WarRoom Battleground EP 966: “Trad Inc” Increasingly Nervous That Traditionalists Consecrate New Bishops Without Papal Mandate
Stephen K. Bannon, Frank Walker, and Jenny Holland dissect the Society of Saint Pius X's unauthorized episcopal consecrations, contrasting Bishop Fellay's warnings with Cardinal Zen's deflection to Pope Francis or Leo XIV. The trio critiques the U.S. bishops' Supreme Court amicus brief on birthright citizenship as a financial grift for federal subsidies while celebrating the UK's ban on cross-sex hormones for minors under 18. Ultimately, the episode exposes how "Trad Inc." navigates internal schisms and external cultural threats, arguing that genuine moral teaching remains entangled with institutional self-preservation and anti-woke resistance. [Automatically generated summary]
Harnwell here at the helm on Steve Bannon's War Room.
It's that time once again in the week when we review all things to do with Christianity, Protestants, Catholicism that's taken place over the last seven days.
With me, the usual stalwart members of the team, Frank Walker, Jenny Holland.
Look, firstly, a couple of things I want to say, because I do read the responses that come in on social media.
We are doing this show not because we are anti-Catholic or because we hate the Catholic Church, but because we love the Catholic faith and have perhaps to varying degrees on varying occasions, a sentimental attachment to the institution of the church.
But this is fundamentally a service, we hope, to the church.
And I would suggest that one of the great obstacles to the possibility of the church evangelizing the secular society right throughout the West is the phenomenon of the sex abuse scandal, the clerical sex abuse scandal against kids that had been taking place over many decades, which came to light around 20, 25 years ago.
And one of the things that most damaged the Catholic Church's credibility was the silence.
Now, many people stayed silent when they might have had a suspicion of what was going on because they believe that talking about these things, bringing them out into the light, would fundamentally damage the church's credibility.
And their desire was fundamentally that.
I think with the benefit of hindsight, we can see that that silence, that institutional silence, even the moving around of priests from one parish to another, rather than just kicking them out and going to the police.
That has been, with the benefit of hindsight, a catastrophic mistake.
And I think it's fair to say that here on the war room, we don't wish to perpetuate the same mistakes of staying silent when we see things in the church which is wrong.
And that is why we are called in the spirit of charity and truth to talk about these things and things and try to pull the church back to the narrow path.
I'm just saying that because some people, especially on Rumble, seem to think that we have an impetus, an anti-Catholic impetus.
And of course, nothing could be further from the truth.
Real people in our crosshairs are, of course, the anti-Catholic hierarchs who are dragging our church into the ground.
So, folks, having said that, it is clear that in times of crisis, heroes emerge.
And Frank Walker, it seems to me that one hero that is ever clearly, ever clearer, a pastor who is not abandoning the flock to the wolves is Bishop Schneider,
who said something in a private meeting, and you're going to tell us a bit about it now, a couple of days ago, on the subject of something that we've been discussing every week here on the war room, which is the imminent Episcopal consecrations of the Society of Pope St. Pius X.
He suggested, because it has been mentioned, that if the Lefebvreists, the SSPX, if they go ahead with these Episcopal consecrations, that will incur latte sentencia excommunication, automatic excommunications, because bishops are consecrating other bishops without a papal mandate.
And into this debate entered Bishop Schneider.
And he did agree.
He was speaking in a private meeting, but he did agree to the publication of his private remarks.
And Frank Walker, Bishop Schneider says that from his point of view, and this is quite a strong thing to say, very courageous thing to say, very true thing to say, right?
And it gives an indication of where we are in the Catholic Church, that it requires a degree of courage to say things which are true.
But he said, should the church respond and announce excommunications, either latte sentense excommunications, and say that those excommunications have already taken place, or if it should proactively proceed with punitive excommunications, they would not be valid.
And that is, as I say, a very courageous thing for Bishop Schneider to do, who's not from a world important primatial diocese out in Astan, I think it is in Kazakhstan.
All the more brave, I think, Frank Walker, because most or all of the cardinals that had been showing a bit of ankle to trads over the last five, ten years have basically publicly urged the SSPX not to go through with these episcopal consecrations, which the SSPX says it's necessary to continue its mission.
Tell us, please, put what Bishop Schneider said in its context and give me your thoughts and reflections to that, please.
Well, I think Bishop Schneider was surprisingly positive about the SSPX consecrations.
In every respect, he sort of agreed with them.
I'm cynical, you know, I'm cynical, but because Bishop Snyder, way back years ago, when Francis was on the scene and there was a lot of discussion about Francis's validity since Benedict had really advocated, which is very, very, very unusual.
And he was always defending Benedict's validity in the face of a lot of different evidence and poo-pooing it.
That's his past.
But here he's been very positive about the SSPX.
And he did say that the excommunications might not be valid in some respects, he said.
And that is very brave and true.
I think it's true.
And the last time that there was an excommunication for this, they were lifted.
And so he's not contradicting Pope Benedict here, but I think if he had gone and he said those excommunication directly, those excommunications will be invalid, then he would get the Archbishop Vigano treatment.
So he's avoided that.
I just, I think that there's so much politically going on here with this.
This situation is really frightening for Leo Church.
And they're pulling out all the stops, everything they possibly can to keep their project of Leo Church together, keep it from falling apart.
For some reason, it seems like the little SSPX is really terrifying to the machine, to the machine that gave us the Vatican II church and Leo and Francis now.
And they really don't want it to damage the church.
But this piece that you mentioned here at 1 Peter 5, which was 1 Peter 5 was founded by a guy who eventually left the faith and it was sort of a disgraced paper by the time it was over.
And then it was bought up by Crisis Magazine and bought up by Trad Inc.
1 Peter 5 is a Trad Inc. operation.
And I see this piece here about Bishop Schneider highlighting it to be mainly a Trad Inc. sort of a therapy session to try to keep people on site with the SSPX and the whole Trad movement all together in one big pile.
They're afraid that they're going to lose the traditionalist movement with all of this that's going on.
And the editor of 1 Peter 5 here is sort of trying to soothe us and make us relax and worry, not worry about it so much.
It's in God's hands.
You don't want to be like the devil.
You don't want to attack Bishop Cardinal Mueller and Cardinal Seurat.
You want to remember, we're all in this movement together.
Don't be the circular firing squad.
You know, whenever they say that, what they really mean is, don't shoot me.
That should be the motto of Trad Inc.
Don't shoot me.
Because like you said, it's the perpetrators who should be punished, not the whistleblowers.
We've got a couple of minutes before I do an ad read here.
One of the great strategies that Trad Inc. has pivoted to in these times, along with the give Leo time mantra, is the idea that consecrating without the Pope's consent is a schismatic act.
And that's probably the worst thing that could possibly happen right now.
So let's encourage the dialogue between the SSPX and Smoochi Fernandez.
I have a different view, Frank Walker.
I have a different view.
I think that in as far as it's true that schism is a devastating phenomenon in the life of the mystical body of Jesus Christ, the schism has already taken place.
The schism is the modernism embraced by 99% of the church hierarchy.
They are the ones in schism and the lefebrists who are consecrating in order to protect the integrity of the unchangeable and unchanging Catholic faith.
That is actually, that's not the damage of schism.
That's the remedy to the schism that the modernist post-conciliar church has been inflicting on the faithful over the last, what, 65 or so years.
You mentioned Cardinal Muller and Cardinal Soar, who are both considered to be by some in some quarters to have been great stalwarts and defenders of traditional Catholicism.
Cardinal Zen has made an intervention.
Now, I have more sympathy for various reasons when it comes to Cardinal Zen, sentimental reasons, and I'm sort of prepared to give him just a little bit more leeway.
But he has himself made an intervention on this.
Just before I do the ad read, could you just summarize for our viewers what Cardinal Zen has said?
Well, Cardinal Zen is just like Bishop Snyder is very complimentary, sort of flattering with them, but he's just like he did with the China policy for Francis.
He blamed it all on Cardinal Perilyn.
Trading is blaming everything on Cardinal Kissy Fernandez of the DDF.
And he's saying, go to Francis, go to Francis when it comes to Vatican II, which Trad Inc. must preserve Vatican II.
It's part of the, it has to be held together.
It cannot be dropped.
And when they come to you about the doctrines in Vatican II, go to Leo.
Leo is a good listener.
This is Cardinal Zen's message.
It's disappointing, really.
It's disappointing, but it's not surprising because this is really how Cardinal Zen handled the betrayal in China.
Everything was very, very good, very helpful, very positive, and very supportive, except for when it came to the solution.
The solution is the Pope or the Leo or the Francis.
That's a summary, I think, of what Cardinal Zen is telling them.
Well, that wouldn't, but you know, I'm not a cardinal.
Well, and that wouldn't be my advice.
I'm, as you are, Frank Walker, you we are on the show extremely vigilant regarding Leo and his governorship of the church.
We have been since day one, because we quite, I think, quite correctly, I think each passing month is validating our original judgment call that Leo is Bergoglio 2.0, more intelligent, more subtle, and more dangerous.
Back in 2006, if you'd have spent $20,000 on gold at spot price, you would have bought around 33 ounces.
Now, 20 years on, if you were to sell those 20 ounces that you'd bought, excuse me, 33 ounces, if you just sell those that you bought for $20,000, they would now be worth $165,000.
So that's from $20,000 20 years ago to $165,000 today.
That's an enormous increase.
And that's why smart Americans have been diversifying a portion of their savings into precious metals.
And that's why you need to consider buying gold from our good friends at Birch Gold Group.
For thousands of years, gold has been a store of wealth.
And today, it's a crucial part of any balanced strategy.
The even better, Birch Gold can help you convert an existing IRA or 401k into a tax-sheltered retirement account in gold.
Just text Bannon to the number 989898 to receive your free info kit on gold.
No obligation, just useful information.
With an A, with a better business bureau, and tens of thousands of happy customers, let Birch Gold help you diversify with gold.
And that's peace of mind.
So, once again, text Bannon, that's B-A-N-N-O-N to 989898.
Again, Bannon 2989898.
Jenny Holland, we often say on the war room that it's no longer true or accurate to refer to the UK as a post-Christian society.
It's more accurate to call it a pre-Islamic society.
Some people think that that's scared tactics.
Some people think it's an exaggeration.
And yet, attentive readers of the daily newspapers will know it's a pretty accurate indication of what's happening.
You know what?
Before we hear from you on this one, before we hear from you on what's happened in the UK, in the north of England, with the educational authorities, let's start off with a bit of good news.
Because not only did you flag up this article that you wanted to share with the warm posse today, you also flagged up this good news coming out from New York.
So, Kyle, if you wouldn't mind, let's just quickly have the footage and then we'll carry on with Jenny.
I just came out of my ass there, and oh my god, it was wedged.
Shout out to St. Joe's.
And you all know that I do talk about St. Joe's this particular mass, and it's for young adults on Sundays at 6 p.m.
This evening, I think it was generally there was well over a thousand people out.
It was the most I've seen yet.
And I seen a stat earlier in the week that said young adults between 25 and 30, both in male and female, are up over a thousand percent in the last couple of years.
I think it was four to five years.
That is an absolutely insane stat.
And I will say this evening was particularly full of young ones.
And it was that busy that I was there well early and I couldn't even get a seat downstairs.
I was sitting upstairs and it was wedged.
So shout out to St. Joe's for doing a great job every Sunday.
But shout out to all you young adults that are getting back into your faith.
I think it's a great thing.
It gives you, it grounds you, it gives you something to hold on to, it gives you something to help you out when you're doing well, when you're not doing well, and when you need that bit of faith to rely on.
So shout out to all you young adults.
I purposely don't take any pictures or videos in the chapel because I haven't asked the priest if I can do that yet or not.
And you really are one of the great analysts on the phenomenon that is taking place amongst Gen Z right now, male 20-year-old cohort of Gen Z.
That statistic is absolutely astonishing.
1,000% increase at this church in the United States.
It's a split screen, isn't it?
From what we've just seen on that video in the United States and the renaissance in the seriousness of Catholic church going in the youth to what is happening in our dear old beloved UK.
Tell us a bit.
This is an astonishing story.
Tell us a bit about the kowtowing behind the British education authorities and the councils having been warned that teachers teaching school kids how to paint, to draw, dancing, to music, this is all harem in Islam.
So as you all know, I'm coming in hot from the soon-to-be Islamic Republic of Great Britain and Northern Ireland today.
And yeah, it seems to be accelerating somewhat these stories that are coming out fast and furious about the growing political clout of the Muslim demographic in the United Kingdom.
And most recently, well, we had two stories back to back.
First was this story coming from the north of England where local councils have warned schools not to approach or to beware of allowing the school children to produce blasphemous work such as drawing the human form.
And there was a little sidebar as well on music where they said, well, of course, you can't not have music, but it, you know, Islamic music is only allows voice and something about drums.
I'm not an expert.
So schools now are expected to be sensitive to Islamic children's faith and not be asked to do anything that they would consider blasphemous.
So that's on the one hand, right?
Then we have the British government, which really doesn't know its rear end from its elbow at this point, saying that they're not going to do a blasphemy law.
There's no way, no, no blasphemy.
We're not going to reintroduce blasphemy.
Blasphemy laws were banned in the United Kingdom.
But what we will do, they say, is we are going to appoint an anti-a, sorry, a what is it, an anti-Muslim hostility czar or commissar, probably a better term, a commissar, to make sure that no one is being mean to Muslims.
So on the one hand, it's definitely nothing to do with blasphemy, you understand, Ben.
Okay, I want to be very clear.
It's not about blasphemy, it's about anti-Muslim hostility.
So, although if you are a teacher in the North of England, they are explicitly using the word blasphemy as in these reports, warning teachers not to do, not to teach blasphemous or assign blasphemous classwork.
Important to note, one of the schools in the catchment area of the councils that have been putting these documents out got into a terrible, terrible situation a few years ago when a, I think it was a secondary school teacher, a British, an English guy, showed a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad in a class, and that man had to go into hiding where he still is with his family on pain of death.
So we have currently a British man, citizen, hiding from essentially a religious edict calling for his death in the British Isles.
A British citizen is living under this under this restriction, under this fear of death.
So this new document, though, it's been leaked to the spectator, and it's a 46-page, 47-page, what's it called, cohesion strategy that is calling for the appointment of this witchfinder general.
That case you were phoning to about that school teacher, by the way, to go to grammar school up in the north of England.
And that took place in 2021.
So that's what, five years ago now.
And he's still in hiring, hiding, because he had made the mistake of encouraging his pupils to draw the prophet Mohammed.
A couple of things here because teachers have also been warned not to ask students to no, they're saying don't reproduce images of the Prophet Muhammad or other figures considered to be prophets in Islam.
But that, of course, includes Jesus Christ as well.
So teachers are being encouraged to encourage their students not to draw our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in the UK.
This is, we're not talking about Dubai or an Islamic, any sort of Islamabad or any kind of Islam.
We're talking about the UK.
Though, of course, the distinction is becoming ever more difficult to observe.
So what does that say to you, Jenny Holland, that in the north of England, children are not allowed to draw pictures of Jesus Christ now because of Islamic sensibilities?
Everyone gets involved in Christmas celebrations and nativity plays and Christmas decorations and all of this stuff.
And what is Christmas about?
Christmas is about the birth of Jesus.
So are we going to have little white children in Northern English primary schools being terrified to draw a crown or draw other representations of the baby Jesus in case they get a fatwa put on them or they're told by a headmaster somewhere or some sort of school marm that they're very close to being blasphemers against the prophet Muhammad?
I mean, this is completely unsustainable.
Where is the Church of England on this, by the way?
This is a Christian country.
This is not a country that was founded like the United States, you know, as a republic.
We are a Christian monarchy in name only at this point, but they haven't gone through the trouble of changing the name.
So we are still de facto that we have that heritage.
And the fact that it's being, I wouldn't even say chipped away, I would say demolished with a sledgehammer and a chainsaw at this point.
So to recap, we are going to have an anti-Muslim blaspheme, anti-Muslim hostility commissar.
Children in the north of England are not going to be allowed to draw pictures of the baby Jesus.
And we have a teacher still in hiding because on pain of death, he did something that was not acceptable that was a crime against the Muslim religion.
If you want to live under Muslim religious standards, move to a Muslim religious country.
It's actually kind of worse because the full document, as mentioned by The Spectator, also says that Islamism is the main... Tell America's Voice family.
unidentified
Are you on Getter yet?
No.
What are you waiting for?
It's free.
It's uncensored, and it's where all the biggest voices in conservative media are speaking out.
Well, for those of you sitting on the edge of your seats waiting to hear the rest of what Jenny Holland was saying, stand by.
We're back to her in about five, ten minutes' time where she's going to continue the theme that she was mentioning.
In the meantime, Frank Walker, is it a surprise to you that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has lobbied SCOTUS via the Supreme Court of the United States via a formal amicus briefing lobbying in favor of the preservation of birthright again,
inverted governments, birthright citizenship for invaders, anchor babies?
This is in response to, I think, it's an executive order that President Trump signed back on the first day of him resuming office back in 2025, suggesting ordering the federal government not to recognize the citizenship of children, of children, of parents who were present illegally in the United States.
This obviously gone to the Supreme Court, hence the present situation.
Tell me a bit: why is the Catholic Church, which ought to be a vehicle for the spreading the gospel of Jesus Christ, why is the Catholic Church getting involved in this?
Since they're filing bankruptcy over abuse charges all over the place, you would think they wouldn't be able to afford to spend so much time at the Supreme Court.
It seems like it would be kind of expensive.
And they're happy to go to the courts on every little procedural monkey wrench that they can throw into the way ICE operates, taking away their control, their local control, making sure that they have to permit them to do all sorts of things, everything they possibly can do to slow down and stifle the deportations that are happening.
They'll do.
So this is this had birthright citizenship stops them from saying you're separating families.
They love to say how, oh, they're separating families and they love to talk about the children, but they really don't ever have a case.
Birthright citizenship has been going on in the United States for, I think, over 100 years now.
It came with the 14th Amendment.
It was about slavery, but it isn't really inherent to the Constitution.
But the bishops, it wouldn't make any difference.
Their points are never really legal.
Their points are human dignity.
Their points are what they would call moral.
And since none of them are Catholic, they really aren't in any kind of position to make Catholic points.
They say it's against the equality of peoples because they're favoring citizens over non-citizens, and they're taking that to the Supreme Court.
But what about citizens' rights?
They don't care about that.
What about the citizens' dignity?
They never address that.
There's some people like at the Heritage Foundation that says, you know, they're really that it's always a one-way street with this human dignity argument that they have at the court.
And, you know, they're more about political statements than moral ones.
That's the case of the people against us.
And they also say it's something that's fundamental to all societies and it's fundamentally Catholic, but most Catholic countries don't even have birthright citizenship.
I think the administration is going to eventually make the argument that the 14th Amendment was primarily concerned with ensuring that former slaves who were freed after the civil war would have the full recognition of being US citizens.
And there's a very strong argument that it wasn't about granting, the 14th Amendment wasn't about granting citizenship to anybody who was born in the United States because there's the famous clause about subject to the jurisdiction thereof, which indicates, of course, that citizens of other countries or diplomats, etc., etc., who have children don't automatically get the citizenship.
But there are two immediate responses to this story.
The first is to warn faithful Catholics, hapless Catholics to some extent, but faithful American Catholics, that this is where your collection plate money is going.
You might be putting that money in the collection plate for the winning of your parish church, for getting flowers for the altar, for the feeding of the poor and what have you, but this is going to pay lawyers to present these amicus briefings at the Supreme Court.
So you can ask yourself in the recesses of your own conscience whether you think your donor collection plate money is being well spent by the hierarchy.
My more fundamental point, Frank, and I'll just hand back to you on this one, is that if you look, as you say, and you did expound what the Catholic Church's argument is to do with the sort of the inherent dignity of individuals being made in the image and likeness of God and all the rest of it, the arguments that the Catholic Church is, the institutional Catholic Church is presenting in its amicus briefing aren't so much an argument in favor of birthright citizenship.
It's an argument about denying US citizenship to anybody, full stop, who asks for it.
And that's the sort of the concern that I have because they're operating under the principle that anyone born outside of the United States is simply basically a block of clay and they only get the full dignity of humanity once they get the US citizenship.
Now, I'm sure there are many people who follow the war who actually think, yeah, that's absolutely true.
To be American is the highest form of humanity and citizenship confers that dignity.
I'm joking, of course.
But the truth of the matter is that invaders, illegal third world invaders, are made in the image and likeness of God.
That comes with conception and that remains until death.
You don't need to illegally break into another country to have that dignity ascribed to your being.
But that's the sort of subtext of the Catholic Church's argument here, which I do find slightly confusing.
Just give me 60 seconds before we have to rush back to Jenny on this point.
Their arguments are fundamentally against the idea of the US denying citizenship to anybody, right?
Exactly, because they say that it's church teaching that you're not allowed to do that like you're at present.
The true Catholic teaching and the attorneys that are on the opposite side, they say it'd be nice to have somebody elucidate actual Catholic teaching.
That would be nice.
You know, if we had a different pope, we would have and different bishops, and we would have Catholic teaching because Catholic teaching says this isn't really a Catholic issue.
The lawmakers of any country have a right to make these decisions themselves.
It isn't really about human dignity or not.
A Catholic Church would not say.
I mean, why would they say that a country that isn't really even Catholic is better for people than people that are leaving a country that is Catholic?
You know, if they're coming from Latin America, they're leaving Catholic countries.
Why would the Catholic Church say that it's better for them to leave a Catholic country and go somewhere else?
You know, they're just making up very specious, very weak, very thin arguments that aren't persuasive to anybody.
And I think it's just desperation.
El Paso diocese, where the head chief illegal aliens grift bishop sites is filing bankruptcy.
They say it's because of the changes to the abuse laws, but really it's because Trump has cut off completely their gravy train down there.
Why is the Catholic Bishops Conference producing these specious arguments?
And you answered the question in your opening words as you announced your analysis on this.
It's about the grift.
It's simply about the grift of the hundreds of millions that they get every year, if not billions, in subsidies from the US federal government.
It's about continuing to suck at the teeth of US taxpayer largesse.
Frank stand by.
We'll come for your social medias in just in about five minutes' time after we go to Jenny.
But quick shout out to one of our sponsors here on the war room, and that's Tax Network USA.
Do you owe back taxes?
Well, perhaps you haven't filed in many years.
So now is the time to resolve your tax matters.
With the national conversation around abolishing the income tax system, the IRS is fighting back and proving it's here to stay by becoming more aggressive than ever before.
They're sending out more collection notices, filing more tax liens and collecting billions more than in recent years.
So if you owe the IRS, can garnish your wages, levy your bank accounts, seize your retirement and even your home.
And if you owe or haven't filed, it's not a question of if the IRS will act, it's when.
So right now, Tax Network USA is offering a completely free IRS research and discovery call to show you exactly where you stand and what they can stop before it's too late.
You want that consultation?
Then call 1-800-958-1000.
That's 1-800-958-1000 or visit tnusa.com/slash bannon for your free discovery call with Tax Network USA.
Don't let the IRS be the first to act.
And once again, I gave you the details for Birch Gold before do give them a ring.
Philip Patrick and his team are waiting for your call.
Text Bannon to 989898.
Again, Bannon to 989898.
Jenny Holland, you wanted to finish the point you were making just before the break and then perhaps tied in to your last story of today's show.
And that is some good news that the UK is going to raise the legal prohibition on gender altering hormones on children from 15 to 17 years old.
That is to say, anyone under the age of 18 will no longer be able to affect these medical journeys of what do they call it, gender dysphoria, of changing their gender.
Tell us, because these are related, finish, if you wouldn't mind the point you were making about these lammification of the UK, and then tell us what's happening here with the NHS.
So what Frank was just saying about the sort of intellectual incoherence of the church, his argument on immigration in the States, has some reflection on this document produced by this Labour government, which is called Protecting What Matters on Social Cohesion, quote unquote.
The obvious raising up and giving special status to Islam as a religion is the core part of this document, even at the expense of free speech and all this very important foundational stuff.
However, the document also says that Islamism, Islamic extremism is the biggest problem to social threat to social cohesion in the United Kingdom.
And it also says that Britons must, not should, but must embrace LGBTQ lifestyles, ideology, etc.
So this is a dog's dinner, as they say here.
This is neither fish nor fowl nor good red herring.
It makes sense to no one and it will please no one.
And I think that's fundamentally because progressive, liberal, left-wing people are living in this illusional space where everyone can be happy and everyone can be special and everyone can have everything they ever wanted and no one is illegal and love is love.
And I think there's a very large proportion of the United Kingdom civil service and political class that is completely in thrall to this obviously incorrect, to put it politely, idea.
So we have this like whip whipsawing back and forth between common sense policy and pie in the sky fantasy policy that is also completely egregious in terms of civil liberties and is a threat to the British way of life.
So the gender thing here has been a really good example of this as well.
Because while you had for many years a very captured NHS in terms of gender ideology, NHS calling breastfeeding chest feeding and encouraging trans women, i.e. men, to breast, to lactate, which I won't go into the details of because they're so foul, and also having gender self-ID.
So a man could just say, yay, I'm a lady and that's the end of it.
And men in women's prisons and all the rest of it.
You had a very, very effective pushback here, spearheaded by the now famous TERFs of the United Kingdom.
And so it was announced this week that the NHS would no longer be treating children under the age of 18 with cross-sex hormones.
This follows on from a ban on puberty blockers, which happened recently as well.
So it seems to me that this effectively kills off gender affirming care, i.e. experimentation and child sex characteristic mutilations in the United Kingdom.
Let me read something to you by Dr. Alice Hodgkinson, who's the founder of the campaign group Biology and Medicine.
And she writes in welcoming the NHS announcement, which for the Americans stands for the National Health Service, she writes that cross-sex hormones do not become any less harmful on a patient's 18th birthday.
There is mounting evidence of the long-term adverse effects, which include heart disease, stroke, and early mortality.
Let me ask you: do you think this move on behalf of the NHS reflects somewhat that the woke lobby overextended itself with badly presented arguments?
And this is somewhat of a counter-reaction to those early gains that the woke brigade made.
I mean, I think, like in the United States, the idea of transgender children is across the board horrifying to all sane people who aren't captured by woke ideology.
And in the UK, we had a very significant court case brought by a young woman who was transitioned as a teenager.
Her name is Kira Bell.
And she brought this court case, which eventually led to the shutting down of the preeminent gender clinic here or in London, it is.
And so, you know, it is just obvious on its face that children cannot consent to having their puberty blocked, and that it is obvious that puberty serves an important physical, physiological, and biological function to the human body and should not be paused, quote unquote, I will say, because you can't pause puberty anyway, really.
And that men should not be given or boys should not be given estrogen and girls should not be given testosterone.
You don't need a medical degree to understand this.
I mean, as the most famous of all the English terfs, Kelly J. Keene, said, I may not be a vet, but I know what a bloody dog is.
You don't need a degree in medicine to know that children should be allowed to grow up free from having their bodies pumped with synthetic cross-sex hormones.
However, as much as the common sense regular folk understand this, and as much as Woke did overreach on the issue of transgender, I would not say that the threat is past.
I would say that these are actual demons who have been working in this ideology and embedding itself in all institutions across the Western world.
So I would caution against letting the guard down in any way, even though it is a massive victory.
And I hope that other NHS, you know, Wales, Scotland, whatever, will follow.
And it is an absolute blessing that children will no longer be mutilated by doctors under the NHS in England.