Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 25, 2025 - The Delingpod - James Delingpole

01:47:56

Miri AF

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	I'm not a financial advisor, thank goodness.
	But I think...
	At this time, in these dark times, you'd be mad not to have at least some physical gold and maybe some physical silver too in what you might describe as, if you're ambitious, your portfolio.
	Gold and silver, if you'd bought them when I first started talking about them, you'd have made a tidy profit by now.
	And if you'd bought them in the form of As I had to explain to my bemused accountant the other day, the place to go for physical gold and silver, you don't want paper gold and paper silver, the place to go is the Pure Gold Company.
	They will either deliver your coins or your Your bars direct to your doorstep, or they will store them for you in their vaults in London or in Zurich in Switzerland.
	You can also have gold as part of your pension.
	And if you want to sell it quickly, they will do so for you very quickly.
	So that's the Pure Gold Company.
	And you will find the hyperlink To their website at the bottom of this podcast because I'm part of their affiliate program.
	I'm not pushing their product because I think it's dodgy.
	I own gold.
	I own silver.
	And in the form of bullion, I think you'd be mad not to have them.
	I don't know where you...
	It's quite difficult storing them at home.
	I tend to go for the vault option.
	But yeah, if you've got a good hiding place, why not?
	Especially when it all kicks off and you're going to need something tradable to buy your potatoes and rice.
	Anyway, go to the Pure Gold Company using the affiliate link hyperlink at the bottom of this podcast.
	Welcome to the podcast.
	Welcome back, Miri AF.
	As you can see in your honour, I'm doing something I never do.
	With any of my other podcast guests.
	I'm wearing a special hat.
	I really appreciate it.
	It's very becoming.
	I'm not going to wear it throughout.
	I've only worn it at the beginning for amusement purposes.
	But I also...
	You might understand.
	You might not.
	Dick didn't understand when I told him that time.
	It's the end of the hunting season.
	And I am really feeling bereft.
	Because... Yeah, I mean, podcasts are all very well, but getting pissed on horseback and galloping round and jumping over things, red-pilling people, is kind of much more fun.
	I certainly appreciate that.
	Getting activism out into the real world whilst wearing a hat is centrally important, I think.
	Well, I tell you what, so...
	My little companion on the last hunt I did was this girl who was younger than I thought.
	I'm getting really rubbish at telling how old people are.
	I assumed she was about my daughter's age.
	In fact, she was only 14. But I think the thing about hunting is you grow up much faster.
	You behave much more maturely because basically you're doing stuff equally dangerous.
	To anything that the grown-ups are doing.
	Everyone is the same, whether you're on a tiny pony or you're on a 17-hand hunter.
	So I told her that I was a conspiracy theorist and did podcasts about it.
	Because I find it's the easy way just to use the enemy's term.
	I'm a conspiracy theorist.
	And she said, well, what's your current favourite conspiracy theory?
	And I said, well, for you, young lady...
	I think it's probably that Taylor Swift is a man.
	And she thought, oh, that's good.
	And then I said, and do you know about Beyoncé being evil?
	And she knew about Beyoncé being evil.
	Which I thought was...
	It's good to know that the kids, even the ones who wouldn't consider themselves down the rabbit hole, know that Beyoncé is a terrifying evil witch that everyone's scared of.
	I mean, you knew that, didn't you?
	Oh yeah, of course.
	They all are, aren't they?
	If you know the name, they're in the game.
	Yes, but there's a hierarchy of evil and I know that...
	Have you seen the Adele speech?
	No. Adele is being given some award.
	That period where all her albums were winning stuff.
	And she comes on the stage and the first thing she does is to pay tribute to the witch tyrant.
	Beyonce. And you can hear the fear in her voice.
	She's, like, cracking up.
	She's just, like, she's not sure where to go with it.
	All she knows is that unless she pays due obeisance to the Dark Witch, she'll probably die.
	Or her career will be destroyed or whatever.
	Yeah. Right.
	Anyway, that's the writing.
	That's the...
	That's that section over.
	Thank you, anyone.
	So, I...
	As always, I've been enjoying your writings on Substack tremendously.
	I always look forward to a new Miri AF posting.
	Thank you.
	And I think we can talk about whatever you want to, whatever you feel like talking about.
	But I thought we might start off by talking about...
	Well, it's not our disappointment, it's other people's disappointment with that RFK Jr is not...
	It's not the saviour some people might have hoped him to be.
	No, sadly not.
	I mean, about five years ago, I was on the RFK train too, and I really admired the work he was doing with children's health defence.
	And I did think he was the real deal.
	But I've refined my understanding of how things work a lot since then.
	Of course, with the amount of publicity he has, how prominent he is, he's from the Kennedy family.
	I mean, it was just too good to imagine that he might truly have broken ranks and be on our side.
	And I think he's been playing the long game and doing bait and switch, which is generally what politicians do.
	They promise whatever to get your vote and then they completely betray you.
	But I think...
	He's going to throw us a bit of a curveball.
	OK, so everybody is very, you know, rightly shocked and dismayed that he's been recommending the MMR, a supposed measles outbreak.
	And he wrote this op-ed for Fox News and it was subtitled.
	I know he probably didn't write the subtitle, but still, you know, he signed up and put his name to this.
	MMR is crucial in beating potentially deadly disease outbreak.
	Now, a lot of people, that's caused them to see through him.
	But still, a lot of supporters are, you know, tying themselves in mental knots and saying, oh, well, he has to do this because, you know, if there was a measles outbreak and he didn't recommend the vaccine, then, you know, hell will break loose.
	And I and many others have been saying, well, he really doesn't have to do that at all.
	He could just say the MMR is much more dangerous than measles.
	If a child does get measles, there are safe and effective ways to treat it.
	But the MMR is very dangerous.
	And that's the truth.
	He could just say that.
	But, you know, clearly he's not doing that.
	So what I think he's leading up to is, I don't know if you've seen it in the news, but the CDC, I think, or the HHS, are going to do a new study into the potential link between vaccines and autism.
	So they have said they're going to do this, kind of spearheaded by him.
	Now, as I understand it, the only formal investigation that's ever been done so far about the links between vaccine and autism is with the MMR.
	They haven't studied all the vaccines.
	They haven't studied the vaccines in concert.
	They've just looked at the MMR and they have decided that there is no link between the MMR and autism.
	Now, we may not agree with that.
	I certainly don't agree with that, but that's the official line.
	Well, what is interesting about the MMR is that it doesn't contain any adjuvants because it's a live virus vaccine.
	It doesn't contain an adjuvant.
	So when you've got a vaccine which is dead, in order to get the desired immune response, they put adjuvants in them, often in the form of aluminium.
	But the MMR being live, it doesn't have such an adjuvant.
	Now, I think what RFK's role is, is to claim all vaccine injury is caused by adjuvants.
	And then he can scrap the adjuvated vaccines because mRNA technology has now developed to the extent that they actually don't need adjuvants anymore.
	They can get the desired response with mRNA.
	So can you imagine what a heroic figure he will become and the celebration he will get?
	He said, right, I've discovered it.
	It's the aluminium adjuvants causing the autism epidemic.
	We're going to ban all aluminium-containing vaccines and then the autism epidemic will stop and I'm a hero.
	But we've got this new generation of safe vaccines which don't use an adjuvant.
	And you know you can trust me because I told you that the adjuvants were bad.
	So I think that's where he's ultimately going to go.
	That is wicked.
	Just briefly, what is an adjuvant exactly?
	So the way the vaccine, when they tell you a vaccine is effective, what they mean is not that it makes you healthy or stops you contracting disease.
	They just mean it prompts the production of antibody titers in the blood.
	If you've got a live virus vaccine, that means that they have...
	Got a weakened version of what they say is the virus in question.
	And then when it's injected into you, you produce antibody titers in response to the weakened version of the live virus.
	If the virus, the so-called virus, whatever it actually is, is dead, then you don't produce antibody titers when the vaccine is injected.
	So they put an adjuvant in, most normally in the form of aluminium, to produce that immune response and to get you to producing those antibody titers.
	Aluminium is neurotoxic.
	There is no known safe amount to inject into the human body.
	And there are, in fact, no clinically approved adjuvants.
	That means that no adjuvant has been tested independently against a placebo and verified safe.
	So there are no clinically approved adjuvants.
	There are only clinically approved vaccines that use the adjuvants.
	So this is horrendously dangerous.
	Absolutely no data verifying this is safe.
	The reason I know a lot about this is there is a famous in this field professor called Chris Exley, and he's known as Mr. Aluminium.
	He is the world's leading expert on aluminium toxicology.
	And by a very strange coincidence, I didn't know this when I was growing up, I didn't find out until I was about 30, but he actually was based at the university that I grew up on.
	And his office was like a stone stone for my childhood home.
	So when I found out in my 30s that he was based there, I got in touch with him.
	And I've had long dialogues with him about the dangers that aluminium do, because that's been his whole life's work.
	He's linked aluminium to the Alzheimer's epidemic, to all sorts of neurogenerative diseases.
	And he got a lot of funding and support while he was doing that.
	But then when he started looking at the aluminium in vaccines, suddenly all his funding avenues started to shut down.
	And he then became linked with RFK because RFK tried to donate some money to Keele University, where Chris was employed, to help Chris's research continue.
	But Keele actually rejected the check.
	They said it would bring too much bad publicity to the university.
	And this ultimately...
	He concluded in Chris being forced into early retirement.
	He was forced to leave his job before he was even 16, like it was his whole life and he absolutely loved it, but he was forced into early retirement.
	So he's got a substat now and he's looking for a new lab and a new job, but he was kind of pushed into obscurity.
	But he did this study which got a little bit of mainstream attention in, I think it was 2018, and he showed that the brains of people who died with an autism diagnosis are very high in aluminium.
	And he posited that the likely cause of this aluminium in their brains was vaccines, because he said that's the most acute exposure any of us have to aluminium, like it is in stuff like tap water and deodorant, but vaccines inject it right into us.
	So he said, I think this is a smoking gun, I think this is how vaccines cause autism, and that really got him cancelled.
	So I know that he has had a lot of dialogue with RFK, and I think that RFK is going to go down this route and say it's the adjuvants.
	And there's no doubt the adjuvants do colossal damage.
	But, I mean, they've done it, haven't they?
	They've done it, exactly.
	Generations of children and young people who are so damaged now and, you know, the social care is not there for them, especially once they age out of education.
	So it's very much, you know, locking the stable door after the horse is bolted, especially if RFK then uses that platform to say, well, yeah, adjuvants are dangerous, but vaccines in themselves are not, which has kind of always been his standpoint.
	I'm not anti-vaccination, I just want safe vaccines.
	So that to me could be why he is prepared to promote the NMR, because the NMR doesn't have an adjuvant.
	That's really interesting.
	I wouldn't normally ask a podcast guest this, but it is kind of your area of expertise.
	So mercury versus aluminium.
	I mean, mercury is used quite often in vaccines as well, isn't it?
	Yeah. Where would you place mercury on the list of, you know, things like your Alzheimer's and stuff?
	Yeah, I'm sure that's horrendously dangerous as well.
	And I think RFK may well go after that as well as aluminium.
	And he's written a book called Thimerosol, Let the Science Speak, because there's this mercury derivative thimerosol in vaccines.
	And he's been very outspoken about that.
	So, yeah, absolutely.
	I can see him going after both mercury and aluminium because...
	As I say, the development of vaccine technology means they don't actually need to use those ingredients anymore.
	So this would be the time, if it was all a big strategic conspiracy, which I think it is, to call out the adjuvants because they now don't need them.
	Meanwhile, we've got...
	I mean, you must know, I certainly know, loads of people of a particular generation or age anyway who've developed Alzheimer's and have had to...
	It's almost worse for the partner who doesn't get it because the partner who...
	Yeah. The cost of looking after these people,
	it sort of eats into their pensions, their savings, and they end up living lives of misery, even if they haven't got Alzheimer's.
	This has all been caused, you suspect, I mean, I think I do, by vaccines.
	I think vaccines are a huge contributory factor, but it seems from...
	Chris Exley's research, certainly, where he says, basically, if there was no aluminium in your brain, there would be no Alzheimer's.
	So there could be cofactors and plaques and stuff that are associated, but basically it's aluminium driving it.
	And vaccines, as I said, are the most acute exposure because that's injecting aluminium right into us.
	But we do get it in a lot of other ways.
	So it's in tap water.
	It's in a lot of cookware, like nonstick cookware.
	It's in deodorant and other personal care products.
	It's in wine, unfortunately.
	So I think the bombardment of aluminium from many different factors, especially vaccines, is certainly driving the Alzheimer's epidemic.
	There is one thing worth mentioning.
	So it's very difficult to avoid aluminium entirely.
	I mean, we can obviously take steps to do so, but it's everywhere, so we can't avoid it.
	Completely. So what Chris Exley recommends is there are certain types of mineral waters you can drink which are high in something called orthosolistic acid.
	An orthosolistic acid can pass through your gut wall and become active in the whole body, including the brain, and bind with the aluminium and flush it out.
	So there are lots of mineral waters all over the world which are naturally rich in this lots of silicic acid.
	And two we've got over here are Volvic and Fiji.
	And there are other ones like in Germany, they've got Gerolsteiner.
	There are quite a lot.
	So Chris actually says we should all, especially if you've got Alzheimer's in the family, be drinking this water daily to flush the aluminium out.
	Fiji water, I've tried it.
	It's expensive.
	It's much more expensive than your...
	It is.
	Volvic is much cheaper.
	Volvic is quite cheap.
	Yeah. What about the latest fad, health concern, that bottled water has got microplastics in it?
	I know, I know.
	But so is tap water because the pipes are lined with plastic.
	Oh dear.
	Ideally glass bottled.
	How do you filter your water?
	We've just got one of those zero water filters.
	And buy some bottle of water.
	It's not perfect, but at least the filters will get rid of chlorine and some other stuff.
	I don't think they get rid of aluminium.
	I think that you need one of those reverse osmosis things.
	I mean, ideally, but this is prohibitively expensive for most people.
	We just drink glass bottle of water or have the reverse osmosis filter.
	But if you can't do that, then yeah, just do what you can.
	So I just use the zero water filter.
	It's almost worth getting...
	Bumped off by the cabal early, so you don't have to put up with this.
	I know the assault is just unrelenting, isn't it, from so many different angles?
	Well, to be fair, I mean, if you are incredibly evil and answerable to the devil, you're kind of going to do this, aren't you?
	I mean, it's what you do.
	You can't really blame them for it.
	I mean, it's like as natural as breathing for them, doing...
	Doing terrible things to cry and kill us and maim us and stuff.
	Did you read that doorstopper of a book by RFK?
	You must have done.
	Oh, the Fauci one?
	Yeah. No, I haven't read it, actually.
	I mean, I read it, or rather, I think I listened to the audiobook, actually.
	And I listened to it on double speed, because it's a real...
	There's a lot of words and a lot of...
	It's quite technical, quite detailed.
	And the accumulation of detail, of evidence against the whole vaccine industry, is so damning, so overwhelming, that you read that book.
	I mean, you don't even need to read it all because it gets quite exhausting.
	But you know about, you discover about how Fauci...
	We invented AIDS as a thing.
	And AIDS was the alleged problem which was used to sell the weapon, which was AZT, which was a repurposed cancer drug, which had been rejected by all the cancer.
	All the oncologists just knew that AZT was so bad, killed so many people that there was no way.
	I mean, you just wouldn't do it.
	So they thought, I know, let's give it to people with this imaginary disease we've made up called AIDS.
	And that's what they did.
	So you read this book and you think, whoever wrote this book, I doubt it, can it really have been RFK?
	Would he have had time or patience to sit down and write that book?
	But whoever wrote it clearly knew that Vaccines, all vaccines are a problem, not just some vaccines.
	So this is quite a vault fuss for Monsieur Kennedy, but entirely, as you say, what these people do.
	Tell us, give us your, is it Rachel or is it Monica from Friends, you know, the horoscope thing?
	Oh, right.
	Yeah, so in Friends, in the early seasons of Friends, Rachel said her birthday was on May the 5th, which would make her a Taurus.
	And then a few seasons later, she described herself as an Aquarius, which means it's a January or February birthday.
	Now, when this happened, nobody said, oh my God, Rachel's such a liar, she's so insincere, she's a fraud.
	We realised that Rachel is not a real character, so whoever's developing her alliance has just made a consistency error.
	And they've forgotten that they said she was born before, so she now acts as a part of being an Aquarius.
	So this is what I said about RFK.
	I said, he's an actor.
	So before he was reading the part of, you know, crusading anti-vax hero, you know, sticking it to the man anti-establishment.
	Now he's just been given a new script.
	Now he's your typical, you know, backpedalling lying politician.
	So he's been doing that script instead.
	So he is, you know, a front, a showman, and he's just been given a different script.
	Because if you look into his background, obviously showbiz and politics are very incestuously linked.
	But his own family is deeply steeped in Hollywood connections.
	So his wife is a famous Hollywood actress.
	And her big show is called Curb Your Enthusiasm.
	And this show is about Hollywood stars playing fictionalised versions of themselves.
	So it's like, well, that's what RFK's doing.
	Yes, he's using his real name, but he's playing a part.
	A bit like I would say the actress, again, famous Hollywood actress, Meghan Markle is doing, an actress playing a part.
	A fictionalised version of herself using her real name, but playing a part nevertheless.
	So that's what he's doing.
	Oh, talking of Taylor Swift, RFK's son went out with Taylor Swift.
	Ah, I think it's part of the humiliation ritual that people have to undergo.
	That you have to go out with the world's most famous female pop star and you discover, if you didn't know already, that she's got a willy.
	I mean, that must be quite a...
	You think about all the people who've gone out with him.
	Tom Hiddleston.
	Yeah. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	And that...
	Didn't that dance DJ go out with him as well?
	The really famous one.
	I don't know.
	I think he did.
	Right. I could be making it up.
	Are you not up to speed with Taylor Swift's...
	Love Life.
	No, I'm afraid not.
	But I did know about the RFK son, because RFK's daughter has gone out with Ben Affleck.
	So, you know, these are very big...
	He probably is a man.
	But he directs...
	Have you seen Severance?
	No. You see, you're probably better than me.
	You probably don't watch TV at all, do you?
	I do watch a little bit, I'm afraid, but no, I haven't seen that.
	What's your guilty secret?
	Well, I do have a Netflix subscription, I'm afraid, and I do watch reruns of Friends, but I like to tell myself, and others, this is just psychological profiling.
	Yeah, you see, what I do is I tell myself I'm a TV critic.
	It's the last remnant of my normie career, and so I have to...
	Also, I have to know what Normies are thinking and what they're being programmed by.
	So I have seen, now you may not have seen, although you've got a Netflix subscription, have you seen Meghan's TV programme?
	No, but I've been reading about it in the press.
	It looks excruciating.
	Well, you mentioned Meghan being an actor, but she's really shit.
	I don't know what she was like in Suits.
	I never saw her in it, but she's really shit at playing Meghan, Meghan Markle.
	I mean, she looks so awkward.
	Although, to be fair, she's playing a role that she's written for herself, which is Meghan Markle, domestic goddess and lovely person.
	Warm, lovely person who's got friends.
	And I think that's quite a tough for a TV show to promote that idea.
	I did a review and I felt a bit bad about it because it's not a very Christian thing to say.
	I said it's a bit like a bird-eating spider with lots of money getting itself commissioned to make a show about itself in which it's portrayed as a lovely baby newborn lamb and it has to prance and gamble.
	It's never going to work.
	The bird-eating spider is never going to be a really convincing lamb.
	I mean, she obviously hates...
	Cooking, for example.
	Which is kind of a drawback when you're supposed to be presenting yourself as somebody who's kind of a homemaker who prepares these lovely bath salt gifts for her guests.
	I was thinking earlier on when you were talking about how these people sort of get sort of...
	They get put into positions where they can be activated at a later date.
	It's a bit like sleeper agents, don't you think?
	So RFK was given this possibly designated role.
	Maybe he was allowed a bit of leeway, but whatever.
	He ended up being a fighter on environmental issues.
	And he was very big on the whole climate change bollocks thing, which is a tale against him for me.
	But then he became briefly our hero with this children's health defense and stuff.
	I'm beginning to share your suspicions that this was only a role allocated for him later on to be given the signal that now was the time to move out of that character and into something else.
	It seems to me that this is how the world of...
	Yeah, exactly.
	It's always bait and switch.
	Every single time.
	They always present themselves as being these great heroes and the real deal and, you know, calling out the establishment and the establishment hates them because look at all these hit pieces the establishment is doing on them.
	And then when they get into power, they reveal their true colours and they're just the same as all the other politicians.
	It's always the same.
	You know, this is what a lot of people have been saying about Donald Trump and Maersk and Vance.
	You know, why do you think they're going to be any different to anyone else?
	They're not going to be.
	And I think they're starting to reveal themselves very quickly.
	And now, of course, we've got this big reform spat.
	Reform being the latest hero saviors.
	People are starting to realise that actually they're just another establishment facade.
	Of course they are, and they're just about managing the dissidents and giving them false hope so the dissidents don't start to create some real hope and some real opposition of their own.
	Yes, I don't normally look at sort of normal world politics anymore because I know it's all charade.
	But I was...
	Lightly interested in this spat.
	It was between Farage and his only charismatic, vaguely independent mind.
	I mean, how many MPs has he got in his party?
	Five, I think.
	Yeah. And this one chap is his most, yeah, free-thinking and charismatic of the bunch.
	I've never met him, and I'm sure ultimately he's as disappointed as all the others.
	But he seems alright.
	And of course, anyone who shows independence, or charisma, and they're in Farage's company, he will knife them.
	He always does.
	I think he...
	I've known him for quite a long time.
	And the impression I've sort of formed is that he's another deep cover agent.
	But his deep cover goes back a very long time.
	I mean, possibly even as early as his time in the city.
	Have you looked into that at all?
	Yeah, yeah.
	I don't know if you're aware of Farage's links with Peter Thiel.
	So Peter Thiel is this very sinister tech billionaire who has basically groomed and funded J.D. Vance.
	So he got to know J.D. Vance at university.
	He went to give a talk when J.D. Vance was at university.
	And J.D. Vance said this was the single most significant day of his life, or something to that general effect.
	And since that time, Peter Thiel has put a huge amount of money into J.D. Vance because he wants him in the top job.
	Because this guy, who was young and inexperienced, he'd only been a senator for one year, had previously compared Donald Trump to Hitler, nevertheless became Trump's running mate and is now, you know, vice president's second most officially powerful job in the world.
	And this is all because of Peter Thiel, who is very, very invested in data mining, AI.
	He's got this company called Palantir.
	Which is the most evil company in the world.
	Yes, exactly.
	I mean, they've overtaken BlackRock, which was doing really well in that role.
	But Palantir is just even more evil.
	Yes, it is.
	Absolutely. So the fact that he is the money behind J.D. Vance, who I'm pretty confident is going to end up being the president and maybe sooner than 2028 if there's another quote-unquote assassination on Trump.
	Thiel is also a good friend of Farage.
	If you just Google Nigel Farage, Peter Thiel, there was a thing in the press quite recently where Nigel Farage was expressing outrage that his good friend Peter Thiel had been...
	He was heckled or something at the Oxford Union and he'd gone to give a speech and some left-wing mob had given him a hard time, something like that.
	But anyway, Nigel was very offended on his friend's behalf.
	So, Nigel's been spending a lot of time in the States since this new administration came in and, you know, it's a joke that he's over there more than he is in Claxton, his own constituency.
	So there's clearly, you know, dark dealings going on between Thiel and Farage.
	I strongly suspect that Farage is another Thiel puppet, and then, you know, whoever's controlling Thiel, and that Thiel is sinking a lot of money into Farage to try and make him the next Prime Minister of the UK, and then Thiel would basically have his two puppets on the UK and US thrones.
	Thiel, of course, is another one, another example of that phenomenon that we were talking about, whereby...
	I remember my first awareness of Peter Thiel would have been when I considered myself as a kind of outspoken, right-wing, sort of libertarian, sort of South Park conservative kind of guy.
	And I remember thinking that Peter Thiel was one of the good guys, that he was into causes that I...
	I can't remember why, but wasn't that...
	The point about Peter Thiel was he was the opposite of Mark Zuckerberg.
	He was opposite of those kind of liberal tech billionaires.
	He was more libertarian, I think, was how he was sold to us.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	I think that's absolutely right.
	He certainly isn't a liberal, and he's totally against all this woke culture and stuff.
	I think they've managed to play us in that way of making liberalism and the left so completely insane that we're so desperate for the antidote and for anybody to be calling this out that when someone like Peter Thiel comes along, initially it can feel like a relief and a validation.
	Finally, somebody with some profile and some clout.
	He's calling out the left and their insanity, oh thank God.
	So that disables our guard a bit.
	And then, you know, they've reeled us in, then slowly they start to reveal their true colours.
	Yeah, I think he's every bit as bad as Mark Zuckerberg and I think that these kind of rivalries are manufactured to a large degree and behind the scenes they're all pally like we saw at Trump's administration.
	They're all there, weren't they?
	I must say, I'm very quickly becoming very frightened by The Trump regime.
	Not least because I've seen, in the last decade or so, I've seen people being moved into position, ready for what's happening now.
	And I realise, as I didn't before, how controlled and planned everything is.
	They leave nothing to...
	Whoever's ultimately making the decisions, and it's not Trump, possibly not even Peter Thiel.
	They play the long game.
	So all these up-and-coming young, hot new aides who are being moved into the Oval Office and stuff, they were recruited a while back.
	Nothing is accidental.
	No. And I think that's a really clever trick they play.
	They teach us to think of our lives in terms of days, weeks and months.
	Whereas they think of life in terms of years, decades and centuries.
	So that's a very effective weapon they've got because to the average person or even the average conspiracy theorist, it's kind of difficult to get your head around that.
	Surely this can't go far that back.
	They can't have been planning this this long.
	That's just not feasible.
	And it's not for us in the way that we've been taught to live our lives, but it is for them.
	And that gives them a massive advantage.
	So much of it.
	As you say, the way we are programmed.
	I can't wait for the weekend.
	I wonder whether that was what Acid House was about.
	They flooded the market with pills and gave us some good music in order that we should live for the weekend.
	My only personal second-hand connection with Peter Thiel is that my old friend Christopher Booker.
	With him I used to chat probably once a week and we used to have a long, long...
	Did you ever come across Booker?
	No. Christopher Booker, he had a very interesting career in that he was one of the founder members at Private Eye.
	He was at Shrewsbury with Richard Ingrams and was Willie Rushton there as well?
	I mean, these are all sort of figures from before your time, but in a way...
	They shaped the culture that you inherited, because they were sort of attached to the Establishment Club, which was owned by Peter Cook, who was the main shareholder in Private Eye, so the satire boom and stuff like that.
	So Christopher Booker, I think, was the first editor of Private Eye.
	He had then a sort of...
	Interesting career as a sort of contrarian journalist and we fought together particularly during the climate wars.
	He was a great caller out of the climate change bullshit.
	And unfortunately he died of cancer a few years ago because I kind of like him with me now so I could have long phone calls to discuss how mad the world has gone since he died.
	And to see what sense he could make of it, because clearly he wasn't awake to the degree that we are now, post-COVID and post-everything we've seen.
	Anyway, after that lengthy description, Booker told me that once he had been invited for this weekend, I've been flown out there in sort of private jets with a bunch of other people at a sort of discussion event hosted by Peter Thiel about evolution.
	Or rather, about evolution being bollocks.
	Essentially about creation.
	Now, I had this conversation with Brooker at the time and I remember saying to him, you don't think evolution is real?
	Because I was really a normie in those days.
	And he said, well, yes, Dallas, there are certain flaws.
	You should look into it sometime.
	It's quite interesting.
	I thought, wow, Booker might be a creationist.
	Well, of course, now I'm a creationist, so I think evolutionary theory is Masonic bollocks.
	Darwin was a 33rd degree Freemason.
	It was commissioned by the Rothschilds and some of the other powerful families to discredit.
	Christianity. But it was interesting that, it's an interesting fact, which probably not many people know, that this guy hosted this thing to discuss creation.
	I mean, he's obviously a deep thinker, but not one of us.
	I don't think he's a goodie.
	No. I do think that we're going to see, In the States, particularly, a return to what will purport to be kind of Christian values.
	So we could have more of a discussion of, you know, is evolution real?
	But I think that this is about an ultimate endgame to scrap religions.
	I think we talked about this before.
	We know what the endgame is for the overlords, as they told us in John Lennon's Imagine.
	They want the one world government with no countries, no religions, no possessions.
	And they have a big obstacle with religions, in particular Christianity and Islam.
	These are very big, powerful, popular movements worldwide.
	And they want to scrap them.
	The way to scrap them is to manufacture the people's consent because that's how the political climate has been governed for at least the last 100 years.
	There's this political scientist called Walter Lipman who wrote this book in 1922 called On Public Opinion and in that he said basically that the masses are stupid.
	You can't trust them to, you know...
	Do anything in their own interests.
	But if you try and force them or coerce them, you know, they'll get angry and kick back.
	So what you have to do is you have to manufacture their consent.
	So they think that they're choosing, you know, whatever it is you want them to do, but really you've just manipulated them into doing it.
	So that's what you said.
	And then that's how so-called democracies have been managed ever since.
	So what I think they're going to do in the US, and I think this will be brought in under Vance whenever he becomes the president.
	Is they're going to push a very aggressive and twisted form of Christianity, and I think there might have been some predictive programming in The Handmaid's Tale of what it might look like, because they want to elicit the response in the populace of, oh my god, this is so horrific, this is so awful, we need laws against it, we need to get rid of it, etc. So I think that that's where they're going.
	So conversations about creationism may be seen to be more accepted and allowed as we move towards what it's going to look like.
	A more Christian world in America, but ultimately will be about scrapping it.
	And I think over here and in Europe, they're doing...
	Christianity has become now very weak in the UK.
	I think England and Wales are no longer officially Christian countries, but there are still pockets in the US where it's much stronger.
	So I think that their assault on Christianity will be focused in the US.
	They want to get rid of Islam as well.
	And when I say this to people, you know, they act shocked and they say, understandably, well...
	How can they be wanting to get rid of Islam when they're letting all these Muslim immigrants in and giving them special perks and all the rest of it?
	And I kind of say, well, for the same reasons, that they're trying to elicit a kickback.
	They want you to get angry with these special privileges that these immigrants seem to be getting.
	They want you to be angry about terror attacks.
	Certainly there are some real terror attacks.
	But some of them are staged to elicit this reaction, the problem, reaction, solution.
	So I think that this is...
	The cultural wars are going to accelerate very rapidly between now and 2030 with religion at the heart to build up what it was seen to be building up Islam in Europe and building up Christianity.
	But ultimately, this is to galvanise a huge pushback from the populists when they say, look at all these problems these religions cause, these terror attacks, and these grooming gangs, and we need to get rid of them.
	So that's where I think they're going.
	Yeah. You certainly see that among the people who are where I used to be.
	So the kind of outright political commentators, the sort of people who...
	Are interested in Farage and Tommy Robinson, maybe, and oh, and fighting the culture wars and fighting woke, which is quite a big constituency, isn't it? And they really are obsessed with Islam as the problem.
	And I'm not sort of saying that There hasn't been some awful behaviour from some Muslims and that it doesn't create social cohesion or anything else and it's not really culturally in tune with our English culture.
	I get all that.
	But you can see that these people who are pushing this are falling into a carefully laid trap.
	So I get that.
	By the way, you said...
	Do you know of any examples of these terror attacks which have been genuine?
	I mean, I can't...
	Well, I don't know, no.
	I mean, most of them look staged, don't they?
	And... Don't mention Manchester, though.
	No, no.
	Of course not.
	No, never.
	No. Because I can't say for 100% sure, yes, I'm absolutely 100% positive that every single terror attack has been staged.
	I have to say it's possible some of them are real.
	But I would say that all the ones that are very high profile, especially the ones that seem to have links to established actors and acting agencies, you know, there's a very, very, very high possibility they're fake.
	So which are acting agencies?
	What do you mean?
	Oh, well, you know that Axel, what's his face, for the Southport Stabbings, he went to Pauline Quirk's drama school and he was a star alumni.
	Do you know, I hadn't, I hadn't even, I'm feeling so stupid, I hadn't even made that connection.
	Yes, yeah, yeah.
	The Greeks were right about actors, weren't they?
	They classed them as prostitutes, I think.
	Yeah, well, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	And another one, you know, Madeleine McCann's been back in the news recently.
	This is way rock solid, isn't it?
	Tell us about Madeleine McCann.
	OK, well, just to link it back to the acting again.
	So there's this girl, Julia Wandout, who popped up about a year ago.
	She claimed that she was Madeleine McCann.
	You know, she'd been abducted, brought up by a different family with a different name.
	Rather than just giving her a quick DNA test and saying, no, you're not, goodbye, the press went to town to make her famous, and they splashed her across the headlines, and they put her on Dr. Phil, and it was, you know, this big edge-of-your-seat thriller.
	But eventually, apparently, she got a DNA test which said she was 100% Polish, so she couldn't be Maddie McCann, and she kind of went away for a while.
	But now she's back, and she says that that DNA test was fraudulent, and she's taken a new DNA test, and this one says she's Irish and English.
	So it's all got very dramatic again.
	Anyway. Supposedly, she came over to England to visit a friend that got arrested at the airport and is now banged up in custody for stalking the McCann's.
	And she's got a trial in the Crown Court on April 7th.
	And this is just very sensationalist, very dramatic.
	Is she?
	Isn't she?
	What's really going on?
	It's been my opinion for several years that the Madeleine McCann child abduction drama was staged.
	It was acted.
	One of the women involved, Bridget, was an ex-Crime Watch producer, you know, Reconstructions of Crime, and I think they just went, flew out to Portugal and acted it out.
	And there's this footage in the airport when they're going to Portugal, and they're filming the group, and someone says to Jerry McCann, you know, cheer up, Jerry, we're on holiday.
	And he says, I'm not here to enjoy myself.
	And it's like, well, if you were going on holiday, you would be there to enjoy yourself.
	But if you were going for work...
	But you wouldn't be.
	So that was an interesting little comment from Gerry.
	Anyway, so I think the whole thing's been staged.
	So do I think she was abducted?
	No. Do I think the parents killed her?
	No, because I don't think it was real.
	I think it was acted.
	And I think it was acted for a long-game purpose, like we were discussing earlier.
	They do plan things out in years and decades.
	A long-game purpose to eventually capitalise later on.
	I think we're getting very close to that point where they will capitalise on it.
	Now, this woman, Julia Wandel, who claims to think she's Madeleine McCann, Has a profile on an American casting agency called Project Casting.
	It's a legitimate, established casting website.
	And it's definitely her.
	It's got plenty of photos of her.
	And she's described as an actress from Arizona.
	So I think that this woman quite clearly is just playing the part of this disturbed Polish stalker who we may or may not be told is Madeleine McCann for the purposes of fulfilling the dramatic conclusion of this drama.
	So what my theory on the Madeleine McCann situation is, is I think that there's certain key agenda items that they need to manufacture our consent for.
	One is that I think they want to microchip us all, starting with children, and they're trying to soften us up for it with, you know, making it compulsively to microchip the pets.
	But to get that final push and get us to agree that children need to be microchipped, we need something very emotive, very hard-hitting, very sensationalist, such as the world's most famous missing child being found alive and well.
	And then you can say, if only she'd had this chip, she could have been located within hours, this terrible heartache could have been saved.
	So I think that's one arm of why they staged this Madeleine McCann thing.
	The other one, I think, is...
	Crushing free speech.
	Now, it's probably one of the most well-known conspiracy theories in the world that Madeleine McCann was not abducted, that the parents were involved in her death and used the friends in high places to cover it up and pretend that she was abducted.
	Now, loads and loads and loads of people believe that all over the world.
	And as a result of this, they have abused the McCanns and called them vile names and all the rest of it.
	Now, if Madeleine turns up alive and well, how does that make those people look?
	You know, it really makes them look terrible, abusing this innocent family.
	She was alive all along.
	And this would give the press and the establishment, you know, huge ammunition to say free speech has gone too far.
	You know, enough is enough.
	We need some protections for these people to be harassed, being harassed by conspiracy theorists.
	And this is happening in conjunction just a few months after Richard D. Hall's very high profile court case, where.
	Martin Hibbert, who was the victorious party, says he's going to use this court case as a springboard to try and develop an anti-conspiracy theory law.
	So what Martin Hibbert says is that we need a law to protect people from being harassed by conspiracy theorists.
	Now, if Madeleine McCann then turns up alive and well, then, you know, the establishment is going to exploit that monumentally and say, you see, Martin Hibbert's right.
	We do need this law.
	Look what the poor McCanns have gone through.
	So I think that's what it's all leading up to.
	I don't know if we're going to find out or be told that this Julia really is Madeleine McCann or if there's going to be another one, because another one, another alleged Madeleine has come forward saying, oh, you know, I saw this Julia on television and when I heard her story, I realised actually I'm Madeleine McCann and this one looks a bit more like her.
	So I do think that that's where they're going.
	And I think April 7th, the court case for this Julia could be a big day.
	Could I be Madeleine McCann?
	Could you?
	Yeah. Yeah, we probably all could.
	I think so.
	I think we're going to have an I'm Madeleine McCann Spartacus Spartacus moment.
	Do you get a lot of shit for what you do?
	For what you say?
	Yes, it goes with the territory, doesn't it?
	Well, I'm just wondering.
	Because you're famous for if you know the name, they're in the game.
	And I think that people, even some people in awake circles, don't want to accept the degree to which everything is controlled.
	We are living in the Truman Show, that everything is a drama.
	Because people think that it's cynical, or despairing, or Or they don't want to comprehend.
	Oh, that's the other line that I sometimes hear, that it gives the enemy too much credit.
	But I don't think that any of...
	I think these are just excuses.
	These are sort of copes for people who can't accept.
	They can't handle the truth.
	Yeah, I mean, you know, I think we're powerfully programmed to want heroes.
	You know, if you go back to earliest childhood, children's storybooks are all about, you know, the hero or the prince saving the day.
	And we want that.
	Why wouldn't you?
	Why wouldn't you want to be saved by a hero?
	So I think part of growing up, and it's difficult to do, is realising, you know, once you're an adult, you know, you have to be your own hero.
	To coin a cliche, you have to be responsible for saving yourself.
	And, you know, it's fine to admire other people and, you know, think, oh, they're doing something really worthwhile.
	I'd like to get involved in that.
	But once you start hero worshipping them or putting on these pedestals, then I think you're in a lot of trouble.
	And what I often say to people, because people say to me, oh, you know, you're telling us we can't trust anyone.
	You know, everyone's in on it.
	And I say, I'm not saying that at all.
	I'm only saying it about a very, very tiny group of people who get a lot of media exposure.
	I'm saying that those people, by definition, you can't trust because they wouldn't be elevated to fame if they were legitimate.
	You know, they're elevated to fame because they're compromised.
	Because a famous person has so much power and influence over manipulating the mass mind.
	You know, if Rachel Aniston gets the Rachel haircut, you know, millions of women rush out and get it.
	The elite would not allow a legitimate person to have that amount of power and influence.
	They only allow their assets to have it.
	So that's why...
	You know, if you're a legitimate conspiracy theorist, they're not going to do lots of hit pieces on you in the press because that brings too much attention to you.
	So that's what I'm trying to say to people.
	It's not about not trusting anyone.
	It's just realising by default anybody who's made very famous is an asset and can't be trusted.
	But moreover, you don't actually know these people.
	You know, they're just characters on the screen.
	You haven't got a personal relationship with them.
	So you can't really...
	You can't invest that much trust and faith in someone that you really don't know who doesn't know you, you know, who would walk past you in the street and wouldn't recognise you.
	And so what I say to people is the way you find people you can trust is you get off your screen and you go out into the real world and you talk to people and you go to events and you meet like-minded people and you develop a local community and you get things done that way.
	That's how you find who you can trust.
	And that's not to say that, like I said, people on screens might...
	Give you interesting tips and interesting ideas, and you might admire them in some way, but they're not the future.
	Your real-world community and your real-world connections are.
	You know what we need?
	Have you seen Terminator?
	I've seen Terminator 2. I haven't seen the first one.
	Well, this might be Terminator 2. I can't remember.
	But in one of them, they have these dogs that can tell whether they're replicants or...
	Actually, are they called...
	Replicants of Blade Runner, aren't they?
	What are the machine creatures called in Terminator?
	They're called Terminators, aren't they?
	Oh, I suppose so, yeah.
	Well, okay.
	So the dogs can tell the difference between...
	They can tell humans.
	And that's what we need when we go to events where we all come together.
	Because, I mean, there's bound to be infiltrators, aren't there?
	Yeah. We need special dogs that can, you know, sniff out.
	I mean, you'd think from his enormous success that maybe he was not to be trusted, but no.
	No. He's fine.
	I mean, my great shock and upset in my life, and I suppose it's a product of having experienced this elite kind of Recruiting system, which is Oxbridge, that quite a lot of people I've encountered in my life are wittingly or unwittingly working for the enemy.
	And it's kind of disappointing because you look around and you see all these people that you thought were like you and had the same values.
	And you realise that what the system does is it headhunts talent from a reasonably early age.
	I mean, possibly they're doing this at the private schools as well.
	But definitely by universities.
	You've got talent scouts.
	I mean, the obvious one would be the college don who's in charge of MI5, MI6 recruitment.
	Every college has one.
	But there must be other ones as well.
	So they're putting in place all these characters for ready to be, as I say, get their trigger code.
	Yeah, yeah, absolutely.
	As you say, Oxford and Cambridge, they are known for having dons who look out for talented people, but I'm sure some of the other big-name universities have the same thing.
	And I think intelligence infiltration is almost complete in media and politics.
	You know, as they're saying that in the 60s, the CIA infiltrated the media, but now the CIA is the media.
	Yeah. Yeah.
	Just briefly, you probably don't read newspapers.
	Oh, I do.
	I do, yeah.
	Okay. This is to your point about how in order to get what they want, they have to give us the illusion that they're giving us what we asked for.
	So I read a piece in the Sunday Telegraph by one of my old mates, Dan Hannan, the former MEP, now Lord Hannan.
	Hannan is writing a piece that I've read of his.
	He's written it about eight or nine times, I'd say, since COVID.
	And the piece is like this.
	Lockdown was sheer madness.
	There's nothing worse than denying children the education they should have had on the flimsiest of evidence.
	Yada, yada, yada.
	I'm too modest to name the person who said this in his Sunday Telegraph columns all the time.
	But basically, his initials are DH.
	But then this is the weasel part.
	He said, but why was this madness?
	Why did this collective madness assault our country?
	Ultimately, it was you, the public.
	That asked for this things, this stuff.
	You wanted lockdowns.
	You demanded, you know, masks and supermarket arrows and things like that because you were frightened.
	And at the end of these pieces, every time I've read them, and it really has been about a time, I say, you weasel, Hannah.
	Either you don't know, in which case you are culpably stupid, or Or you do know, in which case you are culpably and wickedly mendacious.
	But you should know that the reason that all this stuff happened, the reason that the public was, as you argue, clamouring for these measures to be taken, was because they'd been whipped into this frenzy by a media which had told lies on behalf of the government because the government was their main funder.
	All the people behind the COVID scam used every mechanism at their disposal, ranging from pre-printed signs at petrol stations, you know, on sort of whatever that canvas or the shiny stuff that you put in banners at service stations, and placards on the back of dustbin lorries.
	This had all been really carefully...
	Pre-planned to scare the public, to corral them into a particular pen marked COVID is the scariest thing ever.
	And here you've got this guy who pretends to be a kind of, you know, slightly sophisticated, slightly contrarian commentator lying to you.
	I don't normally like to name names, but it disgusts me.
	Yeah. Yeah.
	You're absolutely right.
	This is the game that they play.
	Because it does seem, in a really twisted way, that we live in a consent-based system.
	And they believe, as long as...
	They've got our consent.
	No matter what they've had to do to manipulate it, then what they're doing is legitimate and that they're kind of karmically clean.
	I did watch something on the military mind-control platform Netflix.
	You know who's behind Netflix, don't you?
	He is Edward Bernays' nephew?
	Yes, that's right.
	Exactly. So it's just more of them, you know, harnessing the masked mind to manipulate them.
	Freud first coined and then Edward Bernays obviously used that to invent PR.
	But there was something on Netflix called Lock and Key.
	And it was about this family who had magical keys which gave them special powers.
	And the family were haunted by this evil demon who really wanted to get the keys off them.
	And she was trying all sorts of things to get them.
	Like she'd burn the house down and she'd tell these horrendous lies and all these things.
	and she just wasn't succeeding.
	In the final episode, one of the family says to her, look, you've done all these awful evil things to us, but I don't understand why you haven't just walked up to us and just snatched the keys off us.
	And she gets really frustrated and she says, I can't, I can't do it by force.
	I really enjoyed Lock and Key as well.
	Yeah. Good.
	There was quite weird that scene in the cave at the end where there's sort of bullets going from another realm.
	Or am I confusing it with another TV series?
	It was Lock and Key, wasn't it?
	It was about five or six years ago that I watched it, so I can't remember it that clearly.
	They do tell you on these programmes how the world works.
	And it is part of their Luciferian stroke satanic Karma that requires them to do it with our permission and to show us what they're doing.
	I was trying to think of some other things that I've seen recently where it's very hard to consume popular entertainment as an awake person.
	Because all you're doing is sitting there watching the revelation of the method or watching the programming going on and feeling slightly sort of nauseated at the people who are not getting that they're being programmed.
	I agree.
	They've just started doing this Netflix.
	How do you escape from this thing that we do?
	What artistic products do you consume that you don't feel are tainting?
	I was watching Fawlty Towers last night.
	I felt that that was largely free of the agenda.
	No, I don't think so.
	You don't think so?
	No, I really don't.
	No, have I not rung you?
	No, no, no, I don't.
	Okay, I'll give you my brief theory on this.
	You think about Britain in the 19th century.
	I mean...
	We ruled the world and we felt good about it.
	And we had all these technological advances, all this massive explosion in wealth.
	Between then and, say, look at, by the time of Dark Side of the Moon, I got in trouble for saying this with Floyd fans, and I used to be a Floyd fan.
	But you've got Roger Waters writing the lines, Quiet desperation is the English way.
	So you've got...
	The English were known as being intractable.
	We were kind of...
	We wouldn't take any shit.
	We were absolutely famous for it.
	And that's one of the reasons we ran the world and why we're so pleased with ourselves.
	By the 20th century, we were being shifted into this...
	Understanding of ourselves whereby, yeah, we were great once, but we've lost it all.
	We had it, but we could have been contenders, but here we are now.
	All we've got left is irony, sarcasm, black humour.
	So, you have a string of programmes like, whatever happened to the likely lads?
	Terry and his mate reminiscing on what might have been.
	And they're really quite bitter.
	I think one's gone and served in Korea and the other is a sort of smug proto-yuppie.
	And they've lost their friendship pretty much.
	And then you've got Forty Towers.
	We're really shit at the hotel business.
	Oh, and there's the famous Don't Mention the War episode.
	A lot of it...
	A lot of the programming throughout the, well, I mean, from 1939 onwards, is programming to people to think of the Second World War as the most important thing ever.
	The noble war that was justified, that we had to fight against the evil Germans, and it was our finest hour, and we did this and we did that, now it's all over, now we can kind of rest on our laurels and accept that we're never going to be great again.
	The don't mention the war thing is to sort of reinforce in the English psyche, yes, war is so important, we should think about it all the time, and the Germans are bad.
	In the guise of comedy.
	Then you had Dad's Army as well.
	We fought Hitler, and we're kind of crap.
	We've got Captain Manoring and Sergeant Wilson, and don't panic, don't panic.
	But it's kind of funny, and we're lovable, and we're ineffectual.
	Do you see what I mean?
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	What they were doing to play with us.
	Yeah. Comedy, I think, is a particularly powerful tool.
	Yeah. Brainwashing.
	You keep citing Friends, and Friends was absolutely mindfuck City, wasn't it?
	Yeah. Every agenda that the cabal wanted to push on us, Friends did it.
	They're probably analogous series.
	I don't know what...
	What else was there that was as influential as that?
	Sex and the City.
	And what was that promoting?
	Monogamy, what kind of?
	Serial monogamy?
	Consumerism? Yeah.
	It's interesting, actually, I noticed the kind of arc of programming, how it changed very quickly.
	So in the 1980s, the big sitcom in America that everyone watched was Family Ties.
	I don't know if you ever saw that or heard of that.
	And it was about a family.
	The parents met at university, they had four kids, and it was about their day-to-day lives.
	Then Family Ties finished in 1989.
	And in 1994, the next big sitcom was Friends.
	So then we had these people who'd been to university, but they hadn't got married or had children.
	They'd all just stayed single and all gone and lived in this flat share in New York.
	So that showed us how the social engineering was changing very quickly from family ties in the 1980s to friends in the 1990s.
	Then when friends finished, I think friends finished in 2004, around that time, maybe it was slightly earlier, Sex and the City started.
	Sex and the City was, again, about friendships, but this was only single-sex friendships.
	At least the Friends group was mixed-sex, and they did develop into some relationships eventually.
	So you kind of can see the degeneration through these three big shows.
	And then after Sex and City, there was something really awful, which was almost unwatchably bad.
	Girls with Lena Dunham.
	I don't know if you ever saw that.
	Well, just the name Lena Dunham is enough to tell me it was...
	Yes, and I think that shows us very clearly how aggressively they programmed us and how quickly things change, 80s, 90s, up to today.
	Just briefly, you think about what Star Trek was doing.
	I mean, Star Trek was...
	I mean, how long did that go for?
	It was quite a big thing, and then it mutated into the movies.
	But the guy who created it...
	Gene Roddenberry was an avowed Satanist.
	And the whole purpose of Star Trek was to teach you that space was not fake and gay.
	Space is real and that interstellar travel is a possibility.
	And also, it was also designed to promote the idea of this kind of galactic federation, you know, the sort of one world, well, one galaxy government.
	Yeah. It was all TV.
	That's why they call TV programmes programmes.
	Yeah. Because it is all about programming.
	It is.
	It is.
	And Star Trek's particularly bad, as you said.
	It's not just pushing the space idea, but many other social agendas as well, like UBI, because in the next generation, certainly, they don't earn money.
	They just, they supposedly work for the betterment of humanity, but they don't earn anything.
	So they must be sustained by a kind of UBI.
	And a sister dying.
	There was this episode, Star Trek The Next Generation, about a culture of people who are all required to euthanise themselves when they turn 60 so they don't become burdens to society.
	And what have we got?
	And you're too young to remember Logan's Run.
	I know what it's about, but yeah.
	Except you don't even last at 60. You do it at 30. On ladies' run.
	Yeah. And I remember watching it thinking, well, yeah, well, 30 is quite old.
	Yeah. I mean, come on, guys.
	Yeah. Yeah.
	That's why I was asking you about what you...
	Because, I mean, you're intelligent.
	And it's...
	I just wonder what really uber-awake people do for their kind of intellectual stimulus other than...
	Going down more rabbit holes.
	Is there anything you trust?
	Literature-wise or film-wise?
	No, not completely.
	I saw your chat with Dick about the Bob Dylan film and I think you have to accept to a degree that yes, everything is going to have some kind of programming and some kind of dishonesty to it but you've kind of got to switch that part of your brain off so you can have some kind of downtime because it would be asking a lot of people to To never read any novels, never watch any films, never listen to any music, because it's all got programming in.
	And it has.
	It has all got it in.
	So it's difficult to, I guess, enjoy yourself as a conspiracy theorist, isn't it, really?
	So I haven't got any easy answers.
	Well, I think it's a challenge, but you've got to keep trying.
	I'm of the view at the moment that Tolstoy is safe, but I can't be sure.
	Yeah. But I don't think rereading Anna Karenina in War and Peace to find out is going to be such an ordeal, because they're pretty good.
	And I've just started reading The Leopard by, is it De Lampedusa?
	Giuseppe Di Sampio, is that who wrote it?
	Which is meant to be the greatest work of 20th century Italian fiction, and it's set in Sicily in 1860.
	And I'm thinking, well, is there going to be much room for programming in that book?
	Probably not.
	So I think you can embark.
	I don't think...
	I don't think Bach is tainting.
	I mean, Mozart was a Freemason, so...
	Right. But yeah, I mean, he still composed some nice stuff if he did actually compose it.
	Because you know what they say?
	They say that, same with Bach, that they were like brands of their era.
	So if you were a kind of very talented composer and you wanted to sell it...
	Sometimes you'd kind of palm off your work as a...
	I don't know how the system worked, how you'd get the money for it, but that apparently did go on.
	Not that I'm saying that Mozart and Bach didn't exist and that they weren't very good at what they did and stuff.
	I'm trying to think what other things that have been annoying me, or things that have been annoying you, only you know that, that we wanted to talk about before we...
	What haven't you mentioned?
	Let's see, is there anything else on the agenda?
	There's always something on the agenda, you know that.
	There's always, yes, yes.
	I feel we didn't really, you mentioned that the Farage was a friend of Peter Thiel's.
	I don't think we've really analysed fully enough how he functions.
	And what his role is.
	I mean, if I can advance a sort of quick thought on that, which is that he wears sort of viola shirts, a bit like mine, and he's got a cover coat that he often used to wear, which is what people wear to the races, sort of English country gents.
	And you'll sometimes see him wearing a barber.
	And these are all, And chords.
	Chords. And these are all sort of signifiers of rural England.
	And instantly they make people warm to him.
	I mean, I wear this shirt because I know that in the country people will sort of recognise me as one of them.
	You know, I'm not an interloper.
	I'm not dangerous.
	I'm not a kind of annoying incomer who's not going to know how to...
	What to do with the cast sheep, say, or who's going to try and stop hunting in the village.
	And in the same way, he's understood that you can take these symbols, very basic symbols, the fag, the symbol of rebellion and kind of devil-may-care, the pint, the symbol of merriment, and the attire of the English country gent.
	And he's...
	He's enabled a good third of the country to project their fantasies of what those symbols mean onto Farage.
	And he hasn't actually been able to come, hasn't had to need to come up with any policies to go with it.
	People just assume that he stands for what they stand for.
	But he's never really been held to account.
	Yeah, that's an excellent point.
	I think you're absolutely right.
	And the posing with a pint has very, very powerful...
	Social and cultural cachet, you know, oh, he's one of us, he's not one of these poncy wine drinkers.
	It really appeals to people in a very important way.
	I'm not convinced he is a big beer drinker, but maybe just, I think, a prop for those...
	He drinks baby sham out of a schooner, probably.
	Yes, far more likely.
	And as you say, I think he is a creation.
	I don't think he's anything like that behind the scenes.
	I certainly don't think he's this, you know, nice, pally, blokey guy.
	I think he's probably just as evil and psychopathic as everyone else at that level of politics.
	And he's playing the long game.
	I don't know, there's nothing on the public record that I've been able to find about what his financial relationship is with Peter Thiel, but it's a very odd friendship for him to have, if it's not in fact based on money and politics, I'm sure it is, and what Peter Thiel is gearing up to.
	Now, this current spat that he's currently having with, or before they're having with Rupert Lowe, I'm not convinced that this isn't just another publicity stunt.
	Oh yeah?
	Come on, sorry.
	You know when Elon Musk said, oh, Nigel Farage shouldn't be the leader of reform, he hasn't got what it takes.
	This was so obviously fake and theatre.
	And the whole purpose of it was for Nigel Farage to be able to say, well, you know, Elon's entitled to his opinion, but I'm my own man and I'm going to stay leading the party.
	Because that is quote-unquote evidence that reform isn't being controlled by a foreign billionaire, that it's not infiltrated by all this money, that Nigel Farage really does lead the party, he really does make his own decisions.
	So that was obviously the purpose of that little skit.
	And this thing with Rupert Lowe, again, the hallmarks of being very fake, it's getting a lot of publicity, a lot of attention.
	Because Rupert Lowe is such a fraud.
	I mean, I did briefly, even in spite of everything I know, have a flicker of hope that maybe he wasn't.
	But, first of all, he's been banging on and on about the Farmers Inheritance Tax, right?
	And, you know, it's terrible, it's a travesty, and it is, and I completely agree with him.
	But do you know that he didn't actually bother to turn up to vote when it was put to the vote in Parliament?
	He didn't vote.
	Did he not?
	His job is not to rant on Twitter.
	His literal job is to go and vote in the comments.
	That's what he's there to do.
	And then with the assisted dying bill, right, first of all, he voted for it.
	But second of all, he did it in such an underhand way.
	So he went to his constituents and he did this informal poll.
	He put this informal poll out and said, you know, should I vote for assisted dying, yes or no?
	And a very small fraction of his constituents responded and said yes.
	And so he voted for it.
	But that's not his job.
	We haven't got direct democracy.
	We're not in a country where every important decision is put to the people and vote on a referendum.
	We've got representative democracy.
	He's the representative.
	It's his job to decide and vote on what his conscience dictates.
	But he's basically abdicated responsibility for doing something he knows is wrong, but then he can wash his hands of it and say, oh, well, it wasn't my choice.
	I put it to the constituents and that's what they decided.
	So that's what he's done, even though, like I said, it was only a tiny proportion of them.
	And, you know, they weren't given the chance to understand all the issues and whatever.
	So he didn't vote on farmers' inheritance tax.
	He has voted for assisted dying.
	And he was also the director of some pharmaceutical company with Rishi Sunak's wife.
	I don't know if you've heard about that.
	Well, they're not dodgy.
	No, no.
	What are you saying?
	No, exactly.
	Alex Creel's done some good stuff on that.
	Yeah, he's just another forwarder.
	This looks just like more theatre.
	So, yeah.
	I've spent a bit of time sort of in the company of Farage and he reminds me a bit of Boris Johnson in that There is a kind of carapace of bluff bonhomie,
	and you really don't know what's going on underneath.
	Yeah. So you get the Halefellow well met, but you can sort of see this sort of cogitation going on behind that.
	But you're not sure what to...
	It's not, yeah.
	It's not real.
	No. I suspect Nigel Fry is a very nasty man.
	Come on.
	It's not like there's...
	I mean, they're all...
	Oh, yeah.
	What do you think about...
	What did you think about that bizarre...
	Spectacle with J.D. Vance and Trump and Zelensky in his t-shirt, in his gay t-shirt.
	It's just more ludicrous theatre.
	I mean, it's almost slapstick, isn't it?
	It's just like, how can people believe that this is how the world is run, that these are world leaders and they're having a serious discussion?
	I mean, as you know, Zelensky is another actor, a comedic actor, that's literally...
	What his past was.
	I know.
	It's bizarre, isn't it, that when you know the backstory, you'd think if the backstory were more widely publicised, that, what was it, Colin Whiskey, the oligarch, created on his TV channel this show.
	About a comedian who becomes the president of Ukraine.
	Yeah. And Zelensky plays that part.
	He's never had any political experience.
	Not that I'm suggesting political experience makes you any better a politician than all the other politicians.
	But then this happens, but nobody talks about it.
	There's been a conspiracy of silence across the, not just the, The English media, but I think the world media.
	Everyone talks about him as a hero and a statesman.
	No one mentions playing the piano with his penis.
	I know.
	Nobody! No.
	Well, and it's also a similar situation with Trump and Mance as well, because Trump is a very accomplished actor.
	He's got scores of movie credits to his name.
	He's got a star in the Hollywood Walk of Fame.
	You don't get that if you've just done a couple of bit part cameos.
	That's for serious theatrical professionals.
	And in fact, Francis O'Neill made a good point about this.
	He said that because we're so used to seeing Donald Trump's face, like we saw him in Home Alone and we saw him in all this other stuff that he's done, that unconsciously builds up a level of trust in someone that you don't realise that you have.
	Like when you've seen somebody's face that prominently over so many years, especially in things which maybe have lovely childhood memories like Home Alone or whatever.
	You develop an attachment to them that you're not fully consciously aware of, and then you can be manipulated.
	So when this person that you feel a level of, kind of a primal level of trust in, suddenly goes on to become a politician and they start saying all these things, you react more favorably to them than if they were a complete stranger, you know, a face you didn't recognize at all.
	And I think they play on that a lot.
	So they are building up these attachments to these beloved stars and then transferring them over into politics precisely because they have more power to manipulate, aren't we?
	It's called anchoring, isn't it?
	I think that describes the phenomenon.
	I mean, yeah, it does.
	You associate these faces with feel-good things.
	It's a bit like good old Boris on Have I Got News For You.
	That was definitely he was being groomed for his subsequent political career.
	And all these kind of videos that we saw on YouTube about Boris flattening somebody in his exuberance on the...
	On the rugger pitch or the football field or whatever.
	And Boris throwing a ball through a hoop over the back of his head and stuff.
	These are all...
	Even Boris coming down a zip wire and getting stuck.
	It's like, you like this guy.
	He's kind of fun.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Even though he's the guy we send over to give the order to Zelensky that you've got to carry on fighting Putin because we say so.
	You can't observe any previously agreed peace treaties and you've got to send a few hundred thousand more of your boys into the meat grinder so that the forever war can continue.
	It's quite hard to associate that guy who did that with the guy who opened the...
	The London Olympics and got stuck on a zip wire.
	Yeah. Yeah, yeah.
	As you know, Boris is his stage name.
	He created this persona at university and gave it the name Boris.
	It was based loosely on Gussie Fink-Nottle from Jeeves and Worcester.
	And then he's presented this bumbling persona to the world, which is not his true character.
	You know, he's ruthlessly intelligent.
	And, you know, it's been very successful to him to hide behind this, oh, I'm just a blithering idiot facade.
	And he's even actually said that.
	He said the mistakes I made in COVID, you know, it's not because I'm evil or anything like that.
	It's just because I'm very stupid.
	He said that, and, you know, this has been a very effective cover for him.
	And kind of, it endeared him to people.
	Oh, it's just bumbling Boris again.
	Yeah, yeah.
	I think there are more of these than we sort of think about.
	Jacob Rees-Mogg is another obvious one, although he didn't rise to quite the same.
	I think they all...
	Well, I don't know about...
	What's Keir Starmer's game?
	Is he the man without personality?
	That's his shtick.
	His role seems to become as absolutely despised as possible by as many people as possible.
	I'm still not convinced that he's going to remain in office until 2029.
	That seems an awfully long time, and I do think that the establishment wants reform in Suna.
	So I think that his absolutely horrendous personal and professional credentials are, again, trying to manufacture consent and get us to push to try and oust him before 2029, because it was...
	Interesting, there was that petition to call a new general election, which got loads of mainstream media exposure.
	It got far more signatures than any of these things ever do.
	And they did actually debate it in Parliament, which they're not required to do.
	They're only required to consider it, and they could just consider it and say no.
	But they did debate it, and Farage took a leading role in this debate.
	So I do think that they're softening us up for maybe Starmer resigning, just because the party had made a vote of no competence in him, something like that.
	Because I don't think they want to wait until 2029.
	To move into the next stage, which I don't...
	I think that Keir Starmer, they needed him to get into assisted dying.
	They really would have a tough time doing that under Conservative government.
	They possibly need him for UBI.
	I think, unfortunately, that's an inevitability.
	And again, it would be difficult to get into a more right-wing government.
	But I don't think he'll be with us until 2029.
	Why was assisted dying so important to their plans?
	I think, you know, well, obviously they're evil and they hate us.
	They want us dead.
	But I think that there's a bit more kind of a brutal business plan nature to it.
	So we've got a demographic problem because of the falling birth rate since the 1960s.
	So we've got a very large elderly cohort and we haven't got the younger people to look after them.
	And that is exacerbated by the fact we've now got a very large cohort of vaccine injured younger people who also themselves need care and will need care around the clock for the rest of their lives.
	And social care is in complete crisis and it's just not coping.
	So at the moment, even just in England, there are more than 2 million over 50s who can't access the care they need because they've got various disabilities and illnesses and they just can't get it.
	So I think that this is a books balancing exercise.
	We can't care for these people.
	We haven't got the money.
	We haven't got the manpower.
	So we just need to kill them off.
	In the last couple of days they've announced, you know, which is the last thing you'd expect a Labour government to announce, that they're going to slash disability benefits.
	So they're going to make PIP harder to qualify for, they're going to take universal credit away from those who aren't fit for works.
	And this absolute horror and outrage from, you know, people who are dealing with disability saying, how do they expect us to live like this?
	And the answer, of course, is they don't.
	And I think what they want to do is make...
	People's lives are impossible that they'll just opt for assisted dying.
	Because the system that they have engineered with the collapsed birth rate, there's not the people there to care for the elderly people, to care for the vaccine injured people.
	So their quote unquote solution is to kill them.
	And I think that's what the COVID vaccines were about as well.
	They're trying to engineer a big death spike to...
	Get rid of what they see as useless eaters and people who, even if they haven't got disabilities now, will go on to get older and possibly need care.
	So they just need to get rid of them, as many of them as possible.
	And that's why I think they've brought that bill in now.
	And of course, because of the advances in AI as well.
	So apparently in 2026, that's officially when AI is going to surpass human capabilities.
	So there are so many industries that are just collapsing.
	It's happening so quickly that a lot of us aren't really noticing it because AI is just becoming cleverer and cleverer all the time.
	A friend of mine has been a very successful freelance animator and has worked consistently for 20, 25 years.
	He's been on the dole for about the last 18 months because the work's just gone.
	AI's just doing all of it.
	And there are other industries very vulnerable to this, copywriting, journalism, so many things.
	Oh no, that's really sad.
	Journalism. Not all journalism, not alternative journalism, hopefully.
	But I think some types of journalism, definitely.
	Just go on.
	Sorry, I didn't want to interrupt you there.
	So, telemarketing as well.
	I mean, telemarketing, we might think, well, we don't need any more telemarketers.
	But in fact, it's a massive industry, a huge employer, loads of people, especially low-income and underprivileged situations, rely on telemarketing.
	But that is going to be completely taken over by AI by 2030.
	The ruling classes kind of grudgingly put up with us when they can extort taxes from us because we've got a taxable income.
	But when there's all these people who literally can't get a job because AI is doing all these jobs now and it just won't create enough new jobs for all these people who've been put out of work, like, what is the government going to do with all these people?
	And, you know, these utopian advocates of UBI says, well, they'll introduce UBI and then they can have these wonderful lives pursuing creative pursuits.
	You know, helping out in the community and it'll all be sunshine and rainbows.
	But we know, of course, there is absolutely no conceivable way that the ruling classes are going to pay people to quote-unquote do nothing.
	They only put up with us when they can get tax from us.
	That's why they want to get rid of pensioners.
	So they have the flu vaccine, which becomes free immediately when you turn 65. Because as soon as, you know, you're retired and you're not providing them with tax from your income, they've got no use for you and they want to get rid of you as soon as possible.
	And they definitely don't want to pay your pension.
	Admit this.
	There's an article in the mainstream press that was in the Telegraph saying flu vaccine blunder had unexpected benefits for Britain's pensions black hole.
	So they even tell you.
	So once you retire, they try and get rid of you with the flu vaccine and the COVID vaccine.
	But if you're redundant because AI has taken your job, then they've got exactly the same incentive to get rid of you.
	So assisted dying has been brought in to basically, you know, really...
	Horrific, crude way just to mop up the problems that the ruling classes have themselves created with a falling birth rate and AI.
	I don't see us being replaced by AI.
	I don't see how you'd...
	I mean, how would you get an AI intelligent enough to know that I would put on this hat?
	I mean, it would never do that, would it?
	I think AI...
	AI would not be able to do effective alternative journalism because the ruling classes wouldn't program it to do it.
	You know, if you talk to an AI and say, you know, what do you think about the moon landings being a hoax or something, it will give you a long lecture about how this is a conspiracy theory and conspiracy theories, pardon me, are dangerous, you know.
	It's plausible that a conspiracy theory AI could be created into theory, but I don't think the ruling classes would do it because they don't want to promote these kind of theories.
	So I think alternative journalism is probably reasonably safe.
	But where are you on Candice Owens?
	Well, I've always thought Candice Owens was controlled opposition simply because of my maxim.
	She's too famous.
	She's too well known.
	I don't know about this Bridget McCron thing.
	I mean, she does certainly look like she could be a man.
	Well, I mean, it's a given that she's a man.
	Have you not gone down that one, that rabbit hole?
	Not in any detail, because my assumption is that, yes, a lot of these people are gender inverted.
	He's a bloke.
	He's a bloke.
	Definitely. I wouldn't find it shocking that she was, or Michelle Obama, or any of these other high-profile so-called women.
	But I want to know what Candace's endgame is with this.
	Now, I think it is possible that one thing that they're trying to do is discredit national governments, because they want a one-world government.
	Now, imagine if it was formally revealed that, yes, Brigitte Macron really is a man.
	I mean, that would send such shockwaves through French society and through the world, and it would deliver a colossal blow to the integrity of the French government.
	So this may be a kind of op to so enormously discredit national governments that people respond by saying, we need to have these national governments scrapped, and we need a best system, maybe a one-world government run by AI.
	Yeah. So going back, your sort of default assumption is that Candice probably is working for the establishment.
	You were just trying to work out what her function was in particular.
	Yeah. I mean, I'm inclined to agree.
	I think you sort of...
	It's not always easy to work out what these sort of players, these deep-covered players for the enemy, what they're doing.
	Because, I mean, you want to say, go Candice.
	Cover this story that nobody else is daring to cover.
	Well, they do do a lot of good work.
	I mean, that's the whole thing with a controlled opposition, to be plausible.
	They have to do good work, otherwise they wouldn't get any following.
	So they do do a lot of good work.
	Somebody said to me in the comments of one of my articles, I have bought books or...
	I've seen videos by people I'm pretty sure are controlled, but they've given good information, so I'm not sure that I'm that bothered.
	And I think that if you are able to be discerning like that, then that's OK.
	Because if Candice is waking people up and they're realising, yes, Bridget's a man, and then they're using that information.
	To help them on their journey, then fair enough.
	The problem comes when people start hero worshipping these people and investing too much faith in them and expecting them to save them.
	So I think as long as we can remain very discerning and very vigilant, we can say, yes, Candice is doing some good work and I can see how X, Y and Z she's doing is helpful, but...
	She is ultimately still an asset of the establishment, so we have to stay on our guard and realise she may be trying to manipulate us in certain ways, and I think that's perfectly possible to do.
	I'll tell you who has completely shit the bed as far as blowing his cover is concerned, and that's Alex Jones.
	Oh, yeah.
	Have you seen him recently?
	I don't even believe it's the same actor.
	Yeah, yeah.
	He just...
	Come on.
	Well, he just sounds and looks different.
	Well, Alex Jones, I'm certain he's definitely been replaced once.
	Have you ever seen any footage of the very early Alex Jones when he was really young?
	I can think he's still in his 20s.
	It's obviously a different guy.
	And you can actually tell by his teeth.
	The original Alex Jones had very straight teeth, which you'd expect his dad's a dentist, but the current one has a gap between his two front teeth.
	That can't happen when you're an adult.
	So I am confident that they replaced him early on, the first one, the original one, with the next one.
	And if they did it once, it's potentially possible, yeah, they've done it again.
	So what do you think about Alex Jones being Bill Hicks?
	Yes, I do.
	I think he was.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	I think he's...
	Alex Jones is a guy playing a role.
	The voice is not a natural voice.
	He's obviously intelligent, as these people often are, but it's an underlying intelligence being used to create the persona rather than an intelligence being used to kind of say, as you and I might, look, what's the best way of speaking the truth in an entertaining fashion that's going to bring people round to deeper truth?
	That's all we think about, isn't it?
	We never have to kind of second-guess ourselves.
	I think, by the way, that's one of my tales.
	This is why it's so important to meet people face-to-face, or at least talk to them on the screen face-to-face.
	It's the way people respond to questions and conversations.
	If you're untainted, your natural response to a question is, how can I best answer this question?
	Whereas a tainted person will be going, how can I answer this question in a way that advances my agenda, keeps my cover intact?
	Any number of complicated processes you've got to go through to vet the question and vet your response, pre-vet your response.
	Yeah. Alex Jones, he's...
	I mean, you're not as much into this stuff as me, but I see the Trump administration very much as a Luciferian project.
	And there's a video recently that Alex Jones does where he misquotes Genesis.
	He attributes to the Bible what...
	A phrase is actually lifted from Frank Herbert, from Dune.
	They are preparing for the final stages of their kind of Luciferian, Age of Aquarius, false light takeover.
	Do you follow any of that stuff?
	Loosely, yeah, I think you're right, yeah.
	Yeah, and Alex Jones, Well, Bill Hicks, shortly before he died, he said, didn't he, that he wanted to play the part of a conservative shock jock radio DJ.
	He literally said that.
	Before he died.
	Yes, yeah, yeah, exactly.
	What did he die of?
	Wasn't it supposedly pancreatic cancer?
	Oh, of course it would be.
	Right, quick.
	Yeah, very fast.
	And then suddenly Alex Jones is with us, which, as I said, absolutely definitely is not the same as the first one and may well have been replaced again.
	But yeah, I mean, he's just come out as nothing but a cheerleader for the establishment now.
	And this again proves what a long game these people play, because Alex Jones has been around since the 90s.
	But finally he reveals his hand, what, 20, 30 years later?
	Yeah, yeah.
	And before that, his absolutely key role in the lawsuit, the Sandy Hook lawsuit.
	Oh, yeah, of course.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Which had very similar effects in the US to the Richard D. Hall case over here.
	Yeah. Well, and of course, that other fake, William Shakespeare, said it all, what, 400 years ago.
	All the world's a stage.
	Indeed. And the name of the first man to get the COVID vaccine was William Shakespeare.
	Was it Bill Shakespeare by any chance?
	I think it might have been.
	Yeah. Yeah.
	Yeah. Miri, as always, I've loved chatting to you.
	Tell us where we can read your insights.
	Thank you very much.
	My website is miriaf.co.uk.
	My substack is miri.substack.com.
	And I'm on Twitter at Mattersinformed.
	And What's that hat made of?
	I don't know.
	It was a present, so I really don't know.
	I mean, is it an animal?
	I don't think so.
	I think you need to get a fox one.
	I think we ought to have a reader appeal.
	A fox one or a mink one.
	I mean, it's not that I don't think you look very fetching in your hat, but I like the idea of you wearing real fur rather than faux fur, especially since we're in the business of trying to expose fakes.
	Good point.
	Okay, I will bear it in mind.
	Thank you very much.
	If you, dear listener, viewer, have enjoyed this podcast, look...
	Do try and support me if you can.
	I don't know whether you've got this problem, Miri.
	People who try and support me on Substack, for example, they find that they have to make repeated attempts before they can get through.
	Substack tries to sort of sabotage them.
	Makes it really difficult.
	I think all these platforms are kind of slightly uncomfortable about supporting people like us.
	So please make the effort.
	Substack, Locals, Substack's probably the better platform.
	Or you can buy me a coffee if you just want to give me a one-off treat.
	Or you can, as well, support my sponsors.
	But anyway, thank you for your support in whatever way, whether you're just freeloading or whether you are actually putting your money where your mouth is.
	Thank you for being with me.
	Thank you for watching me and Miri.
	Thank you again, Miri.
	and see you again soon.
	warming is a massive con.
	There is no evidence whatsoever that man-made climate change is a problem that is going to kill us, that we need to amend our lifestyle It's a non-existent problem.
	But how do you explain this stuff to your normie friends?
	Well, I've just brought out the revised edition to my 2012 classic book, Watermelons, which captures the story of how...
	Some really nasty people decided to invent the global warming scare in order to fleece you, to take away your freedoms, to take away your land.
	It's a shocking story.
	I wrote it, as I say, in 2011 actually.
	The first edition came out.
	And it's a snapshot of a particular era.
	The era when the people behind the climate change scan Got caught red-handed, tinkering with the data, torturing till it screamed in a scandal that I helped christen Climategate.
	So I give you the background to the skullduggery that went on in these seats of learning where these supposed experts were informing us, we've got to act now.
	I rumbled their scan.
	I then asked the question, OK, if it is a scan, who's doing this and why?
	It's a good story.
	I've kept the original book pretty much as is, but I've written two new chapters, one at the beginning and one at the end, explaining how it's even worse than we thought.
	I think it still stands up.
	I think it's a good read.
	Obviously, I'm biased, but I'd recommend it.
	You can buy it from jamesdellingpole.co.uk I hope it helps keep you informed and gives you the material you need to bring round all those people who are still persuaded that it's a disaster.
	We must amend our ways and appease the gods.
	There we go.

▲