OK, Well it's my great pleasure to welcome Brian Garish to speak
to Common Knowledge this afternoon.
Brian has a career in the Navy, the senior service, before
leaving this evening, a service and starting up his own business
and then finding out how much corruption there was in this
world. And from then on he's become
effectively an investigative journalist and he set up the UK
column. And the UK column for me was a
lifeline when I in 2020 when I was searching around what's
going on, I was suddenly awake and everyone said go to UK
column. That's where you'll find the
information that you need. And I'm eternally grateful to
Brian for setting up UK column and for all his marvellous work
since then. So Brian's going to tell us
something about, I think we're going to first of all, discuss
the current state of play in the UK and in the world in general,
and then we'll go on to some other subjects after that.
But Brian, thank you very much indeed for joining us here and
I'll hand over to you. Richard, thank you and the team
for the invite. Absolutely fantastic to get
myself all the way to the granary there, the jig room.
I think you're all in. And from what I can, what I can
see, it looks, it looks very nice and yeah, really great to
get the invitation. I, I just say to you that I was
a bit poorly a few weeks ago and I, I just felt that this time I
needed to ease off a bit before Christmas.
So I, I, I apologise for being with you in a virtual sense,
because I'd much rather be there in person.
But yeah, things caught up with me a bit and I'm pleased to say
I am, I am recovered now just and we'll, we'll leave it at
that. So I, I think what you're doing
is, is great. Well done for setting up common
knowledge Edinburgh. I think we need more groups like
this across the country because this is spreading the word
amongst teams of people and there is still very much a need
to do this. And you know, in a personal way
with people being together and able to chat because this, this
gives it a strength. And a lot of what we're fighting
requires people, I think, to be together physically, to be in
contact, exchanging information in, in a physical way.
Because at the end of the day, this is what it is to be human.
And I'll, I'll just then put a Little Rock in the pond and say,
because what we're fighting is absolutely against humanity.
So the, so the more human we are, the stronger we are.
I also wonder whether I can be cause a little bit of trouble
because you, you gave me 3 points.
You gave me the state of things at the moment.
You asked about the movement to war and you asked me about the
setting up of the UK column. And I wonder whether I might ask
very nicely just to kick off with setting up the column
because it has a particular meaning.
And I'd like to share that with you.
And I think it would be a good sort of foundation for them
going on to talk about other things.
So would that be OK with your permission?
Absolutely, absolutely fine. Yeah, OK.
And before I get talking, how long have we got to, you know?
We've got two hours in this room.
Two hours. OK, right.
That's, that's brilliant. Well, the reason that I wanted
to kick off with how the UK column got started was because
there have been a number of things that have prompted me,
particularly over the last year, to talk about this.
It's not something that over the years I've made a very big thing
about, but the time has now come, I think, to talk about
these things because it leads us into matters spiritual.
But the other thing is that next year is the 20th celebration,
the 20 year celebration of the UK column, because January next
year, we'll have actually been running for 20 years, which
seems almost unbelievable to me. But it is rather wonderful that
somehow, despite all the things going on in the world, UK,
worldwide, the UK columnars managed to keep going.
So I'll just tell this little, little story in in the shortest
time I can. And I absolutely welcome any
questions people have got because a few months ago we
were. Invited to the Hope.
Music festival, which was was really excellent and I was due
to talk as the rest of the UK column team were we always find
we don't quite know what we're going to talk about until maybe
a couple of days before it sort of comes to you.
If you try and force it, you, you think I don't know what to
talk about and there's no point worrying about it.
I felt you just sort of sit back and eventually what you're going
to speak about will come. Well at the Hope Festival that
didn't happen and I ended up the day before really starting to
think what am I going to do? And I thought just wait.
And then when I actually got in my car to drive, as I am driving
into my head very strongly came just tell them how the UK column
really got started. And so that's what I did.
And if anybody in the audience wants to see what I said because
it was recorded live at the festival, just put Brian Gerrish
my story into the search bar on the UK Column website.
So I'm going to give you a little flavour of that in person
this afternoon. But if you want to see what I
said to the audience there on a lovely sunny day in In the Hope
Festival, you can have a look at that recording on the UK Column
website. So if we divide this thing into
two parts, I think most people know that the UK Column started
out really with myself and some other people in Plymouth coming
across fraud and corruption in a very big way in the city.
And we initially sort of met as a small group of people and
talked about what was going on. But one one day that we decided
the key thing was to actually publish something.
And a very nice man called Chris, who'd got a little
printing company, set out the format for an A4 sheet printed
on both sides. We decided to call it the
Devonport column, Devonport being an area of the city in
Plymouth. It's an area close to the naval
base, so well known. For me and we, it was a bit
private, eye ish, a bit tongue in tongue in cheek.
We were taking the Mickey out of some quite serious things
happening. We were poking a big stick at
the City Council in particular. The first month we printed 500
copies and next month we printed 500 copies.
Nothing happened. The third month we printed 500
copies. And then slowly we started to
get phone calls and we started to get people contacting us
saying, well, if you've seen that and you've talked about
this, you really need to know this and that is going on.
And in the fourth month we had a massive expansion.
So we got an A3 sheet of paper and we folded it.
So we got 4 pages and we covered that with text and some cartoons
and some humorous stories. And those were distributed
around the city. And we did that for a few more
months until a very nice man said, I think you need a little
office space to make this happen properly.
And he he was kind enough to pay for us to have a tiny room.
We had nothing in it, but that was to be the start of the the
UK column. So that was one part of the
story. But about the same time I
experienced something which was very strange when it happened.
It's still quite strange to talk about it, but it's got a strange
and wonderful aspect to it. And, and I'm going to tell you,
and this is absolutely true, the man I will talk about in a
couple of minutes called Paul. A friend of mine called me on
the phone about an hour ago, and I haven't spoken to him for
quite a few months. And I just thought how strange
that on an afternoon when I'm going to be talking to some
people about how I got started and Paul was key to that, Paul
calls me. So is that another little
coincidence? Maybe it is, but my story was
that while we were discovering all of this horrible stuff going
on in Plymouth and we were talking to other people in UK,
so I'd learnt that it was happening in other cities.
Fraud and corruption, people being bullied and intimidated by
the establishment, the local authorities, plus some other
nasty stuff going on. I was at home one sunny day.
I, I can't tell you the month, I think it would have probably
been about June, July time. And I was sat at my desk working
and the phone rang and it was my friend Paul.
And I'd known him for quite a few years.
He, he was an architect by profession and he'd spend a lot
of time working down in Cornwall.
He called me. He said hello.
He said, what are you doing? And I said, I'm producing some
reports, I'm at home. And he said, no, you're not,
you're coming to see me. And I said, Paul, I can't.
I got to produce these reports. And he said, no, you're going to
come and see me. And I said I can't, I really
can't. And he then said to me, well,
when can you come? And I said, well, I've got a
free day next week. And he said, that's no good.
When can you come and see me? So I said, well, I could come
and see you tomorrow. And I was thinking, why are you
saying this? Because I've got quite a lot on
my plate anyway, because I've known him for a long time.
I thought, OK, I'll do it. I asked him why, why do I need
to come and see you? And he said to me, don't worry
about that, just come. So the next day I fairly early
about sort of, I don't know, 8:45, I'm in my car driving from
Plymouth down to Truro in Cornwall, where he lived.
That's, that's about an hour and a half drive.
And as I'm driving in the sunshine, I'm thinking to
myself, what on earth are you doing?
Because I'm driving to see, albeit a friend, but I have no
idea why I'm going. When I get to his house, I
parked the car, I knock on the door and a lady I've never seen
before answers the door. And I said, oh, I'm Brian, I've
come to see Paul. And she said yes or no.
And I said he's Paul in. And she said no, he's out with
the dog. And I felt a little bit
frustrated because I already committed quite a bit of time.
And she said, would you like to come in?
And I said yes, thank you very much.
And I said to her, I've no idea why I'm here.
And she looked at me with a rather strange expression on her
face. And she said, well, actually,
you're here because of me. And I said, OK, that's
interesting. How does that work?
And she said, well, you'll find this very strange, but sometimes
I get very vivid dreams, and sometimes I feel as though
somebody's talking to me. And then there was a pause.
And she said, and when this happens, it's a message from
God. And I paused, and I probably
swallowed. And I looked at her and I said,
OK, and how does that affect me? And she said, well, I had a very
vivid dream and you were in the dream.
And I said, I don't know, sorry. I said, I don't know you.
So you, how do you know me? And she said, oh, well, Paul
told me about you. So you were in the dream, Brian.
Paul, your friend was in the dream.
And another man who's a friend of mine, also called Paul, was
in the dream. And I, I looked to the earth and
this was so utterly bizarre. I didn't quite know what was
coming next. And she said, well, it was a
very intense dream. And when it happens, I, I, I got
a message. So I said to her, what's the
message? And she said, oh, that's The
funny thing. I don't know.
So I'm feeling that I'm in the middle of a really strange
situation. She said, would you like a cup
of tea? And I said, yes, I think I'd
like a cup of tea. And she put the kettle on.
I sat down at the kitchen table and she produced a cup of tea.
And, and lady's name was Jackie. And I said, Jackie, tell me a
bit about yourself. And the next minute she started
to tell me about the fact she was a single mother.
She'd been through some tough times.
She was a devout Christian and sorry.
And so she, she gave me a little bit of history and then she
started to tell me about a project she started quite some
time earlier, about a year I think.
And she, she got very young children, very early primary
school going to residential homes, care homes for elderly
people. And it was called the
Reminiscence project. And basically the children got a
lot out of meeting the elderly people and hearing about their
lives and careers. And the elderly people loved the
young children coming into their facilities because it, it
brightened things up. And as Jackie told me this
story, she said it was all going beautifully until a lady got
involved and she said she could help me with some funding to
make the project bigger. But she got involved and then
things didn't go as well as they had been going.
And then she said she had a friend, another friend who was a
a lady and she could also help. And then I discovered that the 2
ladies were in a relationship together and the deeper they got
into the project, the more my project seemed to fall apart.
And eventually she told me a specific part of her story,
which was pretty personal to her, so I'm not going to repeat
it here. But at one point she paused and
I found myself saying, and I'll tell you what happened next.
So Jackie looked at me and she said, well, how, how would you
know what happened next? And I said to her, well, because
what you're describing is happening in Plymouth.
It's happening all over the country.
And there are specific techniques which are used to
destroy things which are good for people.
And I'll tell you what happened. So she said, OK, go on.
Then you tell me what happened. So I told her what happened
next. And she said to me, that's,
that's incredible. And that's exactly what
happened. And I, I again said to her, this
is, this is happening all over the country.
And I think that we need to get out and about and we need to
warn people about what's happening.
We need to talk about what's happening and we need to warn
them. And the moment I said that to
her, her whole demeanour changed.
And she said to me in a very authoritarian voice, this is
exactly right. You are to go out, you are to
travel, you are to talk to people, you are to warn them
about what's happening. And then the next minute she
suddenly said, oh, my goodness, I'm sorry.
I get carried away. And I found myself saying to
her, no, you've just given me the message.
And when I said this, it was as though the words were coming out
of my mouth, but they weren't coming from my brain to my
mouth. And so I sat there in complete
astonishment because effectively this this woman told me that it
was going to be my job to get out and teach people and warn
them what was happening. But of course the circumstances
she'd done it in were quite extraordinary.
And so my head was spinning at that moment.
My friend Paul came back from his dog walk and a conversation
started, much of which was about what was going on in the
country. And eventually I left them to
drive back to Plymouth. And as I'm in my car driving
back, there was a bit of it was a bit of black humour against
myself because I found myself thinking, I'm not sure what's
going on here, but I'm not trained for this.
There's a bit of my old military, I think coming to the
fore. I'm not trained for this.
And as that thought came into my head, there was a a beep on my
mobile phone. And that was a text message
coming in. And I didn't look at it.
But when I got home, I looked at it and it was a text from
Jackie. And it was a little quote from
the Bible. And when I went to the Bible to
read the passage, which she texted through, it absolutely
answered those concerns that were in my head.
And I'll say to you that over the next 2-3 months, sometimes
couple of times a day, sometimes couple of times a week, if ever
I felt that I was in a position where I didn't quite know what I
was supposed to be doing, the phone would go beep.
And that was a text message. And invariably it was a biblical
quote from Jackie, which if I read it, seemed to head me in
the right direction. So those 2-3 months had gone by.
I was doing this basic work with the UK column and clearly it was
about spreading the word about what was happening.
And then one afternoon about 3:00, there was a it was a
Saturday. There was a knock on my front
door and I opened it and there was a man called Ted standing
there, very big man. And I knew him.
Previously I'd known him through UKIP and I was very surprised to
see him there. And he was stood with an
overhead projector in his hands, one where you put the old
acetate sheet on to project it onto the wall.
And I said to him, Ted, what what are you doing?
And he said, well, I'm not really sure, but my wife and I
were having a clear out and we thought you would need this.
And he handed the projector to me and I reached out and took
it. And I said, come in and have a
cup of tea or something because I wanted to talk to him to find
out really why he'd come. And he said I can't stop because
my wife's after me for some errands.
Hang on, I'll get the screen. And then the next minute Ted had
gone and in my hall was an overhead projector and a screen.
And the effect of that was about a week later I gave the first
ever talk, which was in the the Methodist.
No, sorry, it was in the WI Hall in my village.
About 17 people came. I talked to them about what was
going on in the country. We got to midnight and they
wouldn't leave. I was telling them to go home.
And that was my first talk. And that talk, ultimately, I'm
not sure how many I've done in the 20 years, but it's up around
the 300 and that includes travelling a lot around the
country in order to talk about what's going on.
And before I pause for a bit, at this stage, once I'd had this
message, anything that was needed to help me or us do what
we were doing seemed to appear. Never too much, never excessive,
but we were given computers, we've given chairs, we were
given everything we needed for our little office, and if we
ever felt we were short of something, it seemed to come.
And that included a steady flow of very small funding which
enabled both myself and other people to travel and to give
talks and warn people about what was happening.
So this was a very positive thing.
But interestingly enough, and this is something which is good
to talk about, I was given a message to go and teach people
about what was happening. It was warning them.
It was lifting stones to show them what was going on.
And for many, many years, I never felt that I was given a
message to go and preach. And there's an interesting
little distinction between the two.
But. If this early phase was was a
very positive spiritual thing, at one point on one occasion I
went to a location which I've been to before.
It was a, it was a flat. It was actually in Southampton.
Went to meet some people I knew very well.
And when I stepped across the threshold of that flat, it was
as though something leapt on me and I felt extremely ill.
I know my wife was very concerned.
I think she thought I was going to have a heart attack or
something. But in my head I, I, I came to
the conclusion it was a spiritual attack and something
pretty dark and unpleasant was attacking me.
And for the next, I'll say for the next couple of days, well,
probably into a couple of weeks, it was as though in the first
instance I was shown the light side.
And then when I got a taste of that, it was as though somebody
said, well, OK, I'll show you what the other side's like.
And so these were pretty amazing experiences, but for a very long
time I didn't feel it was my place to talk about them in too
much detail. Because when you start to talk
about spiritual things, you can very often find people put up
walls or they accuse you of various things.
And I, I didn't want to compromise good research with
maybe getting a reputation that I was trying to say something
about myself rather than to give a clear message.
But that was my story as to how things got going.
And then of course, as the UK column team built, Mike Robinson
in particular came on board. This provision of what we needed
continued. And I'll say maybe because I, I
can't prove it, but maybe this spiritual support is the reason
that we're still here after many trials and tribulations 20
years, 20 years later. But the key bit is that in the
very early days. It was certainly demonstrated to
me that what we're really into was a spiritual battle and I
will talk about the subjects you've asked me to talk about.
But it's fascinating to me how in 2025 I meet more and more,
more people who are coming to the realisation that we're not
up against men and politics. We we are in this spiritual
battle. And ultimately it's
understanding the spiritual battle.
I think that will give us the the know how and strength to
deal with these things, which are clearly.
Becoming more and more visible. So on that note, who, who am I
addressing? Richard?
I'll I'll say if anybody's got any questions or wants to
challenge me, I'd I'd be delighted to respond.
That's that's fantastic, Brian. I think what I'll do is I'll ask
people from the audience if they have any questions at this point
to come up here and ask you the question.
Has anyone got any questions at this point, those experiences
they'd like to share? Yeah.
So there are a number of people who come and can speak to you
and ask you. Brian, I'm Andrew Walden.
I'm the Treasurer of Common Knowledge here in Edinburgh.
First of all, I'd just like to thank you personally for sharing
that experience with you, with us.
So it's actually incredibly moving and I think very
important what you've shared with us.
I think my, my question is essentially in terms of the
struggle you've described, you know, between spiritual
struggle, are you hopeful that the forces of light will
prevail? Well, I, I, I can smile and say
that's that is the very positive mesh message.
Because if you if you stick to relatively simple scripture.
Of course, we're told clearly the battles already won.
But we've still got a roll of foot soldiers to make sure that
our part is done. And, and the reason I express it
that way is because many people, when they start to see and feel
and experience what's happening, it places a great pressure on
them. And maybe maybe I also felt this
in the beginning, that you feel the whole weight of everything
is on your shoulders too. Sorted out to deal with it, to
fight, fight it. But the reality is that, you
know, we're not the general running it.
Our job is to do our best with all of the skills that we've got
wherever we are, but we haven't got to be worrying that we've
got the overall responsibility to deal with the situation.
What worldwide, Somebody else has got that on their shoulders,
and I'm going to say that's God's part.
We just do what we can. Thank you, that's a wonderful
answer. Yeah.
Hi, Brian. Thanks for your talk.
When you said that there was techniques that people use to
sort of break up functioning organisations, you know, could
you describe some of those techniques?
Yes, certainly I, I've seen in Plymouth, I saw this happen
where it was clear that local communities were being attacked
and in particular Devonport, this this key area in the city
where I'd been heavily involved because I tried to get a what
was a positive project off the ground to help create jobs
around building a wooden boat. But essentially, if you had a
group of people, the local community who were coming
together to do something positive into that group would
become would come a number of people.
Might it might be one or two or it could in bigger groups be,
you know, three or four more people.
They initially appeared to be allies of the project.
They initially appeared to be very good people.
But once they got involved, they would slowly but surely start to
break down the good relations in that group.
So there might be little rumours and accusations spread around
the group, and of course people don't know whether it's true or
not. And then they start to become
suspicious of one another. And then the net result is that
the group, instead of being a nice tight team doing good works
together, starts to fragment. And in some cases where we've
seen this happen, you can have quite a big group of people, say
up to 6050, sixty people who were doing some really good
stuff and then it's like an explosion.
The whole unit that's been working together breaks apart
with accusations and sometimes some quite vicious stuff between
people who were previously good friends and getting on very
well. So a lot of the attack was by,
by these people coming in masquerading as other people who
wanted to help. But what they then did is is
spread rumours or they started to challenge the natural leaders
in the group and say we've got a better way of doing it.
And, and slowly but surely, this would pull the, the group apart.
And I'd, I'd just qualify this statement again, sorry, I should
have probably repeated the, you know, the question for the, for
the audience, because your question was, you know, how, how
have I seen groups being broken up?
But this is a very common technique.
And one of the places that it's happening a lot is in the Church
of England. So within church groups across
the country where you've got more conservative congregations
who are really trying to get a baseline established again of
right and wrong and what's good and moral and what's not.
These people come in and eventually the the people who
are trying to do the right things become attacked and
ostracized from the church. So that, that, that's one
technique, but the other technique which became really
became apparent was the use of applied psychology.
And this could come in a number of forms.
The first one I I was aware of was the Delphi technique,
whereby if you have a a group of that same members of the public
who are attending a meeting, they're challenging a policy
from the local authority into the public group would be
injected a couple of people. They disperse themselves through
the audience and it was their their job to ask questions or to
challenge in a way that started to steer the whole group.
You can go online and have a look at the Delphi technique and
see how it works. But in the early days for, for
me, we, you know, going back to sort of 2012 onwards, this was
happening in a lot of meetings where in Plymouth the City
Council was absolutely bulldozing over the wishes of
local people to get the city council's projects in place,
completely trampling on the wishes of the local people.
And it was very interesting that when I got contacted by people
from other cities in UK, invariably where there were
regeneration projects, especially those using large
amounts of European, European Union funding, these Delphi
techniques seem to come with the funding.
So those those are two of the key ones.
But I was later to learn, of course that Delphi technique is
a specially structured application of applied
psychology in order to steer people in the in the way you
want them to go. But there are other more
sophisticated techniques of which Neuro linguistic
programming was one that I was to discover was being used.
And there are many people trained in NLP.
And if I mention it, I always get a bit of push back because
people will say, well, I did an NLP course and I'm not a bad
person and I'm only using it for good.
And I'll say I recognize that. But I'm not talking about people
who are trying to use it for good.
I'm trying to use it. I'm trying to talk about people
who are using NLP for nefarious political or personal agendas.
But NLP is a form of hypnosis. But probably a good way of
describing it is mesmerism. That by the use of language and
grammar, you can you can draw people's attention and you can
focus it in particular directions.
You can reframe individuals so that they have a new set of
beliefs and one of the key places that we we discovered
this was being used and was being talked about was in
actually it was 2010, the government produced a document
called Mindspace MINDSPACE. If you search for that online as
APDF Mindspace and leave a couple of spaces and then put
PDF, you'll find a Cabinet Office document where the
government was boasting of being able to change the way people
thought and the way people behaved.
Saying in in the Cabinet Office document, people will not even
know this is being done or if they realise their behaviour is
being changed, they won't know how it's being changed.
So these are very sophisticated and clever applied psychological
techniques, but we started to see them in the very early days.
They were being used for criminal and malicious purposes
and then we began to see those techniques formalised into
government documents where they were boasting.
And probably the worst case of this type of application of NLP
occurred during the COVID lockdown when the Sage team, the
so-called expert team the government had put in place, it
had a smaller team working with it called Spy B.
And in one of their minutes, they said that they needed to
make people more fearful in order to get them to adhere more
closely to government policy. And so I'm, I'm going to look
you all in the eye. You're there as the audience.
And I'll say, if you just think about this in simple terms, if
you have a, a thought process, could political thought process,
we'll call it, where you're going to use fear and you're
going to and or you're going to change the way people think
where they don't even know you're using these techniques on
them. These are pretty evil
techniques. And this stuff is now running
rampant through local authorities and central
government. So those are some of the
techniques being used. OK.
Thank you. That's very interesting.
Hi, Brian. Hello.
Hi, my name is Mark Wilkinson. I'm the chap that phoned you on
Friday night. Hello.
Hello, Mark. So nice to meet you.
So a couple of things I'd like to know what your reaction was
to our conversation. You know, like in with with a
bit of hindsight, yeah. But the, the question is, is
really regarding this issue of movements being infiltrated.
And, and I would like to be a lot more generous.
And, and you know, the favorite thing that I like to ask people
to do is to shoot me down in flames as much as possible.
OK, so please do. But I'm being a little bit
naive, possibly by being generous.
And, and what I'm, I think what I'm seeing is that when you've
got an organization or a movement and they've been, and
they've been, they've been existing for two years, three
years, you know, and, and people within the movement start to
feel that the group is not achieving what they were hoping
it would achieve and not achieving what they were
expecting it to achieve. And, and I think that that,
that, that is very, very natural.
It's very, very natural. For us to fail as as individuals
and as communities and so on. You know, I've, I've, I've had
several businesses which, which inevitably they all eventually
fail. Yeah.
I mean, they, they were successful for a period, but
then they eventually fail. And, and I suppose what, what
what I'm saying is that is that is that to what extent do you
think that there is an argument for saying that people are
trying to scapegoat their lack of success by starting to
question whether they've been infiltrated or not?
So they can then blame someone else for their failure because,
because, because one of the, one of the, one of the biggest, you
know, things that people like to do is to blame other people for
their, for their failings. And, and so to what extent do
you think that is actually happening?
And, and it's not that these groups have been infiltrated.
What? Well, again, just, I'm sure
everybody could hear what you were saying in the room.
But I, I, I'll just so on the telephone the other day, you
talk, you talk to me about. The idea of, of being able to
help people achieve more by by the way they, they operated in
groups and it's been clear to me over the years that you can see
groups of people coming together with a particular objective and
and they really do some they do some good work.
I mean, council watch just comes off the top of my head and that
that's utterly brilliant Where you've gone from a couple of
people starting it off to the fact you've now got people going
into council meetings and challenging them in a very
measured and structure way. Where the challenge is all based
on facts and figures. And this thing causes the, the
council, whether it's a City Council or, or, or a smaller
local council to really have problems because now they've
they've really got to justify policies that they're putting
forward. So you can see groups of people
who achieve good things on their own.
But you are absolutely correct. The very often you can see
people that have come together to do something and it never
quite seems to work. And eventually somebody will be
pulling in One Direction because they think the key thing to be
targeting is X and somebody else will be saying no, no, no, we
should be focusing on why. And this ends up with a split
and then the group breaks down or, or explodes in a, in, in a
pretty vicious way. That certainly happens and I
recognise that. But I, I'm, I'm going to stick
to my guns and say that particularly if you have a, a
group that's working well and it's tackling a local authority
or, or even some form of non government organization that's,
that's pretty close to the government and the
establishment. If they are starting to have
success and they are having public meetings, I would not be
at all surprised that those meetings are not infiltrated by
people who are actually. Trained in order to help ferment
the dissent. So I think both things go on,
but I absolutely take your point that groups of people have a
sort of predisposition to to falling.
Out with each other, particularly when they're not
clear on what what the aim of their efforts is about.
Right. Thanks very much, Brian.
OK. Thank you so much for everything
that you've done for 20 hours. It's just been quite
extraordinary, so thank you. Well, it has been extraordinary.
It still is. But what what's unbelievable is,
is the wonderful things that happen.
I think I think maybe this might be a.
Actually, Richard, sorry, Richard, if we could just give a
minute for people who are on Zoom to have ask any questions
like Mark Anderson from my, our colleague from UK column is has
his hand raised. So I think he'd like to ask
something as well. Yeah.
Good. Great.
Either way. Hello, Mark.
Hey, Brian, how you doing? Fine.
Yeah, nice program. I, I didn't quite sign up right
on time when you started pretty early here, kind of on a Sunday,
but a nice idea kind of retracing the steps of the
founding UK column. When I was there recently, I
picked up a copy of the Newspaper UK column.
Of course, you started mostly with print from 2006 and it, it
was really interesting to read those bellwether foundational
issues. You know, the British
Constitution group. I, I, I found through some other
early issues that were in the office lawful rebellion, British
Constitution group, you know, pretty soon there's stuff about
common purpose and common purpose really has been one of
those foundational issues for UK column that I, I hope they keep
hitting on because currently if I'm wrong, common purpose sort
of embodied in a more organized, extensive, rather sinister way.
It embodied a lot of these techniques you're talking about,
correct Neuro linguistic programming and a more organized
and deep seated wide-ranging way of subverting what you might
call better government as subverting proper ethical
approaches to things subvert subverting in a way the biblical
foundation of the moral foundation of the country.
It's so it seemed like common purpose became a a a a
particularly nasty manifestation of what you're talking about.
Well, that that was absolutely, that was absolutely true.
Mark And of course. When When We Discover and Common
Purpose was started back in 1985 by a lady called Julia
Middleton. It's an incredible story because
this thing grows like Topsy and huge amounts of money come into
it from big banks. Including Deutsche Bank, but
when you try to dig into that side, it was difficult to do.
But within a few years that they were boasting in, you know, in
the very early days of it, they were boasting of having 85,000
future leaders that were that what they meant by that is
people common purpose graduates that they trained and these
people were across society. They were particularly prevalent
in public bodies, city councils, government departments, but
everywhere fire service, police, NHS, in a very big way,
education. And so these people did the
course and for many of them their views and values were
realigned to the way that the common purpose wanted them to be
realigned. So something that I've said on
many occasions when I've talked about Common Purpose is it's
absolutely wrong to say that everybody who's been on a course
and involved with it is a bad person.
Because the truth is, most people did not really understand
what Common Purpose was doing when it was training them.
But nevertheless, Common Purpose trained its graduates from from
young teenagers all the way up to.
Mature people in mature jobs. Including pretty senior jobs,
chief, chief constables or chief executives of big organisations.
And those people were then used to cede this new, I'll call it
liberal, liberal political thinking across their own
institutions. And moreover, they were
encouraged to open the doors of their institutions and
organisations and companies to more common purpose training.
So it, it was a, a very insidious, it is a very
insidious organization that was like a Trojan horse that got
inside organisations to, to reframe people with the
political stance of the common purpose.
And, and I, I'm afraid I can't remember the man's name, but in
the very early days, I gave a talk on the stage and I was
talking about common purpose. And I said wherever I encounter
it, there's something I can't put my finger on.
I can't quite, it does things, but I don't really know how it
how it manages to do it. And at the end of the talk, a
man came up to the stage and said to me, Brian, when you said
you couldn't put your finger on it, he said, I'll tell you what
it was. They're using NLP.
And at that stage I'd never heard of NLP.
But subsequently I was going to do my own research.
But I was also to meet, I met people who were trainers, NLP
trainers. And this is where I began to
understand that common purpose. I'm going to call it Trojan
Horse because that's the best description, but it was, it was
getting its people inside organisations and then using the
sophisticated techniques in order to change the views and
values of other people. And in my opinion, this is one
of the reasons why we sort of started to see an explosion of
new thinking. We might call it woke now when
the early days nobody was calling anything woke.
You just knew that old values were being trampled on and in
was coming what I now see as an increasingly dangerous
liberalisation coupled with the woke agenda and, and I'm happy
to argue the toss with people, but I, I now see that as a very,
very, very dangerous decay of our society.
Does does that cover it, Mark? Yeah, it's important to to get
that in there based on what you started talking about meeting
with people and realizing something was wrong.
Common purpose just took everything to a whole new level
of corruption and subversion. And that's just been a a
foundational issue for UK column that I hope is well maintained
because it sounds like UK our common purpose has not went away
that they're still operational and so.
Mark, if if I can just add a bit of course in in my journey to
find out what this organization was and what it was about.
I was stunned to find that it was operating through the office
of the Deputy Prime Minister when Blair was in power.
Prescott was the Deputy Prime Minister at that time.
But of course later we were to learn from minutes that it was
also operating alongside elements of the Cabinet Office
in order to drive its people deeper into government.
So this, this organization working at St. level, getting
amongst very small community groups, but demonstrating also
that it could work, you know, at high position amongst really
powerful people in central government.
Yeah, exactly. Well, well, good stuff.
Yeah, that it's very important to illustrate that.
It really shows how far the subversion has come in.
And I like your appeal to spiritual values, that
ultimately it's a spiritual battle and we need God to see
this through. We can't do it on our on our
own. I appreciate you outlining.
That well, this is, this is a really interesting point is,
isn't it? And I know that.
Some people can find what what I'm talking about here is, is
difficult. But if I say, isn't it
interesting that one of the things that's occurred in recent
years is the fact that the government has demonstrated it
does not like people preaching on the streets, it does not like
people praying. And so we've ended up with these
no pray zones around abortion clinics, for example.
But just think about it, The government's so frightened of
somebody standing there, not touching anybody, not saying
anything, but simply standing and praying.
The government's got to bring in a law to make that unlawful.
And I'm going to say it makes sense to me because the
government's agenda is inherently evil and it is the
evil component which understands the power of.
Prayer. And.
So exactly. That, in my head, is absolutely
why you're now starting to see the government's turn against
Christianity above all religions.
It's Christianity that's got to be stamped out.
Preaching of Christianity's got to be stamped out.
Prayer has got to be stamped out.
That's the reason. Even silent prayer.
Well, good stop, Brian. OK, well, I think this is a very
good time for people to and including Brian to go away and
get a drink and we will come back at, I suggest at 3:15 and
continue with the other issues which we were going to talk
about then. Is that OK with you, Brian?
Well, that's absolutely brilliant because I will take a
small walk and I will come for the next session properly
equipped with with a beer, OK. OK.
Well, we look forward to seeing you then, OK.
All right. Thank you.
Refreshed. OK, OK.
Well, I think it's probably time that we resumed.
And what are you going to tackle next, Brian?
Well, the first thing I would like to do, Richard, to say I
obeyed the instructions. I'm able to hold up a glass.
Well, stay to the play. Here we are at the end of 2025,
coming up to Christmas, coming up to the end of the year, and
what do we all think about things?
If I had to sum up the country at the moment, I would be saying
the common theme running across everything.
Is chaos and confusion. So we've got chaos in the NHS,
we've got chaos on the roads, we've got political chaos, we've
got chaos in the military. Every direction we go, the
police, the courts are now in turmoil.
And we've got to, we've got to get rid of juries.
That's a particularly dangerous thing.
But what? What you see is everything which
in the past may of our institutions, in particular our
systems of governance, constitution, they might not
have been perfect, but I'm going to guess most of the audience
old enough to remember back to where you could say, yeah,
nothing's perfect, but there. Was stability.
There was order. People knew how the systems
worked. There was an inherent fairness.
There was an inherent morality. Of course, there were
exceptions. Some people were criminals or
did bad things. But.
Within the country there was an overall feeling of stability and
a lot of that stability came from a historical stability it
was to do with. Our history as a nation state
and it was to do with the the people living in this country.
And if we look out the window today, everything is chaos.
Try and get an appointment to the dentist that sorry, the
doctor's surgery. You can you pick up the phone?
No right dentist. Slip of the tongue there
mentioned dentist. But of course, is it easy to get
an NHS dentist? No, it's not.
And many people now can't get dental treatment.
Chaos in the hospitals, in the A&E departments, everywhere we
go is chaos. This is not, in my opinion, this
is not accidental. This is orchestrated chaos, and
it's been orchestrated because as a nation.
As as society, as communities, as families, we are being
attacked. And that attack in order to
create a new political situation is first of all destabilising
and destroying the old order. And the attack is so vicious
that it isn't only about our institutions.
It's come in to attack families and it's come in to attack the
very nature of what it means to be a man or what it what it
means to be a woman. And I often find myself
thinking, what would people have said prior to or during or just
after the Second World War that. The the nation in years to come
for them would be trying to say that a man was a woman or that
men were going to be allowed into women's toilets and shower
areas. What?
What would people? If we go back into the 1950s,
what would they have been saying about this?
They would have regarded it as madness.
But that madness has been imposed on the nation.
And why have they done this? Because it it is breaking down
the whole fabric. We don't even know what's a real
man or what's a real woman. And on top of it, we've got a
really, really vicious attack on young children which is coming
in via the sexualisation of very young children.
Now, of course, what is coming through mainstream media in the
pop circuit, K pop, all of the scantily clad female, some male
role models which young children are picking up, that's one part
of the agenda. But another part of the agenda
is what is actually being taught to these children in schools.
And of course we've mentioned teams of people doing good work
and into my head comes the ladies in South Wales, Public
Child Protection Wales, where those ladies mums have been
highlighting and exposing the really vicious, unpleasant
sexualization of very, very young children by what what can
only be described as obscene. Sexual education in inverted
commas. So in 2025 for me, we, we exist
in a country which is at breakdown and very often you'll
see a headline in the paper which will be broken.
Britain, I think even Nigel Frage on several occasions says
the system's broken. He's perhaps he was talking
about immigration. And the moment I hear somebody
saying broken Britain or reporting broken Britain, it
makes me annoyed because it's not broken Britain.
It's the fact that Britain has been broken.
It's deliberately malicious political policy which is being
used to break down the nation state.
And why is this happening? Well.
There's a sort of little well, no, it's not a story actually,
there's a man called Peter Drucker who was a an
international business consultant and he was
particularly skilled at a helping very big companies,
global corporations to change their commercial structure could
be combined with branding. And one of the things that he
talked about was that if you had a very big monolithic structure
and, and it was doing its job, it was all working OK.
If you wanted to get that structure going in a different
direction, you had to destabilize it because people
who were happy and confident in their jobs didn't want to be
going in a different direction. They wanted to be carrying on
with life. They were good at their jobs.
They were enjoying their jobs. And, and he was one of the one
of the so-called business experts that said, if you've got
a big organization and it's going to change direction, you
have to destabilize it. And This is why about 10 years
ago we started to hear people actually being described as
change agents or disruptors. And when we went to look at what
these disruptors and change agents said, you you can find
people speaking about it on YouTube, they actually said.
Our job is to destabilise and challenge everything in order to
get people thinking in a different way, and I think it's
interesting that what I'm describing also comes under this
psychological. The psychological tech
techniques, because you're using people in a particular way to
change the way people think and behave.
So everything is about destabilisation and breakdown.
And what I'm suggesting to you is that the reason this is
happening is because the country's got to be shaken to
its roots. The institutions have got to be
broken down South. People can't trust anything,
they can't trust the courts or the police or if they're going
to get treated properly in the NHS.
This is deliberate policy in order to soften, soften this up
as to what comes next. Now just add to that that in the
early days when I was beginning to realise something was badly
wrong in the country myself, I'm seeing all the fraud and
corruption in Plymouth. A man out out of the blue sent
me a copy of a book, and the book was called The EU
Collective Enemy of its member states, and it was written by a
man called Christopher Story. I I met him about a year later.
He's no longer alive, but. One afternoon I sat down with a
cup of tea to read that book or start reading it.
And I opened it and within a few pages of the front cover was a
table. And the table describes first of
all the destabilisation of UK Western countries.
The destabilisation, sorry, first of all it was
demoralisation, then destabilisation, then what it
called the revolution period, the complete breakdown and, and
the synthesis following the complete breakdown of the
country was what it called normalisation, which was, which
was a new society. And I, I looked at this table on
the left hand side, it talked about areas of society, law,
order, health, education, military.
And then it said what was to be done to break up those areas.
And then it said what the result was.
So if I gave you a really simple one with health, it said
introduce junk food and the result was going to be a
complete breakdown in the. Health and well-being of the
nation. I can tell you that in the
military, it said that the military.
Was to be exposed to the gay agenda and women in the
military, and the result was to be a weakening of military
forces. Now I know to some people those
two issues might be a motive, and I'm very happy to talk about
that. So sort of separate thing, but
for me, when I looked at the table, my head said, this is
happening. And one of the things I did is
focus photocopied that table. And at meetings or talks that I
went to give, I would show people the table without any
context. I'd just say, have a look at
this, what do you think? And you'd see them start to read
it and then you'd see their browse get a little bit furrowed
and then they'd say, but this is happening.
So just by seeing this table, which was a plan to demoralise a
country, to destabilise a country to the extent that
ultimately you can install a new political regime, this was all
planned policy. Now unfortunately I lost my or I
gave my loaned my copy of that book, the EU Collective, enemy
of it, enemy of its member States to somebody who didn't
give it back. But you can find that book as
APDF online and you can see the the table.
I'm talking about yourself. But this is the meat of where we
are today. If you feel that around you,
everything is spinning. We can't deal with immigration.
The police are off the rails. We can't deal with the child
abusers. The courts don't run properly.
We've got to get rid of juries. You can't get yourself seen in a
doctor's surgery. You can't get your teeth fixed,
children being sexualized. This is a whirlwind of chaos
which is designed by very, very malicious people as a means of
attacking a whole society. And I'm going to say to you as
my audience today in 2025, this is extremely well advanced now
so that you can start to see people who are beginning to get
fractious with each other as a result of the confusion and
turbulence. And of course, helping to drive
this situation. We have mainstream media such as
the BBC, which is now completely out of control.
It's it's not doing any proper questioning of politicians.
It's not doing any proper investigation to get to the
bottom of stories. It's not challenging MPs
properly over the grooming gangs.
We can clearly see that the mainstream media is itself being
controlled in a way that it's not helping the public get to
the bottom of what's happening with a view to stopping it.
It's actually causing greater confusion and turbulence in in
people's minds and coupled with that we've got a whole plethora
of legislation which is coming through very rapidly making it
more difficult for adults to go on social media to find out
what's really happening. So the Social Media Channels UK
column is one of them. But there are there are many
other good channels. They're all under pressure
because we can see that the government is using its powers,
often internationally as a way of shut, of shutting down media
exposure of what's of what's really going on.
So in my mind, it's very clear that UK is being attacked and
the aim is to completely break this country down.
Violence on the street is good as far as the establishment's
concerned because if you can get violence on the street then you
can bring in emergency powers, emergency laws.
Plus you can use the full weight of the police, armed police,
riot police and indeed the military in order to help
completely squash free speech in the nation.
So to me, UK very, very dark in 2025 and this agenda of created
chaos as the final step to a completely different sort of
society. This, this is where we are.
What is the society that they're bringing in?
Well, that's getting ever more clear to see, isn't it?
Because you can. You've seen all of the reports
to date on the surveillance state, and this may be
everything from surveillance from of our faces through CCTV
cameras to the fact that with now digital banking, the state
is able to pry into the simplest transactions we might have as an
individual or as a family. On top of that, we've got the
police being increasingly brutal and aggressive in their
behaviour, to the extent that we've now got the police kicking
in people's doors because they've said something which is
hurt somebody else on social media.
We've got courts taking children away from families because of
their political beliefs. And if you're saying that can't
possibly be true, well take yourself back to 2012 when it
was reported, across most of the mainstream papers at least, that
a UKIP couple that had their foster children taken away from
them because the local authority had decided that their UKIP
beliefs were two extremist right wing.
And now we've got Lord Leveson, retired judge, who was the man
that the government used in order to bring in the Leveson
inquiry into freedom of the press.
What did he achieve? Well, he actually achieved the
exact opposite, which was the the press being made fearful of
doing its traditional job of investigating and reporting.
Lord Leveson has just been used to do to carry out what he
describes as an independent review of the court system where
he's now recommending, supported by Lammy, that we should get rid
of jury trials in order to get rid of the backlog of cases
which have apparently been caused by COVID troubles and
COVID lockdown. We're going to get rid of the
jury and from more minor trials you are going to be sat in front
of a single politically appointed judge who will decide
whether you are innocent or guilty.
So what can I add to that? Well, probably I'll pause before
we go on to it, but one of the key issues that I'm aware of is
breakdown of the armed forces. We've now got to a stage where
the British Army is barely capable of putting 20,000 men
into the field into a combat situation.
And even if it got 20,000 men into the field, it probably
could only keep them in the field for a matter of weeks.
That's not my personal opinion. That's been reported quite
widely as well. So we we've got a massive
breakdown in our armed forces at the very time that we have a
government that is working desperately hard to make people
fearful of a Russian attack on Western Europe.
And indeed when they mention nuclear weapons to make people
fearful that they're going to die in some nuclear Holocaust.
So this is the reality of the UK we live in at the moment.
But there's a reason for it. The reason is that we are being
attacked. And if we are going to deal with
the attack, we have to see it for what it is.
We have to understand it. We have to understand the
techniques being used against us.
And it's only then that we're going to be in a position to
actually fight back and challenge and counter what's
actually happening. So Richard, if I break there
because I've sort of taken it that it leads into having a chat
about Ukraine and World War. Three another happy subject for
us to enjoy our beer with and. If I could just quickly say that
in the in the Zoom chat, Mark's put in a couple of comments that
Mark Anderson again that I think are are very relevant to say
broken Britain in inverted commas implies it's a passive
process without deliberate sabotage.
And he also put in a couple of reminders. 1 is that Bilderberg
helped create the EU and and he also said and to think we fund
expensive militaries to protect us from China and other purely
external threats. OK.
So at this point, I'm asked our audience to ask them whether
they'd like to ask some questions of you.
Brian, it's OK. Please do.
Brian, I wonder whether my own perception is that we reached
kind of what I would call peak walk maybe 2-3 years ago.
And I think since then, you know, the, the kind of LGBTQ
plus agendas, not so much in your face, not quite so much in
your face as it was. I mean, they seem to be on the
back foot. I mean, here in Leeds, for
example, we have an organization in Scotland called LGBT Youth
Scotland. And although there's by charity
law in their own constitution is supposed to focus on youth of
certain age, years of age, plus they have been active in primary
schools, you know, promoting their agenda, which is obviously
A cause of concern. But that said organization used
to have an office here in lease, you know, that couple of 100
yards away from where we're sitting now, that office is now
closed. And I think that's me as an
example of their profile and strength in society is actually
a bit weaker than it was say 2-3 years ago.
It's obviously still there. I mean, if we're looking at the
Sandy Peggy case recently. But even there, you know, the
judging question was mentioned asked of himself, you know,
apparently using AI or something to get a really ridiculous
judgement trying to justify the NHS fight for reasonable in
allowing Dr. Upton to go into thank you women's changing room.
So to my mind, there's I think of a bit of a background.
I wonder whether the powers would be in a bit of a quandary
because as you're about to discuss, they're pumping up the
war agenda. You know, we're going to war
with Russia and Mark Reuters making these horrendous
statements. You'd be ready for a war that
your grandfathers and great, great grandfathers were familiar
with. Terrible statements.
But I wonder if in order to get people behind that, you have to
kind of pull back on the LGBTQ agenda, which as you've said
before, is not consistent with military vigour that one would
imagine is necessary to fight a war that our grandfathers fault.
OK, OK. Thank you very much for that.
And I particularly like your question because it, it
inherently brings us back onto something positive.
I, I think you are absolutely right that the woke agenda was
pushed too far too quickly to the extent that it got under
people's skin. But the key thing is once it got
under their skin, what did they do?
And the answer is they started to do things.
They started to speak out of it, out about it.
You would see, you might see a Daily Mail article.
And then if you want to see the comments underneath, there was
comment after comment after comment, hundreds of comments
where people would be saying this is utterly nonsense, It's
ridiculous. We're not having it.
And so it was the fact that people, in my opinion, it was
the fact that people actually started to express not only as
individuals, but but within, within their communities and
publicly their deep unhappiness with the agenda, with the woke
agenda. Plus they were ridiculing it.
And and so for the people trying to implement the policies once
it became apparent to them. That that people saw it as
something not only stupid and ridiculous, but they were
ridiculing it. And then they are calmly saying
we're not having it and they're starting to challenge.
It where for example local local authorities were maybe bringing
in trans into into the women's changing rooms as a simple
example. It was this public opinion, it
was like an osmosis of public opinion which made the policy
people realise they'd overcooked it and therefore they had to
step back because if they pushed it, what they will be telling.
More of the. Public is that this is a an
aggressive agenda which we've got to enforce on you.
So there's a little bit of a. I think a tie in here with
Mark's point earlier when he was talking about how do we do
things, what can we do? But this particular subject, the
backlash against woke has been utterly brilliant because it's
been so simple for most people to do.
They've simply got hot under the collar and have spoken out
publicly saying they're not having it and it and it's
produced a result. And I think this is this is a
great teaching point for the fact that other subject areas
could be dealt with in the same way.
So for example, the fact that you can't get a doctor's
appointment by picking up a phone and saying I'm sick and I
need to come and see a doctor. This should be dealt with by
thousands of people coming out publicly and talking about it.
But the irony is that many of them are not tackling that
subject with the same vehemence. They're simply accepting it as a
fait accompli. But first of all, I want to say
that yes, I agree. I think that the woke agenda and
it's the policies have been stalled as a result of
increasing backlash from the public.
I. Think we have a question from Is
It Rob? No, I actually I just joined you
because. Oh OK, I saw your camera on,
sorry about that. I was I was out in in a storm
and managed to get home with the dog and my wife so I just OK I
just logged in. OK, no problem welcome.
Merry Christmas to you all, Merry.
Christmas, Yeah. Yeah.
Do you have a question, Brian? Could I just the the state state
of the nation according to you seems to be absolutely terrible.
But do you think that this this actually leaves a space for new
things to come, not the new things which are being imposed
on us, but other things. So what what we're trying to do
in common knowledge is to think about, OK, we understand what is
trying to be imposed on us. What are the alternatives?
What do we think we really want? And can we start to create what
we really want in the future rather than kind of looking back
and wringing our hands and saying, oh, this, you know,
everything's terrible. We need to look to the future
and put in place things which will in some cases, replace what
we have at the moment and be better than what we have at the
moment. Yes, Richard, this is a really
good point and. I'll say I've never been shy on
really ramming home to people how serious things are because
probably I've, I've got a little bit of something still attached
to me from the early days where you'd often be talking to an
audience where they clearly did not understand anything that was
happening around them. They were just, they were just
happy and and you needed to start actually.
Getting into their psyche to make them understand, no, you
can't just sit here and pretend it's it's all a bit of a joke.
It's all a bit of cock up. No, we're we're dealing with
orchestrated conspiracy. So I'm sorry if I've unleashed a
bit of that on an audience where I know you've got people who
want to do positive things. So I'm really.
Happy to switch back the other way.
I, I sorted out a couple of books while I was sort of
preparing myself for this. And one of the ones that came to
hand is this is a little book by Vernon Coleman, who I got a lot
of respect from. It's called Bloodless
Revolution, and it then says, now we can change the world in
one day. And this little book by Vernon
Coleman includes, Hang on a minute before I see if I can
just find the last paragraph. Well, it's it's over 200.
It's 277 points of what can be done in order to make a
difference. And as I pick this book up, it
sort of flicked open on a particular page.
And what caught my eye was his .2200 and 50.
And he says our first step to freedom must be to free
ourselves of the party system and return to days when our
parliament consisted of honest, caring individuals and who were,
who were representing the people in their constituencies.
And I'd, I highlighted it and marked the book on that one
because personally, I think this is a very, very powerful
statement. If you look at the way society
is being controlled, it's being controlled through a highly
orchestrated party political system.
And if we're to achieve some real beneficial change, we've,
we've got to be breaking that party system down.
Now I'm then going to say ideal and I'm friends with people in
many of the smaller parties of heritage party comes into my
mind and what I always say to them is you are doing a good job
because you're helping to break down the monolithic party
system. But ultimately it's my personal
view that if somebody stands to represent us in the community or
us via Parliament, then they should be doing it as an
individual and not under this orchestrated party system.
So I just throw that that in as one example.
But as long as people do understand that we're up against
something really nasty, we can look at every possibility as to
what we should do because exposure is still a very
powerful tool. Most people in UK have no idea
what's really going on in the country.
So when people do their research, maybe they're using
parliamentary sources or they're doing Freedom of Information
requests when they have got the factual evidence demonstrating
what's wrong and what's being done inside the country.
And that is delivered to. Other people in the country that
simple research and exposure is itself a very powerful tool.
I mentioned the ladies in Wales, Public Child Protection Wales,
they've taken their investigation of the grooming of
school, young school children to the point where they've been
able to produce their own written documents, helping to
train teachers into what they should be doing.
Some of their literature is able to use government statements on
its sexualisation of children and they've been able to show
teachers that the government's own policy fits grooming of
children as a criminal act. So that's a very small group
have done it. I've also mentioned the the
people challenging the council's council watch.
You're another group that's set up.
So I believe that we can be very relaxed about what we tell
people to go and do and what they should challenge because
people inherently were best in sectors that they understand.
So it's to me it seems logical that if you've got people who've
been through the NHS, for example, they are the ones who
should start to work out what they can do in order to
challenge what's happening in the NHS and produce something
better. So we can afford to be pretty
relaxed with the people who are brought on board to fight.
There's no need to be prescriptive.
And because I did pay attention to Mark when he was talking to
me on the phone, one of the things Mark said was what would
help people fight is if we can give them more black and white
examples of this was the problem, this is what was done,
This is why the counter turned out to be a success.
So if we could, if we know what the problems are, if we can show
people what works to bring down that regime or or build a better
system, then we are doing the right job and we want that
message to spread. Well, that that's actually quite
a good way of me giving some publicity to a conference that
we're going to be holding in February, which is about
basically empowerment of people. And the idea is to look at a
number of different areas where people have seen there's a
problem and they've taken the initiative and they've done
something about it and they're on the way to making
improvements in that, in that area.
So I think I personally think that that's one of the areas
that we should be going into, showing people that they do have
power, that they're not completely subjective subjects
of people, that they actually can go out and do and make a
difference. And I think that that's a kind
of very positive thing that we can say.
And what I'd like to add to that is and, and a smile as I say
this, because it's a little bit of military background coming,
coming to the fore. But if you, if you look at
warfare and you look at where minor powers have taken on major
powers, the thing which has caused the major power the most
problem is guerrilla style warfare.
Now we're not talking about encouraging people to engage in
physical warfare. This is an information war
mainly that we're we're in. But nevertheless, the techniques
of guerrilla operations, I believe are very important, and
that is that you train people so that they know why they're doing
what they're doing. You train them, you give them
the tools. In the real circumstance, it
will be the weapon. But we're not dealing in
weapons. We're dealing in pen and paper
and exposure and challenges and maybe demonstrations, but it's
done in such a way that once you've given people the material
and the encouragement, the training to go and do the job,
they are allowed to go and and do that job in their own area.
Because they know their own area best.
And their own area may be a professional area, or it might
be a geographical area, might be a part of the country where they
really stay understand what's taking place.
But the reason I believe that our whole counter to what's
being done should be in a guerrilla style is because every
time you attempt a major response to these criminal
political bodies and, and their and their support agencies, they
are very, very good at attacking and bringing down orchestrated
bodies. Where there's a pyramid, can a
pyramid command structure, one or two people at the top are the
ones who are giving all the instructions and, and people
don't move unless there's communications from inside this
body, this authority. Now gorilla, the gorilla system
doesn't work like that. Provided people have got the
knowledge of how to fight, provided they've got the right
tools to fight, they are largely left alone to to conduct the
battle in their own area. And because there's no central
communications, no central command and control structure,
it's very, very difficult for the opposing forces to break
them down. This is one of the key reasons.
Apologies to you, Mark. This is one of the very simple
reasons why the operations of the Viet Cong was so difficult
for the Americans to counter with all their might in Vietnam.
But it's been the same in other guerrilla warfares.
Relatively small numbers of people, often poorly armed and
equipped, cause big trouble for for bigger, aggressive military
organisations. Brian, we haven't left very much
time, but I just wonder whether you could say a few words about
the push at the moment to get us to go to war with Russia.
Well, my first comment is that although we're seeing all the
hype, I don't believe that they want us to go to war with
Russia. They're more interested in how
fearful they can make the Western population as a whole,
because if they can make the population fearful enough, they
can control the population more easily.
And also they can bring in further draconian policies in
order to control everyday life. So Free Press can be closed
down. We can have arbitrary arrests on
the streets as a result of some accusation that you've you've
helped to a foreign power. So I believe that the the big
call that war is coming and we want to do this, and that it's
fear. That's what they want.
First of all, this is psychological attack on our
minds. However, in doing this, are
these people, they're intelligent, but they're clearly
mad and very dangerous. In doing this, are they taking
us closer to a circumstance where they could trigger an
expanded war with Russia? And I think the answer to that
is absolutely they are. And therefore we need to be
holding our politicians to account whenever we're hearing
this war mongering rhetoric. Because OK, I'm a long time out
of the military and was Cold War days for me.
But it's absolutely obvious to me that NATO, but also the
European Union has been used as a vehicle to expand NATO
military power eastwards. And the European Union has
absolutely been on board with that same agenda.
And for the Russians, and it would be the same if it was the
Americans. Well, the example was Cuba,
when, when missiles were going to be brought really close to
the borders of the of the USA, the Americans had to say no,
this can't happen. It's to do with warning times.
The Russians have had to say the same.
So this war in Ukraine has been ramped up deliberately in order
in the first instance for NATO, but more importantly the
European Union to expand its empire eastward.
And of course, Ukraine is such a huge attraction because of its
vast food and mineral wealth. So that's been the other thing.
And if you've never heard the term before, if you go into
European policy going way back to just post World War, the
phrase was from the Atlantic to the Urals.
The the policy dream for the European project was that the
European Union would extend from the Atlantic to the Urals and
that automatically means that Russia had to be brought into
the project. As we've seen, Russia's not
playing the game. And now, in my opinion, that's
why we've got this vicious, vicious backlash against Russia,
where the Western powers are going to fight to the last
Ukrainian in order to try and fragment Russia so that the
European powers can claim the land east to the Urals.
So I would not be relaxing over Christmas thinking we're all
going to die in a nuclear war next year.
I don't think that's going to happen, but what I think we
should be concerned with is that we've got such a vicious and mad
rhetoric from our politicians calling for war and using terms
of war, that we've got to call out these people before they do
something silly which triggers conflict.
That that's how I view it at the moment.
Well, I think that's a fantastic analysis, Brian.
I think we're just coming to the end of our two hours now.
So I'd just like to thank you on behalf of everyone at Common
Knowledge for giving us such a, a broad understanding your, your
very detailed analysis of many, many different situations.
And I think it's given us lots of food for thought over the
Christmas period and also a lot of positivity as well because
you see that, you know, we shouldn't be people who are
scared that we have power of ourselves.
If you understand what's going on, we can do things about it.
And I think that's a very positive note on which to end
2025. So thank you very much indeed
for giving up your time. And for giving us your many and
many varied views on huge number of different issues.
So thank you very much indeed, Brian.
Well, Richard and team and also big thank you to Diane for
helping to set this up and and and run the event today.
Yeah, thank you for inviting me. It's been fun.
I've still got some of my beer left, so the day's going well.
Yeah, I just want to end on the fact that we're coming up to
Christmas. Christmas itself has changed,
hasn't it? I I don't think it was something
which I I felt as an individual, which was something you feel
because you were younger. But for me, Christmas, when it
came in years gone by, had a calm to it.
Christmas was approaching and there was a an atmosphere which
sort of took over. And now we're surrounded by more
and more LE DS and flashing neon lights.
And it seems to me the more those lights appear, the less
there's a feeling of Christmas. And I know we could have a deep
discussion about what Christmas really is.
But if we if we say that Christmas has always been
regarded as a spiritual time of year, time where we should be
reflecting and and refreshing ourselves, I'd encourage you to
get into that mindset and do not underestimate the power of
prayer. Because as I said early on, this
is the Gov why the government wants to ban it.
Because the evil that that is driving the political agenda is
very scared of prayer. So if over Christmas you get the
time to be somewhere quiet, that's where all you need to be
somewhere quiet and to reflect. And the lady said to me many
years ago, but how do you actually pray?
And I said, well, the thing to remember is that you're sat
quietly talking to a loving Father.
And that is the way that you can put your personal fears and
worries across, but also you can ask for guidance.
And of course, you are also able to ask not for people to be
hurt, but you can ask for people to be removed from power.
And you can't ask for spiritual fortresses, the bad stuff to be
brought down. So you can pray for yourself and
your family. You can pray for the bad guys to
be removed, but you can also pray.
For. The troubling things to also be
collapsed and lead to lead us into something which is how
people should be a loving world. And I get a lot of pleasure out
of thinking that I'm here saying this to everybody in the room,
but really feeling that for some reason, for me, 2025 was the
time that I needed to change my language into the.
Spiritual realm. So there we are.
Well. Thank you very much indeed.
It's been wonderful. Thank you.