's been 100 billion overall
that the world's put in. Our foundation is a bit more
than 10 billion, but we feel there's been over a 20 to 1
return. So if you just look at the
economic benefits, that's a pretty strong number compared to
anything else. Now, if you're listening and not
watching, then I I should tell you that for the last bit there
where he was talking about the money, he couldn't help but
break into a broad smile because really, that's what it's all
about. And hand in hand with the
requirement for vaccination has to be the demonstration of a
threat, emergent or endemic, which is where the Animal and
Plant Health Agency comes in. And this is what they say about
their role. So as you listen, take a note of
the specific language that they use.
Athens role in controlling blue tongue is that we have the
responsibility for controlling animal disease in Great Britain.
It's our job to detect cases as they come through.
So farms and vets will report suspicion of disease to us.
We'll then go out and look at those animals.
We'll take the sample 7 to Purbrite.
They are the lead laboratory for Blue Tum.
So the Purbrite Institute has a wide range of expertise ranging
from not only the laboratory testing aspect but also around
modelling of disease outbreaks, culicoid surveillance and really
supporting Disease Control. So they're now really preparing
ourselves for an outbreak later this year, spread by the
Culicordius midge, and is able to infect all known ruminant
species, including cattle of sheep, goats and camelids.
There we go, responsibility for controlling animal disease, he
said, Which is done by testing and the use of the lab at
Purbright. Now.
That video was published last year and it illustrates
perfectly how the required outcome may be achieved.
Funded in part by the government, the Perbite
Perbright Institute here boasts via the UKRI of combating animal
disease. And they go on to crow about
attracting international investment, citing a $5.5
million investment from the Melinda Gates Foundation back in
2019 to establish the Livestock Antibody Hub.
This funding is channelled through the Biotechnology and
Biological Sciences Research Council.
Bit of a mouthful. The BBSRC and there has since
been a partnership between them and the Gates Foundation as well
as the Foreign and Commonwealth and Development Office investing
a further 40 million into per bride.
So bearing in mind Gates is expecting a 20 fold return on
such an investment, it should be perfectly obvious that accepting
such funding is completely inappropriate and it compromises
every process which occurs thereafter.
Now I mentioned this on the 8th of May last year.
The vaccines themselves may freely enter the food chain.
This note from the European Medicines Agency refers to the
inclusion of adjuvants, aluminium hydroxide and saponin
and goes on to say that the withdrawal period is 0 days,
meaning that an animal may be jabbed and milked in the same
day. So bolstering the narrative is
the 2023 Biological Security Strategy with a forward from
Oliver Dowden, in which he wrote that our world is increasingly
vulnerable to biological threats with catastrophic impacts,
whether it's another pandemic, a terrorist attack or
antimicrobial resistance. So it's the intimation that
climate change is the ring to rule them all.
And in each instance, the government is the answer.
Now, there are multiple references to the threat posed
by zoonotic spillover, which we're told is the transmission
of from from sorry of pathogens, from animals to humans, even if
the animals are not actually ill.
And as always, there's no need for it to make any sense.
The government has just updated its carbon footprint analysis
for the year 2022 and this graph shows exactly how the book
Cooking Exercise works. The destruction of the
countryside and the crippling of the economy may be shown to
bring about a small decline in the production of domestic
greenhouse gases, but this is perfectly offset by the increase
in imported goods. And finally, the evolution of
the bio security state is confirmed by the trials of a
testing regime called DIVA, which is said to be able to
distinguish between cattle which are supposedly infected with TB
and those which have been vaccinated.
So in conclusion, and as if it were really necessary to
reinforce the point that vaccination is only an exercise
in control and profit, this announcement says that as with
other vaccines, a range of protection is expected.
Some animals will be fully or only partially protected after
vaccination, whilst others will remain susceptible to the
disease. OK.
Thank you for that, Charles. Let's move on and welcome Sandy
Adams to the programme. Sandy, you have been looking at
the situation locally in many parts of the country, with
people running campaigns with the local councils and so on,
but increasingly you're seeing the use of certain psychological
techniques in order to try to regain narratives amongst
campaigners. Yes, particularly last Saturday
on the 24th of, of May, we, we, we had a consultation at
Glastonbury Town Council at Glastonbury.
It was the town hall and it was looking at it.
I mean, I, I just want to mention firstly that Rosa Corey
opened my eyes to the Delphi technique technique many years
ago because it was used to gain consensus over Agenda 21 all all
over the United States. And we have to remember that
Delphi technique was developed in the 1950s by researchers at
the Rand Corporation, which is a think tank with close ties to
the US military and government. And really, it's a way to get
people together and lead them through a structured process of
multiple rounds of questionnaires and feedback,
controlled interaction. And it can, well, it is often
used, but you know, it's misused by NGOs and corporations and
education bodies also to steer people into a sort of group
think and into a predetermined outcome, you know, manufacturing
consensus. And we see this happening all
over, particularly with net zero, that that's how they've
reached the, the, the way to, to call sort of a climate emergency
all over the country. They held these sort of citizens
assemblies. And this is what we, we're
seeing more and more now in Glastonbury.
They, they, they had this, this consultation and people are
genuinely worried about the land being being taken over because
we've got this NH, Sorry, WHS scoping exercise happening to
make it a World Heritage status town.
And it's only a small town. But you know, the fact is that
we've seen it happen at Stonehenge and Avebury, where
people have actually been locked out of out of the land and, and
they have to pay extra to, to, to visit the site.
I mean, now to get to Stonehenge, a family ticket is
75 lbs. It's absolutely mad.
Anyway, people, also spiritual people have been locked out of
their practises during can only go there on the solstice in to
Stonehenge. And you know, they've got a big
visitor centre now and it's everything is, is really all
about tourism. So I'll be talking about that a
bit later about what NH, what WHS means to sacred sites later
on in the show. But at the moment I'm dealing
with this, this scoping exercise.
And, you know, they held these, they put everybody on tables and
of course they had the, they had the, the goals on the table
because it's all, you know, the WHS is all aligned to the 17
goals of Agenda 2030. And they give people biscuits
and tea and, and, and, and really lead them through a sort
of an exercise about what do they think?
There's lots of coloured crayons on the table.
It's a bit kindergarten people visualise.
And they, they kind of, you know, they, they, they lead them
through this very safe, what they, what appears to be a safe
environment and, and, and people are relaxed and, and come out
with things. And of course they use that data
to then form some kind of, you know, visioning brainstorming
thing. And the, the first of all, they
start with the scoping exercise. And it's, it's really, it's how,
how it's all all put together. There's a scoping exercise and
then it goes on through other sort of levels, which, and, and
then you've got the Delphi technique here, which it goes
through right from the issue that they lead you through to
get their solution. And it is all about
manufacturing consensus and, and, and bringing people round
and putting facilitators on every table so that they're LED
through this process. And it really is.
I mean, what what's what's unfortunate?
Is by, by the end of it, uh, I think we, we've got the last
slide, I think is, umm, is, is how you, yeah, yeah, it's how
you actually are lead. Umm and, and really everybody's
saying yes to everything, but in their heads they're going
actually, I don't want this, but they're too scared to, to say
something in because they want to conform.
They want to conform. Can we go back to the previous
slide? Sorry, I've jumped the gun a
bit. Umm, yeah, if you, the
definition is a change in a person's behaviour or opinions
as a result of real or imagined pressure from a personal group
of people and the dilemma of being a social animal.
Because actually, you know, you want to keep your individuality,
but you want to conform as well. And the establishment tend, the
establishment tends to like conformists better than non
conformists. So that's where we stand with
with all of that. Sandy, thank.
Thank you for that. As I say, we'll be covering more
about World Heritage sites a little bit, a little bit more in
a little bit later in the programme.
Sorry, Vanessa, let me welcome you to the programme.
Last week we were talking about the, and I don't want to say the
word rehabilitation because it's the rebit isn't really
appropriate, but we're talking about creating a new persona for
Jilani in Syria, who is, as we will remind everybody, remains a
terrorist who had a price on his head until very, very recently.
But last week you hinted at an NGO that I'm not sure that we
had fully identified, but we seem to have now, or at least
you have, I should say. Yes.
And I would just say, Sandy, that sounds very much like gas
lighting, textbook gas lighting, the Dolphy programme.
Yes, we talked last week about effectively the grooming
campaign, as I call it, Mike of Jelani, away from being ISIS, Al
Qaeda terrorist to being a legitimate political challenger
for power in Syria. And we noted that a former
ambassador from the US to Syria, Robert Ford, who was actually
kicked out of Syria for inciting riots in 2011, was basically
invited by a British NGO to to to basically put into motion
this grooming of Geolani. And yes, I have discovered who
it is. It's all written up in a new
article at UK column that was published yesterday.
And I do recommend that everybody go and read it.
There's a awful lot of detail in there.
The Blair and the Blair Bush project in Syria that brought al
Qaeda to power. So who was the NGO that was
responsible for inviting Robert Ford to meet with Joelani back
in March 2023? But actually whose directors had
allegedly met with Joelani back in 2021?
Which of course, is when the PBS Frontline initial interview with
the kind of suited and booted Joelani was published.
The name is Intermediate. It was established in 2011,
which is also interesting timing because of course, that's when
the regime change war against Syria began, backed by the US,
the UK, Israel, Turkey and the Arab Gulf states, to name a few.
Who are the cofounders of Intermedia?
Well, one of them is Jonathan Powell, and you'll be also
interested to know that he was appointed as national security
adviser to Kostama literally weeks before the final fall of
Damascus. So again, let's let's just check
the timeline here. So in 2023, they invited Robert
Ford to come to Edlib and meet with Geolani.
One month prior to the fall of Damascus, Powell was taken from
intermediary and made national security adviser to Kerstamer.
Kerstamer, of course, is known to be, for want of a better
word, the protege of Tony Blair. I actually secured the name of
the organisation and the name of Jonathan Powell from sources
inside Syria, but it was pretty quickly picked up by other media
outlets, mostly regional, but this by the National talking
about Britain's influence. Sorry, influence spreads through
new Syria as security chief meets post Assad leaders.
Now this article in particular goes into a lot of depth about
the complex built by UK intelligence in particular that
waged the Narrative Media charity organisation war,
including of course the formation of the White Helmets
in 2013, the regime change war against Syria.
So British intelligence is intrinsically embedded in in in
the entire operation to overthrow the Syrian government.
This also is an article in French media, in the Figaro,
written by a well known French investigative journalist,
journalist George Malbruno, who wrote a book on the regime
change war called The Path to Damascus.
Here he's talking about Al Shararao Jolani is dangerously
intelligent and his investigation into the new power
in Syria. Now what is interesting is he
also identifies that one of the project managers in
Intermediate, Lucy Stewart, who speaks Farsi and Arabic,
organised or was given the job, let's say of grooming other
members of Jolani's regime, including the former Al Qaeda
founder and current caretaker foreign minister Al Shabani.
And potentially she probably organised this interview with
Tony Blair at Davos with Shabani, which if you remember,
we played it on UK column. It was deeply uncomfortable for
want of a better word. But of course, Powell, people
will remember as the chief of staff was was of none other than
the architect of the war against Iraq and in my opinion also the
architect of the future war against Syria, none other than
war criminal Tony Blair. This is Powell with Tony Blair
back, I think during the time of the Iraqi war.
Powell, of course, has gleaned credit for his role in peace
negotiations in Ukraine and various other countries.
But I just want to draw attention to this is a document
that was released as part of the Chilcot Inquiry, which shows how
Bush and Blair were already planning the war against Syria,
even during the war against Iraq.
So here they're talking about giving support in building a new
partnership with the worst and Syria in return for closing down
support for Hezbollah and Hamas and helping us over Iraq.
He doesn't underestimate the problems of this, but I think
it's possible. Again, this is detailed in in in
a lot more with a lot more information in the article if
people want to read a bit more about it.
Now I also want to look at the cofounder of Intermediate, who
is Martin Griffiths, and he's named here as now being a chief
advisor. But he also has deep
connections, as was shown in this 2023 article in Al
Mayadeen, ex UN envoy to Yemen tied to MI 6, the Secret
Intelligence services and the Foreign Office.
This was originally picked up and declassified and then
republished by Al Mayadeen, but very clear ties to all of the
intelligence agencies. And that includes Powell as
well, of course. Because in fact, what was
exposed was that Powell back in 2012 sent an email to Hillary
Clinton in which he said if we can just have the slide, He
informed a senior Clinton aide in 2012 that intermediate works
closely with the Foreign Office. The NSC thesis in London I am
organises secret channels between insurgents and
governments. Work has begun in Syria, Yemen,
Somalia and Burma. And of course, 2012 is also the
time that Jake Sullivan, then advisor to Hillary Clinton,
emailed Hillary Clinton, according to WikiLeaks leaks,
saying that Al Qaeda is on our side in Syria.
And at this time that Powell was sending this email to to
basically get an audience or to get the interest of Hillary
Clinton in intermediate work as effectively an intelligence
agency outreach organisation in Syria.
He was convening with Jake Sullivan, who who who stated
that Al Qaeda is on our side in Syria.
So I do recommend people read the article just to get far more
detailed than I've been able to give here on the news.
But a fascinating Nexus of intelligence, military
operatives and so on, leading the war against Syria and now
bringing Jolani to power. Thank you for this.
And I'm going to say read the article, but then share the
article. Please do that.
We have to get this type of information out.
It is incredible to me that we have national security advisors
quite happy to admit that they are running back channel
discussions with Al Qaeda. It shouldn't surprise us because
we've been funding it and we've been arming it, but it is
nonetheless a public admission of these types of channels and
discussions and that is something that I think almost
nobody in the country is aware of and everybody should be aware
of. Yeah, I quite agree.
OK, let's move on. If you like what the UK column
does, you'd like to support us, please do so.
We absolutely appreciate and are very grateful for every everyone
that does support us. But you can make it to nation.
You can join the UK column as a member and so on.
You that gets you access to UK column News Extra and other
member only content. And but you can pick something
up at the UK column shop that helps us greatly as well.
And of course that helps promote the brand around the country.
If you're wearing AT shirt or a sweatshirt or a cap or have a
water bottle. But if you'd like to buy some
supplements from Clive to carl.com, we also have an
affiliate agreement there, which gives us a small percentage of
those purchases, although we it doesn't cost you any more to do
that. If you can't do any of that,
please do as I say, share the material.
We've got to get past the censorship regime in this
country and share links are provided on the articles, blogs
and videos on the UK Column website.
And just go and visit the UK Column website because that
helps us greatly too. Now tonight the question is, are
Jews God's own people? That is going to be a very
interesting discussion with Germ at 7:00 PM.
Are they God's chosen people, I should say, at 7:00 PM tonight
on the usual live streams. So do watch that if you possibly
can and let people know that it's on as well.
Tomorrow, the interview's with Linda Wharton.
Yeah. So 29th of May, that's tomorrow,
Thursday, 1:00 PM. Join us for that, and then let's
have a look. We've got Vanessa very briefly
your discussion with Ben and David Miller on Ukraine and
Israel. Yeah, I think it's well worth
watching simply, I mean, for David's expertise in particular
on the connections between Ukraine and Israel.
Many people may not be aware of the of it being the cradle of
Zionism. Yeah, definitely worth watching.
Thank you for that. So that is on the website at the
moment. If you didn't see it live,
Charles Bob is hosting an event. He is, and just to avoid
disappointment, we're going to demonstrate that twice.
I see. But yes, he's got an exhibition
called Paradigms up in London, the castled gallery, which is
running until the end of this week.
So get along to Commonwealth St There'll be a link in the show
notes. And that's just an example
illustration from this show of his, so do get along there.
Absolutely. Would absolutely encourage that
if you possibly can. OK, let's come back to you,
Charles. And well, we've been talking
about the recent allegations or the continuing allegations of
SAS involvement in murders and so on in Afghanistan.
What have you got? We have absolutely and this has
been associated or or linked to the reports that the government
is, is bound to overturn legislation that was put in by
the Conservative government concerning the Northern Ireland
legislation or at least going back to 2023.
And it's the to concerning the prosecutions against British
soldiers for actions taken under OP banner in particular, which
ran from 1969 to 2007. And the specific legislation was
designed to prevent any legal, any further legal action from
taking place. It was called the OR is called
rather the Northern Ireland Troubles Legacy and
Reconciliation Act 2023, something which current
government plans to overturn. As I say now, news of this
government's plans have, for obvious reasons, been
scrutinised by serving armed forces personnel and veterans
alike. And to that to that end, many
regimental headquarters and veterans associations have
provided updates to their various distribution lists.
And now what would appear to be a significant step further into
the domain of censorship. It's reported here by Sean
Raymond in the Mail on Sunday that the Ministry of Defence has
weighed in and ordered that such communications stop now.
This is the second instance of MOD censorship reported on by UK
column in recent weeks, The 1st in the case of serving Royal
Marine who had an online survey taken down after an MOD
intervention before he was disciplined and then silenced.
And now we have a petition to stop the change to the current
legislation being sent round the Houses, which is something that
I can confirm personally. And this has been interpreted as
being outside of the Army's scope of political neutrality.
Now the question is, does this constitute a fair interpretation
of Queen's Regulations which govern conduct within the Army?
And specifically there is a prohibition on comment and the
expression of views. And there may well have been
instances of such, but the response has been a blanket one,
which means that where the information has simply been
passed, it is deemed to be politically controversial.
Now, Greens regulations describe a politically controversial
topic as one which is, has been, or is clearly about to be, a
matter of controversy between political parties in this
country. Now, it may be the case that
such a topic falls into this categorisation.
That's not to say that any parties are necessarily guilty
of comment or expression on the matter.
And further, and for context, I think it's pertinent to consider
the role of politics in the use of force.
And here from the Joint Services Publication 398, which deals
with the rules of engagement, we're reminded that rules of
engagement are one of the key means by which political control
is exercised over the use of force and of ensuring that
action taken by UK armed forces is lawful.
Now, all of that calls into question the way in which the
laws of armed conflict and international humanitarian law
is interpreted. So the issue brought out by all
of this is that of consistency, and not just in the UK.
Various governments appear to want to protect people they
describe as terrorists whilst prosecuting some of their own
soldiers. And at the same time, as in
Australia, a former special forces soldier has been found to
have committed war crimes by two civil courts.
And as asked by the World Socialist website two years ago,
why does he face no criminal investigation?
So to conclude and highlight the level of disarray and plummeting
moral, it's worth listening to the way in which Luke Pollard,
currently Armed Forces Minister, plans to lure the young into
active service. We inherited a broken
recruitment system from the Conservatives.
We promised to take steps to fix it.
And we are the largest pay increase in 20 years for those
who serve, 35% pay increase for recruits scrapped, over 100
outdated medical practises, created a new direct entry cyber
pathway, A conditional offer within 10 days of applying and a
training start date within 30 days.
And we've announced a new Tri service recruitment scheme to
attract the very best to our Armed forces.
Hardly words to inspire generation.
And I think plenty more to talk about in Extra.
Absolutely. And related then to that, of
course, is the issue of online safety, since we're talking
about censorship and Ofcom has called, has commissioned what
they call new qualitative research about MIS and
disinformation, exploring the ways to navigate and mitigate
its impact. Uh, now the report was published
by a consultancy called Varian, uh, who Ben has covered
extensively, or at least did cover extensively last year, I
think in about 5 or 6 different UK column news programmes.
So if you'd like to search the UK Column News archive, you can
find out more about varying themselves now in the in Ofcom's
blog posts on this new report, they acknowledged that quote.
It's important to be clear from the outset that misinformation
is a subjective term. There are a range of ways that
misinformation can be characterised, which makes it
important to understand the wider context of people's
attitudes and knowledge. Ofcom very much wants to bring
the issue of misinformation and disinformation to the forefront
of people's minds. The one we want to amplify here,
they say, is making space in our family and social groups for
civil society organisations and broadcasters and other news
providers to talk about misinformation and
disinformation. So they want to make media
literacy quotes everyone's business, online platforms,
parents, educators, third sector organisations, providers of
health and social care professionals working with
children, broadcasters including public service broadcasters and
others to realise the full potential of media literacy.
They say in the UK contributions and collaboration from all is
essential. So they absolutely want fusion
on this, on this area. But they the the sorry the
report itself funded by Ofcom. It's perhaps no surprise then
that regulation is seen as a major tool to deal with the
problem. Regulation and what are
described here as validation markers.
So the model which they seem to be being imposed or being
proposed here is that Ofcom uses regulation that drive people
towards the regime narrative. While the likes of News Guard,
yeah, there we there we go. Sorry, let's bring them back on
The likes of News Guard provides the so called validation markers
and validation markers might be things like scores that that the
News Guard gave about the trustworthiness and reliability
of particular news outlets. In the meantime, Ofcom has
published another blog post. You got a preview of it there,
claiming that sports stars and pundits receive huge quantities
of online hate, which risks their confidence in their
careers and increases a feeling that they will decide to leave
social media altogether. Poor souls, is what I say.
Surely the thing that people with the public profile need is
a thicker skin. But.
And, and since they don't have a thicker skin, instead we're
going to see a much more stringent censorship regime.
So that's all good stuff, isn't it?
It is. Yes, Sandy, let, let me welcome
you back to the programme then and let's uh, talk a little bit
more about UNESCO and United Nations and World World Heritage
Sites. Hmm, Umm, yes, I mean,
obviously, umm, you know, my, my first slide here is, umm, is
really the fact that UNESCO really are the umbrella
organisation for World Heritage. And I, I did pick up a couple of
their, their things at this consultation and they do have a
policy document and it's all integrated with the sustainable
development perspective. And it's, it's all tied up with,
you know, that they, they meet once a year and they, they say
they have World Heritage site is, is a duty on the state party
and it is achieved through appropriate policies in the
development plan of a local authority and whose parts of a,
you know, are of a management plan.
And, you know, I started looking at what state party means.
And actually it's it, it, it's all, it's all about transferring
the power from the people of a, of a, of an area into the state
in, into the either their government or the United
Nations. And, and how linked up they are
with the WWF, which is quite concerning because the WWF has
quite a history of, of colonialism, which I'll go into
a little bit later. But, but really what, what it
means a state party is a nation state that signed and ratified
the World Heritage convention. In this case, it means the
United Kingdom government. But actually they are answerable
to the United Nations at the end of the day.
So they, they, they can do what they like.
So really unfortunately, what we, what we've seen in, in, in
certain W World Heritage sites that have been taken over
throughout the world and particularly sacred sites.
You've, you've found the displacement of indigenous
people in Kenya. We found it, you know, the
Maasai in, in Africa, you know that they, they were accused in
2022 of violent removals and the destruction of homes and grazing
bans. To me, can you know,
conservation targets and tourism, I mean, this is just
unbelievable what goes on. And it's all in the, in the name
of conservation. You know, in Australia, in
Uluru, the same thing has happened.
You know, spiritual significance was sidelined in favour of
national, international narratives and tourism, cultural
tokenism versus genuine indigenous control.
So it's, it's happened in Nepal, it's happened in India.
And when we, when you look at the, uh, the link between the
WWF and, and they are linked. I mean, although they're
different entities, all, all of their frameworks into, into
interlink and we've got the founder members of the WWF, of
course we've got his, we've got the obviously Prince, Prince
Philip and Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands and Julian
Huxley. Now all of these were
eugenicists, colonialists who actually were were really, and
two of them involved quite heavily in the Nazi party.
So we've, you know, we've got this real colonial thing going
on and it's interesting at Prince when Prince Philip died,
Rashi Oshama said he'd taken a keen interest in.
He'd taken a keen interest in what was it in in?
Oh sorry, I've lost my slide. I'll I'll read it out here.
He had taken a keen interest in religion and conservation
despite dispatching a 2.5 metre tiger with a single shot on an
official visit to India in in 1961. 19 It was 1961.
Yeah, the same year he became president of the World Wildlife
Fund UK. Yeah, and and there's there is
another slide of him with that tiger in 1961 shot in Jaipur.
Now these people just, I mean, it, it really is about money
and, and the whole tourism thing with the WWF, it's all about
financialising nature. This is what they're doing all
over the world. And, and now we've got, you
know, the whole carbon thing intertwined with that, with the
greenwashing. So we're seeing a land grab of,
of massive proportions with WHS. Yeah.
And we shouldn't, uh, Sandy, we
shouldn't forget that, uh, you know, Prince Philip began the,
the whole conservation part of this as far as the royal family
is concerned. But Prince Charles, and now King
Charles has absolutely continued that legacy.
And despite the fact that he said just prior to his
coronation that he would be giving up the the political
activism, he absolutely has not given that up in any way, shape
or form. Absolutely.
Yeah. You got any thoughts?
Yeah. I mean, I think this is it.
It's tracing how far back it goes, but also the
identification of the key part of it, which was money, and
specifically other people's money.
And we go back to the the now King, then Prince of Wales
giving his address in Wales in 1970, talking about people
effectively becoming fed up with the subject of what was then
ecology and saying that not only do they need a sort of buzzing
PR campaign around it, but they also need to find a way in which
to sling the bill around somebody else's neck.
And here we are 50 plus years on and we see that that is exactly
what has been prosecuted. So it was.
It was very, very cleverly done and and continues to be so
because of course the vast majority of people do and will
go along with it. Yes, now I've got to say thanks
to Brian for sending me this video clip that we're going to
watch the 2nd through. But at the weekend on Sunday,
Kemi Bednock, the what we call her the shadow Prime Minister
perhaps, I don't know the the certainly the leader of the Tory
party was on the Trevor Phillips programme on Sky and well, I'm
not going to introduce it much more than that.
Let's just have a listen to what Phillips asked her and a short
excerpt of what she had to say. Earlier this week, the Prime
Minister joined with Mr McCall and Mr Carney in criticising
Israel. Mr Netanyahu responded by
accusing him of supporting murderers, rapists and.
Baby Killers was the. Israeli leader, right to say
that. Well, I think the first thing to
say on this issue is that if Hamas is praising your actions,
you've probably done something wrong.
And what he has said, he, he sees this.
Needs to know where you. Yeah, but I've been very clear
where I stand. Hamas is a terrorist group.
They are not our friends. They are.
No, no, I'm, I'm talking about Trevor.
If I make. It Israeli, yes, but it's all
related. Who's who funds Hamas?
Iran. An enemy of this country?
An enemy of this country. Israel is fighting a proxy war
on behalf of the UK, just like you.
Ukraine is on behalf of the West of Western Europe against
Russia. So here was apparently an open
public acknowledgement from a key senior politician that the
UK, that the UK, the two of the key wars taking place at the
moment are being pursued on behalf of the UK as proxy wars.
I haven't heard any such public acknowledgement like that
before. I think it's a pretty incredible
statement. It hasn't had any particular
coverage as far as I've seen in the mainstream press.
What are your thoughts? Well, one wonders whether, well,
I mean, I think it's it's astonishing the degree to which
people can speak out and be completely ignored.
If we think that what's built up to this is the number of people
who've joined the queue or or in so far as having a go at the
state of Israel or in particular Netanyahu and using the word
genocide and this certainly other.
So a lot of words coming out there, but but in fact, very,
very few or no actions whatsoever.
So it's all very well for her to sit there in opposition,
supposedly opposition and say something like this.
But what? But what can she do about it?
Who will she influence in saying it?
But I but no, I mean I'm sure that her comments will be
suppressed as far as they can possibly be.
Yeah, Vanessa, I know. I don't know whether you've seen
that clip already, but but I'd be interested in your thoughts.
Yeah, I had seen it on on mostly on Telegram.
As you say, it hasn't unsurprisingly, been picked up
on by mainstream media at all because that would necessitate
their investigation into the claim a little bit more.
And of course, they don't want to to do that.
But I think, you know, there's a lot of truth in what she said
for sure. I would argue that Israel is
also fighting a proxy war for the West, the US and the UK, as
it has done traditionally since the creation of the Zionist
movement. So I think the dog and the tail
wagged together much of the time.
Yeah, indeed. Well, let's come back to you
then. And what is the latest that's
going on in Gaza? Yeah, well, first of all, I have
to really apologise because I'm bringing David Lammy back on and
it pained me just as much as it's going to pain all of you to
have to listen to him. But let's roll this video.
I'm announcing that we have suspended negotiations with this
Israeli government on a new trade, free trade again.
We will be reviewing cooperation with them under the 2030
bilateral road map. Netanyahu's government.
'S actions have made this necessary.
Madam Deputy Speaker, today my honourable friend the Minister
for the Middle East is summoning the Israeli ambassadors to the
Foreign Office to convey this. Message I say now to the people
of. Israel, we want, I want a strong
friendship with you based on shared values, with flourishing
ties between our people and societies.
We are unwavering in our commitment to your security and
to your future, to countering the very real threat from Iran,
the scourge of terrorism and the evils of anti Semitism.
But the conduct of the war in Gaza is damaging.
Our relationship with your government.
So one might think a tiny glimpse of A cause for
celebration there. Well, don't think you know,
don't follow that route too quickly because here is the UK
trade envoy, Lord in Austin of Dudley in Israel going to the
cutting edge custom scanning centre, Hyphen Bay Port,
Hyphenazorous Light Railway project and the Technion,
whatever that is. So he clearly has absolutely no
problem with continuing trade with Israel.
As he says in the house very recently, we'd be foolish to
sever our trade links with Israel.
So he seems to be completely overriding the foreign ministers
statement in Parliament. And what does he say in that?
Which is interesting for me because it basically confirms
what we've been saying at UK column for some time.
And note that Lammy actually mentioned the 2030 Israel UK
road map in his statement. So what does Lord Austin say?
Thousands of jobs in the UK depend on trade with Israel. 1.7
million people work for UK firms exporting goods to Israel.
One in eight of the drugs dispensed by the NHS comes from
Israeli companies. Every business and family in the
country uses Israeli technology in their homes, computers, cars
and phones every day. So simply actually confirming
what we've been warning of and the infiltration by the spy unit
8200 and other tech based military spy units in Israel.
He said very similar things back on May the 13th in the Telegraph
which is known to channel British intelligence agency
statements. Also British sanctions against
Israel would be self harming and morally wrong.
So standing against and boycotting a country that is
committing genocide apparently isn't wrong.
And what does he say in this article?
Which again I find very interesting.
And let's not forget that during the pandemic COVID, of course,
Britain was able to reap the benefits of Israel's world
leading health strategies thanks to close cooperation between our
two countries. So this raises the question,
what exactly were those cooperations and what exactly
was the UK reaping an advantage of?
He also mentions in that article that in 2024 during the
genocide, the UK supplied 3.2 billion in exports to Israel and
they imported 2.5 billion from Israel.
And he states that without Israeli tech, RAF planes could
not actually get off the ground. And the the familiar excuse is
that Israel has foiled multiple terror threats.
Now you will remember that Theresa May's government used
the same excuse when Saudi Arabia was bombing the Yemenis
with British made bombs. They said that yes, but Saudi
Arabia helps us to foil terror plots on UK territory.
So very, very familiar canards being floated out there to try
and obscure the fact that Britain is complicit in the
genocide in Gaza. And just to remind everyone as
if they really need it, this young girl that we we're going
to see in the video, if you just want to play and I'll talk over
it. Ward Al Sheikh Khalil, you can
see the the inset photo. There she was, the child seen
trying to escape the burning tents at the family Al Jarjawi
school. Her mother and six siblings were
burned alive in that attack by the Zionists. 36 civilians, the
majority of which were children, were also burned alive in that
attack. And I just want to show this
photo, which I find absolutely horrifying.
These are the starvation lines settling young men in Gaza
towards the American corporate run aid centres and of course
starving people forced into such containment.
Chaos broke out and they were then fired upon by the IOF
military and many of them of course were massacred.
And of course, the response on Acts 2, Austin's Lord Austin's
tweet was, let's say, gratifying.
You can freeze frame and read it.
I can't read it from here, but just the last tweet from or the
last response from Louis All Day, who's a well known
historian academic. You are blood stained genocidal
demons. Well, I can't really disagree
with that. Vanessa, thank you very much for
that. A tragic story, you know, report
because, well, what can we say? Again, more complicity from the
UK government. It's not just the royal family,
it's from top to bottom of the British state.
And well, there are representatives.
Maybe we should be doing something about it.
But let's move on Charles to to Elon and Starlink.
Yes, indeed, and in particular the Internet provided by
Starlink. Getting away from the Internet
of course becoming becoming harder and harder.
And this now applies to air travel, where Elon Musk's array
of low Earth orbit satellites are delivering Wi-Fi directly
into aircraft. And here's the Starlink pitch
for attracting customers. Airlines, of course, have signed
up in their droves like Qatar, nobody wanting to be left behind
by their competitors. But what is neither considered
nor discussed, apparently, is the impact of such a
development. It's reckoned that Mosque has
approximately 7000 such satellites flying at the moment,
with a projection that 10s of thousands will be in low Earth
orbit within decades as the use of wireless Internet in
aircraft. There's no safety data and as
usual the line will simply be that there's no known adverse
effect. So in short, if you don't look
for it, you can't find it. The the other and very much
related issues concern the lifespan of the satellites.
Now, as though a revelation and certainly one that we'd put paid
to the climate change story if anyone were listening, the New
Scientist reports on the devastating effects of solar
storms and the overall effect of the sun on, lo and behold,
temperature and climate. We're in a period described as a
solar maximum, or at least have been recently a term almost
guaranteed to be emitted by any so called climate scientists.
Now, this means that damage is being done to the satellites far
faster than anticipated, which means that many more will be
sent up to compensate. And it also means that the way
in which they're meant to disintegrate is being called,
called into question, raising the possibility of collision
with aircraft. Now, the odds of such a thing
happening are written off or written about dismissively by
mainstream commentators, which presumably will continue to be
the case until there is a collision.
So here we have yet another example of the unthinking
application of the form of technology just because it is
possible and with no regard for the consequences.
So we might go on to talk about that a little bit more.
And in extra. We, we should remember of course
that that SpaceX has form on this because the recent Starship
launches have resulted in two separate incidents of aircraft
having to escape a particular area of airspace as quickly as
possible. And of course, this puts air
traffic, air travellers at risk because as soon as you get into
this type of of emergency situation where air traffic
control is having to move people out of the way as quickly as
possible, the risks of, I mean, there are collision avoidance
systems, but nonetheless, this is not a healthy situation.
It doesn't seem so. And as I say, it's just
something that never gets talked about, never gets thought about
apparently and they just push on regardless.
So, you know, sort of the fingers crossed approach.
Now in terms of fingers crossed or indeed fingers being
manipulated, we'll just finish off with something that might
not necessarily seem credible, but is absolutely true.
And I take you to the website of enhanced declaring that the
future of sports is here, pointing us towards the enhanced
gains in Las Vegas in 2026. And this is something that is
designed to celebrate augmentation of the human form
or put better transhumanism. So here we see performance
enhancements, scientific and technological advancements.
Of course a range of well groomed people supporting such
an initiative. But as with all these questions,
all these things, we have to ask the question if we want to
evolve humanity, as they say here, who's putting the money
behind it? And lo and behold, there is
Peter Thiel, the head man founder at PayPal and Palantir,
of course, running most of the British government projects.
And indeed, behind this grotesque spectacle of
celebration of, frankly, the corruption of human form.
So I'm not sure how many people will be tuning into those games
in Las Vegas, or indeed whether medals will be awarded for
performance or for the degree of augmentation and adaptation to a
particular human. We may cover it, we may not.
Yes, undoubtedly, we'll be talking about that and Extra as
well, amongst other things. I'm going to say thank you very
much, Charles, Vanessa and Sandy for your contributions today and
thanks to everybody for watching.
We'll be back in a few minutes. If you're UK column member for
the UK column news extra. If you're not a member, please
consider joining and joining us for Extra.
Enjoy Germ tonight at 7:00 PM, the interview tomorrow at 1:00
PM and we will be back on Friday at 1:00 PM for another news.
See you then. Bye bye.