Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 9, 2020 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:15:34

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #11

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters on Tuesday the 24th of November 2020.
	I'm joined by Callum and Josh, who is a writer for the website that will be up soon, I promise, and I know I keep saying this, but...
	I'm absolutely certain that it is very, very soon, but moving on.
	I've got some bad news to talk about today, but these guys are going to be talking about more positive things, which is nice.
	And so, yeah, for my fellow Trump supporters, because I want to be very clear, I do not relish having to say any of this, but it looks like Biden's victory is approaching, moving forward incrementally.
	And it's not something that I wanted to have to say, but it is looking worse and worse from an outsider's perspective.
	When I'm watching what's happening and the coverage that's coming out and the things that are being said, it doesn't look good.
	So, I mean, the first one being the Trump campaign brought a lawsuit to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, the state Supreme Court, which rejected the motion within two hours, which I found really frustrating.
	And I really hate the reasoning here.
	So they'd rejected a challenge to 8,329 absentee ballots in Philadelphia, and in the same order, reversed an order that invalidated 2,349 in Allegheny County for the same reason.
	And this is the reasoning that's being given, and I find it very, very frustrating, because the reasoning effectively assumes the correctness of the election, even though there appears to be I hate this reasoning.
	So, the...
	The idea that voters will be disenfranchised by nullifying these votes, well, that's assuming that these are legitimate votes.
	The fact that there appears to be technical questions and violations there, well, I mean, they're there for a reason, to preserve the integrity of the election, and each fraudulent vote disenfranchises a voter anyway.
	So, if there have been Fraudulent ballots which have been delivered, which I think that there is evidence to suggest there has been, and certainly an investigation is required.
	We could be looking at thousands of people who have had their franchise rescinded on this basis alone, but instead the court case has been thrown out, and so we're just going to assume it was legitimate and carry on.
	And Michigan have voted to certify Biden after being pressured into it, voting, and then rescinding their vote, their certifications, after threats and whatnot.
	These have now been done.
	The Republicans urged, the local Republicans urged the panel to delay voting for two weeks to audit the votes.
	But either way, this has carried on as well.
	The reporting on this has been gross.
	This is from the Guardian.
	It's the way they're framing this.
	It's like they've rejected Donald Trump's brazen attempts to subvert the results of the election.
	But if the results of the election themselves are subverted, then Donald Trump is surely trying to do the right thing.
	But yeah, so this.
	And of course, Mary Ellen Gurowitz, an attorney for the State Democratic Party, told the campuses that the attacks on the election results are part of a racist campaign directed by the soon-to-be former President Trump to disparage the cities in this country with large black populations, including Detroit, Philadelphia, and Milwaukee.
	So Trump is being a racist by being concerned about the long history of political corruption in places like Detroit and Philadelphia.
	And this is just being used as convenient cover.
	I don't believe a word of it.
	But the major point that makes it look like things are transitioning ahead towards Biden, regardless of what...
	What Trump's legal teams are doing is that the General Service Administration has begun to make funds available for Biden.
	Now, it's an interesting letter that I think was leaked to CNN initially.
	But in it, it's Emily Murphy.
	It says that she wasn't pressured by the president, the administration, or anyone that appears to be her speaking about the Trump side, but was pressured by threats and various other contacts from the other side to make the determination prematurely.
	And she says she takes this all very seriously.
	But it seems that the apparent winner, being Joe Biden, means that she's going to move forward with this.
	And Trump tweeted out a surprising confirmatory tweet.
	In which he came across very, very well.
	He says, I want to thank Emily Murphy at GSA for her steadfast dedication and loyalty to our country.
	She has been harassed, threatened and abused and I do not want to see this happen to her, her family or employees of GSA. Now this, again, it happened with the Michigan Republicans to certify the votes.
	It's happened here.
	It seems to be just that there are lots of...
	I guess we'll call them rabid Biden supporters who are sending threats and adoxing people and who are trying to intimidate and coerce the opposition into simply conceding.
	But Trump says, I've told my team to do the same.
	But he followed this up by saying, What does GSA being allowed to do preliminary work with the Dems have to do with continuing to pursue our various cases that will go down as the most corrupt election in American political history?
	We're moving full speed ahead.
	We will never concede fake ballots and dominion.
	So we'll pause there a second because there's a lot we've just gone through.
	This is really interesting for a bunch of reasons.
	I mean, all of the fear-mongering that Trump was going to be some sort of Caesarian dictator and refused to leave office, I mean, no matter what he's saying, the actions he's taking, he seems to essentially be going along with the process.
	He doesn't seem to be adopting the mantle of a dictator and marching his troops into Rome.
	I don't know what's going to happen with that.
	But, I mean, it does feel like this is, like, the cathedral pulling in and closing ranks now.
	I mean, you have, like, Chris Christie, like anyone cares about his opinion, coming out and saying, oh, this is an embarrassment.
	And, to be honest with you, I watched Nick Rakita's livestream talking about the Giuliani case, where he was giving his, like, testimony of his case in court, and we could hear the opposition's call.
	We listened to the audio of it on his livestream.
	And he's a staunch Trump supporter, and he's frustrated that Giuliani doesn't seem to have been doing a very good job and made silly mistakes in his filing, whereas the opposition can then take these errors and just demolish his case.
	Again, not disproving him, but just on a more technical level, saying, no, you've kind of messed this up.
	And it is very frustrating to watch.
	Insufferable.
	But didn't you have something to add to this?
	Yeah, I was just going to add, you mentioned Chris Christie.
	The BBC went with the headline, what was it?
	Prominent Republican Chris Christie calls for Trump to engage in the process or something like that.
	I was like, really?
	Didn't he get caught with crack or something?
	I don't know, but he got destroyed in the primaries by Trump.
	So you can see what he's coming back.
	Yeah, no, orange man bad.
	Yeah.
	But the, what is it, the GSA? Yeah.
	So I read the, there are some government documents about this, we'll put them in the links in the clips, where you can read their role.
	And what they are doing here is they are going for the winner apparent, as you said, is the phrase, but there's no legal standard for who the winner apparent is.
	So there's an article from CBS or something like that before this happened saying basically what they usually do is look at the media, the media's guessing this guy's going to be it, therefore they pick the guy, right?
	Well, Biden's the guy being picked by the media, okay, makes sense.
	But the only other time they held out was 2000, in which there was no clear winner and they couldn't do anything for ages.
	So the fact that they are doing something is significant in the fact that they are saying, we believe he seems to be the winner, therefore we're going to give him $7.3 million so he can get transport costs and offices made.
	But it's not official, like anything here.
	But that's the facts on it.
	Yeah.
	Not good stuff, is it?
	It's not good.
	It's disappointing.
	But that is what it is.
	Yeah.
	So, yeah, basically, I'm feeling like I would love for Trump to win, obviously, but I don't think it's looking likely.
	I think it's looking like the victory gets further and further away as essentially more and more state-certifying.
	I mean, they would have to have some sort of quite monumental victory in the Supreme Court above this to overturn all this, wouldn't they?
	I mean, I'm no expert, but this looks bad.
	And the thing is, I don't think a Biden administration is going to be a good thing at all.
	It's going to be a return, as National Review put it, actually, just a return to the Obama-era normalcy, which is true, but that was what caused Trump to become a necessary phenomenon.
	Like, this may end up strengthening the Trump movement, as people put it, because if you're just going back to the old problems, well, the old problems made the Trump movement a success.
	Yeah.
	Okay, weird.
	And not only that, Trump did a very good job, all in all, considering the forces that were against him.
	He got a lot done.
	And I think one of the best places to point to this is foreign policy.
	The National Review article is about the fact that Biden apparently wants Antony Blinken, who they describe as an establishment favourite who has been wrong on nearly every foreign policy issue in the past two decades, to be a Secretary of State.
	And Mattis and another chap co-authored a statement on this, saying that he wanted to abandon the America First agenda, saying that they needed to work more with allies and prepare a defence in depth.
	Cooperating with like-minded nations to sustain an international order of mutual security and prosperity is a cost-effective way of securing that help.
	But the thing is, wasn't Trump's strategy really working?
	I mean, he'd established peace in the Middle East, got a bunch of Nobel Peace Prizes under his belt.
	He'd stopped the war in Syria, he'd crushed ISIS... Ford relations with North Korea, and he was busy isolating China, who, as we saw a minute ago, but we will talk about it at another time, are looking quite aggressive.
	And it looks like Joe Biden will just get bought out by China, because now we've got to pretend that, oh, well, I guess we didn't all see the Hunter Biden laptop, and we didn't see the fact that this is corrupt, that he's been taking money from all of these foreign governments, and Mattis isn't here proposing, effectively, America becoming kind of an umbrella for just international corruption.
	I mean, this all depends on what you determine what a US policy is working as.
	Yeah.
	Because, of course, there's always been these two arguments.
	Usually the Republicans have been the ones advocating for global police.
	We need to be everywhere all the time making sure things stay in America's interest, which, of course, costs a lot of money, costs a lot of American lives.
	And it's flipped now, where that's the Democrat position.
	And the Republicans under Trump were the ones bringing the troops home, stepping out.
	You guys can fund your own defense, because it's not our job.
	Mm-hmm.
	Well, Trump, I think the strength of Trump in international relations is, it comes through what is essentially a doctrine of peace through strength.
	And this is something the Americans maintained all through the later half of the 20th century, sensibly and with good results.
	It is a scary thing to want to cause trouble if you feel that your opposition will take action against you, especially if they are overwhelmingly powerful like the United States is.
	However, under Obama, I don't think that the Iranians thought that there was going to be action taking against them.
	So when Trump has the missile strike in Syria, at the time, I remember very clearly, the tensions were very, very high, and everyone was like, oh my god, this could really explode into something quite major.
	Trump takes one decisive action and diffused all of the tension.
	Everyone was like, right, everyone can save face here, move away, and the United States eventually moves into this void and says, no, we are the guarantor, we're the actor, we're the ones moving, you're going to sit down in your place.
	And everyone sat down in their place.
	And that is, I mean, it's a slightly less progressive way of looking at it.
	You know, we're going to give the Iranians all this money and all this sort of stuff.
	It's like, yeah, okay, maybe you are.
	But those people are taking you for a ride.
	They don't like you.
	They don't trust you.
	They're not working in your interests.
	That's not what a hegemon does, is it?
	Yes.
	That's a good way of putting it.
	It's not what a hegemon does.
	And the advantage of a kind of more primitive form of politics in this way is the fact that it is predictable and reliable, tried and tested.
	If America is the biggest boy on the block, Trump is the kind of guy who will authorize action if he needs to, to protect not just America's interests, but her prestige, her honor.
	And they know it.
	And the thing is, people in the West forget that other countries recognize concepts like honor as being important, especially in the Middle East.
	There's honor culture all over the Middle East.
	So that's why they burn the flags.
	You know, I don't burn an Iranian flag because I don't really care about the honor of Iran, but the Iranians would care about the honor of Iran.
	If they saw us burning their flags all day, they'd be really, really annoyed about this.
	And Trump is sensitive to those issues.
	And so he was able to deal with them on the sort of level, on the playing field they understand as well.
	Whereas what they see, I think, Obama doing is just essentially giving them opportunities.
	And they're going to take money and they're still going to develop a nuclear program, for example.
	Subsequently, the same with Biden.
	Exactly.
	And it will be exactly the same with Biden, as National Review suggests.
	So I think that Mattis is wrong.
	I think that And, you know, he's a much more experienced man than me.
	He's got far more expertise.
	But to me, I'm just looking at this thinking, the results are manifested.
	We can see the world order that Trump was creating, and it was pretty good, actually.
	What's your new favorite phrase?
	It doesn't work in theory, but it works in practice?
	Exactly.
	That's exactly it.
	And this is the problem with the left.
	Far too cerebral.
	But anyway, getting back to the vote, right?
	So I guess the question for us is, are we going to become voter truthers?
	You know, vote truthers.
	Because, I mean, I kind of think that...
	The way to look at it for me is, did the Democrats have the motive to cheat?
	I think they did.
	I think after many, many years of saying orange man Hitler, this is it, we've got to get him out or else our world order will be destroyed.
	And they're right, Trump was destroying the world order.
	He was not just going to give money to Iran.
	He was not just going to give Gibbs.
	He's not just going to...
	He's America first, but that has a certain set of values that mean something.
	And do they have the opportunity?
	Well, yeah, and Democrat-controlled strongholds, like Giuliani's saying, where they've got the old machine there, where they've been...
	And there have been plenty of people who have been convicted for voter fraud in these areas.
	So, yeah, they've got the motive, they've got the means, and it seems they have the opportunity with the election.
	Do they have the opportunity?
	I genuinely can see, and I think there's genuine force to it, that there will be people legitimately saying that this was a stolen election.
	Because it looks like a stolen election.
	Even if, I mean, everything was audited and everything came back, and it turned out that there was no malfeasance at all.
	In that unlikely scenario, it would still have appeared, and this would have to be learned after the fact.
	But I think that a friend of mine keeps saying, look, what's going to happen?
	Trump will lose, and then in 20 years' time, someone will produce a film called Trump, and it'll be like the JFK film, where it effectively confirms the conspiracy theory.
	It's like, yeah, so all of these things are added up.
	It definitely looks like Biden stole it, but it's too far in the future then.
	You know, it'll just be a sort of retroactive in the same way that the sort of the 9/11 conspiracies seem to be pretty normal now.
	Like, it seems that there are a huge number of people that just think there was some kind of conspiracy on 9/11 that wasn't the one we're told about the Saudi bombers.
	But I definitely, like you said, I don't want to become like Cenk Uygur, where he's screaming into the void on Twitter, yelling, verify the vote.
	It's insane that we can't see if anyone hacked into the voting machines.
	Just to confirm any confusion, that's not from 2020.
	That's from 2016, yeah.
	Could you imagine him tweeting that now?
	Yeah.
	So I'm not going to become a hardcore vote truther or anything.
	This was the problem the Democrats had in 2016, because they were making two fundamental claims.
	They were saying, number one, the e-voting machines are easy to hack, could be, and Russia might have hacked them, which there was no evidence for.
	So that's the problem.
	You can keep making the claims like Sydney is this time around.
	but if you can't prove it sorry buddy no one cares yeah although it is obvious evidence for why we shouldn't be using the silly machines yeah and the other claim was that a disinformation campaign had convinced americans to vote for trump or something which again no evidence ended up becoming complete bunk yeah so the the argument from the trump campaign is not oh there was a foreign disinformation campaign or you know sydney powell's alleging the dominion thing which is similar what they're alleging is here's the video evidence of people messing with votes here's Here's ballot harvesting.
	We had a massive increase.
	Preventing watchers.
	40% of all votes were mail-in ballots this time.
	44% were mail-in.
	I mean, that's so suspicious.
	Yeah, but if you can't prove it, what can you do?
	Exactly.
	All you can do is try and secure 2024, 2028 with getting rid of these voting machines, trying to sort out mail-in ballots.
	So what do you reckon, Josh, since this is your first time when we haven't given you time to speak yet?
	That's alright.
	I think it's really strange that in 2016 they were so kind of hardline about Russian involvement and voting machines and then all of a sudden 2020 comes around and they've completely flipped against it.
	Perfect election, in fact.
	It's the best election ever.
	Nothing could possibly have gone wrong.
	I find it hard to believe that people have changed their views so radically in four years.
	I mean, does Jenks still not want an audit of these votes and voting machines?
	Honestly, it doesn't even matter what side you fall on.
	Why wouldn't Biden want this audit?
	I want my victory confirmed.
	I want everyone to see.
	I don't want there to be...
	Because half the country is going to be sat there going, well, this was a stolen election.
	And they've got pretty good reasons to think that, in my opinion.
	And so if I were Biden and I thought I had won legitimately, I would want the audit if I thought I won legitimately.
	But then I didn't come out and say that I built the most inclusive voter fraud machine in the United States, the most inclusive voter fraud machine in the United States history.
	So I can see why Biden wouldn't be on that side.
	I do love that difference.
	Like, the Democrats' claim was always, you know, foreigners had done this to us, whereas the Republicans' claim is not that.
	No, it's the Democrats, yeah.
	But speaking of running again, 47% of people, not even just Trump supporters, 47% of voters, support Trump running again in 2024.
	I mean, he'll be 78, and Biden's 77 now.
	So, I mean, I'm not happy with the idea.
	You know, he's looking good for, what is it, 74?
	He's looking great for 74.
	And yeah, he's a man of tremendous vigour, evidenced by his campaign.
	Unlike Biden, who isn't, and probably, again, he's not going to last his first term.
	He's going to have a dementia attack or something, and then that'll be it.
	President Kamala Harris, first woman of colour, legitimately elected to her position.
	But yeah, no, 47% of registered voters said they support the idea of another presidential run by Trump.
	75% of Republicans and 24% of Democrats were in favour, with obviously the opposite number saying no.
	That would be interesting, because I know a lot of people reviewed this election, at least on the left, as a rerun of 2016, as if, like, oh, that one was stolen by the Russians, therefore we're essentially running the same thing to get rid of Donald Trump.
	And would you have the same on the right there, with Donald Trump running again?
	Yeah, I think it would be considered a rerun of 2020.
	Yeah.
	I mean, I'm for it.
	As long as he doesn't lose his mind.
	If you start getting footage of Trump saying, I built the most inclusive voter fraud election in history, then you might want to get Tucker Carlson instead.
	To be honest with you, I would prefer it if it was Tucker Carlson, because he is younger.
	But if he can get the Trump endorsement, if Trump campaigns with him or something, that would be amazing.
	So this is the air to the centre-right populist movement.
	Because I think he would make a very good one.
	And again, like, a lot of the...
	What I love about watching leftists having to deal with Tucker Carlson is Tucker Carlson's working-class sympathies, because he's an aristocrat, but he understands that he's got an obligation to look, you know, as an aristocrat, to look after the people of the country.
	And so he comes across...
	Like, there was, oh, Comrade Carlson or whatever.
	It's like, he's not.
	It's just you don't have a monopoly on caring about poor people, you know?
	But yeah, so anyway, that's...
	The current bad news from the 2020 election, folks.
	I really wish I could bring you better news.
	I wish I could just be like, yeah, no, everything's going great.
	Trump's definitely going to win.
	I know there are going to be people who are going to say that they've got their reasons that this is, you know, six-dimensional underwater backgammon.
	And maybe it is.
	I mean, Trump did reshuffle the Supreme Court justices to the various circuits in which they'd overlook things on the Supreme Court and stuff like that.
	Maybe he's got some amazing plan.
	I would like that to be the case, but at the moment it's not looking great.
	How's it going in Labour?
	So I've got a Labour story, and Labour land is...
	This better be more jolly, right?
	This is more jolly, because it's...
	So Labour would have been kicked by the Human Rights Commission about being anti-Semites, and their response to this has been to kick themselves over being Islamophobes as well.
	So I thought we'd join in.
	Yeah, okay, let's do it, yeah.
	So they got accused of anti-Semitism, and there's a current hoo-ha going on around Jeremy.
	So this has completely fallen under the radar.
	So they released this report, it's labourmuslims.org, released a piece of research into Islamophobia within the Labour Party.
	And we'll just go over some basic statistics first, because it's...
	But before we do, how popular is the Labour Party with British Muslims?
	So that's what I wanted to get into.
	Because no one really knows about these sort of things.
	Like, there are a few non-governmental organizations, non-partisans that try this.
	But this is, my understanding, Labour Party statistics.
	So if we can get image one up, that gives you a graph of their view between conservative Labour and other for every religious group.
	And the two that stick out the most, obviously, is Judaism and Islam there.
	Islam being recorded as...
	Where is that?
	85% of Muslims vote for Labour.
	And nearly 70% of Jews vote for the Conservatives.
	Yeah.
	Wow.
	That has switched quite a lot recently because of Jeremy.
	It used to be much more centrist.
	Yeah.
	But that's interesting how Labour...
	I mean, that Islam category is staggering, isn't it?
	I mean...
	Buck's the trend.
	Like, 10% of Muslims vote Conservative.
	That's wild.
	I'd like to point out that the Roman Catholics are supporting Labour marginally.
	Disappointing.
	Disavow.
	But, of course, this is just national polling in a UK situation that doesn't really matter.
	It's constituencies.
	So they run the data in the Labour Party, and there are 33 seats where the Muslim vote can swing it between Conservative and Labour.
	And in only one suite, sorry, one seat, they lost it to the Conservatives.
	So in those 32 seats that could be lost if they lose the Muslim vote, they've managed to retain it, which has given them those 32 seats that they otherwise wouldn't have.
	Okay.
	The one other thing was the fact that, what is it, they estimated 20,000 members being Muslim, so that's about 4% of the party.
	4% of the party, sorry, 4% of the country in 2010.
	Yeah.
	So a little bit underrepresented, maybe, but not that big of a deal.
	So, in the report, they give a definition of Islamophobia, and you'll recognize this because it's the one that's been adopted by the Conservatives.
	Is this the one that comes from the Runnymede Trust?
	Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness.
	An extremely broad brush you could apply to pretty much anything.
	Which is how you end up with, if you can get that back up, the Trevor Phillips story.
	story in which Trevor Phillips ended up getting accused of Islamophobia and kicked out of the Labour Party for a short period of time because he had dared to say that there was a problem with grooming gangs in relation to disproportionately being Muslim.
	What's interesting about this is this genuinely is the sort of progressive interpretation of race.
	These things are based on characteristics that you can pick out about people.
	But then if we define races as things that are not intrinsic but are actually characteristics...
	So, like, being a Muslim, you're wearing Muslim garb, you know, so we recognise you as a Muslim.
	And so this is now the sort of race of Muslim that the Labour Party are creating.
	What's the logical step that prevents them from creating a race of Nazis?
	That's a good question.
	Because, I mean, if it's literally just where you're dressed...
	Yeah, if any cultural subculture can become a racial group, then...
	Then anything can.
	The goth race will rise again.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, exactly.
	But that's exactly it.
	And so effectively, what you...
	And I did a video of this a few years ago, because, I mean, it was kind of silly, but now it's actually becoming the standard that they're using.
	That's law.
	Yeah, law, yeah.
	Now you've got the scene to be set to prevent people being racist in the Nazis.
	So Winston Churchill was a racist because he hated those Nazis.
	How did he know?
	Well, they spoke German.
	They had armbands on.
	They had Nazi paraphernalia.
	And he just hated them irrationally on the face of them being Nazis.
	He was a bigot.
	Disavow.
	Narzophobe?
	Yeah, yeah.
	Narzophobia.
	Anyway, this is actually one of the things Trevor Phillips is getting at in response, so I'll take some quotes from this.
	So, Mr.
	Phillips has been suspended pending investigation over remarks, including expressing concerns about Pakistani men sexually abusing girls in northern British towns.
	Yeah, we're not allowed to have concerns about that.
	No, that's not allowed.
	So, his response to this was in regards to the definition of Islamophobia.
	My objection is very simple.
	That definition said that Islamophobia is rooted in a kind of racism, expressions of hostility towards Muslimness.
	First of all, Muslims are not a race.
	My personal hero was Muhammad Ali, before that Malcolm X. Them becoming Muslims was largely because of the pan-racial faith.
	And not a racial grouping, so describing hostility towards them as racist is nonsense.
	So the idea that Islam is actually panracial, therefore describing any Muslim group as a race, surely doesn't make any sense in traditional definitions.
	But in progressive land, of course you can do this.
	Anyway, so...
	Well, yeah, I mean, everything is based on sort of subjective interpretation, right?
	They don't really think that there's a kind of objective reality.
	Yeah, I mean, the progressives kicking him out just don't agree.
	They're like, don't care.
	I mean, look how loose that is.
	It's a kind of racism rooted in racism.
	Well, that makes it circular, then.
	I mean, like every progressive definition, like, you know, a definition of woman is anyone who identifies as a woman.
	Again, so you never complete the sentence.
	Woman is woman.
	A woman is anyone who identifies as a woman is anyone who identifies as.
	It just becomes circular.
	It never ends the sentence.
	This is why we don't like circular sentences and circular definitions.
	And it's the same thing.
	It's kind of racism that's rooted in racism.
	Yeah.
	I mean, Trevor Phillips is the kind of person who...
	Just some history on him, because he's a very interesting guy.
	I'd love to meet him.
	So he used to run the Equalities Commission of the Tony Blair Labour government.
	He now works in the Index of Censorship.
	I mean, I'm surprised by why.
	I think he's a chairman on it.
	But he's the kind of reasonable leftist I could talk to and you could have a debate with.
	And he agrees Britain's a good thing and all the rest of it.
	And that's the problem, obviously.
	He's not the right kind of labour.
	So, in response to him raising concerns about all this, the Muslim Council of Britain is giving a statement at the end of this article saying, Mr.
	Mr. Phillips' statements are incendiary, and they are incendiary about Muslims that would be unacceptable if it was any other minority.
	Well, if any other minority were engaging in grooming gangs up and down the country, I think Mr. Phillips would talk about it.
	Because Mr. Phillips once made a documentary in which he said things that are true about race that we can't say...
	and one of the sections was about Jews in which he claimed that yes they are disproportionately rich and powerful and it's like right the bull's on this man Yeah.
	He laid out the evidence.
	He was like, look, disproportionately they have RMPs.
	What's that documentary?
	Family income is higher.
	This isn't due because of any conspiracy.
	It's just because, well, they have a good work ethic and a good culture.
	Well, no, it's three things.
	It's Ben Shapiro's three things for success.
	They get married before they have kids.
	They finish school and they work hard.
	They get jobs.
	Like, you know, these three things make you succeed.
	It's just one of those.
	It's just life.
	So, I mean, the idea that Trevor Phillips wouldn't go after something if it was a different minority.
	Yeah, son of a flight.
	He has, yeah.
	He's gone after every minority, actually, yeah.
	So they continued with, the impact of Mr.
	Phillips' claims from a privileged vantage point is dangerous.
	From a privileged vantage point?
	Yeah.
	Providing license to the far-right ideologies, such as Tommy Robinson, who have seized upon these remarks, Mr. Phillips would have us believe that he is a martyr for free speech and tolerance, but the fact remains that from the deployment of the sweeping generalizations and tropes would not be acceptable for any other community. but the fact remains that from the deployment of the That's amazing.
	That's a really roundabout way of saying Tommy Robinson has a point.
	Well, this is coming from the Muslim Council of Britain, who are always playing defence.
	But that's what they're saying.
	They're saying, if this plays to the far right, then what they're saying is the far right are saying something that Trevor Phillips also thinks is true.
	Essentially, yeah.
	So, you know, if Tommy Robinson comes out and says, water is wet, or I have to drink water as well.
	Trevor Phillips is like, well, it is wet.
	It's like, well, Islamophobe, get out.
	Well, that's the point.
	What they're doing is analysing the world purely in questions of advantage, questions of power, not questions of truth.
	It's questions of who benefits from this.
	And if it's a truth that benefits Tommy Robinson, then, well, that's a bad truth.
	We can't accept that.
	We've got to ignore it.
	It's crazy.
	I find it interesting that they call him privileged as well.
	Anyway, so they then go on to give a list of examples about different types of Islamophobia in the report.
	Not that one yet, John.
	But the examples are just hilarious.
	I'm going to read some of them out for you.
	Go on then.
	So, accusing Muslim citizens of being more loyal to the Ummah, so Muslim community...
	To their own countries of origin or to alleged priorities of Muslims worldwide than the interests of their own nations.
	So if you allege that Muslims have a higher interest to Islam than the states they are living in, then that's Islamophobia.
	Should we talk about the Charlie Hebdo protests for a second in France?
	I mean, it is French law and French tradition and culture and blah blah blah that you are allowed to do these things.
	And yet you had protests in the thousands in France about this.
	Those chaps do seem to show more loyal to the scripture than to the country they're in.
	I don't see why Macron would be insisting that they sign an agreement to a declaration of Republican values if they already valued Republican values, which are French values, are they not?
	Correct me if I'm wrong.
	But there's the thing.
	By asking for that, he is an Islamophobe, so asking for integration on any level is Islamophobia.
	Yeah.
	Okay, Labour.
	Not submitting to Islam is Islamophobia.
	Yes, that's what we're getting at.
	No, but that's the framework, because if everything is measured by power dynamics, then all you're doing is measuring the sort of relative flow of power from one group to another, who's becoming strong, who's becoming weak, and And so questions of phobia is questions of which group is gaining power at the expense of others.
	So if Tommy Robinson's group, the far right, would be gaining power at the expense of Muslims, that's Islamophobia.
	Even though Tommy Robinson, as the Muslim Council of Britain has said, is saying something true.
	So the truth is not necessarily...
	It could be any group.
	It could be Jehovah's Witnesses.
	Yeah, but any act of resistance to the acquisition of power by our group, whatever that group is, will be considered by this framework a phobia by whichever other group is losing that power.
	You have a phobia of us gaining power.
	Yes.
	Well, I mean, not of Muslims generally, maybe, but Muslim Council of Britain, absolutely, because you guys are crazy.
	Islamists, you know, like, yeah.
	I really don't like the word phobia being used as well, because it implies some kind of psychological condition.
	It's like there's something mentally wrong with you if you criticise Islam, essentially, which is just a belief system.
	It's like Majid Nawaz says, it's not Muslim phobia, it's Islamophobia, which means that I'm scared of the religion, which doesn't work, because I can be an atheist and be scared of the religion.
	What are you talking about?
	Well, even then, I mean, like, a phobia...
	It sounds like it's an irrational fear.
	I mean, that's what a phobia is.
	And A, we don't castigate people for having irrational fears, because all moral choice is based on the fact that it's a choice.
	How dare you be an arachnophobe?
	Well, that's the thing, isn't it?
	How dare you be afraid of spiders?
	Well, I didn't choose to be afraid.
	Well, not me personally, but whoever it is.
	I didn't choose to be afraid of spiders.
	So we don't consider it to be something that we cast moral judgment on, because moral judgments are made on your choices.
	So why would you even get angry at someone for being afraid of Islam.
	Sorry, I need to get on.
	Because this one actually ties in with the previous one about them having loyalty to the Ummah rather than the state.
	So, denying Muslim populations the right to self-determination, e.g.
	by claiming that the existence of an independent Palestine or Kashmir is a terrorist endeavor.
	Muslim self-determination.
	And yet, if you say that Muslims have a higher loyalty to being Muslim than the state they're in, that's also Islamophobia.
	So they are actually committing an act of Islamophobia by their own definition in their own report by defining what Islamophobia is.
	But that's interesting as well, because it makes it sound like Muslims are actually sort of a sovereign entity.
	Like, if Muslims deserve self-determination, then they're an identifiable ethnic group that surely occupies some kind of territory.
	And, like, I mean, you know, you could say the Kurds deserve self-determination, right?
	You can work out what a Kurd is because you ask them, are you Kurdish?
	And they'll say, I identify as a Kurd.
	And, you know, we live in these places and we would like a Republican government or whatever that serves Kurdish interests rather than Turkish interests in Syria and blah, blah, blah.
	So the argument for Kurdish self-determination is pretty clear.
	You can determine who is and who isn't, where they are, where they're not, and where they make claims.
	You're basing the state on the fact that the Kurds have special interests for themselves.
	Yeah, that they're a distinct ethnic group.
	That can be identified by both those within and those without, and lines can be drawn to separate them from others, blah, blah, blah.
	But that's because they claim to be a nation, and they want a nation-state.
	Whereas what the Labour Party is doing here is they're saying the Muslims of Kashmir want, I presume, a Muslim state of independence?
	Because they're not saying they're going to become Pakistani, Indian, or Kashmiri.
	Yeah.
	Like, they're saying...
	So there would be a caliphate.
	Yeah.
	In which case...
	How is it different to ISIS? Yes.
	How's Pakistan different or ISIS? But that's a different time.
	Different question, yeah.
	Anyway, third one here.
	So, another example of what is Islamophobia.
	Using the symbols and images associated with classic Islamophobia.
	It's a certain kind of brand, I guess.
	E.G. Muhammad being a paedophile, claims of Muslims spreading Islam by the sword, or subjugating minority groups under their rule, to characterise Muslims as sex groomers, inherently violent, or incapable of living in harmony with a plural society.
	So, historians are Islamophobic?
	Yes.
	Yes.
	Okay.
	I suppose that's how you get David Starkey in the end.
	Yes.
	The courts of convicted grooming gangs must also therefore be Islamophobic.
	Yeah, I guess.
	I mean, there's also the problem here that they've defined every Islamist organization on Earth as Islamophobic.
	Because, you know, the point there at the end, saying, incapable of living harmoniously with a plural society.
	Well, no Islamist agrees in plurality, do they?
	Believe in the policy of Islam.
	In which case, well, every Islamic country that has run under the war of Sharia is Islamophobes.
	I can see why Macron's like, Islam is a religion in crisis.
	Well, maybe the Labour Party's Islamic group is in crisis.
	I don't know what they're doing at this point.
	But this is just the definitions.
	But I love how wide a net they're casting here.
	Look, anything that doesn't advance our interests is Islamophobic.
	That's what they're saying.
	Yeah, but the specific interests...
	Because it's not all Muslims.
	The Islamists don't have any rights here.
	Well, it's not only that.
	The Muslim Council of Britain, there was a survey done about this, and something like only 2% of Muslims in Britain support the Muslim Council of Britain.
	Yeah, because they're a crackpot organisation.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Anyway, so the last example here.
	Holding Muslims collectively responsible for the actions of any...
	Sorry.
	Holding Muslims collectively responsible for the actions of any Muslim majority state, whether secular or constitutionally Islamic.
	Right.
	Okay, if we have an Islamic state that is run under Islamic law, can we hold the Muslims who put that into power responsible?
	Yeah, but they would complain if you blamed Pakistani immigrants for the actions of the Iranian government.
	Yeah, that would be irrational.
	And, you know, just because they're both Muslims, that doesn't mean there's any loyalty between one to the other and that there's any concordance, really, especially as the different sects of Islam as well.
	So that is the one thing I could actually agree to in their list that you could term as a kind of just open prejudice against Muslims because, oh, Muslim from here, you know, a thousand miles away, Muslim from there, you must be the same and you must support their country or whatever.
	Yeah.
	I mean, it's the nonsensical thinking that ends up with the Islamists when they come to Europe, and they'll attack Greek Orthodox or Anglican or whatever.
	Yeah, yeah.
	These guys have nothing to do with each other, but okay.
	Yeah, you don't know what you're doing.
	But that's their definitions, and then they list the statistics.
	So they did a survey of their members.
	It's well over the 1% threshold for the thing, but we won't get into the statistics of why it's okay.
	So if you can put up Image 2, these are their findings, and there's a whole bunch of points.
	But essentially, they're condemning themselves as Islamophobes on a scale that is rather strange.
	So about half of the Muslims in the party don't agree that the party represents them, or takes their actions seriously, or deals with Islamophobia properly and all the rest of it.
	And what is it?
	One in three have witnessed Islamophobia within the party.
	Jesus!
	You might be a little bit shocked by this, but considering their definitions, I'm not...
	Like, one in three people have witnessed Islamophobia.
	Well, if being an Islamist makes you an Islamophobic...
	Nashar's sweating furiously.
	Like...
	Yeah, I've got some questions about Nashar particularly.
	Like, what's...
	Shut up for the sake of diversity!
	This is how you get the following headlines, so if you can get the headlines up, Sky News, Ultra Zero, The Guardian, we don't need to see the whole thing, just the headlines, because that's all this was done for, was to get Prescott.
	First one, Labour Islamophobia report.
	More than a third of party members experience Islamophobia.
	One in four Muslims have Islamophobia in the party.
	The next one, over half of the Muslims do not trust the party Islamophobia.
	Labour sounds like an awful party.
	They just kicked out their ex-leader for being an anti-Semite.
	Yeah, the new one for being Islamophobic.
	So you can obviously see this is about getting headlines.
	So if you can get the next one up from our lovely contributing editor of Novara Media, Ash Sarkar, this is where you can see it more blatantly because she's bad at propaganda and agitation.
	Got a video about Ash Sarkar coming later as well.
	Look out for that on the second channel.
	No other minority, Keir Starmer's silence on the Islamophobia report speaks volumes about Labour's hierarchy of racism.
	You can read through this, it's garbage, but you can see how bare this is.
	So what they're trying to do is, well, you accused our boy of being an anti-Semite.
	Well, joke's on you!
	You're an Islamophobe, we're going to get you on this.
	No, of course you're not.
	I don't know, Keir Starmer looks like he hates Muslims to me.
	Just look at his face.
	His beady eyes.
	His weedy voice.
	Just strikes me as a man who refuses to submit to Islam.
	Looks too much like Wallace.
	Therefore is too much of a patriot.
	But, yeah.
	So that's my guess as to why they're doing this.
	They're trying to smear karma from the internals who don't like...
	Starmer.
	Starmer.
	Not karma.
	Sorry.
	Trying to smear Starmer, which...
	Okay, whatever.
	But I also think they're trying to bait the Conservative Party here.
	So if you make a big hub-hub about, oh look, there's an Islamophobia report, in response to being accused of anti-Semitism, they have been trying to deflect onto saying, well, the Conservative Party are Islamophobes, so maybe you should investigate them.
	So I think this is them...
	Did Trevor Phillips join the Conservative Party?
	I don't think he did, no.
	Because he did get an award for being an Islamophobe, didn't he?
	Yes.
	He even gave a speech at the Conservative Party conference talking about why the definition's nonsense.
	But I don't think he's joined the party.
	So yeah, the point of the Conservatives going, you're Islamophobes, and the Conservatives are like...
	Well, under your definition, everyone and their mother is.
	We are giving out awards for it, but you know.
	But yeah, I think they're trying to bait them, or at least bait a media storm into the fact that the Conservatives haven't investigated themselves.
	What have they got to hide?
	Which no one's falling for.
	No one's going to fall for this.
	But I think they're also trying to, obviously, distract a little bit from the fact that they're being accused of...
	Well, yeah, there's clearly a huge pylon going on in the Labour Party.
	And you're right, we should put the boot in as well.
	It's good fun.
	But this came out before Jeremy Corbyn going in and out, and now that's taken the storm.
	So this has all been a wasted attempt.
	Too bad.
	Never mind.
	They also give an example, or two examples.
	There's Sir Keir Starman, the straight white man who is a cop.
	I'm sure he'll be very, very gentle on...
	With the communist agitators in the Labour Party.
	I'm not going to say anything.
	Anyway, we've got two more examples of Islamophobia within the report, so witness statements from people who filled out the...
	I didn't even mean to say witness statements!
	That was their language.
	So the first one is...
	Oh, so professional.
	No, no, sorry, carry on.
	So the first one, a member stated, to me, it is Islamophobic if the rights of Palestinians are not heard.
	So if they don't invite Palestinians to give arguments about why Palestine should be a free country and not, that's Islamophobia.
	What?
	What?
	Absolute nonsense, that is.
	Like, how does the British Labour Party have a claim to the rights of Palestinians?
	Part of the Ummah.
	Oh, wait, no.
	That's blasphobic.
	Yeah, that's blasphobic, yeah.
	Why do you care, you know?
	Unreal.
	It shows how nonsensical.
	Aren't there enough oppressed Muslims in Britain yet?
	When do they take precedence over Palestinians?
	Not yet, according to Keir Starmer, you know?
	Anyway, the next one is a reference in the report to how a member had referred to Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party as Jez Balar.
	And the Mirror ran a story about this back in the day, saying, you know, Jeremy Corbyn's nickname Jez Balar by Labour Party enemies, who he is.
	So many extremist friends.
	I noticed that he's pictured there with Jerry Adams.
	I mean, I think this was before the evidence came out of him associating himself with his friends from Hezbollah and then laying a wreath at an anti-Semite murderer's grave, which, you know, it only got worse.
	He says it's from 2015.
	But saying Jez Balar is Islamophobic?
	Because you're insinuating that Corbyn is bringing the caliphate, I guess?
	I haven't got a catchy one for the IRA, though.
	That's the thing.
	You can't create a mash-up of his name in the IRA. It doesn't sound good.
	Jez Balar rolls off the tongue.
	Yeah, Jez Balar's nice.
	Think of the aesthetic qualities of it, Labour.
	Run with the meme.
	Why not?
	Yeah.
	I mean, you've got the Muslim vote.
	Yeah.
	Embrace it.
	Oh boy.
	Anyway, so if you can get Image 3 up, so they give some proposals of what to do in response to these allegations and these findings.
	So the first one, the development of a comprehensive Islamophobia training will be rolled out in conjunction with LMN, the Muslim Council of Britain, and other Muslim organizations.
	So they're going to re-educate the staff of the Labour Party about Islamophobia.
	Done deal.
	I want to see it.
	I want to see what it looks like.
	If you remember the Labour Party, record it and send it to us.
	Tips at loadseaters.com.
	I want to see that footage.
	I want to know what they're going to say.
	It's just Keir Starmer writing that down.
	I want to know what the pro-Islam indoctrination looks like.
	We're not the pro-communist indoctrination looks like.
	I mean, I'm assuming this will also apply to the office of the leader, you know, the opposition.
	So it will be Keir Starmer himself, because he is, you know, an employee of the party at this point, getting us education.
	So, yeah, send us the video, Keir.
	If you can get Image 4.
	So this is one of the others.
	All policies adopted by the Labour Party to be equality impact assessed.
	So they're referencing the war on terror here.
	So they mentioned in the report one example of Islamophobia, one of our sins, is that the Labour Party brought in PREVENT in response to upscaling Islamic terror throughout Europe.
	And this has disproportionately affected the Muslim community because the Muslim community is engaging in terrorism in a disproportionate manner.
	And therefore, the response to this is, for any new guidance, we should make it a quality impact assessed.
	Now, in the spirit of the leftist tradition...
	Are we saying that the Sikhs have to be judged to be potential terrorists as equally...
	I'm not sure.
	So in the spirit of leftist renaming of phrases or redefining them, I'm going to take the term equality impact assessed and say that that's them saying not that we need to equally assess far right or far left terrorism, probably far left because that's the second biggest terrorist organization on earth, far left terrorism.
	Yeah.
	They need to increase far-left terrorism and Sikh terrorism and all the rest of it, and then it will be proportionate and then it will all be fine, because then it's impact assessed.
	I guess they can start adopting capitalist slogans too, you know, rising tide raises all ships.
	And it might sound ridiculous, but the alternative of what they're suggesting is that when it comes to assessing terrorism in the Muslim community, we shouldn't be as strict because it hurts them more.
	Yeah, there's just a simple...
	We're just going to let through more terrorist attacks.
	No, it's simple.
	Just don't.
	Just don't interfere.
	Just don't.
	Which...
	It's Islamophobic.
	You don't want to be an Islamophobe, do you?
	That's what they're suggesting, yeah.
	Think about that, Sir Keir, you straight white privileged male.
	So, the last couple of images here, so we can get image five.
	This is the ending of the report.
	This is the image they used at the end.
	A black flag with the Labour logo and the Islamic symbol.
	Repeatedly.
	I'm sure this is included in the report ending for no reason at all.
	That is a thing of beauty, isn't it?
	Yeah.
	The black flag of Labour.
	So I thought, you know, for anyone who wants to stand up to Islamophobia, I've made a thumbnail which you can use for your profile picture.
	That'll be the next image.
	There you go.
	So if you put that in your Labour Party Twitter page with your pronouns and all the rest of it.
	But they are becoming the party of Islam, aren't they?
	I mean, they get the overwhelming majority of the Muslim vote.
	They seem to be making themselves conformable to this worldview.
	And like you say, they've got a black flag.
	What more do they need, really?
	What does Jez Bala need?
	Apart from an insurgency.
	But this is the thing, like, why do you do this to yourself?
	Like, of all the weeks as well, you could be pumping out this stuff.
	Like, nah, oh god.
	But to be honest, I do quite like, so we've had an Islamic party set up in Belgium, I think it was like last year, and then very recently a Swedish group has set up their own Islamist party because they're upset that they're not being represented by the left there.
	I mean, if any left-wing groups are afraid of Keir Starmer's Islamophobia, you could always set up your own party.
	I mean, you've got the perfect symbol.
	So, all the best to you.
	That's all I've got to say.
	So that's public domain.
	Use that as you want.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Go for it.
	Well, after that trial...
	What do you want to talk about, Josh?
	I suppose I may as well introduce myself a little bit before I talk about some more uplifting stuff.
	I've actually sought out something, you know, a bit more uplifting than before because it's been quite negative these past few podcasts.
	Yeah, I feel judged.
	It's all been very interesting and I'm obviously very grateful to be here.
	Don't worry, don't worry.
	But my kind of credentials are I've got a master's degree in psychological research methods and I'm going to be approaching things from kind of that perspective but obviously I'm going to be talking a lot about politics.
	And at the minute I've got kind of an end in sight for COVID-19 and some actual good news and I'm going to tell you about some vaccines and how things are going to look by about 2021 when things start to reopen.
	So, supposedly vaccines are set to roll out in the US, UK, Germany and Spain will start in 2021 and those first few countries are set to start in December and that will be for your weak and vulnerable people to the virus, but...
	There's kind of been a little bit of debate because, particularly in the UK, the head of the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine has said vulnerable people will get it first, whereas an NHS draft plan has suggested that perhaps people over the age of 50 and healthcare workers will get it first.
	So it's not entirely clear yet, at least in the UK, what's going to happen.
	But I mean, that would be sensible, wouldn't it?
	Because it affects older people, right?
	That latter one certainly seems like the best choice there.
	And there is, of course, some controversy that we're kind of revealing.
	We've got a tip-off of a text message that was received.
	Was it by one of our...
	Viewers?
	Yeah, one of our supporters sent us to, I think it was the Facebook page, a little while back.
	But, no, there's been no news on the vaccine until recently, so we thought we'd bring it back up.
	So, they received a text message, essentially, from their local GP surgery, suggesting that they had to reveal their ethnicity as part of the process for getting a vaccine, which might indicate some kind of racially profiled vaccine...
	So I clicked on that link when they sent me it and it took me to a website and I went to the ethnicity data and you can see you can pick white, mixed, Asian, black or other.
	Traditionally, you know, I'm sure loads of people have filled out these kind of forms.
	There is a prefer not to say category, so I expected there to be one.
	So when I clicked other, all you can do is arable any other ethnicity group.
	Why Arab in other?
	I think because it's a small percent in the UK. They're just not as large.
	So that very weirds me out, because if you can't prefer not to say, you have to give them one, in which case they will use it.
	But this sort of ties in with Sadiq Khan the other day, saying that minorities are most affected by COVID, therefore they should get the vaccine first.
	Yeah, so we've known for a while that that's been going on.
	This is how they're going to collect the data to be able to do it.
	I mean, they literally say that, to prioritize healthcare.
	I mean, just to remind people, this is free healthcare.
	This is what the guys on the left in the United States want.
	Well, there are some downsides, but the state now determines whether or not you get your vaccine on the basis of your pigment.
	Great.
	This is the future we all wanted.
	Thanks, Boris.
	You could have done something about this.
	Sorry, carry on.
	That's alright.
	I'm very angry.
	I just hate this state-funded racism.
	It annoys me.
	Sorry, go on.
	So I thought I'd give some information about the vaccines because it's very complicated and they're very different and they do different things and to someone who's not perhaps a scientist it seems a little bit daunting to look at the information as it's presented at the minute.
	Or someone like me who's actively anti-scientist.
	Anti-scientist actually.
	Just like a beaker glass.
	I don't mean that guys, I need that.
	I've got to write that down.
	So supposedly the most ordered one so far is the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine, which is about 70.4% effective at preventing people from becoming ill.
	But if they receive a dose, like a smaller dose to begin with, and then a larger dose a month later, it's said to be about 90% effective, which is about akin to some of the other ones.
	There's also the Pfizer vaccine and the Moderna vaccine which are the two kind of runners up as the most pre-ordered which kind of follow a different technological approach where they inject you with a protein which essentially It creates a DNA... I don't know.
	It's quite complicated, but it essentially manipulates DNA to cause your immune system to fight it rather than the conventional method of injecting a dormant version of a virus to inoculate you to it.
	So...
	I actually did A-level biology, and I know how this works.
	This is the one thing I remember.
	I failed A-level biology.
	I hated it.
	Yeah, me too.
	I actually got an E. Yeah, I got an E too.
	But the one thing I found really interesting was protein shells on, like, bacteria and viruses and stuff.
	Your immune system learns the shape of the protein shell, and that's why they inject with the dead virus, so you can learn what this thing looks like and recognize it when it sees you.
	This is why you get viruses that are immune to vaccines, where they've got a different shaped protein gel.
	Please correct me in the comments if I'm wrong here, because it's been like 25 years.
	This different approach makes them about 95% effective, and the vaccines are predominantly ordered in North America, but I will go to the breakdown of who's getting what at the end.
	So a lot of the testing though, there's kind of been some deviation in practices and the Oxford one, they actually bothered to swab the patients to test for COVID, whereas the American tests, they simply just asked people whether they had any symptoms or not, which was, you can kind of...
	Got a cough, got a runny nose, you must have COVID. And obviously 50% of people don't even have symptoms, so...
	I'm not sure how rigorous that testing is, but thankfully the Oxford one is tested on actual people.
	People who actually had COVID? Yeah.
	So...
	Yeah, I think.
	And the Pfizer and Moderna ones also require specialist fridges to transport them.
	So there's going to be a huge logistical operation in the countries that have ordered these vaccines to have to transport them, whereas the...
	So we're going to get the 90% effective ones because it's cheaper.
	Yeah, I think so.
	The Pfizer one, I remember reading about this, apparently it has to be kept at like minus 70 or something ridiculous.
	Yeah, it's a really low temperature.
	In my university, we only had one of those, and it was used very reserved.
	That's going to elevate the cost exponentially, I think, whereas the Oxford AstraZeneca one, which is only £3 already...
	It only needs to be kept in a fridge like you would have in your house.
	So it's not going to be very difficult to distribute that one at all, which probably explains why that one is by far the most popular, despite being perhaps less effective than the other two, which take a different method.
	And would you be able to bring up the second picture?
	There we go.
	So you get to see who has ordered what.
	So in the UK we've put all our eggs into one basket.
	That is a terrible map.
	What happened in Pakistan there?
	Well it's just...
	Pakistan has taken over all of...
	Imperial Pakistan!
	All of Asia.
	They've colonised all...
	They've got Canada, they've taken over most of Europe.
	Africa, Australia.
	Wow!
	Okay.
	I think it's just the countries that have the data on the pre-orders.
	This is a prediction of 2025, you know?
	So I disavow everything Callum ever said about Pakistan.
	Don't worry, they've only taken over Ireland, I think.
	But the data about the vaccines, I'm sure that's why it's just...
	Sorry, what are you talking about?
	So, in the UK, I think we've pre-ordered 100 million of the AstraZeneca ones, because obviously we need to have a follow-up dose, so that means two for every person.
	And in the US... That explains why they ordered like 100 million doses, right?
	Yeah.
	Right, because I looked at that and I was like, Christ!
	That seems like a giant waste of money, but okay, that makes sense now.
	So it's 50 million people they can vaccinate, right.
	And in the US, they've obviously got the AstraZeneca vaccine as well, but they've also gone with the other two, the Pfizer and the Moderna, as well as their own, which is the Johnson& Johnson one, which I don't think is very widely...
	Disgust.
	You alright there, Callum?
	It's just like it brings a new turn to the global caliphate.
	Sorry.
	We've got no evidence that Pakistan is plotting a global caliphate.
	Well, it's the Financial Times who are accusing this.
	I'm not saying anything!
	All right, I'll be good.
	Essentially, you can see that the AstraZeneca vaccine is pretty widely ordered.
	I know they're even getting it in China, which means that I think they've got two million off the top of my head.
	I could well be wrong there, but I think that's going to be for the party officials rather than...
	Do you have the other graph?
	No, I took it out because it was a little bit out of date.
	So the Chinese, they're only ordering the Oxford one, which, if you had to pick one, this is always your argument about 5G, people saying, oh, it's dangerous.
	Well, if it's in the rich areas of Beverly Hills, it's probably fine.
	So if the Chinese officials are taking this in Beijing, and not to mention, because of embargoes, almost certainly the guys in North Korea are getting this from China.
	So if the Chinese are only ordering the Oxford one, the Oxford one's probably fine.
	Yeah.
	That's more or less it.
	It's looking like, at least in the UK, we're going to go back to normal by at least April.
	Oh, thank God.
	Thank God St.
	Boris will allow us out of our homes again to live our lives.
	Oh, Jesus.
	I think the United States is projected around the same sort of time and other kind of comparable continental European countries as well.
	We're all going to make it, boys.
	Yeah, I shouldn't minimise.
	This is actually good news.
	It just annoys me.
	I guess there's a libertarian streak in me that's just like, no, don't overthrow the government.
	But, you know, people have been asking for a white pill.
	Well, there's your lotus pill.
	We're all going to make it.
	Sometime next year, we might be allowed to see our friends and family again.
	Actually, not for us.
	We've got Christmas off.
	That's true.
	Because I guess Boris buckled on the first time.
	Islamophobia as well, yeah.
	Boris is an Islamophobia.
	Yeah, yeah, literally.
	That's the story for another time.
	Yes.
	You guys have trouble seeing where we're off, don't we?
	God, where do we leave off?
	That's yesterday.
	Is that yesterday?
	Yeah, that's 23rd.
	Up, up, up.
	Keep going.
	Stop.
	Down a bit.
	Down a bit more.
	There we go.
	So the one above that.
	Right.
	Philip Ibudi says, you guys wondered why there was a difference.
	Sky News UK is owned by Comcast, MSNBC. Sky News Australia is owned by News Corp, which used to own Fox News.
	Right.
	Thank you for letting us know.
	We should have looked into that ourselves.
	That explains why Sky News Australia are basically getting their MAGA caps on and why I can stand watching them.
	Mighty Bolzak says, which one is Man With Beard?
	Assuming you, you're the only old one.
	I guess that's me, yeah.
	Matthew, isn't it obvious by looking?
	Matthew Hammond says, I missed yesterday.
	Did Macron not criticise Marine Le Pen for her thoughts on Islam?
	Is he not exceeding any ideas she had for dealing with extremism?
	Yeah, Macron seems to have deeply embraced Marine Le Pen's innermost Islamophobe.
	And did indeed criticize her for being an Islamophobe, and is a massive hypocrite out of necessity, because it looks like Marine Le Pen may have had some points that weren't accurate on that.
	That's not us saying that, that's Macron saying that.
	Yeah, yeah.
	I think he missed one, though.
	Oh, did I? Oh yeah, sorry.
	Oh, you can read it, go for it.
	Newly elected governor of Texas, Donald J. Trump, declares war on the Democratic Party.
	I have been enjoying the Civil War memes that are coming out of this.
	Trump looks pretty regal in Caesar's gear with a laurel wreath around his head.
	I'm not going to lie.
	It could look a lot worse.
	Imagine Bernie Sanders doing it.
	I just love the idea that his little generals are cruising all the rest of it.
	What would you call them?
	You've got to call them the squad, gang.
	Well, they are the legion, literally.
	Call them his Praetorian Guard?
	Yeah.
	Do you want to read?
	Because you're better at it.
	This is my refund from PayPal for the Teespring t-shirt I bought just before they closed your account and didn't pay you.
	I claim tortious interference and broken contract to my PayPal claim.
	Well, thank you very much, Dispel the Myth.
	I really appreciate that.
	I hope you got repaid.
	Yeah, we hope you got your money back as well.
	Once it's with them, it's out of our hands, and obviously they just deplatformed us.
	Yeah, we had the same thievery, I believe, with RedPubble, wasn't it?
	No, they actually did send the money through.
	They did the legal thing.
	Yeah, they did the legal thing.
	That was good.
	But either way, I think it was the Communist Bandit shirt that did it.
	That's probably where they get the shirts.
	Yeah.
	So if you've got a communist bandit shirt like I do, that ain't going to be produced again.
	It's a collector's item now.
	DL says, Hey guys, really enjoying these podcasts.
	Does it seem to you like the criticism coming from Republican politicians towards Trump is comparable to the ousting of Thatcher in the 90s by her own party?
	Yeah, it's all of the people that Trump whacked on the nose on his way, on his ascent up through the ranks, coming out with their little claws and taking nips and biting them.
	I saw a picture of Thatcher the other day when she was ousted, and she's red-eyed and looking terrible, and it looks like it's that sort of same thing where she had come in like a force, and like Chris Christie and all the other sort of like...
	Mitt Romney and all those sort of people who just got walloped by Trump.
	You can see there, it's like, yeah, no, no, no.
	God, I hate you.
	I hate you.
	It's like, yeah, shut up, hyenas.
	You know, don't make the lion turn around and bite you.
	Like Mitt Romney endorsed Black Lives Matter.
	Mighty Balls again.
	Trump was a twat, but he was our twat.
	Exactly.
	You know.
	Oh, no, God damn it.
	You read it.
	Hey Carl, you might think the Jupiterian macaroni is harsh on the practitioners of the religion of peace, spelt in a certain way, but you might want to look up how Islam is practiced in Romania.
	Hint, license may be required.
	So my understanding is your imams have to get a license to be a Romanian imam because you want to actually have them be...
	Not Islamists, which is a reasonable request.
	I have actually changed my mind a little bit on the has France gone too far.
	Not that I'm in agreement with some of the things they're doing, but I was speaking to the British yesterday and he's convinced me because at least they're doing something.
	No one has done anything on integration in Western Europe.
	We've all just said, oh, we'll just manage it and everything will be fine.
	It hasn't been fine.
	So the French are now sort of in this fog, is how you put it.
	And they're sort of, you know, they're taking steps.
	And they'll take wrong steps.
	But out of it, something will crystallise that's more sensible.
	In Romania's defence, I think something like, you know, 200 years of being crushed under the heel of a caliphate probably makes them a bit sceptical towards Islam.
	Well, they have better knowledge of it.
	So, I mean, maybe the licence thing is a good idea.
	I mean, we have licences for everything else in the UK. Well, yeah, exactly.
	That's a good point, actually.
	Matthew Hammond, you talk about how terrible devolution is in the UK. Devolution would resolve many of the issues in the US and return power to the States.
	Yes, but we're not the same.
	So you have a federalized system.
	We don't.
	We're much smaller as well.
	Yeah, we're much smaller.
	And we have much more insufferable secessionist movements.
	The midwits of the secessionists over here.
	At least your secessionists had direct interests.
	Anyway, President-elect Svalanik, people are freaking out, but we'll be okay.
	Even with dementia Biden in the White House for four years, Trumpism is not going away.
	Yeah, I guess the white pill from all of this is, A, Trump...
	I mean, it's actually not a bad position for the Trump supporters to be in, because, A, Trump...
	It's going to look like a golden shining light of brilliance in years to come.
	Because in the direct immediate effect of the thing, it's hard to tell the positivity of the impact.
	But looking back, people are going to see what Biden's doing.
	It's going to be good content for us when he has a stroke on stage or something.
	Everyone gets to laugh at him, like, literally being the oldest man on earth, being the president.
	Just to be clear, not him dying, him doing something stupid.
	Yeah, yeah, him doing stupid, yeah.
	Otherwise YouTube's going to whack you.
	Yeah, like, you know, him saying something, like, I've created the largest and most inclusive voter fraud thing in American history, right?
	Declares war in North Korea by accident.
	Yeah, exactly.
	He's going to say dementia stuff.
	And so that's going to be funny content.
	But by comparison, Trump's going to look absolutely decisive.
	And he's going to look like someone who operated in American interests.
	And Biden is going to be looking like a guy who sold you out.
	So if come 2024, things are as I expect them to be, Trump's going to look really strong.
	Yeah, I mean, what was the percentage you had from the Republicans?
	Like 80%, 90%?
	Oh, 95% approval.
	Exactly.
	So these Mitt Romneys might be enjoying their time in the sun.
	Yeah, they're dead.
	And a return to the previous status quo isn't going to change anything.
	It's just going to intensify it.
	So, you know, the Trump movement, the MAGA movement, is here to stay, I would say.
	NiceVlogos says, Ezra Watnick-Cohen just granted Trump a direct line to JSOC. He now has total control over Black Ops.
	I don't know what that means.
	I hope that's true.
	He's saying Trump's going to black ops the Democratic Party?
	Yeah, I know.
	I don't know where that's going, but I hope you're correct.
	Tim Cornish, thank you very much.
	I missed one.
	Easy.
	Trump is the only president to not visibly age from the job.
	The man is a force of nature, and I wouldn't write him off yet.
	Well, that's the thing.
	I'm not saying he can't win or anything like that.
	It's just, it looks like it's less and less likely.
	But you are right, he is a force of nature.
	And I wouldn't say that he won't be back, you know.
	I mean, I think he could win again.
	Who's the Tim Minchin lookalike?
	He's cute, but effusive facial expressions are a bit distracting when he's talking.
	I assume they mean me.
	Thank you, but sorry about the facial expressions.
	Yeah, you've got to get your facial expressions under control.
	Who's Tim Minchin?
	I don't know.
	Oh, he's an Australian comedian?
	But you don't look like him.
	Google him.
	I have no idea what he looks like, to be honest.
	You don't look like Tim Minchin.
	Oh, I recognise him.
	You don't look like him.
	Maybe the facial expressions.
	I could get that.
	I think he's been, not QI, but, you know, a few things.
	Yeah.
	Alright, let's go for the next one, Jim.
	Cadwid says, Maybe the groomers have internalised Islamophobia because they think their own religion commands them to do it.
	We should lock them up even more.
	Good point.
	We should lock them up for hate crimes against Islam for being groomers against English girls.
	Based.
	You missed one.
	Hey, I'm not characterising Muslims, but groomers.
	They all happen to come from the same area and they all share the same certain perspectives that can be pre-identified.
	That's the first one.
	So yeah, it's a connection to the second one.
	But good point.
	Grooming gangs are Islamophobic.
	Yeah.
	I mean, if the Labour Party does come to reign on the Starman...
	If that's the only way that we can get them to address the grooming gangs, fine.
	Jesus Christ.
	Alright, fine.
	Could you imagine?
	Yeah.
	That's how the Labour Party will finally come around to reality.
	Good point.
	Makes Islam look bad.
	We've got to stop this.
	1400...
	That's the only reason they give a shit.
	Jesus Christ.
	Otherwise, shut up for the sake of diversity.
	If she hadn't retweeted it.
	1400 years of conquest makes us all look phobic?
	Makes us all phobic.
	Well, I mean, that's one way of pointing out that historians are Islamophobic.
	It caused...
	I can't read that.
	The seventh candidate says it's because the Provost expelled the radical elements around the time of the Beta-Meinhof gang.
	P.S. On the lads...
	No, no, no.
	We're not reading Irish.
	Yeah, okay.
	Shut up, Republican.
	It's not even that I don't want to.
	I just can't.
	I think it's...
	Earthworm Jim says how to extend this podcast.
	Hannibal did nothing right.
	It was all luck.
	Off you go, Carl.
	Banned.
	The English View.
	He's going to be whining about that all day now.
	I am going to be whining about that all day now.
	The new guy needs to smoke a joint or take a couple of shots.
	All the head movements and facial expressions are distracting from the conversation.
	Man, you're getting grilled.
	It won't happen again.
	It's his first day, guys.
	Come on.
	Come on.
	Go easy.
	Josh needs to investigate SPIB, the Behaviour Insights team, into the neuro-linguistic programming.
	I don't know.
	I'll have a look at that.
	Yeah.
	Unholy says, Poisoning of the world to connect vaccines cause autism anti-vaxxers to people suspicious of rushed vaccines shows how disingenuous modern media is.
	Yeah, this is a conversation we were having in the office a bit earlier, actually.
	Because it's just the fact that scientists can make mistakes because they're human like the rest of us.
	And when there is an overriding concern that makes people rush forward to try and get something done, then I think that's the sort of situation in which mistakes can be made.
	So if I found myself being dubious about these vaccines, it's not because I don't believe in vaccines or anything like that.
	It's just because I am worried about human error.
	Convincing Reality says, The idea that this vaccine should be mandatory is beyond insane.
	If I have had the virus and now have gained immunity, why should you get to inject me?
	I don't even care.
	We don't even need to make reference to the virus.
	You do not have the right to inject me with something.
	End of story.
	But thankfully, Boris did say in a press conference yesterday that there would not be a mandatory vaccine.
	We don't do that sort of thing in this country.
	Well, at least that's something, Boris.
	My understanding is if you do get the virus, the immunity wears off or something like that.
	So maybe that's the argument for getting it.
	But not mandatory.
	Never mandatory.
	I think it's only like two months or something like that that it actually lasts after you've got it once.
	And President Alex Vlatnik, again, I don't need a vaccine, I have a strong immune system.
	Yeah, that's why I'm not getting a vaccine.
	I've always seen that as not really a, what do you call it, it's not a boast.
	Because it's sort of like, yeah, I'm a filthy human being who rides around in human ways.
	Yes.
	Okay, Carl.
	Yes.
	Yeah, I ate dirt when I was a kid.
	Didn't you?
	Yeah.
	Depends how I'm going to make my wife and when I'm going to make my own dinner.
	Todd Whalen says, what's the story on mandatory vaccines?
	I'm not taking it yet.
	We're not going to be having them in this country.
	In other countries, I can't say, though.
	Not sure about a vaccine that changes my DNA. I don't think it necessarily changes your DNA, but they're injecting a form of DNA into you which stimulates some kind of protein production.
	I'm obviously not an immunologist, so I don't know the exact science of it, so I'd suggest looking that up, but it doesn't actually change your personal DNA. Thank God.
	How many merchandise have you been deplatformed from now?
	Three?
	Again, I think it's because of the Chinese Communist Bandit t-shirt.
	Razorfish and other right-wingers are not only confident in victory, but he and Bannon have laid convincing arguments for Trump's victory.
	Well, I mean, I hope they're correct.
	I just don't know.
	Might have to watch my videos, yeah.
	Yeah, I'll have to go and check those videos.
	But from what I'm seeing so far, I don't think it's looking promising.
	Knight of Logos, I've tweeted a video to you about...
	It's on Twitter, okay.
	I assume at me, because you're banned.
	Yeah, I'm not on Twitter, so...
	I'll check that afterwards.
	There's one more if you can reload, and then we should be done.
	Don't send any more, please.
	So then we can get back to work.
	Yep.
	So I've got another video coming soon.
	Can you reload that?
	You're talking about Ash Sharkov's...
	I don't know.
	Should we...
	What?
	Open endorsement of terrorism?
	Yeah.
	Yeah, yeah, we'll be talking about that.
	I mean, it's stunning and brave.
	Yeah, it's on the other channel, but it's not just an open endorsement of terrorism.
	It's an open endorsement of racist terrorism.
	Okay, Ash.
	So the last one.
	Nailed the Irish means...
	Sorry.
	Nailed the Irish means our day will come.
	Feature History has a great video on it.
	The Troubles even mentions the internal struggles with commies and the internal Brits in Carl would enjoy.
	I'll watch that.
	Do you watch Feature History?
	I don't, but I will do now.
	He's a great guy.
	Weird thing, he's like 15 or something.
	Oh, really?
	He makes these amazing animated videos, and then, you know, he's just a kid.
	Right, okay, well, good on him.
	And Rich, thank you very much.
	And thanks everyone for joining us and watching, and we will be back at the same time, 1pm UK time, with, we don't know what we're going to talk about tomorrow, actually, but we'll have more current events and stuff, and we'll see you later.

▲