Good afternoon. It's Friday the 17th of October
2025, just after 1:00. Welcome to UK column News.
I'm your host, Mike Robinson. Joining me, My coast is today,
Patrick Henickson. Welcome to the programme,
Patrick. Great to be with you, Mike.
And we have journalist Mark Anderson joining us by video
link today and well, actually not from the United States this
week, but in fact in the other UK column studio at the moment.
So, uh, we'll see him in a minute.
So now looking, uh, later in the program, we're going to be
looking at censorship, of course, uh, Mr. and a the latest
advice, uh, from MI 5, uh, the NATO defence ministers meeting
and of course, Gaza. We're going to begin today,
Patrick, with anti-Semitism in universities.
What's going on there? Well, this is an incredible
story and we're pleased to be joined by Basil Valentine, who's
going to be talking about this next story with us.
We'll connect him in a moment, but for now, let's just bring
this up on screen. This is our lead story today.
A pro Israel group gets 1,000,000 in UK government
funding to quote, identify anti-Semitism.
What in earth is going on here? And now we can see this story is
going to be very controversial. The Union of Jewish Students
will offer some 600 training sessions to university staff
over the coming weeks to help them quote, identify harassment
and hate and facilitate open and respectful debate, says the
Department for Education in their latest press release.
And it goes on. The Department for Education
warns that universities could face action if they do not
protect Jewish students from harassment.
And they're referring to the pro Palestinian demonstrations,
Mike, which have been going on not just around this country,
but Europe and the world. And it goes on to say most
British universities refer to the IHR as definition of
anti-Semitism, which free speech defenders say attempts to impose
political censorship on valid criticisms of Israel.
Something we've talked a lot about on this program previously
here. And Prime Minister Keir Starmer
is planning said the planned student protests were, quote, UN
British and lacked respect for others.
So protesting A genocide apparently is UN British,
according to the PM. And officials in the department
also say they should ban protests that are intrusive and
disruptive. And here is one of the most
important parts of this. And we'll, we'll talk to our our
guest in a moment. The funding recipient, the Union
Jewish Students, has links to the World Zionist Organization,
which funds illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank and E
Jerusalem. So this story goes a lot deeper.
Let's let's connect our guest, Basil Valentine.
He is a journalist and broadcaster based in the UK.
Basil, welcome to the program and tell us about this story.
Basil, this is hugely controversial.
I just get the feeling, Basil, that what's happening on the
other side of the Atlantic seems to be now happening on this side
of the Atlantic. But welcome to the program.
Great to be with you Patrick. Yes, this was announced by the
woman who would be deputy leader of the Labour Party, Bridget
Phillipson. Speaking to Laura Kunzberg on
her programme on Sunday, Kunzberg reminded Phillipson
that she had declared a national emergency.
Of what? Anti-Semitism, of course, on
university campuses back in May, And Kunzberg teed Phillipson up
by asking, well, what now are you going to do about it?
Whereupon Phillipson unveiled this huge funding package for an
organization, the Union of Jewish Students, which boasts of
its ties with the Israeli government.
There's a clip of Nina Friedman of the Union of Jewish Students
talking to Isaac Herzog and boasting of the fact that there
are former members of the Union of Jewish Students in prominent
positions in the Israeli government.
So you can't really get a cigarette paper between the
Union of Jewish Students and the regime in Tel Aviv.
Koonsberg then went on to quote the charity Stand With Us and
Other virulently pro Israel advocacy group who made the
entirely unsubstantiated claim that anti Israel students at
1:00 unnamed British university had compiled a list of Jewish
students for harassment. Now there's no evidence
presented by Kuenssberg or Stand with Us to back this claim up.
No evidence, therefore of its veracity or otherwise.
But the Manchester synagogue attack and to a large extent the
ceasefire, are increasingly being used by the authorities
and as a reason to say right, you've had your protests over
genocide, that's enough now time to shut up again or face the
consequences. The Office for Students, which I
didn't know, is the regulatory body for academic institutions
in the UK. The director of Free Speech,
Arif Ahmed has said that there would be sanctions for
universities in Britain if they failed to toe the line
basically. And it remains to be seen the
seen the extent to which that means clamping down on
legitimate protest against genocide.
So this is developing all the time.
We don't know what's in this so-called anti-Semitism training
being provided by the Union of Jewish Students.
And yeah, this goes with another 2,000,000 being announced for
Holocaust education in secondary schools.
That, of course, refers only to the events of the Second World
War, not the Gaza Holocaust. And is using coercive methods to
intimidate higher education institutions in order to clamp
down on student protests, to clamp down on free speech or
what they call anti-Semitism on campuses, IE protesting a
genocide in Gaza, withholding funding, withholding federal
funding. Do you see the same kind of
coercive measures coming into play here?
Yeah, exactly. It's straight out of the Trump
playbook and Kuenssberg on Sunday morning, and indeed the
entire British government, establishment media and the rest
are are determined to keep reinforcing the entirely
mendacious narrative that anti Zionism is anti-Semitism.
This loops back in of course, to Professor David Miller's case
cases now and Nina Friedman, the individual I just said was
boasting to Eyes and Herzog about Union of Jewish Students
alumni being in prominent positions in Israel.
So if you can claim that anti Zionism is anti-Semitism, then
of course you can clamp down on all sorts of things.
And that's why it's so important that David Miller wins against
the appeal and that anti Zionism becomes enshrined in UK law by
precedent as a belief worthy of respect in a democratic society.
Because there's no doubt Israel's being badly rattled by
the breadth and depth and strength and numbers of people
showing solidarity for the slaughtered and mutilated and
starved of Gaza. And so they will keep up.
They are absolutely relentless. They will keep up their attempts
to, you know, intimidate, silence, clamp down on protest
wherever possible using front groups like Stand With Us and
the Union of Jewish Students. And the the Times just ran this
story, I think it was in today's paper Basel.
Maybe you could tell us a bit more about this.
The headline is Jewish students call for action after pro
Palestinian protests. What exactly is happening here?
Well, the headline says it all really.
The the headline by the Times there again deliberately
conflates pro Palestinian protests with intimidation of
Jewish students. First of all, that obviously is
in itself anti-Semitic because it ignores the increasing number
of anti Zionist Jewish students, which is a absolutely key point,
particularly among young people. Of course support for the
genocide is crumbling, it's cratering.
So they're trying to shore it up by conflating any form of pro
Palestinian solidarity with anti-Semitism.
Melanie Phillips published an article in the Times, I believe,
or it might have been the Jewish Chronicle a few months ago,
saying any form of Palestinian solidarity is anti-Semitism.
Now that's the sort of extremist maximalist line that you get
from ultra Zionists like her. But that's the tone being taken
in that headline is that, you know, pro Palestine protests are
somehow intimidatory towards Jewish students inherently.
So there was an article in on the BBC website which casually
said, oh, at these protests, students could be heard shouting
free Palestine as if that was, you know, somehow in itself an
anti-Semitic chant. Now, of course, on Friday we've
got an important watershed when the result of the government's
appeal against the decision by the High Court to grant a
judicial review into the prescription of Palestine action
will be heard. We'll we'll know whether or not
the judicial review will indeed proceed.
Because one of the things that the Office for Students has said
that is that they may withhold funding, withhold student grants
and generally sanction universities if there appears to
be support among students for prescribed organisations.
And by that of course they mean Palestine action.
So that's an absolutely crucial decision.
And should the High Court allow the judicial review to go ahead,
then the scholars are saying there's every chance the ban on
Palestine action will be overturned.
That will obviously represent a major defeat for the Israel
lobby and cause endless wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Yeah, and clearly that's his weapon, weaponizing the issue in
order to quell free speech of students.
But we'll bring that headline back up on screen from the
Times. What's more concerning here,
even Basil, is if it's not bad enough, university chiefs In the
subtext here, university chiefs have been urged to expel
students after these societies shared posts on Instagram of
Hamas fighters during October 7th.
So expelling students for social media posts about things that
are happening in the news. I find this to be a very
slippery slope. Go ahead.
Well, you know, absolutely. It's always a full court press
from the Israel lobby. You know, they never give an
inch to, you know, they're determined to harass docks
people to the maximum extent. I saw a headline this morning, I
haven't had time to research it, saying that Palestine activists
are being targeted to have their bank accounts closed as well, so
we shouldn't be surprised by this at all.
You know, one would hope that it could go to court should any
student be expelled for sharing a meme or a post.
Whether or not they endorse the actions of the people in the
picture or whoever they may be, I've no idea.
But obviously it's an extremely perverse, indeed inverted
morality where you can cheer on the perpetrators of genocide,
but you're not allowed to speak out against it.
I mean, Mike, the issue of academic freedom is one thing
and David Miller has brought that issue to the fore with his
case. But now we're getting also using
the same issue is being applied to students in order to sort of
police what can be said, what can't be said.
I don't think this this kind of goes against all of the
principles of, you know, the UK higher education, which has
always been a world leader. Yeah.
But I think this goes beyond just higher education.
We we look at what's happened in the United States with, you
know, particularly foreign students in the United States
being targeted, being expelled from the country.
Again, we have the migrant issue in the UK as well.
And so if if the if one of the targets of this, which it seems
to be is student protest, then undoubtedly we're going to see
quite a bit. Are we going to see sort of ICE
style people being scooped up off the streets?
I style it like like we're saying in the United States.
And and my other question would be, what is the response to the
university is going to be? Because of course, they're
already complaining bitterly about reductions in income as a
result of fewer foreign students coming in and the restrictions
on foreign students that are being talked about.
So, so if, if this starts to affect the, the the bottom
financial line, are the universities actually going to
run with this? I mean, obviously, obviously,
there's massive pressure on them to do so.
And in the case of David Mueller, we see that they're
very enthusiastic to do so in some respects.
But if it actually starts hitting their bottom line, what
happens then? Oh, they're already under
pressure for wanting to ban, you know, Chinese foreign students,
which comprise a very large block of high tuition paying
overseas students that have helped to subsidize UK higher
education in a certain way. But Basil, just we have one
minute left. What it's ironic that this is
happening and you're having record numbers of people on the
streets in London. The last Palestinian March this
past weekend, 600,000 people took to the streets in, in, in
the the British capital. The irony of that is incredible.
They're going in two different directions, the public and the
the, the authorities on this. Your final thoughts?
Well, that's been the case for a long time.
I mean, you know, if you hold the whole world, you'll find
that it's increasingly anti Zionist.
Of course it is because they've been perpetrating genocide.
But after the so-called ceasefire, which Israel is
managing to regularly breach, of course, so far a couple of dozen
Palestinians were killed yesterday.
The narrative and the optics are, well, they're attempting to
change them basically say, look, you know, Trump, Netanyahu,
Sharm El Sheikh, it's all wonderful.
So now there's no reason to protest against what's happening
in Gaza. It's all over.
Well, it isn't all over. You know, innumerable war crimes
and crimes against humanity have been committed, and supporters
of those crimes are still populating government, House of
Commons and everything else. We've got a long, long way to go
to see not just peace in the Middle East, but justice as
well, and the perpetrators of genocide brought to justice.
So people, I have no doubt, will and should carry on
demonstrating until that is the case.
Ladies and gentlemen, Basil Valentine, thank you so much for
joining us on the UK column News this week.
Much appreciated. Thank you.
Absolutely. Thank you.
And and just a final, a final thought here, this incredible
piece by Jonathan Cooke, who is just an outstanding journalist
on this issue, will bring this up on screen and in the headline
says it all, Mike, Israel is the excuse to snatch away freedoms
we once took for granted. We're talking about freedom of
speech, freedom of assembly. This issue or this alliance with
Israel's being used, it's being instrumentalized on both sides
of the Atlantic to reduce basic rights.
And Jonathan Cook is, it's just a beautifully written piece.
I encourage people, we'll include the link in the show
notes so people can read this, find this article, read it, and
share it with your friends. It's so concise, the way Cook
has laid out this really disturbing trend.
Thank you, Thank you, Patrick and thank you Basil.
Now let's move on then to online safety related issues.
Now a lot of the floor in the EU over the last period of time has
been around chat control and well, what is that?
Well, it's the idea that the platforms will be required to to
assess the types of content they're being uploaded to the
social media platforms and censor the content before it
ever reaches the social media platform.
So anyway, the the good news is though, that the E U.S. chat
control legislation seems to have, at least for the moment,
hit the buffers. As I say, for those that don't
know, this is the proposed legislation which is being sold
to the public as a mechanism for controlling the uploading of
child sexual abuse material to Internet Internet platforms.
And as I say, it would require platforms to scan content as
it's being uploaded. It's a deeply unpopular idea
because no one actually is stupid enough to believe that
child sexual abuse material is where it would stop.
So it and and there is a certain recognition that C Sam is now
being used as the sort of poster child for, you know, general
censorship. So the EU Justice and Home
Affairs Council was supposed to vote on Tuesday this week.
And to quote them, they said the C Sam proposal is no longer on
the agenda of the meeting for the ministers of Justice and
Home Affairs which took place, which will take place on Monday
and Tuesday. This is a retrospective
statement and the Council's cancellation was probably
because of opposition, mainly coming from Germany.
Now, if Germany had supported the proposal, the regulation
would advance to the final, what are called trilogue negotiations
between the European Council, the European Parliament and the
European Commission. The Netherlands and Poland were
among the states that opposed chat control, France and Ireland
amongst the countries that back it.
And the EU Home Affairs spokesperson said that the
Danish presidency is likely to reintroduce the proposal towards
the end of the year. So as I say, it's hit the
buffers for now, but not forever.
And on Friday, then that's Friday.
Last week, ministers from 27 European countries, led by the
Danish presidency, signed a declaration here it is the
Jetlin Declaration, shaping a safe online world for minors.
And it said that legislation must be effectively implemented
to ensure ensure child online safety.
We need digital bouncers, said Caroline Stage, who's the Danish
digital affairs minister. Digital bouncers to ensure that
the Internet is safe place to be and the children are not granted
access when they're not old enough.
It's crucial that we stand strong together in Europe if we
want to make a real difference. Now I've made the word we bold
on that graphic. Because the question is, who is
the way that she's talking about?
Because she's not talking about we the people.
She's talking about we the, the, the Eurocrats and we need to
stand together. And she's talking about the
other member States and the other leaders and member states
maybe aren't quite so on the same page with this.
So then in the meantime, here in the UK, Ofcom has announced the
roll out of what they're describing as perpetual hash
matching technology. This is a what they describe as
a powerful automated tool that can detect and swiftly move CSAM
material before it spreads further.
And of course, this is effectively our equivalent of
the chat control legislation in in the EU.
And they were particularly talking about file sharing
services. This is, they say, continuing
the roll out of technology which scans content is being uploaded
to platforms. So exactly the same as the EU.
And the two services that they were speaking about in their
press release have agreed to roll this out.
They because they were deemed to have serious compliance issues
and they were being threatened by Ofcom, but because they did
what they were told like good little little children
themselves. No further actions being taken
at this time. But the threat hangs over their
heads. Of course, many more of these
types of organisations have chosen to withdraw from the UK
instead of complying with Ofcom. Here's an example of a file
sharing application which is no longer available in the UK.
But the issue here is that some services that had taken this
action were including on, although that particular page
that you saw on screen there didn't have any information
about VPNs, others did. And Ofcom said that it's clear
that services who choose to block access by people in the UK
must not encourage or promote ways to avoid these
restrictions. So they're, if they attempt to
tell people, you know, just just install AVPN, that that would be
considered a circum, A contravention, and then they
would, Ofcom would be attempting to, to find them or something
like that. And I mean, what could they
possibly be doing here? Well, here's an example. 4 Chan
has not responded to Ofcom's request for a copy of its
illegal harms risk assessment. That's 4 Chan's illegal harms
risk assessment, nor a second request from Ofcom relating to
its qualifying worldwide revenue.
So Ofcom has fined 4 Chan 20,000 lbs + a daily, daily penalty of
£100 per day. And that began on Wednesday of
this week. And that'll run for either 60
days or until 4 Chan provides them with the information,
whichever is sooner. I'm sure 4 Chan is really
panicking Patrick. Well, besides, beside the point
here, but the Mike, the whole point of this is it's criminal
activity. You know this material, there's,
there's laws on the books, right?
Right. Precisely yes.
And so, so that means you have to take away all of the rights
of the entire population. Of course you do because of a
few criminals who are already subject to criminal laws and and
prosecution anyway. Yes.
So that the, so that would mean if kids, if a few kids got a
hold of alcohol, somehow we have to ban alcohol throughout
society, Yes. Or if kids got a hold of
cigarettes, we we must ban cigarettes across the whole of
society. It's the same.
It's the same mentality. It is absolutely.
Then if you remember back to the beginning of this year, the UK
regime imposed an order on Apple to cause Apple to provide a
backdoor to the strong encryption of iCloud services in
the UK. And that would have meant in
practice that Apple would have to remove these protections
globally. Apple fought the issue at the
time and won. Now the UK regime is trying
again. So if we just put that back on
screen, this is the latest from Apple because they've had to
bring back this page which is telling us that they can no
longer offer advanced data protection in the United Kingdom
to new users. It is only for new users.
So anybody that has been operating this already and
continue to operate it in the meantime, but Apple has not said
that that is guaranteed forever because this is an ongoing legal
process. And Apple's basically saying,
you know, that they're attempting to provide what they
describe as the highest level of security for personal data and
so on, and they're hopeful that they're going to be able to do
that again in the future. So I just wanted to very briefly
remind everybody where this is coming from.
This is the Investigatory Paris Amendment Act 2024.
And so this is an act of parliament.
It's been going for, as you can see, for about a year or so.
And let's just remind ourselves what this means.
So the government decided to reduce already weak protections
against security services using our data illegally.
It has removed a reasonable expectation of privacy.
It has not explained why reduction of privacy is
necessary rather than convenient.
It potentially permits bulk data collection of facial images and
social media data. And of course this feeds into
the whole digital ID thing. It absolutely permits bulk
collection of Internet connection data.
It's been doing that for a long time, and expands the range of
politicians who can authorise surveillance of other
politicians. But here's where it gets
interesting. It requires tech companies to
inform government of any plans to strengthen security or
privacy features in their software.
And it permits government vetoing any such security or
privacy features. And it enables the Secretary of
State to require tech companies to provide services or
facilities for the purposes of facilitating or assisting an
intelligence service to carry out its functions.
In other words, back doors to any form of encryption.
Finally, it prevents tech companies for disclosing such
services or facilities to anyone without permission of the
Secretary of State. So, you know, this is the
situation that we are in as a result of the latest
investigatory parse legislation. Fascism.
Absolute fascism. 100% So there it is.
There it is. OK, let's move on the I want to
say thank you very much to everybody that's supporting the
UK column. We do need your ongoing support
and of course, if you have a look at the front page of the UK
column website, there is a ton of material there.
Do use the search functionality top right.
But also please do consider using the click here button to
support us various options for doing that.
You can make a donation, you can join as a member and so on.
You can pick something up from the UK column shop, but please
share any UK Column material you're interested in because
that's how we get round this censorship regime that we've
just been discussing. A final reminder that tomorrow,
Saturday the 18th, is our event in New York.
Some fantastic speakers at that. The live stream will be
available for anybody that wants to pick up a ticket for that.
It's £20 or £18 if you're UK column member.
Please do consider that and we're looking forward to
everybody being on the live stream tomorrow that can
possibly do so tonight at 7:00 PM.
Charles is back, uh, but Jeremy is back.
So, uh, the weekly banter is back.
Uh, and uh, we'll be on at 7:00 PM with Germ, uh, and
yesterday's discussion with, uh, professor in Bright Hope, uh,
right is the best medicine is on the UK column website now.
And also Charles discussion with Morgan Laurette.
This is second conversation that Charles has had with Morgan
Laurette on a world full of mercenaries.
That is, this is looking at private military contractors
around the world. This is also on the UK column
website now. So please do have a look at that
if you haven't seen it yet. And then Patrick, we've just got
to mention that although the digital ID March is taking place
tomorrow, the the the Trafalgar Square event isn't is.
That what's going on there will be there will be a small
speaking groups and stages and there will be people speaking in
different places. But meeting at Marble Arch at
one PMI think so that's that, that's where it starts.
Marble Arch at 1:00 PM and then go with the crowd and probably
is going to end up in Trafalgar Square and there'll be things
happening there, but it'll be slightly different format than
what maybe people were expecting previously.
But yeah, do attend. There's going to be a lot of
people going. OK, let's welcome Mark to the
program. Mark from Studio 2, welcome to
the program. And what's been going on with
mRNA technology? Well, first I'll say the wind
stole my hat. So if you don't recognize me,
yes, it's still me. Anyway, now getting this first
slide up there. It it is a report in the
immediate aftermath, something I covered virtually of
international press conference. It was actually recorded October
9, but broadcast throughout social media and video platforms
as of October 12. And it's it was called the World
Journey of Truth. And they're calling for a total
mRNA vaccine moratorium. There were 30 plus speakers from
20 countries there. They each had two or three
minutes where they spoke their truth, spoke their piece about
why they think an mRNA moratorium is necessary.
This next slide gives some summation of this.
These 30 plus experts in medicine, life sciences, law,
psychology, economics, there were philosophy people there
too. They spoke on behalf of over
2000 scientists and doctors and nearly 10,000 signatories who
are jointly warning of the risks of mRNA technology and calling
for this immediate moratorium. And I'll make a quick footnote.
The moratorium is on the production and the use of the
mRNA jabs, not just the usage. A very important point.
And it real quickly I'll do a call out to Graham, a guy I met
on the way here. He's from Reading and there's
this exercise, Pegasus, a dress rehearsal for another pandemic
going on in the UK right now as we speak.
But I'm seeing no outward signs of it.
And when I talked to Graham, he wasn't aware of any outward
signs of it either. But a shout out to Graham and a
guy named Bruce and his wife from Somerset.
I met them on the way. I told them about UK column.
Anyway, this next slide, just give some of the speakers who
were at this presentation, this press conference, a Professor
Paul Cullen, a lab physician from Ireland.
We have Professor Robin Cosford Colford, the nutritional
environmental medicine person from Australia, the well known
Texas cardiologist from the United States, Doctor Peter
McCullough, and professors and technicians and doctors from
Japan, Thailand, Estonia, Austria and many other places.
A very diverse group in terms of what they talked about, their
backgrounds and where they're from and we'll move on from
there. Some very other some other very
important matters to share. There's a website that was
associated with this conference and this next slide talks about
one of many cases where the Mnmrna jabs have been associated
with clear evidence that they were the cause of illness and
death. This is a case report.
It dates back to the 1st of October of 2022.
And it it comes from the National Library of Medicine,
which is an adjunct of the National Institutes of Health in
the United States. And the report is about a 76
year old man and he had Parkinson's disease.
He's over 76, he passed away and yet they were able to determine,
according to this government related report, they were able
to determine that the mRNA jab was in fact, by all indications,
the cause of his death, even though he had Parkinson's, his
age, comorbidities, things like that.
But anyway, there, there's another slide there that we seem
to have skipped over. I had a a part I wanted to
emphasize on that last slide, slide with the white background.
The bottom part of this where the where I put in the red
emphasis. It talks about how the presence
of spike proteins must be ascribed to vaccination rather
than to viral infection. The findings corroborate
previous reports of encephalitis and myocarditis caused by gene
based COVID-19 vaccines. This is the basic finding where
they determined that the gentleman 76 year old with
Parkinson's disease again, by all indications, passed away
precisely due to the mRNA jab. Now the media propaganda, of
course, amid the WH OS work on the pandemic treaty, which is
chugging along. I'll talk about the schedule to
that. We'll revisit the schedule to
that in a moment. But as we as we think about
exercise Pegasus going on the the pandemic dress rehearsal
right here in the UK, although it's not visible, it's not
outwardly visible, it's going on right now.
You think about The Who trying to actually ratify this treaty,
the pandemic treaty. Meanwhile, the media is putting
out this unequivocal absolutist kind of message guys, where
there can be no dissent. They they relabel dissent as
mixed messaging. And then they they basically
talk as if in this case, pregnant women and their fetus
are absolutely safe, no qualification, no equivocation.
They can all get the MRMRNA jab a pregnant woman who's carrying
a baby without any harm to the baby or the, or the mother.
And this New York Times video that we're about to show is
emblematic of this absolutism that the media is putting out
there, as if there can be no room for doubt, as if, as if
there can be no possibility of danger.
Let's go ahead and and watch this video.
The science is clear. The COVID vaccines are safe for
pregnant women. But public health messaging
around the vaccines has been muddled since Health Secretary
Robert F Kennedy Junior announced that the CDC would no
longer recommend them during pregnancy.
My colleague and I. Spoke to both patients and
doctors and they told us the same thing.
The change in federal guidance has created a great deal of
confusion, both for pregnant women and for the pharmacist who
administer the majority of COVID vaccines.
In fact, a survey released this week found that only 42% of
respondents. Believed it was safe to.
Get an mRNA vaccine during pregnancy So here's what you
need to know about why the COVID vaccine is safe and effective
during pregnancy. If you're pregnant, COVID is
dangerous for both you and your fetus, Even if you were
perfectly healthy before, COVID is more dangerous during
pregnancy for a number of reasons.
First, pregnancy suppresses the immune system, so your body
doesn't treat the fetus as a threat.
That means you're more vulnerable to infections in
general. The respiratory infections in
particular, are more dangerous because as the uterus swells, it
compresses the diaphragm, making it harder to take deep breaths.
The effects of a COVID infection can linger for the entire
pregnancy. They can even affect the
development of the placenta, hurting the fetus.
Vaccines reduce these risks. Getting vaccinated also helps
protect your baby. Newborns can't be vaccinated
against COVID themselves until they're at least six months old,
so maternal antibodies are the only way to protect them.
That's important because the virus is especially dangerous
for infants. In fact, the youngest children
have a higher risk of hospitalization from COVID than
any other group aside from adults over 70.
Five, at this point, we have years of data showing that the
COVID vaccines are safe, including for pregnant women,
and that the risks of COVID far outweigh any risk.
Risks of the shots? So we know that vaccination is
both effective and safe for pregnant women.
That doesn't mean actually getting the vaccine is easy.
Gynecologists often don't offer COVID vaccines in their offices.
So. So there we have it.
There's that video where the unequivocal message is that
women and their and their fetuses are absolutely free of
any possible harm from the COVID jabs.
And there was a lot of talk at that conference about the risk
benefit ratio and that there's been no reliable independent
research to prove that risk benefit ratio is in a favorable
way. Therefore, that's one of many
reasons that the presenters at that press conference were are
calling very loudly for the mRNA moratorium.
This is a quick item that I did report last time, but I have
some technical problems and this was just give an honorable
mention on the extra last week. This is exclusive breaking news.
Let's show this an Alliance of Indigenous Nations International
Tribunal, amid the other calls for an mRNA moratorium.
They're calling mRNA nanoparticle injections
biological and technological weapons of mass destruction in
their view, and they base that on U.S. law, as this slide
indicates, but also on Canadian and international law, saying
that the mRNA nanoparticle injections, quote, meet the
criteria of biological weapons and weapons of mass destruction.
I've got just a couple more things to share here.
And this is James Roguski, the noted watchdog of the pandemic
treaty and all things related to mRNA.
He's calling for revoking the biologics licenses for the mRNA
injections from Pfizer and Moderna.
And also he's calling for the mRNA moratorium.
There's his contact. You can go to
jamesroguski.substack.com. And he encourages people to text
him in the US in Los Angeles at 3:10.
I didn't get that number there, but the number is posted for
those that want to review the slides.
You can text or call Mr. Raguski.
Anyway, this last slide is the Intergovernmental Working Group
agenda. This group took over for the
intergovernmental negotiating body to finish the treaty.
And this shows their schedule all the way through next May,
when the 79th World Health Assembly will happen in
Switzerland. And they have not actually
approved that the pandemic treaty, they'll call it adopted,
but they have not certified it or actually brought it into
force. So a lot of times they're trying
to misrepresent the status of that treaty.
Very important to keep in mind. But back over to you guys.
They'll be, of course, much more as this heats up late this year,
early next year. Heating up isn't.
It yes, it certainly is. Yes, yeah, thanks Mark.
Okay, Patrick, let's let's move back to international affairs
and and Israel. Sure.
Well, briefly the big question is, is the is the ceasefire
holding? Is the ceasefire holding?
So we're asking ceasefire, what's ceasefire?
And as it turns out, this the victory lapse during the victory
lapse by Trump, Netanyahu, all of the sort of posturing and
back slapping in the Knesset and Tel Aviv and what do we find?
The ceasefire has been broken as we said, as we predicted here,
Israel warns it will resume military operations of Gaza, in
Gaza of Hamas violates truce. Well, that was the threat by the
Israelis. But what's actually happened?
Well, that's happened. Israel kills 9 Palestinians in
Gaza despite ceasefire that just happened.
This is just reported off the wires a few days ago.
So they've, and this isn't the only story we we're showing
here. So Israel has clearly violated
the ceasefire. So is this mostly a ceasefire?
Is this like mostly peaceful protests is now mostly a
ceasefire by Israel? They can kill and do whatever
they want and nobody is going to restrain them.
And that's the number one problem.
This is why we said we didn't think that this was going to
last because Israel's record on ceasefires is appalling.
It's 0% success rate. They've broken every single
agreement that's been documented by academics like Zachary
Doctor, Zachary Foster, who I encourage people to follow on X.
We'll try to put Zach's X. Account in the show notes, but
it is very well documented. Mike, 0% success rate.
They violated everything and they're doing it again.
And of course, they're getting the support from Trump to do
this because as we were talking about on Wednesday's program,
the suggestion was unless they provide all the bodies of the
dead hostages that which they can't possibly do because the
place has been turned to rubble. The ones that Israel killed
themselves, they bombed their own hostages, yeah.
And of course they've got to disarm or else and and so on.
So, so they've put a bit of load of criteria on the ceasefire
continuing which which are in some cases impossible.
Well, Trump's already basically foreshadows he's already pre
blaming Hamas if the ceasefire breaks, so no matter what
happens they're going to then blame Hamas.
This is the Israeli negotiation tactic going back for the last
40 years. So nothing new, unfortunately,
yeah. Yeah.
OK, let's move on to the NATO defence ministers meeting now.
This was taking place yesterday, the day before, sorry, on
Wednesday, Thursday, sorry. And recent series of mysterious
drone incursions and airspace violations by Russian warplanes.
Well, that was the key narrative of the of the NATO summit that
that the NATO defence minister conference.
It's important, as we'll come on to later, this whole issue of of
drone and airspace incursions. Everything was heavily
choreographed as you can see on screen at the moment.
The arrivals, there was a family photo opportunity, of course,
all the handshakes, the warm words, there's Hegseth on screen
at the moment and so on. And the key thing is what
they're saying basically is that now that Trump has won the Gaza
war, it seems to be more or less how they're putting it.
The focus is back on Ukraine, or in fact, rather, the focus is
back on Putin. But you know, don't worry
because. NATO is a Sorry, NATO is a
defensive alliance. We will remain A defensive
alliance. But make no mistake, this
defensive alliance is ready and willing to do what it takes to
keep our 1 billion people safe and our territory secure.
Their security is. Linked with ours.
This is not just words, but it's reflected in the support we give
to Ukraine. That's really key what he said
Mike Mark and sorry for the technical glitch there is Mark
Ruta has an effect on our. Yeah, on everybody.
Video capturing 'cause everything to go haywire.
Yeah. He's saying our security is
linked to Ukraine's security, but the other side of that
equation is as valid is Russia's security is linked to Ukraine
and what happens in Ukraine. And that's the part of the
equation that doesn't get spoken about on this side of the Iron
Curtain or on the iron side of the Iron Curtain.
But go ahead. Yes, indeed, no.
Later on there were defence conferences and well John Haley
had this to say. When I argue that a secure
Europe requires a strong sovereign Ukraine, what Ukraine
is teaching us in the way that we can see the rapid evolution
of the nature of warfare, the leading edge innovation that
Ukraine and battlefield techniques.
For some time we have been able to learn from Ukraine and
Ukraine is increasingly recognised and understood to
play a part in the training of other NATO nations forces and in
recent moves to respond to incursions into NATO airspace.
Ukraine has stepped up, responded in practice and I
think is helping to demonstrate more clearly to more people how
the Ukraine is fighting for its future.
But the unique leading the combat experience that it now
has means that it it can already and will in the future make a
huge contribution to the security of Europe more
generally. So a strong sovereign Ukraine
controlled by Britain, the United States and the EU.
Is that how that works? With the CIA running the SBU
which the American government's paying Ukrainian pensions?
And what about elections? Sovereignty.
How about elections? Are they having elections in
Ukraine? I guess not.
Is a dictatorship run by foreign powers subsidized by the US,
Europe and the UK? And that's foreign powers, as
he's just admitted, are using the scenario to develop
strategies for fighting Russia in in the future future, because
they're they're watching everything that Russia does,
obviously in the course of this conflict.
And and you trying to use that to build up with some what some
kind of battlefield database here?
It's sovereignty is a big doughnut in Ukraine right now.
100% unfortunately. More on John Healey.
This is from another session from the the recent confab but
but watch this and listen carefully.
And Secretary Higgseth, I want to praise President Trump's
essential leadership in securing that ceasefire in Gaza.
That was peace secured through strength.
And today, as we shift our focus back to the war in Ukraine, your
presence here reminds US of President Trump's commitment
also to secure peace in Ukraine. But until peace comes,
Ukrainians, military and civilians alike, continue to
fight with huge courage. Our determination must match
their defiance, our support must match Putin's escalation.
And our role as members of this UDCG is to guarantee Ukraine's
strength. Now, the first thing I picked up
there is the sycophanty of all of the European leaders and
Healy now pandering to Trump, Donald Trump's peace to
strength. Is Trump the president of
Britain? It seems like it.
There's no independent foreign policy or thought in the British
defense establishment there. So the sycophanty is something
to know. The other thing is he's talking
about defiance, Ukrainians defiance.
Our commitment must match Ukraine's defiance.
Where's the defiance happening in Ukraine?
Like it seems to me if you have to hog tie young men off the the
streets and bundle them into the back of the vans to conscript
them and then throw them into the trenches on the front line
with the average life expectancy of somewhere between 24 and 48
hours. The real defiance in Ukraine is
coming from the Ukrainian people against the Zelensky autocracy
that is prosecuting A proxy war on behalf of NATO.
That's the defiance in Ukraine. If you look at the polling, the
majority of Ukrainians want this over, but the political class
and those getting funded by this, making money out of it,
want to promulgate this conflict.
So that's the Orwellian language is unbelievable.
And the last one until peace comes.
Until peace comes, in other words, there's going to be war
until peace comes. So they're going to make no
effort to have any dialogue, no diplomacy, no negotiations, no
political settlements, and we're just going to have war until
peace comes. This is so Orwellian.
Yes. What's Trump been up to then?
What's Trump been up to? So let's talk about escalation
here. Is Donald Trump talking about
sending Tomahawk missiles, potentially nuclear armed
Tomahawk missiles, to Ukraine? Listen to this.
Do they want to have Tomahawks going in their direction?
I don't think so. I think I might speak to Russia
about that. No fairness.
I told that to President Zelensky because Tomahawks are a
new step of aggression, right? You understand that very well.
Are you saying that you will speak to Putin first?
About time I talk to him. I might say, look, this war is
not going to get settled. I'm going to send them
Tomahawks. I may send that.
The tomahawk is a an incredible weapon, very offensive weapon.
And honestly, Russia does not need that.
They don't need that. Yeah, I might tell them.
That if the war is not settled, that we may very well do.
We may not, but we may do it. I think it's appropriate to
bring up my first question to you there is he's saying we
might tell Russia this. Has he not just told Russia that
by by making a statement in front of for the TV cameras I
mean. It's so vaudevillian at this
point. So, so, but but what he's saying
is serious. He's saying that we're we're
going to escalate and that's how we're going to negotiate with
the Russians is through threats and military escalations.
But let me just ask you one more question.
Is the Tomahawk not just the latest equivalent, similar to
the F16? It's a it's a weapon that the
Ukrainians can't use. Yeah.
So where does that leave us? Is it just?
Is it just nonsense again? Spot on.
It's it's exactly like the F16. You remember all the furor of
oh, once Zelensky gets those F sixteens then everything is
going to change. Then it was once he gets the
attackers and is once he gets the storm shadows and it's so on
and so forth. So the only danger here is
Russia's made some very strong statement about US involvement
in deploying Tomahawks, especially on Ukrainian soil.
And we'll get to that in a moment.
But in the meantime, let's look at this story here.
So escalation is definitely the policy.
Now, Ukraine, Russia latest US tells NATO to boost firepower
ahead of Trump Szalinski meeting here.
This is from the Independent. Now give a shout out to Sam
Kiley here, this commentator for The Independent.
I was very impressed with the analysis, much more even handed
than we've seen previously. So I'm I'm a credit where
credit's due. I was very impressed with that.
So so now Pete Hegseth is basically the alpha dog of the
Trump administration. He changed it to the Department
of War. Now no longer the Department of
Defense, now to the Department of War.
And here's Hegseth. Listen to this.
The language is just shocked. All countries need to translate
goals into guns, commitments into capabilities and pledges.
Into power, That's all that matters.
Hard power. It's the only thing belligerents
actually respect. Your continued investment and
leadership are vital to helping Ukraine defend itself and to
bring an end to. This conflict peace through
strength now if this war does not end, if there is no path to
peace in the short term, then the United States, along with
our allies, will take the steps necessary to impose costs on
Russia for its continued. Aggression.
If we must take this step, the US War Department stands ready
to do our part in ways that only the United States can do.
This is not a war that started on President Trump's watch, but
it will end on his watch. It may end on his watch in a, in
a nuclear war, we'll all end on Trump's watch with that type of
rhetoric. So he's saying that peace
through strength. What a ridiculous trope.
This is straight out of 1 of Mussolini's Mussolini's speeches
or a Hitler's speech. Peace through strength.
And we'll end this in only the way that the US can.
What exactly does he mean there, Mike?
What? How?
How does the US plan to end the conflict if it's not
diplomatically, militarily, How are they meant to do that
against a nuclear superpower in the Russian Federation?
I'm confused. Nukes.
Well, yeah, basically. So by saying what he said, the
only hard power can solve this and deal with belligerents, Pete
Hegseth in the United States are then basically showing that they
are the belligerents because only belligerents speak like
this in in the international system and throughout history.
So they can't erase millennia of military and political history
and all of the lessons we've learned.
Clearly, not everybody's learned them.
But this wall can't be erased just because Donald Trump
appeared on the scene 9 or 10 months ago.
So absolutely unbelievable. And then now this clip.
Here's Mark Rutte, the empty suit from Brussels, and Pete
Hagseth, the greased grease, the greasy haired DoD head, former
Fox News weekend host. Listen to this.
Firepower, that's what is coming.
We expect it is coming from NATO.
And it was a historic summit just a couple of months ago
brought about by leadership of President Trump to say we need
our allies to step up and and they did and they have in those
commitments now. Those commitments will soon
translate into capabilities, which is the most important
aspect of it. And one part of that, of course,
is Pearl, is the initiative where European countries buy US
weapons, transfer to NATO for the fight in Ukraine to bring
peace to that conflict. And if there's anything we've
learned under President Trump is the active application of peace.
Through. Strength.
You get peace. When you are strong, not when
you use strong words. Or.
Wag your finger. You get it when you have strong
and real capabilities that adversaries respect.
So the guy talking there is a Army reservist or reservist who
attained the highest rank of major and he was a guard at
Gitmo and he's running the trillion dollar a year Pentagon.
I mean, how did that happen? I'll tell you how that happened.
Mary Madelson and Benjamin Netanyahu, that's how that
happened. So let's just move on very
quickly here. This is the Ukrainian
leadership. We'll go back here.
Ukraine delegations invited Raytheon and Lockheed, the
manufacturers of the Tomahawk missile.
And we'll go to this is Andre Yermak, Zelensky's brain, and
he's tweeted out all the details of this.
And of course, they put this snazzy social media video here.
I'll, I'll spare the audience the, the audio, the dodgy Euro
techno soundtrack, but it's pretty gaudy nonetheless.
They're sort of really playing this one up that the US defense
contractors over there pressing the palms with the Ukrainians on
this. So it's all about the Tomahawk
hyping the next generation of wonder weapons that's going to
supposedly turn the tide of the conflict here.
But here's what broke today. This is important.
Now this is the Financial Times. And they they're saying, what
are the US Tomahawk missiles Trump is considering for
Ukraine. But there's some interesting
details in this story. This could also change the
discussion right here. Ukrainian troops will not be
trained to operate these Tomahawk missiles, according to
a source talking to the FT. And they go on, US contractors
will operate Tomahawk missiles in Ukraine.
Now that violates the red line drawn by Putin just last week.
So it's right there in the FT. So decent piece of journalism
here citing a NATO military officials and they're saying the
missiles will complement what Ukraine has already achieved
with drones. So, Mike, I, I think that the
the whole Tomahawk thing, it looks more like a sort of public
relations campaign to keep people interested in supporting
this disastrous failing proxy war project in Ukraine.
That's what it looks like, but over to you.
OK, thank you Patrick for that. Now let's come back to the UK
then. And MI 5's National Protective
Security Authority has issued new security guidance in order
to protect democratic institutions from espionage and
foreign interference. Those are the words.
The guidance outlines how state backed actors and their proxies
attempt to manipulate, discredit or secretly gather information
on political figures at all levels.
This is done through subtle and deceptive means that blur the
line between management, sorry engagement and malign activity.
So that's that's what they say about it now.
This is supposed to help MPs, House of Lords, Peers,
councillors, parliamentary staff, candidates understand the
threats they face from foreign actors and take simple,
effective steps to protect themselves, their teams and the
integrity of the UK's democracy. They.
Didn't mention normal people though.
Like what about the dust men? The milkmen?
Cashier workers? How do they protect themselves
from disinformation and interference?
By watching the UK column. But that's another question.
So sorry, that's what they say. So.
So let's translate what that meant.
It means that you, the people that are on the receiving end of
this as politicians, candidates and whatnot, can safely ignore
the majority of opposition to your policies by writing it off
as foreign interference. That's basically what that all
means. Now, alongside this, of course,
is the alleged Chinese spying scandal.
As if China, Russia, Iran, Britain, United States and EU
aren't spying on each other all the time.
I mean, it is ridiculous. But anyway, Deputy National
Security Adviser Matthew Collins said that China represents the
biggest state based threat to the country's economic security.
Well, of course it does, because China is producing stuff and
we're not. So of course, of course it is in
that sense. But anyway, not quite in the
sense he meant. Starmer ordered the publication
of the the witness statements. This is after Wednesday's Prime
Minister questions when Kemi Bennock accused him of covering
up why the case against two alleged spies collapsed.
The Crime Prosecution Service is supposed to.
It's claimed that they dropped the case after deciding the
evidence did not show that China was a national security threat.
Well, maybe the CPS was dropping the case in a similar way that
they dropped a case against Savile.
I I don't know, I mean that that may be completely wrong.
But anyway, coming back to the. Sometimes these cases get lost.
Well, indeed, yes, coming back to the MI 5 advice, the question
that it it covers things like what should you look out for?
And they talk about elicitation, cultivation, blackmail, online
approaches, financial donations, cyber compromises and so on.
But the best is disinformation, because the example they cite it
is one that Patrick and I covered at the time in 2022.
Let's just remind ourselves. Who can forget this was just a
classic moment. Play it.
But that's his defense secretary's office.
Can I just check who you've got on the line please?
Yes, sure. We'll just we are on the line.
Do you hear me? Thank you.
Yeah, I can hear you loud and clear if you just bear with us
while the Defence secretary joins us.
Thank you. Yeah, we're, we will.
Be we will switch. On our camera, When we will be,
when we will see. Understood.
No problem. Thank you.
Hello. Hello.
How are you there? I'm fine, I'm in Poland.
OK, yes, I know. So, dear Secretary, it's.
My pleasure, I I've visited you 5 times over the last five
years, so I'm determined to keep more and more supplies coming to
you. I can't say where I've been, but
I've just been. To look at.
More of our anti air capacity to give you and making sure that we
are getting it into the country as quickly as possible so you
know that Russia demands to. To leave ideas of NATO joining.
So what's what do you think? Because I don't think Russia
should be able to demand anything other than going home.
Yeah, of course I know that. I'm two things.
I've just been looking at our new anti air missile that we're
sending you, which is better than Stinger.
It'll work at night. It's a very, very fast missile.
And it will help close the skies to Russian aircraft, I think.
Now, just in case you're not sure what that was, that was
Vova and Alexis, the the Russian pranksters who absolutely got
the then Defence Secretary Ben Wallace.
And the thing was in the course of that, if you watch the whole
thing, in the course of that, he hemorrhaged intelligence
information to effectively. And and The thing is that was
not disinformation. That was Ben Wallace telling it
as it was. So I understand why MI 5 might
be suggesting people you don't want to get caught out by Vovan
and Lexus, but it still happens. And I think Samantha Parr was
just done a few weeks ago, so you know.
If ITV did it, it wouldn't be disinformation.
If Channel 4 did it, it wouldn't be disinformation.
If it was Graham Norton doing it for the BBC, it would be fine.
But because the Russians did it, Mike, it's suddenly
disinformation. But they're very clear and
transparent about what their role is as pranksters.
I will argue lastly, Mike, that Vovin and Lexus is one of the
most lethal weapons in Russias. Quite possibly.
Well, well, look, we've got to leave it there for today.
I'm going to say thank you very much to Mark and to Basil
Valentine for joining us. And to you, of course, Patrick.
We've got a little bit to discuss in extra, including Ron
Paul and what he's been doing recently.
But let's leave it for a few minutes.
If you're AUK column member, join us for that.
Otherwise, we will see you again on Monday.
Hope you have a great time if you come and join us in New York
or on the live stream and you'll be in in London at the digital
ID thing perhaps. Yeah, we'll see.
That should be a good event as. Well, and we'll see you Monday.
See you then. Bye bye.