Good afternoon. It's Wednesday the 29th of May 2024, just after 1:00. Welcome to UK column News. I'm your host, Mike Robson. Joining me in the studio today is Charles Mallett. Welcome to the programme, Charles. So much Mike. And from Damascus, as usual, is Vanessa Bailey. Now, Vanessa, we're going to get started off with Rafa. We mentioned it briefly on Monday, but you've got the
details. Yes, I'm sure everybody is well aware of what happened on Sunday night with the Israeli bombing of what was effectively a refugee camp close to the UNRWA, UN agency. So this is just a little video to recap for everyone if we can just roll that None. I mean, really as the UN described that this was an abomination and and we've seen plenty of massacres in the last seven months inside Gaza and even also in the occupied
territories. But this came in the context and I think this is one of the interesting points to make. So this bombardment was basically in, as I said, an UNRWA area, a safe area. Supposedly the Knesset is the whole preliminary vote designating UNRWA a terror organization after their absolutely fraudulent claim that members from us, we're working with UNRWA from the 7th of October onwards. Bearing in mind, of course, that Hamas is the official recognized government of Gaza.
Also. It came at the time also or just after the ICJ International Criminal Court Gaza ruling. Israel was ordered to halt its rougher offensive, open the Gaza Egypt crossing parade, which has effectively been close since the 7th of October, thanks both to Israel and Egypt. And of course, at the same time as the ICC had put in a request for arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Yoaf Gallant.
Now I just want to play those. Not my favorite person, and I apologize for putting him out there again. But let's have a look at how the US basically refuses to say that even this massacre has not crossed any red line for human rights abuses and war crimes. So this is John Kirby speaking to reporters. Every case believes that the US doesn't want to see a major ground operation in Rafa. But. Israeli tanks just moved into central Rafa. How is that?
Not a major military. Well, again, I don't want to talk about Israeli Defence Force operations, but my understanding is, and I believe the Israelis have spoken to this, that they are moving along something called the Philadelphi Corridor, which is on the outskirts of the town, not in the town proper. That's what the Israelis have said. We don't want to see a major ground operation. We haven't seen that at this point.
How many more charred corpses does he have to see before the president considers a change of policy? We don't want to see a single more. Innocent life taken and I kind of take a little offence at the question. No civilian casualties is the right number of civilian casualties and this is not something that we've turned a blind eye to, nor has it been something we've ignored or neglected to raise with our Israeli counterparts, including Ed this weekend as a result of
this particular strike. Now they're investigating it. So let's let them investigate it and see what they come up with. Unfortunately for Kirby, the headline in Jewish media, in Hebrew media, IDF thanks role into central Rafa in an unprecedented thrust into the city. So either the information that he was being given is wrong, or yet again he's trying to fudge details. Basically reaction internationally was strong against massacre and Rafa from Spain, Norway, Ireland.
As the foreign minister in Ireland said, one cannot bomb an area like that without shocking consequences in terms of innocent children and civilians. All of these countries are speaking about a Palestinian state.
Personally, I think A2 state solution is playing lip service to the Zionist entity and it should basically be up to Palestinians to be able to liberate the territories that have been taken from them by the occupying force, including territory that has been taken since the 7th of October. Even a member of the Israeli Knesset aid to Miss Lima. This bloody government refuses to obey all orders of the tribunal and is taking the madness and vindictiveness for a
new criminal level. What did Netanyahu have to say bearing in mind Kirby is waiting for the results of a war criminal nation investigation into its own war crimes?
Netanyahu roughest strike is a tragic accident, will never cave to Hamas while the UN is, as they said, calling it the most cruel abomination as EU weighs up the ideas of sanctions on Israel. But within 24 hours, having called Rafa, the first rough bombing, a mistake, at least 21 were killed in Israeli attacks on 10th camp near Gaza. Rafa and again close to an Unruh agency centre and warehouse. And I just wanted to show this. This was from Haaretz article.
So this was rougher pre April 2024. You can see that the majority of the buildings are intact and this is our rougher looks now on a satellite match. So we can see the extent to which Israel has effectively deployed this entire area, which was sold by Israel as being a safe area. And we shouldn't forget who has given Israel the grim lights carry out these massacres. Biden, Sunak von der Leyen, who is facing an ICC prosecution for her simplicity in genocide, and of course, Keir Starmer.
And when I went to Twitter, both Keir Starmer and Rishi Sunak to see what they had potentially said about this appalling massacre. Imagine that this has been an attack carried out by Russia against Ukraine. They would be all over Twitter in outrage. But in reality, on the very day that the attack was carried out, this is what Rishi Sunak was doing.
Play the video. Not sure what to say at the end of that, but there you go. No, there's not really much to say, Vanessa. Of course, these people are effectively enabling this. So we're playing balls and playing at politics at this time. Well, I think that clearly it seems to me that that this topic and the issue of what's going on in Gaza is off the table as far
as the election is concerned. I think that all, you know, both sides of the, at least the two main parties see this as a divisive issue and they don't want to go near it at election time. Yeah, absolutely. But I think with demonstrations that have been going on since the Rough Massacre, they're going to be forced to confront the situation at some point. Yes, indeed. OK, thank you very much for that. Now let's come back to the UK and at least initially anyway.
Now on Monday we were talking about this issue of National Service and we were, if you remember, we're drawing parallels with what Admiral Sir Tony Rattigan had said earlier in the year with respect to conscription. And could it not being in a traditional sense of the word that they were using the term conscription back in January and whatnot. Now it's not just the UK, at least not just the Tory party that's talking about this.
This is something that's being talked about in other European countries as well. So here is headline. Italy's League party introduces Bill to bring back compulsory military service. This is from the 22nd of May Bill proposes 6 months of civil or military service for 18 to 26 year olds. It's not just Italy and Germany. This is your act of saying Germany moles reintroducing conscription. This one is from March this
year. But actually Germany just in the last couple of days has been talking about pulling back from making it a compulsory thing. So Germany attempting to talk about this in the same kind of language as the UK as as being a voluntary sort of thing, at least initially. So this is the Bundes, the Bundesfair saying voluntary military service, an opportunity, not an obligation. Security cannot be taken for granted.
Protecting Germany and its citizens is and will remain the central mission of the Bundesfair in the future. Everyone can do their part to defend the values which whose values? Because of course, the response to this, at least in the UK and I suspect further afield, has been an utter rejection of the entire idea.
So I see, as far as I can see, on one hand, governments needing the personnel because they're clearly on a war footing now and they see the need in the not too distant future for people at a time, particularly in the UK, as we mentioned on Monday, where there is a complete inability to recruit for the military. So they're trying to force people into it. But nonetheless, at least initially talking about it being a voluntary thing. In the meantime, what do we have
going on? Well, a few days ago when The Economist, The Economist interviewed Jans Stoltenberg, secretary general of NATO. And if you want to see the full interview, it's headline. NATO's boss wants free to free Ukraine and strike hard inside Russia. And let's just look at the complete insanity of what he's
saying here. The time has come for allies to consider whether they should lift some of the restrictions they've put on the use of weapons that they've donated to Ukraine, especially now when a lot of the fighting is going on
in Kharkiv, close to the border. To deny Ukraine the possibility of using these weapons against legitimate military targets on Russian territory makes it very hard for them to defend themselves so openly calling for Western weapons to be used across the border in Russia. This is a direct attack, therefore, on Russia, and Russia is very clear in its military doctrine about what this what happens in retaliation should that kind of thing take place. But it's not just Stoltenberg.
This is the Russian Parliamentary Assembly pushing out a press release yesterday and they're saying in this UK, Ukraine must be provided with all that it needs as quickly as possible and for as long as it takes for it to win.
It went on to say that allied governments, so-called allied governments, need to support Ukraine and its international right to defend itself by lifting some restrictions on the use of weapons provided by NATO allies to strike legitimate targets in Russia. And this is something that they describe as a hard hitting declaration.
So of course, the response from Russia, if we just put that back a second, Stephanie. So here's the response from Russia, this is Sergei Lavrov. I doubt that the secretary general can take it upon himself to speak on behalf of members of the bloc before the issue is discussed within NATO. Well, it seems, based on this Parliamentary Assembly press release, it has been at least to some degree discussed within
NATO. He went to say, he went on to say, I believe that Stoltenberg has stepped outside of his authority. I think that may be true. This is Dmitry Peskov and his response. This cannot be his personal opinion. He is an official. He is the secretary general of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and that's how we perceive it. He went on say NATO is increasing the degree of escalation. NATO is flirting with warlike rhetoric, falling into wartime
ecstasy. This is the reality that we have to continue to deal with and I don't think that's an unfair position. What are your thoughts? No, I. Don't, I don't think it's an unfair position at all. And I think this, you know, this entire narrative is, is the crafting of an emergency. Specifically with regard to the suggestion here of national service, it's often said that people forget their history.
I think in a sense that politicians haven't, although they have no regard for practical delivery troubles because of course the armed forces were enormous. I mean, you know, millions of men last time this was tried. But what people forget is how quickly it was done. The Military Training Act in 1939 happened before the war started. It was in May, 240,000 people signed up immediately. And then when war was declared in September, the National Service Act came into effect
that day. So I think people would do well to bear in mind how quickly these things can be changed. Yes, it's it's. The unfortunate thing is that should there be a complete rejection of the idea, they don't have the prison spaces to put people in. So at this point in time. So it is a bit tricky situation for them. But it's not just NATO. So here's Joseph Burrell, the foreign, so-called foreign minister of the European Commission.
Let's listen to this. We discuss also about something which has been high in the media and Secretary General of NATO referring to it. It is the possibility of lifting restrictions on Western weapons used by Ukrainian forces to target military objectives in Russia territory, in self defence, but in Russian territory.
It's clear that this is a legitimate action on the international law when it is being used in a proportional manner, but it's also clear that it is a decision for each individual member states to take and to take their responsibility on doing that or not. So Vanessa, very, very briefly, I realize I'm hijacking you a little bit here, but he is now claiming that this would be a legitimate action under
international law. We're going to come on to the so-called rules based international order in a minute. But this is just it's a perversion of international law. Well, of course it is. You know, everything that the West is doing and NATO is doing right now is a distortion of international law that is being bent out of shape in order to comply with their agendas. Whether it's Israel, whether it's Ukraine, China. International law is effectively non existent to the West. Yeah, indeed.
So we're going to come on a little bit more in a second on that. But just to mention again, Reuters here reporting that the Ukrainians at least believe that the French are going to send boots on the ground for training in, in order to train personnel in Ukraine. So not to go to the front lines they claim. But anyway, that's, that's the the French themselves still trying to pull back from this position, but that seems to be
increasing. But let's come on to the international law aspect of this because it's an article that was published in the Financial Times by Gideon Rachman. And it's really quite incredible because he's he's effectively admitting that the rules based international order is basically whatever Britain and the United States decides that it is. And he basically says that because it's really something that's mutable and can be changed and whatnot.
That's just abandoned the term rules based international order completely and instead use a completely different term and something which is which is really just about protecting the West or some nonsense like this. So defending the free world, that's what it was. So that was what he was trying to do. So we need to rebrand and make
it defending the free world. In the meantime, Zelensky has been in Europe and Spain in particular, but he's mostly concerned about the fact that there's going to be a so-called peace conference in Switzerland in a few days time. And President Biden might not be there because President Biden is also campaigning and he's apparently running a fundraising event or so on. But of course, Russia hasn't been invited to this peace conference. And so it's not a peace conference at all.
It's much more about organizing the the war effort and so on is how it seems. So, but he's unhappy that Biden might not be there because of electoral commitments. Now, if anybody thinks of course, that getting rid of Sunak is going to get rid of the war agenda and that that Starmer is going to be better, I don't, I'm sure pretty sure not if our
viewers think that. But anyway, just in case you do, let's just remind ourselves what Starmer's attitude was during the COVID pandemic, and you can decide for yourself whether he was he's prepared to take a sort of opposition stance. Anti vaxxers getting platforms and so on well. We have to deal with the anti vax campaigns because they will cost lives and if we need to pass emergency legislation to deal with them, I'd be quite prepared to work with the
government on that. We could pass it in a couple of days in Parliament and the sooner we do that, frankly the better because for many NHS staff it is really distressing. They're under huge pressure and it's been building over the last few weeks and months. They're all doing their level
best. They're all seeing that it's getting very, very difficult and to come out and to have to confront that or even hear that is against the national interest and let, if we need legislation, I'll sit down with Boris Johnson. We can draft it, we can pass it very, very quickly because that misinformation. So there you go. Quite clearly at that time he was quite happy to be a member of the UNI party. And I suspect that nothing has changed there.
We're going to get the same kind of nonsense. So look, here's my point. This is where we're heading unless we change TAC. And this isn't to scare anybody, but we've got to be realistic about the kind of lunatics that we have running the asylum at the moment and we need a change.
And so I want to really strongly urge people to get involved in this general election and get these fools out because there's nobody from any of the mainstream parties that is actually taking a pro peace position at the moment. And the direction of travel is extremely dangerous. But anyway, extremism, that might be an extremist view, you see. So we've talked about extremism and the new definition of extremism, which Charles is going to mention again in a second, but there's been an
update on this. It has. Thanks very much, Mike. Yes, essentially the The Continued reframing of extremism, most recently updated last week in the House of Commons with the Land for Parliament of Lord Warney's report on what's called Protecting our Democracy from Coercion. The then Minister of Security, Tom Tuguenad, from whom we've heard a lot on this issue, talked about it being a timely and compelling report identifying a rising tide of
extremism. And its central finding is that political intimidation and the incitement of hatred by extremist groups and individuals are infringing on the essential rights and freedoms of the British people. So we'll have a look into the report itself here. It is protecting our democracy from coercion.
And he starts with a a forward talking about the elected representatives facing violent threats on a daily basis and intimidation, slightly surprisingly, or maybe not, he refers to noble causes such as the battle against climate change being hijacked by extremist groups. And at the same time, hostile states have been emboldened. So he's very much conflating the apparent sort of risks and threats from within and without the country. I've compiled a sort of scorecards.
You might be interested to know what topics turn up more frequently than than others. Perhaps far right, Top of the pops with 171, far left only 154, transgender, Black lives matter, anti vax, climate change, anti-Semitism, a fairly high score with 103. And of course nationalism, which crept in as being guarded now as a sort of criminal offence. But he also makes recommendations, and I think
this one's particularly telling. Specifically left wing anarchist and single issue threats to provide ideological coherence to the categories and add the word extreme to avoid unintentionally conflating mainstream left wing views with the far left.
Now of course the the far right has not been afforded the same privilege or indeed the right also a recommendation for MI 5 and Counter terrorism to publish information specifically to allow researchers, journalists and the wider public to track, report on and better understand the threat from failed terrorist
attempts. Now my question is what sort of researchers, journalists and wider public, because I would doubt that it includes absolutely everybody and as Mike said, the definition of extremism, which is enabling all of this narrative to be put forward.
But just to remind you, it's now defined as the promotion or advancement of an ideology based on violence, hatred or intolerance that aims to negate or destroy the fundamental rights and freedoms of others or undermine, overturn or replace the UK system, system of liberal parliamentary democracy and democratic rights or, or to create the environment where either of those things is possible.
Now the point of that is really what it's doing is shifting the ground in order to demonise people and describe them as being intolerant or full of hatred. And the shift here, as I say, is described as being the threat from extremism has been steadily growing for many years. So it's this idea that this is getting worse and worse. But also he goes on to say this is in line with the first duty of our government to keep our citizens safe and our country
secure. Most extremist materials and activities are not illegal and do not meet a terrorism or national security threshold. I think that's a very important point. But of course glossed over. And I simply finished by with with the the quotes attributed to the Code of Hammurabi from 1772 BC. In actual fact, saying that the first duty of government is to protect the powerless from the powerful, which is quite a significant diversion from what Walney has suggested.
And if you want to know where this comes from and indeed why we're on this path, we look at the document Operating with Impunity, which is referenced. This goes back to February 2021 and Sir Mark Rowley, the the Metropolitan Police Commissioner involved in putting that together in which he said my last role in policing was a national responsibility leading
counter terrorism policing. During those years I saw terrorism and extremism transforming terrorism more from small secret organisations to terrorism inspired and encouraged via social media, something we've talked about a
lot in the past. Terrorism leaders split their efforts between the long established tactic of planning large scale events and the new tactic for spreading their ideology online and through their agents to grow support and use this outreach to inspire some of their new followers into lone actor attack. So it looks like that that in order to cement this seed in in people's heads, the the there are going to need to be lone actors found around who's next.
This sort of accusation can be hung. But but this to just make the point that this was rarely in in 2021. Of course, he was appointed Metropolitan Police commissioner in 2022. And I would put it that this is a very obvious reason for why that's why he was put in the job. OK, if you like what the UK column does, you'd like to support us, you can do so by going to support.ukcolumn.org and there are options to help us out there. It is only £5 a month for a membership and that absolutely
helps massively. So if you can't possibly do that, please do join us. Do share anything you find on the various platforms, especially ukcolumn.org. UK column extracts.co.uk Not on Facebook anymore. I believe Vanessa has the same problem. We'll talk about that in extra. And if you've seen anything on the shop that you would like, please pick something up there because that helps us out greatly as well.
Now tomorrow at tomorrow is the anniversary of the passing of Arnie Burkhart, who did so much work on mRNA vaccines and so on. Now Taylor Hudak will be introducing a short a summary of her interview with him, the the last interview that she did with him that'll go out at 1:00 PM tomorrow.
Please join us for that. So that's the anniversary of Arnie's passing and we want to, to note to, to take note of that and so on. So also at the weekend or sorry, on the weekend of June the 2nd of 2024, if you would like to head over to Glasgow, if you're in Scotland and there's going to be an event there for the vaccine injured. So please do visit that if you possibly can. And of course, Charles, on Monday you were travelling back from the Stand in the Light event, Yes.
Go through driving rain. But the the festival itself was a great success. And so just to feedback, I think that the sense of delight at being able to encounter people face to face and share broadly similar views was really appreciated by everybody that turned up. UK column had a had a stand there, which I'll just show you. You can see Brian sort of surrounded by people who were very generous in their words and coming up to engage with us at
UK column. Also a great opportunity for Kenny and Claire there to to sell a good quantity of very special merchandise. But really just an encouragement to people to get out to these sorts of events because the the they're very, very good-natured. They're they're a great way of re engaging and encountering people with someone who's to, you know, to push the things forward that you care most about in life. So it was a real success, very well organized, absolutely beautiful countryside and.
There were about 1200 there were. About 1200 people there, I think. Yeah. So it was a lovely, it was a really good size too. Yeah, brilliant. OK, Now on Monday we were discussing the launch of the World Health Assembly and, well, one of the video clips that Mark Anderson showed was this one. Let's just have a look at it again. Also at the Assembly, WHO will be launching a new global health strategy developed in partnership with 194 Member States and partners, Which?
Sets a course for getting the world back on track to hit the health related Sustainable Development Goals. Crucial decisions are expected on a range of health priorities such as climate and health, WH OS work in health emergencies, access to transformative tools, communicable diseases, non communicable diseases, mental health, Women's Health and the.
Reform of WHO itself On 26th May, WHO will be launching our first investment round, a new mechanism for WHO, which the Executive Board approved in January. The investment round is designed to ensure that voluntary contributions, which are currently the majority of our funding, will be more predictable, flexible and sustainable. Our new investment case outlines why and how supporting WHO is essential for progress in global health and saving millions of lives.
It will be launched on 28th May during the Assembly. And indeed, it was launched yesterday. And here is the first graphic that they want to show. We're not sure what kind of salute that is that they're giving, but what the World Health Organization will deliver between 2025 and 2028. So this is all about working with existing donors and other partners. They are calling it an investment round. So it's like a venture capital kind of thing that they're attempting to to sell it as here.
And it aims to attract new donors through an inclusive, inclusive engagement process will culminate in a high level financing event in the fourth quarter of 2024. So let's just look at what they're doing. So 40 million additional lives saved globally. This is their elevator pitch that you're seeing right now, by the way, because this is what you know, it's like Dragon's Den. So they're attempting to sell this to investors. What else did they say?
7 billion people protect better, protected from health emergencies. This is the World Health Organization's doing this. It's fantastic work. It deserves massive investment. 6 billion people unable to live healthier lives, they claim, and 5 billion people able to access health services without financial hardship. But they had produced in the actual report a nice little infographic which tells us what the funding gap is that they have between 2025 and 2028. So there's $7.1 billion short of
what they need. And I would say that that there's an opportunity for a campaign that they to make sure that they remain $7.1 billion short of their with respect to their funding. And well, what more can we say? We're going to have James Rogowski with us on Friday's programme to give us a full update on what's been going on this week at the World Health Assembly.
So join us for that on Friday. Now, in the meantime, avian flu, Charles. Yes, yes, again, but this time there is rather more to talk about I think, because what we see is the slow March towards a well choreographed move into the creation of a pandemic. And I will just go through this
sort of step by step. This morning the Human Animal Infections and Risk Surveillance Group, part of the UK Health Security Agency, published a document called Avian Influenza in Livestock, The risk statement. Now I'm not going to go through the specific details of it, but the point is that you put the suggestion out there that there is a defined risk or threat and you allow that information to circulate whilst submitting at the same time that there are
evidence gaps. So they admit that the source of infection to the index farm is a gap of gap in evidence. So is the severity of clinical signs, critically, the risk to other ruminants and mammalian livestock. And also there's uncertainty around the transmission risks to humans in contact with affected cattle, risk factors associated with increased susceptibility and disease severity in human cases. So they're putting it all out
there. But of course, the headline really is there is a risk or a threat. Now where is that coming from? The UKHSA put out a extraordinary graphic suggesting that bird flu in Europe seems to be coming from Russia, but of course they don't substantiate that even at all. Russia is not actually referred to. And yet here we are now, also from last month, avian influenza in US cattle, of course suggesting therefore that this could be anywhere.
So here we go. Bird leaf cows were monitoring reports of highly pathogenic avian influenza identified in dairy cattle. We'll come on to exactly how it was identified later. These reports do not change the risk level for animals in the UK, which is currently low. And we've no reason to suspect the virus is circulating in our cattle. Not for now at least. And nor is this virus strain circulating in Europe.
So the Food Standard Agency remaining advice remains that avian influenza poses a very low food safety risk. But of course that doesn't matter because if the food has tested for it, then it will be destroyed and will not be fit for human consumption because that's what they say. So that's the first bit. You put that sort of information out there and then you need a willing media to effectively corroborate the the suggestion that there is going to be a
pandemic coming to here. We have the BBC obliging and of course the question is cows in the US of bird flu? Is it inching closer to humans? And they are of course desperate that it should be despite the absolute absence of evidence. And here written up as the long feared leak, the H5 N one strain of avian flu has been around since 1996. Well, that's very much a qualified statement, but until now it has been largely confined to animals.
But now it's jumped to cattle in America, and some think it means we're inching towards eventual human to human infection with potentially serious consequences. I should point out this article was written by somebody called David Aronovich, who has absolutely no background in science, medicine, or anything to do with animals. Anyway, the next thing is of course to be prepared for the
outcomes. And here we have the Animal Welfare Commission reporting just last week on the use of high expansion nitrogen foam for culling poultry. This is effectively where you just fill poultry sets with nitrogen foam in order to starve them of air with which to breathe. This hasn't been used on a large scale before, but nonetheless they're putting forward this as an idea for disposing of all the poultry that will be disposed of
later this year. Now, these are the conditions that are being set in the UK and of course these things don't always necessarily move at the same pace. So to highlight the difference, what I thought we'd do is take a look at New Zealand, which had an extraordinary and draconian response to the apparent pandemic in New Zealand in 2020. But of course here, interestingly, they they say that you do not need a license if you want to keep animals in a rural area. So they are behind the UK.
And the reason for that is that their Ministry for Primary Industries declares that New Zealand has never had a case of highly pathogenic or avian influenza.
Nonetheless, the the Department of Health has it it within its pages highly pathogenic avian influenza and believe it or not, they state at the moment this chapter is currently under review as of April 2024. The guidance is being updated in the event of a case of HPIA occurring, sorry, AI occurring ahead of publication of the VICE guidance, interim guidance will be communicated to public health services.
So here we have a country that has never, ever declared that it's had a case of Avalon influenza updating its literature based on what's happening around the world. This is almost exactly the same as what happened at the tail end of 2019-2020. And it's, it's frankly, it's just, it's only a matter of time.
And of course, the only thing they're basing this on was what was reported on UK columns some months ago, which was the apparent discovery of bird flu in elephant seals in South Atlantic. And that that is what they're basing this on. Nonetheless, the next step, of course, having confirmed that it's possible to jump from one animal to another, is to suggest that people are also at risk.
And here we've got the CDC in America talking about monitoring influenza data to better understand the current avian influenza situation in people. Updated May the 24th, 2024. So here we are moving into lockstep. And how do they do this? They do this by talking about testing. And this goes back to 2023, where in the UK we were told that it'd been detected in two individuals, but when we scrutinize the detail of it, we
found it wanting. The two people returning positive tests are known to have recently worked on an infected poultry farm in England. But what does that mean? Neither has experienced any symptoms of avian influenza, and both have since tested negative. Detection of avian influenza and poultry workers can follow contamination of the nose and throat from breathing in material on the affected farm or
can be true infection. So already they're admitting they have absolutely no idea of what they're talking about. And they finish by saying it can be difficult to distinguish these in people who have no symptoms. So just just think about that for a moment and consider that the tests used, the PCR test cannot, in the words of Carrie Malis, it's inventor, be used as a diagnostic tool.
It cannot tell you whether or not the thing it's detecting has come from another animal or whether it's going to result in illness. So that that needs to be considered. But of course the, the, the direction of travel therefore is towards vaccines and they have all bases covered here. So first of all, we look at the pen medicine news talking about pen researchers developing an experimental mRNA avian flu vaccine. Well, I think this is again beginning to sound very, very
familiar. And look at the date May 23rd. So this is all being brought out at exactly the same time, and this is again based on the assumption that everybody will pick up the narrative at an illness that is only determined in a laboratory and ascribed to poultry can infect other animals and therefore humans. That is the basis of this.
And now another chance to use UKC verify, because just yesterday, Reuters and many, many other news agencies put out news or apparent news that bird flu vaccines for laying hens prove effective in practice. They go on and say the Dutch government has implemented the use of a particular vaccine, that they're going to roll it out across their poultry population because it's been proven to be effective on farms.
Now this is not true. We see here the particular university in question and they talk about two vaccines being effective against Bird. This is from September 2023 and their laboratory tests, which I think we can safely say were compromised to say the least, suggests that it's been
effective. But in actual fact, what they say quite clearly here is the trial on the two farms will last until the third quarter of 2025. So there's absolutely no way it's possible to say whether or not there is any sort of effectiveness or efficacy of this vaccine in this instance.
And of course, this again should reinforce the message that the premise that avian flu exists in the 1st place is the construct of laboratory experiments and and of course culturing of samples, which is not possible to do in the field. And just to finish off, they say 1st results are expected in the second quarter of 2024, which of course is where we are now, but.
The point is that we're seeing this play out in slow time and it is effectively a complete rehash of the COVID narrative, and it's going in exactly the same direction, and the consequences will be almost identical if it's not stopped in its tracks. Yes, thank you, Charles. OK, Vanessa, back to you. And what's the latest on the Rafa Crossing? I just wanted to mention on that report about the bread flu also, doesn't that result in contaminated or vaccine contaminated meat, eggs,
etcetera? Anyway we can talk about that in extra. Yeah, this was a just an odd story that sort of jumped out at me. Biden officials are in talks with an EU group help reopen the Rafa crossing, which is currently controlled by effectively Israel and Egypt. So the US is proposing bringing in a so-called mutual third party to take control of the crossing, the European Union Border Assistance Mission, or U
ban to the Rafah crossing point. The organization previously worked at the border in Gaza, but suspended its operations in 2007 after Hamas took over the EU border assistance didn't comment. Representatives with the EU Commission also did not respond. It's an EU funded organization in partnership with the International Organization for Migration. So I just wanted to have it.
So I, I, I basically went to EU Band site and let's have a look at it's kind of mission statement on the website on, on the next slide. What do we do? Who are we? So basically it, it's head offices are in Odessa in Ukraine and then Moldova. It basically monitors the borders between Moldova and Ukraine. It seems to be a sort of quasi military security organization just from looking through its
various press releases. And I guess what I really want to do is to put the question out to the audience because obviously this is about bringing in EU control into Gaza, into the border itself. The connection to Ukraine, the connection between Ukraine and Israel has also been talked
about consistently. But why now, and why this particular organization, although it has a history of having been at the Rafa crossing, it was established in 2005. It was at the Rafah crossing until, as they said, the Zionist settlers and forces withdrew in 2005. Hamas was elected in 2007. So if anybody has any bright ideas why this organization in particular? Not as far as I can see.
Funded by the US, funded specifically by the EU and it has actually been held on a retainer of 2.6 million. So sorry, yes, no. No, that that was, I was just going to make that point. They've been held on this retainer to do nothing on 2.6. €1,000,000. A year their, their funding runs out in June this year and then they've got to get a new tranche of funding. And so this announcements we made just in time for that new tranche of funding perhaps. Yes, possibly, yes, you could be
right. But but then why are we funding it for that purpose? Of course this could be related to basically the destruction of the 320 million US peer if we just have a look at the video. So, dare I say it, American build quality. I think at least two ships were washed up shore and are currently under repair. But yeah, just anybody has any comments on that story, please let me know or let UK column know. Yeah, brilliant. Thank you. Vanessa and Charles back to you then on Energy.
Energy, yeah, something we've talked about in conjunction with food security quite a bit over the last few months. But I just want to look quickly at the Energy Trends, or at least the way that some we're being told the Energy Trends are playing out. So the most recent report from the tail end of last year says that total demand has been down for 2023. The renewable share is at a record of 47.3, but we'll come on to explain exactly why that
may not be the case. Wind generation, they're saying, is at 28.7%. Overall electricity generation down 11%, the lowest since 1983, and fossil fuel generation down 22%, lowest since the 1950s. Now I'll explain what I mean when I say that things are not quite as they seem.
Here we see the what I've described as the cooking the books feature, which is that that the increase of 115% import of electricity for that quarter has skewed the statistics absolutely dramatically, which is the only reason that they're able to claim that renewable energy has made such
contribution. But of course, we bang the same drum about the winds not blowing all the time, the sun not shining all the time, because of course they have to go and qualify by saying with the exception of 2021, renewable generation has been largely stable. Now that's in itself an admission because the amount of renewable generation facility or capability has increased dramatically in that time and yet the outputs has remained the same. So the vulnerability is
enormous. Anyway, they talk about the drivers of changes in generation being complex for renewables, but of course they are with the impact of new capacity interacting with variable weather conditions. I mean the suggestion is that perhaps they'd imagine the weather would not have variable conditions. And we go on to see this in a a graph format. The arrow that I've inserted there, the red arrow show the solar generation and of course everything coming down below the
line is a decrease. And we've talked a lot about the amount of farmland that's being used for the construction of these enormous, great solar farms. And yet of course, the output is actually going down at the same time, the capabilities going up. So it's completely topsy Derby.
Nonetheless, the ESO, the part of the National Grid that's due to operate the system's electricity system operator, has put out future energy scenarios in which they're trying to work out how we're going to do something towards finding credible ways that the UK can achieve net 0 by 2050. And won't surprise you much, I shouldn't think to learn that. It's largely based on research and modelling and of course it
is because we're not there yet. They use what they call the scenario framework, which has some variables, the worst of which they're calling falling short and the scenario not meeting the next zero target by 2050. And it's just interesting to specifically see what I've underlined there. The electric vehicle take up grows more slowly. Well, I think that does seem to be exactly what is happening. So this is already presumably
way off course. We thought at the other side of it, consumer transformation and this is the behavioral change part. So the next zero target is met with measures that have a greater greater impact on consumers and is driven by higher levels of consumer engagement by which they mean behavioral modification. They will have made extensive changes to improve their homes energy efficiency and most of their electricity demand will be smartly controlled to provide flexibility to the system.
Yes, but will they have chosen that for themselves or will it have been chosen for them? So just to highlight what they're wanting to do here, the projected increase in annual demand by the year 2050 is 254%. So they're wanting to move from 286 terawatt hours of electricity generated now up to 726. And bearing in mind what I've just said about renewables, which seems to be the direction they want to go, that looks extremely unlikely.
They do talk about large electricity demands and in particular they highlight hydrogen electrolysis, which is effectively unproven. Nonetheless, they refer to it as being an emerging technique that if commercially developed could provide one of the following. And I have to say it doesn't necessarily sound like the best bet. It could provide a higher level of general protection for the environment, or at least the same level. So again, not particularly convincing.
But I just had a look elsewhere and in the private sector I found a company called Recharge, which say that it's much cheaper to produce green hydrogen from waste than renewable. So tellingly the the chief executive here, John Louis Kindler in 2020 talks about creating hydrogen, but without using the vast space that solar panels require. So again, sort of finding some sense of it somewhere, but certainly not from the ESO or indeed the British government.
But data centres really what I want to talk about a little bit because of the, the, the push towards the fourth industrial revolution, where in fact everything is controlled by the Internet. It's worth noting that data centres now consume about 2 1/2 percent of UK energy, which is an enormous figure. And because they run round the clock, it's possible that they might waste up to 90% of the
energy that they actually consume. 40% of that energy is just, is just spent in, in cooling the various machinery required for in these data centres. UK has the largest data capacity in Europe. Just to give an indication of the exponential rise, it said that there were 2.8 zettabytes of data in the world in 2012 and at the last count in 2020 there were 44 zettabytes. So it's very, very unlikely that this can be managed on the
current projections. But what I want to point out going back to the, the frameworks that they're putting out is the, the effectively the push required. So societal behaviour and the growth of remote services to facilitate hybrid working because of the COVID-19 pandemic. So it's just another thing to look at is now the use of electricity. And of course, the, the point again, the second bit of highlights and text people being first instructed to work from
home. So the suggestion is that people are doing this because they want to be doing it. And the reality is, in actual fact, they're just being told to do it. But again, we just finish off because everything now is about data and electronic systems. The Bank of England, of course, working on their CBDC are very keen to put forward the case that centrally controlled digital currencies are better for the environment.
And in fact, they're ticking the climate box because they're going to be energy efficient, whereas decentralized ones are bad and not, you know, not good for the environment. So they, they talk about it minimizing its impact on the environment and the physical effects of climate change and the transition to a nextary economy can create financial
risks and economic consequences. So that's again a telling statement that that really should be applied to the, to the, the, the idea that digital currency, centralized digital currency has anything to offer at all. Yes, thanks for that, Charles and Vanessa. Back to you for one more time in this news bulletin and Egypt and
Israel having problems. A couple of days ago, there was basically a skirmish, as it's described here, by Al Mayadeen on the Rafah border, during which at least one Egyptian soldier was shot and killed. And if we just have a look at the report, so Israeli investigations disagree with the Egyptian armed forces. Basically, Israeli sources report that Egyptian soldiers opened fire. Egyptian soldiers are of course saying that Israel basically targeted I think one of their watchtowers.
There were reports today and Al Akbar saying that both Egypt and Israel have agreed to basically defuse the situation and any inquiry the the results of which are going to be kept confidential so as not to inflamed. Particularly an an Egyptian public that is already pretty much up in arms against Egypt's role in facilitating the genocide and the blockade of Palestinians in Gaza.
In fact, the Egyptian Nasurist party, which to a degree reflects much of the population's opinions on Palestine, calls for the cancellation of the Camp David of cords signed by President Sadat in 79, which was effectively Egypt's normalization process with Israel. So let's have a look at what they're talking about. So they're saying severing all ties with the Israeli regime, cancelling all treaties for most of which are the shameful Camp David accords and peace
agreements. And that, of course, includes the Philadelphia Accord signed in 2005 that gives Israel some control of the Rafah border, providing all forms of support to the valiant Palestinian resistance. Asserting Egypt's sovereign rights over the Rafah border crossing by opening it for humanitarian aid and the transfer of injured people without coordination with the
Israeli regime. Lifting the security restrictions imposed on the citizens and releasing the prisoners of conscience, especially those detained due to their participation in pro Palestine protests. Supporting campaigns, boycotting the companies and products affiliated with the Israeli regime, the movement also found the right of the Egyptian and Arab people to utilize all means and methods of expression and support of the Palestinian
people. Now interestingly, today in China and Beijing, there is the Arab state comet heads of Egypt, Bahrain, Tunisia and UAE to attend cooperation forum in Beijing during state visits to China. Basically again Saudi Arabia and Bahrain are floating the idea of the two state solution. I've given my opinion on that.
But I think really despite the rhetoric that we're hearing, this may be a potential opportunity for China to try and bring some of these states on board and away from the US and normalization with Israel. That's the hope. It remains to be seen. I think it's going to be extremely difficult with Egypt, who's, you know, completely in hoc through the IMF and to Saudi Arabia, UAE and to Israel to a large extent. Yes, OK. Thank you very much for that, Vanessa.
Now let's let's just bring UKC Verify back on screen again because this was published in the BBC this morning. It's another bite at the cherry of the Singapore Airlines plane which experienced extreme turbulence a few days ago. Tragically, a British man passed away as a result of this and his wife and, and a number of other people injured in it. But never let the cynical British media, you know, take
that. They're going to use that as any opportunity to suggest climate change, which is what they did, of course, but the interim report is out on this now. And so they decided they had to create the sensationalist headline. Singapore Airlines plane dropped 178 feet in five seconds, according to the preliminary report. But first of all, well, what can we say about Isaac Newton here, Charles? Because I wanted to highlight this paragraph in particular,
their preliminary report. This is the the Singaporean equivalent to the NTSB or the the investigation team for for Air Accidents, the AAIB would be the equivalent in the UK. Their primary report said that rapid changes in gravitational force caused the altitude drop. What happens when the when gravity changes, Charles? I'm not sure. I mean, I, I suspect there was a sort of scrabbling in Newton's grave as he's struggled to get out to contribute to the news today. I I don't know.
Yes, indeed. But anyway, the truth is forgetting about any claims about and I believe Sky News by the way also tried to claim it was there was some kind of change in gravitational force involved here. But what actually happened was that this aircraft flew into absolutely between two major thunderstorms.
Now, unfortunately, the the weather radar on these aircraft can see what they're approaching, but can't really see through it, particularly if it's dense thunderstorms and so on. And there was a third thunderstorm, major thunderstorm behind the two that it was flying in between. So it ended up hitting some
major turbulence. And apparently what the interim report says is that it went from experiencing within a few seconds plus one point 35G to -1 1/2 G. And that of course caused anybody that wasn't wearing a seat belt to hit the ceiling in the aircraft. Quite an aggressive change in direction. And so there was 178 feet foot drop. But bearing in mind there were 37,000 feet, 178 feet in and of
itself is not a major problem. It was the the speed at which the altitude change happened that was the problem. So absolutely fantastic reporting from the BBC on this and well, we'll do more to highlight their errors in the coming days and weeks. I just wanted to end with this report from Declassified UK. The headline here is King Charles accepted award from Nazi veteran.
So what they're saying here is that a photograph has been discovered of the then Prince Charles receiving an award from former member of the Waffen S S Charles was given an honorary law degree during a ceremony at the University of Alberta and Edmonton, Canada in 1983. In his acceptance speech, he praised those who'd sacrificed their lives 40 years ago, referring to the Second World War. Yet the award was conferred to on him by Nazi collaborator.
I go further than that. I don't think that's the appropriate word. The university's chancellor, Peter Savarin, originally from Ukraine, he served in the 14th Waffen Grenadier Division, otherwise so-called Glacia Division, that particular group responsible for absolute atrocities in Poland, in particular Total War crimes.
They were vilified for it after the war, but nonetheless, Britain helped a lot of these Ukrainians out of Ukraine at the end of the Second World War and they got quite a lot of them got sent over to Canada. So anyway, maybe, maybe, perhaps if we were being charitable, we could argue that Prince Charles can't have known that at the time. I do wonder about this. We should remember that of course, the family ties to the Nazi party.
This is Prince Philip his father at the funeral of his sister which was course was attended by most of the Nazi dignitaries at the time including his brother-in-law. The Prince Philip's brother-in-law which who was Prince Christophe of Hesse who joined the s s in 1932, so well
before Hitler came to power. And also Christophe's brother also called Philip except with two PS on the end instead of one who joined the SA in 1930. He was considered Hitler's favorite Prince and actively acted as go between between Hitler and Mussolini all the way through the war. So until obviously Mussolini was no longer in in charge in Italy as it were so. So many, many questions to be asked about Prince now, King Charles and the entire family in
fact. And of course, bearing in mind he is pushing and leading the charge towards net zero, I think these are reasonable questions to ask as to what his ideology actually is. But anyway, we'll leave it there. But undoubtedly we'll talk a little bit more about that and extra as well in a few minutes. So if you are Auk column member, join us for extra in a couple of minutes. Just stay on the stream and
we'll be back. If you're not AUK column member, please do consider joining us and then you can watch Extra Live and On Demand afterwards, but otherwise, we will see you on Friday at 1:00 PM As usual, don't forget the Arnie Burkhart interview at 1:00 PM tomorrow. See you then. Bye, bye, bye bye.