Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 5, 2021 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:33:00

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #125

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters for the 5th of March 2021.
	I I'm joined by Bo Dade and today we're going to be talking about Donald Trump's new social media platform, the woke-isms that run the feds, and also the white pill we're going to have.
	So Bo's joining us to give us a white pill on the new frontiers of space and to explain that there are some good things in the world.
	White pill Wednesday, if you will.
	So it's going to be fun.
	White pill Wednesday.
	Well, thanks for having me, first of all.
	I really appreciate it.
	It's good to have you on.
	So the first thing I want to do is do a bit of shilling because shilling is always nice.
	Also because it's good content.
	So the first thing here is Sebastian Gorka's interview with Carl.
	If you haven't seen it yet and you're a premium member or you want to be a premium member, go and sign up to thelotacys.com and give this a watch because it's totally worth your time to see Carl and Gorka talking about this.
	Also because there are a few things in there that go against YouTube's editorial policies.
	So of course they can't be on YouTube.
	So you're going to have to go to the website for those things.
	And the last thing I wanted to share was the Nick Buckley interview is up.
	So this is an interview I did with Nick Buckley.
	He's a candidate for Greater Manchester for the Reform UK party.
	So trying to take away from the Tories and Conservatives.
	He's an interesting guy because it's not just, you know, okay, some guy from Manchester is running for office.
	But the thing that popped me up on his radar and why I call him a free speech fighter there is because he fought back.
	So he was the head of a charity.
	He criticized Black Lives Matter and he got canceled.
	They literally took his charity away from him, kicked him out of his position.
	And then within 18 hours, he was able to use the free speech union's backing to fight back.
	And there was a petition signed to get him back in state.
	They got 18,000 signatures in like a day.
	And then he got his position back.
	It's like, good, good.
	This is why I like the Free Speech Union and people like him.
	Because it shows that there is cultural fight back and you can win.
	It's just if you can get everything in order and have the courage to do it, you will get your stuff back.
	So he's up against Andy Burnham, right?
	In Greater Manchester for the mayor.
	Yeah, yeah, right.
	Anyway, that's free, so go and give that a watch.
	Because of course, in two days, what is it?
	Is it two days or is it one day now?
	It's the election for local elections in the UK. So we did interviews with, as you can see, David Curtin from the Heritage Party in London.
	There was an interview with Lawrence Fox that Hannah Gell did, which is wonderful.
	And I also interviewed Richard Tice from Reform UK. So we tried to cover as many bases as we can with that kind of stuff.
	But without further ado, let's get into it.
	So, Donald Trump's new social media platform.
	You might remember, so I'm going to go through this because I'm a little bit underwhelmed, but I'm not angry at all.
	I don't know why he bigged this up so much.
	So you might remember, of course, that Donald Trump was deleted off of everything for nothing.
	I'm not even joking.
	You remember that the accusation was that he had incited violence, and of course he didn't.
	So this is one of the articles we had listing it at the time, that Donald Trump was deplatformed from Twitter, he was deplatformed from Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and a whole bunch of others, all at the same time.
	All for the same policy that all of them suddenly had altogether.
	It's almost as though they're a cabal.
	Interesting how that works, isn't it?
	Almost as though that were the case, yeah.
	Is this what people are seeing right now?
	We've got my article over on the side there, BB Dade.
	So this is just listing the fact that he was accused of inciting violence by all of them.
	And it got worse, of course.
	It got much worse.
	If you go to the next one, he got completely unpersoned.
	So it wasn't just your suspended.
	It was your ban from everything.
	I mean, he was banned from, like, his bank account was gone.
	His, what was it, like, his club's golfing association banned him.
	Fucking MySpace banned him.
	Is that even still a thing?
	I don't think he's ever had an account on MySpace.
	But MySpace got rid of him, Stripe got rid of him, and now he's sort of a walking pariah-like British Voldemort, for example.
	You think the next thing, if they could, they would want people to believe that he never existed?
	It's not enough to unpersen you.
	You have to be erased from history.
	I don't know why the party wouldn't want that, so...
	Anyway, but this is just documenting history.
	But if we go to the next one here, so this is a couple of months ago in which he said, or at least a spokesman for him said, that Trump will be returning to social media with his own platform in two to three months.
	Like, huh, okay.
	Bit strange, because it's like, you just got the platform from a bunch...
	Most people expected him to join Parler.
	Of course, they went after Parler and got rid of them.
	No fault of Parler's own.
	They were destroyed by a cabal, as you say.
	And that happened.
	So instead, he wanted to set up his own social media.
	Seemed to be what the spokesman was saying.
	So a couple of quotes from them.
	I do think that we're going to see President Trump returning to social media in probably about two or three months here with his own platform, as senior Trump advisor Jason Miller told Fox News.
	And this is something that I think will be the hottest ticket in social media.
	It's going to be completely redefining the game and everyone is going to be waiting and watching to see exactly what President Trump does.
	So he's going to set up his own social media that's going to redefine all of social media.
	This platform is going to be big, Miller said.
	Proceeding that Trump will draw tens of thousands of millions of people, sorry, tens of millions of people to the platform.
	Okay, so it's going to be a huge social media site.
	He's going to set up in two months, and it's going to be the biggest thing ever.
	They've got millions of people.
	Of course, this is sort of like Trump show voting.
	I mean, typical, like, everything's going to be great.
	It's going to be huge.
	It's going to be grading, and it's going to be huge.
	You know, all that stuff.
	What is it?
	He's launched it.
	If you can go to the next one, it's a blog.
	It's a blog.
	It's him blogging on his blog.
	It's a bit underwhelming.
	Yeah, it's not even a bad thing.
	It's like, if he wanted to, because it was really hard to find his posts, you know, the office of the former president or whatever it was he set up, and you could see it, like, post up on Twitter from, like, Disclosed TV or whatever, you know, his statement from the president telling so-and-so to get effed.
	And it was irritating to find them, so it's good that he set up a blog, but what I don't really get is why the hype?
	Like, why the whole, we're going to be the best platform on planet Earth, we're going to have tens of millions of people coming over to this platform, it's going to be the biggest thing, and it's just a blog.
	So this does just look like, essentially, sort of tweets, just lists, just, yeah.
	Yeah, so he's just essentially redone Twitter, except it's just him.
	So, I mean, technically it's a platform.
	So, yeah, it is a platform.
	It's a platform of one.
	Right.
	Sure.
	I mean, this is the thing.
	I'm not mad.
	This isn't bad.
	I mean, it's nice, but just why be like, we're going to compete with Twitter and Facebook to launch a blog?
	I don't know.
	It's weird.
	Yeah, it doesn't seem like it's full-throated.
	It doesn't seem like his heart's massively in it.
	I mean, if I was a billionaire or whatever, and I wanted to get my voice out there or launch a platform, I'd get a team of people to put something together better than that.
	Or at least that's what you'd expect he was doing, which is why everyone assumed when his spokesman was like, yeah, we're going to set up a new platform with tens of millions of people on it.
	I wasn't really expecting a blog, but okay.
	I just wanted to play the first clip, which is just the first video that's on here when you go on to see what he's talking about, so let's just see this.
	...consign him and those who supported him in the Senate to the trash of history.
	Twitter permanently batting the commander-in-chief's personal account with 88 million followers.
	I mean, nice?
	Cool?
	I like your blog, bro, but it is just a blog.
	It's quite serious music there.
	Yeah.
	I mean, I like the boomerism about it as well.
	So to give an example, if you click on one of the posts, so this is an example here, which is just...
	I like these here.
	I mean, I'm not complaining that this is a thing, as I say.
	So, an example.
	So nice to see Rhino Mitt Romney booed off the stage by the Utah Republican State Convention.
	They are among the earliest to have figured this guy out.
	A stone-cold loser!
	Exclamation point.
	It's great.
	It's wonderful.
	I mean, it's the nice stuff about his Twitter account, except, you know, now it's his blog where he just posts these kind of things.
	And if you, John, if you can, if you can click on the heart there, just so you can see, like, what you can do.
	Like, as a guest, you can just heart it.
	It's really weird.
	There's no number of how many people, it's just a thing you can do.
	And if you click on the, I don't want you to, but if you click on the Twitter or Facebook links, it sends you to Twitter or Facebook and you can share this blog post to your Facebook or Twitter account to be like, hey, look, President Donald Trump blogged this thing.
	Which, it is weird.
	I don't really know what else to call it.
	It's nice, but it's just strange.
	Well, I'm no programmer.
	In fact, my technical abilities are pretty limited.
	But this seems like it's sort of kind of entry-level stuff.
	Like you could get one person that really knows what they're doing, put this together in a day or two.
	Am I being silly there or no?
	I don't know either.
	It does seem a bit straightforward, though.
	I don't know.
	Maybe I'm just being really unfair, really unkind.
	I mean, it might just be...
	The chat is just like, no, it's a big troll.
	It's got to be a big troll.
	I'm like...
	I hadn't thought about that.
	Maybe he's playing 4D chess and this is a huge troll, but I don't buy it.
	I think actually his spokesman was just talking S and he was just setting up a blog.
	So, whatever.
	But there is a reason for this, of course, which is that, as I said, you can share his blog posts.
	You can share a link to his blog.
	But you can't...
	You would have thought, okay, this is kind of pathetic.
	But it is pathetic, but what other options has he got?
	I mean, he can't be on there.
	And it gets worse than that.
	Like, you can't even have his voice on Facebook.
	So, for example, if you want to interview British Voldemort, the man who shall not be named because he can't be...
	Otherwise you'd get kicked.
	So he was banned from all social media, I think it was like a couple of years ago or something, and you could still interview him, you could have him on, like you could have Alex Jones on, and you could interview the guy, and be like, hey, this guy believes this, because this is my show, interviewing them, he's the banned guy, I'm not.
	And that was okay.
	Everyone was okay with that.
	Not with Donald Trump.
	With Donald Trump, his voice, as it says here, voice of Donald Trump, is banned on Facebook.
	So his daughter-in-law, Laura Trump, decided to post a video in which she interviewed Donald Trump.
	And for posting the video, she got a hit.
	She got it taken down because she had the voice of Donald Trump on her Facebook page.
	So that is why.
	I mean, he could do a whole bunch of interviews, but that's not allowed.
	All he can do is share his blog post.
	That's all that's allowed to exist.
	So it says in here that she was banned for sharing that video, and in response, Facebook sent her this message.
	We are reaching out to let you know that we removed content from Laura Trump's Facebook page that featured President Trump speaking.
	In line with...
	Sorry.
	In line with the block we placed on Donald Trump's Facebook and Instagram accounts, Further content posted in the voice of Donald Trump will be removed as a result in additional limitations on the account.
	Sorry, Lara, Lara.
	Sorry.
	But the fact that he hates his voice.
	I mean, they literally say the president's voice is the thing that's banned.
	I mean, his vocal chords are forbidden.
	I think we're firmly in the realm of, like, hysteria, right?
	I mean...
	I mean, yeah, I mean, as Lara points out, she responded with, and just like that, we're one step closer to Orwell's 1984.
	Wow.
	I was like, well...
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	I mean, the party would unperson people by making sure that they never existed.
	I mean, if you want to ban the guy from being able to be on there, but also ban his voice from being on your platform.
	I mean, British Voldemort.
	There's a reason we have to call him British Voldemort.
	It's not just for show.
	Like, if you mention his name on certain platforms, the content gets taken down.
	If you show an image of him in your profile picture or as a picture, it'll get taken down.
	I mean, John's got the best example of this in which he took an image with the guy, like, holding him here.
	And then when he found out about the ban, he, like, went into Photoshop and just, like, you know, Silhouetted him, like silhouetted him out.
	So it's just pure black where he is.
	Yeah, so he's just holding like a silhouette.
	Yeah, the TR, the guy who can't be named.
	So, and then that, that got him a strike on Facebook.
	It's like, Jesus Christ.
	I think it's actually in 1984, I mean, it's an obvious and much used analogy, isn't it?
	But in 1984, they use the image and voice of Goldstein, well, every day, isn't it?
	Two minutes of hate, is it?
	Yeah, a few minutes of hate, where you're encouraged to hear the voice of the enemy of the party.
	So, I mean, there's specific reasons for that in the novel 1984, but this has gone beyond that even.
	They're not even prepared to do that, to use it as a tool.
	It's just...
	Just stop it.
	Just end it.
	Just can't have...
	They used to have the two minutes of hate with Donald Trump when he was around, and now he's not around.
	They've gone to the unperson section, which is just pretend he didn't exist.
	He's gone.
	Never happened.
	So they say in this article, I can't remember which one of you guys read it, but it's great.
	So the approach of banning such an important figure from being shown on a platform is unprecedented.
	Prior to Facebook's latest move, only individuals' own accounts were subject to being banned, whereas others were not prevented from hosting content featured on said banned accounts.
	As I mentioned, you could interview Alex Jones or British Voldemort because, well, this is my platform and I'm interviewing them and I'm asking them a question.
	That was the case, and now it's gone to the point of just his voice.
	So presumably the same goes for all other figures.
	So I don't know if Alex Jones' voice is now also banned.
	I mean, what about British Voldemort's voice?
	Like, if you report something he said, is that something worthy of a ban now?
	God knows.
	Who knows?
	And as you can see, it's just an attempt to stifle free speech and create that chilling effect in which there's so much uncertainty.
	I mean, what do you even do?
	And continuing here, most of the language around what President Trump was accused of was he was accused of insurrection or a coup d'etat on January 6th.
	Except that now that we've gone through the process, he was acquitted, and also most of the actual rioters who were charged ended up going from riots to being charged with trespassing, as Politico reports.
	Although prosecutors have loaded their charging documents with language about an existential threat of an insurrection to the Republic, the actions of many individual rioters have been boiled down to trespassing.
	Yeah, not a great deal.
	I think, why don't these people seem to, the people banning Trump's voice even, or Facebook, whoever it is, don't seem to have taken on board the Streisand effect, you know?
	Yeah, I mean, it's almost like they don't even know what it is.
	You ban a thing, it makes people want to go and find it.
	Yeah, and that's a really powerful thing.
	I mean, I remember when I was younger, or, you know, not 18, I really wanted to, you want to see any sort of band film or whatever, and at the time, Clockwork Orange was sort of a band movie.
	So everyone wanted, people that had a pirate Clockwork Orange, everyone wanted it.
	You know, it's a really strong thing.
	Censorship doesn't work, fundamentally.
	It doesn't get rid of the thing unless you're fully unpersonalized.
	Because imagine there's a new generation of people that we don't have to imagine.
	The new generation of people that might not really know much about or wouldn't know anything about Trump from the 80s and 90s and, you know, aware of the name but weren't really paying attention during his presidency, in the next three years or five years or whatever, you hear this guy is so dangerous that you're not even allowed to hear his voice.
	How interesting or intriguing is that?
	They just...
	I mean, that's the thing that made me so interested in British Baltimore growing up because it was just like, why is this guy hated so much?
	It was just like, I think Islamisation is a bad thing.
	I was like...
	What?
	That's the forbidden opinion?
	Really?
	Anyway, so just going on here, so Donald Trump being acquitted, as mentioned, they went through the whole trial.
	Remember we covered this, the Democrats literally started fabricating evidence so embarrassingly that they lost that attempt, in which case, well, why is he still banned?
	For what?
	Like, he's literally been exonerated.
	He didn't do nothing.
	So says the US government.
	So, what are Facebook doing?
	So Facebook, in response, I don't know about Twitter, they've decided to set up an oversight board, which will look into the matter of the banning of Donald Trump, because now, well, he didn't do nothing, so what's he banned for?
	So if you can get up the next link, this is their page here, oversight board.
	Ensuring respect for freedom, sorry, ensuring respect for free expression through independent judgment.
	Right.
	Hmm.
	Not sure about this.
	Like, why do you need an oversight board to defend free expression?
	And who from Facebook?
	Because Facebook are the ones that set this up.
	Like, they say this is an independent body, and okay, sure, but you still set it up.
	So, I'm not sure about how independent a thing can be that you created.
	To overlook yourself to tell you whether or not you're damaging free expression.
	Yeah, it's your own mods or something.
	I don't understand.
	Like, you must know what you're doing is wrong if you're having to set up oversight boards to reconciliate the fact that you've been overly censorious.
	It's weird.
	So, who's on it?
	Because that's all that really matters, who's on this board.
	So if you go to the next link, there's a half a section which can meet the board.
	So you can scroll down, just so there's some portraits, and there's like 20 odd people, so we're not going to go through all of them, but most of them that I've seen are like from lore backgrounds or journalism backgrounds.
	So, I can't really make too much of a judgement because I don't know almost anyone on here.
	And, you know, I mean, who would?
	But it looks very checkmark-y.
	Like, it looks like the kind of people on Twitter that would all have checkmarks.
	So, yeah.
	And there is one I was able to recognise, which is actually an ex-prime minister from Denmark.
	And she's from the Social Democrat Party.
	So, I mean, take a guess as to what her opinion will be on free expression of Donald Trump.
	Banned.
	So the only person on that I did find that was interesting, he was described as an expert in free speech, was this guy from the Cato Institute.
	So John Samples, so if you go to the next link, I just see on the Cato Institute they had a debate about Donald Trump, but irritatingly they called it that and then just didn't talk about it.
	I watched the thing, it was a waste of time.
	But we can go to the Cato Institute and just see what their opinion is on the whole thing, because there was a senior fellow who wrote an article about this exact issue.
	So if you go to the next link, there's some senior fellow.
	Sorry, there should be another Cato Institute link there, in which they're talking about whether or not they should ban him.
	And they say in here that "The Russoian right thinks that Twitter violated their freedom of speech when they are blocked from it, but Twitter is a private property.
	It has provided you with a megaphone that you would not have if it did not exist, which it never had an obligation to do.
	If it decides to withdraw your megaphone, you are free to talk without it, or to get another one, or even build your own.
	Libertarians, shut up.
	Just shut up.
	I'm so sick of just building your own.
	What happened to Parlour?
	What happened to parlor?
	Where is it?
	Who's on it?
	Who's on it now?
	It's probably still down for, like, maintenance or something at this point.
	You're free to build your own platform as we are free to then destroy you for trying to do that.
	Yeah, and we are free to build a cabal which will destroy anyone who threatens us.
	Sure.
	And I'm sure, like, this is the stupidest argument as well.
	You always hear it, like, oh, they're a free company and they can do whatever they want.
	What?
	Like, slave companies were companies.
	Like, it doesn't mean they can do whatever they want.
	Like, sure, they can act within the law, but that doesn't mean what they're doing is right or wrong, and that's the question.
	Was the banning of Donald Trump for not doing something right or wrong?
	I mean, he didn't do the thing they were accusing him of.
	Therefore, is the banning right or wrong?
	That's the question.
	So, he continues in here to end it with, whatever it is, it's not a violation of free speech, not in the Lockean Enlightenment tradition, at least.
	And I understand his argument here, which is essentially that Twitter's private property, and therefore they're allowing anyone they want on the place, but that doesn't change the reality of the situation, which is, like it or not, these are the public squares of discourse.
	I mean, everyone recognizes this.
	And there's no easy solution, of course, but one of the solutions is obviously alternative do-it-yourself stuff.
	And Parler?
	I mean, where's Parler?
	Parler's dead.
	So what's Donald Trump had to do?
	He set up his own blog.
	I mean, that's it.
	There is, I suppose, the idea of anti-monopoly laws.
	I mean, I think of the example of the big oil tycoons at the end of the 19th century, early 20th century.
	John D. Rockefeller, for example.
	There's many, the steel magnates, Carnegie, people like this.
	J.P. Morgan in the realm of just money.
	But John D. Rockefeller just sort of...
	He bought everything he needed to just control that industry, more or less.
	And in the end, the government was like, okay, this is insane.
	We can't let you do that.
	And so we're just going to pass a bunch of laws to prevent you from doing that.
	And it becomes an arms race.
	They then try and do everything they can within the framework to still have their monopoly.
	And it goes on and on and on.
	But a sovereign nation is able to or should be able to prevent monopolies happening.
	Like, if the monopolies only usually exist because the government assists them in what they're doing, but like with this with section 127, sorry, not 127, what is it, section something or other, the one that gives them immunity for being sued, the one that the Republicans are always threatening with taking away from them.
	I can't remember the section off the top of my head.
	Anyway, but they get this situation, and as you say, it's eerily similar to the Rockefellers or company towns and things like this, and everyone knows it, in which case we know what the solution is.
	We've been here before.
	You have to intervene to protect the free speech rights of the population.
	And the fact that they're not the US establishment, the US state or establishment or whatever you want to call it, the fact that they're not doing that or don't seem that they really want to do that, Well, that speaks volumes, doesn't it?
	Yeah.
	Doesn't it say that they're actually okay with how it is?
	But there's also something to be said here of the disappointment in Donald Trump himself or his team, I don't know if it's his decision or not, which is the alternative media.
	so i mean here's here's gab setting up an account for donald trump in which they they've called it off they've given it a little check mark they've been posting his tweets ever since he was on there and one of the public statements he makes and apparently he doesn't run it that's not him that's you know the gab team doing it for him and then there's also minds as well if you go to the minds link which they've they've set up a little account for and be like hey if you want to come to alternative social medias that won't ban you we're here for you you know we will give you a place in which you can give your thoughts and we won't censor you and he's not there hmm
	why i mean i just i don't understand it actually i'll face it with his new blog as well Yeah, so they've updated it with their blogs on Gab.
	It does beg the question, doesn't it?
	It's the thing of just like, why is he not there?
	Why is he himself not doing these things?
	It's embarrassing to see him not come out and be like, yeah, alternative social media is the best.
	Screw you guys.
	You guys are the worst.
	And then you could say, well, here's the new free market that will overtake the old monopolies that are not good to their customers.
	But that's not what's happening, which is sad.
	But that's why he's got a blog now.
	Cool.
	Check out his blog, I guess.
	Cool beans.
	Donald Trump blogger.
	I mean, it does...
	I mean, it...
	We're a much smaller enterprise than the Trump estate.
	And yet we've got a whole guy who's just to make sure we're on every platform we can possibly be.
	So the fact that Trump didn't do that almost, well, when he started running in 2016, and now we've got today where still places like Parler are just waiting for him to start using it.
	He set up his own little blog thing, which looks kind of lame.
	You ask the question, why?
	Yeah, why?
	Why?
	Why is that?
	Is it that he doesn't necessarily, honestly, he doesn't actually want to be president again?
	People would say at the time in 2016, oh it's only a vanity project, he's only doing it to get more money for his businesses and running for president is a vehicle for just exposure and he never really expected to win.
	I didn't believe that entirely at the time, but I still thought there was certainly an element of truth.
	There must have been an element of truth to that.
	Whereas the way he's acting now, it does, it gives me a bit more, it seems a bit more likely, in fact, that he's not putting everything into getting re-elected in 24.
	One of the weird things is, like, when Karl was talking with Sebastian Gorka, he used to be an advisor with him.
	It's interesting, because Sebastian Gorka was saying that there are a bunch of people around him, you know, right at the start and all the way, obviously, now as well.
	These people have no idea what they're doing, or they're completely incompetent, or still think that they can reason with the left or something.
	So him waiting for the decision from Facebook to get his Facebook account back on, it's over.
	That debate is long gone.
	Just look at the people on the board.
	Don't waste your time with it.
	Anyway, let's move on.
	Turns out, Wokism is run by the feds.
	I'm not joking.
	So let's get into this.
	There's this recruitment ad that's come up from the CIA. And we're not going to focus on the CIA entirely.
	We're going to go over to British intelligence in a minute.
	But the CIA decided to make this recruitment ad, which is unbelievably woke.
	It's super cringe.
	And I know we said no more cringe.
	Here.
	But cringe for cringe sake is banned.
	Cringe for a purpose.
	I'm going to keep around.
	So you can see someone saying in here the quotes from the CIA recruitment ad.
	I'm a woman of colour.
	I'm a cisgendered millennial.
	And you're like, no, come on.
	This has got to be fake.
	Nah.
	Let's play the clip.
	Let's enjoy some CIA recruitment ads.
	When I was 17, I quoted Zora Neale Hurston's How It Feels To Be Colored Me in my college application essay.
	The line that spoke to me stated simply, I am not tragically colored.
	There is no sorrow dammed up in my soul nor lurking behind my eyes.
	I do not mind at all.
	At 17, I had no idea what life would bring, but Sora's sentiment articulated so beautifully how I felt as the daughter of immigrants then and now.
	Nothing about me was or is tragic.
	I am perfectly made.
	I can wax eloquent on complex legal issues in English while also belting Guayaquil de mis amores in Spanish.
	I can change a diaper with one hand and console a crying toddler with the other.
	I'm a woman of color.
	I am a mom.
	I am a cisgender millennial who's been diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder.
	I am intersectional, but my existence is not a box-checking exercise.
	I am a walking declaration, a woman whose inflection does not rise at the end of her sentences, suggesting that a question has been asked.
	I did not sneak into CIA. My employment was not and is not the result of a fluke or slip through the cracks.
	I earned my way in and I earned my way up the ranks of this organization.
	I am educated, qualified, and competent.
	And sometimes I struggle.
	I struggle feeling like I could do more, be more to my two sons.
	And I struggle leaving the office when I feel there's so much more to do.
	I used to struggle with imposter syndrome, but at 36 I refuse to internalize misguided patriarchal ideas of what a woman can or should be.
	I am tired of feeling like I'm supposed to apologize for the space I occupy rather than intoxicate people with my effort, my brilliance.
	I am proud of me, full stop.
	My parents left everything they knew and loved to expose me to opportunities they never had.
	Because of them, I stand here today a proud first generation Latina and officer at CIA. I am unapologetically me.
	I want you to be unapologetically you, whoever you are.
	Know your worth.
	Command your space.
	Join the CIA. Oh god, I mean, not save the country, defend us from terrorists, none of that.
	But I also love the section there where she's like, I made it here on my own, I've done the hard work.
	And she's showing certificates that say, you know, Equality and Inclusion Officer, Equality and Inclusion Award.
	Like, she's literally calling herself a diversity hire in her own video.
	And we're gonna go through some of those statements, so we're gonna go through a whole list.
	So there's just...
	There was one line in there, can I just say real quick, there was one line near the beginning where she said something like, I'm perfect, or I'm immaculate.
	I am perfectly made.
	Yeah.
	Wow.
	Wow.
	What are you talking about?
	What are you talking about?
	You know that's nonsense.
	If I had a small child that said that, I'd correct them.
	Slap them.
	Shut up.
	You're weak.
	There you go.
	No, you're not perfect.
	You're not perfect.
	You've got a massive chip on your shoulder, sounds like, about loads of things.
	The woke speak in there, like, I'm a woman of colour.
	I'm a cisgender millennial with generalised anxiety disorder.
	Should you be working for the CIA? I don't know.
	So the CIA have abandoned meritocracy then?
	Is that what this is saying?
	I don't know.
	They've just adopted wokest ideologies like a fundamental pin, but also that they want to recruit on that basis.
	I mean, that's a recruitment ad.
	I mean, they're saying to the people that they want to get, they're targeting groups with their recruitment wrestling, right?
	So who are they targeting with that ad?
	They're targeting people who used to be on Tumblr.
	They've now gone to university, they've probably done a grievance study degree, and the CIA's like, yeah, come work for us.
	It's ridiculous.
	So I just love the idea that she's got generalised anxiety disorder.
	I mean, from what?
	Like selling guns to the communist terrorists in South America?
	Whatever.
	So she says she's intersectional.
	Yeah, of course you are.
	Who cares?
	But my existence is not a box-chicking exercise.
	After you just said you're cisgender millennial woman of colour.
	Like, what?
	What?
	I'm not a box, but also all these boxes are me.
	Like, I belong to all these boxes and that's nothing else.
	My employment was not a slip-up or, sorry, it was not or is not a slip-up through the cracks.
	It's like, yeah, as I show you my awards for being a diversity and inclusion award for this year and that year.
	And it's like, okay, diversity hire.
	Shut up.
	It kind of seems like that's exactly what she is, yeah.
	Exactly.
	But this statement that my employment was not or is not a slip-up, Yeah, of course it's not.
	It was planned.
	That's what a diversity hire is.
	You are there to be the woman of colour, you know, millennial, intersectional type.
	You are there for that.
	And there was no talk of her ability of analysing intelligence.
	No, there was no...
	Nothing along those lines.
	That's not important.
	It's skills to combat terrorism.
	I don't know.
	There's some fascist stuff or something, I guess.
	So she continues, At 36, I refuse to internalise misguided, patriarchal ideas about what women can or should be.
	Yep.
	Yep.
	It's like, chill out.
	Can't you just do some intelligence work?
	Like the words, the way, you know, the specific word she's using, the fact that she's explicitly saying, I'm a wokest, and also if you're a wokest, join the CIA. God.
	Anyway, she then goes on to say that the parents risked everything to give me opportunity.
	I was like, no.
	Oh.
	And you're from South America, she says.
	So what happened there?
	Like, they didn't like the Castilian political traditions.
	And instead of like, no, Anglo-Saxon political traditions are better because it provides opportunity.
	It's pretty racist.
	Interesting angle.
	So, I mean, she loves white supremacy.
	I can get that from that.
	But also, that's not her only slip-up, as John points out.
	Her other slip-up is saying she's a proud first-generation Latina.
	Latina?
	Not Latinx!
	Shouldn't you say, isn't it more like Latina?
	Don't they say that?
	She needs, well, Latinx is the new gender-neutral one, isn't it?
	So she needs to go some unconscious bias training by the looks of it.
	Good God.
	They put that out on the recruitment app.
	Anyway, but they're not the only ones.
	Britain is, you know, this might be new for the United States to advertise on that basis, but Britain is an asshole with this regard.
	I'm not going to go through it.
	I know this is going to make you mad, but it's just so stupid.
	So the first thing here is MI5. MI5, the Domestic Security Intelligence Agency that deals with domestic terrorism and whatnot.
	If you want to go work for them, one of the things you can do is get an internship.
	Wonderful.
	Wonderful.
	So they say in here, an internship with MI5 is like no other.
	Here you'll enjoy a summit of discovery and responsibility.
	It is a challenge that calls individuals from a range of backgrounds with different skills and knowledge.
	With the support and guidance from our colleagues across the organization, the work you will do in developing these skills will contribute to keeping the country safe.
	Yeah, okay, nothing wrong with that.
	Like, you're going to come here, you're going to learn a bunch of skills, and you're going to keep Britain safe.
	Sounds great.
	How are you going to do it?
	Well, we offer two internships you can take.
	Here's the first one.
	Summer Diversity Intelligence Internship.
	Hmm.
	Over 11 weeks, you will help us investigate and disrupt international terrorism.
	Sounds good.
	The internship is open to individuals in their permanent year of university, and from a black Asian minority ethnic background with a socially or economically disadvantaged background.
	What?
	So you've got to be black and poor.
	If you're not black and poor, you can't fight terrorism.
	And apparently you're not interested in your skills or worldview or...
	No, I mean, you've got to...
	Or loyalties...
	The penultimate year of university.
	I mean, that's something.
	But that's it.
	Yeah.
	That's the standard.
	And then what's the other standard?
	Being black and poor.
	Huh.
	Okay.
	So, like, if you're black and rich, don't want you.
	If you're white at all, get out.
	Get out.
	You're not worthy of the CIA. Yeah.
	But one of the things I love in here is the demonstration.
	This is obviously just for the diversity hires, you know, the summer diversity internship here.
	You can get this if you're black and poor.
	But also, we offer a technical internship for people who actually know anything.
	Over 11 weeks, you will have the chance to work on live projects in collaboration with your peers, which will help share technology to use to protect the UK from security threats such as terrorism and espyage.
	Sounds great.
	The internship is open to individuals who have a strong interest in technology and the drive to learn.
	You will need to be in the Penelope at University and be expecting at least a 2-2 in a STEM-related subject.
	So there we go.
	There's the internship.
	There's people with skills in the technology side of the department.
	And then there's the diversity hires who are going to take the summer diversity internship.
	I mean, how pathetic would you feel if you applied for the summer diversity internship and you got it?
	Like, I'm literally just here because of my skin tone.
	Nothing else.
	And it's not like these are people going to the front lines to infiltrate ISIS. I mean, these are just interns.
	Plus 2-2 seems a bit low.
	There's a joke I think in Yes Minister or Yes Prime Minister where the senior civil servants joke about people that have got a 2-1 and of course they wouldn't have anyone that got a 2-2.
	Obviously that's laughable.
	Well, why would you need a university degree at all?
	Which is what we'll get into in a minute.
	The standards are that low, apparently.
	So if we go to the next one, this is just MI5, their diversity page.
	And if you can scroll down, there's a bunch of bubbles in which they have their lists of diversity percentages.
	So if you keep going right in the middle here, you can see the percentages they have.
	So they're literally box ticking.
	There has to be a certain percentage of women in the workplace.
	So they're complaining here 43% of the females in our workplace are women.
	I don't know, actually.
	Maybe we should ask how they identify rather than just tick-box it.
	God knows.
	But, again, it's the stupidity of the equality thing where it's like 50% of the population are women, therefore 50% of the workplace should be women.
	Why?
	But just this workplace, though.
	I mean, what are the stats on hod carrying?
	Sure.
	What are the stats on bricklayers?
	Women are 50% of the population.
	There should be 50% of the murderers.
	I mean, there's no rhyme or reason for this.
	It's stock feminist nonsense.
	And, of course, gets applied to every other section here, which is just embarrassing.
	But if you scroll down a little bit further, they have a bunch of sections here, which I find weird.
	So you can see there are networks.
	I've just got to read two of them, because they're just really funny.
	MyFive.
	MyFive.
	And if you hover over it, it gives you a list of what MyFive is about.
	So they say, Our Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic Network, building an environment which embraces the background, race, colour, and beliefs all of MI5. It's like, what?
	Why would you need that?
	Why would we need to have somewhere where we can all discuss our different beliefs and our race within MI5? Why at all?
	I don't understand what it does by the description.
	But the next one, Genie.
	Genie's even funnier.
	Our gender network, including non-binary, to achieve gender equality throughout MI5. Ugh, boys.
	Both being sick over there.
	The rest of them are just as silly, so let's move on.
	So let's go to our achievements from MI5. So MI5 have a diversity achievement section, because of course they do.
	And if you scroll down, there's a whole bunch of boxes where they list, like, oh, Stonewall thinks it's great to work here if you're gay.
	It's so annoying, though, because it's...
	All this is the abandonment of meritocracy.
	There's no problem hiring someone that's gay or bam.
	There's no problem if they're the right person.
	In fact, please do hire them.
	Please, just let's have the best people for the job.
	That's not MA5 standard.
	MA5's like, no, we need a certain number of gays.
	Yeah, but this guy who's not gay is really good at fighting terrorism.
	Yeah, but is he gay?
	Yeah.
	So if you go down to the bottom...
	He's not even remotely gay, if we could employ him.
	See the last one, the last one that's the funniest.
	Black History Month.
	No description.
	Just Black History Month.
	That's our award.
	Like, 2020, we're the best-accelerating Black History with MI5. I feel like Black History Month is racist.
	Why isn't every month Black History?
	Dawn Butler agrees.
	The Labour Party say this is racist, so we can take their opinion on it.
	And also, I don't want you to do it, but all the rest, if you hover over them, of course, because it's a link, you can go somewhere if you click it.
	But the Black History Month one, if you click it or mess with it or anything, nada.
	It's not interactive.
	It literally is just a little logo that says Black History Diversity Champion, and then Black History Month.
	Nothing else.
	Well, MI5 is a very, very, very serious organisation, or used to be.
	I mean, it's military intelligence, isn't it?
	Domestic military intelligence, right?
	Technically...
	Demon terrorists.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	You know, MI5 and MI6, I think technically...
	They aren't supposed to exist.
	They're supposed to be secret.
	Well, MI6 is now the secret intelligence services, SIS. But they've got Twitter accounts, so don't worry.
	Right.
	So they've utterly abandoned all of that, utterly abandoned it.
	I remember, I was saying this to you earlier today when we were talking about it, I actually applied for SIS a couple of times when I was fresh out of uni.
	And, yeah, the criteria was exceptionally strict.
	The best of the best.
	Yeah, yeah.
	And that's even to just...
	That's to put you off for playing, mainly, it felt like.
	And then when you do start to do the tests and the various stuff they want you to do, it's not easy.
	No.
	It's really not easy.
	And it really shouldn't be, because you're dealing with a very serious national defense.
	Right.
	Again, and it's...
	So the thing I wanted to point out here, like, okay, it might have been infiltrated by intersectionalists and the CIA and MI5 and MI6. No, no, I guess further than that.
	GCHQ, Black History Month School Resource Pack.
	GCHQ are the ones promoting intersectional nonsense like Black History Month, in which we segregate the blacks into a certain month.
	They can't be British.
	They can't be part of British history.
	They're black.
	They've got to be in their own month, in which we just segregate them.
	This is GCHQ we're promoting this.
	So the other part of intelligence in the UK people.
	So GCHQ and MI5 come under the Home Office, right?
	Yeah.
	So the government and Preeti Patel can do as they please, more or less, with that.
	Yeah, this is all government.
	So they're doing this.
	They're actively doing this.
	This isn't a Labour plan from the Gordon Brown years.
	This isn't a mistake either.
	This is the Home Office.
	No one tripped and wrote this on the website.
	Right.
	But I've got to keep going.
	So the Black History Month thing I mentioned earlier, I actually managed to find a website of blackhistorymonth.org.
	So we go to the next one here.
	And one of the interesting things here is they're like, oh, at MI5 and MI6 and GCHQ, our core mission is to keep the country safer than their praises for their diversity.
	And one of the things is they actually kind of throw GCHQ and MI6 under the bus as well.
	Because of course we saw MI5 being openly racist by saying that only black people could be interns.
	And then it turns out now, MI6 and GCHQ also did the same thing.
	So if you go to the next link, this is just the similar thing.
	And you can see secret intelligence service, MI6 and also MI5, both hiring here.
	And they're both hiring on the basis that you've got to be BAME.
	If you ain't BAME, you ain't in.
	That's the standard.
	It's good.
	You've got to be the penultimate year of university, and also BAME. And if you ain't BAME, no future view in the intelligence services.
	Well, I guess we'll see if diversity is our strength.
	Yeah, I guess we will.
	We will find out.
	I mean, how many terrorist attacks have we gone through now?
	So then there's GCHQ. GCHQ are even worse.
	It's not even just an internship or any such nonsense.
	There's a job they promoted.
	So you can see if you scroll down, this is an IT and customer service support position.
	So IT and customer service.
	So, you know, running the desk or running the goddamn Twitter account or whatever else.
	And you can see here as they write, please note this registration of interest is only open to those from an ethnic minority background or women from any ethnic background.
	So you've got to be an ethnic minority or a woman from an ethnic minority background.
	I don't know why they wrote that twice.
	But then you see underneath, there's a little bit of an update.
	At this stage, applications from candidates of all ethnicities and genders are welcome.
	Huh?
	Why would you be like, we only accept ethnic minorities, but also anyone who's not an ethnic minority can apply?
	And you'll notice the reason for that is because they got bullied.
	Who'd they get bullied by?
	Us.
	Because they deserve it.
	So Ranvier did a good job on Twitter here.
	If we go to the next one, it's just a load to see us bullying them for being racist.
	Just openly racist.
	You know, this is only open to ethnic minorities.
	And then thankfully, apparently, they got so bullied by this, they decided to add.
	But it's also open to everyone, which just obviously doesn't make sense.
	So it's evidence of them being openly racist.
	And then I found the GCHQ has like a blog, just like the Trump blog, I guess.
	And their deputy director had written a whole thing about this.
	So if you go to the next link, he says in here, This year, for the first time, we ran an initiative called GCHQ Decoded.
	We invited all the female and blame applicants for our main two recruitment campaigns to a familiarization event.
	So they got them to familiarize themselves and they made special effort on the BAME and women.
	And this isn't the only way they describe this.
	So I found a government document from 2016 in which they describe it quite differently.
	The government document words it as, GCHQ has encouraged women and BAME applicants to remain interested in Throughout the recruitment process by holding GCHQ decoded events.
	Like, women and black people are, I don't know, goldfish?
	They're, like, applying for the job and then they're like, nah, bored now.
	So they've got to remain interested.
	And then I found just this, which is amazing.
	In here, they openly say that...
	They want to recruit more women into the services, and that's fine.
	Sure, if you have positions you want to fill, you want to send female agents out there or something like this, that's a worthy argument.
	I mean, working behind the desk doesn't mean that you need a uterus, as far as I'm aware.
	So they're saying here, women or mothers in middle-age or mid-career who might be taking some years out to bring up their children may offer an untapped recruitment pool.
	So am I being punked?
	I just love the idea, like, Mumsnet is a front for MI6. So they continue, and they say that they lowered the standards for women.
	GCHQ removed the core criteria of a 2-1 undergraduate degree from its Future Leaders campaign, the fast-track leadership recruitment that they're only advertising for women, to encourage women from careers who had followed non-traditional graduate routes.
	So to get more women, we have to lower the standards.
	Right, okay, I've heard this before.
	Happened in the British military, and it sucked.
	I feel like this is, if you were going to try and destabilise and undermine a nation, if that was what you wanted to do, this is the sort of thing.
	It's like it's a comedy.
	Who wrote this?
	Who honestly wrote this?
	Sorry, I've got a blast through it because of that time.
	But they say in here that in 2016, unconscious bias training was integral to SIS induction pathway and helping embed desired behaviors from the outset.
	MI5 has also enrolled a number of staff, including middle managers, in our unconscious bias training e-learning, in which they will further develop face-to-face sessions over the financial year.
	GCHQ, who also mandated unconscious bias training for SES, are reviewing their approach.
	It's just like, right, okay, so now that Kemi Baden-Ock has shown that that's all nonsense, what are you doing about it?
	And funnily enough, of course, the head of MI6 is on Twitter, so we can check it out to guess whether or not he's got rid of it.
	You see his bio?
	Chief of the UK secret intelligence service.
	Very secret.
	Retweet show my interest was piqued.
	Nothing more.
	He, him.
	We can't swear, can we?
	It's just like that.
	There's the dog whistle.
	He's a progressive.
	He endorses all of this.
	Just in my mind, I can see, like, Kemi Baden-Knox reaction to all this, so you can get the first image up.
	This is why I imagine her walking into the office in the morning.
	There we go.
	Just staring at him when you see he, him, the head of MI6. But yeah, it turns out anyone who speaks woke-speak from now on, just call them a Fed.
	They work for the Feds.
	That's what they are.
	Because the Feds run all this stuff.
	The Feds are apparently producing content to make people get involved in wokeism.
	So just call them a Fed.
	There's no place to say them, seriously.
	They're literally woke in the darks.
	So, that's why.
	Can I just say real quick, I know there's time limits and everything, but it's really no joke now.
	The military and intelligence services...
	Yeah, it's getting deadly serious.
	I mean, it's one thing if the RSPB gets taken over by Wokists or, you know, whatever, or even the BBC or even, you know, like the National Trust or something.
	But when MI5 and MI6 and the military top brass are all Wokists...
	Don't worry, it's just for college campuses.
	I mean, it would be funny if it wasn't the harbinger of some terrible, terrible future we're staring down the barrel of.
	Yeah, I know, right?
	Anyway, we've got to move on because there's time.
	But give us a white pill.
	So after that black pill.
	White pill Wednesday.
	White pill Wednesday.
	Let's see if we can...
	Because you guys got really, I think you're really good with giving your contributors and people who work here sort of a free reign, sort of a fairly free editorial hand and so I was allowed to pick more or less what I wanted and I thought I'd go with something that's actually optimistic, that's actually, you know, isn't designed to ruin your self-esteem or anything like that.
	And it's the Perseverance rover, the Mars Perseverance rover.
	I don't know if you know much about that or if people out there have seen much about it in their news feeds.
	But that's exactly what happened.
	There's a long, fairly long tradition of us going to Mars with rovers and the latest one is called Perseverance.
	And it weighs more than a tonne.
	It's huge.
	It's like the size of a car.
	And it's just a load of science is on there.
	There's a picture of it.
	That big blocky thing on the back, that's a nuclear reactor using plutonium.
	So it should last for a long time.
	We don't have to worry about dusty solar panels anymore.
	But one of the things that was on it was, what's it called, Ingenuity, which is a little, tiny little helicopter, a little drone thing.
	And if we see the first clip, you can see at the bottom right there, you can see a little thing there, there you go, it's about to take off.
	So this isn't CGI, this isn't an artist's impression.
	This is real footage from just a few days ago on Mars.
	Of a drone and JPL in Pasadena, NASA, just testing it out, playing around with it and making sure it works.
	I mean, I think that's truly incredible.
	I mean, some people may be a bit blasé about the stuff we do in space nowadays, but I'm still always blown away by it.
	I think, you know, because what we're looking at there is, you know, we're standing on the shoulders of giants.
	In order to achieve that small bit of footage is actually the culmination of, well, our entire civilization, one way or another.
	I mean, that is peak.
	Yeah.
	It's incredible, really.
	I do know an interesting fact about this, though.
	The rovers.
	So you said to mention, what is it, Leo?
	I can't remember the acronym.
	RTG or something.
	but the uranium on the back there.
	There was an agreement that apparently you weren't meant to send those up anymore because of the idea, let's say you launch a rocket, it's got a nuclear reactor on it, and what happens if the rocket explodes?
	Well, you get uranium going everywhere.
	So the agreement was no one was to do that anymore, and the Americans signed this agreement and just went, nah, just did it anyway, sent the rover.
	I think, I mean, you know, I'm no expert, but I believe there's a relatively small amount of plutonium in there.
	I mean, really small.
	Yeah.
	But that's interesting.
	I didn't know that.
	I only know that because I did spacecraft design at uni.
	Oh, did you?
	The guy in charge knew about it, and he told me about it.
	So if it's wrong, blame him.
	But yeah, so I mean, I think it's incredible.
	I mean, just to go back a little bit, we, I don't know if you remember, well, we've only gone to Mars with rovers and things since sort of the 60s.
	Well, there's a picture of Mariner, I think, I believe that's Mariner 5, it might be Mariner 4.
	But the first time we sent probes to Mars, and they just flew by, the Russians were the first to do it, and failed a couple of times, like Sputnik V. 24, these really early things by the Russians, and they all failed.
	In fact, the success rate of sending things to Mars is quite bad.
	I think only 40% of things we've ever sent there actually landed there and worked.
	So it's actually kind of tough to get things to work there.
	Anyway, so that's Mariner 4 or 5, and that flew by and we got a few pictures, and that's sort of the mid-60s.
	So it's interesting to think that before about 1965, the best images we had of Mars were from telescopes, Earth-based telescopes.
	So in other words, not great.
	Not higher resolution at all.
	And we didn't know, even in sort of, like I say, the early 60s, we didn't know for sure if there were going to be, you know, like vegetation and things or even animals or whatever on Mars.
	We didn't know.
	But that's the reason for not wanting to launch RTGs onto planets, because if there's life there and the radiation kills it, whoopsie.
	Oh, I see what you mean.
	Oh, if the reactor blows up in the atmosphere of Mars.
	Well, if it blows up on Earth, it's a problem, but also if it kills something on a foreign planet, then.
	Yeah, that's way worse.
	Yeah, yeah.
	So much more terrible, yeah.
	But the first mariners just flew by and were able to snap a few, what is to us, very low-resolution images.
	Anyway, skipping forward a bit, sort of the age of the Viking landers, Yeah, so there's the legendary Carl Sagan, one of my all-time heroes, standing with one of the Vikings.
	There was Viking 1 and Viking 2.
	Both were successful, I think, landing on Mars.
	This is the mid-70s, late 70s, 76-odd.
	You can tell by Sagan's attire and haircut.
	It's deep in the 70s there.
	And that was a real success, and we were able to get really good images back from the surface of Mars.
	For the first time.
	And again, all that sort of thing kind of blows my mind, even to this day.
	But yeah, and then there was a hiatus for quite a few years between the Vikings and the next really successful thing was the Pathfinder.
	Pathfinder stays in orbit.
	Well, anyway, Sojourner was the little rover they had.
	So there's an image from the surface of Mars.
	Incredible, really.
	But the Sojourner didn't really go very far.
	I think it only went a few metres, really, a handful of metres.
	It was sort of to see if they could do it, see if it would work, see if we could have sort of Radio controlled things running around on the surface of Mars and the Sojourner showed that it was possible.
	But again, we're skipping out loads of things because there were lots of other attempts at stuff which failed, which either skipped off the Martian atmosphere and never landed or just crash-landed and smashed to pieces or whatever.
	So it's actually a good success if you can get down and get some images like that.
	And I mean, us Brits, you may remember the Beagle 2 thing that happened.
	This was a spacecraft we tried to send to Mars and it was going to land on Christmas Day.
	Yeah, yeah.
	So Mars Express was the mission, and part of that was a little lander called Beagle 2, which was all built by us, by the Brits.
	Don't swim with the chair.
	Oh, sorry.
	I apologize.
	Keep perfectly still.
	The guy that was running it was Colin Pillinger, who unfortunately has passed away now.
	And that failed to work.
	They think that its solar panels, it didn't have its own nuclear reactor, it worked on solar panels that sort of unfurled after it landed.
	And they think that that didn't happen properly for whatever reason.
	So it could never really power up.
	And so we could never get a link with it, a contact with it.
	And so to this day, it just sits there on the surface.
	I do sometimes think maybe a crazy...
	What one's that?
	That's the...
	Is that the Sojourner?
	I'm not sure.
	Anyways...
	Yeah, I always think that maybe hundreds or even thousands of years now when we can go to Mars, when humans go to Mars as though it's just a holiday, there'll be some sort of something built around the dead Beagle 2 and you can go and visit it.
	I always think that's interesting.
	Or when we go to the moon, and it's like nothing to take a trip to the moon, there'll be like some sort of small museum built around those, like the Apollo 11 landing site, or the rovers that are still sitting up there.
	I feel like the one on Mars, those would be like, ha-ha, look at the British fare, the other side.
	Yeah, it's a tad embarrassing, I must say, but it was still a success in lots of other ways, and yeah, anyway, it's worth mentioning.
	The next things after that, which were great, so that's an artist's mock-up of Beagle 2, because we don't have any images actually of it, not at ground level anyway.
	After that, I suppose the two big ones were Spirit and Opportunity.
	There's Colin.
	The next two were Spirit and Opportunity, which were sort of joint rovers.
	They were both successful, very successful, outlived their operational lifetime, what NASA suspected they would be able to do.
	They went much, much further and travelled a lot further and did a lot more science than we'd ever hoped for.
	One of them lasted for 14 years or 15 years, we'd hoped maybe two at best.
	So the Spirit and the Opportunity rovers showed that we could do a great deal actually.
	Once you can get it down onto the surface of Mars safely, we can do a great deal with it.
	But they were still quite small, these things.
	John, can you show Pic 11?
	Is that the one with the three different generations of Rover?
	Or their Spirit and Opportunity?
	There, see that image?
	I think that's very interesting.
	So you've got, I can't remember if it's Spirit and Opportunity on the top left there, and the small Sojourner down the bottom, and then the big almost car-sized Curiosity.
	People may remember Curiosity Landing.
	When was it?
	Like 2012-odd, I think, around then.
	And of course, that's like a sea change.
	That's a whole different thing.
	It's not just attempting to see if we could do it.
	This is a full-blown attempt to do loads of science on Mars, isn't it?
	And it's a quite incredible thing, really.
	And it's still up there now.
	It's wills.
	Curiosity's wheels are getting bashed to bits, basically.
	But it's still up there doing its thing, which is quite incredible.
	And it was able, actually, to land on Mars with the use of a sky crane.
	People who know anything about this will know about the sky crane.
	So that's a proper, like, Star Trek style where it comes down, rockets go up, and then it slowly drops, which is not usually what happens.
	But...
	Yeah, yeah, they didn't do that before.
	I think Curiosity was the first time they used the sky crane.
	It got pick 10, John?
	Should be a picture of a sky crane.
	There you go.
	That is an artist's rendition.
	So the thing would fall out of the atmosphere, fall out of space, use special parachutes to slow down, and then for the last bit of the descent...
	The actual land, the actual rover would, as you can see, come down on those wires and the sky crane thing would be blasting its rockets to slow it down to, you know, less than a metre per second or something like that, so it could drop it on the ground.
	And then those cables would detach and the sky crane itself would just sort of fly away and go and crash land somewhere a little bit away so it doesn't hurt the rover.
	And it worked perfectly.
	It worked pretty much perfectly.
	Which is, again, it's just...
	I think when the media, the mainstream media and all sorts of people in this world want to try and distract you from great things And try and black pill you and try and just convince you that the world is going to pop one way or another.
	And I just think it's not the case.
	I just think, you know...
	There is great stuff going on.
	Exactly.
	Exactly.
	Humanity does kind of anything and everything it can at all times.
	You know, that's the real reality.
	So, for example, when we did the first moon land in 69, I mean, Vietnam was going on.
	There was all sorts going on.
	The world was in a bit of a mess in 1969.
	Yet we're still just going to go and land on the moon as well anyway.
	It's the same with this sort of stuff.
	If you weren't careful, you would think that the world is just completely degenerating.
	And sure, I mean, I agree that politics is kind of degenerating, at least in the West.
	But sure, I mean, on the scientific front, it is actually amazing.
	Yeah, I mean, really, you could be forgiven for thinking that the most important things going on in the world right now are people twerking in front of a burning cityscape or LeBron's last tweet.
	That's the most important thing you should concentrate and be interested and worry about.
	But actually, no, there's some really incredible things, truly incredible things, that every human should really be quite rightly proud of.
	So it says here that you've got some sky crane footage.
	Ah, yeah.
	Do you want to put that up?
	So again, this is real.
	That's the surface of Mars from not very long ago.
	It's from February, end of February.
	It's quite a dusty surface.
	And that's the sky crane, the downdraft from the sky crane.
	About to conduct the sky crane manoeuvre.
	Skycam maneuver has started.
	About 20 meters off the surface.
	We're getting signals from MRO.
	Tango Delta.
	Touchdown confirmed.
	Perseverance safely on the surface of Mars, ready to begin seeking the sands of past life.
	So is that the last one or is that the one on the top of the nail?
	No, that's Perseverance, which is the newest one.
	So that's the one on the top of the nail.
	Yeah, and I've got to tell you, it makes my heart swell a bit to see something like that.
	It really does.
	I think anyone that sees that should have some faith in humanity in the most general sense restored.
	We are an incredible animal, really.
	We do crazy and insane and violent things, but also truly noble, truly spectacular things.
	And I just think it's worth people remembering that.
	White Pill Wednesday.
	Is there one more image?
	I see you've got, like, number 13 down there.
	What have we got?
	Ah, yes, Ingenuity!
	The little drone thing.
	Yeah, just, again, just an image of that.
	I mean, it's like the cherry on the cake, almost.
	I remember when I first heard about that they were going to do that, because...
	So is this, or is it...?
	Oh, no, that is Perseverance.
	So you want to go for the next one?
	Yeah, pick 30.
	There you go, that's just a picture of it on the surface there.
	It looks like it's blades are spooling up.
	I mean, literal extraplanetary helicopter built by humans.
	Pretty cool, right?
	I mean, any way you want to cut it, I find that quite pretty cool.
	And yeah, I mean, when I first heard about that, because it took off like summer last year, and of course it was planned long before that.
	And, you know, I just think those crazy geniuses over at JPL, they're really going to do that.
	And, again, so far, it's worked perfectly.
	It's worked perfectly.
	Apparently the people at NASA were surprised because they just suspected something, some of the parameters, some of the science might not be perfect, but it just is.
	Because Mars is quite different to Earth.
	There's only one third of the gravity and the atmosphere is like...
	Many, many times, dozens of times, or a hundred times less dense.
	So it's a completely different game you're playing with trying to do a drone on Mars.
	And they just got it right.
	Perfectly right.
	Good on them.
	Yeah, that's wonderful.
	All right, let's go to the video comments after that nice little white pill.
	Hey guys, I noticed a friend of the show, Katie Glass, had another article in The Telegraph.
	She's looking to give away her engagement ring to someone who deserves it.
	I would have thought the person who deserves it is the guy who bought it and rightfully owns it.
	Well, that's a good point.
	I mean, if you buy the ring, who else would deserve it, Katie?
	I mean, it's not like you can give it to someone else and then, oh, this is the new union.
	I mean, the whole point of the rings is it's meant to be, you know, you and I. You know, this is the marriage, right?
	Once you're losing that person and then going somewhere else, I don't know, it seems like it shouldn't be the same ring anyway.
	Maybe that's just me.
	I mean, rings are stupid anyway.
	The whole thing comes from the De Beers Corporation, as people have pointed out a million times, but still.
	I mean, absolutely right, oil guy.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Afternoon.
	I work as a presiding officer here in England, so I just wanted to remind all the Brits to get out and vote, either today or tomorrow, depending on when this goes up.
	Make sure you check where your polling station is.
	A lot of them have moved due to the virus of unspecified origin.
	Even if you don't like any of the candidates, go out and spoil your ballot, because spoiled ballots get properly counted and recorded in all the official statistics.
	Bring your own pens and pencils.
	You've always been able to do this, but this year we are encouraging it due to COVID. It saves us time having to clean all the pencils after every use.
	And in regard to masks, we will ask you to wear them.
	But if you're exempt, don't worry.
	Your right to vote comes first.
	We won't ask you why you're exempt.
	We won't ask you to prove that you are exempt.
	And we will not make you wear a mask.
	Your right to vote comes first.
	So get out and vote.
	Some little bread things there.
	But I love how we have public service announcements.
	That's awesome.
	Thanks for sending that in.
	But I was thinking about the politics on the way in with John because the difficulty, of course, is you've got local candidates, assuming if you prefer Party X. Well, if Party X doesn't have a candidate where you are, screw you.
	But, I mean, I was thinking I'd probably just try and find out the guys and then decide which one's the most based and then just go for the most based person there.
	But I don't want to give advice about how to vote.
	It's up to you.
	It's not my fault.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, I had that thing where there's just no one on the ballot that really even comes close to representing my worldview at all.
	It's all the same.
	It's all the shades of the same.
	Have you checked your local area?
	Because it'll be like a ward or whatever.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Do you live in London?
	I can't remember.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Well, Havering.
	Yeah.
	London Borough of Havering.
	Okay, so you've got more things to vote for than just London councillors.
	But the thing is, with the spoiling your ballot thing, I did that in a general election back in, when was it?
	01 or something?
	It didn't feel great doing it, I must admit.
	I didn't feel like I was really sticking it to the man or anything.
	It would be someone at the ballot thing going, oh, yeah, a ruined one, right?
	That's why you've got to have fun with it.
	So there was an old friend of mine in Canterbury who decided to go for his elections and there was no one on there he wanted to vote for.
	So you just throw like a, what was it, like a movie spoiler in massive like, so whoever read it would just, screw you!
	And they're just like, carry on.
	One way of dealing with it.
	But anyway, let's go for the next.
	Hello, gentlemen.
	What is it like working for Carl?
	What's it like working for Carl?
	A lot of lectures about bread, that's for sure.
	Has its ups and downs, as I said the other day, but when you have to watch a lot of vaccine cringe, it's certainly a down.
	But no, otherwise, no, he's a great boss.
	He treats you well, lets you have the freedom you need to go and do what you want.
	I mean, he's not a micromanager, so he doesn't try and interfere with everything you're doing.
	He's just like, right, I trust you to go and do the thing, get it done.
	Well, I've only been here a week and a half, but I'm very happy with the amount of sort of...
	Editorial freedom I've got.
	Very happy with it.
	So, yeah.
	I'm not sure if there's many other media organisations that would essentially let you write whatever you want.
	I mean, within reason.
	He knows my character and I'm not completely insane.
	I'm going to write something...
	But other than that, it's up to you.
	I'm very happy with it so far.
	Anyway, let's go to the next one.
	I am proud of the Lotus Eaters for taking back the media from the billionaires and the millionaires and the corporations and giving it back to the working class British people.
	Also, while Carl is gone, you should set up bread lines at the Lotus Eaters because bread lines are a good thing.
	It's a good thing that people are lining up and they are getting bread.
	That's a good thing.
	It means they have bread.
	He's joking, right?
	He's a great guy.
	He does impersonations of all the different people.
	Come on, Bernie Sanders.
	Where's our endorsement?
	Find the millionaire and billionaire media.
	Screw you.
	But if we had bread as well, the Bernie Sanders example, I remember he was complaining about deodorant, you know, like some old man, and he was like, what's the problem with deodorant?
	He's like, well, there's so many different types.
	It should just be one.
	And it's like, yep, that's socialism, so if we had bread, it would all just have to be the same type of bread.
	You want a different kind of bread?
	Screw you.
	There is no different kind of bread.
	Like, if we're going to eat meals, we're going to eat potatoes tonight.
	I don't like potatoes.
	Screw you.
	Like, you're eating potatoes.
	It's horrible.
	What a strange way to look at the world, I think.
	Why would you want one type of deodorant?
	Why would you want one type of...
	I can't remember where I read it or who said it or something, but I heard about how in Soviet Russia, they'd have a factory that made the left Wellington boot and a factory that made the right Wellington boot.
	LAUGHTER It sounds like a joke, but it's probably true.
	No, it was true.
	It's definitely true.
	And, you know, if one factory's production...
	If their productions don't perfectly match, you're left with a surplus of one or dearth of one boot or the other.
	You've got Diane Abbott's shoes, you know.
	Well, yeah.
	But that's...
	God.
	It's just a strange way of looking at the world, I think.
	Have you read Conquest of Bread at all?
	No.
	You really should.
	It's not that long.
	It's worth it just for a laugh for anyone at home as well.
	Go and give Conquest of Bread a read.
	Because I had a mate of mine.
	I don't know what his political opinions were, but he gave me this and was like, yeah, this guy's kind of out there, but he's got some good ideas.
	And I read it.
	I just find myself laughing page after page after page.
	Because, for example, he wants an anarchist socialist utopia.
	He literally calls himself a utopian.
	I mean, you couldn't be more stupid.
	And one of his ideas is like, right, so we'll set up the commune and we'll just pull together all the kitchens so we don't have to cook individually.
	So we just have a collective kitchen.
	Collective canteen.
	In which two people work in the canteen and they make the food and then everyone come and get their food after work.
	It's like, yeah, but what if you want the...
	You know, they're going to make one kind of food.
	What if I want different food?
	What if I want something spicy tonight?
	And it's like, screw you, the canteen's not doing that.
	I mean, at the first hurdle, it looks ridiculous.
	I don't know why people fall for this.
	Or if the food was contaminated, let's say.
	So everyone's going to get food poisoning, or go hungry.
	I mean, well, they had collective canteens in Maoist China.
	And, well, the horrors and misery that played out there...
	What about if the food runs out?
	The collective food runs out?
	Well, it gets mixed with sawdust.
	And then you've got double the food.
	Yeah.
	Anyway, let's go for the next one.
	Hey, Callum.
	So you often complained in the George Floyd trial about the double standards that the media was reporting compared to what you and Carl were reporting.
	And I have a complaint about this event.
	These 45 people died in Maroon in a stampede.
	One of the People who was recovering in a hospital reported that he heard people yelling I can't breathe as they were crushed under their peers and yet the media reported nothing about this and that just makes me even more angry because we care so much more about a literal criminal saying I can't breathe as compared to 45 people who really did
	nothing wrong.
	So she's referencing there.
	I did see the story, but I didn't know what to make of it.
	So in Israel, there was some kind of religious gathering.
	There was footage before, and one of the things I find kind of cute about the whole thing, the way they danced, they'd all just jumped up and down on the spot together.
	It looked amazing.
	Anyway, so then, I don't know what happened, but it turned into a stampede, and as she says, 45 people got crushed to death.
	Awful.
	I mean, she's right.
	I mean, one of the things there is that Israel is Israel and America is America.
	I mean, people have much closer ties with the United States.
	But then, of course, the fact that George Floyd isn't some hero who got crushed in a stampede is totally not his fault.
	He's some criminal who tried to pay for the $20 bill, got arrested by the cops.
	The way they dealt with him might have left to death, might not.
	That's a matter of debate for the court.
	And yet, that's the main thing that the entire planet cares about.
	It's...
	Yeah, the thing I'll just say about that, obviously people being crushed to death, you have the wind crushed out of you so you can't breathe, yeah.
	And so it's a completely different thing to George Floyd who I think couldn't breathe because of a drugs overdose.
	The other thing would just be that...
	She says there, in broad terms, we care more about the individual death of George Floyd than these 40-plus people.
	I'm not sure it's the case.
	It's the cabal that runs mainstream media care more about That's true.
	It's not everyone.
	It's not the people of America or the people of Israel or Britain.
	It's the people, the puppet masters that choose what the mainstream media seems to care about day after day after day.
	They want to use him to push their leftist agenda.
	I mean, we've literally seen this in the interviews Project Veritas have had with people from, say, CNN. But they're just like, yeah, we just use this to push bullshit.
	Well, it's a hand-picked news cycle by a very, very small number of people that are all in contact with each other, it seems.
	Was it Peter Hitchens?
	He doesn't believe in conspiracy theory, but he believes in people having lunch together.
	Take the tech giants.
	They literally admit to all being in WhatsApp groups with each other.
	So it's not us.
	It's not that humanity really cares about George Floyd and doesn't care at all about those 40 plus people in Israel.
	It's a very, very small number of particular people have decided they're going to keep a particular news cycle.
	So I don't think she should beat herself up too much or have a downer on humanity in general that that's what's going on.
	But anyway, that's what I felt about that.
	Anyway, let's get into the comment section underneath.
	So I don't really feel this.
	Cindy J, supposedly the new platform is supposed to expand into a full public forum.
	These are comments about Trump's new platform.
	Okay, well, that'd be cool if it happened.
	Maybe, sure.
	I don't have any information that shows that, but if he said that, then okay, sure, that's interesting.
	I don't know how he's going to get that done.
	I did see on that he was asking for people to sign up, not only to get the emails, but to then sign up and give money.
	I mean, maybe that's the thing.
	He's going to go for a Gab-style situation in which he funds the whole thing himself, buys the servers, pays for the code, so on and so forth.
	That'd be interesting.
	Absolutely.
	I don't know why he doesn't get on Gab.
	Maybe he wants to own it himself, so then it's secure.
	I mean, why didn't he do this, like, four or five years ago?
	No one expected what happened.
	I mean, even the most black-pilled, cynical people didn't expect social media giants to be this blatant of just, we're going to cancel the president.
	It's audacious, if nothing else, for sure.
	So, Yanisa J. Mulluk, sorry, the hype of the blog sounds like free advertisement for the site.
	Make the mainstream media talk about it, and soon most people will know about it.
	It got you talking about it.
	Yeah, it certainly did get me talking about it.
	So, I mean, I've signed up.
	I go to my email address.
	I'm like, yeah, email me when you've got tweets.
	Because it's going to be funny.
	I know it's going to be funny.
	James Hayes.
	This isn't the social media Trump was talking about, as far as I understand it.
	There is an actual social media in the works mentioned in the BBC article on this.
	Okay, maybe that's the case.
	Maybe I missed that.
	But what I saw was the blog.
	Hi Callum, not sure you're being fair regarding Parler.
	It has been up for more than a month now and has been running just fine.
	I've used it on an almost daily basis regarding how many people can still use it.
	I have no such numbers.
	But I am sure if it gets promoted it will very quickly catch up to where it was.
	Maybe.
	Absolutely.
	I saw Carl complaining that he wasn't getting the same number of reactions on there.
	It's just, personally, whenever I go on there, like, I went in this morning to try and check it out.
	It was just down for maintenance, so I just...
	I've sort of given up on it.
	The main problem I've got with it, though, is it demands a phone number, and then it's tied to that phone number.
	And I used it for one account, and then I got rid of that account.
	And it's like, no, no, your old account is still tied to that phone number.
	I'm like, I've only got one phone.
	What do I have to do?
	I've got no comment.
	I'm afraid I've never, ever been on Parlour.
	It was good.
	I mean, that's the saddest thing about all of this.
	Parler was great.
	Yeah, I've heard good things about it.
	I just don't really interact with Twitter or Facebook or anything.
	Matthew Hammond, I think Trump planned something more grand, but was then informed all the pitfalls of what would happen to Parler.
	As a blog entry, it bypasses many of these issues.
	That's certainly true.
	It does look like people are saying there's more to come, there's more in the pipeline.
	Hopefully, because his spokesman there saying that it was going to be the best platform ever, with tens of millions of people on it.
	It doesn't look like a blog, or at least that's not what I had in mind.
	George Harp, do you guys think a true free speech social media platform is possible?
	It seems that regardless of what side creates such a platform, they inevitably insert their own bias in the rules.
	Case in point, Michael Lindell's platform bans swearing for using the Lord's name in vain.
	It is perhaps the case that the people actually believe in free speech are a tiny minority.
	Certainly true.
	I mean, my prediction for the internet is it's just going to split, and you will end up with Twitter and leftist sites, and you'll end up with Gab and obviously right-wing sites.
	The right-wingers seem to have a more tolerant stance on speech at the moment.
	I don't know if Gab's just decided to say, if you're a socialist, you're banned.
	I wouldn't be surprised.
	He's certainly right that it's so difficult to actually go straight and narrow down the line.
	How funny is it?
	I've seen minds doing it.
	I should call out minds here.
	They've been good on this.
	They've tried to keep it straight and narrow.
	It used to be that the leftists were the most open and it was the more conservative types, like Mary Whitehouse, that wanted to ban things that were censorious.
	And it was the leftist hippie types that were for freedom of expression.
	It's just interesting.
	I mean, in my lifetime, that is.
	So it's interesting to see that invert almost entirely.
	I can't see the thing, but when you said, the guy said, is it possible to have sort of a free speech?
	Of course it's possible.
	I mean, within reason.
	I mean, there's defamation laws, libel laws, things like that, where, you know, society really does need a way to libel type stuff.
	But beyond that, sure.
	I mean, as the chat points out, 4chan applies terrorist laws, they apply libel laws, and then that's it.
	Right, yeah.
	Also, laws against obscenity and whatnot.
	And that's the standard.
	There's a couple of things that you really have to, really.
	But beyond that, of course it's possible.
	I mean, 4chan exists, for example.
	But one of the things on my mind is I always thought, what if the government just made their own social media?
	Sure, it would suck.
	I imagine it would suck in comparison to Facebook's ability.
	But they would have to apply US law, or at least annex the moderation departments of Facebook.
	Be like, hey, these are going to be run by the Bureau of Censorship, in which we will apply US law and nothing else.
	One way of dealing with it.
	Although I do like Poland's solution, which is just to find them.
	Never there.
	So, Chris Wolfe.
	The Streisand effect is definitely a powerful force.
	I remember hearing about a spicy racist content creator with which nobody wanted to engage.
	Thought I'd check out this Sargon chat for myself.
	That's totally true.
	Oh boy.
	Yeah, as I tell you, that's why I found Tommy Robinson.
	British Voldemort.
	So interesting.
	It was just weird that he was hated so much.
	And sure, he's got some, you know, a lot of views I probably disagree with, but on the question of is Islamization bad, I mean, yes.
	I'm a liberal.
	Why wouldn't you believe that?
	So on the woke glow-in-the-darks, I can almost hear Carl shouting, what did I say after watching that recruitment video?
	Yeah.
	It's just on college campuses.
	It's never going to spread anywhere serious.
	Dave Hanna.
	The CIA non-diversity hire video reminds me of a Lady Thatcher quote.
	Power is like being a lady.
	If you have to tell people you are, then you aren't.
	Bit glib, but I mean, it's like cool, isn't it?
	If you have to tell people you're cool or ask them to call you cool.
	I'm going to disavow the transphobia laden in Margaret Thatcher, just in case.
	So, Robert Longshore.
	Read the diversity hire in the CIA. She was suffering with imposter syndrome simply because she knows she's a diversity hire.
	True.
	And knows, therefore, she would not be the best choice for the job.
	True.
	Therefore, imposter.
	She is sus.
	Robert, you're absolutely right.
	I want someone to put it to her in her day-to-day life.
	If someone's in the CIA and you know her, go after her and ask her about that.
	Like, why have you got all these diversity hire awards and then you have imposter syndrome?
	Just put two and two together, love.
	So, Brad Ayu.
	I swear that this CIA advert on The Onion a few years back, maybe they are time travellers as everything they joke about becomes true.
	Yeah.
	It's also like the Babylon Bee.
	I mean, they're known as the prophet these days.
	They just prophesise things.
	They don't publish satire.
	They make prophecies.
	It's crazy, really crazy.
	Crazy stuff.
	Andy D. On the CIA part of the show, I hire a lot of former intelligence, police officers, and other agencies in the UK, US, and EU. Most of them cite the woke BS for leaving the service.
	Yes, tragic, isn't it?
	You've got these good guys, and they all end up leaving because of that.
	The talent bleed from these agencies is extremely alarming, as anyone of any worth is doing it.
	The 15 years pension and quitting.
	Many cite the agencies that's now more interested in wokeness than terrorism, crime, etc.
	It's so poised and so pernicious to have the intelligence services infected by this sort of thing.
	We were speaking about this earlier, and it's like, okay, there are loads of different political opinions.
	We all agree on the fundamental, which is, what do we want the state to do?
	Point one.
	Well, national defense.
	Build the army, save us from being invaded, intelligent services to stop us from being victims of terrorist attacks.
	We can all agree on that part.
	These are the fundamental, fundamental parts of the state.
	And if they're compromised...
	I mean, never mind the welfare or the goddamn equality department or other such, you know, tacked on nonsense.
	I mean, the very fundamental reason for the state existing has been compromised by this ideology.
	If the army MI5, MI6 and GCHQ are lost, essentially view vast swathes of our own population as the enemy...
	If they've got this ideological possession on them...
	It's an extremely dark future we're looking at, then, if that is indeed the case.
	Yeah, but also they're the resistance, don't you know?
	The wokers.
	They're resisting the system.
	Funded by GCHQ! That's what I say, just call them feds.
	But it's also tragic, though.
	I mean, Andy's right.
	Whenever we get a chance, you know, when we happen to meet someone who was ex-police or something...
	You could tell they were good, and then they just left, and it means that there's such a bleed of talent.
	Adrian Farrow.
	You laugh and you don't understand, maybe, but the intelligence hiring is old NKVD stuff.
	Those are the grunts' voices, mods of your life.
	They're poor and they have nothing but their checkboxes, so they'll do anything to the letter and do what they're told.
	Edit, the new guy got it in the end, but Callum seemed to brush it off.
	That's a fair point.
	These diversity hires, they're there to be morons.
	They're there just to follow orders.
	So that might be desirable.
	Sure.
	I don't think it's desirable at the top.
	And I bet at the top it's just as infected.
	Adam W. Wait, what?
	I had to look up the UK grading system to see what they're talking about.
	A 2-2 is a 50-59%.
	That's one question away from a fail in all of your subjects.
	You can get a third, I think.
	They also allow dual citizenship as well, in case you were wondering.
	In MI5 and MI6. You can have dual citizenship with Iran, and you can still get accepted into MI5 and MI6. So that...
	It's actually making me feel sick.
	That is...
	I said it earlier, but that is what you would do if you were looking to undermine it.
	If you were looking to...
	Oh my God.
	Well, I said it.
	I said it.
	You know, I'm dual with Britain and China.
	Also, I'm a Communist Party member.
	I mean, I'm sure they do some background checks, but apparently, yeah.
	Dual citizenship.
	When I looked into the intelligence services, you know, 15 odd years ago or more, One of the main things was that you had to be British.
	You had to show both your parents were British.
	It's sort of obvious, really.
	We want to be as confident as we possibly can that you're loyal to the Crown.
	Sorry, that's what we're going to need if you want to be in MY6. But, no, you can be a dual citizen now.
	Of anywhere, does it matter?
	John's pointing out that China, for example, doesn't accept dual citizenship as existing at all.
	That's so bigoted of them.
	How dare they?
	How weird.
	They're weirdos for that.
	Yeah.
	Anyway.
	The radical centrist god.
	Well, looks like I need to write another letter to the PM and my MP again.
	Why on earth are our taxes going towards funding diversity hires in the damn MI5? Unbelievable.
	No, I take it back.
	It's believable because our security services are brain dead.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	I like the anger you injected into that.
	It's perfect.
	Quite right.
	I remember when we did the segment on the fact that the parliament was promoting critical race theory, like the parliamentary accounts.
	They have a bunch of accounts.
	They have a bunch of sections within the parliament as in like the building, the institution.
	They have their own section set up.
	And they were all promoting critical race theory.
	And I sent this to Kevin Badenlock.
	I emailed her.
	And she said, hey, I love what you're doing.
	Here's a bunch of other stuff that's going on within the government in case you're worried about them promoting critical race theory elsewhere.
	And she was like, great, thanks.
	I'll look into it.
	I don't know if she did or not.
	But the fact that, oh my god, the level of work to get rid of this...
	I mean, you'd have to go to literally every department within the government and slowly weed it out from the most obscure places because it's so deep within the system.
	It's horrible.
	But, you know, good luck to her.
	So on Beau's white pill, Alex Ogle...
	Ogle?
	We're going to get that wrong forever.
	As a cisgendered heteronormative male, I object to today's white pill.
	The object of the discussion was a rover, clearly a male object.
	I will not support space exploration unless there are female robots of colour being sent to gather data in the most intersectional manner possible.
	Quite right.
	Well said.
	Well said that man, right on the money.
	We didn't do a segment on it, but we were reading an article from the BBC a while back at the office, and NASA had been infected with wokeism, because of course they have.
	And they had a section that was like, yes, by 2050 we will send a person of colour to the moon.
	It's like, what?
	Like, what are you saying there?
	It's like, okay, sending white people to the moon.
	Easy peasy.
	Person of colour.
	We need some tough decisions before we...
	It's like, you put them in the space rocket and everything goes wrong or something now.
	So what?
	What are you talking about?
	Like, why can't you just send astronauts to the moon?
	No, no, no.
	Person of colour.
	That's difficult.
	It's like, good God.
	Yeah.
	Alex Hiley.
	Great to hear some space stuff on the podcast today, particularly this mission, as my company has recently secured a contract that is part of this mission, and I shall be building the engine for the Mars sample return mission that's rendezvous with the rover.
	Fantastic.
	Collect samples and bring them back to Earth.
	So, some British investment.
	Brilliant.
	That is really interesting to me.
	Because I was trying to look for a British angle in it, but it looked like it was pretty much exclusively a JPL NASA thing.
	But that's really interesting actually.
	I'd like to know a bit more information about that.
	I remember when I was doing spacecraft design, the guy who taught it was fantastic.
	I can't remember his name, but he was great.
	And one of the facts he brought up was that we do have the British Space Agency, and one of the funny things about them, for every pound of government investment goes into it, because government is the one funding it, they also get private funding, but the government's main one.
	For every pound they put in, they basically get £10 back.
	Like, it's an absolute cash cow.
	I don't know why it isn't funded more.
	Like, space, I mean, a lot of people think that it's just a waste of money.
	Sure, back in the 60s it might have been, but there's loads of money to be made now.
	Well, in the next generation or two, they'll probably be mining the moon for rare earth metals.
	Funny thing, to get rare earth metals on the moon.
	But it looks like they probably will do that.
	This is what a lot of people think of.
	I mean, like the satellite system, for example.
	I mean, the global satellites that do all communications and the GPS systems and all that.
	I mean, these things are worth loads.
	And to get contracts to set them up, build them, great.
	Makes tons of money.
	I mean, they literally generate so much wealth.
	I mean, how much is our life better thanks to satellites communicating GPS, for example?
	Elon's going to put people on the moon, I think, on the moon and Mars, hopefully within our lifetimes.
	I don't think that's a silly expectation at all.
	So, yeah, that's just great.
	Great stuff.
	It's also loving the White Pill Wednesday concept.
	Yeah, me too.
	So let's go to the general questions.
	Tyler Williams on.
	Oh, wow, Bo is on.
	Any chance for History Rhodesia podcast?
	Want to hear about them standards.
	Yeah.
	I might just release the clip we have of Ian Smith on my Twitter or something.
	There's an interview he gave, and this is what we're referencing, in which some Australian journalist came to Rhodesia when he was Prime Minister and was like, so why do you suppress the whole situation and whatnot?
	And his explanation...
	Of course, I don't endorse Rhodesia or him, but his explanation, there was no sentence in there you could take out and be like, that's bad?
	Because every sentence, he was literally just saying, I don't care about race, we just have a standard, and if you don't reach the standard, then you can't vote.
	He was like, there are plenty of white people who don't read the standard, but most black people don't reach the standard.
	And that was his argument?
	It's like, right, okay, I understand, of course, that this was obviously in place to stop most black people voting in Rhodesia, and that's why it's bad.
	But the central argument of, there's this standard, and you must reach this standard, and if you don't reach this standard, you don't get to vote.
	There's nothing wrong with that.
	There's nothing wrong with that point.
	Well, it sounds like a meritocracy, doesn't it?
	Exactly.
	You just have to reach this standard.
	Okay, if you could get rid of all the segregation he had in Rhodesia, and then set up a liberal state in which, you know, you'd be treated fine, but you've got to reach this standard.
	What's wrong with that?
	That's great.
	Anyway, so, sorry, going on a rant about Rhodesia.
	Rhodesia's a weird place.
	It's a weird moment in history.
	You're, like, refusing to call it Zimbabwe.
	I like to call it Istanbul, Constantinople.
	I feel like the people of Zimbabwe are probably refusing to call it Zimbabwe at this point, with what's been done to it.
	I do like to call things like Istanbul.
	Just refuse to accept that if it ever fell to the Turks.
	I was talking about that period of Rhodesia.
	So Baron Bon Mersh, foreign name.
	So far, I really like the podcast being co-hosted by different people.
	Helen, Josh, and now Bo Dade, I think.
	I think on your name, though.
	As much as I enjoy the classical combination of Carl Callum, I hope you keep mixing up the presenters every once in a while in the future.
	Also, a warm welcome to Bo Dade from the audience.
	Apploiding noises.
	Thank you, well, a.k.a.
	BB Dade.
	All the articles I do on the Lotus website are under BB Dade.
	Is that your middle name, or...?
	Yeah, my first two names are Benjamin Boat, so yeah, that's my initials.
	But also on YouTube is History Bro.
	I've got my own channel, small channel.
	Because that's how we met as well, like you reached out to Carl to do...
	Yeah, I've had lots, I've had hours and hours of conversations about history with Carl on History Bro.
	So yeah, it's all me.
	Facebook upheld the ban on Facebook.
	Oh, really?
	Oh, what a surprise.
	So as John's just telling us, Facebook have decided that the oversight board, who are so carefully considering whether Donald Trump should come back, they've banned him.
	They're not accepting that he should go back on, even after he's been acquitted and shown that he did not do the thing he was accused of.
	This is the thing.
	If Trump was waiting for that...
	Why?
	Why?
	It's not something...
	But the thing is, he's not that naive.
	He's not that naive.
	Surely not.
	I really hope not.
	I really hope I'm just reading it wrong.
	I mean, as I said, I've never met the guy.
	I don't know anyone around his team.
	We've only spoken, I think, closest probably...
	Carl spoke to Steve Bannon.
	I've seen him in conversation with Sebastian Gorker on the premium podcast.
	And Sebastian Gorka's view on it was just, there are a bunch of people around him that are not good.
	So, maybe it's just that.
	Let's find one to end on.
	So, Maxwell Silverhammer.
	No, I'm not doing it in all voice.
	My voice can't take it today.
	Maxwell Silverhammer?
	Mexican name, I'm going to say.
	I don't know if you guys know this, but yesterday's elections in Madrid...
	Oh, so Spanish...
	Well, I was close.
	Yes, yesterday's elections in Madrid resulted in a crushing victory for the right.
	Yeah, I saw the conservative group of one, the PP or whatever they are.
	From my understanding, proper conservatives.
	But I also saw Vox had won a seat.
	And being that the winner party was headed by a woman, I'm left wondering, why is it that the right is way more able to place females as elected officials than the feminist left?
	Because they use diversity hires.
	They don't hire good people who happen to be women.
	They hire women who are women.
	And that's it.
	The requirement is not you're good at being politicians.
	It's just that you're a woman.
	And therefore, they're not going to get to the top because they're not good politicians.
	You're very unlucky in that regard.
	But the right is lucky in that regard.
	They just hire the best.
	And that means the women they do get through are the best.
	Well, I wrote an article about AOC being the modern Marat, and I said in that that she obviously wasn't selected for her intellectual abilities, her agility in debate.
	She's not very eloquent, is she?
	In Britain, we have the all-women shortlist, for example.
	What's that about?
	That's not hiring for the best, and of course then you won't get the best, you'll get women.
	And there'll be differing abilities, but they won't be the best.
	Whereas if you just say, I want the best, then it happens to be a woman where you've got the best, and she's a woman.
	You know, the best comes first, identities come second.
	It'd be nice, wouldn't it?
	Well, as he points out, I mean, the woman who just won in Madrid.
	The only thing, I'm a little bit like, eh, on Fox in Spain.
	I don't know if you know about Fox.
	So, like, the populist group, I get told.
	I mean, I'm not in tune with...
	I don't know a great deal about it, I'm afraid.
	Sorry.
	But I looked them up when we were in Gibraltar, because they want Gibraltar back, and their most popular constituency is apparently, like, the town to the north of Gibraltar.
	I'm just like, no, no alliance.
	No, Gibraltar is British.
	Deal with it.
	You get to keep your colonies in Morocco, and we get to keep our colony in Spain.
	When you can pry a Gibraltar from our cold, dead hand, you can have it back.
	Until then, no dice.
	You've tried multiple times and lost.
	Anyway, we're going to end it there.
	Go and check out the premium podcast called it with Sebastian Gawker on the website.
	That's well worth your time if you want something free.
	Go check out the interviews we did with David Curtin, Richard Tice, and Nick...
	Buckley, the last two from Reform UK. David Curtin from Heritage Party.
	And I guess go out and vote in tomorrow's elections.
	May the best man win.
	But thank you for tuning in.
	We'll be back tomorrow at one o'clock.
	Thank you and goodbye.

▲