UK Column News — 16th January 2026

Good afternoon. It's Friday the 16th of January 2026, just after 1:00. Welcome to UK column News. I'm your host, Mike Robinson. My hosting studio today is Patrick Henickson. Welcome to the programme, Patrick. Great to be with you, Mike. And we'll be joined once again by Basil Valentine today.

Now, later in the programme, we're going to be covering the 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 a 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 the use of juries in the UK. First with these speed trials to do all these mass arrests with, without a jury, 20 minute trials. And now we get to the actual core, which is the independence of the jury. And Mike, the also 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 sympathise or you have no interest in this issue at all regarding the proscription of Palestine Action and these 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 organisation are actually being used to undercut everyone, jury trials.

So it is important, you need, you do need to take an interest in this issue. 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, 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 Charmelo, he is diabetic, so he's alternating day's hunger strike. But Hebba Moreasi and Cameron Ahmed, they also have withdrawn their hunger strike. Now. Now, Hebba, in the 773rd day, Mike, that's the exact amount of time that Kieran O'doherty in 1991 reached the longest hunger striker before, I believe. I'm not sure. Did he pass away or not? I'm not sure, but nonetheless, just just put this in perspective, Mike.

The the the earliest in terms of the hunger striking was 46 days back in 81. Just 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, here's the 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 £2 billion contract to the Israeli arms company subsidiary Elbit Systems UK. So, so they're saying that the US, 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 it?

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 proscribed 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 $2 billion contract. This is the home and legal correspondent Dominic Casgiani, and he doesn't somehow mention the government $2 billion contract, which is the reason they stopped the hunger strike or Elbit. Systems. So this is the BBC. What? 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 and Elbit systems the cancellation of this 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're called the Uncle Joe AI translator. And this is what Uncle Joe said. Uncle Joe translation state propaganda, Oregon shielding government apparatchiks not wanting to publicly. Admit defeat. That's 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 on their proscription of Palestinian action. Craig Murray's 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 will bring on to the screen in just a

moment. And this is very well summarised by Jonathan Cook. We'll get Basil Valentine's commentary on this. So the, the barrister for the, the the defendants here, he has basically, he's basically in the crosshairs of the judge on this issue. So he 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, would that amount to a lawful excuse?

And here it was the response the judge who repeatedly stifled efforts by the defence to air evidence of Elbit Systems involvement and genocide, answered that the jury must not take into account such lawful such a lawful excuse in the judges 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 defence of the rights of juries to reject judicial interference and of their 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 Mike Starmer, they really need convictions here to justify the prescription

of Palestine action. That's what Jonathan Cook says. And I think, I think that's a fair assessment. So I mean, I'm not a lawyer, I'm not AKC, 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 and of course you talked about a normal 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 of he is, he is effectively by by making that definitive statement and the way that he has, he has removed the ability that the right of the jury to annul bad legislation that that is, that is a step too far in my opinion. But I'm 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, your thoughts on, on this. This is absolutely, I think a pivotal moment perhaps in, in, in legal history in Britain. Is that an understatement? Yeah, I mean, the right 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 the, you

know, 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 at Woolwich Crown Court, with the judge I'm indebted to of all media organisations, The face the 1980s music and fashion magazine.

It has found away the best reportage on what's been happening there this week and it is extraordinary. 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 organisation. 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 get into very

detailed legal arguments. As you said, Patrick, the judge ruled out a justification defence, basically that the jury could find the defendants not guilty even though they'd 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 defendants KC 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 piece meal one by one on individual counts and individual cases, or they may come back and return verdicts on all the charges against all six simultaneously. We simply don't know. Those verdicts could come today. They could come next week. All depends on how long the jury

feel they need to deliberate. What's interesting, I'll go to you in a minute, Mike, but unlike your comment on this as well, Mike, but to to Mike and Basil Samuel Cornor at this, everything seems to hinge on this particular individual. He's the one accused of violent sledgehammer attack that hit either intentionally or inadvertently a law enforcement officer on site. And this they would have to prove that this was intentional and it wasn't just the result of

an ensuing brawl. And this is a defence that's usually brought in for football hooligan fights and things like that, if you look at past cases. So, but but by doing that, if they can, if they, 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 proscription of Palestine Action as a violent terrorist organisation as it. Were so it is so much hinging on the technicalities of this case,

Mike? Yeah. Well, I mean, what I would say about that, Patrick, is, you know, this is if, 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, we're not talking about guns and bombs here. We're not even talking about petrol bombs or you know, or so on, but the traditional

terrorist paraphernalia. We're talking about something that was brought on site in order to do damage to the, 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 does it is, is that what it takes to become a terrorist organisation? Not at 1 case, but 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 has absolutely made his position clear. He 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 if there if there was no jury in the in the case that he would find them

guilty. And the problem here is that juries are inconvenient for the government these days, not that they're trying to justify the restriction on the use of juries because of the length of time that, you know, the backlog that there is in the court system. But it's not just that the the fact is that juries, you know, often find against you, find in ways that 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. The state would prefer with his current politics, would prefer no jury or a non independent jury, a jury that couldn't make a decision on its own, common law volition as it were. That's really what's at stake. I want to bring Basil on in a moment. But before that, let's look at. This is the part part of the

speech here. This is again serialise that Jonathan Cook's Substack. Everybody support Jonathan Cook, one of the great independent journalists in the in in Britain and in the world, quite frankly at this moment. But here's the important part. And he's 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 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 I 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 were tried in 1670 for preaching to an unlawful assembly in. Grace Church St Talking about Quake, a Quaker meeting at the time. This tablet commemorates the courage and endurance of the jury. Thomas Veer, Edward Bushel and ten 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 jurymen 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 Bezos, but it is available on Amazon. The trial of William Penn and William Mead for causing a Talmud and the Old Bailey, etcetera, 1670 And I want to go back to you, Basil, just

briefly. Basil, 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, is extraordinary. But this cuts right through race and identity politics. It gets right to the fundamentals of a free society.

Basil, 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 the 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 the jury and with the terrorism, the whole use of the terrorist legislation hanging over the defendants for the first time in six months time. A similar case could be bought with no jury if David Lammy 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 right to a jury trial. Both those things could disappear if the government have their way. Very important. So, so much changes on this and Basil, 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 Doctor Abu Sita. Explain to us the significance of this finding this week. Well, I mean, it's, you know, really extraordinary that Doctor Abu Sita had to go through this process. He described lawyers for UKLFIUK, 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 this, it's incredible, you have all of these NGOs, stop hate, there's a whole bevvy of these. And you know, I think it's lawyers for Israel, these different organisations. It's starting to be recognised 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 anathema to the right to freedom of speech. There's a crowd funder for that.

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 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. You know, where streeting is very firmly the property of the Zionist lobby in the UK is 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 let's just have a

quick look at what's going on with Gaza at the moment, because Donald Trump yesterday announced on true social, let's bring it up on screen, that the Gaza Board of Peace has been formed. It's my great honour, he said, 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 Witkoff posted on X today on behalf of President Trumper announcing the launch of phase two of the President's 20 point plan to end the Gaza conflict, moving from ceasefire to demilitarisation, technocratic governments and reconstruct governance and reconstruction. Phase two establish, as he says, a trans 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 of Gaza, Mike, There's a few candidates vying for that. We. Will come on to that in one second.

I'm just going 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 unnamed source, that the board will consist of the heads

of state of around 9 countries. So that's the 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 Witkoff 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 got to be Tony Blair, Steve Witkoff 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, the bring that off screen, not to traumatise the audience any further. But Mike, Phase 1 isn't finished. Phase one is the ethnic cleansing, is the is the genocide, the extermination of the Palestinian, the native Palestinian population? And the ethnic cleansing of any survivors? Big 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. Baz, Olivier, any brief thoughts on this? It just goes from bad to worse, doesn't it? I mean, my understanding, let's always recenter 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, you know, 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, Basil. Thank you for that.

OK, let's move on to the outbreak. 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 7:00 PM. We have Carl speaking to Doctor Warwick Powell about global chaos, breaking down Trump's moves on Venezuela, Iran and Greenland. That's at 9:00 PM tonight. Charles's discussion with Ian Overton is on the UK Well Column website Now if you want to watch On demand, if you didn't see it yesterday at 1:00 PM. And then at on Sunday we have the 1000 Words podcast.

Let's just have a look at a quick promo for that TuneIn this Sunday for the second instalment of my portrait and conversation with comedian Abby Roberts. I haven't laughed this much whilst painting since Richard Robes told us the story of Graham the alien. Abby recounts her experience of being arrested at a COVID protest and how Susie the cat wasn't happy about it. God, truth, spirituality, authenticity all get mulled over whilst I try and capture Abby's

spirit and likeness. See how I get on this Sunday at 7:00 PM exclusively on the UK column for past shows. Look for 1000 words in the show drop down menu. Thanks to Jake for that. So Abby is this is the second Part 2 of this three part series. This one's for members only. But if you're AUK column member, please join us at 7:00 PM on Monday. OK, let's move on then to the question of insurrection

Patrick, because well, this went out on Truth Social on yesterday. In fact, was it yesterday? Yes, it was the 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 has taken place in that once great

state. Is it true that many presidents have brought in the Insurrection Act or called in the Insurrection Act in the past? No, it's an extremely rare occurrence, Mike. And it's been done in the past for reasons very different, different than what we are seeing here. And so that's one of the problems with with this conversation as as you'll show us and we have some video as well.

Yes, OK. Well, this was apparently because a new wave of protests began in Minneapolis on the evening of the 14th of January following another shooting by federal agents involving in this this case of Venezuelan national on the north side of the city. This was the response from the Minnesota governor, Tim Waltz. 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 Minnesotans.

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's definitely an attempt by the federal government to fan the flames of this.

Yeah. The the language is increasingly aggressive and, and heated and, and so this is bringing people out on on the streets, but it's also making ICE agents behave more and more oddly, it seems. Well, they're, they're giving a a dog whistle from from the federal government. They've been told they have immunity from prosecution so they can commit any crimes. We've heard stories, Mike, with their and we've seen as 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 to check people's papers, see if they're U.S. 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 2000. 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 through 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 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 what he's saying. There's going to be retribution to Minnesota for, you know, putting up resistance to what looks like a federal invasion. And so funny, Mike, because of 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 bunnies 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, the right or cheering on executive power. They're cheering on the federal government even in the face of, you know, killing American citizens, they're still cheering this on, which I find to be extraordinary and just. Show you how dysfunctional US politics is at the moment. Absolutely.

Well, on Tuesday, if we bring this on screen on Tuesday, 6 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, Minnesota attorneys told the New York Times on screen at the moment that they were outraged that instead of investigating the ICE shooter in the recent killing, senior Justice Department officials wanted to investigate the goods family.

And so they were also upset that the FBI was refusing to cooperate with state level investigations. And in the meantime, of course, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Christy Norm is facing impeachment efforts as a result of the ICE behaviour. The article, the impeachment articles detail accusations against Norm, including obstruction of Congress, violations of public trust and

self dealing. 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 the four came about because of allegations that this was a Nazi linked slogan, or perhaps linked 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, I would ask why they

would begin to do that. But before we we before we ask that question, let's just have a look at that, that video clip that you were talking about, Patrick, because that's that's 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 behaviour during the Second World War in 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 to make it clear this is not a phrase from Nazi Germany, but. What does it mean then? Well, we'll 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. But so why are the Russian to his defence now? What could it be? That it's not for his benefit that they've been quick to act? Could it be that this slogan represents the 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 is, 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 with what Israel has been doing. No. Well, it's it's common that Israel would normally say 1 Israeli dies, we're going to kill 1000 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 grab, having people off the streets, you know, ramming cars, pulling people out of cars and etcetera, demanding Americans show their papers to prove that they're a citizen in a public space.

I mean, this is never, we've never seen this before in, in the US. Maybe there was maybe 150 years ago or something. But modern, modern times, no. 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 and normally you see countries that don't recognise international law tend to also not recognise domestic law either historically, and I think the US is now facing that problem. Basil, any thoughts?

Well, it speaks to the extreme polarisation 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 force, trained to regard protesters and what we call civilians as the enemy. And that is a sea change in societal behaviour. Thank you Basil for that. OK, 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 destabilising 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 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 are been planned for weeks so and they even the plan predated predated these so called protests or demonstrations in which be really riots. That's some crystal ball he's got right there. In Tehran, 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 mullahs shoot any protesters, we're going to come in and intervene. So he said that early on.

And what? And then we find out Mike Pompeo, former CIA director, admits that Mossad is on the ground around stirring up the protests and the Israeli press, the Jerusalem Post also acknowledged this, as have other Israel. 14 have acknowledged this. They're both. They're boasting about the fact that they were ginning up the violent riots that included arson, 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 Democrats 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 and political leaders are saying, oh, they, they, they're being hard handed, heavy 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 with this, which to me is incredible.

But the 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 going there's not going to be a strike for now, for now. But here's here is the the South Carolina Peach, Lindsey Graham. There are a lot of headlines out there that are, in my view, not accurate. President Trump's resolve is not

the question. Question is, and when we do an operation like this, should it be bigger or smaller? I'm in the camp a bigger time will tell. 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 the Venezuela OP right? Overthrowing the. Overthrowing all these governments and then the to bomb Iran. I mean, Lindsay's 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 he wasn't. Part of his life's work. Absolutely. And and he thought we were finally going to get that. It's the legacy of John McCain, his former close associate here. So, but where, where are 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 grey Zone. Western media whitewashes deadly riots in Iran relying on U.S. government funded regime change NGOs. Now this is incredible. National Endowment for Democracy. Which is really ACIA front. It's it's regarded as ACIA 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 it was 5000 and then later that day it was 10,000. Then it next day it 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 2 actors, the US, U.S. government and Israel, for example, unconfirmed casualty numbers coming from Western, quote, human rights activists organisations.

Here's one here, the Abdul Rahman Borroman Centre for Human Rights in Iran. Well, it's not in Iran, Mike, is it? It's, it's in the United States. And here's another one. This is another one that's also mentioned a lot. It was the centre for human Rights in Iran. That's not actually in Iran, that's actually New York City. And this is also an Ed cut out organisation, Iran International News.

This has been admitted by former Israeli intelligence officers as a clearing house for disinformation and Israeli propaganda on Iran. And the the latter will show there's other organisations 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 organisation, they were repurposed to work on Iran in the last couple of weeks

here, the Centre 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 propaganda activities as well. Just do 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 use the same formula for Venezuela. These are US based or or British based or EU based human rights or. Remind me who was behind the Syrian Observatory Human rights? He was operating out of his bedroom. Rami Abdul Rahman, above, a chip shop in Coventry. Yes so but EU funded. That's not his real name, that

was his pseudo name. So. Again, so, so all of the all of the Western influencers, Western politicians are drawing off this propaganda and then repeating it and 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 except 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, it's in front of the Iranian embassy. We'll roll this beautiful virgin, people. You wonderful people, you freedom fighters, this time are we going to win? We're going to win a terrible price, a terrible price being paid. I find many 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 may. God bless Of you So this is new that Nigel Farage seems to be taking a position on international affairs. Well, he's taking a position, all 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 Shaw Reza Pahlavi junior, 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, DC and 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 we're challenging all of these 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, the, the claims of thousands of protesters slaughtered or executed or hung, it just hasn't materialised. 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 organisations somehow. And it's just, there's hundreds if not thousands of these videos, many of them have been paid for which we'll show you. These people are being paid activists, many of these. But what here's Here's a typical one right here. The equivalent of 49 elevens have happened in Iran in just

the last four days for contacts. 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 seven of a total Internet blackout will 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 10s 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 reserved

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 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 Shidinishku, which means where are the sweets, Where are the pastries and 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, shidinishku. It's a celebratory thing. This is the evil with which the regime treats Iranian people. They're asked 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 birdshot. 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, Mike, 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. That'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. Well, just before you move on, I just want to make the point that that the there's 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 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's mass rape after October 7th, etcetera. 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 could get out of soft touch with Donald Trump on this issue. So let's look at the funding briefly here. Just quickly and many of you are already aware of this, Who are the influencers? Israel is paying $7000.

Per post on X, so there's huge. Huge budgets, millions have been allocated to the Ester 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 the regime. 20,000 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 10s of millions, maybe hundreds of 1,000,000 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 be aware that everything you're seeing on social media, a lot of it is completely engineered and it's very expensive, expensive propaganda. Okay, and well, I'll just very briefly mentioned that the Plymouth Herald today has 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, Major. Protest. Major protest 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 as they try to push this now this it. Looks like the royal flag as well. Yes. So these are royalists? Yes, Absolutely. Yes. So how's the monarchy Democratic? Well, that's another question. That's another question.

OK, let's 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, the 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 Greenlandic governors government, sorry, because they've had their first meeting 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 that 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 to 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 that sorry, stressed that he and Motzalt were able to oppose the narratives that Chinese and Russians pose. And then imminent threat to Greenland. But that's quite strange because that's not the message he was expressing during his comment to the press following the meeting. Let's just have a brief listen 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, in the high N All of us transatlantic took the peace dividend years ago and we have the vision of keeping Arctic as a low tension region. So that doesn't seem to quite add up with with that.

But anyway, the President Trump's press secretary, Karen Levitt, said on yesterday that the two sides agreed to establish a working group, which you just mentioned he'll continue to have technical, not that one, William, sorry, have technical talks on the acquisition of Greenland? The president has made his priority quite clear. The US wants to acquire Greenland. He thinks it's in our best interests 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 CNBC here, Natal nations deployed to Greenland after tense White House talks. Now, this is, you know, they're using terms like deploy. They're hinting at something serious. The situation is not quite as the headlines would want us 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 now I'm not going to deny that Arctic Endurance has clearly been quickly organised because it doesn't appear on the NATO Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe exercise page, which we can see here. It's 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 document documentary called Arming the Arctic. And so, you know, while the rhetoric continues about Russian and Chinese ships encircling Greenland, that rhetoric's clearly pretty unhinged.

Nonetheless, Western nations clearly unhappy with the fact of Russia and China are way ahead in developing the Arctic Silk Road with the first container ship bringing goods from China to Felix still last September. But my question is this, Patrick could just be very interested in your thoughts on that, on this. Is Trump's rhetoric about green Greenland really about Russia and China? Or is this eye really on the 51st 1st state Canada? Because we bring the map on

screen here. Of course, what we see is that if he does get his mitts 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, well, at least the whole of North America, save Mexico for now, Mike. But Canada is a British Commonwealth 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, digest, 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. And I mean, it's just so ridiculous. Totally the whole thing. But but what? 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 biessing. Sorry to be explicit, he's BS ING the public on this. How a billionaire with interest in Greenland encourage 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 aide to discuss a new idea. Trump called me down to the Oval Office, says John Bolton, who is his national security advisor. He just said the prominent businessman had just suggested the US by Greenland. That was in Donald Trump's first term and understand the significance of this year. Like many of those around the President, Ronald Lauders policy suggests appear to intersect

with his business interests. So the policy intersects with the business. And as 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 country's 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 earth, raw earths. And what happened with the raw earths? Nothing's been signed, hasn't been done, but it'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 Zelinsky waving 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 Thiel, they've also got interests in Greenland and the rare earths in Greenland, as well as putting data centres up there and creating an AI hub in Greenland. This is all real. So it has 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 Jon Stewart at all because particularly during the COVID years, he was appalling along with Stephen Colbert and others. But. He's found his footing again. I suggest he has because because I can't really disagree with anything he says in this clip. So let's just end the programme with Jon 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 neighbour. We're already Russia's already our name. This is where Greenland is Russia's closer. Unless in your mind you think Alaska lives in a box next to Hawaii. No, no, again, again, again. We, 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 Organisation that we, I don't know what we could. I guess we'll never know. But again, since we all now dance to the tune of Juan 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 doesn't mean that they own the land. Can someone pass him a note? How do you think we got our land? So I'm afraid it's hard to disagree with that of. Course, I mean just a couple miles down the road there is the Plymouth, the Mayflower steps. That's where it all happened. Yeah, Fain, they landed a boat 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, you know, on the details. Well, it's just history. OK, well, look, we 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 Basil will be joining us for some more discussion on what we've been talking about today. If you're 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 Basil and Patrick and everybody that's been watching. Don't forget Jerem and Carl tonight and also Jake Fern on Sunday night at 7:00. But have a great weekend and we will see you on Monday at 1:00 PM. As usual, thanks for joining us. Bye bye.