Good afternoon. It's Wednesday the 17th of
December, just after 1:00. Welcome to UK column News.
I'm your host, Mike Robinson, and joining me in the studio
today is Charles Mallett. Welcome to the programme,
Charles. Thank you, Mike.
I'm Vanessa Bailey and Mark Anderson joined us live by
videolink. And later in the programme,
we're going to be asking what happens to our health data.
Vanessa is good to have more on the Bondi Beach incident.
Charles will be reporting on the spot between the Metropolitan
Police and the Freemasons, and Mark is going to report on the
childhood vaccination schedule in the United States.
But we're going to begin today with comments by the recently
appointed head of MI 6, Charles. We are, and in fact not just
her. But it certainly appears that
the one infrastructure project the government is on top of is
the construction of the path to war.
And this week is notable for the coincidence of two speeches and
some very joined up messaging from the state, they being the
chief of the Secret Intelligence Service, MI 6 and the chief of
the general staff. So we're going to look first at
what plays Metrowelli, who's taken, who's taken over
recently, as C said. Now, given what she did go on to
speak about, I think it should be noted that she is the
granddaughter of Konstantin Dobrovolski, who was a Russian
collaborator with the Nazis in what is now Ukraine during the
Second World War. And although she never knew her
grandfather, this is a difficult detail to ignore totally.
We'll just start with a video that sets the tone for her
speech. I'm going to break with
tradition and I won't give you a global threat tour, but I will
focus here on Putin's Russia. We all continue to face the
menace of an aggressive, expansionist and revisionist
Russia seeking to subjugate Ukraine and harass NATO.
I find it harrowing that hundreds of thousands have died,
with the toll mounting every day.
Because of Putin's historical distortions and his compromised
desire for respect. He is dragging out negotiations
and shifting the cost of war onto his own population.
But Putin should be in no doubt our support is enduring.
The pressure we apply on Ukraine's behalf will be
sustained because it is fundamental not just to European
sovereignty and security but to global stability.
Alongside the grinding war, Russia is testing us in the grey
zone with tactics that are just below the threshold of war.
It's important to understand their attempts to bully, fear
monger and manipulate because it affects us all.
I'm talking about cyber attacks on critical infrastructure,
drones, buzzing airports and bases, aggressive activity in
our seas above and below the waves, state sponsored arson and
sabotage, propaganda and influence operations that crack
open and exploit fractures within societies.
The only thing she hasn't tried to mention there is yellow cake.
Indeed, not yet anyway, but much of what she said could, of
course be applied to these shores and what's going on here.
But instead she wants to direct all attention away from every
other country on earth and ensure that it's directed at
Russia. She's referring to historical
distortions. Again, something that's very
much been going on on this side of the channel.
The phrase that she used, which is a particular interest, is
just below the threshold of war. And that causes us to look back
at the integrated operating concept, which was withdrawn in
June of this year. And I quote in response on the
integrated operating concept, in response to what they're
identifying as a threat. They say that it establishes the
need to compete below the threshold of war and it
distinguishes between operating and war fighting.
So in actual fact, the suggestion that we are not going
to supposedly stoop to Russia's level seems to be not exactly
reinforced by current doctrine. Mike, I wonder if you had a
comment specifically on this? Well, we like to project onto
other people what we do ourselves.
That was that was our doctrine. And suddenly it's become
Russia's doctrine. This is this is absolutely what
we constantly do. Yeah, exactly.
Yeah, Blame everybody else and then and then do it yourself.
She then goes on to talk about how should how should we
respond? The export of chaos is a
feature, not a bug, in this Russian approach to
international engagement, and we should be ready for this to
continue until Putin is forced to change his calculus.
So how should we respond? It's not enough now just to
understand the world. We must shape it too.
MI 6 is well positioned to respond to these threats and
wider global instability and we will continue to evolve, just as
we have throughout our long history.
The UK government has invested in our intelligence agencies and
we are all using our unique powers to keep the British
people safe. Our open and connected
partnerships across the UK intelligence community with
HMGCCNSIF and the wider tech ecosystem in the UK will become
even more important because in the digital battleground, no
single organisation can prevail alone.
No, considering the references to investment and her concluding
sentence there, no single organisation can prevail alone.
The the undertone there is that there is an acknowledgement that
the United Kingdom is well out of its depth and really doesn't
have sufficient equipment or manpower to deal with the
threats that she is conjuring. So therefore there's an
increased need for the use of the private sector which is
articulated by the U KS modern industrial strategy among other
documents. But this was published last
month and within the text there it says that it it's to ensure
that procurement strategically supports our industrial strategy
priorities and creates high quality jobs and skills in our
local communities and supports sectors critical to national
security. Now as part of this, there also
there's going to be a great reliance on the National
Security Strategic Investment Fund, which is described as
being the UK's deep tech venture capital fund for national
security and defence. So what we're really talking
about here is off the shelf procurement by way of venture
capital control of which goes straight to the to, to the fund
that I've just been talking about, the National Security
Strategy Investment Fund. And I think this is really an
example of what we, what's been described as the defence
dividend playing out in real time.
And now of course we get to the people and who is going to be
bearing responsibility for any of these actions that have come
in due course. And we'll just listen to hear
what she had to say about the future.
But the response to the increasing risks we face won't
be delivered by the UK intelligence community alone.
Wider society has a role to play too.
That includes work taking place in schools across the country so
our children don't get duped by information manipulation.
Let's all check sources, consider evidence, and be alive
to those algorithms that trigger intense reactions like fear.
It also means everyone in society really understanding the
world. We're in a world where
terrorists plot against us, where our enemies fear monger,
bully and manipulate, and the frontline is everywhere.
Online, on our streets, in our supply chains, in the minds and
on the screens of our citizens. We must all stand together
against this. So you're saying that the
integrated operating concept has been withdrawn, but she's just
expressed it yet again, because if you remember, the other part
of that was the idea that foreign ventures are no longer
the only front, there's also the front at home.
And now she's basically reiterating that point.
Cheers. Indeed, absolutely.
And and and and wrapping it up as part of this whole of society
approach, which was written large across the Strategic
Defence Review and the National Security Strategy of this year.
But of course this is directed specifically at children, with
the references there to getting into schools and educating
people from an early age. Now coincident with this, also
on Monday, the Chief of the Defence Staff, Air Chief
Marshall, Sir Richard Knighton, spoke at the Royal United
Services Institute on basically exactly the same theme, talking
about the long term success and reconnecting society with the
armed forces, supported by what he describes as a national
conversation. And he wants to push that
forward now, he said. Also, specifically, he will
argue that the situation is more dangerous than I have known
during my career and the price of peace is rising and our
response needs to go beyond simply strengthening our armed
forces. He went on again hammering the
same point. It needs a whole of nation
response building, defence, industrial capacity to enhance
the resilience of society and the infrastructure that supports
it. Of course, it should be borne in
mind that the government's doing very little on that front when
we consider the capabilities of, or at least the restriction on
farmers, farmland and reliance on food from abroad, reduced
access to water and in particular, of course energy as
it's sabotaged by the net zero agenda and the massive
consumption from data centres and AI in particular.
Now. He also spoke about the
probability of an attack by Russia, or of Russia and one of
the more one or more NATO states being in conflict by 2027.
He used AI to produce this prediction, which he actually
relied upon to write his speech in the first place.
Now he also talked about more people being ready to fight for
their country and said that there were over 100,000
applications to join the armed forces last year, with only
13,000 successful applicants. And it's interesting to note the
Army website says on its joining as a non UK national page that
they're no longer inviting applications from Commonwealth
nationals, except, strangely enough, for musicians.
So it should be perfectly clear to anyone listening that both
Metro Welle and Knighton are politicians first and foremost,
installed to drive the state's propaganda.
And an important distinction to note between the two speakers is
their respective levels of operational experience.
She describes herself as operational to the core, whereas
Knighton has virtually no operational experience
whatsoever. And this disparity may well
point towards the focus when it does come to prosecuting war.
The delivery of kinetic effects is looking less likely to be on
the main effort. Base speeches printed in full on
the government website and I would recommend reading them in
full. There'll be links to the show
notes. I'll just conclude by reading a
tweet from the Russian embassy to the UK, which in effect is
responding to these speeches and says very explicitly Russia has
no plans, intentions or reasons for entering into an armed
confrontation with the UK. OK, well, part of what she said
was the rise of intelligence, as if we haven't had enough of that
from military intelligence. And we.
But the UK military intelligence is apparently going to be more
efficient, faster and better able to anticipate future
threats as the Ministry of Defences launches the new
military intelligence services. And that's according to the
Ministry of Defence. This has been done following
recommendations in Strategic Defence Review that Charles just
mentioned. Military intelligence services
brings under centralised control, they say intelligence
units from the Royal Navy, the British Army, the Royal Air
Force, UK space commander, the permanent Joint Headquarters,
ensuring they operate as one system speeding up high
information is gathered, analysed and shared across the
armed forces. So that's what they have to say
about it. This operation was launched by
the Minister for Armed Forces, Alistair Cairns at RAF Whiten in
Cambridgeshire. And this is a key intelligence
site which houses quotes top secret intelligence from across
the Five Eyes partnership. And he was some selected
journalists were brought for a briefing and they were given a
tour and they were told that the shadow war is knocking on
Europe's door once more. I mean, Blaise was talking about
the fear agenda and, and we're just being bombarded with it
from them. And the the journalists were
also warned that the next major conflict is likely to cause more
casualties than any UK deployment for decades and would
not be a war of choice. So anyway, the MIS will be
commanded by Cyber and Specialist Operations Command
and it's going to be led by this man Adrian Byrd, who's the chief
of Defence Intelligence. And the Starmer regime is also
in parallel creating a new Defence Intelligence Academy to
offer what they describe as world class training in key
intelligence disciplines such as cyberspace and geospatial
analysis. And as we see from their useful
infographic here, the basis for all this is that unnamed
adversaries are intensifying their hybrid war on Britain with
increasing cyber attacks, disruptions and satellites,
threats to global shipping lanes, increasing
disinformation. And as Blaze was saying, of
course, all those naughty drone attacks that we're being told
about constantly that don't really exist.
But on top of that, they're also launching the Defence
Counterintelligence Unit because they claim hostile intelligence
activity against the Ministry of Defence has risen by more than
50%. And they then go on to say,
would you believe that the Don Sturgis inquiry published last
week made clear that foreign intelligence services are now
operating far beyond traditional espionage norms, targeting
defence personnel, technology programmes, supply chains and
wider defence industry both at home and overseas?
So if anybody is still laughing at that, I just just remind
everybody that last Thursday we held this event in Salisbury
entitled Skripal and Novichok. What didn't happen?
So if you want to know just how real the Don Sturgis Inquiry
report is and you haven't seen that those presentations yet,
then please do head on to the UK column website and watch it.
Because the fact that they had the goal to cite that particular
report is just spectacular, isn't it?
It absolutely is, yeah. And we look forward to seeing
what the product will be from combining all the various
intelligence in the same place. Absolutely.
So let me welcome Vanessa to the programme.
Vanessa, obviously weekend saw events in Australia kicking off
and just give us your take on it then.
Well, of course, it wasn't only Australia and there was the
event in Rhode Island at Brown University, also in a number of
incidents in Syria, which I'll talk about later in the news.
I'm looking into the Bondi Beach incident and I have to say the
pushback was almost immediate, that this was a false flag and
and many other variations on that kind of narrative.
I'm not reaching any conclusions of what I've tried to do here is
just bring together some of the information that we now have and
some of the opinions that are are gathering traction in social
media and in various media outlets.
But first of all, the first point I want to make was that
Netanyahu almost immediately went out to speak about the
event itself and to talk about the heroism of what he called a
Jewish individual who tackled one of the gunmen.
So let's just see Netanyahu making this statement.
Rhino tawa the Shibuto, the rhino gang.
Huayu did the Sia. Well, the interesting thing is
that I believe he had already been informed that actually that
hero came from Syria, actually from Idlib in northwest Syria.
He's Ahmed al Ahmed, a source of pride for family and friends in
Syria. He, he came from a village known
as al Nairab in Idlib. He left Syria in 2006 because,
again, many people now are trying to associate him with Al
Qaeda and ISIS because Al Nairab became a headquarters for
Jolani's Takfiri thugs from 2011 onwards.
This is a recap coming from the BBC this morning.
Now what this mentions, and this has been picked up by a number
of commentators. Australian police are
investigating a trip taken to the Philippines by two alleged
gunmen. The month before, 15 people were
killed at the shooting attack at Bondi Beach.
Apparently they travelled to the country on their Indian passport
and the son Navid using an Australian passport, border
authorities in Manila told the BBC.
It's previously been reported that they visited the
Philippines to receive military style training.
So let's see where this actual island is.
This is Mindanao, which is famous for having had an
infiltration of ISIS groups, which we talked about on UK
columns some time ago actually, and it is known as an ISIS
training area. Now this apparently was actually
known to the Australian authorities who had of course
also had the two individuals on their radar.
This was picked up by an account on X known as Propaganda Co.
You can watch the whole video, it'll be in the show notes.
But this is just the one section relating to what the Australian
authorities already knew about the two individuals.
An Australian born citizen was investigated by the Australian
Security Intelligence Organisation for six months back
in 2019 over close ties to a Sydney based Islamic State
terrorism cell. Authorities feared he was
accessing extremist material online and speaking with other
radicalised men, but an assessment was made that there
was no indication of any ongoing threat or threat of him engaging
in violence. Counterterrorism police believed
the gunman pledged allegiance to the ISIS terrorist group.
Prior to carrying out the attack. 2 Black and white ISIS
flags were discussed covered in the attacker's car, according to
a senior official. They always got the flag.
Very true again. But apparently I, I was actually
told by a friend in Sydney that there are takfiri enclaves where
they actually sell Al Qaeda and ISIS flags in the marketplaces
though. So not so unusual, but the fact
that they're now trying to tie this in.
To ISIS, while of course both the US and Israel have supported
ISIS in Syria to overthrow the former government.
Then we come on to this now very famous selfie taken by Arsene
Otrovsky, who after being shot and wounded in the head, managed
to take a selfie and also then when he'd been bandaged up,
managed to give very, very lengthy interviews to the media
that were actually present. Who is Arsene Otrovsky?
We'll come on to a little report by Niko House again that he put
out yesterday. But in fact, he's basically at
the Majev Institute for National Security and Zionist Strategy.
What does this translate as? He's in charge of running the
propaganda for the Zionist regime, particularly since
October the 7th. So let's just play this part of
the report by Nico House again. You can find the whole report in
the show notes. So you're trying to tell me that
one of the victims who was shot at the Bondi Beach shooting is
one of Israel's top propagandists who just so
happened to be there and October 7th and survive them both?
Meet Arsene Ostrovsky, a lawyer who resides in both Australia
and in Israel, who just so happened to be at the Bondi
Beach shooting and was shot in the head but managed to survive
his wounds. Now I need you all to
understand, this guy is one of Israel's top propagandists.
It is literally his job to go after any and everybody who
criticises Israel. And it would be one thing if he
was a top Israeli propagandist, it was at October 7th and mad to
survive. And another thing if he was a
top Israeli propagandist, was shot in the head at Bondi Beach
and was only there and managed to survive.
But when you are at both and you managed to survive both and your
first instinct is to stop, drop and take a selfie after
allegedly being shot in the head.
Yeah, you're going to get some side eyes.
Deservedly so. Well, I mean, I mean it's a
valid point. As I said, all of these are
valid points and I'm sure over time we are going to get a lot
more clarity. This is an article that was
written by Nate Bear at Substack.
He calls it terror on the beach and I actually opened it
assuming he would be talking about the Bondi event.
In fact, what he's looking at is the fact that of course the
Zionists have conducted multiple massacres on the beaches of
Gaza. He he lists them all.
This is just one section. In June last year, Israel bombed
the tents of display displaced people on the Gaza beach.
Fishermen have regularly been fired at.
Israeli soldiers film themselves enjoying firing water shells at
people on the beach. August last year, Israeli
gunships once again opened fire on the tents of displaced
Palestinians, killing and wounding.
August this year, Israel bombed a tent on the beach in Gaza
which had been turned into a makeshift cafe.
Killing for the cafe attack came after the far more deadly cafe
attack just a few weeks earlier in late June, which targeted the
popular Albaca cafeteria and killed 39 people, including a
one year old girl and numerous journalist.
So of course he's making the point that there is a degree of
hierarchalization of victimhood and we're seeing it again with
the Bondi Beach event. He then does also go on to
identify one of the victims, Rabbi Eli Schlanger, who's also
again, very well known. This is from his Instagram page
where he's basically celebrating with the genocidal about Zionist
forces. And this is a video from him
inside the occupied territories talking or or rather channelling
Zionist policy. So let's just hear this.
Friends, ladies and gentlemen, I am here at the Malpesa
Chalamdina, which means the porch of the country.
It's an unbelievable place. It's a very, very High Peak, and
from here you can see half the country.
Unbelievable place. Can you imagine?
If. This was in the hands of the
Arabs. This is right in the heart of
the West Bank. This is why this needs to be in
the hands of the Jewish people, because of its security and
obviously the obvious. Because it belongs to us,
because our land. I'm standing over here with a
beautiful, beautiful Khayal soldier man who has left his
family to be able to protect this village at this very very.
Heightened. Moment.
What's your name? And my name is Dolev.
Dolev and Dolev, on behalf of the entire village over here,
has received a very, very sizeable donate.
So he was obviously very in support of of the genocide
that's ongoing in Palestine. The Shabbat movement in Bondi
also was responsible for raising funds for the IOF since October
the 7th. And Nate Bear actually pointed
out again, I think it's a very valid point, he said.
Actually, rather than being dead, these people should be in
The Hague. They should be prosecuted for
having raised money to support a genocidal entity while it's
slaughtering and exterminating Palestinians for the last 100
years, but of course intensified since October the 7th.
And then of course, we have to also look, this is another
potential lead to it being a false flag.
Almost immediately there were claims from Israeli media that
Iran could potentially be responsible for the Bondi attack
or agents of Iran. Of course, that's been slightly
mudded by them having ISIS affiliations.
And Hezbollah was also mentioned at some point in the Israeli
media. And this report in Jerusalem
Post is claiming that should Israel respond, if Iran was
behind the attacks, then it would be supported by the United
States. So, ongoing narratives to watch
for here. But clearly not all is as it
seems. Thank you for that, Vanessa.
Any thoughts? Well, I mean the, the other
element to it obviously being manipulated in Australia, it was
the the proposals for gun control either across the whole
country or or by sort of state. So it'd be interesting to see
which direction that goes in and whether there's going to be a
knock on effect in other places because of that.
Yes, OK, let's move on then. If you like what the UK column
does, we do need your financial support.
If you are a member, we want to say thank you very much for all
of that. Or if you've made a donation.
But if you're not, please have a look at the front page of the UK
column, your website. You'll find a link that takes
you to a page that explains how you can support us.
As I said, we do need your ongoing financial support and
that'd be very much appreciated. If you can't support us
financially, then please do share anything you see on the
website because that helps us beat the censorship regime.
Now tonight at 7:00 PM, Jeremy will be speaking to Simon Roche
on the incoming global catastrophe.
So that's at 7. And Carl is talking to Doctor
Work Paul, about China's trade surplus reaching a trillion
dollars, allegedly. So watch that at 9 yesterday.
Charles, you were speaking to Chris Coverdale.
Yeah, indeed, this second interview with Chris, first one
was dealing with the sort of individual issues with paying
taxation and how it shouldn't be done because it's used to fund
wars. And this is essentially the same
theme but with a with more of a corporate focus and what people
can do when they're working within organisations.
OK, now next on Friday is our last UK column, News of the
Year, and we'll be doing our usual end of year roundup while
we're off on the Christmas break at 1:00 PM.
Most days there'll be some content going out and most of it
will be the presentations from the Cheltenham event that we
held earlier this year. So Catherine Gunn, Alex
Thompson, Patrick Henningson, Raja Mayor Brian Gerrish and
also the the panel discussion that UK column members had the
Q&A that will those will all go out at 1:00 PM on most days.
Obviously, we're not putting out a thing out on Christmas Day,
Boxing Day and so on, but join us at 1:00 PM for those if you
possibly can. OK, Charles, let's move on then
to the question of Freemasonry and the police.
Yes, the Metropolitan Police Service has finally kicked the
hornet's nest and they put out an announcement saying that they
have changed the conditions under which people are regarded
when they have membership of what's described as a
hierarchical organisation. So hierarchical organisations
added to declarable association policy and they said
specifically the move follows a consultation of officers and
staff which showed 2/3 of those who responded felt membership of
such organisations effects perception of police,
impartiality and public trust. Now they went on saying that
officers and staff are now required to declare a
membership, past or present, of any potentially influential
organisation that is hierarchical as confidential
membership and requires members to support and protect each
other. Now, that was 1 one of the
particular thorns that the United Grand Lodge of England
has taken with the Metropolitan Police Service, as well as the
percentage of Metropolitan Police staff that actually took
part in the survey. That's effectively delivered
this result because it was only about 5% of the total.
However, the point about public perception is one that we'll
come back to now. This changes the situation
somewhat according to how it is at the moment.
The College of Police Vetting Code of Practise gives a number
of reasons why people might be ineligible for joining the
police, and that relates to connections to criminals or
criminal activity posing risks to the public and those who are
vulnerable have a demonstrable lack of honesty and so forth.
Now the suggestion here is not that membership of the Masons
would actually preclude one from being a member of the
Metropolitan Police Service, but rather that it's just something
that needs to be declared. Now.
On the 11th of December, the United Grand Lodge put out a
statement entitled Metropolitan Police Update in which they
critically say we are disappointed that a decision
which potentially effects our members has been taken without
open or effective consultation. Now it might be seen that what
they're doing there is effectively giving a tacit
admission that they do have undue influence or indeed
certainly that they want to as part of this process, presumably
to overturn it and make sure that doesn't happen.
Now, if they're talking about having their members affected by
this, how do they mean? I mean, you know that the the
point of this is purely a declaration that you are a
member of such an an organisation and and nothing
beyond that. Anyway, the the level of their
dissatisfaction has gone further and just today they've announced
that they are going to launch legal action against the
Metropolitan Police and they say that they've made their concerns
clear and that the requirement has the potential to undermine
public credibility of Freemasons and could impact negatively on
its members. So the same line in effect about
the priority going to the members of Masonic lodges rather
than to the public and not undermining the credibility of
the police by having among their number people who do have
conflicts of interest or at least potential conflicts of
interest. The Federation, effectively the
Union, has come out and issued a short statement in which they
say that this is unnecessary and wrong, so don't.
This is going to be quite a bit more back and forth on this
particular issue. Thanks, Charles.
Now let's, well, let's again, I want to introduce everyone to
this company, Zivr. This is the secure
communications company, they say.
Zivr was founded in 2015 in Amsterdam in the Netherlands and
they raised $32.2 million in funding from investors,
including DM Capital and Dawn Capital.
They currently employ around 130 staff with offices in Amsterdam,
London and New York and provide secure communications for 11,000
organisations. That's what they say, but as
their announcement banner at the top of their website shows, they
have just been acquired by Kite Networks.
Sorry, Kite works, sorry, and we'll come on to that.
Come back to that in a second. Zipper provides cloud based
secure communications solutions specialising in encrypted email,
file transfer and E signatures, and they market themselves as a
European alternative with quotes Zero knowledge 0 access
encryption and they're saying that neither Zivr nor cloud
providers could access customer data, which is apparently not
the case. In fact, because content is not
encrypted on the user's computer in all situations, it is
encrypted on Zivr servers in some situations.
So Zivr can read the data before it's transmitted to its
destination. Now this report on screen at the
moment sites the news website follow the money, which is a
Dutch news website, and also sites independent security
analysts who discovered the data centre servers are sent in the
clear before being encrypted. Now, the headline implies this
is a problem because of the acquisition by Kiteworks.
And so the question is then, why would that be?
Well, it's because Kiteworks is yet another of these is really
Unit 8200 founded tech companies, Well, actually not
founded, but at least run by hoovering up bulk data from,
well, WHO, including health data.
So their chief executive then is Jonathan Yaron.
He has a background in Unit 8200.
He was appointed to the board in 2016.
He later became chairman and chief executive.
He recruited Yaron Gallant, we'll see in a second, also a
Unit 8200 graduate, the chief product officer is Ahmed Turin
that we could see on screen. At the moment, he is department
head at Israel Defence Forces Intelligence Unit 8200, where he
founded and LED a special data analytics team that received the
Israeli Defence Prize. And we just mentioned Yaron
Gallant here. He is described as an 8200
graduate and inventor of the web application firewall.
He was appointed chief product officer at Kiteworks.
And then on top of that, we've got other Israeli executives
working for the company, including Ron Margalit, who
worked at Unity 200 before serving in the office of Israeli
Prime Minister Benji Netanyahu. And mergers and acquisitions
director Yuri Kadem is a former Israeli naval captain.
So lots of links to Israeli intelligence and the IDF in
this. And yet, despite these concerns,
multiple NHS trusts and European government agencies continue to
use ever though they were originally attracted to it
specifically because it was European owned.
And this idea of data sovereignty in Europe, in the UK
publicly, we know about West Sussex NHS Foundation Trust and
and a whole host of others because in fact, the NHS mail
system is connected up to this infrastructure as well.
I'm just going to say, you know, although Kiteworks is AUS
company now, it is run by these guys.
This data export from the UK to the United States was really
enabled by this legislation, the Data Use and Access Act that we
were warning about well before it ever became formal
legislation. And this is enabling a lot of
the bulk data collection surveillance that we're seeing
at the moment and the export of that to the United States,
where, of course, it falls into the hands of not only Israeli
intelligence, but also the AI companies.
So we should be absolutely paying attention to what's going
on here. We should.
I mean, I think, you know, interesting to have the sort of
reference to data sovereignty, which effectively as a concept
is made to be utterly laughable in so many ways.
I mean either by people who we might regard as bad actors, or
by corporations or states who simply want to do what they
like. Yes, we'll undoubtedly discuss
that more during Extra Mark. Let me welcome you to the
programme now and bring us up to date on what's going on with the
childhood vaccination schedule in the United States.
Good to be back, ladies and gentlemen and everyone at UK
column after some domestic and holiday related breaks there.
Interesting thing, it's kind of a scalpel here.
You might say something very precise.
RFK and the HHS have made the recommendation, a vote in fact,
by the vaccine advisory committee, to end the
requirement that all babies at birth should get the hepatitis B
vaccine. It might not sound like much,
but the critics of RFK and the vaccine industry and the mass
media cartel that's basically in the thrall of Big Pharma are all
screaming to high heavens. They're saying this is terrible.
What it is, is for 30 years, the hep.
Hep the B vaccine was required for all newborn babies, no
matter what their condition or the condition of the mother.
Now this this gets rid of the universal requirement.
Now the Hep B shot will only be limited to those mothers that
test positive for hepatitis B, but even then I believe they'll
still be some room for choice, but it basically makes more room
for for choice and informed consent, which in principle is
very important. This slide mentions some of the
background of the CDC's advisory committee voted to change the
hepatitis B birth dose recommendation, moving towards
individual decisions for infants of negative testing mothers.
The vaccine sceptical groups have been pushing for this shift
away from the universal birth dose mandate, although
paediatric groups strongly disagree.
So there's a lot of pushback going on, and some of that
pushback is from a usual source here.
This is from the University of Minnesota.
And the paediatricians, at least some of them are rebelling,
outright rebelling. Paediatricians reject the CDC
advisor's guidance and they plan to continue vaccinating all
newborns against TAP B. So they're really pushing back
hard. Many healthcare providers,
including doctors, medical societies, state health
departments, etcetera, are rejecting what they're calling
unscientific vaccine recommendations from an
influential federal advisory panel and will instead continue
following guidance from the American Academy of Paediatrics.
So it's kind of a turf war going on here.
And this is just some of the responses of the media.
The nation is sort of a centre left, a publication.
They're, they're really making their views known.
RFK Junior is a public health disaster.
They're even going so far as to say, but local Maha laws may be
an even bigger threat. And what they're talking about
there is the Make America Healthy Again recommendations to
reduce fluoride or eliminate fluoride in public water
supplies. So they're not just criticising
RFK along vaccine lines. Meanwhile, we have something
that you're not hearing much about, and that's an impeachment
effort out of Michigan. And this is Haley Stevens, a
pretty new member of Congress. As of the 10th of December,
Michigan Congresswoman Haley Stevens formally announced
articles of impeachment against RFK, Secretary of the Health and
Human Services Department, citing what she calls his
dangerous actions that have endangered public health and
gutted life saving medical research.
And we have a quote from her. Senator RFK has, excuse me,
Secretary RFK Junior has turned his back on science, on public
health and on the American people.
A bit of hyperbole here, spreading conspiracies and lies,
driving up costs and putting lives at risk.
And it definitely sounds like she's overstating the case.
It's also interesting to note that there is a long way to go
the the age. The age requirements from birth
to age 6 include hepatitis, BRSV, diphtheria, tetanus,
whooping cough, polio, COVID, flu, measles, MMR, chicken pox,
and hepatitis A. And that's the myriad of
vaccines that are required for age 0 to 6.
So there is a long way to go, but many are seeing this as a
good step forward for informed consent.
Although there's much more that could be done.
And I can extrapolate a little more on this an extra if you'd
like, but a lot of people aren't hearing about the impeachment
effort. I'm putting it all together
where most of the media reports this in a very fragmented way.
But that's the latest, and we'll see how this develops as this
year ends. Thank you, Mark.
Thanks very much for that, Vanessa.
Let's move back to the Middle East then.
And of course recently the attack on U.S. military there by
ISIS. Yes, I would argue, I think it's
the first attack by by ISIS against U.S. military and the
only time that ISIS attacked Israel, they actually apologised
for it to Israel back in 2017. So people should pay attention
to that when when the US and Trump in particular is claiming
that he's he's in Syria to fight against ISIS.
Of course, ISIS is another proxy of the US that has been used to
overthrow the former Syrian government and to destabilise
Iraq also. So on the 15th of December,
three Americans were killed in Syria, in Palmyra.
And I'll show that on the map in a second by ISIS.
And ISIS terrorists were members of the Iowa National Guard.
So that was two of the three Americans killed.
Let's have a look. Actually where the attack took
place. It was in really central, can't
be any more central than that. In Palmyra, which actually
traditionally was an ISIS held area just before the fall of
Damascus, the Syrian Arab Army had been running a campaign in
exactly that area to try and clean out the the ISIS terrorist
cells that was still operating there and that had conducted
attacks against the Syrian Army and and which led to massacres
of the Syrian Arab Army personnel.
At that time. Pete Hagseth went on X in his
usual rational way. The savage who perpetrated this
attack was killed by partner forces.
Let it be known, if you target Americans anywhere in the world,
this is obviously come from AI. You will spend the rest of your
brief, anxious life knowing that the United States will hunt you,
find you, and ruthlessly kill you.
So, again, demonstrating that he's perfectly of sound mind
when he's putting posts on X. This was from Ambassador Tom
Barrack, Trump's hitman, economic hitman in the region,
strongly condemning the cowardly terrorist ambush targeting a
joint US Syrian government patrol.
They had been warned of the potential for attack.
No one had taken any notice of it.
And then a response there from Karim Franceski, who's a Kurdish
supporter. With respect, Ambassador, you
helped legitimise A faction whose security apparatus is full
of recycled ISIS and Nusra, Al Qaeda and Syria fighters.
You pushed to replace the SDF, the only force that actually
broke ISIS. I would disagree with that with
HTS, a group that absorbed them. Now U.S. troops are dead.
Now, he's making a valid point. the US actually supported ISIS
and as President Assad said in one interview, if you supporting
terrorism is like putting a scorpion in your pocket, I'm
paraphrasing, eventually the scorpion will sting you and kill
you. Now, what is particularly
interesting, and there is a photo circulating on social
media, but I can't verify it, but this was in Le Man today.
The Syrian who killed the Americans was actually part of
the security forces, so he was actually part of Jolani's
entourage, albeit ISIS. But then again, this shows the
ridiculousness of Jolani being made part of the coalition
against ISIS when the majority of his Takferi forces are in
reality de facto ISIS. But then let's see what excuse
Jolani and the Syrian authority new Syria authorities came up
with. So basically they said, well,
no, hang on, we were about to sack this guy.
But actually we were waiting until Monday.
This was from another report because Saturday is an
administrative holiday. Well, believe that and I've got
a bridge somewhere else to to sell you.
But anyway, they were going to sack him just as the White
Helmets were going to sack a White Helmet that was involved
in the execution of Syrian Arab Army soldiers back in 2016.
And then he reappeared in White Helmet promo videos about a
month later. So, and you know, let's take
that with a pinch of salt and then what is happening?
Of course, as I said, after Jolani was made part of the anti
ISIS coalition, ISIS would use this as a very successful
recruitment drive because the majority of Jolani's Takferi
forces were ISIS. Now many of them have laughed
and have defected to the official ISIS organisation.
And this was in the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights
this morning, an alarming development.
Gunmen in military uniforms with ISIS patches established
makeshift checkpoints in Aleppo and Derozorso in effectively the
north of Syria and the North East.
And in fact, 1 of Jolani's security forces was killed this
morning by an ISIS or or rather sorry, an unknown assailant,
masked assailant. No guesses for who that might
be. So in my opinion, either the US
is trying to stoke some kind of civil war between Jolani's less
tack fury entourage against a newly reinforced ISIS, of course
reinforced by the US and Israel effectively, or the US is
looking to carry out a bombing campaign on Syria on the basis
that American forces are getting killed.
OK, Thank you for that. Thank you for that.
Let's come back to the United Kingdom and Charles Online
Safety Act. Obviously, the petition got
quite a response. What happened?
Well, very little unfortunately. And as Mike says, there was a
petition earlier in the year which attracted over half a
million signatures and this was therefore debated in Westminster
Hall just on Monday. And the question to be asked is
who cares that it was very, very sparsely attended and indeed
only by people who were in support of it.
So it looks very much like there was absolutely no resistance to
censorship whatsoever. And that is in stark contrast
with the attendance at the debate into digital ID, which
took place the previous week. Now, the debate was led by Lewis
Atkinson, and in the many remarks he did make was to say
my only regret is that the few members of the House who have
publicly called for outright repeal of the Online Safety
Safety Act were not here this afternoon.
So now how one explains that is not really totally clear, but
we'll just show a short clip of Lewis Atkinson in his closing
remarks, of course having had absolutely no pushback during
the entire debate. As a result, I think it's it's
entirely natural that the first. Attempt at regulation and
legislation will not ever get everything right and will
require require evolution. And the Online Safety Act was a
landmark moment attempting to regulate online harms.
And I think it's fair to say that the the consensus that
we've heard today. Is that that needs to evolve,
that we shouldn't be looking to repeal, but to evolve at pace
and ensure implementation at place at pace.
To ensure that we tackle those online and harms in a way that
is consistent with our rich values and there's freedoms of
expression and association that we've heard.
So that's basically what the government are taking from that
petition. They've got a couple of things
wrong, but they should now proceed at pace.
Yes, because we've got to accelerate everything all the
time. We have.
We do. Yeah.
OK. Well, I suppose in a sense
related to this, the Trump lawsuit against the BBC, which
was, was that yesterday it was announced to.
The way time goes, it's hard to say, but this is what the BBC
had on on their thing. BBC says it will defend Trump
over defamation lawsuit over Panorama speech Edit Well, it's
not $5 billion as they, as they reported.
There's what they said about it. They're going to defend
themselves against a $5 billion lawsuit.
Well, before we clarify exactly what the amount is, let's just
look at what Trump had to say. I'm sorry to do this, but we
just thought there's certain comedy value in it.
In a little while, you'll be seeing I'm suing the BBC for
putting words in my mouth. Literally, they put words in my
mouth. They had me saying things that I
never said coming out. I guess they used AI or
something. So we'll be bringing that
lawsuit. A lot of people are asking when
are you bringing that lawsuit? Even the media can't believe
that one they would. They actually put terrible words
in my mouth having to do with January 6th that I didn't say
and the beautiful words that I said, right?
The beautiful words talking about patriotism and all of the
good things that I said, They didn't say that, but they put
terrible words they actually have me speaking with.
Words that I never. Said And they got caught because
I believe somebody at BBC said this is so bad it has to be
reported. Let's go fake news.
So we'll be filing that soon, probably this afternoon or
tomorrow morning. What did those three chaps do
wrong to have to stand behind him?
Well ended good question, but but anyway, as I say, it's not 5
billion because it's 10 billion. So the the lawsuit is seeking 5
billion in damages for defamation, sorry for defamation
and other and another $5 billion under Florida's deceptive and
unfair trade practises Act. So more information if we have a
look at this tweet here from Judicial Hub.
And they have, I think that on that Twitter thread, they have
links to the the actual suit itself.
The BBC had, of course, as we reported, issued a formal
apology saying that their editing gave the mistaken
impression that President Trump had made a direct call for
violent action. And they also reported that the
Trump team never responded to BBC's apology, but their apology
sort of gave the impression that they had created.
They had created the impression sorry that Trump had incited
violence that and that that was unintentional on their part.
Well, that has clearly hasn't gone down well with Trump.
They said on the 15th, which was Monday, We're not going to make
further comment on ongoing legal proceedings.
But here's the thing. Also on Monday, Trump suspended
the tech prosperity deal with the UK and what is being
reported as a major set back. So if you remember, this was the
the whole business of the new UKUS Energy partnership powering
1.5 million British homes. And let's not forget Stargate UK
as well. So that has apparently been
suspended as a result of the BB CS actions here.
And I haven't really seen that much coverage of that particular
aspect of this in any of the British press.
So I just thought best to to mention it.
But where does that bring us then?
Back to Mark then and sticking with Trump and tariffs.
Thanks gentlemen. Yeah, this is a really big
issue, bigger than meets the eye.
You might recall April 2nd and I covered it some on UK column
after that, the Trump introduced a major tariff initiative and it
would rescue America from what was basically deemed as a would
be or actual economic emergency. And so before we talk about the
Lutnick family for a moment before we do that, a a Supreme
Court decision is hanging in the balance.
It could happen any day, conceivably even later today,
probably after the new year. And that Supreme Court decision
would cancel Trump's ability to carry out his tariff policy
under a emergency law in 1977. That's when that law was passed,
and that law gave Trump delegated authority from
Congress to enact tariff laws on his own as long as an emergency
threshold was made. Otherwise, you would have to
default to the US Constitution where under 1, Section 8, tariff
policy, trade policy is up to Congress and Article 1, Section
7 of the Constitution says that all bills for raising revenue
shall be in the House of Representatives.
The only way to get an exception to that is to have a statue.
That's the key here. Now, briefly, meanwhile, the
Lutnick family, Howard Lutnick, of course, is the commerce
secretary under Trump. They've been angling.
Let's show this. This hasn't been reported much,
only in a piece meal fashion and not with a lot of hoopla.
They're angling to make a lot of money.
If the court votes down Trump's tariff policy, the Supreme
Court, what they would basically do is they'd approach the
importing companies, the ones that pay the brunt of the tariff
taxes, and they would give them some money and say here, take
take a couple million each and you'll be happy.
And in return, Howard Lutnick, who divested himself of this
direct involvement of this, but his son Brandon Lutnick is is
head of the company now Cantor Fitzgerald.
So the sun has taken over because Howard is commerce
secretary. But nevertheless, it's the
Lutnick family anyway, they'd pay off the importing families.
And then that would give the the the Lutnick business, Cantor
Fitzgerald rights to collect the full payback that the Trump
administration would have to do, paying back the the money it had
collected through the tariffs. So the Lutnick family's business
here, it stands to make a killing if the Supreme Court
rules against Trump's tariffs, a very illicit and and rather, you
know, repellent development. You might say it.
A lot of corruption here, a lot of robber Baron kind of
behaviour. Now, let's move on real briefly.
And basically the rest is the Supreme Court's pending
decision. The rest of the slides basically
outlined that. And this here, this slide here
we can show very briefly, this is the main thing, the Supreme
Court ruling on EPA, that's the 1977 law, the International
Emergency Economic Powers Act. That's what gives the president
this exception from congressional power and allows
him to regulate commerce during national emergencies.
Yes, we ran huge trade deficits with China, China realising huge
record surpluses. That's all true.
Did it ever constitute an economic emergency?
Probably not. Something of a crisis, something
of a economic problem for sure. This is something from the
Peterson Institute. Will the Supreme Court determine
the fate of Trump tariffs? That's something else that'll be
in the show notes, but that's sufficient for the slides.
It, it boils down to this being a bellwether decision, guys, as
to whether Trump's tariff policy will stand.
So once once these Supreme Court makes that decision anytime now,
then it's just a question of whether Trump will appeal to
other laws that are on the books that might give him some wiggle
room. Otherwise, he'll have to defer
to Congress under the Constitution.
So there's billions of dollars at stake here.
The Lutnick family engaging in hanky panky like we're seeing
and many other matters, and it'll change very quickly, so
we'll see what happens. Thanks, Mark.
Thank you for that. Let's finish then Charles with
farming. Yes, and via an examination of
the Finance Bill, the second reading of which took place
yesterday, and that has resulted in two days worth of committee
hearings on a number of provisions therein.
Now, one of those is the proposed changes to inheritance
tax for farmers and business owners.
And I just have a video clip really to illustrate how
parliamentary democracy works, or indeed doesn't, as expressed
by comments made during a meeting of the Liaison Committee
on Monday. And we'll see Alan Carmichael,
who's the chair of the Environment, Farming and Rural
Affairs Committee, asking the Prime Minister about what would
appear to be a vindictive attack on smaller farms via the changes
to agricultural property relief. It is a it's an economic reform
which we took in the budget before last, not targeted.
It is to adjust the rate at which inheritance tax is that
the fact that it's paid, the rate at which it's paid and the
period over which it is paid. But it's not targeted against
individuals. I'm not, I'm not, I'm not
arguing with you that there are therefore going to be
individuals affected, as there are with any change in any tax
regime. But there's a difference between
changing the tax regime and targeting a group of
individuals. This is about changing the tax
regime. The anti force stalling clause
that we've spoken about traps farmers.
And. Into the new rules, it doesn't
allow them the same opportunities that other
taxpayers will have to use tax planning to manage their affairs
in a sensible way that will allow the succession of family
farms in this country. That doesn't make it targeted.
It is a necessary consequence of the decisions that we've taken.
But I can assure you, as you would expect, the president of
the NFU has raised this issue issue with me on more than one
occasion. Not just the president of the
NFU. Well, I appreciate that You've
heard it from Kat Smith, you've heard it from my Select
Committee, you've heard it from the Welsh Affairs Select
Committee, you've heard it from the Northern Ireland Affairs
Committee. You don't.
These are all select committees, incidentally, that have
majorities from the Labor Party, and they have all produced
unanimous reports calling for this to be paused and rethought.
You don't have to listen to me. You don't even have to listen to
the farmers out there. You don't have to listen to the
president at the NFU. But why do you not listen to
your own party colleagues? I do listen to party colleagues
all the time. And then do what you're going to
do anyway. The last word going to Alan
Carmichael. And it should be noted that the
projected return from changing this inheritance tax threshold
would be £500 million in the year, which is equivalent to 1
day's pay for the National Health Service.
And when we think back to what Blaze meant well and Richard
Knighton was saying about resilience and whole of society
approach, in fact it seems nothing more than a drive for
corporate capture and a deliberate destruction of of the
establishment of certainly the rural economy as it stands.
There we are. Thank you, Charles.
Well, lots to talk about an extra.
We will be there in a few minutes.
If you are UK call members, stay on the live stream for that, but
we're going to leave it there for today.
Enjoy the rest of the day, enjoy Germ and and Carl tonight.
We'll be back for news at 1:00 PM as usual on Friday.
We'll see you then. Thanks for joining us.
Bye bye. Bye bye.