Good afternoon. It's Wednesday, the 3rd of
December, just after 1:00. Welcome to UK column News.
I'm your host, Mike Robinson, joining me in the studio today,
Charles Mallett. Welcome to the program, Charles.
Thank you, Mike. And Vanessa Bailey joins us by
live video link. Later in the program, Tim Norman
will be joining us to discuss the Don Sturgis inquiry report.
Charles will be reporting on the removal of jury trials in the UK
and also water pollution from data centres.
And Fidessa's going to be reporting on the wall being
built around Syria. And I'll have more on this
insane drive for war by NATO, the UK and the EU.
But we're going to begin today with the case of Natalie
Strecker. This is peace activist Natalie
Strecker, who was yesterday facing up to 10 years in prison
under the Terrorism Act. She was charged for eliciting
support for Hamas and Hezbollah based on it tweets.
Apparently this is, according to Craig Murray, cherry picked by
police and prosecutors from an astounding 21, sorry, 51,000
tweets that she'd sent, mainly from the Jersey Palestine
Solidarity Solidarity Committee account.
Now, at 1:00 PM yesterday, David Miller posted on X that Natalie
Stryker had been acquitted. And I'm very pleased to say that
David is with us now to discuss this.
So David, what are your thoughts on on the charges in the 1st
place and on what happened in court yesterday?
Well, the charges were manifestly ridiculous from the
word go. I mean, what had happened
originally was that she was accused of saying something in
private message groups, which was to do with supporting A
prescribed organization as well as the charges about the public
tweets. And it turned out, according to
evidence heard in court, that there was a bug in meeting a
problem in the police software for reading this, this message
app which they had got from her phone when they seized her phone
and that it had misidentified her as being the author of
particular messages. And eventually, and she said I
didn't send those messages and that, and I personally was aware
that she hadn't sent the messages as well.
And I was in touch with her about it at the time and with
her lawyers. And the police eventually
recognized that she hadn't sent the messages.
So they had to withdraw those, those charges.
And they were left with some charges about her, her, her
posts on X, which you know, were nothing to do with supporting
prescribed organisations, specifically Hamas and
Hezbollah, the so mention of course of Palestinian Islamic
Jihad or the PFLPGC, the two of the other Palestinian
organisations which were prescribed.
And so it was left to the judge, or possibly more than one judge,
to decide whether she was guilty or not.
The judge has decided that she wasn't guilty because she was
clearly talking about supporting the Palestinians.
There was an attempt in court to try and suggest that supporting
the Palestinians to resist the genocide was tantamount to say
that she supported Hamas, which of course is transparently
ridiculous and as everyone knows, it's written into
international law. But the Palestinians
specifically, and indeed all people under occupation have the
right to resist by all available means, including specifically
using these words, armed struggle.
But she she hadn't even gone anywhere near that.
And she's not even she's a she's a pacifist.
You know, she's not even someone who who would support in the
abstract, the international right under international law.
So the whole thing was a was a farrago, an attempt to
criminalize people by illegitimate means through
existing laws, which are already Orwellian.
And it's in the term which has failed.
And I'm very glad to see that it has failed.
And I anticipate that there will be many more of these cases
coming up and and failing in the near future, including probably,
I would think, Sarah Wilkinson's case.
And also, of course, there was a case of Richard Barnard, Co
founder of Palestine Action before it was prescribed, who
had talked about making lacks a flood into a tsunami.
And the the courts are trying to suggest that that there's a
specific support for Hamas, which again, is is ridiculous.
So I'm looking forward to this, these cases 1 by 1 being knocked
out of court as we've seen with a number of cases involving anti
Zionists in the last few weeks to months.
So does this set any kind of precedent do you think is are
the, are the British, are the English courts going to take
this as a, as a stare? And, but I mean, the other point
to make here is that this is a complete waste of taxpayers
money in many ways. And but, but it's clearly
designed to be intimidatory and and have a chilling effect on on
speech. Yeah.
I mean, it's not going to be formally A precedent, but I
mean, the, the, the CPS in England and Wales will, you
know, will begin to realize that they can't get these kind of
cases to, to closure in the current circumstances, even when
they've got judges, only when there's no jury involved.
Then these cases are going to get thrown out and they're going
to, they're going to have to recognize that they're not going
to get these cases to the finishing line and they will
have to abandon them, many of them.
So I think that's it will in in fact act as a precedent because
they will realise that there's no way to get these cases.
And the, the legislation is, is very specifically written.
And if you, if you look back at the legislation, it's on the
government's website and you can see very helpfully that they,
they include all the separate revisions to the legislation
which they have made over the years to the Terrorism Act.
And those revisions have been made to try and entrap people
who are clearly not supporting organisations who exist in a
different country in West Asia, but who are talking about the
right to resist or talking about the need to resist oppression.
And the government have tried to to alter the law so that those
kinds of statements can be caught.
As if they are saying, oh, I think we should go out now and
get weapons and fight for Hamas, which of course nobody has been
saying. It's completely ridiculous.
So the the the legislation is already overweening and
Orwellian, but it can't be bashed into to bashed out of
such shape that they can convict people for for opposing genocide
and. Do you think this will have any
implications for the Supreme Court case on the prescription
of Palestine action? Well, it's hard to know.
I mean, the, the extent to which the judges in that case, and
let's remember, these are three judges who have been drafted in
the last minute to replace a seemingly more liberal judge.
So all three of them apparently have significant conflicts of
interest. One of them has even said that
his favorite clients are security and intelligence
agencies, which is a some fairly something to have on your CV,
that kind of quote. So I think that the extent to
which they will be paying attention to the, the public
mood is, is largely minimal. But the, the, the people at the,
at the centre of what was, I mean the politicians, Starmer,
the home Secretary and indeed, of course the intelligence
agencies, they will be looking at this closely and they will,
there will be a point where they will realize that they can't
pursue this line of attack anymore.
Yeah, so obviously Natalie Streicher has found herself on
the on the wrong end of this. She's seen a court case in
Jersey. Many others have been on the
wrong end of this type of legislation.
Just very briefly, David, where does this leave the kind of
intimidation that we've seen from the state for the future?
Well, I think someone like Natalie and also someone like
Sarah Wilkinson who faces their case in a few months time, they,
they have been really very, very badly treated by the state.
And if it if it was possible for them to have some kind of legal
redress, then that they should try and pursue that if they can
face it. But the, the fact that Natalie
has got off is an indication that that we can be much freer
than perhaps many of us have felt in saying what we think
about the genocide. You know, it's not, you can't
say under the law, I support Hamas, but you can say, look,
the the people of Palestine have the right to resist under
international law. It's perfectly legitimate and
legal to say that. And that I think people will,
can, will begin to get some confidence in, in the kinds of
things they can say as a result of these decisions.
David, thank you very much for joining us today.
That's been really helpful and we will keep covering this this
topic in the coming days and weeks because this actually
effects everybody no matter what their views on various
situations. So thank you for joining us,
David. But David Charles mentioned
juries there. Do we have them anymore?
Well, yeah, this is it. The devil will be found in the
detail. We're going to go back a bit and
actually address exactly what David's finished up with, which
is this idea of having any confidence in the justice
system. Now in 2020, David Lammy, then
an opposition MP, tweeted that jury trials are a fundamental
part of our democratic settlement, and he reinforced
the point by saying criminal trials without juries are a bad
idea. And yesterday, the government
put out a press release saying that the Deputy Prime Minister
of the office that David Lammy now holds, as well as being
Secretary of State for Justice, announce the reforms in
Parliament today. And this is to deal with the
headline of the press release, which is swift and fair plan to
get justice for victims. They say that the reforms were
announced in Parliament, bringing the system back from
the brink of total collapse and regaining the trust of both
victims and the public. Now they set out several methods
by which they're expecting to achieve this, or at least
telling us that this is how they're going to achieve it.
One method which indeed has been touched upon and mentioned
before is this idea of swift courts, which will see cases
with a likely sentence of three years or less heard by a judge
alone estimated to take 20% less time than a jury trial.
That was one of the sort of sub headlines.
It then went on to say guaranteed jury trials for the
most serious and almost all indictable offences, including
rape, murder, aggravated burglary, blackmail, people
trafficking, grievous bodily harm and the most serious drug
offences. So in effect, selling the
negative as positive in that they're guaranteeing juries for
those offences pertaining to those trials.
They then go on to say they're going to give magistrates the
power to hand down sentences of up to 18 months so more cases
can be heard by magistrates, freeing up the Crown Court time
for the most serious offences. And this could go up to two
years if needed. It's worth noting I think on
that point immediately that there has been quite a bit of
flip flopping on exactly what magistrates should or should not
be able to do. And I think a further reminder
that of course, in order to hold that role, do not need to have
any background in law and they only receive 10 days of training
across two years in order to be able to prosecute that job and
therefore have the potential now to hand out sentences of up to
two years. Now all of this comes from the
relatively recently published Leveson Independent Review of
the Criminal Courts, which we've reported on quite a bit on UK
Colin Brian indeed doing so on Monday.
Now a key part of this document which really does relate to what
Lammy was talking about in the House of Commons yesterday is in
the text of this document which is where Leveson himself
reflects and says I consider that long term reforms to the
setup of the criminal courts which on the whole would require
primary legislation to implement.
So to Mikes question at the start of this report, are we or
aren't we having juries done away with now?
It's very much being presented as a fait accompli.
But as Leveson suggests, there is a need for legislation.
And indeed, when David Lammy addressed the House of Commons
yesterday, he concluded his opening speech with with this
statement, which was finally, we must also be honest that this is
a problem that has taken years to build up.
So it will take years to fix. The changes I'm proposing will
require legislation which will take time to implement.
So at the same time as saying that he's going to be saving all
this time by doing away with juries and this, that and the
other, he's also putting in an enormous caveat should he fail
or indeed the government fail. Now he and they the government
ran into inconsistencies almost immediately.
I just thought I'd bring out a short clip from Lincoln Chop MP
who previously served with Scots Guards and highlighting where
one of the in the areas where this is going to run into some
sort of trouble. Can I thank the Minister for
coming here today to answer this urgent question?
I've taken note of what she said and if I may quote it back to
her. Swift, a swift and prompt trial
is a fundamental principle of fairness. 3 to 4 years delay is
deeply demoralizing and justice delayed is justice denied.
So can I ask how she squares that position with her support
of the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill?
Well, he's right to quote those things back at me.
Those are the headlines of the arguments that I'm making this
morning in relation to this UQ, in relation to the backlogs in
our England and Wales criminal courts, in relation to my
support for that Bill. It is a fair piece of
legislation and one which I stand by.
So job there just exposing some of the things that don't make
sense. Now on the same list of things
that don't quite make sense and indeed, considering the question
of why is the system so broken. We're just going to look at the
statistics for police recorded crime, which do admittedly show
an increase across the last few years with a graph that sort of
dips in the mid twenty 10's and has gone up recently.
This is not reinforced by the arrest data.
Now arrests in England and Wales, compared with the numbers
from 2006, seven or eight have gone down quite considerably.
So why is it therefore that there's a need for greater
clogging in the system? And why, I think it's pertinent
to ask, is the government, via the Ministry of Justice putting
out messages as it was in December last year about
thousands of new prison places? This was a press release that
came out in December 2024 where they said that 14,000 new prison
places with the target to open by 2031 are going to be put in
place in order to keep the public safe.
And this seems to be, as with everything else, at the basis of
anything that has the potential to be extremely unpopular and
questionable. Now, the other thing I really do
want to take a look at is the report by the Institute for
Government Performance Tracker 2025 on the criminal courts.
And in effect, they've torn what Leveson has written to shreds to
a certain extent. And I quote, at the heart of
this problem is poor productivity.
Magistrates Court and the Crown Court are processing fewer cases
per day than before the pandemic, even though average
case complexity has fallen since 2016.
This means that this means that both types of courts are failing
to keep up with demand. They then go on to say that if
these problems can be adequately addressed, many of the proposals
for radical reform, such as Sir Brian Leveson, suggested
restrictions on jury trials would not be necessary.
And I think that's a key part to come out of this report.
They also go on to say that cases where the defendant pleads
not guilty and there is a jury trial by far the most time
consuming. Well, of course they are.
And of course, the inference in suggesting that juries would be
done away with is that there might be more guilty verdicts
where there shouldn't be. Now the other thing they say for
context is the Crown Court jury trials put much more demand on
the system than any other kind, but in 2024 they made-up only
13% of all cases and 65% of hearing hours.
But the interesting thing is that the number of trials in
2024 surpassed pre pandemic levels but remained more than
1/4 below 2016, despite the fact that sitting days were slightly
higher in 2024. So the question really is why is
productivity quite so low? And indeed, Leveson appears to
have ignored the fact that courts are not spending an
unprecedented amount of time on jury trials and that total time
on guilty pleas in Crown courts fell from, sorry, fell by 22%
from 2016 to 2024. So there's absolutely something
not adding up here. But we might be seeing the law
of perhaps intended consequences, which is a graph
that shows how during 2020 when everything got shut down, it
looks very much like it's basically been the creation of
an artificial backlog. Now obviously the cry is that
there wasn't enough investment. So I just want to point out on
the House of Commons Library statistics, we've had £13
billion spent on justice in the UK, which of course equates
exactly to the amount that we've spent on death in Ukraine.
The latest statistic coming out in 7th of November for on the UK
to support the Ukraine fact sheet, very much looking like a
planned destruction of the system which Peter Hitchens is
pointing out the Daily Mail and he harks back to the 1960s where
it was only a requirement for 73,000 police versus 148,000.
Now the prison population was down at 27,000.
It's now up at over 87,000, of course with 14 more in the
pipeline. And he's going back to the
changes that were implemented by the then Home Secretary, Roy
Jenkins, starting with the removal of a requirement for the
jury verdict to be unanimous. Now, something that is talked
about quite a bit around this subject is the issue of
nullification. And I've just got a very short
clip from Daniel Shensmith. You might know him as the black
belt barrister. Just explaining a bit about
this. Nonetheless, if you are in a
trial as a barrister, you cannot mention jury nullification
because it would be contempt of court to do so, because it would
tempt the jury into making a decision that goes against the
law and the findings of evidence, which is against their
oath that they take as a member of the jury.
So. It's not an uncomplicated area
and the the link to the full videos in the show notes.
I really would recommend that you do watch it.
But the government document explaining to jurors what they
should do states quite clearly that among their legal
responsibilities they are to swear an oath or an affirmation
and to deal with the situation based only on the evidence you
hear in court. But the difficulty is, of
course, as far as contempt or indeed nullification goes, is
that a jury's decision is final. But of course, the Ministry of
Justice are trying to scare jurors into.
Threatening them effectively with prison for contempt of
court for considering nullifying a guilty verdict.
So I'll just finish off by pointing to the UK column
Dissidents Guide to the Constitution, in particular
Episode 2, which deals with exactly this, and I hope we'll
be talking about it more in Extra.
Absolutely. OK, let's let's move on then to
war and international affairs, because today is the NATO
Foreign Ministers meeting. As the war preparations ramp up,
it should be stated straight away that we're increasingly in
an increasingly insane and dangerous situation.
And just to illustrate that, here's some comments from NATO
Secretary General Mark. Ruta, we face real and lasting
dangers. Russia continues to test our
detours. Russia has violated our airspace
with jets and drones. So that's this morning.
Russia has violated our airspace with jets and drones.
And to reinforce this, EU countries continue to be
bombarded with lying media propaganda that Russia is flying
drones into European airspace. Here are just three examples in
the last few days. Now the problem for the
mainstream media is the Dutch newspaper Trial has reviewed
dozens of incidents using the platform Drone Watch and they
found that they could not verify even one of the incidents, which
is allegedly Russian made. Drones had been sent into
European airspace. The report claimed that no radar
record or debris was found that could validate Russian
authorship. And even in the case of Poland,
where allegedly Russian made drones were found, there was no
evidence that they were fired by Russians or from Russia.
And they say that at least 14 of the Dutch drone sightings were
later attributed to ordinary aircraft, helicopter ships or
even stars. It's like UFOs in many ways.
But anyway, the the map that we saw on screen there a second
ago, which was compiled by trial, showed three hobby or
tourist drones and 11 other objects that were ultimately
decided to be not drones at all. And in the Netherlands, the
Defence Department stressed recent reports near Vocal and
Eindhoven are no cause for alarm.
So according to the military police, they report hobby drones
were spotted and although the originals are it was unclear
there was no evidence of a state level threat.
So let's hear, we'll move on then.
And let's hear more from from Mark Ruto.
Conducted sabotage and spends send spy ships into our waters.
These actions are reckless and they are dangerous.
And it's not Russia alone. It is working closely with
China, North Korea and Iran to attempt to disrupt our societies
and tear up the global rules. They are preparing for long term
confrontation. Are they there preparing for
long term confrontation? Wasn't it just one week ago that
I reported on the RUSI Long War Conference and Luke Pollard's
comments there? That was just the last last
Wednesday's USE program. If you didn't see that, go back
and watch it. And then more from Ruta.
Let's listen to this. And we are responding with
strength, unity and resolve. European allies and Canada are
really stepping up defence investments and that's good.
But we cannot afford to rest on our laurels.
We all need to pull our weight and fast.
We need to develop and buy core capabilities for our defence and
invest in industry, in infrastructure and innovation.
Which just by coincidence, echoes the Starmer regime's push
to turn Britain into a war economy, which we were talking
about last week. Let's put look Pollard back on
screen again if we can. And because this is what he was
saying at the Long War Conference conference, to get to
war fighting readiness, we need a whole of society approach.
We've got to turn it into a war economy.
This is quite an incredible situation.
So let's get the last clip from from Ruta.
To stimulate production and boost resilience, we also need
to support Ukraine more. Russian missiles keep causing
death and destruction, and winter is here.
I absolutely believe that he was citing Game of Thrones there
Winter is coming. The the the war arrived.
The real war arrived when when winter was here.
I, I absolutely believe that's the kind of nonsense is going
through these people's heads at the moment.
But this just to reinforce this idea.
We reported last week on comments by French General
Fabian Mandel, who was determined to sacrifice French
children. Well, it's gone on because this
week chair of Natos Military Committee, Admiral Cabo Dragoni
gave an interview with the Financial Times and he said how
deterrence is achieved through retaliation, through preemptive
strike. This is something we have to
analyze deeply. He was absolutely calling for
preemptive preemptive strikes. Now that quote caused quite a
fraud, but it was echoed by others.
For example, here's General Fabio Many former military,
sorry former NATO chief of the General Staff, who wrote in an
article published on the 2nd of December in El Fato in Italy
that NATO is already in a war against Russia and will launch a
pre emptive attack. And also by current NATO Supreme
Commander General Christopher Cavalli.
NATO is preparing for an attack that should be so devastating as
to not allow Russia to react. In fact, if we do not succeed, a
15 year war of attrition awaits us.
And so he's echoing again the long war narrative.
But to return to the question of whether or not children should
be sacrificed, you'll be glad to know that children are saying
no. And back in May, Germany's
Institute for Generation Research found that 81% of the
country's Generation Z, Generation Z, were not prepared
to sacrifice himself and also found that 69% said they were
not willing to defend their country with a weapon.
Now the German government's plan is to increase the size of the
army by 260,000 volunteers. And if there aren't enough
volunteers, compulsory service could be instituted.
And so on the 5th of December, which is on Friday this week,
the, the parliament, the German parliament's going to decide on
their proposal on this and they're going to be
demonstrations by students in many German cities.
We don't want to end up as common cannon fodder is the
clear message. And, and so on.
So that that is the situation that we're in at the moment.
The narrative coming out of the mouth of these people becomes
increasingly it demonstrates increasing insanity in my
opinion. It absolutely does and it and it
completely ties in with the, you know, the propaganda campaign
about drones. Why on earth, given the
circumstances, would Russia be picking a fight with with NATO?
It makes no sense and it's very much obviously going the other
way around. Absolutely no.
Let's welcome finesse into the program and, and if we move over
to the Middle East and, and what's going on, sorry,
Southwest Asia and what's going on in Syria with a wall.
I thought walls were being built in the United States.
I didn't know walls were being built in in Asia.
Yeah, very interesting. Something that I was looking
into in depth over the last few days, but particularly
yesterday. So if we start, we'll we'll
basically go around the border of Syria.
So this is the border with Iraq. At the end there is a map so
that people can get an idea of what I'm actually talking about.
So this is November this year, Iraq completes 350 kilometres of
concrete border wall with Syria. Other reports have said they've
reached up to 400 kilometres. So what does this actually mean?
That Baghdad is seeking to seal the entire 618 kilometre border
with a multi layered security system, 3 metre wide trench, 3
metre deep four layer inflatable barrier observation towers,
everyone kilometre equipped with advanced thermal cameras linked
to a central monitoring system and no gases as to who is at
that central monitoring system, Integrated defence network
made-up of trenches, barbed wire and early warning systems, high
precision thermal imaging and 24/7 surveillance devices.
Of course. What is this sounding very
similar to Gaza And of course the draconian 15 minute cities
like Cabron in the occupied territories.
So this is a map from 2013. I'm just showing this to show
how it was already beginning to take shape even back in 2013,
two years into the regime change war against Syria.
The areas in black show reinforced border areas, so you
can see with Turkey in particular between Israel and
the occupied Golan territories in the South and the border wall
with Jordan leading up to the triangle between the border with
Iraq and Jordan. So then going on to Jordan
itself. Well, guess what?
Beginning actually back in 2008, but escalating under the Obama
administration. And Mike, you and I were talking
yesterday that the policy to basically destroy and
destabilise Syria did not begin with any particular president,
but it was a bipartisan policy that was continued throughout
various presidencies. So in 2016, he spent half a
billion on sophisticated electronic fencing on the
northern and eastern borders to protect the US bases.
The project began in 2008, erected surveillance towers
along 50 kilometre stretch of border, fully integrated and
networked fence, 442 kilometre border with Syria and Iraq.
As I mentioned that triangle camera studied network of ground
sensors with a file mile, five mile radius, either side of the
fence and of course centralised joint US Jordan Command centre
receiving all of the information from those surveillance blocks
on the fence itself. Then we look at under the Biden
administration again, demonstrating how this isn't
something that is relative to one particular party in the US
or one particular president. So this was in 2024, the
Department of Defence Appropriations Act.
And now I'm just showing this part to show that 397,000,000
was put to one side for the counter ISIS of Iraq and Syrian
Syria train and equip fund. Now the slightly interesting
part of this is that part of that fund is going to foreign
forces, irregular forces or groups and individuals without
of course actually naming them or identifying them.
And that that sum then is also a a portion to border security.
And if we can just move on to the next part of the ACT itself.
So the Middle East partner reimbursements section 811-0300
and 80 million to reimburse Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, Tunisia
and Oman basically for enhanced border security.
So this again began under Obama but was continued under Biden
and will continue under Trump until September 2025.
Again, I just want to show that Turkey had been building
reinforced border areas that you can see in red there.
I myself in 2018, this is a 2016 map, but in 2018 I actually went
to the north eastern border with Turkey and saw the building of
the annexation wall. And again, let's have a look at
what this actually represents. So this is the Turkey border
security to be boosted by concrete walls.
Now interesting statistics from 2025.
It's an 825 kilometre wall which is almost finished.
It's the third longest in the wall after the Great Wall of
China and the US. Mexico borders 120 border towers
with irregular patrols on either side of the border.
Seven ton concrete blocks, 3 meters high, 2 meters wide.
Surveillance includes thermal cameras, seismic and acoustic
sensors. EU funded Cobra armoured
vehicles are patrolling the wall the entire length.
Drone detection jammers. Now, this is an extraordinary
construction that is really effectively gone under the radar
in Western media and then in Lebanon.
Not only is Israel building, these are just two posts from X
talking about various areas in the South of Lebanon where
Israel has of course invaded Lebanese territory since the
ceasefire in November 2024 and is building a separation wall
inside Lebanese territory to effectively create it's
so-called buffer zone in the South, of course, totally
unlawful annexation of territory and Turkey has done the same in
northern Syria. But here comes the UK.
So, Mike, you will remember that last year we were talking about
UK reinforcement of Lebanese armed forces, but also the
establishment of watchtowers along the border with Syria,
which are of course not to protect the Lebanese, but to
effectively one the the, the pretext for for these borders is
to prevent the smuggling of weapons of mass destruction.
So we bring in the pretext for the war against Iraq, of course.
But UK military veterans were involved in the training of the
Lebanese Armed Forces, while armoured boxes used in the new
30 foot constructions were taken from towers being decommissioned
in Northern Ireland as part of the £62 million projects.
So basically Britain has also established watchtowers.
It's now suggesting that it can do the same on the southern
border between Lebanon and Israel.
And of course, clearly this is not for the benefit of these
countries, it's for the benefit of the security of Israel and
its allies that are stationed particularly in Lebanon. 115
million of taxpayers money, UK taxpayers money has been spent
on effectively reinforcing border security in Lebanon.
We can talk about that more in extra.
So now I just want to bring up a map that I drew up yesterday
which shows very clearly here exactly how Syria is effectively
being completely encircled by these border walls with massive
surveillance capabilities. So effectively, it's becoming a
tech theory cauldron. The various armed forces like
ISIS, al Qaeda and all the various affiliates are going to
be cattled inside Syria, of course, committing heinous
massacres against Syrian people. The only open area, Sorry, can I
just have the map back on for a second?
The only open area will be to the coast.
And then of course, they're facing Cyprus, which is
gradually being taken over by Israel and Israeli influence.
But also, if you look at Lebanon, it's about the
corralling of the Lebanese resistance in the South of
Lebanon there, because the border wall will effectively
close the resistance in Lebanon off from Syria.
But also if you look at the orange arrow there, the reason
I've put that there is because effectively this will isolate
Syria from Iraq and from Iran and it will isolate Lebanon from
Syria, Iraq and Iran and also Palestine from Lebanon and
Syria. So this is effectively about
corralling, imprisoning any resistance actor States and in
that area of Iraq. So again, this is compounding
the imprisonment of Syrians. If we look at, we can look at
the Yinon Plan, we can look at the clean break doctrine.
But I just drew up the map of the new Middle East, which was
published in the early 2000s. But where I've circled the map,
you can actually see that on the border with Syria, the intention
is to build in Iraqi Sunni Muslim state, which effectively
will again further distance Syria from any assistance that
it might receive either from Iran or from any of the
resistance actors in the region. Quite, quite an incredible
situation, quite an incredible development.
Vanessa, do you have any idea what the the total amount of
money that's being spent on this is?
Oh, very difficult to tell because, I mean, Turkey is
running its own project. Raytheon in Tucson, AZ is the
prime contractor for the Jordanian wall.
Britain, as we've said to date have spent 115,000,000.
But it's it's, it's up in the hundreds of millions that have
been poured into this project. Any thoughts?
Well, I mean, that's a lot of monitoring as well, you know,
all these sort of sensors and whatnot.
Do you get, do you get the sense that that that data will be
shared, especially with Israel? Yeah, of course it's going into
a central command which is manned by the Zionist bloc,
particularly the US and the UK. So of course, yes, it's entirely
for the benefit of Israel. Yeah, OK.
Well, we will discuss this more an extra.
Thank you, Vanessa. OK, if you like what the UK
column does, you'd like to support us.
We do need your financial help. If you look at the front page of
the website, there is a link there take you to a page that
explains how you can help us financially.
If you can't help us financially, please do share our
material because that helps us defeat the censorship regime in
the UK and elsewhere. Tonight, 7:00 PM Germ warfare
has been to Alex Newman. Sustainable Development Evil is
the title for that and at 9:00 PM Carl will have Silicon Steel
and discussing how the US China marriage went SAR.
Yesterday's 1:00 interview was Sandy Adams speaking to Andrew
Bridging. That's on the website now.
So if you can, if you haven't seen that, please do have a
look. It's doing very well on YouTube.
So thank you to everybody that's watching on YouTube.
And I just want to mention this because Matt Campbell, who's
been on this program many times, is attempting to get a new
inquest into his brothers death from during 911 into the Supreme
Court to to get another look at that.
He's almost reached his target for the amount of money he needs
to raise. Apparently this is now going to
be heard in the Supreme Court. If you can possibly help with
this, there's only about another 1000 lbs or so to go on the on
the goal of on the crowdfunder. It's on the crowdfunder website.
The link will be in the show notes and also if you want to
get a bit more of the background have a look on the UK column
website. But also Ted Walters from IC
911's just done an interview with Redacted on this case and
on the progress on the case. So do have a look at that if you
possibly can. OK, Now let's let's move on then
to the issue of the Don Sturgis inquiry.
This, of course follows on from the Skripal case, the issue of
the claimed Novichok poisoning in Salisbury.
And well, the Don Sturgis inquiry was running earlier this
year and the inquiry report is due to be published tomorrow.
Now we're going to have a main segment on this on Friday's news
program, but I just want to welcome.
Tim Norman to the programme. Tim, you wrote the the day of
the script all the big article on the UK column website and a
whole host of other content for propaganda and focus and other
places. But just very briefly, what are
your thoughts on on what's likely to come out in the
inquiry tomorrow? I think, well, I don't think the
UK government ever wants to hold a a public inquiry, but I think
it really didn't want to hold this public inquiry.
It's shrouded a great deal of stuff in secrecy.
It's hidden a lot behind closed doors and as you say, it relates
to this 2018 poisoning. So it's seven years in the
making. It's really been quite a long
time for the Sturgis family to try and find some kind of
justice or some answers to what led to the death.
It's brought by Dawn Search's daughter, with Michael
Mansfield, the barrister behind her and looking for, as I say,
answers to what could have killed Dawn, who was apparently
killed by this nerve agent Novichok that was abandoned in
Salisbury after a failed attempt to kill Sergo Skripal.
And well, what are your views on whether Novichok was actually
used on the day? I would say the evidence is
rather slight. It actually bears comparison to
the Duma atrocity in 2018, which is only a month or so later, in
that in that case, we know from OPCW whistleblowers there was no
nerve agent and yes, there was mass casualties.
In this case we apparently had a deadly nerve agent, far more
deadly than sarin, which was allegedly the use of Duma.
That produced an initial case at least.
No casualties until four months later.
I don't think. Yeah, sorry.
Go ahead. I think the answer is probably
that Novichok was a fabricated event, just as sarin was
fabricated in the Duma case. Yes, I think I would concur with
that. And particularly bearing in mind
we keep mentioning it, but we just should keep remembering it.
That the chief medical officer of the United Kingdom suggested
that if you thought you had been coming in contact with with
Novichok, that the best course of action was to wash your
clothes or whatever as normal and wipe things down with wet
wipes. I mean, the the narrative was
just so separated from reality that if if if there had been
actually a nerve agent on the streets that it just didn't make
any sense. Now, look, I want to Tim.
Well, first of all, before we come on to this, I mean, you
were talking about the secrecy involved in this.
When the report comes out, how are they going to deal, do you
think, with the issues that were held in secret?
I think they're going to gloss over them.
I mean, it's, it is extremely serious, although as you
suggest, it's comic. It's comical in many ways.
The way that we were asked to respond to it.
It was, of course, setting the ground for the war, incoming war
in Ukraine as it then was. And it involved the death of a,
of a, of a, of a innocent woman under whatever circumstances.
But I don't think they're going to go into any detail about the
very problematic elements that came up during the inquiry,
though I do look forward to going into them in detail with
you on Friday. There's a great deal of odd
evidence that emerged despite the British government's attempt
to keep a very tight sort of control over the narrative.
So we would urge everybody to keep an eye out for that report
tomorrow and have a look at the mainstream media reporting and
then come and see us on Thursday, On Friday, sorry to
get the update, but just to finish this segment, I want to
let everybody know that next Thursday, the 11th of the 11th
of December, that's tomorrow week, we will be holding an
event in Salisbury, which we're calling Skripal and Novichok.
What didn't happen if we could put that on screen.
And so this is not yet up on Eventbrite, but will be up on
Eventbrite on Friday. So tickets will go on sale on
Friday. They're going to be 10 lbs.
Now look, what we're aiming to do here, Tim, very briefly, is
to get people, local people engaged on this.
So while we're very happy to see UK column members and UK column
viewers and listeners joining us for that, we'd actually very
much like to encourage as many people that are aware of what we
do to to invite people that aren't to come to that event
which you'll be speaking at. Yes, I'm looking forward to it.
We're planning a tour of the city, I believe.
Yes. Well, that's something else
which might be going on as well, but we'll talk more about that
on Friday as well. So Tim, thank you very much for
joining us. We're looking forward to seeing
you on Friday. Let's move on then, Charles.
Yeah, just a very brief piece extending really Tim's theme of
controlling the narrative. And as if it wasn't undignified
enough, having all the for all brought into the public about
the decision of West Midlands Police to ban the fans of
Maccabee Tel Aviv a short while ago.
It has got worse. And with thanks to Declassified
UK for bringing this to everybody's attention.
But the Home Affairs Select Committee met, and we've just
got a very short clip of a video of them declaring their
interests before the hearing. Before we start, there are some
declarations of interest. I I will declare that I am an
officer and member of the Conservative Friends of Israel.
And a member of the Labour Friends of Israel.
I've received a donation of £2000 from the Lib Dem Friends
of Israel an. Amateurish Labour MP.
And in fact, as reported by Declassified, there was actually
somebody present who didn't even declare that they'd recently
made a trip to Israel. So as if anyone needed the the
type of confirmation that there really are undue influences
everywhere, that is it. Vanessa, let's welcome you back
to the programme and what's going on with respect to Trump,
Israel and Syria. Yeah, One thing I, I I failed to
point out on the map that was up on screen, but we can talk about
it and extra is the potential for a wall to be built basically
cutting the South of Syria from the north to the South of
Damascus. But anyway, we're seeing again,
these these manufactured rifts between Trump and Israel.
So allegedly Trump warns Israel not to interfere in Syria
because of course he's such a mega supporter of the AL Qaeda
takfiri regime there. Absolute nonsense.
It's, it's just effectively plausible deniability for the
United States for what Israel is, is for the crimes that
Israel is committing in southern Syria, which include in the last
few days, an Israeli raid in southern Syria, which killed 13
in the village itself in the South, encroaching into Syrian
territory beyond the 1974 territorial agreement in
relation to the occupied Golan territories.
Just a very quick video of the incursion by the Israeli forces
that included helicopters as well.
And they had to leave one of their Humvee vehicles behind,
which they then later bombed to prevent it falling into the
hands of civilians in Syria. So here's the RAID itself.
So I mean sort of extraordinary scenes, bearing in mind the
majority of these people were civilians.
The claim by Israel, of course, was that it was a Hamas
affiliated group that they were trying to root out there.
Just a very quick map here to show where Beit Jin, the
village, actually is. It's in that southern section
that Israel is effectively trying to occupy and annex.
And then in fact, another video has been released by various
social media channels showing Israeli tanks actually entering
Syrian territory and moving around quite happily with
absolutely no restrictions whatsoever.
While this has been going on for some time, this is actually one
of the first video evidence that we've had of it.
And then if we can just go forward to the map itself, which
is the occupation of Syrian territory.
So this shows how Israel has basically the red section shows
how far it has encroached beyond the 1974 agreement line.
It's about 40 to 20 kilometres from Damascus itself, 19 new
bases and taken over 800 square kilometres of Syrian territory.
So clearly we know that Israel doesn't leave territory once
it's occupied it neither does the US.
So it appears to be very clear what Israel's intentions are.
Thank you for that and thank you very much for that.
Charles, what's going on? Let's come back to the UK then
and Children's Schools Bill. Yeah, very briefly.
I mean, unfortunately as with so many subjects, there's, there's
not really time to give as much coverage as we'd like.
But still it should be noted that there was a debate in the
House of Commons on the on the progress of the Children's
well-being and Schools Bill on Monday.
And the gist of it is that really there is very little
opposition to many of the intrusive measures.
But what's been of particular concern across the board really
is this idea of having a unique identifier, effectively a type
of digital ID for children. But Gideon Amos was notable in
speaking out about exactly this issue.
And I'll just quote what he said, which was let us remember
that it gives any public body the ability to share any
information, whether or not it is right, correct and accurate
without the knowledge or consent of parents.
Anyone who thinks the public sector is good at looking after
our data and getting it accurate has probably been living on the
moon. Now, there's obviously much more
to come out about the the debate and the direction of this bill.
But bearing in mind what's being said about digital identity in
the round at the moment, it's important that Amos's remarks
are taken note of, especially since they're so discordant with
the majority of other parliamentarians, which seems
perfectly extraordinary given his position.
And indeed, you'd think that everybody would be well aware of
exactly that fact. OK, now we have a report from
Wilk also. We do, yes, on the case of Derek
Dimock and the inquiry there, sorry, the inquest that's that's
taken place into his death in 2020 and the suggestion that in
fact it was due to treatment with midazolam in particular
that ended his life. This is a really, really
important case. It's been going on for some
time. It's been a miracle for that.
The family have actually got it to inquest.
A lot of families don't even get this far.
It costs an awful lot of money to get a case to inquest.
It's very difficult to get evidence because a lot of
families do not know this has happened to their loved ones and
those that do, when they try to pursue to get the medical
evidence, they're told no, they can't have it.
Hello, this is Will Coles with reporting for UK column today.
I'm now outside the Coroner's Court down here in Suffolk
reporting on the inquest into the death of Derek Dimock, aged
86. At the time of death in 2020 at
the Royal Trinity Hospice, Derek Dimmick was administered
midazolam, a respiratory suppressant, and is being
alleged by his family, including his son Paul, that he was killed
by this during the height of the so-called COVID pandemic.
This case has dragged on a number of years.
Obviously it's been five years now since the death of Mr.
Dimmick with many delays and extensions to this inquest which
was originally billed for only around 4 days.
Now another four days have been billed here in December.
This is the first day of those. Today I was actually denied
access to the main court and was provided instead with a video
link. We were told that the main
court, despite it not being in full use today, and I did get a
glimpse inside One of the other courts which was absolutely
huge, could not be used for this case and instead people were
funnelled into a smaller court which did not have access.
Instead I was provided a video link where I could see about 1/4
of the coroner's face and none of the rest of the courtroom.
In addition, we've had a number of other issues with the case
today. Of the two nurses who were meant
to be the focus, we have heard that one of the nurses was
unable to attend due to medical reasons.
The other nurse has disappeared and apparently cannot be
contacted. Much of the day has been
consumed by wrangling over which written questions could be
submitted to the first nurse. Through these questions we were
able to look at many of the main themes of this inquest,
including nurse awareness around formazinol, which is meant to be
the antidote to midazolam, irregularities over medical logs
and whether these were backdated in terms of records.
Why more Antonox was not given to Mr. Dimock when Antonox
appeared to work earlier on. Why he appeared to have been
from the medical records, denied pain relief for 58 minutes.
How a holistic assessment was conducted when he was either
comatose or unresponsive. How early he had been agitated
and drowsy when previously alleged to be talking, drinking
Walter and briefly walking. The disposal of the drugs used
and whether these were properly logged and finally the
controlled drug book being destroyed during the
investigation. Earlier I spoke to Amanda Hunter
and Andrew Bridging, both of whom have a keen stake in this
inquest. It's the third time I've come
down on the third session. I was approached by the Dimmick
family back in 2023 when I was an MP and I wrote to the then
coroner for Southwark. A man called Andrew Harris asked
him to consider expediting A inquest into the death of Derek
Dimmick, where he went into hospital with gout or Respite
Hospice with gout on a Friday. He was suffering from dementia
and had been for quite a while and by Monday morning he was he
was dead and the evidence showed that he was immediately put on
midazolam and morphine. During COVID, many of the people
who from my group, families against involuntary medical
euthanasia, their loved ones were basically euthanized, not
only with midazolam and morphine that that is in some of the
cases, but in many of the cases it's basically the Liverpool
Care pathway under another name. So what happened was families
were told that their loved one was dying and they were now end
of life and they were put on, they were dehydrated, they were
not given food. They deteriorated.
They were then sedated and then put on end of life drugs.
Not all died with the because of the end of life drugs, but many
did. Obviously I was aware of NG163
implemented by Matt Hancock on the 4th of April 2020 as a
protocol for the treatment of vulnerable elderly not suitable
for ventilation who's suspected of suffering from COVID it.
Was basically the Liverpool Care pathway, which is supposed to be
banned in 2014, went on steroids and you can see evidence from
that from both the Scottish COVID inquiry and the UK COVID
inquiry. You have families on record,
care home managers on record saying that they called the GP,
asked for antibiotics, they were refused and they said send the
end of life care. Well, what we've actually got
here is the cold blooded murder, I believe involuntary
euthanization of 10s of thousands of vulnerable elderly.
What we do know about G163, which is the parallel track.
So stay at home until your lips go blue, Come to hospital, if
you're healthy enough, we'll put you on a ventilator.
And about 85% of people died and were put down as having died of
COVID. Or if you're vulnerable and
elderly, not suitable for ventilation, we'll put you on
midazolam morphine. And 100% of the people died and
we've been put down as COVID deaths.
During COVID, it really was phenomenal what was happening.
We believe 10s of thousands of people died during COVID on
these protocols. And these protocols are
continuing, not on the scale that they did before, but they
are continuing. And it's extremely concerning in
the context of the city's suicide bill, which is coming
in. The two nurses who are witnesses
once said that she's ill and got a sick note and the other one
apparently is uncontactable. They were supposed to be here to
be cross examined by both sides today and and it's just not
really acceptable. But people can dodge being able
to give evidence. It's been months and months
since we were here with the last session of this case and it's
very interesting that as a result of the letter I wrote in
2023, we're here today. The then coroner for Southwark,
Andrew Harris, approved permission for Derek Dimock's
inquest. Then he retired and I had CC D
into my letter, the Chief Coroner for England, who's also
now retired. But back in 2023, despite the
fact that the inquest was approved, the Chief Coroner for
England wrote to parliamentary standards and tried to get me
disciplined for attempting to influence the judge.
I don't think the establishment want this case.
I think it's actually far more dangerous for the establishment
than the vaccine. We hope that this will be a test
case and we hope that this will this will expose what has been
going on and we hope that the family get justice because they
deserve justice. I can see why the establishment
really want to keep a lid on this, on this information.
And this is a totemic coroner's inquest.
And that's why, quite honestly, it's being dragged out and
dragged out. And as we all know that justice
delayed is justice denied, and justice is being denied here.
This is just the first of four days allocated here in December
and it seems that this is going to be a case to watch with many
wider implications. This is Will Coleshill reporting
for UK column. So huge thanks to Will for that.
And this issue of midazolam and morphine use is not going to go
away anytime soon. So undoubtedly we'll be coming
back to it. But another issue which isn't
going to go away anytime soon, Charles, is the issue of water
supplies and the requirement for the use of water to cool data
centres that we are building increasingly.
What have you got on this? Well, it's something we've been
keeping a keen eye on as as big Tech continues to plunder all
the natural resources that are there and take all of our
electricity at the same time. We're going to have a look at
Amazon who are making the resplendent claim to be
interested in water conservation and replenishment efforts around
the world. Now, they've got much
promotional material to apparently support this claim,
but we're going to look in particular at a project that
they've got in Oregon and they've said on their on their
website, their water replenishment website.
We're excited to announce Amazon's first water
replenishment project in Oregon as Amazon Web Services continues
to make progress towards its big commitment to being water
positive, whatever that means. By 20-30 they say that they're
going to be able to restore as much as 2 billion litres of
water a year using nature based solutions, which makes one
question whether actually they can really claim responsibility
for restoring or replenishing the water in the 1st place
because they're obviously not creating it themselves.
That's slightly beside the point.
And the issue here is that all is certainly not well, at least
according to a number of sources in Oregon.
And here we've got Tekorian reporting on an investigation
conducted by Rolling Stone in which the nuts and bolts of it
are that nitrate levels in the water there are being recorded
at 10 times their normal concentration.
Aquifers are reported as being contaminated.
Now it's important to clarify that there were existing
nitrates from agricultural natural chemicals in the water
and it's not that the level has been increased by Amazon, but
the process of concentration has been happening, they say, by the
process of condensing in the cooling of the Amazon data
centres. Now there's also meant to be
alongside this a significant increase in Oregon in particular
of cancers and occurrences of miscarriage.
Amazon of course have refuted all of this, but it it, I think
really the the coincidence cannot be ignored, particularly
at a time where water has become quite such a sensitive issue.
And I think just for the UK column audience, well and indeed
they particularly based in the UKI would just point out that
they have got a water replenishment project running in
the Thames Valley at the moment. So we will keep our eyes on that
very clear way in the coming months.
So we got to end there. Unfortunately, we're out of
time. I'm going to say massive thank
you to Vanessa and Charles and to Tim Norman and to David
Miller for joining us today. We'll be back in a couple of
minutes on the live stream. If you UK column member for some
UK column news extra hope to see you there.
Don't forget the videos going out tonight and also tomorrow at
1:00 PM. And we'll see you at 1:00 PM as
usual on Friday for another UK column news.
See you then. Bye bye.
Bye.