UK Column Radio

UK Column News Extra Podcast 8th November 2024

Mike, Debi, and Mark discuss what to expect from Donald Trump and King Charles. This UK Column News Extra is now available for non-members. Support independent news by joining us for future UK Column News Extras. Join here: https://community.ukcolumn.org

Duration:: 43m
Broadcast on:: 08 Nov 2024
Audio Format:: other

At Sprouts Farmers Market, we're all about fresh, healthy, and delicious. Step into our bulk department to scoop up as much as you like from hundreds of bins filled with wholesome grains and limited-time goodies. Visit your neighborhood Sprouts Farmers Market today where flavor fills every scoop. Okay, welcome back a little bit early, perhaps, but welcome back for some extra. Thanks, Mark and Debbie for joining again now. I'm going to say we've got to recognize that a lot of people respect, or at least have a lot of hope in Donald Trump and his election. A lot of UK coal members have that as well. And some people push back quite hard on what I said about him on Monday. And well, first of all, Mark, I'd be interested in what you thought about, sorry, on Wednesday, what we said on Wednesday. Well, I didn't watch it ultra intently. It was just the basic idea that you can't necessarily expect policy to change markedly or significantly between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. Of course, that's based on the truth that there's an establishment out there, a power behind the throne, that will only tolerate so much nuance, that will only tolerate coloring outside their lines so much. And that's true. Donald Trump is something of a gadfly. Of course, he grew up in a different wealth lineage than, let's say, the Rockefellers. He had some inherited wealth, but he worked for it more than these matoys like Rockefeller, Morgan, and so on. A matoid is a person of great intelligence with criminal inclinations. But so Trump is something of a different animal, to be sure, being powerful in the New York City and New Jersey real estate markets, things like that, a bit of a gadfly. I think that carrying that over to politics, that big business attitude has had some good effect. Certainly, in his first term, he was able to impose some needed tariffs on Chinese imports and put some revenue in our treasury as a result. He balked at the Federal Reserve's policies and was quite outspoken at times about that. He probably could have went a little further on that one. He certainly, he trimmed or at least temporarily cut back on WHO funding. He was a bit duplicitous in COVID, boosting the COVID regime with Operation Warp Speed, and yet complaining about some of the lockdown measures and things like that, and again, being skeptical of the WHO and withholding their funding. Something of a mixed bag there. All in all, I think that certainly he's not a boring guy. You'll never be bored with Donald Trump. That's for sure. And he's got a chance to prove himself now to show his nationalist and American first bona fides are real, to intensify some of the good things he did in his first term. All eyes are on him and his backers, be they Americans or elsewhere, need to hold his feet to the fire. I think if they do, I think they'll get reasonably satisfactory results, but Trump is under pressure from groups like the CFR, Consulon Foreign Relations, whose overview of Trump, I recited and reported on in the main segment today, they don't just look at him and talk about him and assess him against a globalist measurement. They want him to do the things that they want, and they're highly influential. The CFR comes out of big money. It comes autorecafeller. It comes out of Morgan. They don't play around. They've got journalists in their holding pen. They have papers that they put into congressional committees, advising them on what to do. And they have personnel who will go to the State Department, possibly of the Trump administration, go to the Pentagon, possibly under the Trump administration. So the CFR isn't just some armchair philosophy sitting in overblown leather chairs sipping caviar. They are they want action on the globalist agenda. And they don't see a lot of that in Trump. They they give him pretty bad grades, as I noted in the main report. So Trump would appear to be that America first or that everyone wants. But appearances can be misleading. You have to be careful. Any politician, you have to be careful. And it's going to be a matter of the people getting involved and holding his feet to the fire. If he hires too many CFR people in his administration, people need to balk at that. They need to send him letters. And they just need to say we don't like what we're seeing. So people have to stay involved and not just get overly inundated by the man on the white horse that's going to save us all a phenomenon. He will be a market improvement over Joe Biden. Of course, that's not saying much. Just about anybody, Alfred E. Newman of Mad Magazine would be an improvement over Joe Biden. But but Trump does have a lot of cahonies. He's got a lot of courage, I think, to be assertive when he needs to be. So there's a lot a lot of eyes on Trump now he's going to have to live up to his core promises that people are going to have to keep his feet to the fire. And if he's really the American America first nationalist that the CFR doesn't want, then Donald Trump has to prove it. The proof will be in the pudding. And that's why we're journalists to make sure that the facts get out so people can make these judgments. Yeah, okay. So let me ask you this then. Obviously, he's in a much, much stronger position this time than he was in 2016 because he appears to be winning the House of Representatives. He has a majority in the Senate. Let's just take the majority in the Senate for a second. Does him having a majority in the Senate guarantee that whoever basically whoever he chooses for positions in his cabinet will get the Senate approval that they need? Certainly will increase the likelihood. Americans at least need to keep an eye on their senators as to who's being nominated for what and what they're approving. If there were to be a change in the Supreme Court, let's say Clarence Thomas, a flagship conservative were to step down. He's getting up in years and they were to replace Clarence Thomas. That would be an important one. Various departments in Department of Defense, Department of State are going to be really important where Senator approval would be required. And let's not forget the pandemic treaty that the final touches of which are being put on right now, according to James Riggusky, people can go to JamesRiggusky.substack.com to see the latest on that. Will the Senate, will they treat it as the treaty that it is? And will Donald Trump and his administration raise that specter and say, you senators have to treat this like a treaty. The Constitution requires your advice and consent. And if Trump is so inclined, this treaty doesn't look good to me. I don't like the smell of it. I urge you to decline on this. That would be a major bell weather issue right there, Mike. In terms of the House, I think they're still looking at the final touches on what the House majority would be for the Republican Party. Not all Republicans are of the same persuasion. Some are the purely big business kind of Rockefeller Republicans that don't like the new brand of Republican that Trump represents. A slightly more populist bent. Hopefully that's genuine and not deceptive. But it is better than his first term. And another factor in it, Mike, is that Trump can be a little bit more unequivocal now because I don't believe he can serve another term beyond this one he's just been elected to. And so he's got to really get to business. He's got four years. He can move with more impunity now. And so we'll see just how courageous he is and just how genuine he is. Again, the proof's in the pudding. There is a lot of confidence among a lot of people I know in Donald Trump. But my job as a journalist is not to be on the bandwagon, but reportedly lay out the information that can make a difference. And just the final point on this, and his first term, we could call it the deep state, had him tied up in knots with various kinds of, you know, Russia getting queries and legislate, you know, sort of judicial kinds of things. Are we going to see the same types of attacks on him? Is he going to be tied up in knots again? Does he have the co-owners to actually deal with that this time because he didn't the first time right? That is one of the best questions I've heard asked, Mike. That is essential. The media, even though Jeff Bezos' confessional that I reported on last week shows that they're sinking. And finally, he's admitting it's their own fault. And the Los Angeles Times had a similar melee at their newsroom. No more endorsements. It's our own fault, you know, but losing viewers, losing subscribers, board members from editorial boards resigning. But the media is pretty incorrigible. They and elements of what we call the deep state, Rhinor Republicans, the Democratic Party, et cetera, et cetera. I believe you're right. They're going to kick a lot of dust in Trump's face. There's going to be a lot of allegations, probably things we don't expect to try and trip him up. And he's going to have to cut through that with a very straightforward way of doing things not to be too distracted or too dismantled by the SH storm, SH, the shite storm that's sure to come his way. There's a lot of interest that didn't want him back in there. So that is the big question. Can he resist what will be an even bigger shite storm this time around? Yeah. Debbie, what are your thoughts? Oh, well, I mean, I can't ever understand actually why, you know, when somebody's elected in America, you've got this two months sort of transition time. It seems an awful long time, whereas here in the UK, you know, we have an election and our prime ministers in Downing Street overnight, you know, the removal spans have been and gone. So I've always found that a bit strange. But I think, you know, when it comes to Trump, I get why people are so thank goodness Trump's got in, because clearly, if, if, I mean, this is just a hypothetical, but if Kamala had got in, perhaps, that would have triggered a civil war, I don't know. So I get the reason that people are very relieved that Trump's gotten in. And nobody was more pleased when I saw him withdraw from the WHO last time. I mean, it's yes. All right. And he's a charismatic character with a personality. I mean, you know, Boris, we were all fascinated with Boris's personality, because Boris has got, he goes, he goes places where angels fear to tread, let's face it. And I think Trump does too. And I've listened to many pastors in the Bible belt in America. And I get it. I get why everybody's like, make America great again. But I agree with Mark, in that I think he has got to what is he going to do? He's a Maca, make America great again. So is he going to stick to his promises? And stick to America first. This is what's going to be interesting. What if Iran, for example, should attack Israel? Will he get involved? Will he go? You know what? This is about America. This is about me protecting our people. And we're not going to get involved. If China, and if the China and Taiwan thing hots up, is he going to turn around and go, none of my business, I'm making America great again. And, you know, he's very tight with Elon Musk, Neuralink, you know, SpaceX, all of the he put in, I think his is called Space Force Mark, just before in his last term, and warp speed. So I'm very much on the fence, but I don't think personally we should expect any one person, especially a politician, to come in and save us. I think it's, if we all sit back and go off, fantastic Trump's in now, he's going to make it all right. I think we really need to be cautious of a feeling like that. And let's see what he does. But I get why so many people are happy that he's in, but I think it's early days. And yeah, we'll see. So I agree with everything you said there, Debbie. I mean, a couple of points I would make. It is dangerous if people put all their faith in one person, and they're then say, well, I don't need to get involved, because he's going to sort it out for us. I think that is very, very dangerous. I think, though, that with respect to foreign policy, which is really what I was saying on Monday, it's clear what they are intending to do. And to this degree, I mean, Mark was suggesting that the issue with Trump and NATO was a bit overblown in the main news. But the point here is that the NATO establishment, the military industrial complex, has been wanting the European Union to step up to the plate on defense for years. And the EU establishment has been wanting the EU member states to step up to the plate for years. And we've been covering at the UK column, this whole drive for European defense union. Now, the defense union is not any different to the monetary union or any of the other unions that the EU has. They have all these policy areas that they describe as unions, where they've merged everything, your monetary union, the euro, and so on. They've merged, they effectively moved the par base from the member states legislatures up to the European Commission level. And of course, as we know, the European Commission is selected effectively. It's not a popular vote, which chooses the people that sit in that. So Ursula von der Leyen never had a popular vote for her to be in her position. But she wants control of EU defense decisions. And they want, we've been talking about this for years, they want single point command of and control of the militaries of the European nations. And Trump has, without question, been used by the NATO establishment to drive fair within the populations of European member states in order to give the political elites within those countries the mandate to move forward with this project. And that that is going to be the case. But of course, he has contributed to this himself, because we reported in 2018 his speech at the NATO, the opening of the new NATO headquarters in Brussels, where he was basically telling the the leaders of European member member states off for not spending enough on defense. The UK has said it is going to lead the way by spending two and a half percent on defense. And they have said Jeremy Hunt was saying yesterday, we don't need to worry because as soon as the UK spends two and a half percent, everybody else in the EU will start spending two and a half percent as well. So we're leading the charge here. But the fact that Trump is now president is going to reinvigorate. It already has reinvigorate. In fact, Orban yesterday at the EU meeting was talking about the reinvigoration of this move towards a European defense infrastructure. So that's already happening. That's one of the things that's already happening as a result of Trump winning the election. And the video clip that I showed of Vance on Monday, where he was describing what he saw as being the way that things would work, that the United States, the Trump administration wants Israel to step up to the plate and deal with Iran. They want the European Union to step up the plate and deal with Russia. And they want to be able to focus, the US wants to be able to focus itself on China. And that is not a policy that JD Vance has been expressing on his own. That is something that has gone right through the Trump platform for ever, actually, and going back. And it has, I mean, even people like Nigel Farage are echoing this, right? So that is going to be, I believe, the fun. Now, on the Israel matter, in the meantime, of course, and Mark, you can tell us a little bit more about this, because Debbie talked about this transition period. So we have a transition period now where Biden is still supposedly the president, but there's this handoff to Trump. And how does that work? Because aircraft have just been sent, because RAF Lake and Heath is effectively a United States Air Force base, even though it's called RAF Lake and Heath. And it's just been upgraded for nuclear weapons, because they have 35 USF 35s are going to be stationed there, and so on. But a whole bunch of aircraft, I believe F-15s. I can't remember. I think it's F-15s have just flown from Lake and Heath to the Middle East, in preparation for a potential attack by Iran. And as Vanessa was saying on Wednesday, that is very likely to happen now. And Iran, certainly the rhetoric seems to have strengthened somewhat, and they are intending to do something with Israel very, very soon. So there's already US assets be moved into the region, potentially to get involved in that, if that happens or when that happens. So Mark, how does this work? Can Trump, does he already have the ability to change that policy? Or is that something that he has no control over until January? The answer would be he has no direct control over it until he's actually inaugurated. All he can do now is express his opinion. A Joe Biden is still president, like it or not. And it's a dangerous time in the sense that Joe Biden could simply go along if he already supports this thing, or he could easily be pressured to support it if he doesn't go along with it, because, hey, he's going to be out of there fairly soon anyway, and he can let Trump pick up the pieces. So it's a time when exploitation can happen, when they pass legislation in America, some of the worst legislation in America has been passed during the time of transition, which, as Debbie noted, is extended here compared to the UK. It's a very sensitive time between the election of a new president and the seating of that new president. Some of the worst legislation in US history, including the Federal Reserve Act, has been passed in that time gap, what they call the lame duck session, the lame duck time. So yeah, we have to be very watchful right now. All Trump can do is make his views known, and he can be pretty assertive. Of course, his views will be widely reported, so it'll have a lot of impact. But Joe Biden is still president, so it's a sensitive time. Right. Okay. And if something egregious like that was done in this lame duck time, would Trump have the ability to just revoke that by some kind of executive order since he became president? Generally speaking, yeah, he could reverse a policy, just like when Joe Biden got in, he took down the border wall that was being built and piled a lot of those sections only four or five miles from where I'm sitting. And I'm going to be watching whether those slightly rusting border walls metal sections will be removed from the land along some old railroad tracks and taken taken to the border and reerected. So yeah, just like Biden counteracted a lot of border policies, Trump, theorizing in many ways realistically could counteract some of these foreign policy measures. It might not be real easy, but the answer is generally yes. Yeah. Okay. But in the meantime, of course, sorry, Debbie, go ahead. Sorry, no, I was just going to add very quickly too, because, you know, when you think about Trump, we also covered last week, Professor Claire Wardle and this information information. Now, this I know it's always been an issue, but Trump was really the catalyst when he came out with fake news, because after he came out with the term fake news, everybody just went into overdrive and invented this information disorder, where we're now seeing misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation. And if you take it back, although it was going on in World War One, World War Two, propaganda, et cetera, misinformation, it really became an industrial complex as soon as Trump uttered those two words, fake news, we mustn't forget where that originated and where it started at the previous Trump presidency. I mean, and I have to say, you know, I've seen how he's being dealing with the press over the last day or two, and he's not taking any nonsense from them. I will give him that. And they are trying their best to make him look like an idiot, but he's not falling for it at this stage, which that is a positive thing, I suppose. Now, let's move from one world leader, Debbie, to another. Well, we've got to talk about the royal family, I mean, you know, and I'm going to be talking loads more about the royal family. And also, by the way, I just want to add very, very quickly, thank you for mentioning scrap the app, Mike, in the main news, because I'm going to announce to our viewers right now, every single week, I'm going to be doing something about scrap the apps, whether it's the NHS app, that'd be the first one, or whether it's your bank app, or whatever I'm going to be doing that. But you know, the royal family, I'm so interested in the royal family. And it seems that Channel 4 are interested in the royal family, too. Thank you to so much, so much to everybody who sent me this, that Channel 4 were doing a big expose, and the King, the Prince, and their secret millions. And it's like, when I started to watch, I thought, Oh, wow, and there were a few, there were a few wow, or woa moments, if you like, but also a lot of the material we have covered in our series, The Green King. So we found out through dispatches that King Charles is charging the NHS NHS hospitals. This is in London, 11 million to park ambulances on the land. I mean, that's just a ticket to the iceberg. But I just want to remind you just before you remind everybody, can I just ask a question, Debbie, because I've seen this in Plymouth as well, a bunch of ambulances being parked up. Why are the ambulances being parked up on this land in the first place? Well, that's a really good question. I mean, that is, that is the million dollar question, isn't it? And this is what is exposing now the King of unsustainability? Because he's, he's getting in all of this money from charities, from the NHS, Circo businesses. I mean, you name it everywhere. And we've been exposing it on the column for Apsi ages. And I would say to people, you know, go and have a look at The Green King. And even if you are a staunch royalist, like my mother, who is a staunch royalist, it may just surprise you, because this is based on fact, you know, we build everything we we base everything on evidence and fact. And one of the things that we brought out was the saviour of the world, you know, and people were shocked when they saw the statue of Prince Charles as he was then, as the saviour of the world with wings and a loin cloth standing on a hill of skulls with a crucifix on there. And you can make whatever you want. I mean, there's so much to be said about that picture, but you know what? I've got a little tiny clip. There was a little trailer from the Channel 4 dispatches expose. Have a look at it and see what you think. Hold on. I have to find it first. Keep talking. I'll keep to well. It was shocking, quite honestly. And I really do think that King Charles, he's got his fingers in every single pie. Have a look. Tonight, what Charles and William aren't telling you about their secret millions, their private estates, the duchess of Lancaster and Cornwall make Charles and William £50 million a year. But they have repeatedly refused to reveal exactly which properties they own. Can we have a report on the list of properties? I don't see why. And details of how these estates make their staggering profits and from where have remained secret until now. Wow. God Almighty. This is a really, really important revelation. Thousands of documents obtained by dispatches reveal how hard up government departments, schools and even the NHS are helping to keep the cash rolling in for Charles and William. It's all shrouded in secrecy, isn't it? I don't know why we don't find out more about it actually. Our evidence shows how the commercial activities of these private estates are undermining their environmental commitments. Well, this is the worst performing kind of property. Well, we can reveal to you that the landlord we are talking about is the duchess of Cornwall, which was managed for about 50 years by Charles, who is now the king and is now run by Prince William. OK, that does surprise me. I think when you own so much, it's hard to comprehend how people could appreciate such a small beach. They clearly don't understand who we are and what we value. They are exempt from most of the taxes we all pay and there are now calls for that to change. This would be a brilliant time for them all to say, I'm going to be open and I want to be treated as fairly as anybody. It is public money, it's taxpayers money, your money, it's my money, it's the viewers money. It's your money and it's being stolen and if it's not, if it's not that, there's tons of other stuff that he's filtering off money from charities, he's filtering off money from sports, he's sucking out the money from celebrities of which he's become part. His family connections, his close family connections, we cover all of this in the green king. So when you look at now, everybody's asking questions about the royal family and it's not just our UK royal family, but it's also, you'll see the Spanish king got mud thrown at him recently with regards to the Valencia floods. I can tell you that Prince Charles came to visit me after I lost my house, two floods and mud. Does he care? No, they don't care and in Cornwall, I'm going to rant now, in Cornwall, when any of the royal family do come down to Cornwall, they temporarily fix the potholes of where their royal carriages or royal cars are going to go and it's a cheap fill just so that they think, honestly, the whole thing is a scam. There's much more to come on King Charles, what his dealings are, who he is, who he's linked to, who his family are linked to, and what has his agenda been for the last 50 years. He has been the prince in waiting for a reason and that reason is now that he is the globalist of, he's the top globalist in the world in my opinion and he's got an awful lot to answer for and as people are starting to ask questions, more and more dirt is coming out, but yes, King Charles, I'm keeping a very close eye, but not just King Charles, on Princess of Wales, on Queen Camilla, on their family, I'm keeping an eye on all of them and the Duke of Edinburgh, Prince Edward, his family, the Duchess of York, Andrew, what are all these people up to now? Don't forget Princess Anne, now Princess Anne is very interesting because she hides in the background, you don't really see very much of her, but she's behind common purpose, she's behind CSC leaders, she's behind the Windsor leadership trust, she's all the globalist leadership programs that are placing people in positions of power and authority in the country and she's right there supporting it, so she also has a role to play. Oh, don't even start me and you know what, I find myself in this really sort of, again, it's a divisive situation because my family, my mother and my family are very pro-royal, this isn't if I turned around right now because I'm at my mother's at the moment. Is that an age thing, Debbie? Do you think older generation would be more pro-monarchy and the younger generation actually wouldn't be too worried about seeing the back of them? I definitely think that's in it and of course the older generation, remember the Queen and many people have got, although the Queen, her first, let's not just forget her first public visit, after lock up was poured down, so there are question marks there too, but a lot of people think of the Queen, but my mum is very, very pro-royalist and if I turn around now, we've got pictures in this house of my father with now King, of my father with the Princess Royal, so military connections have led to introductions and I myself met Charles and when I trained at the Royal Free, it was opened by the Queen, so I met the Queen, but now when I see how much is involved and how much corruption and dirty dealings there are, it's simply staggering and I think more of this is going to evolve, we're going to start seeing more, but as regards to the younger generation, yeah I don't think younger generation really care, to be quite honest, I think they could take it or leave it. I mean, a problem we have here Mark is that, we're lumbered with this historical artifact, but the United States, and maybe there are people that would say, well we should be a republic and then we look at the United States and of course you supposedly don't have an aristocracy and that's nonsense, you absolutely do have an aristocracy, all the names that you mentioned, the Rockefeller and Bush and all these types of people that go to Yale and Harvard and whatnot and consider themselves to be the blue bloods of your nation. I'm not certain that you're in any better position actually. There's a slight difference only that it's less based on blood and more based on money, kind of a money accuracy, but the effect is about the same and in a way it's worse in the sense that it's a little bit more hidden. The average American is just beginning to grasp that the political system and the politicians we see, the branches of government are an outward thing, but inwardly behind the throne, there's old money lines and those lines of inheritance they park their money and tax exempt foundations while the rest of us pay taxes. So it's a different kind of royalty built a slightly different way and it's more deceptive, but in the end the effect is about the same. A republican form of government and republic I think is a pretty good one, but it's also an extremely fragile one. Even James Madison talked about that as did some of the other founders, Benjamin Franklin, it's a republic if you can keep it, they knew it was fragile and they were right. Yes, I had the finding fathers saying at the time, I can't remember whether it was Adams or Franklin or whoever it was, we should not be moving to a party political model. This is a recipe for disaster. Yeah, George Washington too. Yeah, and they were vindicated big time on that one as well as Jefferson. It's sad because the political parties make everything into an ideology because one important point about the presidency, the irony is that in the ideal sense, it almost shouldn't even matter who the president is because they step in, their job is to see to it that the laws are faithfully executed. They're supposed to have adherence to and reverence for the constitution, the letter of the law, and they're supposed to apply those principles, whoever steps into that gap is supposed to apply the very same principle. So in some ideal Republican sense, it shouldn't even hardly matter who the president is. So that's a really important point because that's exactly the role of the monarch as well. And in Britain, the monarch has averted that role. And well, in a different way, the presidency, the role has changed. And political parties are a chief way that that's been achieved. Well, you have to adhere to the party, but the party isn't totally in in tune with the constitution. Wait, you don't want to fight that word? That means you're an isolationist. What the hell's wrong with you? We don't like no isolationists around here. And that's a big one with the CFR. They don't like them isolationists, you know, they're they're they're they're redneck rat wingers here. So yeah, it's pretty pretty sensitive stuff. Anyway, I don't know if you wanted to I had a couple other slides, and I know we're at a time mark, but but you did want to show this the second clip from Gordon Sinclair. So why don't you introduce that? Yeah, well, he has a little bit more to say this this guy was really interesting. Canadian journalist, as I mentioned, the way he spoke up. And one of his main things was he always knew the main press, even the legacy press of his day was still even then getting into statism to preach the gospel of the state. The state can't be wrong about fluoridation. The state can't be wrong about vaccination. If the move if the moon's made a cream cheese and the state says it, it must be true. But he had a way of saying things as well as the specific topics he addressed. So, you know, to learn more about Gordon Sinclair, let's let's listen to a little bit more from him. I object on the grounds of my rights as a citizen to refuse medicine. I don't want this medicine, and I challenge the authority of anybody to force it on me. You can go to a drug store and buy a can of this sodium fluoride, but under the laws of our country, it will have to be labeled poison. This is a must. It is a basic chemical used in rat and bug poison. No one disputes that point. No one claims that fluoride is useful to any adult anywhere on earth under any condition or combination of conditions. They do claim that it is helpful to some of the teeth of some of the children, that it is not cumulative in the human system, and that it will not be injurious. Okay, we're right back to my point, and that point is this. Why, if this is supposedly good to a limited group in the population, is it forced in the water of all of the people all the time? One of the rights we have to protect is the individual right to take or refuse medicine, and I don't want that right trampled underfoot. Well, that's all from Gordon Sinclair, who normally does only the weather on assignment. Oh, thank you, Gordon. A bit of a character. Thank you, muted, Mark. Sorry, I had there was extra noise here. Yeah, he was quite a guy. I like the little the dry sense of humor he had as well. I normally do the weather, but now I'm going to let it let you have it on a floor ad. Sorry. He's completely right, you know, Mike, because what he said there was medicalizing water, medical water. Yes. An recent interview with Joy Warren, she said this is what she does. I'm not suggesting that anybody else should or could, but this is what Joy does. She says that because she didn't agree to receiving medicalized water, she doesn't pay her water rates for clean water. She pays the sewerage rates, but she doesn't pay for water because she says she's then got to go to the extra expense of getting either reverse osmosis or distillation to remove that fluoride from the water, because she doesn't choose to drink water that's been medicalized. Thus far, the water company have not insisted that she pays that particular part of her water bill. But this is all about medicalizing water. And in the first clip that marks, but of course, you don't know the dose. Nobody knows how much fluoride they're getting. It depends on how much water you drink. You know, so this is a huge, this is a huge move in the USA. It could have huge effects here in the UK. I'm hoping one other quick thing. He mentioned that kids don't drink a lot of water. That's even more true now. And to the extent they do, it's not out of the pipe. It's not out of the out of your tap. So, you know, the fluoride is largely bypassing the kids anyway, but by putting it in, hold on, hold on. Is it though? Is it because it's drinking fizzy pulp instead? And what is in that? You know, what is it? What's the water base that's used for that? Okay, that's true. Yeah, I don't know what the, I don't know what the concentrations would be. I was, I meant in the strict sense of public water being used for that purpose. And therefore, it's going to get in food too, because water is going to be used to make bread and so on. So, yeah, point taken. But the, I just don't want viewers to forget that RFK now being rolled out once again, because this happened last time regarding medical matters. He's now being put up there once again, RFK junior as some sort of health advisor, maybe on some panel for Trump. And he's the one that I quoted in the main news saying they will call for a national ban on fluoridation upon getting in office. So those that have all eyes on Trump, this is a real bellwether issue because, yeah, just like with vaccination, if you can make, if you can assert your will on fluoridation and make it happen, that would be a measurement that Donald Trump is who he says he is, that would really prove his freedom loving impulses that are, that are, you know, prove their genuine, you can make foreign policy changes. You can do this or that. But if you can make a change on fundamental vaccination policy or fluoridation, that really proves a lot. Let's say, for example, he was able to get the legal protection removed from big pharma for vaccine damages that Reagan, a big conservative Republican, passed in 1986. Let's say Trump were to repeal that and expose Pfizer to all the lawsuits that it deserves for MRNA and all that. Boy, if Trump were to do that, then, you know, he really would be on a white horse in a sense. So, you know, a lot of, a lot of proving things, proving grounds are coming up here. A lot of key pivotal issues that will really show where he's at. It's coming right up. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Well, we will. Or two pregnant women, the effects of drinking fluoridated water on pregnant women for the unborn baby because of the neurodevelopmental conditions that have been seen as a result of fluoride. Such a big subject, very important. Yeah. Okay. In lowering the IQ of children, yeah, children who have been born and preborn as well. Yeah. Yeah. Super. Okay. Well, look, we've got to leave it there for today. Thank you very much to Mark and Debbie. Hope everyone has a great weekend. Absolutely. Absolutely. One p.m. as usual on Monday. See you then. Bye-bye. Bye. At Sprouts Farmers Market, we're all about fresh, healthy, and delicious. That's why you'll find the season's best organic produce, hand-picked, and waiting for you in the center of our store. We bring in local farm fresh fruits and veggies bursting with flavor. Come on in to discover everyday favorites like juicy berries and crisp greens, but also unique peak season varieties like moon drop or cotton candy grapes. Visit your neighborhood Sprouts Farmers Market today where fresh produce is always in season.