Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 19, 2021 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:32:41

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #135

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters for the 19th of May 2021.
	I'm joined by Carl, and today we're going to be talking about Breadtube's terrorism, the police of vice and virtue in the UK and how they've abandoned their impartiality, and also the British public.
	Not woke!
	Funny that.
	Based.
	Based public.
	Anyway, first thing I want to talk about here was the new premium content we have on loadedseas.com, so this is a new premium video of the ghost ship of Theseus.
	So this is the age-old question of if you take a ship and it's Captain Theseus, sail it around the world and replace plank by plank, and eventually you end up with the ship at the end having known the original parts, is it the same ship?
	And you have some expansion on their thoughts, a new idea of how to interpret what's going on there.
	Yeah, I've got a proposed solution that I think philosophically fits with the other philosophers who have built us up to this point.
	But the point is, this was a really fun thing to do, and I kind of really enjoyed springing it on Callum, just because, all right, we're going to talk about this ancient philosophical problem, because it's just really interesting.
	And I think I did a pretty good job of laying out the sort of depth and breadth of it, and I'm really, really happy.
	This is the kind of content that I really like to produce.
	I'm really proud of this, actually.
	So, yeah.
	Definitely go check that out.
	So we did the different arguments over time, and then just your solution to the problem, which I couldn't find an argument against, and I still haven't.
	So go and check it out.
	If you do have an argument against it, we'd love to hear it.
	But it resolves it satisfactorily to all of the specifications that everyone else has laid out.
	So I think it's the best answer.
	I don't know.
	Just wait for the siren to go past.
	Smug.
	Yeah, looking smug.
	Yeah, I resolved it.
	No, I didn't.
	I'm joking.
	So, let's get...
	Let's get into it.
	So tell me about BreadTube funding terrorism.
	Yeah, they're not committing terrorism yet.
	They're just funding it.
	And so this is, of course, in regard to the Israel-Palestine conflict that is going on.
	I don't have a particular side in this conflict because why would you pick sides with people in the Middle East generally?
	But this is just something I just don't care about.
	I just don't care about Israel.
	I don't care about Palestine.
	And BreadTube is really obsessed about this.
	And I find that really interesting because...
	It's not like if the Palestinians were taken out of this context, they'd be like, oh yeah, those Palestinians are such good blokes.
	I mean, this is Amnesty International's view on the Gaza Strip, right?
	So, apparently, in the Hamas de facto administration, which is the Gaza place, the other West Bank is controlled by...
	Hamas.
	No, no, no.
	It's Fatina or something.
	I... Hitler?
	It probably says here, in fact.
	But yeah, something like that.
	But it's not Hamas, and they're not a terrorist group.
	But Hamas is a terrorist group, and they're pretty awful.
	They, as they say, crack down on dissent, stifling freedoms of expression, assembly, attacking journalists, detaining opponents.
	This is from 2020 as well.
	This is not exactly old news.
	You know, this is literally last year, what they were doing.
	Security forces in both areas use unnecessary or excessive force during law enforcement activities.
	You might...
	Is there anything about police that the left doesn't like when they're using excessive force?
	Dunno, this is just one of those questions that's left up in the air.
	Unresolvable, BreadTube.
	And of course, they torture and have other ill treatment of detainees, which are committed with impunity.
	BreadTube doesn't have anything to say about that.
	Women face discrimination and violence, including killings as a result of gender-based violence, as in honour killings.
	Glad we're not feminists.
	Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people continue to face discrimination and lack protection.
	That's a really mild-mannered way of putting that.
	They continue to face discrimination in Palestine, in Gaza.
	So, very underplayed, I would say.
	Anyway, authorities may widespread use of administrative detention without trial.
	These people don't get any justice, obviously.
	They use, in Gaza, civilians are tried before military courts.
	I mean, literally, if you were to say, look, how could one place on Earth do everything wrong?
	It would be the Gaza Strip, right?
	Civilians tried before military courts, causing Gaza's hand down death sentences.
	Palestinian armed groups in Gaza, occasionally fire rockets indiscriminately into Israel, which, of course, is what's going on right now.
	So, the counter-argument to this is, of course, Israel bad?
	It's like, sure.
	But is it this bad?
	Possibly not.
	So you're literally not allowed to be gay in Gaza.
	Faces discrimination.
	Faces discrimination.
	It's a very nice way of putting you will go to prison for a decade, at best, incidentally, which is something that, in fact, one Hamas militant found out.
	The Hamas executed recently, in fact, four years ago, five years ago, but they executed one of the group's leading commanders because he was alleged to be gay.
	Was he gay?
	Who knows?
	Probably not, to be honest.
	But someone said, bro, you is gay.
	Yes.
	And the other guys were like, maybe he is.
	Is al-Din al-Kassam brigades shot Mahmoud Ishtiwi three times in the chest after they detained him because he was alleged to be gay and a thief.
	I mean, I guess Breadtube are like, well, he's at least a thief.
	At least he doesn't believe in private property.
	But, of course, this is doubtless going to be something about, as his family said, no, this is about settling of internal scores and whatnot.
	Sure, it probably is.
	I doubt he was actually gay.
	But the point is, they thought that if we just say that this guy's gay, people won't mind that we shot him.
	And that's the kind of attitude that...
	It exists in the Gaza Strip.
	And like I said, it's not a very nice place if you're concerned about civil liberties or women's rights or gay rights or civilisation.
	You generally wouldn't want to live in a place like this.
	And that's not to say that this justifies any atrocities that are done against them.
	Of course it doesn't.
	It doesn't justify killing of children or civilians or anything like this.
	It's just really weird how the left online have made Palestine their sort of cause celebre, or however you say it.
	It's the thing that they're all talking about.
	And you get things like this from Black Lives Matter.
	It's like, Black Lives Matter stands in solidarity with Palestinians.
	In what way?
	Is it about their killing of gays?
	Or is it about their killing of women?
	Or is it about their using military courts to try civilians?
	Or the just general abolition of civil rights?
	Is it about the heavy-handed policing that they use?
	I mean, what part of Palestine did Black Lives Matter actually stand behind?
	I really want to know.
	They say we're a movement committed to ending settler colonialism in all forms.
	So it's just that.
	It's just that.
	It's just the fact that the Israelis are there.
	And this is why people keep saying, yeah, you kind of look a bit anti-Semitic.
	It's like, yeah, because in all other circumstances, if the description that you can, that amnesty applied to Palestine applied to anywhere else, breadtube would be like, no, this is evil.
	They're bad guys.
	They're fascists.
	They're Nazis.
	Blah, blah, blah.
	But when it's Palestinians, eh, but they're Jews.
	Anyway.
	So, there was a great deal of money being raised for something called the Palestinian Children's Welfare Fund.
	Now, it has been alleged that this has links to various jihadi websites, but these are fairly old allegations.
	This isn't the only set of allegations, but it just seemed like the most prolific one, frankly, where basically they've got links to various websites, and obviously the groups that are running these websites, that are jihadi groups.
	And that's not really very controversial.
	I think most Palestinian organizations probably have some links to Hamas in some way, and this is something that BreadTube are well aware of.
	In fact, let's play a clip to show that BreadTube are well aware that Hamas are essentially a fascist party that are in control of the Gaza Strip, which means they...
	Are embedded and intrinsically part of any organization.
	There will be members of Hamas that are at the very top.
	In the same way that the Nazi party, all businesses would have had party members at the top to coordinate what's going on.
	But this is Vosch saying that he's well aware of this fact.
	Can you do a shout out to Vosch's charity stream and Twitch raid?
	He's raised money for Palestine Children's Relief Fund.
	Hold on a second.
	That rings a bell to me.
	Let me look that up.
	Yeah, Palestine Children's Relief Fund has been criticized due to its financial affiliation with the Holy Land Foundation, which was shut down for suspected funneling of donations to terrorist organizations.
	So no, that's not something I'm going to get involved in.
	That's not a good connection.
	Can you do a shout out to Vash's charity?
	Yeah.
	I'm pretty sure Deepak is a Zionist.
	That's not surprising to me.
	Just so you guys know, the source, or like the assertion that he's referring to there, is an old one.
	And it stems from like, the charity has assisted children, and those children's parents were associated with an organization associated with Hamas.
	We're talking like multiple layers deep.
	The problem is that Hamas is pretty broadly integrated into Palestine.
	They have their hands in a lot of things.
	I mean, they're one of the dominant power structures there, of course.
	So, pretty much everything in Palestine is about two degrees of separation from Hamas, and people will use this as an excuse to label everything they don't like as terrorist sympathizers, and it's a way, essentially, it's essentially the legitimizing mechanism that allows Israel to do what it does over there.
	Um...
	Yeah.
	I think it's an incredibly irresponsible mentality, and I think this is definitely a major blind spot for David Pakman.
	Which is unfortunate, but...
	I saw him getting some criticism.
	Pretty crystal clear.
	And again, if you were discussing any other country and you would say, well, I'm going to send money or any organization, and they were like two degrees of separation from the Nazi party, I suspect the BreadTube would probably have a lot more to say about sending that organization money.
	But when it's Palestine, for some reason it's fine and there's no complaint.
	Even though, as they say, the whole thing is, you know, Gaza is controlled by...
	Hamas.
	Hamas are a literal terrorist organization.
	And BreadTube decided they were going to raise nearly half a million dollars for them.
	That's weird, isn't it?
	And this seems to have been a combined arms attempt by BreadTube.
	So as The Serfs, which is like one of those small crumbtube grifter channels, they tweet out, So considering he raised $250,000 last night between Valsh, Sean, Denims, Chapo, Kevin and Tonight, Thought Slime will have raised nearly half a million for Palestinian relief efforts.
	Cue obligatory conservative Great Day for Hamas retweets.
	Why wouldn't they?
	I mean, it seems like Vorsch is admitting that this is a great day for Hamas.
	You're sending them half a million dollars.
	Any thoughts on this, Callum?
	I don't even know what to say.
	Just yikes, I guess.
	I feel pathetic, but I just...
	I don't know why you'd do this.
	Good question.
	Why would you raise half a million dollars for organizations that you know are staffed by people who are either sympathetic to or active members of Hamas?
	Like, are there not more, you know, neutral actors there?
	Like, I assume like the Red Cross or Doctors Without Borders or something would be present.
	I actually don't know.
	But that would be an easier thing to give to, I would have thought.
	It would be a more morally neutral thing to give to, I think.
	It wouldn't be money that you know is going to go straight to terrorism.
	But it's not a big deal, though.
	I mean, as you can see in the comments and the replies, this is someone replying to one of them.
	We'll go to the next one, John.
	So what if some of the money goes to Hamas?
	Even if they were right about that, people need homes.
	At the end of the day, Israel will be fine.
	Terrorists act on such a small effing scale that anyone who genuinely considers 9 out of 10 of them to be a threat should be laughed at.
	So, it's okay if the money goes to mass.
	What do you mean small scale?
	Like, I thought Hamas were in charge of the entire Gaza Strip.
	They are.
	Like, they're the elected government they were voted for.
	They're the ones who are sending hundreds and hundreds of rockets into Israel.
	Yeah, but they are the government of the strep, in which case that's not some tiny group of 12 people.
	Yeah, they are the power structure, and they are a designated terrorist organization in the US, Canada, and the UK. And so, I mean, the idea that they don't know that Hamas is going to get this money is ridiculous, and if...
	Someone you know is a breadtuber, it might be worth letting the authorities know that they're actually funneling money to a terrorist group, and they seem to know it.
	Which is why David Pakman very wisely was like, look, I'm not touching this.
	David Pakman being a Jewish left-wing political commentator, so this is why he forces out, oh, well, he's a Zionist, as if...
	This is a guilty red mark against him, and it probably is in left-wing circles.
	But this is why David Pakman is saying, well, okay, I'm not going to go down that road, because I don't want to fund terrorism, because David Pakman is not a lunatic, apparently.
	But the thing is, this is, I think, a general problem with charities, is they're not exactly hugely reliable at getting the money to the needy anyway.
	The Daily Mail actually recently published quite a long report that I'm not going to go through in its entirety, But a long-running problem of charities basically...
	Using huge amounts of the funds on wages, fundraising, and other overheads, which seriously cuts into the amount that actually gets the needies.
	Probably one of the best examples being the Joe Biden one we did that he set up.
	He spent 98% of all the donated money on salaries.
	That's right.
	And the only reason you know that is because these charities publish their finances.
	Whereas the PCWF, or whatever it was called, PCRF, They do not publish their finances.
	And that's interesting.
	This was reported by NGO Monitor.
	They do not publish funding information and therefore lack transparency and accountability.
	So not only are you giving money to an organization that has been implicated in funneling money to terrorists, and you know that generally if you send any money to Palestine, it's going to Hamas anyway, you can't even find out where the money went because they're opaque when it comes to how the money is spent.
	Is that an organization you'd give money to for just anything?
	If you're like, right, breast cancer awareness or something, and this charity is like, yeah, we don't reveal how we spend the money.
	Are you going to give them money?
	Or would you go for a charity that does reveal how the money is spent so you can at least have some form of accountability there, right?
	But as you said, this is a long-running problem with these kind of international charities because how do you hold them accountable?
	You know, they're non-governmental organizations Non-profit organizations, presumably.
	And so they're not really accountable to any one particular personal group.
	Channel 4 did a really interesting breakdown of this.
	And from the ones that we can see into, it seems that between 60 and 70% of the charity's annual spending actually goes on charitable activities.
	So almost half of what's going into some of the really big charities is going on wages and fundraising.
	Interesting.
	But I mean, you've got some that, like the National Hereditary Breast Cancer Helpline, how could you not want to donate to that?
	Well, it turned out that only 3% of their total expenditure went on charitable activities in 2014-2015.
	That was 27 grand.
	800 grand went on fundraising and other expenses.
	So it's not like these international charity organizations are free from corruption.
	And as you said with Joe Biden's one, 2% was actually going.
	So, I mean, like, just if you want to give money to someone charitably, the pound you give, only two pence or three pence of that is actually, it possibly gets to the destination.
	So Hamas is going to be like, is that it?
	So, I don't mean to joke or anything, but, like, it seems to me wildly irresponsible for left-wing YouTubers on the internet who are thousands of miles away from the problem to just simply pour gold into the pockets of people who will eventually fund terrorists.
	And it strikes me that this is probably illegal in our countries anyway, so not the wisest move, but I guess it seemed like a really good virtue signal, didn't it?
	Yeah, boy.
	I mean, it's the thing on my mind as well, like, why not just donate to the Red Cross?
	I just looked that up to check.
	Apparently, it's the Red Crescent Society within the Islamic world, because, of course, you don't use the cross because of a Christian symbol.
	That would have been so much easier.
	Like, it's an organization that's trusted.
	You know, they've done great work even going back to the war, you know, Second World War.
	I don't know if they're around in the First World War, maybe.
	I don't know.
	But it's totally neutral, but instead you go for a charity that's got shady organizations.
	Sorry, shady associations.
	It's not something that even the people doing the donating can admit that the money's going to Hamas.
	So what if it goes to Hamas, bro?
	Well, so what?
	They're oppressing the people of Gaza.
	They're a bunch of terrorists, and it's probably illegal in our countries to do so.
	That's what's so what.
	Idiots.
	Absolute idiots.
	And I don't know why you're siding with these people.
	It really just seems that you just...
	Why can't they just not?
	Why do you have to do that?
	Why can't you just not?
	Just give it to Doctors Without Borders or something like that.
	What am I saying?
	Because you want Hamas to get the money, that's why.
	That's why.
	They want Hamas to have the money.
	That's the only reason I can think of for why they would do that.
	What other reason is there?
	Unless they're just totally idiots, just total morons, who have got this starry-eyed, idealistic view.
	Well, we'll give this money, and then they'll give it to the Palestinian children.
	No, they won't.
	They're going to take it and use it for weapons.
	That's what they're going to do.
	A cynical, realist view of how this money is going to be spent would definitely be a more, yeah, I wouldn't trust that in any way, shape or form.
	I don't trust most of the normal charities to actually do with the money that I give them what I expect them to do.
	And so I think that charity begins at home and I give money to people who I know and who I know are going to use it and how they're going to use it.
	So rather than just some randos who are like, yeah, I promise I'll spend this money 5,000 miles away in the way that you want.
	I've never met you.
	I have no idea how your organisation works.
	And you're connected to terrorists?
	Yeah.
	Bollocks.
	Not great luck.
	Why would you trust this?
	Boy.
	Anyway.
	Let's go on to something a little bit lighter, shall we?
	So, British police.
	Now, there's been a big discussion going on in Britain right now because you remember we reported on the Israel-Palestine, well, just Palestine demonstrations in London.
	I haven't seen the Israeli ones in London.
	And the people who went through there shouted some anti-Semitic stuff, like rape Jewish daughters.
	God.
	Yeah, those guys.
	Apparently they've been charged now because that is a crime in the UK, regardless of what you think of what the law should be.
	They have been charged.
	But one of the other events that we didn't note on at the time in the clip, but has now gone viral, is that there was a uniformed police officer who has been filmed interacting with the Palestinian protesters and siding with them, chanting Free Palestine.
	So if we go to the first link here, this is Dispatches.
	So Roy just Dispatches, in case people are wondering, on sort of breaking news on Lodicies.com if you want to check that out.
	So...
	This is the uniformed police officer here.
	So she was filmed while holding a white rose and speaking with members of the crowd who were asking her about her thoughts on the current conflict between Israel and Hamas.
	The officer proceeded to hug the protester she was speaking to before chanting Free Palestine, Free Palestine to praise of the crowd in violation of police conduct, rules on fairness and impartiality.
	In a statement released on Twitter addressing the footage, Scotland Yard Chief Superintendent Roy Smith stated, I can confirm that colleagues at MET Contact Centre are aware of this incident and it has been passed to the relevant department for investigation.
	Whilst we expect officers to engage in events, they must remain impartial.
	I mean, true, from the police there, and pretty disgusting that this officer was not impartial.
	I mean, just to be clear, propriety demands that this woman is fired.
	I was listening to the radio this morning.
	There were some police officers calling in and saying, this is the different procedures you can do.
	So you can come in for what it's like, what do they call it, like professional words or whatever.
	And the first level is essentially, was it wise to do that and sort of make them think about it?
	Second one is like, right, you've effed up big time here and you're getting a big telling off.
	or it's then to go to suspensions and then firings and whatnot um with it being so public and it also being so obvious like there was no way this lady did not know what the rules were she knew she was breaking the rules and now she's been filmed doing it and it's such a it's such a divisive issue it's it's not a small thing either it's it's not like you were chanting for women to be able to vote or something like you you were saying free palestine free palestine the free palestine rally
	If the alternative happened or you were an EDL rally chanting, you would have had the same kind of response you're demanding.
	So if we can go to the first link here, so there's some footage.
	As you can see, this is the footage that is going around.
	And if we go to the first clip, we're going to play the clip just so you can see her doing it.
	So she's like, no, I can't get a point.
	Right.
	Free, free Palisades!
	Totally unacceptable.
	Totally unacceptable.
	Yeah, there's no question about it.
	It doesn't matter what your views on Palestine are.
	A police officer cannot do this.
	It is as simple as, you know, imagine that's the EDL. Not going to happen.
	So if we go back to the article, there's some more stuff in here.
	So in the midst of last summer's worldwide racial activist protest following the death of George Floyd, a number of metropolitan police officers broke their impartiality requirements by taking the knee in solidarity with Black Lives Matter.
	If we go to the first image, just so we can demonstrate them there.
	That's the image.
	So this isn't the first time either?
	Like, the Met Police have been ridiculously bad on this?
	Not just one officer?
	Just to be clear, I absolutely hate this.
	And the reason that British policing was held up as a model to the rest of the world was because of the standards of impartiality.
	The fact that the police were meant to simply be those upholding the rules, as in keeping the order, keeping...
	Keeping everything to be a sort of level playing field that everyone else can engage in and not be expected to have explicit biases one way or another.
	And this is, I think, a necessary component to a free society.
	And when you have openly politicized police, you have essentially kind of an ethical state being formed on the ground.
	And I really despise that.
	Again, in a country that expects a plurality of political opinions, you can't have this.
	This is unacceptable.
	Police officer, you know, who looked as if she was of Muslim descent, shouting free Palestine?
	Unacceptable.
	Unacceptable.
	She should be fired.
	I think she said she was Iranian.
	Well, there we go.
	These people should be fired.
	She should be fired.
	It should be held up as a goddamn example.
	You do not do this.
	You are in Britain.
	You will act like a neutral police officer.
	And if you don't, you will be fired.
	She should be fired.
	on the 7th of june i believe they did that because the crowd was in front of them they've endured all of them a long hard day hours of protests they were being abused and shouted at by all kinds of people not least my black and ethnic minority police officers suffering racial abuse oh they're worse i suppose there's police officers they're police officers so they get on with their job Bring back the constabulary.
	Where are the truncheons?
	No, seriously.
	If people are racially abusing the police, I'm not allowed to racially abuse people.
	But catch what she's saying there.
	What she's giving you as a message there is if you racially abuse the police, they will kneel for your protest.
	They will side with your protest.
	I hate it.
	What a statement.
	All of the rules are being broken here.
	Yeah.
	God, Jesus Christ.
	So she then, in response to being pointed out to being a pathetic excuse for a leader of the Mets who just openly says, yes, we should be a political police force, she issued another statement.
	So on June 7th, Dick issued an impartiality direction to all officers to not repeat the jester in public order situations or operations, adding, every briefing after that for the protest included, quote, we will not be taking the knee.
	So she did eventually accept that, yes, this was wrong, and you should not do it, but she defended the officers at the time initially, and then when she got the pushback, she was like, oh wait, no.
	And everyone knows it.
	She's the woke lesbian police commissioner of the Met under Sadiq Khan, who is also woke, who are instantiating this kind of police of diversity and tolerance, who have rainbow flags on their police cars, they kneel for Black Lives Matter, and they chant free fucking Palestine.
	I hate it.
	Sorry, I know I'm getting unreasonable.
	No, we're going to go through and demonstrate all of that, because it's unbelievable.
	Like, you can say, you know, in abstract, political police force bad, but in this case, let's not beat around the bush.
	There is a political force behind the British police, particularly the Met, and it is not one of, you know, right-wing conservatism or something.
	No, it is one of woke leftism, as you can see in this example of BLM, or if we go to the next image, so we can see the diversity cops there at gay pride parades.
	Unacceptable.
	Taking part in uniform with gay pipe fags on their cheeks and one stuck in their head there.
	So you go to the next image.
	This is another example, just a random police force, Nottinghamshire here, going to a pride parade with a big pride flag with the police symbol in the middle of it.
	Seems a bit Islamophobic, but never mind.
	Did you ask your Muslim constituents how they feel about the police having a pride flag?
	So we go to the next one as well.
	This is the British Transport Police who were taking part in a Pride Parade celebrating the fact that they were there.
	You could see they were leading the procession with their police van, police uniforms and rainbows along with themselves.
	What are you doing?
	Do you think it's your day off?
	Goddammit!
	You're in uniform.
	I hate it.
	These pride parades, as has been mentioned a million times, we have equal rights in the UK. Obviously.
	Like, we even have privileges in the UK. We do.
	But we'll get into that another time.
	But the privileges and the equal rights mean that there is no argument here about you being like, oh, we're just marching for the same treatment.
	No.
	These pride marches have been politicized in other ways, particularly in the woke way.
	So, no, this is not just you celebrating diversity or something.
	Don't give me that BS. So we've got the next one here.
	This is just some of the more ridiculous stuff.
	So this is Greater Manchester Police.
	Some guy wearing like a puffin outfit.
	I don't know what that is.
	Like some big bauble.
	I joke that this is Islamophobic.
	But this is exactly the problem with this kind of policing.
	As in, this is an overtly political statement.
	As ridiculous as it looks, it is overtly political.
	And the thing is, if you ask the Muslim community or the devoutly Christian community if it still exists...
	They'll say, well, hang on a second, this is asserting a series of values from an institution I'm forced to pay for, that governs over me, that I morally, deeply disagree with.
	This is why you have to be neutral.
	Because you are showing favour to one community over another community, which, and I don't know why I have to say that, isn't equality.
	It's not fair, it's not just, it's wrong to do this.
	And they'll put you in jail if you offend their values as well, which we'll get into in a minute.
	But the next image here is just the, as you mentioned, the LGBT police car.
	This is the famous one where they've redone the car to get rid of the...
	So you have the blue and the light green there that's meant to indicate that it's a police car, and they've drawn all over it with rainbows, so kind of defeating the purpose of a police car looking like a police car there, but whatever.
	And if you go to the next link here, this is the Times.
	They found out that they had spent £750, this police force, to redo two cars.
	Like this.
	And if you go to the next link, this is them on Twitter saying why.
	So someone saying, good morning, how much did this cost?
	I thought the police were under great financial strain due to budget cuts.
	Sussex Police response, it cost £750 to decorate two cars, mainly paid from the diversity budget.
	Why do you have a diversity budget?
	I like the 400 replies to the 57 likes.
	Literally people being like, wait, what?
	You have a diversity budget?
	How much is in there?
	How much are you wasting?
	Why are you constantly begging for cash if you have this cash?
	Who's not just saying, actually, I don't know why we have a diversity budget, let's just pay the police more.
	Could have been used to catch criminals, but no, instead we're using it to paint police cars with rainbows.
	Don't worry, we've got the clown car.
	And in case you're wondering, the diversity budget, let's go into it a little bit.
	So you can see here this is the West Midlands Police Job Centre under Diversity and Inclusion and Support.
	And they say in here they have goals such as eliminating discrimination, harassment and victimisation, ensuring equality of opportunity and fostering good relations.
	And to do this, we will discriminate on age, disability, race, religion, gender, faith orientations...
	Lines.
	As you can see, they end up saying that they have positive action.
	Positive action is about lawful actions to address any disproportionality in workforce representation.
	Race and gender socialism.
	They've got a quota, they've got a goal of the percentage they want, and you're going to fill that quota.
	How are we going to do it?
	By positive action.
	Yeah.
	So they say in here, it does not include offering someone a job based on a specific protected characteristic, privilege characteristic, as this is classed as positive discrimination, which is illegal.
	B.S. B.S. You are liars.
	There is no way this does not happen because we have the proof.
	You have been sued for this in the past.
	So we go to the next link here.
	This is Merseyside Police.
	Police forced discriminated against white heterosexual male applicant.
	It was a guy who was massively overqualified, came in, he was a white heterosexual male, there was someone who wasn't a white heterosexual male who was underqualified, who do you think they went with?
	They didn't go with the white guy.
	Didn't want him.
	He's got the wrong characteristics.
	So then he sued, saying, I'm massively overqualified petition, how on earth has someone beat me?
	And they had to say in court, yeah, we discriminate against you because of your race, gender, and sexuality.
	Because you're a white heterosexual male.
	And just to be clear, this is what Joe Rogan was talking about yesterday.
	It's going to be open discrimination against straight white men because that's the way that intersectionality works.
	That's the way that wokeness works.
	It has a hierarchy of power and privilege, considers some races, genders, and sexualities to be superior to others innately, and therefore action needs to be taken.
	In this case, it views white people as being superior to non-white people, straight people being superior to non-straight people, and Men to be superior to women and other.
	This isn't the only thing here.
	I mean, just the procedure, let's say, of being openly partial, and then the open discrimination against people.
	There's also the money, the money element.
	So this, I took these screenshots a while back, but they've now been filled by the sounds of it.
	So I think this was like 2016.
	Head of Diversity and Inclusion.
	Salary, £60,270 to £65,751.
	£60,000 for the Head of Diversity and Inclusion.
	£60,000.
	Can I have two cops?
	For an institutionally racist police force, incidentally.
	You could send those two cops out.
	They could be patrolling somewhere.
	Keep that area safe.
	Or you could get the Head of Diversity and Inclusion to check everyone's melanin and genitals.
	I mean, I know what I would do, but I'm not in charge of the police.
	Police went with melanin and genitals are important.
	That is not the only job either, the next one here.
	So if we go, positive action manager, £39,522 to £46,422.
	We could redefine this as discriminator-in-chief, if you like.
	Yeah, that's the job they were hiring for.
	£40,000.
	£40,000.
	You could pay a peace officer for 40 grand.
	I'm sure he'd be happy to go out and patrol for 40 grand.
	Or you could hire a discriminator in action and he can go do that.
	This isn't the only one either.
	There were a whole load of these.
	I didn't take screenshots of them all because it didn't feel like it.
	But there were like 10 jobs on offer when I took these screenshots.
	And they were all grossly overpaid for people who just check melanin and genitals.
	And we're talking literally like millions being spent on this each year.
	This is just one police force.
	This is West Midlands.
	Every single police force has to hire exactly the same number of people, not to mention how much the apartment costs, the room costs, the utility costs, and all the rest of it.
	And then you've got to consider that every NHS trust also has to do this, because that's also run by the state.
	And they're mandated to do the same thing, and then we go to the civil service, and you will have exactly the same situation.
	Probably in the fire service, and every other goddamn service that government runs here will have exactly the same thing, in which they're paying people unbelievable amounts of money to just be discriminator-in-chief.
	Dear conservatives, fire all of these people.
	Just liquidate these job roles.
	They don't need to exist.
	They don't do anything of any use.
	And they're just a way of promoting a kind of religious perspective within these organizations.
	They're entirely political.
	You're not going to get them filled with right-wingers or anything.
	It will only be people who agree with radical left-wing ideas.
	That's a politicization of these forces.
	It's unacceptable.
	Liquidate them.
	You want to save some money?
	I mean, we just spent a lot of money.
	Let's save some.
	Get rid of these guys.
	In case you're wondering, the costs have gone up, because of course they have.
	So we go to the next link here.
	This is the latest hiring of the Wedmislens Police Chief for Diversity and Inclusion.
	Presumably the last one left, because, I don't know, you got so much money, you decided to go on a yacht to Argentina or something.
	And this new one is going to get paid £74,000 a year.
	£74,000 to sit there and say you need more browns.
	that's going to be his job don't be transphobic or you could just get rid of position i mean 74 grand why i mean how many criminals could you apprehend for 74 grand or how many genitals could you inspect for 74 grand that's the that's the two options conservatives don't make the wrong So let's go for the next link here.
	This is the organisation as well.
	So you've got all of this structural crap, and then you've got the way they act openly partisan.
	So you can scroll down a little bit here.
	This is what we talked about the other day.
	Lauren Southern, she was defended by Nigel Farage after she was banned from entering the UK for distributing racist leaflets.
	The racist leaflets in question said Allah was gay.
	A pride protest with the same sides will be going on this year.
	So I don't know what's going to be racist about those LGBTQ Muslims who are going to be saying that.
	But that's the police force in action.
	That's the home office there in action.
	Why did they say that?
	Why did they say saying Allah is gay is a racist leaflet?
	Because they run on political lines.
	It is a political force.
	And it's political in one direction.
	Wokeism.
	So we're going to the next one here.
	This is also just the absurdity of what takes place in the UK. So Met Police Chief saying that it's not practical to investigate all crimes.
	This might be true.
	Maybe you are underfunded and you don't have the police force.
	And therefore you're like, look, we can't investigate every burglary.
	I just don't have the men.
	And you'd have sympathy for that and say, okay, fair enough.
	Then we need to increase the police budget.
	Get more people in.
	If you weren't wasting so much money on such nonsense as diversity departments...
	But it's not just that.
	This is also Parliament's fault here, as we mentioned.
	So go to the next one here.
	Nine people a day.
	Nine people a day are being arrested for mean tweets.
	They say things are offensive online, and the police have to arrest nine of them a day.
	So they've got time for that.
	They don't have time to go out and check your burglary, or if you're being stabbed to death.
	That's going to be a waiting time.
	Tweet something.
	They'll be there like that.
	Why?
	Why?
	And if you want to get rid of this, I mean, we've got the petition.
	I'm just going to mention it again, the Repeal Section 127 of the Communications Act, which criminalizes being grossly offensive online.
	Please sign and share this to anyone you can who lives in the UK, particularly content creators who can then push it out, because that's exactly the kind of thing.
	At least we can get rid of that department.
	I mean, millions have been spent on the department for London, and a Freedom of Information request revealed that not one crime was stopped by this department.
	Like, not one real-world crime that wasn't just a fence.
	So, waste of time.
	And also, when they're not just enforcing unbelievably draconian laws such as this, they also just break the law, because why not?
	I'm going to the next one.
	This is CrimeBodge.
	CrimeBodge is a lovely channel.
	Everyone should subscribe.
	He's a great guy.
	And this is the story of how he sued the Met Police for data protection breaches.
	So, this is a clip from this video, and we're just going to play it, and it's an amazing story.
	Let's play.
	On the 12th of August 2016, Mr X, as I shall refer to him, tweeted the following remark about the British team at the Summer Olympics to the Daily Mail.
	Is the whole of Team GB gay and or ethnic?
	The next day, the MetLGBT retweeted it with a following comment.
	Another reason for our network.
	An undercurrent of homophobia, racism and just general nastiness right here.
	Mr X saw the tweet and was incredulous, so he asked if it was a genuine Metropolitan Police account.
	They responded with...
	Yes, and feel free to write to Scotland Yard with your request for his staff details.
	We're a staff support association within at Met Police UK, but we also focus on hate crime and responding to trollers.
	At this point, another Twitter user chimed in that the Met only seemed interested in targeting heterosexuals with his virtual rock throwing, to which they replied, We're very welcoming of straight people.
	My mum is straight.
	She loves gay people.
	Hashtag love wins.
	Hashtag equality.
	Hashtag join us.
	That was soon followed by this bizarrely sinister tweet.
	Delighted you've taken an interest in us.
	We'll take an interest too.
	Open source is a goldmine.
	Give my love to Caroline.
	Caroline is the name of Mr X's wife.
	So they broke data protection laws there, looking up him, finding out his wife's name, and then tweeting back at him a veiled threat.
	Yeah, that's intimidation.
	God, defund the police.
	That's the British police there breaking the law.
	So CrimeBodge, who everyone should go and support and give him a subscription, because he's a great guy, he sued the police for that, and he got Mr X £2,750 in compensation for threatening a member of the public.
	The person who was running that account should be fired.
	I mean, it's so simple.
	This is the thing.
	Like, it's not just, oh, one police officer's been a bit impartial.
	Like, this is the thing I'm hearing on the radio.
	It's like, oh, that's a bit off.
	We need to stamp this in the butt before it gets worse.
	Gets worse.
	The whole thing is broken to the base.
	Like, you have to go in there with a sheave and just start clawing out department after department.
	Never mind all this other stuff that you've got, you know, with random police officers saying something stupid on the marches.
	Well, the problem is absolutely institutional.
	There's no question about it.
	There is an institutional problem with radical left-wing ideology in the police, just as there is an institutional problem with radical left-wing ideology everywhere else at this point.
	And this has to be dealt with.
	It has to be done.
	Something has to be done about it.
	And the conservatives who hold all of the cards in this situation, who have massive advantage when it comes to anything they want to do, could just defund it all.
	They could just get rid of it.
	And they should.
	Pass legislation repealing that stuff.
	And then just reinvigorate the old legislation.
	There was nothing wrong with our old laws before Tony Blair on dealing with discrimination.
	Tony Blair's enforcement of we must hire people to check your genitals and your melanin.
	Not useful.
	Massive waste of our money.
	Our money.
	We're paying for it.
	No one else paying for it.
	Yeah.
	Simple as.
	I don't have more to say on that.
	It's unbelievable.
	It's not just one police officer.
	I hate this conversation where it's like, oh, this one police officer's done something wrong.
	No.
	The entire force needs a skin.
	Well, we know exactly where it's coming from.
	It's coming exactly from the commissioner.
	It's going down through the ranks.
	You can see exactly how it's being laid out because of the people that they're paying to do this.
	And then it gets to the point where people are on the streets yelling free Palestine or kneeling for Black Lives Matter or making veiled threats on Twitter.
	Unreal.
	Disgusting.
	But this leads quite nicely into our next topic here.
	So the British public, they're not woke.
	Wonderful.
	I'm glad we have some numbers now.
	So, you might think, well, the police force, you know, maybe if wokeness was the majority view, then maybe they could push it.
	Well, thankfully, it's not.
	No one believes in this.
	Crud.
	So, if you go to the first thing here, this is politics for all, tweeting out, are you woke?
	12% say yes, 23% say no, 59% say they don't know what that means, because a lot of people find it difficult to find.
	And this, incidentally, is very YouGov poll.
	Now, it's important to note that YouGov polling is self-selecting.
	So it's via the internet and you sign up to their website and then they email you a poll and then you choose whether you're going to join in or not.
	And so this is not representative of, I don't know, Yorkshire farmers or something like this.
	This is not representative...
	Entirely online.
	It's entirely online.
	This is not representative of, you know, just Welsh miners or, you know, this is representative of people who use the internet and care what YouGov do.
	And I feel that YouGov may have dropped the ball in trying to explain what wokeness is here.
	I don't think it's entirely the public's fault there, saying we don't know what the hell you mean there.
	Race communism.
	Of those who do, 23% say no, so they're outnumbered two to one.
	This is a non-woke code trait.
	You're just stuck in here with us.
	So if we go to the source here, so this is the YouGov poll, this is the first thing here.
	Are you woke among all Britons?
	12% say yes, 23% say no, 29% say they don't know.
	Among those who say they do understand the term woke, 29% say yes, 56% say no.
	So again, nearly a two-to-one margin.
	B-T-F-O'd, as the kids say.
	So we can scroll down a little bit there, just see the graph, just so we can get a look at that.
	But I love it.
	I love it.
	Good British public understanding that this is nonsense.
	So if we go to the next link as well, there's some more data here.
	So this is what is woke according to people who identify as woke.
	So they asked them, what do you consider woke?
	And then they gave them a list of options.
	So scroll down again just so we can see the data here.
	So I'm just going to list the biggest standouts for me.
	So supporting equality for transgender people, 69% of people said that was woke.
	Supporting racial equality, 67% said, yeah, that's woke.
	Supporting BLM, 66% said, yep, that's woke.
	Supporting equality for gay and lesbian people, 66%.
	Supporting gender equality, 59% there.
	So these are the biggest ones.
	Then taking stronger action on climate change, 58%.
	What I find interesting is the not-woke people answering that.
	So a much smaller...
	So no, this is just woke people answering this.
	Well, no, the red one is not woke.
	That's them saying they don't think it's woke.
	Oh, right, okay, okay.
	So all of these results are from people I self-identify as woke, and then you've got some people there saying it's not.
	But you can see that the climate change one kind of sticks out there.
	But the rest of them, the universal thing in there is the term equality.
	So BLM being a Marxist organization and equality being a Marxist value.
	It's not a liberal value.
	Freedom is the liberal value.
	And those things can't be in the same realm.
	You either free or you have equality.
	Pick one.
	That's how it is.
	So you can see that, yeah, okay, well, if you boil that down, what is wokeness from this poll?
	Equality.
	It's a Marxist value.
	Yeah.
	So this is why people say wokeness is a left-wing ideology, because it is.
	It is based on equality, not freedom.
	I mean, these are just left-wing talking points.
	Supporting equality for transgender people, racial equality, Black Lives Matter, gay and lesbian, yeah, exactly, none of these things.
	Gender equality, climate change, the removal of historic statues, political correctness, a negative view of the British Empire and being left-wing in general.
	There was disagreement on those, you can see that the data's not so clear, but on the first ones, the data is clear.
	The universal thing there being the value of equality, not fairness, not freedom.
	So, I mean, the liberal view is we have freedom and fairness, and therefore, if you are gay or straight, it doesn't matter, we will treat you fairly, you're both treated the same under the law for committing the same crime.
	But equality, you know, racial equality there, well, what's that?
	Black people and white people have to have the same as groups.
	Yep.
	So if you're a black person and you've done something wrong, let's say, but your group deserves to have more stuff because you're underrepresented or something, therefore you can get away with it.
	The most pernicious one being over-representation in prison.
	Because justice is delivered on an individual level.
	So if you've got gangs of ethnic youths in London who stab each other, and then they, in the individual case, well, you stabbed him, right, you go to jail...
	And this keeps happening and happening and happening.
	The jail's become disproportionately full of these black ethnic youths.
	It's like, well, sorry, we can't just release you because of racial equality.
	You kept stabbing people, and so you go to jail.
	And the opposite view is the view that David Lammy expressed a little while back, which is he said that there was an over-representation of black youths in London policing, so the fact they were being overly put in jail.
	And it was like, yeah, David, what are we going to do about that?
	Start arresting innocent white people or releasing guilty black people?
	They're your options, David.
	They are your options.
	Absolutely nuts.
	So one of the weird things in here is they said that being politically correct, 54% said that wasn't woke.
	Which seems wrong to me.
	I don't know why the woke would think being politically correct is not their stance.
	They're the ones promoting political correctness.
	They also said opposing people from having unpopular views from being on TV, 57% of the wokest said that's not woke.
	Although, I think that's true.
	That's very interesting.
	That's totally true.
	Because as we saw, the unpopular view is wokeness.
	So they're saying we need to not oppose people having unpopular views from being on TV, which would mean that they're not opposed to having wokeness on TV. But what I find about this is interesting, because this is an issue that I think Hayek spoke about as well in his day, is that a lot of people just end up parroting Marxist talking points without realizing that these are Marxist talking points.
	And so I think there probably are a lot of useful idiots who consider themselves to be woke without knowing anything about the theory behind any of this.
	And so they're like, what do you mean?
	We don't want to stop people from voicing their own popular opinions.
	We just want to make the world better.
	Because that's how it's packaged, that's how it's framed, and that's how it's sold to the rubes who are just like, yeah, yeah, racial justice for Palestine and Black Lives Matter and all this.
	You know, the regular person who doesn't really know anything about it but just wants to feel like they're doing something good.
	You know, they're not like, well, yeah, I mean, one of the things is having a negative view of the British Empire.
	It's like, you know, the average British, well, no, why do I have to have a negative view of the British Empire?
	But 28% of the people who say that they're woke say, yes, you have to have a negative view of the British Empire.
	Hmm.
	So interestingly, it looks like out of the sort of 12%, the die-hard Marxists make an even much smaller sort of view of that.
	So if we go to the next one, this is just the other people who know about wokeness.
	Is it a good or a bad thing?
	11% saying good, 15% saying bad.
	So again, beaten out there.
	Neither say 14%, 59% saying they don't know.
	But if we go to the ones who just know, 26% of people say it's good, 37% say bad, 33% neither.
	Hmm.
	Rookie numbers.
	I was about to say exactly that.
	You need to pop those numbers up.
	So, who is woke was also asked, and Jeremy Corbyn was crowned king of the wokists.
	So, as you can see here, Jeremy Corbyn got 34%, then Joe Biden, Boris Johnson getting 2%.
	So, as woke organizations, the BBC scored top joint with The Guardian at 34%.
	So, there we go.
	Now we know.
	The public perception is that the BBC is as woke as The Guardian.
	Yeah.
	Unreal.
	And as woke as Jeremy Corbyn.
	Yeah, as woke as Jeremy Corbyn and The Guardian.
	I mean, wow, that's based British public.
	Yeah, so we've got the next one here.
	This is, what is woke to all who understand?
	So this includes people who said they weren't woke and those who said they did.
	What do they consider wokeness?
	And you see here, removing statues, 60%, supporting BLM, 56%, trans equality, 52%, politically correct, 46%, gay equality, 43%, no platforming, 41%, anti-British empire, 40%.
	Yeah, so it's communists.
	And if you scroll down to the tweet below this, you can see that YouGov are like, ooh, this is weird.
	Like, how is it the case that these two don't add up?
	But what people say is woke differs.
	It's like, doesn't.
	No, it doesn't.
	This is why I don't trust YouGov to have displayed this in a way that people would understand.
	Because they're like, how can these two things be the same?
	They're different issues.
	It's like, no, they're not.
	Fundamentally, they have the same value perspective, which is equality.
	Yeah, but what people say differs depending on their own wokeness.
	Most woke people say supporting social equality, tougher action on climate change.
	Most non-woke people say political correctness, no platforming, anti-British Empire, the BBC. These aren't contradictions.
	No, those are succinct.
	There is absolutely no reason why these two things can't exist in perfect harmony with one another.
	And what the non-woke are saying is that we see the sharp edges of wokeness.
	The woke people promote the soft center of it, going, yeah, well, we just want social equality, we just want the climate to be solved.
	And then it's like, yeah, but what do you do?
	Well, you de-platform people.
	You push political correctness and silence people with it and you hate the British Empire.
	You project all of this from the BBC. They are showing the soldiers of the empire, the woke empire, how they're pushing out against the outside world.
	But for those 59% who said they didn't know what wokeness means, sorry if we've been going on and you don't know what we're talking about, but I'll go to the next one here, which is just the video you made with your co-host, Ash Sarkar, What is Woke Culture?
	And we're just going to have Ash redefine it here, so let's play clip three.
	And before we do, I can't help but notice as well, I made this video like a year ago, a year and a half ago, something like that.
	And it had about, I don't know, 200,000 or 300,000 views.
	And recently, I've been getting in my notifications, oh, you've got a comment on what is work culture.
	So you can see this issue is rising quite a lot because I'm just getting a lot more hit.
	I mean, this has got nearly 600,000 views on it now.
	So it's like a lot of people have been searching for this and getting my video.
	But anyway, let's go for it.
	We don't have it yet, Josh.
	Can you load that up or not, John?
	Just give him a second.
	Yeah, so this has become a much more popular video in the last couple of months, and I've been seeing it every day.
	What precisely do you mean by woke?
	What exactly do you mean here?
	What is woke culture?
	This is what no one has been able to explain to me.
	What is woke culture?
	To answer Ash Sarkar's totally honest question of what is woke culture, we now turn to respected television academic Ash Sarkar from later in that very same podcast.
	Woke is accepting that LGBT identities are valid and should be protected under the law.
	That woke culture is an acknowledgement that there are racialized outcomes reproduced through institutions and society and people of color measurably are treated differently.
	What I want at an interpersonal level is understanding empathy and solidarity, and at a political level, I want the pursuit of redistributive goals, whether that's power, whether that's wealth, whether that's land, in order to pursue aims of social justice along class, gender and race lines.
	I mean, pretty succinct, though.
	Like, a lot of garbage about her, what she wants on a personal level.
	Who cares?
	Like, she can live in her commune and believe nonsense.
	But on the political level, that's the important bit here.
	That's the thing to understand with the woke types, because all they care about is the royal power.
	She wants the redistribution of land, wealth, and power on race, gender, and class lines.
	That's what wokeness is.
	The redistribution of power, land, and wealth on race, gender, and class lines.
	That's it.
	That's what they want.
	And she is famously a literal communist, you idiot, Piers Morgan.
	And so why exactly would we not say, right, so we've got a communist promoting wealth and land and whatever else, power redistribution, on the basis of innate characteristics like race, gender and sexuality.
	Why would we not just call this identity communism?
	That's what wokeness is.
	Race, gender, communism, class communism, identity communism.
	We can just describe wokeness as being racist.
	Like, but if you need a succinct version, I mean, I just love how Ash gives it to you.
	So YouGov, if you're going to do that poll again, just play that clip and say, that's what wokeness is in case you're confused.
	And now, do you want race socialism?
	Let's see how the results come back, huh?
	Anyway, you have one more poll you want to tell me about that.
	Yeah, well, one quick point.
	I like the way she's like, oh, I want LGBT identities to be recognized as valid.
	So sure, I recognize that.
	Bisexual.
	Because there are only two genders.
	Anyway.
	The thing is, I don't even care about, like, recognizing these things as valid.
	You know, I'm not going to be rude to a trans person.
	But also, I don't know why they care if the government finds them valid.
	Yeah, what difference does it make?
	But, well, I mean, I guess it's just about...
	I'm conquering territory, to be honest.
	But the thing is, I'm not going to just be disrespectful to a transgender person, but the problem I have is the underlying theory that we're being forced to accept.
	Trans women are women.
	It's like, well, what does that mean?
	Well, that means there literally, there's no distinction in your mind.
	And it's like, sorry, that's something that's not really possible.
	But anyway, yeah, so this was a poll from a couple of days ago from Ipsos Mori that spoke too much to the same problem, in fact.
	The polling of the British public was just like, okay, what are the problems we're facing?
	And race relations have doubled as a concern for the British public.
	They've gone from 5% to 9% in one month.
	So twice as many people are like, well hang on a second, there seems to be something going on with race relations and I'm a bit concerned about it.
	But of course this isn't the majority problem that most people have, it's just a remarkable increase percentage-wise.
	Most of the people, 49% of people were like, COVID-19 is the biggest issue because obviously that's all we ever talk about, that's all the government talks about, that's all the media talks about and we're all about to get forcibly injected or something and that turns us into anti-vaxxers.
	So, you know...
	Bad stuff.
	But then people are worried about the economy and things like that.
	But then 18% were saying, like, climate change and pollution is a concern.
	And what was interesting about this is just, again, not really connected to the other thing, but like, just the way that this was broken down, because you can actually see some very interesting class dynamics here.
	Because the people mentioning climate change as an environmental worry It's been going up.
	So again, that's gone up like 5 percentage points in the last month.
	So it's something that a lot of people are very concerned about.
	But who is concerned about it?
	Well, it turns out it's a big issue for the 3 in 10 of those in social grades A and B, which is double the level of concern among the social grades C to DE. It's probably explained because this is British.
	So obviously that means people who have lots of money are concerned about climate change.
	People who do not have lots of money are not concerned about climate change.
	They're concerned about real world issues.
	And not these sort of abstract things.
	Labour supporters are of course twice as likely to mention environmental concerns than Conservative supporters and it's those living in the south of England and in Scotland who are more likely to mention these issues than those in the Midlands and the north of England as in the places that are the most woke.
	I'm the most interested in the climate change phenomenon, and they're also, well apart from the Scots, doing the best.
	But I mean, Scotland's being propagandized by the SNP every day, so what do you expect?
	But this is just the elites.
	This is the problem, this is the new sort of culture of the elite.
	And as this article from The Guardian recently, a year ago now, said, the World Economic Forum had their annual risks report, and for the first time in its history, All of the top five places were concerned about climate.
	All of it.
	So the World Economic Forum, the internationalists, the pro-European types, all they do now is talk about the climate, and so they're going to become radicalized to think that the world is ending, the sky's falling, even though all of these models have been shown to be...
	Highly inaccurate at best.
	None of the predictions that the environmentalist lobby have made in the last like 60 years have ever come true.
	And I'm not saying that we should pollute.
	I'm not saying we shouldn't do anything to reduce carbon emissions.
	I think we probably should.
	I think we should use clean energy like nuclear power.
	We should try to make sure that we live in a clean world, but let's not pretend that the world is coming to an end because it's not.
	I mean, what was it, AOC, 12 years, the world's going to end?
	Well, Al Gore said in 2009, we'd have, in 2002, by 2009, we'd have no ice caps.
	I know, but why is this never listed from YouTube?
	You know, they love to put little warning signs about how something's misinformation.
	I mean, why is that never listed as misinformation?
	I don't know.
	I don't know.
	They just keep saying things that are demonstrably untrue, and we're at the point now, I mean, like, go back to the 70s, and they were saying we were coming to an ice age.
	And now we're like, oh, we're going to have no ice caps.
	And now the world's going to end in 12 years.
	It's like, none of that's true.
	This is all, like, you know, doomerism that's being produced by very wealthy people who just sat there with their hypothetical models and saying, this must represent reality when it kind of doesn't.
	It's kind of the weird thing.
	Well, caring about the climate in, like, I want cleaner cars so I don't have to breathe in fumes and things like this, there are plenty of reasonable things people can say, like, I want this because I want this.
	And you can point to the things.
	But when it turns into, like, sky god worship, I start getting a bit suspicious.
	Yeah.
	But that's the point.
	The sort of woke agenda is kind of harmonizing into all of these...
	We can identify the percentage of the population who it appeals to, and we even know they're social class.
	They're labour-supporting, upper-class prats who live in the south of England.
	We know exactly who these people are.
	They don't represent the working class.
	They are not representing real issues.
	They're just representing themselves.
	And we know where the ideas are coming from.
	Let's go to the video comments.
	Hey guys, so I've been a paramedic for over 10 years now and I had mentioned previously that I would take apart the George Floyd narrative for you as we make our way towards murder trial round two and the trial of the other officers involved.
	And I'm going to start with a very basic Part of patient assessment.
	And I'm going to pull directly from this book and read it to you.
	It's a quick blur in the Advanced Trauma Life Support or ATLS manual.
	And this is, of course, pertaining to severe trauma patients' treatment and assessment in, like, an emergency or critical care setting.
	And this book and, of course, is created by the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma.
	So what I'm going to read to you is a very quick blurb on page 6.
	And what it says is this.
	What is a quick, simple way to assess a patient in 10 seconds?
	A quick assessment of the airway, breathing, circulation, and disability in a patient can be conducted by identifying oneself, asking the patient for his or her name, and asking what happened.
	An appropriate response suggests that there is no major airway compromise, as they have the ability to speak.
	Breathing is not severely compromised, as they have the ability to generate air movement to which would permit speech.
	And there is no major decreases in the level of consciousness, as they are alert enough to describe what happened.
	Now, that being said, does that describe the situation of anybody you know?
	I hope I followed that right, but essentially what I got from that was if someone's still talking to you, not only are they still breathing, there's air getting to their brain because I asked you to talk.
	And therefore, can you say that the guy is unable to talk?
	He did say he was going to do that in response to Dr.
	Tobin's arguments.
	I can't remember off the top of my head, but I know Dr.
	Tobin gave a response to that in which his point was that it's...
	Fundamentally true that if you are breathing...
	Sorry, if you are talking, you are still breathing.
	But it is...
	Because I want to give this side of the argument here, which is that it was...
	It's a bit of a false sense of safety because it can end like that.
	You can have someone who's then suddenly not getting oxygen to their brain and therefore they can die.
	So it's not...
	He would argue it wasn't useful to use that as just a pure measuring rod saying that the person's okay.
	But I can't remember the top of my head.
	But thank you for that.
	Yeah.
	Hello, gentlemen.
	I wanted to ask about the British Voldemort.
	I'm not sure how much information you can go into, but it wasn't really until today that I was able to figure out who he actually is, but I still don't know what he did wrong.
	So I'm not sure how much you can talk about it, but if you can tell me what he did wrong and why he got depersoned, that'd be great.
	I think it's really creepy that they can do that because, like I said, it's hard for me to find information on this person and why They've been depersoned.
	So any information you can give would be great.
	Thanks.
	Well, that's a very, very interesting question because it seems that Lord Voldemort doesn't actually have any racist statements to his name.
	I've yet to hear one.
	You would think that there'd be clips, a compilation.
	You know, they're very fond of this on Twitter, just clipping people out of context, saying, right, he said this, this, this, this, and this.
	There's doubtless dozens of them of me, out of context, to twist the meaning of what I've said.
	But I've yet to see one about Lord Voldemort.
	Have you?
	No.
	So as far as I can tell, he's never said anything racist.
	He doesn't seem to have a racially charged political platform either.
	He seems to have been discussing the tenets of a particular religion and the behaviour of the followers of said religion.
	All of his predictions and accusations turned out to be true.
	I guess his problem was being ahead of the curve and also being working class.
	So my interpretation would be, I'm going to go a bit, go and walk his Oxford Union address to understand where he came from.
	But if I want to do like real politics, the reason I think that he's been dealt the way he has and why he was depersoned.
	So he set up an organization that was campaigning fundamentally against Islamization.
	So cultural change in the UK becoming more Islamic.
	And the problem for that with the state was that this really embarrasses them.
	The fact that they have allowed this to take place, that they are doing very little to stop it, and unable to stop it by the looks of it.
	They have no real impotence to be able to control.
	For example, when Asia Bibi wanted to come here after committing blasphemy in Pakistan, the British government said no.
	There was a refugee who wanted to come to England.
	Wasn't she a Christian?
	She was a Christian.
	She wanted to come to a Christian country like England and be safe.
	We said no, and the reason given by Home Secretary Theresa May was if she came to England, she wouldn't be safe.
	God!
	We'd love to allow you here, but we can't protect you.
	Who's going to harm her?
	I don't know.
	I can't say, but Lord Voldemort's a racist.
	It's issues like this, the issues of the grooming gang, so on and so forth.
	Let's just say community tensions is probably the puns they would use.
	So he was causing these community tensions by pointing to true things and saying, you've done this and that's bad, and demonstrably so.
	We are the victims of the things your community has done.
	Well, the government being the ones who have permitted everything to take place.
	And then the government has no counter-argument because it's true.
	So in response, he became public enemy for them.
	There's a compilation I've made of the MPs calling his name out in Parliament and trying to get him shut down.
	So the thing that got him in person, so that's the first part.
	That's why I think he is so hated by the establishment.
	The thing that got him in person...
	There was a meeting in Parliament before the lie.
	Oh, before the lie.
	In which there was a representative from YouTube who was listening to Labour MPs.
	And the Labour MPs, I think, was it Caroline Noakes is the main one I'm going to quote?
	She was saying, I still get those videos popping up in my YouTube recommended feed.
	And he's like, woman, then stop watching them.
	That's how YouTube works.
	Go watch some cooking videos.
	It was pathetically transparent that they just hated him.
	They hated his politics because they're Labour MPs and wanted YouTube to censor him.
	And the guy from YouTube had no idea who the hell he was.
	He was just like, I'll look into it.
	I don't know what people are talking about.
	And then nothing really happened.
	But then a man named Mohammed Shafiq, the tweet still exists, went to Facebook HQ, had like a midnight meeting with them in which he lied to them and told them he was radicalizing people into terrorism.
	He tweeted that that's what he told them at like two in the morning after he got back from his meeting.
	The following day, so presumably at like 5 o'clock in the morning or something, Voldemort was banned from Facebook, then from Instagram, both platforms owned by Facebook.
	And the BBC contacted Facebook and said, why is he banned?
	Facebook gave the statement that he had made a post calling for the beheading of Muslims.
	A post that does not exist.
	I will put a £5,000 bounty on it.
	It's not there.
	It can't be found.
	Otherwise, they would have published it.
	It would be on the front page of the Daily Mail.
	Yeah, yeah.
	It would be everywhere on Twitter.
	It would be all over social media.
	Tommy Robinson said, behead the followers of Mohammed or something like this.
	Yeah, it's just not that.
	It didn't exist.
	It's a complete bull.
	And then Facebook admitted that.
	Yeah, they admitted that on Danish TV a year later.
	It just didn't exist.
	Yeah.
	And just to be clear, though, when pressed by the journalist, who actually did a surprisingly good job about this, when pressed by it, the Facebook representative said, well, it wasn't any one post.
	It was the general theme of his brand, the theme of his YouTube channel, we thought was this.
	But it's like, right, so you claimed that he had called for the beheading of the followers of Mohammed, which of course would be illegal in this country.
	That was a lie, and then you depleted him over this lie, and then you just come out and say, yeah, this was a lie, and there's no recourse.
	You told us on the BBC, the BBC put it everywhere, then the Guardian and everyone else retweets that lie.
	And now everyone is believing that he called for people to be beheaded, which he never did.
	And then subsequently, of course, his YouTube channel is quarantined, not banned.
	So effectively, if you Google it, you won't find it.
	If you Google his name, all you will find is mainstream media reports on him, which is a tactic.
	Then he's banned from TikTok, VK, all the rest of it, any international place.
	Because as soon as they look him up, they find that lie, and there's no counter-narrative.
	They don't know the details of that interview in Denmark.
	They're like, right, banned.
	He's gone.
	And we have the interview with Ryan Hartwick, people should go check out on LotusEars.com, in which we have the screenshots, because he used to be a moderator for Facebook, in which they put him on the same list as Adolf Hitler.
	Adolf Hitler, Joseph Goebbels, leader of the Nazi party, Lord Voldemort.
	It's pathetic.
	And this is how a lie is used to destroy a person's life.
	I'm sorry, I'm very passionate about this.
	Not necessarily because I have a huge interest in the guy, but if they can do that to him, they'll do it to anyone.
	You don't even have to say anything.
	They will just lie about you in public with no shame and you'll be unpersoned.
	They will all repeat the lie and they will take everything you have away from you.
	It's disgusting.
	Anyway, sorry.
	Let's go for the next one.
	I can't hear anything.
	Oh, we're just looking.
	Well, these are very pretty nails.
	Okay.
	Oh, yeah, it's the Lotus Easter logo, of course.
	Oh, yeah.
	I don't know why I didn't notice that immediately.
	I was just thinking, okay, these are those sparkly nails.
	But that's very pretty.
	I like holes and things like that.
	Yeah, me too.
	Thanks for that.
	Honestly, we've got the one that...
	What was the...
	Was it Charlotte?
	Charlotte.
	Charlotte, yeah.
	Charlotte, you won't be able to see it, but we've got it on the wall there.
	Yeah, but we've got it on the wall there, because it really is gorgeous.
	So we really appreciate these things.
	Not just Warhammer bolters.
	Orcs, orcs, orcs.
	Lauren Southern has been banned from the UK by the so-called tolerant left.
	imagine my shock the social justice warriors control the media and the police all those soy boys with their soy products complain to the tech companies and get us taken down i love That's a great impression.
	Like, how can he do so many?
	That's the thing.
	Like, what do you do?
	What's your process?
	I mean, you know, Paul Joseph Watson makes a good point.
	LAUGHTER Instantly, I messaged PJW the other day and he hasn't replied to me.
	Paul, get back in touch, man.
	I'll come down to Lone.
	We'll hang out and you can come on the podcast.
	That'd be awesome.
	Oh, I thought you just sent him a meme.
	No, no, no.
	I sent him a couple messages and he hasn't replied.
	He's like, damn it, man.
	Come on.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Fairly recently, gender activists have attempted to fortify their "sex is a spectrum" argument with the totally more sciency "sex is a bimodal distribution." Is this claim true?
	No one can say.
	What sex is Carl?
	Negative two?
	Fine.
	But giving the claim as much charity as we can, we can say that many markers of sex do follow a bimodal distribution, such as height or the mean blood concentration of testosterone.
	The question must be asked, then, why are there only two modes?
	Why not three modes?
	Why not six gender...
	I mean modes.
	Why not seventeen?
	Why not infinite modes?
	Or even one?
	Uh...
	Infinite.
	One.
	Infinite.
	One.
	Hmm.
	I wonder why they like the idea so much.
	That's an amazing video.
	Can we put that out?
	Like, email us and let us know if we can put that on our social media.
	Because again, all of these fantastic videos you guys do, I want them to go further.
	Because, I mean, that's a really great point.
	Because, of course, if they're like, hey, this is bimodal, let me give you science-y terms.
	It's like, but you're talking about things you can't measure.
	Why are you talking about things you can't measure?
	That's not science.
	Shut up.
	Anyway.
	But yeah, let us know if we can put that out.
	That was awesome.
	I love these videos.
	I don't think the Beatles were a bad thing for the world.
	I think a lot of what you're talking about, Carol, can be put down to just a song imagined in and of itself.
	That's correct.
	And while it's a good song, I'd disavow the message behind the lyrics, because obviously it is communist nonsense when you listen to the lyrics in particular.
	But even John Lennon, he disavowed that later on in his life.
	So I mean, I think he was just caught up in some of the leftist stuff that was going on in the early 70s, to be honest.
	But apart from that, they would do things like refuse to play before segregated audiences and stuff like this.
	I think they were definitely...
	On the whole, a positive thing for the world more than they were a negative thing for the world.
	It's not to say they don't have any drawbacks.
	Thank you!
	I was literally, literally this close.
	I endorse this message.
	I was this close to being conciliatory.
	I was about to say, you know what, Jack's right, it is just really the song Imagine.
	I'm not a fan of their music generally, so it was easy for me to pathologize everything about the Beatles because of the song Imagine.
	And I didn't know that John Lennon had kind of walked it back going, wait a minute, this is communist nonsense.
	And I was about to make all those concessions and you went, you fucking sandwich.
	And now, no, the Beatles are the worst thing in the world.
	And you're just defending them because you happen to like them.
	Fight me, Jack.
	But they were actually quite funny, to be honest.
	There's one great Beals jokes.
	They were in an interview or something, and the interviewer asked Paul McCartney, so is Ringo Starr the best drummer in the world?
	And he's just like, he's not even the best drummer in the Beatles.
	So cool!
	That's advanced.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Good bit of British sarcasm there, though.
	I was like, okay, good job.
	Good job.
	Holding up the last side of the team.
	I've never really listened to the Beatles.
	They're crap.
	Okay.
	Is that just because of the press?
	No, they're not.
	No, no, no.
	I've always found the Beatles to be really uninspiring musically.
	I just don't know why people like them.
	I shouldn't really talk about inspiring music, so let's go for the next one.
	The Beatles sucks, is that what you said?
	Can we play that one again, John?
	I miss that.
	I love the old guy.
	He's a good guy.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah, I like him too.
	I like all of the comments, to be honest.
	They're always good.
	When do you want to do the next live?
	Dagoth sucks.
	Dagoth?
	I don't know.
	I can't make out what he's saying because he's saying it quietly.
	But we've got a context comment here.
	Guys, we've all had bad dreams.
	It's easy to fall into despair.
	In these trying times, try to remember that there's always someone having a worse day than you.
	Today, I'm a contender as I patiently wait for underpaid NHS staff to shove a bundle of gadgets up my dick.
	So, whatever's happened, that oil guy, we obviously wish you well, godspeed, and we hope whatever the problem you have resolves itself as soon and as well as it can do.
	Whatever's happening, man, sorry to hear it.
	But I hope you're back on your feet as soon as possible.
	But right.
	Yeah, that's not good.
	I don't want to hear that.
	What?
	I can't think of anything worse, medically, than invasive stuff in...
	Yeah, well, I mean, it's a pretty unpleasant thought, yeah.
	But Israel Hayes says, BLM is dying down and Palestine versus Israel is the hot topic of the hour, no more, no less.
	Yeah, I mean, that's probably why Black Lives Matter is just...
	I think there is more than that, though.
	I think there's the general feeling of victimization that's syncretic.
	I think there's the reason that the Celts are all, like, joining in with the BLM and the Palestine and saying, oh, we're just, like, the oppressed lumpenproletariat.
	Yeah, I mean, I found a Vox article from 2014 I posted the title of the other day.
	It was like, yes, Hamas put their rockets in schools, but...
	And if you read the article, the argument was that, yes, Hamas put their rockets in schools so that when Israelis bomb them, they kill kids, but Israel doesn't have to bomb them.
	I was like, what do you think you should do in a war then?
	Like, not bomb the enemy because it may hurt civilians.
	That's not an argument.
	Except the rockets of peace.
	And the thing is, I'm not even unsympathetic to what Israel has done to the Middle East.
	I don't care about either of the sympathetic tribes.
	Are you Israel or are you Palestine?
	I'm England.
	Go away.
	Yeah, exactly.
	What does Richard the Lionheart have to say about it?
	But the...
	The growth of Israel has been at the expense of Palestine, and so you can't deny that.
	And so I'm not unsympathetic, and I don't even think that the Palestinians shouldn't fight back or anything.
	I'm not even saying, oh, you're not allowed to fight back or anything like this.
	But...
	Depending on what that means.
	Yeah, well, yeah, obviously.
	But don't complain when the people you're waging war against continue to wage war against you back.
	Yeah.
	That's what I meant the other day.
	I should apologize because I said something inconsiderate, which was...
	I don't get why mothers are holding their children and posting videos of it.
	I wasn't trying to say that it's unreasonable that mothers should be scared.
	What I found unreasonable was people displaying those videos and being like, how could Israel do this?
	And it's just like, it's a war.
	Horrible things are going to happen.
	To be surprised by the fact that a war gets started and horrible things happen is strange.
	I've got a pretty good knowledge of the history of the Middle East as well, which is when you're like, oh, well, the Semitic tribes are at it again.
	Yeah, that's literally all of the Middle East through all of time until, like, you know, the Mongols turn up or the Crusaders turn up or, you know, the Egyptians turn up or something like this.
	I mean, they might be Semitic, actually.
	But, you know, it's just...
	But the thing is, this is not really very different to the entire history of the world anyway.
	You know, like, war in Europe.
	Oh, the Germanic tribes are at it again.
	You could say that, and that would be an accurate statement.
	That's just all human history is, is war.
	You said Germanic tribes.
	Yeah, in Europe.
	Sorry, in Europe.
	I thought we still talked about the Middle East.
	No, no, no.
	You could say the same thing about Europe, you know.
	The Germanic tribes are at it again, or the Mediterranean are at it again.
	Eastern European is.
	It's just what happens.
	It's like, okay, well, I don't really have a preference for either one in the Middle East.
	It's just...
	Yeah, I'm in England.
	I don't care.
	I'm for British Mandate of Palestine.
	Problem solved.
	I'm from the Kingdom of Jerusalem.
	Problem solved.
	Cuck.
	Cuck?
	British Mandate's better.
	I suppose so.
	I want to cut the Europeans out of the question.
	There's no French kings turning up now.
	Problem solved.
	True, but there are also far less glorious battlefield victories.
	Dylan Tucker says, I don't have a hardline stance on Israel-Palestine thing, but it comes to the people, but I do tend to fall favourably on the side of the conflict whose government doesn't have genocide in their charter.
	Yeah.
	The government that doesn't throw gays off buildings and execute women for honour reasons also tends to be my preference.
	Like, I don't think either of us could actually live in Gaza or Palestine without being killed by the law.
	Well, I'm not a gay woman.
	No, for disbelief.
	Oh.
	I imagine they probably kill or persecute atheists.
	Yeah, I didn't actually think to check what the status of atheists is in Gaza, but I would just convert to Islam.
	It's hard to justify doing the things that you do as an atheist.
	It's just because you've got a wife and you want to do what you want, don't it?
	Yes, it is.
	Israel says, imagine sending money to an organisation a hand away from ISIS under the guise of they're progressive because they don't like white supremacy.
	Yeah, I know.
	It's amazing, isn't it?
	Buy a bread tube ISIS much?
	The black flag of labor is flying high!
	I just can't get over it.
	Vorsch is like, oh, they're two degrees of separation away, so what are you going to do?
	Send them money?
	No.
	If an organization was two degrees of separation away from Nazis, I had a real strong thought that Well, you know, I would like to donate to, like, the Ukrainian Liberation Front or something, but I seriously think that it might go to Svoboda or whatever they are, you know, the actual Nazi party and the thing.
	I'd be like, look, if they've got some sort of deep connection or, like, tangential connection, I'm not going to donate to them.
	And if you can describe it as, well, yeah, I mean, this Nazi party basically controls all of this country, and so you can't really donate to one of the organizations without there being some interaction.
	I'd be like, okay, well, then I won't.
	Obviously.
	You know, God...
	It's the money part as well.
	Like, if you donate to an organisation that literally transfers the money into food in England and then ships the food over, there'd be less things to argue about.
	Yeah, yeah, sure.
	You're still feeding a terrorist organisation, but you might well feed some other people as well.
	It's not the end of the world.
	They're probably not going to starve anyway.
	A story to tell you afterwards.
	Okay, that's good.
	Joseph Woodland says, bear in mind, one of Sadiq Khan's main donors was Saif al-Islam, an organisation illegalised for funding Islamic terror.
	Yeah, well, there have been a lot of these, though.
	You know, it's actually...
	Really interesting just how inbred the networks of these sort of Muslim organizations with the Middle East are.
	Okay, yeah, bad framing of words.
	I didn't mean it like that.
	But there's a great deal of overlap between the kind of people.
	I mean, look at the white helmets and stuff like this.
	There are videos of them flying the black flag of labor and things like this.
	So much is what we're going to call it from now on.
	Yes, yes it is.
	Look, if Labour wants to become the party of Islam, then let them become the party of Islam.
	Mashallah.
	Henry Ashman says, I see the EU has called for a ceasefire in the conflict.
	Don't see how this could happen.
	Well, I mean, you know, they're going to have to persuade Hamas not to launch hundreds of missiles, aren't they?
	Hamas of something like obliterate Israel is 0.2 on their manifesto, which makes me wonder what's 0.1 on their manifesto.
	Would Hamas back down from that?
	Could Israel ever make concessions around that point?
	Yeah, well, you see, centrism is about finding compromise.
	So one side says obliterate, the other side says please don't obliterate, and so we find a compromise in the middle.
	No, I'm joking, obviously.
	Not entirely sure you can call Israel colonizers of Jerusalem, Gaza, etc., but the Middle East is a perfect example of why bitching about historical colonizers is just bollocks.
	It's been a four- to eight-way tussle for the land for thousands of years.
	So I've got...
	Point one here, the Islamic resistance movement is distinguished from the Palestinian movement whose allegiance is to Allah and whose way of life is Islam.
	It strives to raise the banner of Allah out every inch of Palestine.
	Communism for Arabs, right.
	That's point one.
	Point two, Israel will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.
	Yeah.
	I don't see much in the way of compromise going on there.
	But, I mean, Henry is completely right about the history of the Middle East.
	It's like the irony of someone saying, we own this.
	It's like, that's what everyone...
	I mean, how did Arabs turn up in the Gaza Strip?
	They used to be Greek.
	I mean, like, literally the Sea Peoples, presumably Greeks, were settled there by an Egyptian pharaoh who defeated them in their invasions.
	And this is why you can find, like, Mycenaean boar's hat helmets and stuff like that.
	And this is what, in the Bible, David and Goliath.
	Goliath is a Philistine.
	He's a giant Greek warrior that David kills.
	But, I mean, where did they come from?
	Apparently Egypt.
	Well, maybe.
	But they're going to be some, you know, migratory Semitic tribe who settles in the area, and it's just whether you're strong enough to hold it.
	Because there's no real natural land barriers.
	Fundamentally, as John's military mindset come down to, that is it.
	How do you own land?
	You control it by force.
	Exactly.
	And so, like, appeals to the Bible?
	Shut up.
	Appeals to the Quran?
	Shut up.
	If you're not able to control it by force, you're in the ground.
	Exactly.
	And that's the way it's always been in the Middle East and everywhere else.
	So, you know, don't give me this crap.
	Did the Egyptians survive the Sea Peoples?
	Yes.
	They're the only ones who did?
	Yes.
	That's awesome.
	Everyone else got absolutely...
	Well, the Assyrians survived them as well, actually.
	But the Assyrians probably didn't have to fight them directly, because the Assyrians are like, you know, 500 miles from the coast or whatever.
	So they didn't...
	But they were reduced because it was just a general smashing of civilization.
	But yeah, the Hittites, the Canaanite kingdoms, various other...
	You should do a thing with Bo on this, on the collapse.
	We will at some point.
	I've only seen a couple of videos about it and it's crazy.
	It's like the end of the world is happening.
	It's mad.
	And there were various environmental disasters as well.
	But basically all of the cities along the seaboard were burned down.
	And eventually, I can't remember which Egyptian ferret it was, but he managed to defeat them in battle and then settle the survivors in what is now Palestine.
	I mean, the fact that they're called Sea Peoples, there's not even a name for them.
	Well, the interesting thing is that there's a conspiracy in their isles, and so obviously a giant confederation of barbarians, basically, is invading.
	It's got to have been Greece.
	It's got to have been the Aegean.
	Where else have you got a collection of islands in the local region from where they could have launched, right?
	And the historical artifacts of the Philistines, the Peleset, have been found in Palestine.
	And that's where the name comes from.
	But the thing is, don't ask what the Romans did.
	The Romans ethnically cleansed the area.
	There weren't Jews in the Middle East for hundreds of years after the Romans dealt with them.
	They literally forbade Jews from entering Jerusalem.
	The Assyrians destroyed the Kingdom of Israel, so it was just the Kingdom of Judah left.
	Deported all the population.
	So it's just, oh my god, you know.
	Anyone being like, yeah, we've got a claim to this.
	No one's got a claim to anything.
	It's just power, unfortunately.
	Anyway, Lee says, the mainstream left finds their allies in strange places, often completely contradicting their values, like sexual freedom and women's rights.
	Yeah, we're not big on women's rights or sexual freedom in Palestine.
	Oh, by the way, free Palestine.
	I don't know why I'm speaking as if I'm on their side now.
	LAUGHTER When they were bombing the journalists.
	From the river to the sea.
	I find these contradictions are often explained by the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
	Both are a mutual enemy in the West, which is what we know the white cis male patriarchy, the left which is referring to.
	Things start to make a lot more sense.
	Yeah, but it's more than that.
	I think it's a shared sense of victimhood.
	I think that's what it is, that binds them together.
	The leftist argument against Israel is so stupid.
	Palestine is smaller and weaker than Israel, therefore it's okay for them to murder people and wrong for Israel to hold them accountable for said unprovoked murder.
	Yes, that's exactly the left position.
	It's the Carl Rittenhouse position.
	Yeah.
	It's like, Carl has the power with the gun.
	They don't.
	Maybe they should stop attacking, then.
	Yeah.
	There's no limit to the number of paedophile bodies that Carl Rittenhouse has justified in creating.
	It's just a great way of putting it.
	There's an angry mob of pedophiles attacking you.
	What do you do?
	Surrender or shoot?
	We know what bread tubes say to do.
	Surrender yourself to the mob of pedos.
	The right-wingers say defend yourself, because that's your human right.
	And this is why I'm not angry at the Palestinians fighting the Israelis.
	Okay, well, I mean, I guess I'd probably do the same in their position, but then if I was an Israeli and they were constantly attacking me, I know what I would do in their position.
	So, I don't really have very much sympathy for either side.
	Miles Mitchell says, I believe the Red Cross, Crescent and Diamond are of the same organization.
	They are also the symbols that are worn by medics in battle so they don't get shot at and are out to shoot as long as we're fighting someone who follows the Geneva Convention.
	There we go.
	So, talking about the woke police, George Hatch says, Goodfellow made a great analogy once.
	If the police turn up wearing swastikas, would a Jewish person think they were impartial when they have to dispute with a Nazi?
	That's a great question.
	Same with the rainbow flag and the people don't recognize 257 genders.
	Yeah, the Muslim community.
	Well, no, seriously.
	Well, no, also the British public.
	Sure.
	But the British public aren't considered to be a minority group worthy of consideration.
	Okay, so what minority groups are worthy of consideration that disagree with the left's view on gender?
	Well, the Muslims.
	So we'll use the Muslims.
	I'm sorry.
	I mean, I would like to say we disagree, but they're like, shut up, white Englishman.
	I'd like to say me as a free person.
	Yeah, no, shut up, Englishman.
	Your opinion doesn't count.
	If the police are going to be empowered partisans abusing their powers, especially with the COVID excuse, I'd have to agree with our BLM frenemies and say, defund them.
	Well, that's the point.
	Yeah, those departments.
	I mean, easy enough.
	Every diversity department under the British police should be gone tomorrow.
	There's no excuse to keep them around.
	Yep.
	You no longer exist.
	You no longer have jobs.
	You no longer have departments.
	You no longer have money.
	Good luck on the private sector.
	Radical centrist God says, Ah yes, murders and rapes are worse going around the country while police are being underfunded and understaffed, but somehow across the country they can spend money for diversity hires and more and take the time out of their day to march in parades.
	Millions.
	Millions upon millions.
	It's not even a small amount.
	Yeah.
	It's mad, and it's your money, if you're a British taxpayer.
	Yeah, that's because they are.
	Embarrassingly so.
	Is that real?
	Well, no, but it's going to come sooner than later.
	Someone's going to have invented that.
	Come on.
	Scott says, Hi, Colin Callum.
	Yesterday you spoke about the rainbow flag being communist dog whistle.
	Sorry.
	Notice how the thank you key workers signs are all in rainbow.
	Authoritarian lockdowns, neo-communism, yeah, it's all coming together.
	Yeah, these are all dog whistles.
	They know what they're doing.
	This is why they accuse everyone else of dog whistling.
	In a situation where Western values of liberty are being destroyed, where do you think people who don't bend the knee will end up, if not in a gulag or dead?
	What do you mean, if not?
	I don't see where else we can go.
	It doesn't seem like there would be anywhere to escape to, to start a new free society, even if even the US is taken over by Marxism.
	Yeah, that's another thing.
	People are like, oh, you should move to here.
	So why?
	It's just as woke, and it's getting woker, and nowhere is free.
	I mean, we're literally going to have to move to Russia or something.
	I don't really fancy that.
	No.
	I don't really...
	I mean, A, the weather's probably not great.
	B, it's Russia.
	The weather's great for me.
	I'm sure it's good for you.
	It's what you grew up with, but like...
	But the point is, I don't really like the idea of fleeing.
	It seems to...
	I just...
	It goes against my nature.
	Why can't we just beat them?
	Yes.
	Like, they're so ridiculous.
	That's the thing that's absurd.
	And the public are obviously on side with defeating wokeness.
	The more woke the Labour Party get, the more the Conservatives get a massive majority.
	Like you were saying the other day, if the Conservatives had an election tomorrow, it would be 415 seats or something.
	I don't know if they've ever had that many before.
	And yet they're still tweeting out, like, Ida Hob LGBT committees.
	Oh, God, that love is love thing.
	Just, what are you doing?
	Liquidate everything woke.
	That's what the Conservatives should be doing.
	They should be outlawing it as being racism, a formalized version of racism, which it is, and they should say, no, this is just racist.
	In the same way, we're not going to allow you to be a Nazi or a jihadi or anything like that.
	You can't be woke.
	And if you don't like it, to jail.
	Omar says, It's funny, I was thinking about my feelings on policing last night, and it just so happens to be a topic for Dead Age Podcast.
	I haven't lost respect for the police.
	It's a necessary institution in the civil society.
	Correct.
	Maybe for the institution, sure, but I respect that an officer's job is difficult to deal with people in situations every day.
	What I have lost is expectations.
	I don't expect the police officers to protect my rights, to stand for moral principles, be impartial, or enforce law evenly or against any who break it.
	They are civil servants doing a job that doesn't mean anything beyond the next paycheck.
	Omar, you've got some great points here, man.
	I cosign everything he's just said there.
	That's exactly how I look at it.
	At best, I expect them to leave me alone.
	That's the best possible outcome.
	Now, I don't really expect things to be proper.
	Matthew says, What if the law is political, such as hate crime speech?
	Well, I mean, the politicization of the laws is something that we can talk about.
	But the question of the police serving impartially to administer the laws is their job.
	It's the politician's job and thereby the public's job to elect the politicians to have the laws being made that they want to see.
	It's not the police officer's job to promote a particular agenda, to wave flags, visit pride parades.
	Check people's thinking or any of this sort.
	That's not their business.
	Their business is to make sure the order is kept.
	George says police must remain aloof in order to maintain impartiality.
	Having a cop in rainbow face indicates a political stance they should not espouse.
	A police officer should no more wear a rainbow than a kirpan or a cross.
	On the job, cops are not people.
	That's right, they're agents of the state, and therefore they're responsible to every single person in the country, which means you can't have political favour.
	I'm sorry.
	I hate it.
	We've run out of time, haven't we?
	Yeah, we have.
	Sorry, folks.
	We've got a recording to do this afternoon as well.
	We're doing a new episode of Epochs.
	This is going to be a really good one as well.
	This is going to be one I've wanted to talk about for a long time, which is Alcibiades' political brilliance.
	So it's very niche, but trust me, it's going to be really interesting because it's about how the Athenians basically turned around the Peloponnesian War in one day.
	Through the political machinations of the ancient Greek version of Milo Yiannopoulos.
	Isn't this the guy who, like, sucked his way to the top?
	No, no, no.
	He's way more talented than that.
	But I thought he was, like, super pretty and just everyone wanted to have sex with him.
	Yeah, that's true.
	But he was also a great warrior and a really popular guy, and he...
	Just happened to be a great sucker as well.
	He was...
	Well, apparently he was, yeah, just that as well.
	But he was also an unbelievably clever political actor.
	And we're going to go through just in detail how he essentially turns an entire war around in one afternoon by simply doing something very dishonest.
	Is that the one where he goes to the other side and then...
	No, no, no.
	He does do that later, but before that.
	It'll be up for Sunday, so sign up to Logistics.com and you can join us.
	It's going to be great.
	I can't wait to do it.
	Without further ado, we'll see you tomorrow at 1 o'clock.

▲