UK Column News — 16th January 2026

Good afternoon. It's Friday the 16th of January, 2026. Just after 1 o'clock, welcome to UK Column

News. I'm your host, Mike Robinson. My host, New Studio, today is Patrick Hennexon. Welcome to

the program, Patrick. Great to be with you, Mike. And we'll be joined once again by Basil Follettine

today. In a letter in the program, we're going to be covering what's described as the new

technocratic board of peace for Gaza, the use of the insurrection act in the United States,

and of course Greenland. But we're going to begin today, Patrick, with the use of the various

Palestine action-related court actions as a mechanism to attack everyone's right to jury trial

here in the UK. Such an important precedent. We'll bring this graphic up on screen here.

Under threat, trial by jury, and it's just my incredible to me that this issue of Palestine

action is being used by the state, or it appears that way, to basically undercut the use of

juries in the UK, first with these speed trials, to do all these mass arrests without a jury,

20 minute trials. And now we get to the actual core, which is the independence of the jury,

and Mike, the issue of jury nullification is also an important part of this. All of these

things are hinging on this issue with Palestine action. So Mike, if you think that this doesn't

affect you because you don't support, or you don't sympathize, or you have no interest in this

issue at all, regarding the prescription of Palestine action, and the story which we're about to

cover, you're probably making a big mistake if you're living in Britain because it is fundamental.

What the decisions being made, and using these people in this organization, are actually being

used to undercut jury trials. So it is important, you do need to take an interest in this,

so, but just to bring us up to date, how did this begin? It's important that we just give you an

important update here, a very important update here, the three Palestine action protesters,

and their hunger strikes. These are the three remaining hunger strikers they have now

ceased their hunger strike, and we'll tell you why in a moment here. So these are the three.

Louis Charmello, he is diabetic, so he's alternating days hunger strike, but

have a Maraci and Cameron Ahmed, they also have withdrawn their hunger strike. Now,

now have a, in the 73rd day, Mike, that's the exact amount of time that Kieran O'Darherty

in 1991 reached the longest hunger strikeer before, I believe, I'm not sure, did he pass away or not?

I'm not sure, but nonetheless, just put this in perspective, Mike, the earliest in terms of

the hunger striking was 46 days back in 81. This is an exceptional event, and I think people

need to pay attention to that, but we'll back up on screen here. So here's the gist of this,

and this is the important part. These three prisoners announced the end of their hunger strike.

After the government, the UK government decided not to award a two billion pound contract

to the Israeli arms company subsidiary, Elbit Systems UK. So they're saying that the UK government

cancelling that contract seems to be grounds for them to end their hunger strike.

Well, that was one of their key demands, wasn't this?

This is one of their key demands, and also they're being treated as terrorists, even though, Mike,

when they were arrested in August 2024, Palestine action was not prescribed at that time by the UK

government, yet they're being treated and incarcerated like terrorists. So, but what's amazing,

when we go to the BBC, that was the Guardian there, and you go, we'll bring the BBC here.

This is their article. Mike, I searched and I searched. I went down, I read this three times,

no mention of Elbit Systems or the government basically falling on their sword regarding this

and cancelling this two billion dollar contract. This is the home and legal correspondent, Dominic

Kaskiani, and he doesn't somehow mention the government two billion dollar contract,

which is the reason they stopped the hunger strike or Elbit Systems. So, this is the BBC.

What exactly is going on here? Nothing. The BBC has left out the most important part of the story

and why? Well, here, no mention of the BBC and Elbit Systems, the cancellation is contract.

So, we have to, I put this through a new AI bot that we're working on here, Mike.

This is the Joseph Stalin, or we'll call it the Uncle Joe AI translator, and this is what

Uncle Joe said. Uncle Joe translation, state propaganda, organ shielding government

apparatus, not wanting to publicly admit defeat. That's a, according to our new chatbot,

thank you, Uncle Joe. And this brings us to Craig Murray here. Now, Craig Murray, Mike,

they've delayed the judicial review on the prescription of Palestinian action.

Craig Murray is putting a challenge in the Scottish courts directly, and he's making incredible

headway here. And I do encourage people to go to Craig Murray's website, a step towards sanity.

And this is directly tied to the main story here, which we'll bring on to the screen in just a

moment. This is very well summarized by Jonathan Cook. We'll get Basel Valentine's commentary on

this. So, the barrister for the, the defendants here, he has basically, he's basically in the

crosshairs of the judge on this issue. So, this is the dramatic point of the trial. At one point,

the trial, the jury member sent a note to the judge, Mr. Justice Johnson, asking this very

question. If we decide that they, the defendants, genuinely believe that they were performing

life-saving action, and were morally compelled to destroy these weapons, they believed they

were going to be used to kill civilians in what they believed to be an illegal genocide,

with that amount to a lawful excuse. And here was the response, the judge who repeatedly

stifled efforts by the defense to air evidence of elbow systems involvement in genocide answered

that the jury must not take into account such lawful, such a lawful excuse. In the judge's words,

there is no evidence in this case of any that is capable in law of amounting to a lawful excuse.

So, that is not something that you need to consider. Now, this is where things got even more

interesting, and this is the KC Rajiv Menon, and this is where he entered the story. He

made a rousing defense of the rights of juries to reject judicial interference,

and of the right to make up their own minds based on guilt and on factors that might mitigate guilt.

And he does so at the very moment when Starmer and his ministers are seeking to eradicate

the principle of jury trials. Everything hinges on this case. I want to go to Basil Valentine

in a moment, but my Starmer, they really need convictions here to justify the prescription

of Palestine action. That's what Jonathan Cook says, and I think that's a fair assessment.

So, I mean, I'm not a lawyer, I'm not a KC, I'm not a judge, but it seems to me that the comments

by Rajiv Menon are absolutely appropriate. This judge, if he is directing the jury,

he is not giving the jury the chance to make up their own minds. And of course, you talked about

an old man by jury earlier on. That is key here, because of course, the jury has the right to decide

whether under this set of circumstances, this was not a crime. And he is effectively by making

that definitive statement and the way that he has, he has removed the right of the jury to a

null bad legislation. That is a step too far. In my opinion, but I'm not legally qualified,

I've got to stress. Well, I think Basil Valentine has some historical perspective on this.

Basil, we're going to bring you on right now. Basil, your thoughts on this, this is absolutely,

I think, a pivotal moment, perhaps in legal history in Britain. Is that an understatement?

Yeah, I mean, the right to trial by jury goes all the way back to 1670 and the key case where

jurors were imprisoned, but nevertheless brought back verdict, which was contrary to what the judge

wished. One of the key defendants, Mr. Penn, then went on to America to found the great state of

Pennsylvania. So, interesting that, you know, 355 years of precedent is about to be overturned,

if this government has its way. Now, there's been a lot of tension in the case of Woolwich Crown

Court with the judge. I'm indebted to of all media organizations of the face, the 1980s music

and fashion magazine. It has fallen away the best report charge on what's been happening

there this week. And it is extraordinarily worth pointing out that corporate media seem to be

completely ignoring the fact that so much hinges on this case, including the prescription

of Palestine action as a terrorist organization. It would appear that the judges on that panel

are waiting for a verdict in these cases to see whether or not they can use them to bolster

a case for prescribing. So, it's a very, we're getting some very detailed legal arguments.

As you said, Patrick, the judge ruled out a justification defense, basically, that the jury

could find the defendant's not guilty, even though they had committed a crime. But the concept

of jury equity remains. Juries are entitled to find defendants not guilty, and the judge

cannot direct the jury as to their findings. This is the key point that the defendant's case

see made. Judges are not allowed to tell a jury what the verdict should be. Otherwise,

what would be the point of having the jury? We can see clearly here, if there was no jury,

it's highly likely that the judge would find against the defendants, but they're entitled

to make up their own mind. So, an awful lot of, you know, a lot of hinges on this decision.

The jury retired on Tuesday of this week to consider their verdicts. We may get them back

piecemeal, one by one, on individual counts and individual cases, or they may come back and

return verdicts on all the charges against or sick simultaneously. We simply don't know. Those

verdicts could come today. They could come next week, or depends on how long the jury feel they

need to deliberate. Well, it's interesting. I'll go to you in a minute, Mike, but I'm not like

you're coming on this as well, Mike, but to Mike and Basil's Samuel corner, everything seems to

hinge on this particular individual. He's the one accused of a violent sledgehammer attack that

hit either intentionally or inadvertently a law enforcement officer on site. And they would

have to prove that this was intentional, and it wasn't just the result of an ensuing brawl.

And this is a defense that's usually brought in for football hooligan fights and things like that

if you look at past cases. So, but by doing that, if they can, if they get a conviction based on

some kind of a premeditated aggravated burglary, violent disorder that has intention attached to it,

then that fits the prescription of Palestine action as a violent terrorist organization as it were.

So, it is so much hinging on the technicalities of this case, Mike.

Well, I mean, what I would say about that, Patrick, is this is if the case against that

guy is proven, then that would be the first, as far as I'm aware, the first conviction for any

kind of violent action, but we're not talking about guns and bombs here. We're not even talking

about petrol bombs or, you know, we're so on, but the traditional terrorist paraphernalia,

we're talking about something that was brought on site in order to do damage to the physical

apparatus of elbit systems. It was not intended to damage, at least, it's not proven yet that it

was intended to do damage to any individual. So, but nonetheless, that's one case. Is that what it

takes to become a terrorist organization, one case? But, you know, Basil said there that it's

highly likely that the judge would find a guilty verdict. I think the judge in what he said,

and the way that he expressed what he said to the jury, has absolutely made his position clear.

He considers that there is no justification for the action that they took. So, I think it's

more than just likely that he would, if there was no jury in the case that he would find them guilty.

And the problem here is that juries are inconvenient for the government. These days, they're

trying to justify the restriction on the use of juries because of the length of time, that

the backlog that there is in the court system, but it's not just that. The fact is that juries

often find, against, you find, in ways that governments don't like, and that I think is the

main driver for wanting to get rid of them. Oh, this case is definitely an example of that.

They'd prefer, would prefer with current politics, would prefer no jury, or a non-independent

jury, a jury that could make a decision on its own common law volition as it were.

That's really what's at stake. I want to bring Basel on the moment, but before that, let's look at

this is the part of the speech here. This is, again, serialized at Jonathan Cook's sub-stack.

Everybody support Jonathan Cook, one of the great independent journalists in Britain and in

the world, quite frankly, at this moment. But here's the important part, and he's addressing

members of the jury. You can find Charlotte and her co-defendants not guilty of criminal damage.

It is a perfectly fair and proper verdict for you to return in this case. Please don't think

for one moment that you're somehow barred as a matter of law from doing so. And it goes on.

And Craig Murray said, this is one of the most important speeches that he's ever seen in his life

moments in sort of legal history and precedent here. And Jonathan Cook includes this mic. And this

is a placard here. And I'll read this. If you can't read the Old English, it says,

near this site, William Penn and William Mead, we're tried in 1670 for preaching to an unlawful

assembly in Grace Church Street, talking about Quaker meeting at the time. This tablet commemorates

the courage and endurance of the jury. Thomas Vier, Edward Buschel and 10 others who refused to

give a verdict against them, although locked up without food for two nights and were fined for

their final verdict of not guilty. The case of these jury men was reviewed on a writ of

habeas corpus and the chief justice Vaughn delivered the opinion of the court, which established the

right of juries to give their verdict according to their convictions. So important. And again,

if you want to read more about this case, we direct you here. And I'm not plugging Jeff

Bessos, but it is available on Amazon, the trial of William Penn and William Mead for causing a

tall moat and the old Bailey, et cetera, 1670. And I want to go back to you, Basel, just briefly.

Basel, just briefly, you know, people who don't identify with this issue because they don't support

the Palestinian cause, but might identify as quote, patriots. They seem to be wildly

disinterested in this issue at all. When in fact, you have a Pakistani or I don't know if he's a

Muslim KC defending the fundamentals of common law in England. Again, it's extraordinary,

but this cuts right through race and identity politics. It gets right to the fundamentals of a free

society, Basel. Go ahead. Yeah, absolutely. You would think that all the conservatives and

constitutionalists would be all over this case. We don't have a written constitution in Britain.

It is defined very largely by precedent. And then 1670 case is one of the most

important precedents in the whole of British law. And now, as I say, unwritten constitution.

This particular trial is taking place with a jury. And with the terrorism,

all use of the terrorist legislation hanging over the defendants for the first time.

In six months time, a similar case could be brought with no jury if David Lamy has his way.

And with the defendants predefined as terrorists, we're then in a very, very different place.

So it could be, of course, we hope not, that this is the last trial of its type,

where defendants are not assumed to be terrorists and defined as such in law,

and where they have the rights to a jury trial. Both those things could disappear if the government

have their way. Very important. So so much hinges on this. And Basel, just on the back end of this,

we want to get your comment here. Tribunal finds no basis for misconduct in General Medical Council,

GMC case against Dr. Abu Sitta. Explain to us the significance of this finding this week.

Well, I mean, it's, you know, really extraordinary that Dr. Abu Sitta had to go through this

process. He described lawyers for UK LFI, UK lawyers for Israel as trying to destroy his life.

And it would appear that they are, they're trying to paint him as inherently violent because he is

simply of Arabian extraction. But it's really just the tip of the iceberg. I mean, I'm

pleased to say in this case, the tribunal found that there was nothing anti-Semitic about anything

he'd said or written or done. But of course, the process is the punishment. And UK lawyers for Israel

are well-funded. And you know, keep bringing these vexatious cases against not just him, but dozens

of others. We're streeting posted online about now the imposition of the IHRA definition

on the health service across the broad primarily to silence doctors from, you know, speaking

their minds about the genocide. And particularly Britain's complicity in it. So what

streeting is trying to do, what the government trying to do, is stop people from simply stating

the facts about Israel's genocide and Britain's role in it. If you work in the NHS, you're not

allowed to do so, you'll end up before one of these tribunals. And so it's incredible. You

have all of these NGOs, stop hate. There's a whole bevy of these. And, you know, I think it's lawyers

for Israel, these different organizations. It's starting to be recognized by some of these

judicial bodies or tribunal bodies as being vexatious litigants basil. In other words,

there's a possibility that they might now be sort of blacklisted, if you will, from bringing these

spurious cases, vexatious cases. Just briefly, final comment, Basil.

Yes, it's to be hoped. So the key thing is the judicial review, the legal challenge to the

imposition of the IHRA definition on the NHS as being fundamentally anathemer to the right

to freedom of speech. There's a crowd funder for that, but we sincerely hope it succeeds,

because at the moment there are people in the GMC staff who are now being forced to use the

IHRA definition, which we haven't got time to go into in detail here, but basically means that

any meaningful criticism of Israel and its actions is deemed as beyond the pale and means that

you will be in the crosshairs of disciplinary action. So that's got to be overturned.

We're streeting is very firmly the property of the Zionist lobby in the UK. He's not acting

on behalf of the British people. He's acting on behalf of the foreign government.

Thank you, Basil Valentine, Mike. Absolutely. Thank you. Well, let's just have a quick look

at what's going on with Gaza at the moment, because Donald Trump yesterday announced

on Truth Social. Let's bring it up on screen that the Gaza Board of Peace has been formed.

It's my great honoree set to announce that the Board of Peace has been formed. The members

of the Board will be announced shortly, but I can say with certainty that it's the greatest and most

prestigious Board ever assembled at any time, any place. Thank you for your attention on this

matter. So that's what he wrote on Truth Social. Now, on Wednesday, Steve Whitcoff posted on X

today, on behalf of President Trump, we're announcing the launch of Fez II of the president's

20 point plan to end the Gaza conflict, moving from ceasefire to demilitarization,

technocratic governments and reconstruct governance and reconstruction Fez II establishes,

he says, a transitional technocratic Palestinian administration in Gaza. What does he mean by using

that term? Technocratic. He means non-democratic. He means effectively a colonial administration,

administrative government. So who's going to be the viceroy of Gaza? Mike, there's a few candidates

vying for that. We will come onto that in one second. I've just got to also mention this because on

Wednesday, as well, Egypt, Qatar and Turkey released a joint statement also using the term technocratic

announcing that Ali Shath, a former Palestinian authority official, had been selected to lead the

Palestinian technocratic committee charged with administrating the Gaza Strip. So who else

is involved? Well, political tells us, citing an on-dem source that the board will consist of the

heads of state of around nine countries. So that's United States, United Kingdom, Italy,

Germany, Turkey, Qatar, Egypt, UAE and Jordan. And while they say former British Prime Minister

Tony Blair was initially expected to be included, he has since stepped down from the position,

however, it's not quite that simple. Political claims that Blair will serve on an executive committee,

attached to the board of peace, which will also include Steve Whitkoff and Jared Kushner,

amongst others. And well, ever dripping with irony, the British regime in its statement said

the UK has been consistently clear that the future of Gaza, the Gaza must be Palestinian led,

which is why it's going to be Tony Blair, Steve Whitkoff and Jared Kushner. I mean, could they do

better, Patrick? Bring that picture of Blair back up on screen just a moment, please. It's too

bad. Mike, there's not a safe and effective job for TB in Gaza. That's what we hope anyway.

We hope for these things. No, to be clear, Mike, bring that off screen, not to traumatize the

audience further, but Mike, phase one isn't finished. Phase one is the ethnic cleansing,

is the genocide, the extermination of the Palestinian, the native Palestinian population,

and the ethnic cleansing of any survivors. Make no mistake, Israel's been very clear that that's

their phase one, and they're not finished with that yet. Right. So I think just put that into

perspective. So people read through the propaganda. Basel, if any brief thoughts on this,

it just goes from bad to worse, doesn't it? I mean, my understanding, let's always

recent to the suffering of the Palestinian people, because the conditions on the ground in Gaza

are as bad as ever. There's been no meaningful ceasefire. It's merely the rate at which Palestinians

are exterminated has slowed down somewhat, but children have been freezing to death. Nothing

like the amount of aid has come into the country. Dozens of people have been killed by buildings

collapsing, having previously been badly damaged, and the yellow line keeps advancing so that

Palestinians are crammed into ever smaller space. And all that completely ignored by the corporate

media. We only ever hear about Gaza in the corporate media when it's an announcement like this

about the imposition of government on the beleaguered people by Western powers.

Thank you, Basel. Thank you for that. Okay. Let's move on to the ad break, and we've got to say,

you know, if you do like what the UK column does, we do need your ongoing support. There's a button

there to click on the front page of the website, which will take you to a page that shows your

options. If you can't support us financially, please do share material that you find on the website.

So we can beat this censorship regime that we're facing. Now, as for future video content,

we've got the weekly banter that's Charles, myself, and Jeremy speaking tonight at 7 pm.

We have Carl speaking to Dr. Workpal about global chaos breaking down Trump's moves on

Venezuela, Iran, and Greenland. That's at 9 pm tonight. Charles's discussion with Ian Overton is on

the UK column website now. If you want to watch on demand, if you didn't see it yesterday at 1 pm.

And then on Sunday, we have the Thousand Words podcast. Let's just have a look at a quick promo for that.

Tune in this Sunday for the second installment of my portrait and conversation with

comedian Abbey Roberts. I haven't laughed this much whilst painting since Richard Vovitz told us

the story of Grey and the Alien. Abbey recounts her experience of being arrested at a COVID protest

and how Susie the cat wasn't happy about it. God truth, spirituality, authenticity, or get mold over

whilst I try and capture Abbey's spirit and likeness. See how I get on this Sunday at 7 pm,

exclusively on the UK column. For past shows, look for a thousand words in the show, drop down menu.

Thanks, Jake, for that. So Abbey is the second part of this three part series. This one's

for members only, but if you're a UK column member, please join us at 7 pm on Monday.

Okay, let's move on then to the question of insurrection, Patrick, because this went

on truth social on yesterday. In fact, it wasn't yesterday. Yes, it was. If the corrupt politicians

in Minnesota don't obey the law and stop the professional agitators and insurrectionists from

attacking the patriots of ICE who are only trying to do their job, I will institute the insurrection

act, which many presidents have done before me and quickly put an end to the travesty that is

taken place and that once bridge stayed. Is it true that many presidents have brought in the

insurrection act or called in the insurrection act in the past? No, it's extremely rare occurrence,

Mike, and it's been done in the past for reasons very different than what we are seeing here.

And so that's one of the problems with this conversation as you'll show us, and we have some

video as well. Yes, okay. Well, this was apparently because a new way of the protest began in

Minneapolis on the evening of the 14th of January following another shooting by federal agents

involving in this case a Venezuelan national on the north side of the city. This was the response

from the Minnesota governor Tim Walls. I'm making a direct appeal to the president. Let's turn

the temperature down, stop this campaign of retribution. This is not who we are and an appeal to

Minnesotians. I know this is scary. We can. We must speak out loudly urgently and also peacefully.

We cannot find the flames of chaos. That's what he wants, and he's referring to President Trump.

And it does, I have to say, Patrick, it does on the face of it. Look like that's what, you know,

there is definitely an attempt by the federal government to find the flames of this. The

language is increasingly aggressive and heated. And so this is bringing people out on the streets,

but it's also making ICE agents behave more and more bodily, it seems.

Well, they're giving a dog whistle from the federal government. They've been told they have

immunity from prosecution so they can commit any crimes. We've heard stories, Mike, when we

seen this well in video, which will show you some of them, they're ramming. They're rear-ending

cars because people won't get out of their cars. They want to do random stop and searches,

just check people's papers, see if they're US citizens or not. So they're ramming the back of people

to get them to stop and come out of the car and then they grab them. So Donald Trump is sent,

he sent reinforcements as well. So now 2500 roughly masked paramilitary agents who aren't actual

federal agents, but many of them have been hired to recruitment agencies that deal with mercenaries

and security guards and things like that. And so these aren't real sort of servants of the people

as it were. They're basically hired guns, wearing masks, and stopping people at random,

demanding to see their papers, demanding to prove their ID. I just see where this is going.

It's going to a very bad destination. And then you didn't show the other Trump tweet,

which we could have shown where he's saying there's going to be retribution to Minnesota

for putting up resistance to what looks like a federal invasion. And so funny, Mike,

because he's the same people on the right that were defending the Bundy family at Bundy Ranch for

federal overreach. And they went there and rallied to the support of the Bundy's because the federal

government had no jurisdiction coming in all guns blazing. In that case, that was 10 years ago.

And now you see a total reversal to write or cheering on executive power, the cheering on the

federal government, even in the face of killing American citizens. They're still cheering this on,

which I find to be extraordinary. It just shows you how dysfunctional US politics is at the moment.

Absolutely. Well, on Tuesday, if we bring this on screen, on Tuesday, six senior lawyers

from the US attorney's office in Minnesota resigned, along with four leaders of the Civil Rights

Division of the Justice Department. The Minnesota attorneys told the New York Times on screen

at the moment that they were outraged that instead of investigating the ice shooter and the

recent killing, senior justice department officials wanted to investigate the goods family.

And so they were also upset that the FBI were refusing to cooperate with state-level investigations.

And in the meantime, of course, Department of Homeland Security, Secretary Christy

Noam is facing impeachment efforts as a result of the ice behavior. The

article, the impeachment articles, detailed accusations against Noam, including obstruction

of Congress violations of public trust and self-dailing. The allegations are that she denied

access to ice facilities for Congress members, that she misused funds for personal gain,

and that she compromised public safety and constitutional rights. And this comes on top of the

controversy over the podium that she was standing behind earlier this week,

carrying the phrase, one of ours, all of yours. And that, for all, the four came about because

allegations that this was a Nazi-linked slogan, or perhaps the slogan was linked to the Civil War,

the Spanish Civil War, sorry. The fact-checkers were out and forced to deny this.

And I would ask why they were beginning to do that. But before we ask that question,

let's just have a look at that video clip that you were talking about, Patrick, because

we'll have a look at it and talk about it in a second. Yeah, this is one of the most tame.

So, Patrick, obviously, the allegation over that podium sign was that this was somehow linked

to Nazi behavior during the Second World War. And in fact, you know, as I said, the fact-checkers

have been out, if we bring the fact-check article on screen again, just for a second, they've been

out to make it clear this is not a phrase from Nazi Germany. But... What does it mean then?

Well, come on to that. My question is, why are the fact-checkers so keen to do this? Because they

all hit Trump. Don't they, at least, they've taken a very anti-Trump position.

Previously. Yeah. But so, why are the Russian

leaders defense? Well, could it be that it's not for his benefit that they've been quick to act?

Could it be that this slogan represents policy of Israel, which has been imported into the United

States? And they're now openly, you know, bragging about it effectively. The policy of collective

punishment, which is, which Israel has pursued for decades, because all the criticism of that

comment was all about Nazi Germany and Spanish Civil War. I didn't see anybody

drawing parallels. Was that what Israel has been doing? No. Well, it's it's common. The

Israel would normally say one Israeli dies. We're going to kill a thousand Palestinians or

something to that effect. It's a fascist, very authoritarian phrase, one of ours, all of yours.

There's no business being on a government podium. Let's be clear. Not unless the

government that you're looking at is representing an ideology that is different to the one you

think it's representing. And we're starting to see more and more that that is the case here, Mike,

that this isn't, you know, showing up and making a scene like that, grabbing people off the streets,

you know, ramming cars, pulling people out of cars and et cetera, demanding Americans show their

papers to prove that they're a citizen in a public space. I mean, this is never we never seen this

before in the US. Maybe there was maybe 150 years ago or something, but modern, modern times know.

So it is highly disturbing. And it speaks to, I think, a federal government, a Trump administration

that believes it's above the law that believes that and he has mocked the constitution in the past.

So he, you know, there's people are rightly saying he doesn't have any respect for the constitution

or international law, which he said this week that he doesn't need to abide by international law.

Normally, you see countries that don't recognize international law tend to also not recognize

domestic law either historically. Right. And I think the US is now facing that problem.

Basel, any thoughts? Well, it speaks to the extreme polarization in American society. Well,

the sort of, you know, the battle lines are really drawn between increasingly authoritarian and

violent oligarchy of which Trump is the current figurehead and a particularly erratic one. And

then the sort of the great mass of ordinary American people theoretically, Trump got a mandate for

all this from the Maga crowd, but Maga has since fractured and cratered and his support is

absolutely in the toilet. But it just shows that, you know, the sort of civil society that America

was built on over the last 200 years is starting to disintegrate. And yes, we do have to point out

that these ICE agents are trained in Israel, trained to use deadly ports, trained to regard

protesters and what we call civilians as the enemy. And that is a sea change in societal behavior.

Thank you, Basel. Okay, Patrick, let's move on then to Iran.

So a little, well, let's give you a very, very quick synopsis of where we're at with this story.

We'll bring this up on screen. So destabilizing Iran, this is exactly what the plan was and where

we're at right now is that there seems to be a low. We're told, Mike, that the Trump administration

has backed off strikes against Iran. There were pre-planned strikes against Iran. We now know

that these have been planned for weeks. So in the even the plan predated, predated the so-called

protests or demonstrations, which be really riots. That's some crystal ball. He's got right there.

And in Iran, and it is pretty clear what happened here. Trump telegraphed the plan. I think this

was one of his undoings. He said that if the regime, if the Mueller's shoot any protesters, we're

going to come in and intervene. So he said that early on. And then we find out Mike Pompeo,

former CIA director admits that Mossad is on the ground stirring up the protests. And the Israeli

press, the Jerusalem Post, also acknowledged this, as have other Israel 14 have acknowledged this.

They're boasting about the fact that they were gending up the violent riots that included

Arsene, burning of mosques, the murder of civilians, and the killing of 100 Iranian police.

Now, I don't know about you, Mike, but if there were, if there were foreign-backed mobs in Britain

that killed 100 police officers, do you think that the state would just be hands off and let the

democracy mobs flourish? Or would they just come down with the most incredible heavy hand?

Yes, they would. And in America too. But yet the American and the British governments are saying

in political leaders are saying, oh, they're being hard-handed with these democracy protesters.

So I think the game has been given up here on this. So Trump claims he's now claiming credit

for stopping the massacre that didn't happen. Now, there's a lot of reports, and we'll go through

the disinformation side of this, which to me is incredible. But let's just say, Lindsey Graham,

if you want an indication that the attacks are definitely off, I have never seen it so deflated

Lindsey Graham as in this clip, which to me is a pretty strong indication that there's not

going to be a strike for now, for now. But here is the South Carolina peach, Lindsey Graham.

There are a lot of headlines out there that are, and I view not accurate,

present, Trump's resolve is not the question. The question is, and when we do an operation like this,

should it be bigger or smaller? I'm in the camp a bigger time or till. I'm hopeful and optimistic

that the regime days are numbered.

I've never seen him that. I mean, he's been totally high on the Venezuela off, overthrown all

these governments and then the Dabami ran. I mean, Lindsey had such a whirlwind of excitement

over the last couple of weeks. But as well as that, he's been anticipating dealing with Iran

for how long? Decades, maybe. It's part of his life's work. Absolutely. And he thought we were

finally going to get that. It's the legacy of John McCain, his former close associate here.

So, but we're all these claims coming from about these massacres of Iranians. And the number

just keeps growing here. But I point people to this article here. We'll bring this up on screen.

This is a great report by the gray zone. Western media, white washes, deadly riots in Iran,

relying on US government-funded regime change NGOs. Now, this is incredible. National

endowment for democracy, which is really a CIA front. It's regarded as a CIA front by many people.

Let's just look, drill down a little closer into this situation here. So you've seen the claims

2000 have been massacred by the regime. And then a few hours later was 5,000. And then later that

day, it was 10,000. Then next day blew up to 20,000. I think it's probably at 50, maybe 100,000.

Seems to be going up by like 20,000 every few hours by the regime. And at every turn, you find

two actors, the US government and Israel. For example, unconfirmed casualty numbers coming from

Western, quote, human rights activists organizations. Here's one here, the Abdul Rahman,

Boramon Center for Human Rights in Iran. Well, it's not in Iran, Mike. It's in the United States.

And here's another one. This is another one that's also mentioned a lot. It was the center for

human rights in Iran. That's not actually in Iran. That's actually New York City. And this is

also a NED cutout organization. Iran International News. This has been admitted by former Israeli

intelligence officers as a clearinghouse for disinformation and Israeli propaganda on Iran.

And the latter will show there's other organizations here called the Human Rights Activist

News Agency. They were they were doing anti-China anti-China campaigning calling the Beijing

Winter Olympics, the genocide Olympics, that same organization. They were repurposed to work

on Iran in the last couple of weeks here. The Center for Human Rights in Iran, we mentioned that

as well. So incredible here. But here's this organ. You probably see a lot of this. Google is

giving this priority on searches. And again, this is admitted by Israeli intelligence officials as

being a disinformation hub for their propaganda anti-Iranian propaganda activities as well. Just

to a search here. Iran Human Rights Activist Network or Iran Human Rights. These are all western-based

NGOs. They're not in Iran. And the same exact, like the same exact formula was used for Syria.

We had the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. They used the same formula for Venezuela. These are

US-based or British-based or EU-based human rights organizations.

Who was behind the Syrian Observatory Human Rights? He was operating out of his bedrooms.

Rami Abdul Rahm above a chip shop in Coventry. Yes. But EU funded. That's not his real name.

That was his serial name. So again, so all of the western influencers, western politicians are

drawing off this propaganda and then repeating it. They're all putting these videos up online.

But Nigel Farage was out on the street. Now Nigel doesn't like to opine on foreign policy issues

unless they accept for boats coming over the channel. That's the extent of his foreign policy

portfolio in terms of commentary. But he's really engaged in this regime change

story on Iran. Here is Nigel Farage just the other day. I believe if I'm not mistaken,

this is the front of the Iranian Embassy. That's right. Yes. We'll roll this.

Yes, we're going to win. I don't know the terrible price. The terrible price being paid.

I find it very innocent people in every Iranian city right now. But you've got to believe that

this is the moment. We really appreciate you. May God bless you. I wish everything.

What made God bless all of you.

So this is new. That Nigel Farage seems to be taking a position on international affairs.

Well, he's taken a positional right, Mike. He took a position in front of the Iran royalty flag.

So he is effectively advocating for the return of a monarchy. Even if he didn't explicitly say it,

those are all pro monarchists there in front of a monarchy flag. And the monarch himself,

the son of the shawl, Reza Pallavi, Jr. as it were, he's on record as saying he doesn't know

anybody in Iran because he's lived his whole life in the suburbs of Washington. He's seen

Los Angeles for the last 50 years. So he himself is not popular. He doesn't actually have a support

base. So they're not going to take power. It's just not going to happen. And again, we're

challenging all of these claims about these massacres by the quote regime. When in fact,

we have more evidence, documented evidence that Iranians, Iranian law enforcement and people

trying to basically stop arson and violence on the streets were killed on mass. So again,

the claims of thousands of protesters slaughtered or executed or hung, it just hasn't materialized.

But the propaganda keeps flowing. Here's a good example of it. Another one from the west,

probably from the United States, probably involved in these organizations somehow. And there's

hundreds, if not thousands of these videos, many of them have been paid for, which will show you.

These people are being paid activists, many of these. But here's a typical one right here.

The equivalent of 4 9 11's have happened in Iran in just the last four days. For context,

the death toll of the last three years of the Russia-Ukraine war stands at 14,500. The number of

protesters killed by the Islamic Republic stands at 12,000 in just the last four days. These

numbers are being confirmed by rights groups, doctors working in Tehran's hospitals,

and people who recently left Iran. This number focuses only on Tehran, the country's capital,

not a sum of all of Iran's 31 provinces. Iran is going into day 7 of a total internet blackout.

We'll only receive updated numbers once the country is reconnected to the outside world.

The estimated number of those killed is said to be in the tens of thousands. This is a mass

casualty event that has been overwhelming Iran's hospitals. Witnesses report regime

forces shooting to kill using military-grade weapons and automatic machine guns typically

reserve for the IRGC. Witnesses also confirm that the regime is shooting at anyone on the streets,

whether you're a protester or not. This means they're not targeting. They're just shooting at random.

Doctors report receiving victims who have been shot in the face and who have been shot at close

range, including the elderly and teenagers. One witness sent a voice note saying that when people

go to retrieve bodies of their loved ones from the morgue, they've been asked to pay an exorbitant

fee. This is another cruelty the regime imposes on family members of protesters. This person also

said that they were asked she didn't use koo, which means where are the sweets? Where are the

pastries? In our culture when something good happens, like you get a new job, you have a baby,

you buy a house, people ask you, oh where are the pastries? She didn't use koo. It's a celebratory

thing. This is the evil with which the regime treats Iranian people. They're asking it of people

who are coming to pick up the dead bodies of their loved ones. Friend of my friend sent a message

and said that her cousin was shot in the face and is now dead. We're reaching the point where every

Iranian you know, know someone who has been killed or is friends with someone who knows someone

who has been killed. Many of us are still unable to reach our loved ones. The Islamic Republic is

massacring civilians in real time. They're shooting them in the eyes with bird shot. They're shooting

them in the head at close range and leaving a trail of bodies and blood in the streets. Please do not

stay silent. Please share what this regime is doing and please stand with the people of Iran.

So just just to be clear, I'm like some of these are scripted because we have found videos from

different people reading the exact same talking points, the exact same script. And what happened was

and it's admitted, the Israelis admit that they had agents on the ground. Probably the CIA,

probably British intelligence were involved as well. It's not being naive. And then the Chinese helped

to basically jam starlink. Musk sent thousands of starlink terminals into Iran and the Chinese

jammed it. And that's when the riots started to fizzle out because they weren't able to coordinate

and do all the things they over the internet. So that's incredible. So just before you move on,

I just want to make the point that the this story about an exorbitant fee being charged for the

recovery of bodies. That was on the BBC news front page today. So they're taking some of these

narratives themselves and promoting them. And exactly. And notice what she said, like a friend of a

friend called me and told me dot, dot, dot, this is just like 40 beheaded babies. So and this is

the same type of thing. Oh, I know somebody who knew somebody mass rape after October 7th, etc.

These, this is the propaganda that's used to basically they want to pressure Trump to bomb

Iran. This is clear in all of the messaging. So they think they get a soft touch with Donald

Trump on this issue. So let's look at the funding briefly here just quickly. Many of you are already

aware of this. Who are the influencers? Israel is paying $7,000 per post on X. So there's huge

budgets. Millions have been allocated to the Esther project among many as well as social media

influencer agencies that are basically paying young influencers in the West to put out these

videos that we need to save the people of Iran. Trump, please bomb, please intervene. We need to

get rid of their genes. Twenty thousand have been massacred. There's mass rape. I even heard

mass rape going on in Iran. So it's the same type of propaganda that we saw from the Israeli

side before it's being repurposed a massive operation. They're spending tens of millions,

maybe hundreds of millions on the total information warfare side of this. And they've been,

many of these people are making getting paid a lot of money to do this. So please people be

aware that everything you're seeing on social media, a lot of it is completely engineered,

and it's a very expensive, expensive propaganda. Okay. And well, it's just very briefly mentioned

that the Plymouth Herald today has a story saying that there's a major protest planned for Plymouth

as death toll rises. So even in local media, we're getting the same propaganda as they're talking

about thousands of people dying and major protests, major protests planned. I think that's

probably going to be about it tomorrow. But anyway, my point is this is being brought down

absolutely to the local level as they try to push this. No, this looks like the royal flag as well.

Yes. So these are royalists. Yes. Absolutely. Yes. So how's the monarchy democratic? Well,

answer another question. That's another question. Okay. Let's move on to Greenland then.

And well, here is a tweet. And we're going to say that this is according to Danish media.

This is showing the meeting between Danish foreign minister and Donald Trump. So that was a

couple of days ago. And this was on the request of Danish and Greenland governors,

government sorry, because they've had their first meeting up with Trump, but actually mainly with

Janie Vance and also Marco Rubio about this demand for Trump to take over Greenland.

And so they were represented by Lars Rasmussen, who's the Danish foreign minister and the Greenland

foreign minister Vivian Modsfeld. And so the main message that they were trying to get across

after the meeting was the meeting was held in a respective tone that they and the United States

representatives agreed to disagree and to continue discussions. And then a high level working group

was going to be set up to see if there was any way to achieve some kind of agreement with respect

the security concerns of the United States while they say not crossing the kingdom of Denmark's

red lines about maintaining the sovereignty of its land. So I wonder is the kingdom of Greenland

in a position to have red lines? Now it's reported that Rasmussen stressed that it was sorry

stressed that he and Modsfeld were able to oppose the narrative that Chinese and Russians

pose an imminent threat to Greenland. But that's quite strange because that's not the message

she was expressing during his comment to the press following the meeting. Let's just have a

brief lesson to this. But I must say that of course we share to some extent his concerns.

There's definitely a new security situation in the Arctic and the high north. All of us,

Transatlantic, took the peace dividend years ago and we have the vision of keeping Arctic

as a low tension reaching. So that doesn't seem to quite add up with that. But anyway,

the Trump's press secretary Karen Levitt said on yesterday that the two sides agreed to establish

a working group which we just mentioned. He will continue to have technical, not that one

with him sorry, have technical talks on the acquisition of Greenland. The President has made

his priority quite clear. The U.S. wants to acquire Greenland. He thinks it's in our best

interest for national security since that since the meeting the headlines of course have been

full of this BBC article here of troop deployments to Greenland. So we've got the BBC here.

We've also got C and BC here. NATO nations deployed to Greenland after tense White House talks.

They're using terms like deploy. They're hinting at something serious. The situation is not

quite as they had lines with wanters to believe. What has actually happened is that small numbers

of personnel have gone to Greenland to take part in Operation Arctic Endurance, which is a

Danish-led NATO military exercise. And I'm not going to deny that Arctic Endurance has clearly

been quickly organized because it doesn't appear on the NATO Supreme Headquarters allied parts

Europe exercise page which we can see here. It's not on that list. The first event is Arctic Dolphin

which take place in February. Now back in September we mentioned this article in the BBC suggesting

that the competition for control of the Arctic is getting risky. And at the same time Patrick and

I had attended a screening of a propaganda documentary called Arming the Arctic. And so you know

while the rhetoric continues about Russian and Chinese ships and circling Greenland,

that rhetoric is clearly pretty unhinged. Nonetheless, Western nations clearly unhappy with the

fact that Russia and China are way ahead in developing the Arctic Silk Road with the first

continued ship bringing goods from China to Felix still last September. But my question is this

Patrick can just be very interested in your thoughts on that. On this, is Trump's rhetoric about

Greenland really about Russia and China? Or is this I really on the 51st state Canada? Because

we bring the map on screen here. Of course, what we see is that if he does get his mits on Greenland

Canada is effectively encircled, isn't it? And with all the additional rhetoric about Mexico,

Colombia, and Cuba, Cuba, it actually looks like he wants the whole of North and South America.

Yes, at least the whole of North America, saved Mexico for now, Mike. But Canada is a British common

wealth state, isn't it officially? Officially, but are we going to go to war with the United States?

Well, it's like we got the Europe and Britain have dealing with Putin on the other side,

threatening to invade, I just invade Europe. Then they've got now Trump on the other side.

So it's like a pincer movement with the US and Russia coming in. I mean, it's just so ridiculous.

Totally. The whole thing. But what's the real motivation? Is it about China and Russia occupying

Greenland? Of course, not. Don't be silly. Does Russia need any additional land? I kind of don't

think so. But anyway, this is what it has to do with. Let's not kid ourselves here. Donald Trump

is BSing sorry to be explicit. He's BSing the public on this. How a billionaire with interest in

Greenland encouraged Donald Trump to acquire the territory. This ladies and gentlemen is Ronald

Lauder, a friend of Trump. Of course, Trump has many billionaire friends, doesn't he? One day,

during the first term, Donald Trump summoned a top aid to discuss a new idea. Trump called me

down to the Oval Office as says John Bolton, who is his national security advisor. He just said

the prominent businessman had just suggested the US buy Greenland. That was in Donald Trump's first

term and understand the significance of this year. Like many of those around the president,

Ronald Lauder's policy suggests it appeared to intersect with his business interests. So the

policy intersects with the business and his Trump has ratcheted up his threats to seize Greenland

Lauder has acquired commercial holdings there, surprise, surprise. Lauder is also part of the

consortium whose desire to access Ukrainian minerals appears to have spurred Trump to demand

a share of the war torn countries resources here. Ladies and gentlemen, do we any further questions

on the motivation behind these policies? Remember when Trump said we're going to get the raw

earths? It's rare earths, but Trump said raw earths, raw earths. And what happened with the raw

earths? Nothing's been signed. It hasn't been done, but he's still there's plans to try to leverage

those away from Ukraine. And he's doing it here in Greenland. So all you people that are,

you know, pro Zelensky waving you Ukrainian flag, like there's some valiant cause for democracy.

This is nothing more than a resource grab. Can you work this out yet? I hope so. And by the way,

Jeff Bezos, Peter Theo, they've also got interests in Greenland and the rare earths in Greenland,

as well as putting data centers up there and creating an AI hub in Greenland. This is all real.

So there's nothing to do with Russia and China. But then again, we're talking about Donald Trump

here. So we have to try to tease out his logic, Mike. Don't we? We do. No, I'm going to say, Patrick,

I'm no fan of John Stewart at all, because particularly during the COVID year,

Steve is appalling along with Stephen Colbert and others, but he's found his footing again.

Yeah. It's just he has because I can't really disagree with anything he says in this clip.

So let's just end the program with John Stewart here.

I don't understand. Why do we have to take over Greenland?

If we don't do it, Russia or China will take over Greenland and we're not going to have Russia or China as a neighbor.

We're already f***ing hatred.

Russia's already, aren't we? This is where Greenland is.

Russia's closer. Unless in your mind you think Alaska lives in a box next to white.

No, I get it, I get it. We don't want Russia or China to take over Greenland.

Oh, you know what we could do to deter it, not through arrogance or conquest.

But what if we formed like kind of an alliance with Denmark and Greenland?

We could include all the North Atlantic nations.

What what would we call this?

Like like almost like a North Atlantic treaty organization that we I don't know what we could

guy guess we'll never know. But again, since we all now dance to the tune of one Piper,

what possible justifications could you have for just taking someone else's land?

And please, if you would, irony proof your answer.

I'm a fan of Denmark, but you know the fact that they had a boat land there 500 years ago,

does it mean that they own the land?

Can someone pass him a note?

How do you think we got our land?

Yeah, so I mean, I'm afraid it's hard to disagree with that.

Of course, I mean, just a couple of miles down the road there is the

Plymouth, the Mayflower Stests, that's where it all happened, they landed a boat in

in Massachusetts 400 plus years ago. So anyway, Trump's not big on history,

so let's not let's not get too hard on them, yeah, too well, no, you know,

on the details. Well, it's just history.

Okay, well, look, we got to finish there because we're out of time. We'll be back in a few minutes

for some UK column news extra. Basel will be joining us for some more discussion on what

we've been talking about today. If you UK column member join us for that stay on the live stream.

If you're not a member, maybe you would like to join us and then you can take part in that

discussion as well. Thank you to Basel and Patrick and everybody who's been watching.

Don't forget Jerome and Karl tonight and also Jake Fernand Sunday night at seven.

But have a great weekend and we will see you on Monday at 1pm as usual. Thanks for joining us. Bye,