Radio4All mp3 audio files usually available from 23:00 2-4hrs, after TX – we’ll credit you if you rebroadcast. Any probs. mp3s should be on alternative links below by then
Part One – Local and National News Review
VIDEO
Today we give thanks for the life and work of Tyndale and for the riches he bequeathed to us. William Tyndale was born in Gloucestershire in around 1494. He was a priest and scholar, a brilliant linguist who famously vowed to “cause the boy who drives the plough” to know more of the scriptures than the powerful and learned. But England in the 1520s was a dangerous place for the work of translation. Diarmaid Macculloch is Emeritus Professor of the history of the church at Oxford University Interview with Professor Diarmaid Maculloch on why translating the Bible into English was so dangerous, how Tyndale died, and Thomas Cromwell’s role in ensuring a copy of the Bible in English was placed in every parish church. Dr Paula Gooder, Canon Chancellor at St Pauls, the Tyndale translation of the New Testament, the cathedral’s copy of Tyndale’s New Testament and his genius for translation. There will be events up and down the country this year, marking the anniversary of Tyndale’s translation. But one Cheshire town has already stolen a march on the celebrations, As part of its annual festival, Churches Together in Lymm organised a Tyndale 500 programme, showcasing the Bible through readings exhibitions and the performing arts. Miranda: Often in a Sunday worship the gospel will be followed by a sermon. But in the spirit of Tyndale who put the scriptures into our hands in our own language I’m here with the some of the people of Lymm to consider what this passage might mean to us today. Almighty God, we thank you for revealing yourself to your world, in the beauty of creation, in the incarnation of your Son Jesus, and in the witness of the Holy Scriptures. We thank you for all those who in countless generations have passed on the scriptures to us. We thank you for the skills of translators and scholars; of readers, preachers, composers and lyricists; and for all those involved in the printing and distribution of Bibles throughout the world. We pray for those who risk danger simply by owning a Bible, or by challenging those who seek to enforce one reading of it. We pray for all those who are persecuted for their faith; and for a world in which your peace, love and justice may prevail. Closing music. Thou whose Almighty Word , from Christmas Oratorio by Bob Chilcott. Choir of Merton College, Oxford. Delphian Records
BBC fake journalism not allowing use of word ‘kidnap’ or ‘Zionism’. Kidnap of Maduro and wife from Venezuela – problems with the trial in US. Trump’s speech about Venezuela operation – he wanders off script and says ‘ attack on sovereignty’. Trump leads world into geopolitical Wild West where might makes right, while laws and rules fall away “American dominance in the Western Hemisphere will never be questioned again,” President Donald Trump declared after United States forces hit various Venezuelan targets and elite commandos carried out the capture and rendition of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife with an audacious raid in the dead of night. “American dominance in the Western Hemisphere will never be questioned again,” President Donald Trump declared Saturday, after U.S. forces hit various Venezuelan targets and elite commandos carried out the capture and rendition of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife with an audacious raid in the dead of night. “Under the Trump administration we are reasserting American power in a very powerful way in our home region.” The world is still digesting the consequences of the U.S. intervention, which the Trump administration has tried to characterize as a “law enforcement” mission against Maduro, indicted in U.S. federal court on charges of narco-trafficking, rather than the clear military operation in a foreign nation that it appeared to be. Some Venezuelan military positions were leveled by U.S. strikes, with officials reporting an unspecified number of casualties. Maduro is already in New York City, awaiting an appearance in court. For many Venezuelans, especially millions of people compelled to flee from the country over the past decade of economic catastrophe under Maduro’s watch, his removal is joyous news, and the first step to a happier future. On that count, the U.S. operation was a clear tactical success in its brazen precision and efficacy. Still, the likelihood of a strategic failure looms. A dark history of failed U.S. interventions and regime-change projects haunt the current action. Boosters of the move liken it to the capture of Panamanian dictator Manuel Antonio Noriega in 1989, with U.S. criminal investigations into money laundering and drug smuggling justifying the operation. But the analogy to the present collapses amid Trump’s talk of open-ended control over Venezuela and its tremendous oil wealth. By the end of the weekend, the White House had done little to dispel the confusion about what comes next in Venezuela. Trump himself suggested the United States would somehow “run” the South American nation until a proper transition away from the current dispensation could be forged. His lieutenants were more circumspect, emphasizing U.S. interests in dismantling alleged criminal networks within the Venezuelan state apparatus and reasserting American control or influence over Venezuela’s vast oil sector. Venezuela’s pro-democracy opposition voiced fears that they would be cut out in a Trump-brokered deal with the remnants of Maduro’s regime. Speaking to the Atlantic, Trump said that he expected Maduro’s former vice president — and hastily installed successor — Delcy Rodriguez to essentially do the White House’s bidding. “If she doesn’t do what’s right,” he said, “she is going to pay a very big price, probably bigger than Maduro.” The rest of the world has watched with mixed emotions. Many in Latin America, especially among the ascendant, Trump-aligned political right, cheered Maduro’s ouster and what seems a grievous blow to the region’s remaining left-leaning autocracies. Elsewhere, world leaders feared a grim precedent. “The bombing of Venezuelan territory and the capture of its president crosses an unacceptable line,” Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva said. “The action recalls the worst moments of interference in Latin American and Caribbean politics, and threatens the regional preservation as a zone of peace.” French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot shed no tears for Maduro in a statement but said the U.S. action “contravenes the principle of the nonuse of force that underpins international law.” He warned that it was part of the steady erosion of international norms, worsened by countries such as Russia that are supposedly the guarantors of the rules-based order. “The growing number of violations of this principle by nations vested with the primary responsibility of permanent membership on the United Nations Security Council will have grave consequences for global security, sparing no one,” he said. Trump’s move into Venezuela is another nail in the coffin of the old postwar status quo. The White House reneged on commitments to receive authorization from Congress before deploying the U.S. military in Venezuela. Ahead of Monday’s emergency U.N. Security Council session on Venezuela, Trump’s U.N. ambassador, Mike Waltz, scoffed at the “hand-wringing” of his diplomatic counterparts. In a Sunday television interview, Secretary of State Marco Rubio waved away concerns about an open-ended regime change mission as a kind of “phobia.”…
This accusation comes as Moscow ramps up claims of foreign interference, threatening to derail fragile peace negotiations. call to action icon Major General Apti Alaudinov, a prominent Kremlin figure, unleashed the allegations in a fiery statement, claiming the strike was designed to sabotage any chance of a truce between Russia and Ukraine. ‘The strike carried out against civilians celebrating the New Year in the Kherson region once again proves that the Ukrainian side is doing everything possible to ensure that there will be no peace agreement,’ Alaudinov said. He went further, asserting that ‘behind all these actions stand representatives of foreign intelligence services, first and foremost those of England and European states.’ The incident happened in Khorly, a coastal resort in the Russian-controlled Kherson region, where revellers had gathered at a cafe and hotel to welcome 2026. Regional official Vladimir Saldo, installed by Moscow, painted a grim picture: ‘The bodies of the dead were almost completely burned, like in a nuclear strike,’ he said. Initial reports put the fatalities at 24, but the toll climbed to 27 as more bodies were recovered from the rubble. Among the identified victims was Sergei Bohan, a 55-year-old police chief in the occupied area of Kalanchak, raising questions about whether the site was purely civilian. Russia labelled the event a ‘terrorist attack’ and a ‘massacre,’ withdrawing a list of victims from public view after claiming a Western hack. Ukraine has vehemently denied orchestrating the strike on civilians. Dmytro Lykhoviy, a spokesperson for Ukraine’s General Staff, dismissed the claims as ‘disinformation and fake statements’ aimed at swaying international partners and peace talks. ‘The Armed Forces of Ukraine adhere to the norms of international humanitarian law and strike exclusively at the enemy’s military targets,’ Lykhoviy stated. He emphasised that Kyiv focuses on reducing Russia’s military capabilities, such as targeting oil refineries. call to action icon Independent verification remains challenging in the fog of war, but Reuters reported similar details, confirming at least 24 deaths and noting Russia’s call for international condemnation. Al Jazeera echoed this, highlighting Moscow’s accusation of a ‘war crime’ while underscoring Ukraine’s stance against civilian targets.
They called on sanctions on the Israeli government to go further. Among the letter’s signatories was John Deverell, who served in the British army for more than three decades. He was also defence attache in Saudi Arabia and Yemen, including at the time of the 11 September terror attacks. The other signatories were Andrew Graham, the former director general of the UK defence academy; Peter Currie, a retired major general, and Charlie Herbert, a former senior army commander in Afghanistan. The letter strongly rejected a claim that Israel’s military followed similar protocols to the British military. A senior defence ministry official said that “Israel appears to have thorough and rigorous processes for the conduct of hostilities and targeting, that in many respects resemble our own” – an assertion that was cited by the UK government in a legal case on arms exports to Israel last July. The former senior officers rebutted the claim, stating that there were clear differences. They cited Israel’s use of indiscriminate munitions that had led to “exceptionally disproportionate and avoidable civilian fatalities and widespread destruction of civilian infrastructure”. They added that evidence of Israeli war crimes was “so well documented and compelling that the British government should cut all military collaboration with Israel forthwith, to avoid the charge of complicity”. The sanctions that should be imposed, the signatories said, include RAF and British contracted aircraft not being used for any purpose connected with the Israeli military, and a suspension of all military technology transfer. In September, the UK announced that it was banning Israelis from enrolling at the Royal College of Defence Studies, a prestigious military academy. The UK was accused of complicity after carrying out near daily reconnaissance flights over Gaza during the war. The flights stopped after the ceasefire. In addition, despite a partial suspension of arms sales to Israel over the war on Gaza, approved UK arms exports to Israel have skyrocketed under the Labour government. Export data released in May showed that 20 different licences in categories such as military aircraft, radars, targeting equipment and explosive devices, were approved between October and December 2024. Arms campaigners said the three-month total was more than what was approved altogether under the Conservative government between 2020 and 2023…
And yet here we are, days after America seized the Venezuelan president and his wife from the country’s capital Caracas, and the prime minister’s language about whether that amounted to a breach of international law is circumspect. In the immediate aftermath of Washington’s extraordinary actions, Sir Keir’s words could hardly have been more bland given the gravity of what we were witnessing. In a social media post, external, he talked about “a transition of power” in Venezuela being something the UK had long supported. But what about how it was brought about? His answers, or lack of them, are the latest case study in No 10’s handling strategy of a maverick US president: don’t commentate, act in what they believe is a pragmatic, sober way and have discussions in private. Notably, the prime minister hasn’t spoken to President Trump since Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores were, as Washington puts it, captured. Strategically, the prime minister decided a year or so ago, once he knew Donald Trump was returning to the White House, that he would resist the temptation to offer a running public commentary on what was highly likely to be a – literally – remarkable presidential term. To do so, he calculated, would risk ongoing public spats with not just the most powerful man on the planet, but someone with near zero compunction when it comes to spectacularly falling out with people. Better, instead, Sir Keir concluded, to be cautious and revere the upsides of a decent relationship with the White House, something the prime minister is proud to have secured. His supporters point to, for instance, the deal the government secured with Washington to limit the impact of tariffs imposed by the White House last year – a deal, ministers believe, was the difference between thousands of jobs being retained by Jaguar Land Rover in the UK and them going. Sounding off about President Trump, his allies say, might be tempting but would not only be “juvenile” as one put it, but not be in the UK’s best interests. The government’s equivocation has been pounced on by its critics, within the Labour Party and beyond.
out today, Harp investigates a string of unsolved murders at America’s premier special operations base and uncovers its connection to drug trafficking, fueled by a culture of cover-ups and corruption. The Fellows program recently caught up with Harp about discovering a dark ripple effect of America’s “forever wars,” telling a true crime story about the military as a veteran, and building more transparent armed forces. How did you first come across this story of corruption in the U.S. military, and what compelled you to pursue it? In December 2020, I learned that two special operations soldiers had been found murdered at a remote training range on Fort Bragg, and that police did not have a suspect. That in itself was worth investigating. But then I learned that one of the victims was an active-duty operator on Delta Force, the most elite unit in the U.S. military, and was suspected of dealing drugs on base. At that point I knew there had to be more to the story—a lot more. You served in the United States Army Reserve and did one tour of duty in Iraq. How did your military experience shape your approach to investigating this story? Were there times where it helped—or perhaps even hindered—your work? I actually served in Iraq at the same time that my main character of the book, Billy Lavigne, did his first tour there. Although it took longer for him to lose faith in the post-9/11 wars, we both became disillusioned with the military and U.S. foreign policy as a result of events in Iraq. That sympathetic connection enabled me to much better understand his state of mind around the time that he went to work trafficking drugs in conjunction with an international drug cartel. The book is classified as true crime, but it also delves deeply into history and politics. What draws you to true crime storytelling? How do you balance the benefits of telling these stories with the ethical challenges that come with the genre—such as the risk of sensationalizing crimes and the exploitation of participants? Concerns about sensationalizing crimes and exploiting participants never entered into my thinking because I was scrambling to keep up with real events that were unfolding in real time. If anything, I was too hesitant in the beginning to publicize some of the most sensational allegations that I heard from my sources, including the existence of a cartel-like structure on Fort Bragg made up of Special Forces soldiers who were trafficking drugs from abroad into the United States. I later came to find out that such claims were no exaggeration at all. Your reporting has uncovered a culture of drug use and trafficking within elite military circles. What have you learned about that culture, and what discoveries surprised you most during your investigation? I was most surprised by how open and accepting my military sources were of widespread drug use in the Special Forces in general and Delta Force in particular. The attitude of tacit acceptance that prevailed was surprising because civilians have a very different picture in mind of elite troops, a carefully cultivated image jointly created by the Pentagon and Hollywood that fails to capture the lawlessness and hard-partying lifestyles of real-life special operations soldiers.
The man stored kilos of cocaine in a spare bedroom inside his West Kendall home to later smuggle around the United States in cigarette cases. During Miami’s Cocaine Cowboy era of the 1970s and ’80s, Orlando Cicilia played a major role in an international drug ring, using an exotic animal business as cover. Mario Tabraue, who would later allow spotted leopards to roam free inside his Coconut Grove estate, was the boss of the operation, but Cicilia was the frontman. In 1989, Cicilia was sentenced to 35 years in prison. He was released early in 2000. Decades-old drug offenses, often much less serious than Cicilia’s charges, have come back to haunt immigrants living in South Florida as President Donald Trump unleashes his hard-line immigration agenda. Juan Erles González, a 56-year-old Cuban immigrant who served 18 months in prison for conspiracy to possess with the intent of distributing cocaine nearly two decades ago, now faces deportation. Back in July, 75-year-old Isidro Pérez died in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody after immigration officers picked him up at a community center and charged him with “inadmissibility pursuant to the Immigration and Nationality Act.” In the 1980s, he was convicted of marijuana possession and sentenced to 18 months in prison. In July, 75-year-old Isidro Pérez died in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody after immigration officers picked him up at a community center and charged him with “inadmissibility pursuant to the Immigration and Nationality Act.” In the 1980s, he was convicted of marijuana possession and sentenced to 18 months in prison. While the Trump administration is busy deporting immigrants with previous petty drug offenses, a member of the president’s cabinet, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, has a brother-in-law who served over a decade in prison on federal drug charges after emigrating to the U.S. from Cuba. His name? Orlando Cicilia. When Rubio was 16, Cicilia, who is married to Rubio’s older sister Barbara, was arrested on federal drug charges for dealing cocaine. After Cicilia immigrated to Miami in 1972 when he was 15, he met Barbara in high school, and the pair started dating. Barbara ended up staying in Miami with Cicilia when Rubio’s father got a bartending gig in Las Vegas in 1979. The Rubio family decided to move back to Miami two years later and temporarily lived at Cicilia’s home in West Kendall. The family, including 14-year-old Rubio, lived at the house around June 1985 until July 4. At that point, his brother-in-law played a significant role in the $75 million drug operation, right out of his home. One of Cecilia’s drug runners later testified at trial that he cut and stored massive amounts of cocaine in his spare bedroom between March 1985 and January 1986. Rubio wrote in his memoir, An American Son, that he would visit the home every week to help care for their seven Samoyed dogs, all while his brother-in-law ran this prolific drug operation out of the house. He maintained that he and his family were not aware of Cicilia’s drug dealing at the time, although two law enforcement officials previously told New Times that they found it hard to believe.
The SOA’s activities first came to public light in connection with a series of highly publicized murder and torture cases–some involving U.S. citizens. In 1980, a Salvadoran death squad assassinated Archbishop Oscar Romero. Just months later, Salvadoran soldiers raped and murdered three American nuns and one missionary. Then, in 1989, Salvadoran soldiers executed six Jesuit priests, their housekeeper and her 16-year-old daughter at Central American University. As the death toll mounted, the murders were coming closer to home. Sister Diana Ortiz, an American nun, brought the story of her abduction, rape and torture in 1989 at the hands of an SOA graduate to Washington D.C., where she held a week-long vigil that embarrassed Washington officials. – Graduates have a long history of participating in and orchestrating killings, rapes, targeted violence, and the suppression of popular movements. Research continues to turn up SOA grad involvement in human-rights violations across the Americas. Around 1,000 students per year receive training at the SOA/WHINSEC. Courses are taught in Spanish. The SOA/WHINSEC is paid for with U.S. taxpayer dollars, money for foreign military training that is authorized by Congress each year. In 1996, the Pentagon, under intense public pressure, released training manuals used at the school for at least a decade that advocated torture, extortion, and execution. Despite this shocking admission—as well as hundreds of documented human-rights abuses connected to soldiers trained at the school over its long history—no independent investigation into the training facility has ever taken place. Among those targeted by SOA graduates are educators, union organizers, religious workers, student leaders, and others who work for the rights of the poor. Hundreds of thousands of Latin Americans have been tortured, raped, assassinated, “disappeared,” massacred, or forced into refuge by those trained at the School of Assassins. The purpose of the School of the Americas has always been to control the economic and political systems of Latin America by aiding and influencing Latin American militaries. One former SOA instructor, U.S. Army Major Joseph Blair (Ret), explained: “The hope is that close personal contacts developed at Fort Benning will result in future U.S. potential to influence Latin American governments.” Unjust economic policies opposed by the majority of Latin Americans cannot be implemented and enforced by governments without strong military support. George Kennan, a central policymaker for the U.S. State Department, explained in 1948: The SOA is part of a tradition and system of white supremacy. The purpose of the school is to maintain U.S. hegemony over the Western Hemisphere, and it is also a tool to maintain white supremacy over the non-white populations of this hemisphere. Working for justice for the people of the Americas in a principled way means that we have to address white supremacy as one of the root causes of oppression. From police killings of black and brown people inside the United States, to attacks on Muslim communities, to the U.S.-supported military coup in Honduras, we’ve seen that the school is not an aberration of U.S. policy, but a clear illustration of it.
MW– Do you think that Hugo Chavez was murdered and, if so, who do you think might have been involved? Eva Golinger– I believe there is a very strong possibility that President Chavez was assassinated. There were notorious and documented assassination attempts against him throughout his presidency. Most notable was the April 11, 2002 coup d’etat, during which he was kidnapped and set to be assassinated had it not been for the unprecedented uprising of the Venezuelan people and loyal military forces that rescued him and returned him to power within 48 hours. I was able to find irrefutable evidence using the US Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), that the CIA and other US agencies were behind that coup and supported, financially, militarily and politically, those involved. Later on, there were other attempts against Chavez and his government, such as in 2004 when dozens of Colombian paramilitary forces were captured on a farm outside of Caracas that was owned by an anti-Chavez activist, Robert Alonso, just days before they were going to attack the presidential palace and kill Chavez. There was another, lesser-known plot against Chavez discovered in New York City during his visit to the United Nations General Assembly in September 2006. According to information provided by his security services, during standard security reconnaissance of an event where Chavez would address the US public at a local, renowned university, high levels of radiation were detected in the chair where he would have sat. The radiation was discovered by a Geiger detector, which is a handheld radiation detection device the presidential security used to ensure the President wasn’t in danger of exposure to harmful rays. In this case, the chair was removed and subsequent tests showed it was emanating unusual amounts of radiation that could have resulted in significant harm to Chavez had it gone undiscovered. According to accounts by the presidential security at the event, an individual from the US who had been involved in the logistical support for the event and had provided the chair was shown to be acting with US intelligent agents. There were numerous other attempts on his life that were thwarted by the Venezuelan intelligence agencies and particularly the counterintelligence unit of the Presidential Guard that was charged with discovering and impeding such threats. One other well known attempt was in July 2010 when Francisco Chavez Abarca (no relation), a criminal working with Cuban-born terrorist Luis Posada Carriles, responsible for bombing a Cuban airliner in 1976 and killing all 73 passengers on board, was detained entering Venezuela and later confessed he had been sent to assassinate Chavez. Just five months earlier, in February 2010, when President Chavez was at an event near the Colombian border, his security forces discovered a sniper set up just over a quarter of a mile away from his location, who was subsequently neutralized. While these accounts may sound like fiction, they are amply documented and very real. Hugo Chavez defied the most powerful interests, and he refused to bow down. As head of state of the nation without the largest oil reserves on the planet, and as someone who openly and directly challenged US and Western domination, Chavez was considered an enemy of Washington and its allies. So, who could have been involved in Chavez’s assassination, if he was assassinated? Certainly it’s no far stretch to imagine the US government involved in a political assassination of an enemy it clearly – and openly – wanted out of the picture. In 2006, the US government formed a special Mission Manager for Venezuela and Cuba under the Directorate of National Intelligence. This elite intelligence unit was charged with expanding covert operations against Chavez and led clandestine missions out of an intelligence fusion center (CIA-DEA-DIA) in Colombia. Some of the pieces that have been coming together include the discovery of several close aides to Chavez who had private, unobstructed access to him over prolonged periods, who fled the country after his death and are collaborating with the US government. If he were assassinated by some kind of exposure to high levels of radiation, or otherwise inoculated or infected by a cancer-causing virus, it would have been done by someone with close access to him, whom he trusted.
VIDEO
US Takes Maduro Hostage For Oil: BBC Business Market Reaction after US Markets close on Mon05Jan25 The U.S. is planning big changes for Venezuela’s oil industry after ousting the country’s president. Shares of a handful of U.S. companies stand to benefit from the upheaval. Energy Secretary Chris Wright on Wednesday said that the U.S. will control Venezuelan oil sales “indefinitely,” funnelling proceeds to American banks and rolling back sanctions that have choked the country’s crude exports for yearsRefiners Valero Energy Corp. (VLO) and Phillips 66 (PSX) rose on the news. Chevron (CVX) is the only U.S. oil major still operating in Venezuela. That head start could be worth billions if the Trump administration follows through on its promise to rebuild the country’s energy sector. Venezuela has more proven reserves than any other country, but years of economic turmoil, corruption and sanctions have dramatically curtailed its ability to produce and export oil. So which stocks are positioned to gain from a revitalization of Venezuela’s oil industry? Stocks Positioned For Gains Normally, U.S. investors can access foreign markets through brokers who can trade stocks on foreign stock exchanges or American depositary receipts (ADRs) that let them trade foreign stocks on U.S. exchanges. There are also exchange-traded funds covering many countries and regions. Venezuela offers none of these. No ADRs trade on American exchanges, and no Venezuela ETF exists, though Teucrium Investment Advisors filed for one on Jan. 5.2 That leaves indirect plays: U.S.-listed companies with exposure to Venezuela’s potential recovery. Those companies fall into four categories: producers already there; other major oil companies, some with outstanding debts from before they exited Venezuela; the services firms that would win reconstruction contracts; and the Gulf Coast refiners built to process the heavy crude Venezuela produces. The One Oil Major Left in Venezuela Chevron (CVX): It’s the only American major still in Venezuela. It operates joint ventures with PDVSA, the state oil company, that account for about a quarter of the country’s output and exports about 140,000 barrels per day.34 Morningstar analyst Allen Good has said it’s the best-positioned among the oil majors to benefit.5 Oil Majors That Could Return to the Country ConocoPhillips (COP) and Exxon Mobil (XOM): They left Venezuela after the 2007 nationalizations but have up to $12 billion and $1.4 billion, respectively, in outstanding claims for property the government expropriated.67 JPMorgan analysts say the companies could return to recover seized assets, should the Venezuelan government allow it.8 Companies That Build Oil Infrastructure Halliburton (HAL) and SLB (SLB): Many of Venezuela’s pipelines are more than 50 years old, its refineries run at 20% capacity or less, and estimates suggest it would cost at least $100 billion over a decade or more to return production to 1990s levels.9 That’s years of contracts for service firms, should any money for them materialize.
Jorge Rodriguez releasing 900 prisoners in Venezuela.
In December 2018, Russia sent two Tu-160 strategic bombers to Venezuela for exercises, which experts interpreted as a sign of support for Maduro. They landed at Caracas airport — the same airport used by the US to fly out the Venezuelan leader in handcuffs. But Russian air defenses were unable to protect the disputed leader during last week’s operation, as US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has pointed out. “Russia’s support for Venezuela has been more symbolic than practical,” Neil Melvin, an expert at the Royal United Services Institute, told DW. In his view, Russia is not in a position to challenge the deployment of US forces in the neighboring region. Felix Riefer, a German political scientist and author of a book on Russian foreign policy, also said he was not surprised by Putin’s response. After Trump’s return to the White House led to a rapprochement between Moscow and Washington, Russia responded to “American hints toward Venezuela with relative restraint,” he said. “Russia had already abandoned Maduro.” Both experts said a key explanation for Putin’s silence is Russia’s ongoing war against Ukraine and the US shift from being Kyiv’s partner to acting as a mediator in talks. Russia is keen to avoid harsh criticism of Washington because it does not want to cause offense, according to Melvin. In his opinion, Moscow’s rhetoric on the events in Venezuela would be “significantly harsher” if it weren’t for the war against Ukraine. The British expert saw no immediate consequences for the war in Ukraine. This could change if Trump does not stop at Venezuela but goes further and, for example, attempts to annex Greenland, which belongs to Denmark — something the US president recently hinted at again…
VIDEO
In his testimony, Butler claimed that a group of men had approached him as part of a plot to overthrow Roosevelt in a military coup. One of the alleged plotters, Gerald MacGuire, vehemently denied any such plot. In their final report, the Congressional committee supported Butler’s allegations of the existence of the plot, but no prosecutions or further investigations followed, and the matter was mostly forgotten. On July 17, 1932, thousands of World War I veterans converged on Washington, D.C., set up tent camps, and demanded immediate payment of bonuses due them according to the Adjusted Service Certificate Law of 1924. This “Bonus Army” was led by Walter W. Waters, a former Army sergeant. The Army was encouraged by an appearance from retired Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler, who had considerable influence over the veterans, being one of the most popular military figures of the time. A few days after Butler’s arrival, President Herbert Hoover ordered the marchers removed, and their camps were destroyed by US Army cavalry troops under the command of General Douglas MacArthur. Butler, although a self-described Republican, responded by supporting Roosevelt in that year’s election. In a 1995 History Today article Clayton Cramer argued that the devastation of the Great Depression had caused many Americans to question the foundations of liberal democracy. “Many traditionalists, here and in Europe, toyed with the ideas of Fascism and National Socialism; many liberals dallied with Socialism and Communism.” Cramer argues that this explains why some American business leaders viewed fascism as a viable system to both preserve their interests and end the economic woes of the Depression.
[WATCH AND DOWNLOAD HERE ] Using the interrogation of a US counterinsurgency agent as a backdrop, the film explores the consequences of the struggle between Uruguay’s government and theTupamaro guerrillas. Dan Mitrione got what he deserved – maybe less, actually. The subject of State of Siege is the activities of CIA-like organizations that were being undertaken in various South American territories.The plot is about an American, Philip Michael Santore (Yves Montand) who worked for USAID as a “Communications Expert.” I used quotes for his job title because we’re not sure exactly what he did during his various travels. Was he a benefactor or was he a terrorist? That answer is not provided, although it is strongly hinted that he was at least aware of the latter activities, if not a direct participant. I am about to reveal a major plot point, but not to worry. It is not a spoiler, at least unless you consider the beginning of Sunset Blvd a spoiler. Our operative friend, Mr. Santore dies at the beginning of the film in Montevideo, Uruguay. The film begins with a shot of a shiny Cadillac followed by a series of roadblocks and an exhaustive search by the authorities. We do not know what they are searching for initially, but minutes later when they discover a carcass in a car, we know. Soon after the discovery, we see a highly ceremonial funeral, with an American flag draped over the casket. We get the impression that something is awry because the archbishop and academics are not present, yet the funeral is well attended, implying that this was the passing of an important, political person. Is Mr. Santore a good person? That’s another tough question. He comes off sympathetically, some of which has to do with the ever-likeable performance by Yves Montand, who was also a popular political figure at the time. As the film flashes back to the kidnapping and interrogations, we wonder which is the truly righteous, Santore or his kidnappers? He is accused of, at the very least, knowing of torture, and at worst, guilty of perpetrating war crimes. Yet he is part of a system. If he was guilty, was he simply doing his job? That does not mean that he deserves to be kidnapped and killed. His captors also are sympathetic. We learn through Santore’s observations that they do not intend or want to kill him. They are merely fighting a battle with limited weapons. We are not spoon-fed who to like or root for. One could make an argument that the kidnappers and kidnapped are both right to some respect, and simply pawns in a chess game between people far more powerful. The real evil could be the state that infringes on the rights of the people, or those who choose to not compromise and therefore through inaction lead to the creation of a martyr.
VIDEO
Trump says he doesn’t need international law amid aggressive US policies UN rapporteur tells Al Jazeera she is concerned that the world may be returning to an ‘age of imperialism ’.United States President Donald Trump has dismissed international law, saying only his “own morality” can curb the aggressive policies he is pursuing across the world after the abduction of Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro. “I don’t need international law. I’m not looking to hurt people,” Trump told The New York Times on Thursday. Asked whether he needs to abide by international law, Trump said he does, but it “depends what your definition of international law is”. Trump has shown a willingness to use the brute force of the US military to achieve his foreign policy goals. On Saturday, the US launched an early-morning attack on Venezuela, with explosions reported across the capital Caracas and at Venezuelan military bases. US troops ultimately abducted Venezuelan President Maduro from Caracas in what critics say was a clear violation of the United Nations Charter, which prohibits “the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state”. The attack on Venezuela appears to have supercharged the belligerence of the US president, who received the inaugural FIFA Peace Prize Award last month. In the immediate aftermath of the attack, Trump said the US would “run” Venezuela and exploit the country’s vast oil reserves, though his administration has said it would cooperate with interim President Delcy Rodriguez. Still, the Trump administration said it would “dictate” policy to the interim government and repeatedly threatened a “second wave” of military actions if US demands were disobeyed.
VIDEO
John Sawyers, Bilderberger and former MI6 Chief, on Venezuela operation. Former MI6 chief on implications of Trump’s actions in Venezuela Former MI6 chief Sir John Sawers looks at what the implications of Donald Trump’s actions in Venezuela might be. The former MI6 chief told Sky’s Trevor Phillips that whilst there were questions in terms of legalities and what comes next, the “operation itself was very effective”. He also said that whilst the capturing of Maduro was a problem for the regime, “it wasn’t regime threatening”.
VIDEO
This question goes directly to article 2, section 4 of the United Nations Charter, which prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. The council must decide whether that prohibition is to be upheld or abandoned. Abandoning it would carry consequences of the gravest kind. Let me offer some background. Since 1947, the United States foreign policy has repeatedly employed force, covert action, and political manipulation to bring about regime change in other countries. This is a matter of carefully documented historical record. In her book, Covert Regime Change, political scientist Lindseay Oor documents 70 attempted US regime change operations between 1947 and 1989 alone. These practices did not end with the Cold War. Since 1989, major United States regime change operations undertaken without authorization by the Security Council have included, among the most consequential, Iraq 2003, Libya 2011, Syria beginning in 2011, Honduras 2009, Ukraine 2014, and Venezuela from 2002 onward. The methods employed are well established and well documented. They include open warfare, covert intelligence operations, instigation of unrest, support for armed groups, manipulation of mass and social media, bribery of military and civilian officials, targeted assassinations, false flag operations, and economic warfare. These measures are illegal under the UN charter and they typically result in ongoing violence, lethal conflict, political instability, and deep suffering of the civilian population.
VIDEO
Sky News – Former DG of Private UK Military Think Tank Michael Clark – now Sky News ‘Expert’ – seize of oil tanker in Atlantic – who is Micheal Clark? Our security and defence analyst , Michael Clarke, tells Sarah Jane-Mee how and why British armed forces got involved with the US seizing an oil tanker linked to Iran and Russia. He said: “If any ship needed to be intercepted, then we ought to be involved in that, because in a sense, it’s not our territorial waters, but it’s a part of the North Atlantic for which we take responsibility.”
The Venezuela Propaganda: David Stockman article.
VIDEO
After all those months of babbling about fentanyl and “narcoterrorism” and freedom and democracy, the Trump administration has come right out and admitted that its regime change interventionism in Venezuela has always been a good old-fashioned oil grab. “We’re gonna take back the oil that frankly we should have taken back a long time ago,” Trump told the press following Maduro’s abduction, saying “We’re going to be taking out a tremendous amount of wealth out of the ground, and that wealth is going to the people of Venezuela, and people from outside of Venezuela that used to be in Venezuela, and it goes also to the United States of America in the form of reimbursement for the damages caused us by that country.” “We’re going to have our very large United States oil companies, the biggest anywhere in the world, go in, spend billions of dollars, fix the badly broken infrastructure, the oil infrastructure, and start making money for the country, and we are ready to stage a second and much larger attack if we need to do so,” Trump said. “We have tremendous energy in that country. It’s very important that we protect it. We need that for ourselves, we need that for the world,” the president added. Ben Norton@BenjaminNorton After bombing Venezuela and abducting President Nicolás Maduro, Donald Trump said the US government is “going to run the country” until there is a “transition” to pro-US leadership. He boasted that “very large” US corporations will exploit its oil.
VIDEO
Fake greens 2:ITV report – Ken Goodwin – river’s low – water companies extracting water. Water bills – privatisation – cost of living crisis.
Part Two – International news review, Accelerationist, Armageddonist reports and investigations
VIDEO
(from c. 11pm) This week’s full interview mp3s, bottom of page. SHOW STARTS 17:00 London time FOR c. 3½ HRS TO c. 20:30 – OUR LIVE STREAM to Listen live online. Alt. live stream, DJ Plug Radio OR Download Show After Transmission HERE. Repeats 11 & 5 AM & PM daily on our stream
Deep State infiltrator Nadim Zahawi joins Reform UK: Secret ‘CIA-funded’ group linked to UK ministers. Current education secretary Nadhim Zahawi, a former business minister, is another previous chair of Le Cercle. Zahawi and Stewart both claim, despite their senior roles in Le Cercle, that they don’t know how the networking group is funded. A “Whitehall security source” told the Daily Telegraph that Stewart was an MI6 officer before he entered politics. Kenny MacAskill MP, a former Scottish justice secretary, told Declassified: “Given the nature of this group and its links with other states and security organisations much more candour is required. It’s essential in a democracy that those accepting hospitality from an organisation such as this are fully transparent”. Secret ‘CIA-funded’ group linked to UK ministers Two current ministers and two recent justice ministers have been funded by an opaque transatlantic right-wing group which includes members of the intelligence community. Declassified finds eight current Conservative parliamentarians are associated with the organisation. The group, known as Le Cercle, was described by former Conservative minister Alan Clark in his diaries as “a right-wing think (or rather thought) tank, funded by the CIA, which churns Cold War concepts around”. Le Cercle has existed since the 1950s but has no public presence, and has never revealed its funders. Even the group’s existence is only occasionally disclosed. It is unclear how influential Le Cercle – which is believed to meet twice a year, once in Washington DC and once elsewhere – actually is. Declassified has found that eight current Conservative parliamentarians are associated with the group. Two current ministers – business secretary Kwasi Kwarteng and his deputy minister Greg Hands – have been funded by Le Cercle. Kwarteng was given £5,258 to travel to Bahrain in June 2019 for a trip jointly funded by Le Cercle and the Gulf regime, which is one of the UK’s closest allies. Three former justice ministers are associated with the group. David Lidington, the justice secretary from 2017-18, and Crispin Blunt, a justice minister from 2010-12, were previously funded by Le Cercle to attend meetings in Washington DC and Madrid. Rory Stewart, who served as a justice minister under Theresa May, was previously chair of Le Cercle. Several high-profile US figures are also linked to the group. US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who sat on America’s most powerful court from 1986 until his death in 2016, attended at least one Le Cercle meeting while sitting on the court. Other ministers known to have been funded by the group include former foreign secretaries William Hague and Margaret Beckett, the latter being the only known Labour associate….
Farage still set to be PM. And this isn’t Le Cercle crook Zahawi’s YouGov either… MRP Poll January 2026 13 January 2026 On behalf of PLMR, Electoral Calculus has conducted a new MRP poll. Polling using MRP, which stands for Multi-level Regression and Post-stratification, is a relatively recent innovation in polling science which have been used to successfully predict the last three British general elections, and gives the estimated result in each Westminster constituency. Fieldwork was conducted from 1-8 December 2025, with a sample size of over 5,500 people. The poll places Reform UK on 31pc, ahead of the Conservatives on 21pc with Labour in third place on 17pc. On these figures, Reform is predicted to secure 335 seats with an outright majority of 20, leaving the Conservatives on 92 seats and the Liberal Democrats on 60. Labour would be in sixth place behind the Greens and the SNP. Based on the numbers, if a general election were held now, Nigel Farage could enter Number 10 with a small overall majority. The Conservatives would be the official opposition, with the Liberal Democrats remaining as the third party. The new ‘Your Party’ would win 2pc of the votes and 4 seats, and acts to further fragment the left of British politics. The following Labour cabinet ministers are at risk of losing their seats under our calculations: (To Reform): Rachel Reeves, Yvette Cooper, Pat McFadden, John Healey, Wes Streeting, Bridget Phillipson, Ed Miliband, Liz Kendall, Heidi Alexander, Emma Reynolds, Lisa Nandy, Hilary Benn, Douglas Alexander, Jo Stevens, Jonathan Reynolds, James Murray (To Greens): Sir Keir Starmer, David Lammy, Shabana Mahmood, Darren Jones, Steve Reed, Peter Kyle And the following prominent Conservatives are also at risk (both to Reform): James Cleverly, Mel Stride 2. Tactical Voting Following a major polling project on tactical voting (TV) by Electoral Calculus and Find Out Now, we are able to estimate the effect of tactical voting on the predicted election result. Our TV analysis shows that: Strong anti-Reform tactical voting could cost Reform dozens of seats Over a third of Labour voters say they would vote Conservative to keep Reform out Otherwise voters on the left and right respectively support other candidates on the same side The table shows the predicted vote share and seats won both without tactical voting and with tactical voting. Without tactical voting, Reform UK would gain a landslide majority of 146. When tactical voting is factored in, the picture tightens but the destination barely changes. Reform falls from 398 seats to 335, a loss of 63 seats, most of which would switch to the Conservatives. Yet even with tactical voting and a concerted effort to collaborate from parties on the left, Farage would still be likely to lead the next government.
July 2024 – Tony, Dave and Martin’s NOT The BCfm Politics show was CANCELLED/EVICTED in a no fault, no notice, no appeal, eviction by The People’s Republic of Stokes Croft (PRSC) arts centre – An email from Chloe Slater and Keith Cowling explained that: ‘Transphobic’ leaflets had been left in the building by a recent guest (who denied it) making Transsexual users of the building feel ‘offended’ and ‘unsafe’. To quote: ‘Please let us know when you or Dave would like to come and retrieve your equipment and drop off your keys. Kind regards’ PRSC Directors (Keith Cowling, chair) PRSC / Stokes Croft China 17-35 Jamaica St Bristol BS2 8JP. Chloe Slater (formerly Jez and self-defined as ‘she’) also made it difficult for us to retrieve the last of our equipment by inferring we couldn’t be trusted, we were made to wait outside their building for over 30 minutes to return their mixing desk in December 2024. 
[UPDATE channel restored by YT in July 2025] October 2022 – Tony’s Public Enquiry Channel opened in March 2008, with 13 million views, over 1,600 videos and 26,000 subscribers is removed under false pretences by YouTube – A video Tony recorded in New Zealand ‘Bill Gates, ID2020 & Revelation: Quaker Tony Gosling on Covid 19 & the Bible’ and uploaded on 8th April 2020 got a ‘third strike’ but YouTube’s ‘medical misinformation’ regime was introduced in September 2021 so should not have included as ‘strikes’ videos uploaded before that date. Documentary makers are just about the only public interest investigators left in the NATO zone. From the top down, our mainstream media, police, political parties & intelligence services are being compromised by feudal banksters, secret societies and the mafia. Key people intimidated by psychopathic black magic types and their pliable drones who will even kill to take over positions of power? Just search for “John Scarlett” and “Dodgy Dossier” and you’ll see what I mean. The Zionists are every bit as fundamentalist and twisted as the leaders and followers of ISIS. Register here and join us in the discussion as we wriggle free of the psychopaths, back to sanity http://www.911forum.org.uk
March 2020 – BCfm’s weekly Politics Show presented by Tony Gosling with Irish Republican Labour activist Martin Summers was forced off FM, now online only by station manager Pat Hart. He decided the show should be ‘rested, due to the pandemic’ on 24 March 2020 and then refused to communicate at all when we requested to do the show remotely. Bristol Community FM (BCfm) charity ‘CEO’ Patrick Hart is a longtime personal friend of Bristol’s all-powerful right-wing ‘Labour’ mayor Marvin Rees. Now on Internet only NOT The BCfm Politics Show is available 17:00-c. 21:00 live on Fridays. Pat Hart replaced us with an inane student show repeating MSM stories called The Bristol Agenda. If you’d like to share your views on his deliberate dumbing-down and pro-Covid jab mismanagement you can contact UK broadcasting regulator Ofcom or BCfm board chair and the ‘Don’ himself, here.
February 2019 – Ofcom complaint result: UKLFI exposed as creation of Israeli foreign ministry – Bristol Post article: BCfm cleared after being reported to Ofcom for anti-semitic conspiracy theories – It could have resulted in BCfm radio station being shut down if the complaint was upheld Tony Gosling reported to Ofcom by UK Lawyers for Israel after being accused of anti-semitism A Bristol radio station, which had one of its programmes reported for anti-semitism and racism has been cleared by Ofcom. The radio regulatory body received a complaint from “UK Lawyers for Israel’ over a show on BCfm radio, hosted by investigative journalist Tony Gosling. The weekly politics show, on the popular community radio station based in Easton, was reported for several allegations on a show which aired on November 23. Tony Gosling, who was a former BBC journalist between 1989 and 1993, has been producing and presenting ‘The Tony Gosling Politics’ show every week on BCFM radio for 11 years. They have released a statement which reads: “Whilst we are supportive of all our volunteer presenters, The Tony Gosling Politics Show only represents approximately ten percent of our political output content wise, and less than two per cent of our entire weekly output.” Mr Gosling’s programme looks at local politics and he interviews a range of councillors and MPs in the city. The show is also perhaps more well known for its alternative look at international politics, and he has a cult following online from across the world. Mr Gosling has made regular appearances on national media including the politics show with Andrew Neil on BBC One, and international channels such as Russia Today, Channel1 Russia, NTV, and recently for both Turkish and Lebanon TV.
November 2012 – Tony gets death threats on the phone from the Jewish Defence League – ‘you’re a dead man walking’ – a man calls him and Tony records the call. Audio of UK Jewish Defence League (JDL) death threat against British journalist Tony Gosling (2012) – Avon and Somerset police Special Branch investigate, trace the caller, and after six months report to Tony that the individual has been served a caution that they will proceed with a prosecution for harassment under the 1861 offences against the person act. Seems pretty clear this death threat was issued alongside the lies, copied below, which were published on their blog by London based UK JDL in November 2012. Firstly Tony Gosling is not a ‘homophobe’. That accusation was first made in an article published by the ‘Harry’s Place’ blog, penned by Zionist David Toube and propelled by him anonymously into Private Eye in 2008. It refers to Gosling’s criticism of senior teachers at Bannerman Road Primary school in Bristol who used homosexual early learning picture books against the express wishes of the parent governors. His criticism was about the deception by teaching staff not because of the homosexual content of the books. Secondly, if you follow the JDL link you’ll find what Tony Gosling actually says about the ‘Protocols Of The Learned Elders Of Zion’ says “…I don’t think there is much doubt that the Protocols are fake…” Thirdly he is not a member of Bristol Palestine Solidarity Campaign and has never been to any of their meetings.
Autumn 2014 – Tony’s documentary production and distribution business shut down by its bank. Our thriving Co-op business bank account ordered closed for undisclosed reasons. Tony Gosling and Ben Edwards founded i-Contact Video Network to distribute documentaries on VHS video and DVD and to make their own documentaries as well as attend news events and sell video footage to TV news channels. Amongst the films we distributed were Operation Solstice, Coconut Revolution, Mark Purdey and Organophosphates, McLibel, 9/11 In Plane Site, Ludicrous Diversion and The Battle of Trafalgar. These, plus books, and even a board game about drug dealing ‘Dollars and Dibble’, were all available via mail order and we supplied libraries around the world too. The bank had clearly been ordered to investigate us for money laundering, although they never admitted it. All the questions they asked Ben and I were about proving our identity through passports etc.. When we did, yet more letters kept arriving demanding more proofs, birth certificates etc. and eventually when one of us missed supplying the required information, within a week or so of being asked, the account was summarily closed and we got a cheque made out to one of us with the few hundred pounds that was in the business bank account. Since neither of us could get a business bank account up and running for at least a few months and the bank account meant nobody could any longer use the website, we made the reluctant decision to shut it down. Thus was a thriving business killed off by the Co_operative bank. Having said that, co-op were not quite the worst. We did apply to open an account at Bristol’s ‘ethical’ Triodos bank, who proceeded to string us along for several months and then said our business was too risky for them to provide an account! 
