UK Column News - 3rd December 2025

Good afternoon. It's Wednesday, the 3rd of December, just after 1:00. Welcome to UK column News. I'm your host, Mike Robinson, joining me in the studio today, Charles Mallett. Welcome to the program, Charles. Thank you, Mike. And Vanessa Bailey joins us by live video link. Later in the program, Tim Norman will be joining us to discuss the Don Sturgis inquiry report. Charles will be reporting on the removal of jury trials in the UK and also water pollution from data centres.

And Fidessa's going to be reporting on the wall being built around Syria. And I'll have more on this insane drive for war by NATO, the UK and the EU. But we're going to begin today with the case of Natalie Strecker. This is peace activist Natalie

Strecker, who was yesterday facing up to 10 years in prison under the Terrorism Act. She was charged for eliciting support for Hamas and Hezbollah based on it tweets. Apparently this is, according to Craig Murray, cherry picked by police and prosecutors from an astounding 21, sorry, 51,000 tweets that she'd sent, mainly from the Jersey Palestine Solidarity Solidarity Committee account. Now, at 1:00 PM yesterday, David Miller posted on X that Natalie

Stryker had been acquitted. And I'm very pleased to say that David is with us now to discuss this. So David, what are your thoughts on on the charges in the 1st place and on what happened in court yesterday? Well, the charges were manifestly ridiculous from the word go. I mean, what had happened originally was that she was accused of saying something in private message groups, which was to do with supporting A prescribed organization as well as the charges about the public

tweets. And it turned out, according to evidence heard in court, that there was a bug in meeting a problem in the police software for reading this, this message app which they had got from her phone when they seized her phone and that it had misidentified her as being the author of particular messages. And eventually, and she said I didn't send those messages and that, and I personally was aware that she hadn't sent the messages as well.

And I was in touch with her about it at the time and with her lawyers. And the police eventually recognized that she hadn't sent the messages. So they had to withdraw those, those charges.

And they were left with some charges about her, her, her posts on X, which you know, were nothing to do with supporting prescribed organisations, specifically Hamas and Hezbollah, the so mention of course of Palestinian Islamic Jihad or the PFLPGC, the two of the other Palestinian organisations which were prescribed. And so it was left to the judge, or possibly more than one judge, to decide whether she was guilty or not.

The judge has decided that she wasn't guilty because she was clearly talking about supporting the Palestinians. There was an attempt in court to try and suggest that supporting the Palestinians to resist the genocide was tantamount to say that she supported Hamas, which of course is transparently ridiculous and as everyone knows, it's written into

international law. But the Palestinians specifically, and indeed all people under occupation have the right to resist by all available means, including specifically using these words, armed struggle. But she she hadn't even gone anywhere near that. And she's not even she's a she's a pacifist. You know, she's not even someone who who would support in the abstract, the international right under international law.

So the whole thing was a was a farrago, an attempt to criminalize people by illegitimate means through existing laws, which are already Orwellian. And it's in the term which has failed. And I'm very glad to see that it has failed. And I anticipate that there will be many more of these cases coming up and and failing in the near future, including probably, I would think, Sarah Wilkinson's case.

And also, of course, there was a case of Richard Barnard, Co founder of Palestine Action before it was prescribed, who had talked about making lacks a flood into a tsunami. And the the courts are trying to suggest that that there's a specific support for Hamas, which again, is is ridiculous. So I'm looking forward to this, these cases 1 by 1 being knocked out of court as we've seen with a number of cases involving anti Zionists in the last few weeks to months.

So does this set any kind of precedent do you think is are the, are the British, are the English courts going to take this as a, as a stare? And, but I mean, the other point to make here is that this is a complete waste of taxpayers money in many ways. And but, but it's clearly designed to be intimidatory and and have a chilling effect on on

speech. Yeah. I mean, it's not going to be formally A precedent, but I mean, the, the, the CPS in England and Wales will, you know, will begin to realize that they can't get these kind of cases to, to closure in the current circumstances, even when they've got judges, only when there's no jury involved.

Then these cases are going to get thrown out and they're going to, they're going to have to recognize that they're not going to get these cases to the finishing line and they will have to abandon them, many of them. So I think that's it will in in fact act as a precedent because they will realise that there's no way to get these cases. And the, the legislation is, is very specifically written.

And if you, if you look back at the legislation, it's on the government's website and you can see very helpfully that they, they include all the separate revisions to the legislation which they have made over the years to the Terrorism Act. And those revisions have been made to try and entrap people who are clearly not supporting organisations who exist in a different country in West Asia, but who are talking about the right to resist or talking about the need to resist oppression.

And the government have tried to to alter the law so that those kinds of statements can be caught. As if they are saying, oh, I think we should go out now and get weapons and fight for Hamas, which of course nobody has been saying. It's completely ridiculous. So the the the legislation is already overweening and Orwellian, but it can't be bashed into to bashed out of such shape that they can convict people for for opposing genocide

and. Do you think this will have any implications for the Supreme Court case on the prescription of Palestine action? Well, it's hard to know. I mean, the, the extent to which the judges in that case, and let's remember, these are three judges who have been drafted in the last minute to replace a seemingly more liberal judge. So all three of them apparently have significant conflicts of

interest. One of them has even said that his favorite clients are security and intelligence agencies, which is a some fairly something to have on your CV, that kind of quote. So I think that the extent to which they will be paying attention to the, the public

mood is, is largely minimal. But the, the, the people at the, at the centre of what was, I mean the politicians, Starmer, the home Secretary and indeed, of course the intelligence agencies, they will be looking at this closely and they will, there will be a point where they will realize that they can't pursue this line of attack anymore. Yeah, so obviously Natalie Streicher has found herself on

the on the wrong end of this. She's seen a court case in Jersey. Many others have been on the wrong end of this type of legislation. Just very briefly, David, where does this leave the kind of intimidation that we've seen from the state for the future? Well, I think someone like Natalie and also someone like Sarah Wilkinson who faces their case in a few months time, they, they have been really very, very badly treated by the state.

And if it if it was possible for them to have some kind of legal redress, then that they should try and pursue that if they can face it. But the, the fact that Natalie has got off is an indication that that we can be much freer than perhaps many of us have felt in saying what we think about the genocide. You know, it's not, you can't say under the law, I support Hamas, but you can say, look, the the people of Palestine have the right to resist under

international law. It's perfectly legitimate and legal to say that. And that I think people will, can, will begin to get some confidence in, in the kinds of things they can say as a result of these decisions. David, thank you very much for joining us today. That's been really helpful and we will keep covering this this topic in the coming days and weeks because this actually effects everybody no matter what their views on various

situations. So thank you for joining us, David. But David Charles mentioned

juries there. Do we have them anymore? Well, yeah, this is it. The devil will be found in the detail. We're going to go back a bit and actually address exactly what David's finished up with, which is this idea of having any confidence in the justice system. Now in 2020, David Lammy, then an opposition MP, tweeted that jury trials are a fundamental part of our democratic settlement, and he reinforced the point by saying criminal trials without juries are a bad

idea. And yesterday, the government put out a press release saying that the Deputy Prime Minister of the office that David Lammy now holds, as well as being Secretary of State for Justice, announce the reforms in Parliament today. And this is to deal with the headline of the press release, which is swift and fair plan to

get justice for victims. They say that the reforms were announced in Parliament, bringing the system back from the brink of total collapse and regaining the trust of both victims and the public. Now they set out several methods by which they're expecting to achieve this, or at least telling us that this is how they're going to achieve it.

One method which indeed has been touched upon and mentioned before is this idea of swift courts, which will see cases with a likely sentence of three years or less heard by a judge alone estimated to take 20% less time than a jury trial. That was one of the sort of sub headlines.

It then went on to say guaranteed jury trials for the most serious and almost all indictable offences, including rape, murder, aggravated burglary, blackmail, people trafficking, grievous bodily harm and the most serious drug offences. So in effect, selling the negative as positive in that they're guaranteeing juries for those offences pertaining to those trials.

They then go on to say they're going to give magistrates the power to hand down sentences of up to 18 months so more cases can be heard by magistrates, freeing up the Crown Court time for the most serious offences. And this could go up to two

years if needed. It's worth noting I think on that point immediately that there has been quite a bit of flip flopping on exactly what magistrates should or should not be able to do. And I think a further reminder that of course, in order to hold that role, do not need to have any background in law and they only receive 10 days of training across two years in order to be able to prosecute that job and therefore have the potential now to hand out sentences of up to

two years. Now all of this comes from the relatively recently published Leveson Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, which we've reported on quite a bit on UK Colin Brian indeed doing so on Monday.

Now a key part of this document which really does relate to what Lammy was talking about in the House of Commons yesterday is in the text of this document which is where Leveson himself reflects and says I consider that long term reforms to the setup of the criminal courts which on the whole would require primary legislation to implement. So to Mikes question at the start of this report, are we or aren't we having juries done away with now?

It's very much being presented as a fait accompli. But as Leveson suggests, there is a need for legislation. And indeed, when David Lammy addressed the House of Commons yesterday, he concluded his opening speech with with this statement, which was finally, we must also be honest that this is a problem that has taken years to build up. So it will take years to fix. The changes I'm proposing will require legislation which will take time to implement.

So at the same time as saying that he's going to be saving all this time by doing away with juries and this, that and the other, he's also putting in an enormous caveat should he fail or indeed the government fail. Now he and they the government ran into inconsistencies almost immediately. I just thought I'd bring out a short clip from Lincoln Chop MP who previously served with Scots Guards and highlighting where one of the in the areas where this is going to run into some

sort of trouble. Can I thank the Minister for coming here today to answer this urgent question? I've taken note of what she said and if I may quote it back to her. Swift, a swift and prompt trial is a fundamental principle of fairness. 3 to 4 years delay is deeply demoralizing and justice delayed is justice denied. So can I ask how she squares that position with her support of the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill? Well, he's right to quote those things back at me.

Those are the headlines of the arguments that I'm making this morning in relation to this UQ, in relation to the backlogs in our England and Wales criminal courts, in relation to my support for that Bill. It is a fair piece of legislation and one which I stand by. So job there just exposing some of the things that don't make sense. Now on the same list of things that don't quite make sense and indeed, considering the question

of why is the system so broken. We're just going to look at the statistics for police recorded crime, which do admittedly show an increase across the last few years with a graph that sort of dips in the mid twenty 10's and has gone up recently. This is not reinforced by the arrest data. Now arrests in England and Wales, compared with the numbers from 2006, seven or eight have gone down quite considerably. So why is it therefore that there's a need for greater

clogging in the system? And why, I think it's pertinent to ask, is the government, via the Ministry of Justice putting out messages as it was in December last year about thousands of new prison places? This was a press release that came out in December 2024 where they said that 14,000 new prison places with the target to open by 2031 are going to be put in place in order to keep the public safe.

And this seems to be, as with everything else, at the basis of anything that has the potential to be extremely unpopular and questionable. Now, the other thing I really do want to take a look at is the report by the Institute for Government Performance Tracker 2025 on the criminal courts. And in effect, they've torn what Leveson has written to shreds to a certain extent. And I quote, at the heart of this problem is poor productivity.

Magistrates Court and the Crown Court are processing fewer cases per day than before the pandemic, even though average case complexity has fallen since 2016. This means that this means that both types of courts are failing to keep up with demand. They then go on to say that if these problems can be adequately addressed, many of the proposals for radical reform, such as Sir Brian Leveson, suggested restrictions on jury trials would not be necessary.

And I think that's a key part to come out of this report. They also go on to say that cases where the defendant pleads not guilty and there is a jury trial by far the most time consuming. Well, of course they are.

And of course, the inference in suggesting that juries would be done away with is that there might be more guilty verdicts where there shouldn't be. Now the other thing they say for context is the Crown Court jury trials put much more demand on the system than any other kind, but in 2024 they made-up only 13% of all cases and 65% of hearing hours.

But the interesting thing is that the number of trials in 2024 surpassed pre pandemic levels but remained more than 1/4 below 2016, despite the fact that sitting days were slightly higher in 2024. So the question really is why is

productivity quite so low? And indeed, Leveson appears to have ignored the fact that courts are not spending an unprecedented amount of time on jury trials and that total time on guilty pleas in Crown courts fell from, sorry, fell by 22% from 2016 to 2024. So there's absolutely something

not adding up here. But we might be seeing the law of perhaps intended consequences, which is a graph that shows how during 2020 when everything got shut down, it looks very much like it's basically been the creation of an artificial backlog. Now obviously the cry is that

there wasn't enough investment. So I just want to point out on the House of Commons Library statistics, we've had £13 billion spent on justice in the UK, which of course equates exactly to the amount that we've spent on death in Ukraine.

The latest statistic coming out in 7th of November for on the UK to support the Ukraine fact sheet, very much looking like a planned destruction of the system which Peter Hitchens is pointing out the Daily Mail and he harks back to the 1960s where it was only a requirement for 73,000 police versus 148,000. Now the prison population was down at 27,000. It's now up at over 87,000, of course with 14 more in the

pipeline. And he's going back to the changes that were implemented by the then Home Secretary, Roy Jenkins, starting with the removal of a requirement for the jury verdict to be unanimous. Now, something that is talked about quite a bit around this subject is the issue of nullification. And I've just got a very short clip from Daniel Shensmith. You might know him as the black belt barrister. Just explaining a bit about

this. Nonetheless, if you are in a trial as a barrister, you cannot mention jury nullification because it would be contempt of court to do so, because it would tempt the jury into making a decision that goes against the law and the findings of evidence, which is against their oath that they take as a member of the jury. So. It's not an uncomplicated area and the the link to the full videos in the show notes. I really would recommend that you do watch it.

But the government document explaining to jurors what they should do states quite clearly that among their legal responsibilities they are to swear an oath or an affirmation and to deal with the situation based only on the evidence you hear in court. But the difficulty is, of course, as far as contempt or indeed nullification goes, is that a jury's decision is final. But of course, the Ministry of Justice are trying to scare jurors into.

Threatening them effectively with prison for contempt of court for considering nullifying a guilty verdict. So I'll just finish off by pointing to the UK column Dissidents Guide to the Constitution, in particular Episode 2, which deals with exactly this, and I hope we'll be talking about it more in Extra. Absolutely. OK, let's let's move on then to

war and international affairs, because today is the NATO Foreign Ministers meeting. As the war preparations ramp up, it should be stated straight away that we're increasingly in an increasingly insane and dangerous situation. And just to illustrate that, here's some comments from NATO Secretary General Mark. Ruta, we face real and lasting dangers. Russia continues to test our detours. Russia has violated our airspace with jets and drones. So that's this morning.

Russia has violated our airspace with jets and drones. And to reinforce this, EU countries continue to be bombarded with lying media propaganda that Russia is flying drones into European airspace. Here are just three examples in the last few days. Now the problem for the mainstream media is the Dutch newspaper Trial has reviewed dozens of incidents using the platform Drone Watch and they found that they could not verify even one of the incidents, which

is allegedly Russian made. Drones had been sent into European airspace. The report claimed that no radar record or debris was found that could validate Russian authorship. And even in the case of Poland, where allegedly Russian made drones were found, there was no evidence that they were fired by Russians or from Russia. And they say that at least 14 of the Dutch drone sightings were later attributed to ordinary aircraft, helicopter ships or even stars. It's like UFOs in many ways.

But anyway, the the map that we saw on screen there a second ago, which was compiled by trial, showed three hobby or tourist drones and 11 other objects that were ultimately decided to be not drones at all. And in the Netherlands, the Defence Department stressed recent reports near Vocal and Eindhoven are no cause for alarm.

So according to the military police, they report hobby drones were spotted and although the originals are it was unclear there was no evidence of a state level threat. So let's hear, we'll move on then. And let's hear more from from Mark Ruto. Conducted sabotage and spends send spy ships into our waters. These actions are reckless and they are dangerous. And it's not Russia alone. It is working closely with China, North Korea and Iran to attempt to disrupt our societies

and tear up the global rules. They are preparing for long term confrontation. Are they there preparing for long term confrontation? Wasn't it just one week ago that I reported on the RUSI Long War Conference and Luke Pollard's comments there? That was just the last last Wednesday's USE program. If you didn't see that, go back and watch it. And then more from Ruta. Let's listen to this. And we are responding with

strength, unity and resolve. European allies and Canada are really stepping up defence investments and that's good. But we cannot afford to rest on our laurels. We all need to pull our weight and fast. We need to develop and buy core capabilities for our defence and invest in industry, in infrastructure and innovation. Which just by coincidence, echoes the Starmer regime's push to turn Britain into a war economy, which we were talking about last week. Let's put look Pollard back on

screen again if we can. And because this is what he was saying at the Long War Conference conference, to get to war fighting readiness, we need a whole of society approach. We've got to turn it into a war economy. This is quite an incredible situation. So let's get the last clip from from Ruta. To stimulate production and boost resilience, we also need to support Ukraine more. Russian missiles keep causing death and destruction, and winter is here.

I absolutely believe that he was citing Game of Thrones there Winter is coming. The the the war arrived. The real war arrived when when winter was here. I, I absolutely believe that's the kind of nonsense is going through these people's heads at the moment. But this just to reinforce this idea. We reported last week on comments by French General Fabian Mandel, who was determined to sacrifice French

children. Well, it's gone on because this week chair of Natos Military Committee, Admiral Cabo Dragoni gave an interview with the Financial Times and he said how deterrence is achieved through retaliation, through preemptive strike. This is something we have to analyze deeply. He was absolutely calling for preemptive preemptive strikes. Now that quote caused quite a fraud, but it was echoed by others.

For example, here's General Fabio Many former military, sorry former NATO chief of the General Staff, who wrote in an article published on the 2nd of December in El Fato in Italy that NATO is already in a war against Russia and will launch a pre emptive attack. And also by current NATO Supreme Commander General Christopher Cavalli. NATO is preparing for an attack that should be so devastating as

to not allow Russia to react. In fact, if we do not succeed, a 15 year war of attrition awaits us. And so he's echoing again the long war narrative.

But to return to the question of whether or not children should be sacrificed, you'll be glad to know that children are saying no. And back in May, Germany's Institute for Generation Research found that 81% of the country's Generation Z, Generation Z, were not prepared to sacrifice himself and also found that 69% said they were not willing to defend their country with a weapon. Now the German government's plan is to increase the size of the

army by 260,000 volunteers. And if there aren't enough volunteers, compulsory service could be instituted. And so on the 5th of December, which is on Friday this week, the, the parliament, the German parliament's going to decide on their proposal on this and they're going to be demonstrations by students in many German cities. We don't want to end up as common cannon fodder is the clear message. And, and so on. So that that is the situation that we're in at the moment.

The narrative coming out of the mouth of these people becomes increasingly it demonstrates increasing insanity in my opinion. It absolutely does and it and it completely ties in with the, you know, the propaganda campaign about drones. Why on earth, given the circumstances, would Russia be picking a fight with with NATO? It makes no sense and it's very much obviously going the other way around. Absolutely no. Let's welcome finesse into the program and, and if we move over

to the Middle East and, and what's going on, sorry, Southwest Asia and what's going on in Syria with a wall. I thought walls were being built in the United States. I didn't know walls were being built in in Asia. Yeah, very interesting. Something that I was looking into in depth over the last few days, but particularly yesterday. So if we start, we'll we'll basically go around the border of Syria.

So this is the border with Iraq. At the end there is a map so that people can get an idea of what I'm actually talking about. So this is November this year, Iraq completes 350 kilometres of concrete border wall with Syria. Other reports have said they've reached up to 400 kilometres. So what does this actually mean?

That Baghdad is seeking to seal the entire 618 kilometre border with a multi layered security system, 3 metre wide trench, 3 metre deep four layer inflatable barrier observation towers, everyone kilometre equipped with advanced thermal cameras linked to a central monitoring system and no gases as to who is at that central monitoring system, Integrated defence network made-up of trenches, barbed wire and early warning systems, high precision thermal imaging and 24/7 surveillance devices.

Of course. What is this sounding very similar to Gaza And of course the draconian 15 minute cities like Cabron in the occupied territories. So this is a map from 2013. I'm just showing this to show how it was already beginning to take shape even back in 2013, two years into the regime change war against Syria.

The areas in black show reinforced border areas, so you can see with Turkey in particular between Israel and the occupied Golan territories in the South and the border wall with Jordan leading up to the triangle between the border with Iraq and Jordan. So then going on to Jordan itself. Well, guess what? Beginning actually back in 2008, but escalating under the Obama

administration. And Mike, you and I were talking yesterday that the policy to basically destroy and destabilise Syria did not begin with any particular president, but it was a bipartisan policy that was continued throughout various presidencies. So in 2016, he spent half a billion on sophisticated electronic fencing on the northern and eastern borders to protect the US bases.

The project began in 2008, erected surveillance towers along 50 kilometre stretch of border, fully integrated and networked fence, 442 kilometre border with Syria and Iraq. As I mentioned that triangle camera studied network of ground sensors with a file mile, five mile radius, either side of the fence and of course centralised joint US Jordan Command centre receiving all of the information from those surveillance blocks

on the fence itself. Then we look at under the Biden administration again, demonstrating how this isn't something that is relative to one particular party in the US or one particular president. So this was in 2024, the Department of Defence Appropriations Act. And now I'm just showing this part to show that 397,000,000 was put to one side for the counter ISIS of Iraq and Syrian

Syria train and equip fund. Now the slightly interesting part of this is that part of that fund is going to foreign forces, irregular forces or groups and individuals without of course actually naming them or identifying them. And that that sum then is also a a portion to border security. And if we can just move on to the next part of the ACT itself.

So the Middle East partner reimbursements section 811-0300 and 80 million to reimburse Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, Tunisia and Oman basically for enhanced border security. So this again began under Obama but was continued under Biden and will continue under Trump until September 2025. Again, I just want to show that Turkey had been building reinforced border areas that you can see in red there.

I myself in 2018, this is a 2016 map, but in 2018 I actually went to the north eastern border with Turkey and saw the building of the annexation wall. And again, let's have a look at what this actually represents. So this is the Turkey border security to be boosted by concrete walls. Now interesting statistics from 2025. It's an 825 kilometre wall which is almost finished.

It's the third longest in the wall after the Great Wall of China and the US. Mexico borders 120 border towers with irregular patrols on either side of the border. Seven ton concrete blocks, 3 meters high, 2 meters wide. Surveillance includes thermal cameras, seismic and acoustic sensors. EU funded Cobra armoured vehicles are patrolling the wall the entire length.

Drone detection jammers. Now, this is an extraordinary construction that is really effectively gone under the radar in Western media and then in Lebanon.

Not only is Israel building, these are just two posts from X talking about various areas in the South of Lebanon where Israel has of course invaded Lebanese territory since the ceasefire in November 2024 and is building a separation wall inside Lebanese territory to effectively create it's so-called buffer zone in the South, of course, totally unlawful annexation of territory and Turkey has done the same in northern Syria. But here comes the UK.

So, Mike, you will remember that last year we were talking about UK reinforcement of Lebanese armed forces, but also the establishment of watchtowers along the border with Syria, which are of course not to protect the Lebanese, but to effectively one the the, the pretext for for these borders is to prevent the smuggling of weapons of mass destruction. So we bring in the pretext for the war against Iraq, of course.

But UK military veterans were involved in the training of the Lebanese Armed Forces, while armoured boxes used in the new 30 foot constructions were taken from towers being decommissioned in Northern Ireland as part of the £62 million projects. So basically Britain has also established watchtowers. It's now suggesting that it can do the same on the southern border between Lebanon and Israel.

And of course, clearly this is not for the benefit of these countries, it's for the benefit of the security of Israel and its allies that are stationed particularly in Lebanon. 115 million of taxpayers money, UK taxpayers money has been spent on effectively reinforcing border security in Lebanon. We can talk about that more in extra.

So now I just want to bring up a map that I drew up yesterday which shows very clearly here exactly how Syria is effectively being completely encircled by these border walls with massive surveillance capabilities. So effectively, it's becoming a tech theory cauldron. The various armed forces like ISIS, al Qaeda and all the various affiliates are going to be cattled inside Syria, of course, committing heinous

massacres against Syrian people. The only open area, Sorry, can I just have the map back on for a second? The only open area will be to the coast. And then of course, they're facing Cyprus, which is gradually being taken over by Israel and Israeli influence. But also, if you look at Lebanon, it's about the corralling of the Lebanese resistance in the South of Lebanon there, because the border wall will effectively close the resistance in Lebanon off from Syria.

But also if you look at the orange arrow there, the reason I've put that there is because effectively this will isolate Syria from Iraq and from Iran and it will isolate Lebanon from Syria, Iraq and Iran and also Palestine from Lebanon and Syria. So this is effectively about corralling, imprisoning any resistance actor States and in that area of Iraq. So again, this is compounding the imprisonment of Syrians. If we look at, we can look at

the Yinon Plan, we can look at the clean break doctrine. But I just drew up the map of the new Middle East, which was published in the early 2000s. But where I've circled the map, you can actually see that on the border with Syria, the intention is to build in Iraqi Sunni Muslim state, which effectively will again further distance Syria from any assistance that it might receive either from Iran or from any of the

resistance actors in the region. Quite, quite an incredible situation, quite an incredible development. Vanessa, do you have any idea what the the total amount of money that's being spent on this is? Oh, very difficult to tell because, I mean, Turkey is running its own project. Raytheon in Tucson, AZ is the prime contractor for the Jordanian wall. Britain, as we've said to date have spent 115,000,000. But it's it's, it's up in the hundreds of millions that have

been poured into this project. Any thoughts? Well, I mean, that's a lot of monitoring as well, you know, all these sort of sensors and whatnot. Do you get, do you get the sense that that that data will be shared, especially with Israel? Yeah, of course it's going into a central command which is manned by the Zionist bloc, particularly the US and the UK. So of course, yes, it's entirely for the benefit of Israel. Yeah, OK. Well, we will discuss this more an extra.

Thank you, Vanessa. OK, if you like what the UK

column does, you'd like to support us. We do need your financial help. If you look at the front page of the website, there is a link there take you to a page that explains how you can help us financially. If you can't help us financially, please do share our material because that helps us defeat the censorship regime in

the UK and elsewhere. Tonight, 7:00 PM Germ warfare has been to Alex Newman. Sustainable Development Evil is the title for that and at 9:00 PM Carl will have Silicon Steel and discussing how the US China marriage went SAR. Yesterday's 1:00 interview was Sandy Adams speaking to Andrew Bridging. That's on the website now. So if you can, if you haven't seen that, please do have a look. It's doing very well on YouTube. So thank you to everybody that's watching on YouTube.

And I just want to mention this because Matt Campbell, who's been on this program many times, is attempting to get a new inquest into his brothers death from during 911 into the Supreme Court to to get another look at that. He's almost reached his target for the amount of money he needs to raise. Apparently this is now going to be heard in the Supreme Court. If you can possibly help with this, there's only about another 1000 lbs or so to go on the on

the goal of on the crowdfunder. It's on the crowdfunder website. The link will be in the show notes and also if you want to get a bit more of the background have a look on the UK column website. But also Ted Walters from IC 911's just done an interview with Redacted on this case and on the progress on the case. So do have a look at that if you possibly can. OK, Now let's let's move on then

to the issue of the Don Sturgis inquiry. This, of course follows on from the Skripal case, the issue of the claimed Novichok poisoning in Salisbury. And well, the Don Sturgis inquiry was running earlier this year and the inquiry report is due to be published tomorrow. Now we're going to have a main segment on this on Friday's news program, but I just want to welcome.

Tim Norman to the programme. Tim, you wrote the the day of the script all the big article on the UK column website and a whole host of other content for propaganda and focus and other places. But just very briefly, what are your thoughts on on what's likely to come out in the inquiry tomorrow? I think, well, I don't think the UK government ever wants to hold a a public inquiry, but I think it really didn't want to hold this public inquiry. It's shrouded a great deal of stuff in secrecy.

It's hidden a lot behind closed doors and as you say, it relates to this 2018 poisoning. So it's seven years in the making. It's really been quite a long time for the Sturgis family to try and find some kind of justice or some answers to what led to the death.

It's brought by Dawn Search's daughter, with Michael Mansfield, the barrister behind her and looking for, as I say, answers to what could have killed Dawn, who was apparently killed by this nerve agent Novichok that was abandoned in Salisbury after a failed attempt to kill Sergo Skripal. And well, what are your views on whether Novichok was actually used on the day? I would say the evidence is

rather slight. It actually bears comparison to the Duma atrocity in 2018, which is only a month or so later, in that in that case, we know from OPCW whistleblowers there was no nerve agent and yes, there was mass casualties. In this case we apparently had a deadly nerve agent, far more deadly than sarin, which was allegedly the use of Duma. That produced an initial case at least. No casualties until four months later. I don't think. Yeah, sorry.

Go ahead. I think the answer is probably that Novichok was a fabricated event, just as sarin was fabricated in the Duma case. Yes, I think I would concur with that. And particularly bearing in mind we keep mentioning it, but we just should keep remembering it.

That the chief medical officer of the United Kingdom suggested that if you thought you had been coming in contact with with Novichok, that the best course of action was to wash your clothes or whatever as normal and wipe things down with wet wipes. I mean, the the narrative was just so separated from reality that if if if there had been actually a nerve agent on the streets that it just didn't make any sense. Now, look, I want to Tim.

Well, first of all, before we come on to this, I mean, you were talking about the secrecy involved in this. When the report comes out, how are they going to deal, do you think, with the issues that were held in secret? I think they're going to gloss over them. I mean, it's, it is extremely serious, although as you suggest, it's comic. It's comical in many ways. The way that we were asked to respond to it. It was, of course, setting the ground for the war, incoming war

in Ukraine as it then was. And it involved the death of a, of a, of a, of a innocent woman under whatever circumstances. But I don't think they're going to go into any detail about the very problematic elements that came up during the inquiry, though I do look forward to going into them in detail with you on Friday. There's a great deal of odd evidence that emerged despite the British government's attempt to keep a very tight sort of control over the narrative.

So we would urge everybody to keep an eye out for that report tomorrow and have a look at the mainstream media reporting and then come and see us on Thursday, On Friday, sorry to get the update, but just to finish this segment, I want to let everybody know that next Thursday, the 11th of the 11th of December, that's tomorrow week, we will be holding an event in Salisbury, which we're calling Skripal and Novichok. What didn't happen if we could put that on screen.

And so this is not yet up on Eventbrite, but will be up on Eventbrite on Friday. So tickets will go on sale on Friday. They're going to be 10 lbs. Now look, what we're aiming to do here, Tim, very briefly, is to get people, local people engaged on this.

So while we're very happy to see UK column members and UK column viewers and listeners joining us for that, we'd actually very much like to encourage as many people that are aware of what we do to to invite people that aren't to come to that event which you'll be speaking at. Yes, I'm looking forward to it. We're planning a tour of the city, I believe. Yes. Well, that's something else which might be going on as well, but we'll talk more about that

on Friday as well. So Tim, thank you very much for joining us. We're looking forward to seeing you on Friday. Let's move on then, Charles.

Yeah, just a very brief piece extending really Tim's theme of controlling the narrative. And as if it wasn't undignified enough, having all the for all brought into the public about the decision of West Midlands Police to ban the fans of Maccabee Tel Aviv a short while ago. It has got worse. And with thanks to Declassified UK for bringing this to everybody's attention. But the Home Affairs Select Committee met, and we've just got a very short clip of a video of them declaring their

interests before the hearing. Before we start, there are some declarations of interest. I I will declare that I am an officer and member of the Conservative Friends of Israel. And a member of the Labour Friends of Israel. I've received a donation of £2000 from the Lib Dem Friends of Israel an. Amateurish Labour MP.

And in fact, as reported by Declassified, there was actually somebody present who didn't even declare that they'd recently made a trip to Israel. So as if anyone needed the the type of confirmation that there really are undue influences everywhere, that is it. Vanessa, let's welcome you back

to the programme and what's going on with respect to Trump, Israel and Syria. Yeah, One thing I, I I failed to point out on the map that was up on screen, but we can talk about it and extra is the potential for a wall to be built basically cutting the South of Syria from the north to the South of Damascus. But anyway, we're seeing again, these these manufactured rifts between Trump and Israel.

So allegedly Trump warns Israel not to interfere in Syria because of course he's such a mega supporter of the AL Qaeda takfiri regime there. Absolute nonsense.

It's, it's just effectively plausible deniability for the United States for what Israel is, is for the crimes that Israel is committing in southern Syria, which include in the last few days, an Israeli raid in southern Syria, which killed 13 in the village itself in the South, encroaching into Syrian territory beyond the 1974 territorial agreement in relation to the occupied Golan territories.

Just a very quick video of the incursion by the Israeli forces that included helicopters as well. And they had to leave one of their Humvee vehicles behind, which they then later bombed to prevent it falling into the hands of civilians in Syria. So here's the RAID itself. So I mean sort of extraordinary scenes, bearing in mind the majority of these people were civilians. The claim by Israel, of course, was that it was a Hamas affiliated group that they were trying to root out there.

Just a very quick map here to show where Beit Jin, the village, actually is. It's in that southern section that Israel is effectively trying to occupy and annex. And then in fact, another video has been released by various social media channels showing Israeli tanks actually entering Syrian territory and moving around quite happily with absolutely no restrictions whatsoever. While this has been going on for some time, this is actually one of the first video evidence that we've had of it.

And then if we can just go forward to the map itself, which is the occupation of Syrian territory. So this shows how Israel has basically the red section shows how far it has encroached beyond the 1974 agreement line. It's about 40 to 20 kilometres from Damascus itself, 19 new bases and taken over 800 square kilometres of Syrian territory. So clearly we know that Israel doesn't leave territory once it's occupied it neither does the US.

So it appears to be very clear what Israel's intentions are. Thank you for that and thank you very much for that. Charles, what's going on? Let's come back to the UK then

and Children's Schools Bill. Yeah, very briefly. I mean, unfortunately as with so many subjects, there's, there's not really time to give as much coverage as we'd like. But still it should be noted that there was a debate in the House of Commons on the on the progress of the Children's well-being and Schools Bill on Monday. And the gist of it is that really there is very little opposition to many of the intrusive measures.

But what's been of particular concern across the board really is this idea of having a unique identifier, effectively a type of digital ID for children. But Gideon Amos was notable in speaking out about exactly this issue. And I'll just quote what he said, which was let us remember that it gives any public body the ability to share any information, whether or not it is right, correct and accurate without the knowledge or consent of parents.

Anyone who thinks the public sector is good at looking after our data and getting it accurate has probably been living on the moon. Now, there's obviously much more to come out about the the debate and the direction of this bill.

But bearing in mind what's being said about digital identity in the round at the moment, it's important that Amos's remarks are taken note of, especially since they're so discordant with the majority of other parliamentarians, which seems perfectly extraordinary given his position. And indeed, you'd think that everybody would be well aware of exactly that fact. OK, now we have a report from

Wilk also. We do, yes, on the case of Derek Dimock and the inquiry there, sorry, the inquest that's that's taken place into his death in 2020 and the suggestion that in fact it was due to treatment with midazolam in particular that ended his life. This is a really, really important case. It's been going on for some time. It's been a miracle for that. The family have actually got it to inquest. A lot of families don't even get this far.

It costs an awful lot of money to get a case to inquest. It's very difficult to get evidence because a lot of families do not know this has happened to their loved ones and those that do, when they try to pursue to get the medical evidence, they're told no, they can't have it. Hello, this is Will Coles with reporting for UK column today.

I'm now outside the Coroner's Court down here in Suffolk reporting on the inquest into the death of Derek Dimock, aged 86. At the time of death in 2020 at the Royal Trinity Hospice, Derek Dimmick was administered midazolam, a respiratory suppressant, and is being alleged by his family, including his son Paul, that he was killed by this during the height of the so-called COVID pandemic. This case has dragged on a number of years.

Obviously it's been five years now since the death of Mr. Dimmick with many delays and extensions to this inquest which was originally billed for only around 4 days. Now another four days have been billed here in December. This is the first day of those. Today I was actually denied access to the main court and was provided instead with a video

link. We were told that the main court, despite it not being in full use today, and I did get a glimpse inside One of the other courts which was absolutely huge, could not be used for this case and instead people were funnelled into a smaller court which did not have access. Instead I was provided a video link where I could see about 1/4 of the coroner's face and none of the rest of the courtroom. In addition, we've had a number of other issues with the case

today. Of the two nurses who were meant to be the focus, we have heard that one of the nurses was unable to attend due to medical reasons. The other nurse has disappeared and apparently cannot be contacted. Much of the day has been consumed by wrangling over which written questions could be

submitted to the first nurse. Through these questions we were able to look at many of the main themes of this inquest, including nurse awareness around formazinol, which is meant to be the antidote to midazolam, irregularities over medical logs and whether these were backdated in terms of records. Why more Antonox was not given to Mr. Dimock when Antonox appeared to work earlier on. Why he appeared to have been from the medical records, denied pain relief for 58 minutes.

How a holistic assessment was conducted when he was either comatose or unresponsive. How early he had been agitated and drowsy when previously alleged to be talking, drinking Walter and briefly walking. The disposal of the drugs used and whether these were properly logged and finally the controlled drug book being destroyed during the investigation. Earlier I spoke to Amanda Hunter and Andrew Bridging, both of whom have a keen stake in this inquest. It's the third time I've come

down on the third session. I was approached by the Dimmick family back in 2023 when I was an MP and I wrote to the then coroner for Southwark. A man called Andrew Harris asked him to consider expediting A inquest into the death of Derek Dimmick, where he went into hospital with gout or Respite Hospice with gout on a Friday. He was suffering from dementia and had been for quite a while and by Monday morning he was he was dead and the evidence showed that he was immediately put on

midazolam and morphine. During COVID, many of the people who from my group, families against involuntary medical euthanasia, their loved ones were basically euthanized, not only with midazolam and morphine that that is in some of the cases, but in many of the cases it's basically the Liverpool Care pathway under another name. So what happened was families were told that their loved one was dying and they were now end of life and they were put on, they were dehydrated, they were

not given food. They deteriorated. They were then sedated and then put on end of life drugs. Not all died with the because of the end of life drugs, but many did. Obviously I was aware of NG163 implemented by Matt Hancock on the 4th of April 2020 as a protocol for the treatment of vulnerable elderly not suitable for ventilation who's suspected of suffering from COVID it.

Was basically the Liverpool Care pathway, which is supposed to be banned in 2014, went on steroids and you can see evidence from that from both the Scottish COVID inquiry and the UK COVID inquiry. You have families on record, care home managers on record saying that they called the GP, asked for antibiotics, they were refused and they said send the

end of life care. Well, what we've actually got here is the cold blooded murder, I believe involuntary euthanization of 10s of thousands of vulnerable elderly. What we do know about G163, which is the parallel track. So stay at home until your lips go blue, Come to hospital, if you're healthy enough, we'll put you on a ventilator. And about 85% of people died and were put down as having died of COVID. Or if you're vulnerable and elderly, not suitable for ventilation, we'll put you on

midazolam morphine. And 100% of the people died and we've been put down as COVID deaths. During COVID, it really was phenomenal what was happening. We believe 10s of thousands of people died during COVID on these protocols. And these protocols are continuing, not on the scale that they did before, but they

are continuing. And it's extremely concerning in the context of the city's suicide bill, which is coming in. The two nurses who are witnesses once said that she's ill and got a sick note and the other one apparently is uncontactable. They were supposed to be here to be cross examined by both sides today and and it's just not really acceptable. But people can dodge being able

to give evidence. It's been months and months since we were here with the last session of this case and it's very interesting that as a result of the letter I wrote in 2023, we're here today. The then coroner for Southwark, Andrew Harris, approved permission for Derek Dimock's inquest. Then he retired and I had CC D into my letter, the Chief Coroner for England, who's also

now retired. But back in 2023, despite the fact that the inquest was approved, the Chief Coroner for England wrote to parliamentary standards and tried to get me disciplined for attempting to influence the judge. I don't think the establishment want this case. I think it's actually far more dangerous for the establishment

than the vaccine. We hope that this will be a test case and we hope that this will this will expose what has been going on and we hope that the family get justice because they deserve justice. I can see why the establishment really want to keep a lid on this, on this information. And this is a totemic coroner's inquest. And that's why, quite honestly, it's being dragged out and dragged out. And as we all know that justice delayed is justice denied, and justice is being denied here.

This is just the first of four days allocated here in December and it seems that this is going to be a case to watch with many wider implications. This is Will Coleshill reporting for UK column. So huge thanks to Will for that. And this issue of midazolam and morphine use is not going to go away anytime soon. So undoubtedly we'll be coming back to it. But another issue which isn't going to go away anytime soon, Charles, is the issue of water

supplies and the requirement for the use of water to cool data centres that we are building increasingly. What have you got on this? Well, it's something we've been keeping a keen eye on as as big Tech continues to plunder all the natural resources that are there and take all of our electricity at the same time. We're going to have a look at Amazon who are making the resplendent claim to be interested in water conservation and replenishment efforts around

the world. Now, they've got much promotional material to apparently support this claim, but we're going to look in particular at a project that they've got in Oregon and they've said on their on their website, their water replenishment website. We're excited to announce Amazon's first water replenishment project in Oregon as Amazon Web Services continues to make progress towards its big commitment to being water

positive, whatever that means. By 20-30 they say that they're going to be able to restore as much as 2 billion litres of water a year using nature based solutions, which makes one question whether actually they can really claim responsibility for restoring or replenishing the water in the 1st place because they're obviously not creating it themselves. That's slightly beside the point.

And the issue here is that all is certainly not well, at least according to a number of sources in Oregon. And here we've got Tekorian reporting on an investigation conducted by Rolling Stone in which the nuts and bolts of it are that nitrate levels in the water there are being recorded at 10 times their normal concentration. Aquifers are reported as being contaminated.

Now it's important to clarify that there were existing nitrates from agricultural natural chemicals in the water and it's not that the level has been increased by Amazon, but the process of concentration has been happening, they say, by the process of condensing in the cooling of the Amazon data centres. Now there's also meant to be alongside this a significant increase in Oregon in particular of cancers and occurrences of miscarriage.

Amazon of course have refuted all of this, but it it, I think really the the coincidence cannot be ignored, particularly at a time where water has become quite such a sensitive issue. And I think just for the UK column audience, well and indeed they particularly based in the UKI would just point out that they have got a water replenishment project running in the Thames Valley at the moment. So we will keep our eyes on that very clear way in the coming months.

So we got to end there. Unfortunately, we're out of time. I'm going to say massive thank you to Vanessa and Charles and to Tim Norman and to David Miller for joining us today. We'll be back in a couple of minutes on the live stream. If you UK column member for some UK column news extra hope to see you there. Don't forget the videos going out tonight and also tomorrow at 1:00 PM. And we'll see you at 1:00 PM as usual on Friday for another UK column news. See you then. Bye bye. Bye.