All Episodes
Previous Next
June 2, 2021 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters
01:30:01
The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #145
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hello and welcome to the podcast of the lotuses for the second of What was it?
May?
June?
June?
Oh yeah, it's Pride Month, isn't it?
God.
Can't forget that.
Be put up against the wall.
Anyway, welcome to the 2nd of Pride Month, 2021.
Rename the term now.
Dildos at dawn, Callum.
That's some sweet gang.
I'm joined by Carl, and today we're going to be talking about the Anthony Fauci leaks.
Please face the wall has a much more different meaning now, doesn't it?
God, okay.
Okay.
Maybe we should just forbid ourselves from using the term Pride Month.
Just ever?
Ever, yeah.
I don't know, I kind of like it.
We're just going to rename February as well to Black History Month, or just Black Month, and then we're slowly going to rename the entire month to the new Progressive Order.
Oh my god.
Yes, that's right, we're conservatives.
You bet they'll do that in 50 years.
Anyway, so as I was saying, we're going to be doing Anthony Fauci's leaks.
It was a freedom of information request of all his emails when the pandemic was starting, so you can see him agreeing with himself and then disagreeing with himself.
Oh, it's worse than that, but we'll go into it.
Also, Dawn Butler admitting that Britain is not a racist country, and therefore what's the point in Labour?
What's the point in Dawn Butler?
Why does she justify anything if she's like, well, actually it's not?
Yeah, I mean, all my race grifting, it's for nothing.
Thanks, Dawn.
Simple as.
And also, the Guardian is arguing that every single statue should be destroyed.
Not just the...
Women's rights, you know, pioneers, yeah, destroy.
Nelson Mandela, throw him into the burner.
He's got to go.
This is all getting quite radical.
Anyway.
So, first thing first, just wanted to mention all the premium content we have on the site.
So, if you're not a member, go on and sign up.
If you have signed up to loadseeds.com, go over and check out all the premium content, because there's loads of it.
I mean, bloomin' loads of it.
And it's totally worth your time.
It's because I'm an absolute slave driver when it comes to producing the premium content.
I'm always whipping them and saying, you know, more, more, more, because people are paying us for this.
So, and hopefully it's all good stuff.
And I think it is all good stuff, actually.
But it's going to get even better, because after the podcast, we're going to be recording a premium podcast about what Alex Jones was right about.
And it turns out that it's actually loads.
Yeah.
Loads and loads of stuff.
I was expecting it to be like one or two things, and it's quite a lot, actually.
And some of it's quite disturbing.
Yeah.
So, yeah.
But that'll be up either later this week or next week.
And that'll be good.
Look forward to it.
It'll be good fun.
Anyway, without further ado.
So, tell me about the...
I can't.
You've got to talk about YouTube's policies first.
Yeah, so we're going to do a video now about Anthony Fauci.
And, yeah, not going to be on YouTube.
Because YouTube has certain policies, and I'm going to read you the policies.
Editorial policies about the information that we're allowed to give on YouTube regarding COVID-19 and vaccines and...
Drugs.
And these policies are 100% correct, can never be changed.
Even though they've been changed very, very often in the past couple of months.
It's literally like Mao coming out and saying, I'm a rightist now, and everyone who isn't a rightist is going to get purged.
So the claims, for example, that they say you cannot make.
So claims that hydroxychloroquine...
Hydroxychloroquine.
Hydroxychloroquine are effective treatments for COVID-19.
And not allowed.
Claims that masks do not play a role in preventing the contraction or transmission of COVID-19.
Also not allowed.
Claims that COVID-19 vaccine will kill people who receive it.
Which we can't really say anything more on, but the point is the...
This isn't the only one, so there's like a whole-ass list on them.
There is a whole-ass list.
But the point is that YouTube have said you're not allowed to say these things about the coronavirus, and they contradict some of the things that Fauci has said, and so that's for the sort of YouTube segment that we'll put up about this.
That's all we can really say, I think.
But you will probably want to go to lowsees.com or follow the link in the description to watch this podcast in full on the website where we can actually talk about the full thing, which we'll do now.
So, the bombshell Fauci leaks.
Now, this is all breaking news.
This is all very, very recent.
And it comes from a BuzzFeed Freedom of Information request that has unleashed Fauci's partially redacted emails.
And some of them are just staggering and show that Fauci was lying about a lot and knew that he was lying.
So let's just begin with the masks.
So on the 5th of February 2020, Fauci had said this in an email.
Masks are for preventing the spread by infected people, not for preventing uninfected people from becoming infected.
Typical mask is not effective in keeping out the virus as it is small enough to pass through the material.
I do not recommend that you wear a mask, particularly at a low-risk location.
So, that's crystal clear.
And that's a direct email from Anthony Fauci.
As you can see, the masks don't prevent the spread of the coronavirus, at least directly.
They might have some sort of indirect sort of accidental slowing effect or something like this.
And there we go.
That's just it.
Here's advice.
Don't waste your time.
Don't waste your time.
Money is best spent on medical countermeasures such as diagnostics and vaccines.
Masks don't work.
We are forced to wear these masks everywhere in Britain.
I imagine that a lot of places in America are forced to wear the masks.
They don't work.
According to Anthony Fauci.
According to Anthony Fauci.
It didn't stop him from a couple of months later in April 2020 from coming out on, say, Fox News and saying, oh, everyone should wear masks.
Why, Anthony?
Why should we wear the mask?
They don't prevent the virus.
He says, the better part of valour when you're out and you can't maintain that six foot distance is to wear some type of facial covering.
An important point to emphasise, though, is that you should never take away the availability of masks that are needed for healthcare providers who are in real present danger.
So this is an addition to the physical separation, not as a substitute for it.
Yeah, but it doesn't work, does it?
As you knew.
And you can see, like, there are loads of videos going around, I should have got one, really, of someone, say, sneezing in the mask.
You see lots of mist coming out of the mask.
So, like, large droplets of, like, snot or whatever, you know, They obviously are prevented from going through.
But it doesn't prevent, like, the air going through the mask.
It doesn't prevent the disease going through the mask, as Fauci said.
So why is he saying this?
And the answer appears to be political theatre.
As he said in May 2021...
Well, you know, George, I'm obviously careful because, I mean, I'm a physician and a healthcare provider.
I'm now much more comfortable in people seeing me indoors without a mask.
I mean, before the CDC made the recommendation change, I didn't want to look like I was giving mixed signals.
But being fully vaccinated personally, the chances of my getting infected in an indoor setting are extremely low.
And that's the reason why in indoor settings I now feel comfortable not wearing a mask because I'm fully vaccinated.
But the mask didn't work anyway, so what difference does that make?
And then during the March hearing, Rand Paul was grilling him, and he says, you've been vaccinated and you parade around in two masks for show.
Fauci was walking around with two masks.
As political theatre.
And Fauci was like, yes.
I just didn't want to have mixed messages.
But in this hearing, Fauci was like, here we go again with the theatre.
Let me just state for the record that masks are not theatre.
I totally disagree with you.
Liar.
You liar.
We have the proof that you lied.
Any thoughts?
I suppose you could try and argue that, because there's two things there I want to say.
The first one is, yeah, that's a small drop that's through, and he could argue that you get a lower dose of the virus, and therefore that would lower the chances of you dying from it.
But then the point he says that about he doesn't wear a mask because he's vaccinated, that doesn't make sense with his previous email.
No.
Because as his point was, it's not about you getting the virus, it's about you spreading it to other people.
Yeah.
I mean, you could still...
And if you're vaccinated...
Yeah, but even if he's vaccinated, you know, I presume this is at the time when everyone was disagreeing about whether you could still pass it to other people.
In which case, again, I mean, his advice doesn't even make sense.
And as he said, the masks don't prevent the spread of the disease anyway, so...
Pointless.
But anyway, then we get people recommending to Fauci a bunch of drugs that apparently help.
This is in March 2020 when a physician emails him and says, I've been told by frontline colleagues in Japan, China and Korea that Alvesco is an effective treatment as well as hydroxychloroquine.
However, Alvesco is a better treatment, a more effective treatment than hydroxychloroquine because it seems to do some other medical stuff that I don't know anything about.
But apparently, various late-stage patients of the coronavirus fully recovered.
People on ventilators who look like they're about to die, fully recovered.
And the same sort of thing happens with hydroxychloroquine, according to this email.
But Alvesco is better because it appears to prevent the virus from being replicated, so infection is wiped out and no longer contagious.
Seems to be two silver bullets in one, says one scientist who has been speaking to his frontline colleagues in three different countries.
Fauci, and this is an email to Fauci, and then you can just go, this was in March 2020, then in May 2020, he, uh...
Well, he was on CNN, but he just said that the data shows hydroxychloroquine is not an effective treatment for the virus, disputing the use of the drug to fight the deadly virus, even though Donald Trump touts it as a potential cure and says he's taken it himself.
The scientific data is really quite evident now about the lack of efficacy for it.
What data?
Where are you getting this data?
What are you talking about?
And the scientist who emailed regarding the tests that they'd done in the front line, he's not the only one.
There was the coalition of doctors who came out and said, look, we've been treating people with hydroxychloroquine.
This works.
They were totally marginalized, totally sidelined, even though they had direct evidence of it working.
It didn't matter.
Who cares?
Goes against what Fauci says.
For some reason, Fauci's like the scientific data shows it doesn't work.
That's not true.
Doesn't appear to be true.
There appear to be scientists all telling you, from direct on-the-ground experience, this works.
Why are you saying?
Why didn't you even mention Alvesco?
I don't even know what Alvesco is.
Apparently it really works, according to the scientists who have been using it to treat people.
But who knows?
I don't know.
Any thoughts?
Did he ever cite any sources as to why it doesn't work?
I've not found any.
So did he ever reply to that email he got, saying that we've been using this and it worked?
There were six studies done that I find very dubious, because they don't say it doesn't work, or at least the summary I read said they didn't work, but they basically came to the inconclusive.
It's like, okay, but there are other people who are doing direct tests on the ground who are saying this is working for them.
Hydroxychloroquine is a well-known anti-malarial drug as well, so it's not dangerous.
It's not lethal.
If you take some, it's not going to kill you.
So why not just give it to them anyway?
Oh, but there's a slight chance it will raise blood pressure.
Okay, but these people are going to die.
I'll live with high blood pressure if it means I don't die.
If you're on the ventilator, what would you...
Yeah, exactly.
What are your options?
But no, instead Fauci came out and was like, no, there's lack of efficacy, according to Fauci, for some reason.
Anyway, moving on to February 2020 and talking about gain-of-function experiments.
Now, I understand that gain-of-function is a virological term that speaks to the infectious nature of the disease, right?
I'm no virologist, so this is all stuff I've had to...
Learn secondhand.
But this is how effectively a virus infects people.
And there's an email from a Hugh Auchinloss, I think I'm pronouncing that wrongly, who says, The paper you sent me says the experiments were performed before the gain-of-function pause, but not sure.
Emily is going to determine if they have any distant ties to the work.
So they're talking about the experiments in the Wuhan laboratory that apparently they had at some point asked them to pause gain-of-function research.
But he says the experiments that he's talking about were performed before it.
Now, the implication to this is that the money that is given by the United States to the Wuhan laboratory under Fauci's guidance has been used for this gain-of-function research.
So to make coronavirus more infective?
It seems that way, yeah.
And then there was a pause on it?
Apparently, there has been a request.
It seems that way.
All we have is that information.
So I don't want to extrapolate too much.
But it seems that the implication here is, you know, there were a bunch of experiments performed before the gain-of-function pause, which implies that there was a request from the United States or whoever.
To not do any more gain-of-function experiments.
And, of course, they were investigating whether there's any distant ties to the work.
But the thing is, Fauci has just come out and categorically denied that there were any gain-of-function experiments, which is really bizarre.
So, in the New York Post reporting, the National Institutes of Health earmarked $600,000 for the Wuhan Institute of Virology over a five-year period to study whether bat coronaviruses could be transmitted to humans, Fauci told lawmakers.
Fauci, the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told a house appropriation subcommittee that the money was funneled to the Chinese lab through the non-profit EcoHealth Alliance to fund, quote, a modest collaboration with very respectable Chinese scientists who are world experts on coronavirus.
But Fauci emphatically denied that the money went towards so-called gain-of-function research.
Which he described as taking a virus that can infect humans and making it either more transmissible and or more pathogenic for humans.
This, he says, was categorically not done.
So that is a concrete statement.
You couldn't get any more concrete than this.
Categoric.
We gave them $600,000, but I'm telling you, none of that money went to gain-of-function research.
Absolutely.
Which, to be honest, kind of just sounds like the kind of thing you'd do to make a bioweapon.
Well, yeah.
I mean, why would you want to create viruses that could be more infectious towards humans?
I mean, maybe to test it?
To test your bioweapon?
No, no.
So you make something more infectious and then test cures for it.
So if something did come out naturally, you could fight against it.
But I'm being very charitable.
I think you're being very charitable.
But the question then is, well, how do you know that this is categorically not done?
And Fauci's answer in the subcommittee hearing was basically like, well, we're taking it on faith?
Let's watch the clip.
How do you know they didn't lie to you?
Excuse me, sir?
How do you know they didn't lie to you and use the money for gain-of-function research anyway?
How do you know they didn't do the research and not put it on their website?
There's no way of guaranteeing that, but in our experience with grantees, including Chinese grantees, which we've had interactions with for a very long period of time, They're very competent, trustworthy scientists.
I'm not talking about anything else in China.
I'm talking about the scientists.
You gave them money and you said, don't do gain-to-function research.
Correct.
And they said, we won't.
Correct.
And you have no way of knowing whether they did or not, except you trust them.
Is that right?
Well, we generally always trust the grantee to do what they say.
And you look at the results.
Have you ever had a grantee lie to you?
I cannot guarantee that a grantee has not lied to us, because you never know.
Yeah.
You never know.
Which is why Fauci said, categorically not done.
You never know.
So he says, yeah, it looks like John, the smirk, the absolute smirk.
He knows he's lying.
He knows he's lying, and he knows he's just been caught in a lie.
Did you notice what he said there as well?
Like, oh, I'm talking about the scientists, not anything else in China?
Could you imagine saying that about Germany?
Being like, yeah, it's the Nazi scientists, not the Nazi regime, don't worry.
Yeah.
Well, I was about to get onto that.
Why would you trust the CCP's scientists?
Because, like, you know, China being a totalitarian country, being run by the Communist Party of China, obviously don't allow things to be outside of their remit.
Don't worry, the Soviet scientists never lie.
There's no graphite on the ground.
It's mad.
It's the scientists saying it, not the government, don't worry.
But Fauci's argument is, well, you know, we saw the research they put on the website.
Yeah, okay, but what if they didn't put it on the website?
Well, I mean, we can't guarantee.
Yeah, you can't.
So don't say categorically it wasn't done.
You liar.
It's mad.
So we know, again, from these leaks that Fauci is lying about that as well.
And so talking about whether the virus itself was engineered, and you may remember engineered a lab, so you may remember this was a highly controversial thing when Donald Trump said it.
Well, he just said there was evidence of it coming from the lab.
Yeah, I've seen evidence that it comes from lab.
Not being engineered for a weapon?
No, no, I didn't say for a weapon, just whether it was engineered, whether it was natural or artificial.
And this is an email on January the 31st, 2020, that Fauci received from Christian Anderson, who says,"...the unusual features of the virus make up less than 0.1%, so one has to look really closely at all the sequences to see that some of the features potentially look engineered." And four scientists that he names, Eddie, Bob, Mike, and myself, I used to work in the research councils here, and scientists do speak very informally with each other.
They don't use their own honorifics when they're talking about each other.
There's no point.
No, there's no point, exactly.
They only use these honorifics when dealing with the public.
So the four scientists, quote, all find the genome inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory.
So four scientists have emailed Fauci to say this is unlikely, it is not consistent, to have been a natural occurrence.
Can you go back for the chap's name, the previous image?
Christine Anderson.
Right, okay.
So this is an email to him saying, look, we've looked at this, and all of us agree.
Mining coronavirus genomes for clues to the outbreak's origin.
They've been sequencing it, or whatever it is they do.
And, you know, whatever magical mumbo-jumbo they do in the laboratories, and this is the result.
So Fauci knows that there are credentialed scientists that he is in contact with who think that this does have some indications that it is man-made.
And then February 21st, 2020, Michael Jacobs, a professor at Cornell, says he is alarmed at the news that the Chinese government is sterilizing their money from Huabei province.
We think there is a possibility that the virus was released from a lab in Wuhan, the biotech area of China.
We also think the virus might be complexed with another organism, such as a yeast or a fungus, to make it more sticky.
There was also another email on the 11th of March, 2020 from Adam Gertner, who is at Very Virology on Twitter.
He's a Trump supporting virologist.
And he just emails Fauci saying, hello, Anthony, this is how the virus is created.
And then a load of scientific mumbo jumbo, which is just, you know, do this at 15 degrees for 12 minutes and blah, blah, blah.
But so he's instructing Fauci on how he thinks the virus is created.
And because he's a virologist, I'm sure he's got scientific research to back this up.
I'm sure he's not just pulling this out of his rear end.
For some reason, though, after receiving all of this on the 5th of May, 2020, Fauci just did an interview with National Geographic going, no, there's no evidence that there's Maiden Lab.
None at all.
If you look at the evolution of the virus in bats and what's out there now, the scientific evidence is very, very strongly leaning toward this could not have been artificially or deliberately manipulated.
Based on what, Fauci?
Based on what?
You've got a bunch of scientists saying, look, this looks really sus.
Yeah, but they're not Chinese scientists.
They're not.
They haven't sent me any stacks, is presumably what Fauci's saying.
Everything about the stepwise evolution over time strongly indicates that this virus evolved in nature and then jumped species, Fauci says.
Based on the scientific evidence, he also doesn't entertain an alternate theory that someone found the coronavirus in the wild, brought it to the lab, and then accidentally escaped.
Put a pin in that, because we're going to come back to the found in nature and then jumped species.
We'll come back to that in a minute.
But he had previously said this, and in April he gets thanked by Peter Daszak for defending the naturalist theory.
It's a very blurry screenshot for some reason, but, you know, as of the blah blah blah, I want to say a personal thank you on behalf of our staff and collaborators.
Well, who is Peter Daszak?
Well, he's a British zoologist and disease ecology expert who's a member of the World Health Organization team who's sent to China to probe the origin of the coronavirus.
He had previously collaborated with Xi Zengali for many years, who is the director of the Wuhan Institute of Technology.
Looking good, isn't it?
His nonprofit organization, the EcoHealth Alliance, this is the one that funneled the money to the Wuhan laboratory, his organization, got the 600 grand and sent the money to them, helped support several public health programs, blah, blah, blah.
And since 2014, he has led a project on the emergence of novel zoonotic coronaviruses that originate from bats.
So for the last seven years, he's just been working on coronaviruses that come from bats in the Wuhan Institute of Virology using the money that Fauci gave them.
Thanks for standing up and saying this was natural, Fauci.
Thanks, I appreciate that.
Could it look any worse?
He could have worked for Wuhan's biology lab directly instead of just being friends with them for several years and giving them money and all the rest of it.
He did.
He did work with them.
He collaborated with Shi Zengali, who's the director at the Wuhan Institute.
I know, but he could be employed directly.
Well, I guess, yeah, but I mean, you know...
That's the only way it could be worse.
Yeah, I guess the only thing...
He could be caught in the act of spilling over viruses in the lab.
I mean, that would be worse.
Yeah, I suppose, but it's pretty bad, right?
And so he's, you know, warned World Health Organization experts about the next pandemic.
The pandemic would be caused by an unknown novel pathogen that hadn't yet entered the human population.
And he claims to have said this back in 2018, naming it Disease X. Really weird, isn't it?
He just happens to be working on bat-origin coronaviruses in the Wuhan lab, and he's been doing this since 2014, working closely with them, getting funding that seems to have this gain-of-function research included in it, and he's just saying, look, there could be a pandemic.
My Shapiro sense is tingling.
I'm going to say it's probably more likely he's just an idiot in that case.
Well, he's got a PhD in virology.
I don't think we can assume he's an idiot.
No, not an idiot in that case.
I don't think he's plotting in 2018, like, we're going to release it in 2020.
I think it's probably just really coincidental that he's like, yeah, what if this happened?
It wouldn't be interesting if this happened.
He's like, oh.
And now he's trying to cover his ass.
Why?
It seems that this virus was created in a lab.
Yeah, yeah.
That's what I'm saying.
It seems that Fauci deliberately lied that this virus wasn't created in a lab.
On his behalf.
I'm just saying about the aspect of him writing for the New York Times there two years before.
I'm just saying, on his behalf, Fauci has lied again.
Yeah, and all that, that looks like malice.
Yeah, it looks like malice.
So why are we giving him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to this?
Oh, because it's just, it seems silly.
Like, it's, you'd have to be a real comic book villain two years before, be plotting the release of a virus in China.
Well, I mean, why are they trying to create more contagious viruses in a Wuhan laboratory?
For every biological weapon research purpose.
Exactly.
I'm just saying, the domino's really lining up here.
I know, I think it would be really, really weird for him to do this two years before being like, yeah, we're going to do this, or saying this is going to happen.
But I could be totally wrong.
Maybe.
But anyway, so a couple of days ago, The Telegraph published this article, and this is absolutely fascinating.
So this is an article about how the Wuhan virus laboratory theory has resurfaced.
And you know, places like Facebook are like, yeah, we're kind of going to allow people to talk about this because this might be real.
So when the coronavirus pandemic first emerged in Wuhan in 2019, conspiracy theorists pointed out how close it was.
I love that conspiracy theorists pointed out how close it was to the Institute of Virology.
Anyone with Google Maps could have pointed out how close this was to the Institute of Wuhan Virology.
Which is a leading world centre for research on coronaviruses.
That's how the media think about everyone.
Exactly.
Everyone except them is a conspiracy theorist.
But the coincidences are just stacking up, you know?
Oh, you know, this coronavirus came out of a leading research centre on coronaviruses.
And near that, oh, don't be a conspiracy theorist.
But anyway...
I mean, it's the way the cathedral works.
Unless you have a PhD or you're part of the cathedral, then you're a conspiracy theorist.
Absolutely, right.
Even if you've got the facts.
But anyway, yeah.
So within a matter of weeks, of course, vocal members of the scientific community had roundly ridiculed the claims, criticising shoddy research that had been spread on social media.
And because Trump had said something of the same sort, they were like, no, no, that's it.
That theory's dead.
But, geneticists who claimed that they had found evidence of man-made inserts into the virus was shunned, and the journals refused to publish their work.
But in a letter to the journal Science earlier this month, 18 of the world's top epidemiologists and geneticists from institutions including Cambridge, Harvard, and Stanford called for an independent inquiry, because they published a paper.
One of the authors was Professor Ralph Barak of the University of North Carolina, who'd worked with Shi Zhengli, the person that Peter had worked with.
And Professor Eric Van Nimwegen, the University of Basel, was also a signatory to it and said, Reports may have created the impression that there is a consensus in the scientific community that the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 leaked from a laboratory can be safely dismissed.
However, there is no solid scientific basis for such a dismissal.
Almost a year and a half after the outbreak, there's still essentially no direct evidence available either for the zoonotic spillover or for a lab leak.
And so there's no evidence that this has come from a bat.
Thank you.
None, right?
It also mentioned a letter in The Lancet, which is a medical journal, last February, strongly condemning the lab escape theory that had been organized by Peter Daszak, the president of the EcoHealth Alliance.
So he had used his position as an important and political scientist to leverage The Lancet as an important scientific publication to try and crush the theory that it came from a lab, and promote the theory that it came from bats, whereas there's no evidence for that at all.
Increasingly, some scientists now believe the lab escape may actually be a simpler solution than the virus jumping from a bat.
Particularly, and this is where the pin comes in, as the infected bat population or intermediary host has never been found, despite huge efforts.
This virus has never been found in a bat.
This virus came from bats.
Which bats?
None of them.
Literally none of them.
Doesn't exist.
One of the major problems with zoonosis, the bat-jumping theory, was that the coronavirus turned up oddly well-adapted to affect the human upper respiratory tract.
Remember that gain-of-function research that Fauci was denying had happened, where they were trying to make viruses that were more effective at infecting humans?
He denied the Americans have paid for it.
That's true.
I mean, even if they haven't, the Chinese certainly would.
They certainly would.
But it'd be better if the Americans paid for it because of their money, isn't it?
But if a virus had been altered to specifically infect humans, it would make more sense.
The new unpublished research paper that has been seen by The Telegraph shows the scientists were doing just that as early as 2008.
So is it crazy that in 2018 he's like, well, hey, look, beware, there could be a pandemic.
We've been working on it since 2008, you know?
Just saying!
The tests, known as gain-of-function experiments, were designed to get ahead of an emerging deadly virus.
In 2008, Dr.
Xi's group in Wuhan first demonstrated the ability to switch the receptor-binding domains for bat and human SARS viruses.
By 2010, the Institute of Virology had embarked on gain-of-function experiments to increase the infectiousness of SARS coronavirus in humans.
Sounds like what supervillains would do.
I mean, that's the defense of why you do that kind of research.
We want to get ahead of the viruses that are going to come out.
But, I mean, bioweapons are more profitable.
Yeah, I just don't trust them, to be honest.
Just don't trust them.
My gut's saying no.
And I'm going to go with my gut, because I've been lied to a lot by Fauci.
By 2015, Wuhan scientists had created a highly infectious chimeric virus, which targeted the human upper respiratory tract.
Thanks, scientists.
Thanks so much.
In 2018 and 2019, and no one's going to be held to account for this.
When this all comes out and it turns out that they did engineer this and this killed millions of people around the world, no one will be held to account.
In 2018 and 2019, grants from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, that would be Fauci's organisation, in the US show that Dr.
Xi had applied to work on virus infection experiments in humanised mice using SARS coronaviruses to find out what changes could lead to a spillover event into humans.
Shortly before the first cases of coronavirus were reported, Dr.
Daszak gave an interview, saying the work had been going on for six or seven years, and warning that they'd created untreatable SARS viruses which could infect humanised mice.
It's not a conspiracy, though, is it?
It's just this guy saying, yeah, by the way, we've been creating these untreatable viruses that are really great at infecting humans.
You might want to watch out for a pandemic in the near future, but don't worry about it.
We'll just call it Mysterious Disease X. Not a conspiracy, though, Callum.
Just saying, it's not looking good, is it?
Like, you can't vaccinate against them, so they are a clear and present danger, he said.
In the new paper, scientists also point out that the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, which the virus uses to enter the cells, has changes on the surface that would fit with manipulation through gain-of-function experiments, where high infection is the goal.
Oh, that's good news.
The authors of the new work say that the chimeric experiments in 2015 were also found to impact bitter and sweet taste receptors that could account for why people lose their sense of taste during COVID. It's all coming together, isn't it?
They even speculate that because these groups use cell lines from Henrietta Lacks, the African-American woman whose cancer cells are the source of the first immortalized human cell line, I don't even know what that is, it may have enabled the virus to become more infectious to black populations.
Do you think that the Chinese Communist Party scientists would deliberately create an infectious disease that was racist towards black people?
Yeah.
Yeah, me too.
I think they would.
Yeah.
I mean, it's not like they hold a particularly high opinion of black people, is it?
McDonald's.
China.
I mean, if there's signs on the door saying black people can't come in.
Yes.
I mean, unironically, if there's one place on Earth that would do something so evil, it is the Chinese Communist Party's China.
Just saying.
The paper concludes that several features in the coronavirus are unlikely to be the result of natural evolution, and taken together point to purposive manipulation specifically for gain of function.
What's going to happen?
Nothing.
Nothing's going to happen.
This is going to go away.
Biden's going to make it go away.
Fauci's career will be fortified.
The worst thing about all of this for me is the 2020 election and the way this influenced that.
Yep.
And the fact that you gave Beijing Biden instead of Trump.
Yep.
Trump got screwed by what appears to be some kind of Chinese conspiracy that various actors in the West are complicit in, presumably because they're getting their stags.
I love how this was also banned until now, and now it's re-personed.
And I just want to say, right, all of the sources we're using here will be linked in the show notes, right?
Go and read them yourself.
What they are, totally mainstream.
Fox News, The Federalist, CNN, the BuzzFeed Freedom of Information request, Fauci's own personal emails, and then the Telegraph reporting on all of these credentialed scientists from around the world who have written a giant paper on this because all of this evidence is glaringly in people's faces.
Looking forward to recording that Alex Jones is Right podcast, to be honest.
We're going to have to add COVID to it as well.
Yeah, I think we probably are.
Yeah, that'll be the last thing.
I think we probably are.
No, I'm going to have to rewrite a bit of the script, but yeah.
Okay.
Anyway, let's go on to something that we can go talk about on YouTube, I guess, because that's bad.
Dawn Butler being an idiot.
Yeah.
So Dawn Butler, I love Dawn Butler as an MP because she's amazing.
Like, she's a real idiot.
And she does it to herself, so it's completely deserved.
She's one of these front Labour Party people that just embarrass themselves.
Diversity, yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah, basically.
Like, she is not there because of her skills as an MP, like Diane Abbott, for example, or Nadia Whitton, or the rest of them.
I mean, they're all...
Oh, right, I thought you were going to say you used Diane Abbott as an example of skills as an MP. They're there because of their group characteristics, not because of their skill as MPs, because all of the folks they have there are just a mess.
And you compare this to the conservative ladies, let's say.
Oh, God.
Like, the non-diversity hires.
They're actually skilled in politics.
Which is why the Conservatives have had two female Prime Ministers and Labour haven't even had a female party leader.
Yeah, and they've got plenty of candidates for the next one.
I mean, you've got Priti Patel, you've got Liz Truss, Kate Badenock, all fantastic.
I'd like Liz Truss to be in charge, to be honest.
She's been amazing.
Anyway, so Dawn Butler decided to do a poll on this.
So who do you trust more, Stonewall or Liz Truss?
Because, of course, Stonewall were claiming that anyone who...
Yeah, give it a click, John.
That's the answer.
90,000 votes.
70% vote for Liz Truss of who you trust more than Stonewall.
Stonewall are the people that think that if you're gay, you're trans, and if you criticize them, you're an anti-Semite.
I really am amazed that she hasn't deleted this.
Yeah, it's still up.
Go give her a fuck.
Yeah.
Anyway, so we go to the next one here.
So something that ran under the radar was like a couple months ago, John Cleese was on a show with Dawn Butler.
I mean, weird crossover, but it was some tiny channel called Byline TV. And then I looked it up and yeah, it's the leftist byline organization.
The pathetic organization.
So 8,000 views.
Commie propaganda organization.
Copy propaganda.
So John Cleese won in here with Dawn Butler.
And Dawn Butler was mouthing off about how there's offensive TV that exists and woke comedy is better than offensive comedy.
And John Cleese just took it to town.
So let's play.
Dawn, you see, I want to know what Dawn thinks is offensive.
Okay.
Other than, obviously, unpleasant racial jokes.
Obviously, we don't do that.
That's awful.
But what else is offensive?
Well, that's what I'm saying, that if your comedy is based on offense, like, you know, back in the day, you had, like, The Minstrel Show and all those kind of racist shows.
Yeah, give me an example of something that's well-liked as a comedy, but you find offensive.
Now, in today's day...
I think in the last 30 years.
Last 30 years.
There should be a longer video, but I probably messed up the clip.
But she has nothing.
Nada.
She doesn't name a thing.
And then it just kind of ends and they move on.
And then Dawn Butler looks really awkward for the rest of the interview.
She's sat in the corner, like, not saying anything.
And you can tell because she knows she's just been caught out.
Yeah.
She's got nothing.
The last 30 years, there's nothing you can point to and say, this is highly offensive.
This is the minstrel show or something like that.
Because it's not that.
Can you imagine?
I mean, the 1990s.
Yeah.
You thought that was on TV, do you?
No, of course not.
It's an absolute nothing burger.
And then, by that, she is demonstrating that she knows that there is nothing culturally racist in British history, in the specifics of television for this instance, for the last 30 years at least.
Man, I can't believe the BBC hasn't been promoting racist jokes for the last 30 years.
That's shocking to me.
But it's nowhere.
I mean, name a popular show that is openly racist.
I mean, 40 years.
Still nothing.
I mean, they'll go back to, in fact, John Cleese doing various old-fashioned 70s TV shows in which there will be a racist character that is the butt of the joke.
He is bad because he's racist.
That's what she's going to be referring to.
Hmm.
So, the thing is, she's got nothing.
There is no racism in British society when it comes to culture or media.
And she knows it for decades upon decades.
Remember, it's 2020 now.
2021 now, actually.
I mean, in the sense of the decades.
The 1950 was 70 years ago now.
It really is getting far away.
And yet, people like her still try to go on this racial grift.
And it's run out.
There's nothing.
And John Klee's calling her out perfectly there.
But then we have to wonder, why does the Labour Party still only propose nonsense like this?
So this is a BBC News article saying, Black history lessons will be made mandatory in Welsh schools.
Well, I'm sure the ten black people in Wales will be really well informed by that.
But what?
Black history lessons will be made mandatory in Welsh schools.
So you don't know where this comes from.
This comes from a petition, the BBC says.
So you're on the next link, which is just the petition itself.
You can see 34,000 signatures for the Welsh government to make black history and POC history.
Love how humanising that is.
To be mandatory in Welsh schools and the Welsh Labour government have done it.
Because, I mean, why not?
It agrees with their leftism.
It really irritated why the Section 127 position that agrees with conservatism is not a holy, hearty, embraced by the Conservative Party, but whatever.
So, that's the petition.
If we go back to the article, do you remember when Voice of Wales were warning about how Wales was becoming American?
It was coming with Yankee nonsense?
Yep.
Like Barack Obama being the face of the Welsh History Museum?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Black and pock history in Wales...
It doesn't make any sense.
Well, I mean, you can see by the picture they're using, it's just all American colonization.
Black Lives Matter.
Black Lives Matter.
I can't breathe.
Well, where did that happen?
Yeah, so they say in here the changes will mean all learning will need to reflect the diverse experiences and contributions that BAME communities and individuals both past and present in Wales.
Leftist American imperialism, got it.
Following worldwide protests after the death of George Floyd in US police custody, yep, not Welsh, there were calls for greater recognition of Wales' role in colonialism and slavery to be taught in schools.
God, how George Floyd dies and Wales is like, oh, flagellate, flagellate, flagellate!
We're sorry!
What did you have to do with it?
God, it's so sad!
And again, no race of element to the George Floyd murder.
Never brought up in the court case because there isn't any.
You can say that it's a murder by a police officer, you can say that he's committing manslaughter or murder, but you cannot say he's committing racist murder.
There is no element of it.
And it is a lie that everyone has been told.
And don't worry about those toxicology reports.
So, Professor Charlotte Williams, who led the working group set up by the Welsh government to look at how BAME contributions throughout history were taught in schools, said that there was considerable evidence of, quote, racial inequality in the Welsh education system.
I knew it.
I knew the Welsh were the oppressors.
I agree with her, right?
England did nothing wrong.
Scotland did nothing wrong.
Ireland did nothing wrong.
France, Germany, the rest of...
No, it's all Wales.
It's all Wales.
You're absolutely right.
We've found the considerable evidence.
Let's pin it all on the Welsh.
Sorry, Welsh.
I'm sorry.
It's just, you know, sacrificial lamb and all that, you know.
We've got an activated race professor to come in.
I looked up just her quotes on this, so we go to the next link.
This is the government Welsh page.
She gives a quote in here.
This isn't about adding an element of black minority ethnic history here and there in the new curriculum, but about reimagining learning and teaching across all elements of the curriculum so that it reflects Wales that is and always has been ethnically diverse, internationalist in its outlook and progressive in its aspirations.
What?!
What are you talking about?
Owen Glendower is invading England going, for international diversity and progressivism.
What are you talking about?
Oh, the diversity of Wales.
What do you mean?
It's been full of the Welsh since literally before the Romans.
Oh my god.
Mark Drakeford said, oh, First Minister Mark Drakeford said, oh, diversity is one of our strengths as a nation!
The meme is real!
It is like Wales has always been about ethically diverse international outlook and progressive in its aspirations.
Yeah, just like the Roman Empire or the Mongol Empire.
Literally, for the last two and a half thousand years at least, Wales has been a Welsh ethnostate.
Like everywhere else on Earth.
You can literally trace the genes of Welsh people back thousands and thousands of years.
International outlook.
It's actually, I wonder...
It's so embarrassing.
I mean, where might you actually find a more homogenous population?
Actually.
Scotland?
Maybe, yeah, Scotland.
Well, no, a lot of the Scots came from Ireland.
So, like, actually, Scotland is actually more diverse in that way.
But Wales didn't have Irish colonisation, as far as I'm aware.
So, like, it's literally the purest area of the British Isles.
No, it's always been diverse.
I mean, this is the lie you are meant to believe, which is for...
Nothing has ever changed in the last few hundred years.
Everything has always been as it is now, and always will be as it is now.
The past is the present.
Progressive and ethnically diverse.
Internationalist Wales.
Oh, internationalists.
That is another great thing.
Welsh independence has been an internationalist project, I guess.
Anyway.
God damn it.
So, Rory lists some of the plans that they've outlined, and I'd love to see his article about this.
So, they list in here, the report makes 51 recommendations for changes in the curriculum and teacher training, including...
Mandatory anti-racism and diversity training for all trainee and acting teachers.
Of course.
So, leftist indoctrination for all teachers.
Yep.
Yep, this is about progressivism.
So it is.
BAME history to be mandatory in schools and all subject areas.
So you've got, I don't know, BAME physics.
Then you've got BAME biology and BAME mathematics.
BAME chemistry.
BAME lightning calling.
BAME electrics.
That's just a stupid thing to say.
It's just...
BAME Computer Engineering.
BAME Business Management.
I don't want to call it that.
I mean, they're the ones who are making us do this.
BAME Criminology.
What have you got to say about that, Mark Drayford?
Not much.
Wales has always been diverse and internationalist.
Moving on.
That's why we're teaching about BAME criminology at all schools.
Lesson one.
George Floyd.
It gets worse.
That's the best part.
Scholarships to support more BAME students to enter teacher training.
So just Gibbs.
Gibbs if you've got brown skin.
Privileging race.
Yeah, that's progress.
Mentoring and social support to be offered to all teachers from BAME backgrounds.
More like the disabled?
Yeah.
Excuse me, retarded brown person.
Can we mentor you?
Just there's a brown person in the room.
Quick, get a mentor.
Jesus Christ.
This is horrible.
Why would you...
It's the kind of thing you'd write, you know, there's like the special ed section of all schools where you keep the kids right who've got problems.
And then you've got like the managers, like they're the mentors.
Literally like they're disabled.
Yeah.
Don't worry, he's a BAME teacher.
He's a little slower.
That's why we got the mentor.
Is the mentor going to be white?
He's got a whip.
Jesus, calm down, Cal.
Well, it's not me who's done this.
I am denouncing all of this.
I stand verbally against this entire program, but good God, Labour are chucking money at it like there's no tomorrow.
No, but that's mad.
Like, literally, you could have, like, the BAME teachers who've got a white overlord who are mentoring them.
Teaching BAME criminology.
Teaching BAME criminology, yeah.
This is what anti-racism looks like in I thought they were Yukmagers or something these days.
Wales hasn't had the update yet, so I guess they're 10 years behind.
They're still calling them BAME. They've also got a point here.
Working with the unions to support BAME staff experiencing discrimination, and governing bodies should consider having diversity champions.
So we've got...
It's just a consideration.
I'm sorry, it just sounds so much like we've got a house BAME here.
Like, this is our diversity champion.
I mean, that's how they're wording it.
I mean, not to mention the fact that they've got mentors for brown teachers with their white overlord here, and they're teaching BAME criminology.
It's so condescending.
Everything about this is awful.
Good God.
I mean, it's caricature though, isn't it?
It's literally like a caricature of, look, what we want to do is, if we were to produce like a skit or something, where we were like, look, we think they're a bunch of racists, and we want to show how they're a bunch of racists, it would come out looking like this.
Don't worry, Deborah, we got you a mentor!
Yeah, just some white professor with a monocle, you know?
Oh, God.
Hello there, I heard you chaps were having trouble in the schools.
Oh, God.
With the browns and the blacks.
Yeah, so I guess how much money's been thrown at this.
Right, I told my opinion on this clear, right?
I think that everyone should be treated the same, because I don't think there should be any difference in the way that races are treated and considered in the institutions that we have.
So, like, no one needs a mentor unless they're actually falling behind, not because they're brown.
Radical?
Radical position?
I endorse that statement.
We hear the liberal position of just not being racist.
We're not under levels of IQ of anti-racism, where you get all the brown teachers, their white overlord, who teaches them correctly.
We're anti-racists!
I guess you must be.
Don't worry, today's lesson on BAME physics.
I'm going to be assisted.
Here's how the shaman call for lightning.
God.
Anyway, so the Welsh Government has said that all the recommendations in the report have been accepted.
Without thinking.
God!
Good point.
Good point.
They do need white mentors.
Mark Drakeford.
Okay.
Okay.
And has allocated £500,000 to help in their implementation.
Enjoy your taxpayer money being flushed into the pockets of this new grifting class.
God, I mean, I would sign up to be a mentor like that.
I mean, there's good money to be made here, apparently.
They're just standing around.
I don't even know what you're meant to do.
What, you're policing a BAME teacher?
I mean, they're not people who are slow.
They're people that, just like everyone else, Mark Drayford, they don't actually need mentors.
And therefore, if you're a mentor, you'd have to do nothing.
Because they're just a teacher.
Message to Mark Drakeford, black people are people too, just so you know.
Are we not a man?
Am I not a man and a brother?
They're just normal, Mark.
Just treat them like normal.
You don't have to do a thing, honestly.
Don't worry, I spent £500,000 of the taxpayers' money on plantation guards.
We're going to have to invade Wales to free the slaves.
Yes.
From Mark Drakeford's...
We're literally going to have to run a coup to free the brown people of Wales from their oppressors.
I guess we'll have to get the mile-long petition, am I not a man and a brother?
We can probably set that up, actually.
Actually, we probably could.
Yeah, we'll do that afterwards.
That'll be a laugh.
For no other reason.
I don't think brown people need mentors.
Mark Drakeford.
Brown people are not disabled.
Yeah.
Message to the Welsh Government.
This isn't the first time either.
You remember, we covered this before, but there was grants being given out by the Welsh Government in response to the COVID crisis.
They locked everything down.
Everyone's getting poor.
So they're like, right, we'll give our business grants to set the economy back up.
And you will get priority for them if you're a woman or disabled.
Or have brown skin.
So it was like, yeah, women and brown skin people, they're in the same category as being disabled.
And it was like, good God, who's running the Labour Welsh Government?
Like Rich Spencer's doing the account for them or something.
Again, we here at the Loat Seaters disavow any indication that women and brown people may be considered to be disabled.
Disavow the Labour Party in its entirety.
There is nothing to be said if that wasn't clear already.
But what's interesting is Dawn Butler actually agrees with us on this position that black history shouldn't be some separate thing that you teach.
Black history is British history because they are British citizens, not black citizens.
They are people of the country and therefore that's what's important about them, not that they have a type of skin tone.
So this is her clip talking about that.
False framing of these histories reinforces the artificial separation between us and them, between their history and our history.
Black history is British history.
I mean, base, that was a speech in which you were saying we shouldn't segregate the histories.
I mean, I don't know why it's got for that, which we're arguing about segregation and mentors for black people, but...
Modern Wales.
But anyway, if that's the case, okay, we all agree that we don't need this stuff, but why do we need preferential treatment for Yook McGamers?
Sorry, BAME. I don't know which one's the right one these days.
So this is Met Chief Cressida Dick of the Met Police calling for law to be more favourable to minority recruits.
Oh, what are they?
The same as disabled people, Crisida?
Her opinion.
Dame Crisida Dick, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, has called for a change in the law to allow the force to favour ethnic minority candidates when they are equally qualified to white applicants.
Yeah, but the problem with that, Crisida, is that that's racist and we have laws against being racist because racism is bad.
Why do I have to say this?
That's why she wants a change in the law.
Exactly.
Sorry, I'm being, it's just like in California where they try to repeal the anti-discrimination laws.
Yeah.
It's like, sorry, we're like pro-discrimination actually.
Actually, we are a bunch of racists, says Chrissy DeDick, and the anti-racism laws are getting in the way of our racism.
I mean, that's the thing.
The Welsh government's just running full ahead of being racist, but in England over here, the racism that's taking place or being asked for is to be racist against white applicants, against male applicants, and so on and so forth.
So are the police of Britain institutionally racist?
Yes.
Yes, we can point to it.
We can point to your statements calling for that power.
We can point to you being guilty of it in a minute.
The Welsh government are institutionally racist.
Yes.
They think brown people are disabled.
Sorry, that's their COVID. They do!
They actually do!
Anyway, so she says more than 40% of London's residents are black, Asian or minority ethnic compared to 18% of the Met's workforce.
The Met wants to increase its intake to 40% of all officers by next April and has the aspiration for 8% to be from black backgrounds specifically.
Does your skin tone make you a better police officer?
No.
Being a good police officer makes you a good police officer.
But the wokest don't care about that.
They care about race socialism.
The equality part being here, the equal representation of all the races stay in your place mentality.
Which is awful.
I mean, that's literally the white nationalist position.
Yeah.
God.
Awful.
Anyway, so under the law, as it stands, the Met can already apply the principle to individual jobs.
So they can already be racist against white applicants for individual jobs, but it is unable to apply it to entire cohorts of recruits.
It's such a big difference.
You've already got that power, and you're just like, no, we need more.
We need to be able to discriminate more.
And they mention in this article, and we're just going to go through the links to prove that they're all true as well, which is that the police have already been caught being institutionally racist and sexist against whites and men.
So the first one here, the first link.
So this is, in 2019, Cheshire police were found guilty of discrimination after they rejected a well-qualified recruit because he was a white heterosexual male.
They were found guilty in court.
He got the job.
This isn't some fantasy.
This isn't like, oh, I imagine if this would happen.
Happened.
It happened so much that someone said, alright, I'm going to go to court, I'm going to prove it, and they did.
Police are institutionally racist and sexist, and in this case also heterophobic.
So it turns out the left was right that the police are an institutionally sexist and racist organisation.
Yes.
Just not in the way that they described it.
Yeah, and it's not the only time, as I mentioned, so if we go to the next one.
So three years earlier, Nottingham police were criticised for tweeting specifically to attract ethnic minority recruits.
So if you scroll down, you can see some of the tweets here, and they're just really weird.
So someone from UKIP here saying, disgraceful, by definition, no discrimination is positive.
You should employ people on ability, regardless of the colour or who they sleep with.
Right, and just...
Just before we go on, right?
Exactly.
UKIP are literally, they were described by a BBC reporter as the racist party to Gerard Batten.
He's like, you are the racist party of Britain.
That's what they consider to be racism.
Discrimination is not positive.
And that's the racist position now.
And the police responded with, Hi, Lee Waters UKIP.
Positive discrimination in recruitment is making appointments based on protected characteristics, which we do not do.
Hi, Lee Waters UKIP.
Not police are proud to use positive discrimination initiatives as Section 158 Equality Act 2010 and will continue to do so.
Why did you say you didn't?
I don't even know, but it's just...
There's another one here just below as well, in which they're asking for only certain types of people to apply.
Nottingham Police are recruiting PCs January 2017.
If you're from a BME slash LGBT plus group...
Usually we go with the ethnic groups together and sexuality stuff separate, but we've thrown them all together now.
If you're black or gay...
If you're black or gay, we want you to join us.
Call or text number for more info.
And then images of, I don't know, I presume black and gay PCs.
I have no way of proving that they're gay.
Special invitation would you be proud to serve?
We're only recruiting black and gays today.
That's institutional racism right there.
That's what you're doing.
I can't stand this.
Imagine the reverse.
Okay, think for a second.
We're only hiring heteros and whites today.
If you're brown, not your chance.
Think about that.
Think about if they were being found guilty of a black guy who applied for that police job, remember the previous one in Cheshire, and he had been rejected and had proved in court he was rejected for being black.
Think about that.
This has already happened.
This has happened in Britain.
It's not some fantasy.
It's not a what-if.
This stuff has already happened and been proven in court.
Go to the next one here.
They admitted that they did wrong here.
This is a public apology for saying that 186 candidates who were white men, we rejected them outright for being white men.
2006.
This is ridiculous.
I mean, it's unbelievable.
And this is the thing that just is a little bit of a gripe of mine with the race report.
I mean, they're looking for racism against non-whites and homosexuals and so on and so forth, and then they didn't find any.
Go and look for the white stuff or the heterosexuals or the men stuff.
You'll find it in an instant.
Google it.
It's so easy.
And you've got public apologies.
You've got court documents, you know, court rulings.
It's unbelievable.
But at the same time, thanks to Dawn Butler.
There is no racism against non-whites that is serious in this country.
There is no popular racism.
There is no institutional racism.
There is no such discrimination against the LGBTQIA +, or whatever alphabet is being added these days.
But against white men, we have the apologies.
We have the court documents, and we have the reports.
Yeah.
I don't really have much to say about that.
It's a bit of a downer for the last bit.
But thank you, Dawn Butler, for proving the point.
Yeah, I mean, we're not going to have time to do the third segment, so I guess we'll just go straight to the video comments.
Sorry, I got a little angry.
No, no, no, sorry.
So, here is your dinner of raw bread roll.
Now eat it.
There's a hint of malice beneath the surface of this, as if this is a form of secret humiliation.
I seem to enjoy debasing the dignity you hold for your own personhood, the part of you that says it's wrong to do some things because they are beneath you.
LAUGHTER Well, I think he makes a great point, to be honest.
Why are you eating bread?
For a good meme.
It was a good meme.
It should be beneath you.
It's wrong to do these things.
Let's get to the next one.
Hello, Lotus Teeters.
This is Private Rion.
We've got another beautiful morning here in Texas.
Carl, as little as I liked the Kilo Sharia, it is clear to me that it is better for you to be in the office, as the Calum Fate was getting far, far, far too decadent with its bread.
This is clearly true.
A few days ago, there's a solution to this schism of Ketosharia.
Someone suggested moderation, and I agree, moderation is indeed the solution.
However, what we have to recognize is that not everyone has the sufficient self-control or power will to maintain moderation.
For example, one could buy a bar of chocolate and eat one piece a day.
However, there are people who do that, who are tempted, but the moment they have that first bite, they end up eating the entire bar in one go in less than five minutes.
And therefore, for such people, there is no really workable moderation to be found.
And therefore these weak individuals have no choice but to adhere to Karl's Ketosharim.
They must turn their back to sugar entirely, because they lack the self-control to eat it in moderation.
And now this is not an accusation, because acknowledgement of weakness is wisdom, because when you acknowledge your weakness, you can overcome it in one way or another.
And once you have wisdom, you have a basis for strength.
I sign off on all of that.
I think that's fantastic.
There's an ancient Greek term, I think it's a retail, something like this, that he's describing where you know what the right thing is to do.
You just don't have the willpower to follow through with it.
And that's basically what he's describing there, I think.
And yeah, no, he's right.
I mean, to you, your religion, and unto me, mine.
No.
Tolerance is the last refuge of a scoundrel, or something like that.
I don't want every video to be out keto all the time.
No, no.
We do need to move on from the keto meme at some point.
Although, actually, I want to...
Can you...
There's some crisps, you know, the crisps, on Carl's desk.
Oh, no, I ate them all.
Oh, you ate them all.
Ah, okay.
So...
They were good, though.
I got, like, a gift the other day.
If you go to a Polish shop, at least the ones around here, they're selling, like, packets of crisps, and when you get them, it's actually, like, dehydrated, very thinly sliced meat.
And when you eat it, it does crunch, but it's all meat.
Yeah, it's got the texture of a crisp, but none of the carbs.
Yeah, it's great.
I fixed my audio so my future comments should sound better, although more importantly I'd like to remind everyone that it only costs £30 or $43 per month to force the Lotus Eaters to watch any appropriate video that you choose to send them.
Well, actually, we're going to have to bring in editorial policies for this because we get a lot of videos now, and they're taking up a lot of time.
So, basically, it's going to have to be that if you go above the 30-second limit or something like that, we're just not going to be able to have it and show it.
And to be honest with you, it takes a lot of Vicky's time as well.
So, you know, she has to actually process these and sort them out and stuff like this.
They've got to give up the sequence rendered.
Yeah.
And so, actually, if you could...
Actually only send us, like, proper comments or questions.
That would really be appreciated.
The odd meme one is fine, but, like, you know, when it becomes too much, it's just too much.
Hey from Florida, guys.
In honor of my bullheaded contrarian nature, I have decided that this June I will celebrate Gay Ambivalence Month.
We're here!
We're queer!
Whoop-dee-doo!
I quite like that.
That's great.
Douglas Murray's signing on right now.
Yeah, exactly.
Yeah, no, that's a good idea.
Gay Ambivalence Month.
Yeah, that's good.
So I'm currently writing a book about my perspective as a Christian classical liberal virtue ethicist.
I've gotten to the point on family values.
Now, being 23, I don't have any kids of my own yet.
So I was wondering if Carl, the Pope of Dadism, could provide any unique advice on family values and that sort of thing.
And I was wondering if maybe you could at some point do a premium podcast on Dadism.
Yes, I'll save it for when I've collected my thoughts in a much more detailed and expansive way.
But yeah, I've got a fair amount that I can say about family values and will do.
Did you do that yesterday with Tree of Logic?
Yeah, a little bit.
Nice chat with Tree of Logic and we talked about a lot of that and I'll flesh these things out in a more full way at some point.
Ah, good afternoon, gentlemen.
It is I, the glorious voice of Satan, which, thank you for that one, by the way.
Coming from the Keto-Sharia atheist, that one is a bit rich.
I was going to ask a question about bringing back some bass-chan version of Christianity, which I can't do now, seeing as I'm batting for the other side, apparently.
Again, blasphemy from this man, not engaging the church as a good carb argument, instead going for the classic smear like a leftist.
Very cheap tactic, sir, pisk-pisk.
Now, regardless of Mr.
Benjamin's assertions, we at the church actually do not advocate for some sort of gross demonic food, last of all things, carb.
I myself advocate for a brutally strict regime of clean carbs only, so no coke, no sweets, no ice cream, no sugar of any kind.
Things that I suspect Mr.
Benjamin are familiar with, seeing as it was his ill-disciplined, over-indulging sweet tooth that made him a bit on the porky side over the last couple of years, things that I did not contend with because I ate the right carbs.
You swing from all sugars to no sugars.
A radical extremist of dieting you are, sir.
See, if you simply engage the good church for its philosophical principles of ironclad discipline, I'd wedged you'd have lost the weight as well.
And yes, I'm aware I'm being a bit petty, but you did call me the voice of Satan.
That is hardly going to be a fair fight.
All fun and games though, Carl.
It's good to see that you've lost the weight.
You actually look great, sir, so I'm impressed.
Well done.
Thank you.
But I'm still going to be pro-carb.
Cheers, lads.
I see the chat.
It's just like, clean carbs.
Yeah, like clean coal.
I mean, being realistic and not memeing on it.
Yeah, I mean, he's in a totally sensible position.
He has a YouTube channel, isn't he?
I don't know.
He sounds like he should have one, though.
I really like his voice.
I'm pretty sure he mentioned it before and I just couldn't find it.
So if you're sending a video tomorrow, mention it and then I'm going to look it up and give you a sub because I need some more stuff to listen to.
But I mean, he is right.
The reason I became like a keto extremist is because I had weight I wanted to lose.
But if you just want to maintain a healthy weight, then what he's suggesting is very sensible.
Are you not at your healthy weight yet?
No, I want to get a bit more buff.
When people talk about transgenderism or even homosexuality, there is a tendency to talk about these phenomenon as if it is a property of the soul of a person, i.e.
they were born in the wrong body.
As if it is an ephemeral soul which determines one's sexuality.
However, from a science and biology perspective, this question has actually been settled for about 50 years now.
Sometime around the late 70s, some neuroscientists investigated the phenomenon of transsexuality by slicing up male, female and transsexual brains to compare the structures.
What they discovered was a portion of the brain called the sexually dimorphic nucleus which is consistently larger in males than in females.
Which appears to be true of all mammals.
When they investigated the transsexual brain, they found the SDN to be abnormal, so that the male transsexual person had an SDN consistent with a female brain.
This area of the brain also has direct links to homosexuality in males, but via a slightly different mechanism.
Damage to the SDN has been shown to change the sexual preference in mammals.
It's certainly fascinating stuff.
I wonder if it's possible for you guys to get a neuroscientist on the show to tell us more about it.
I mean, we can certainly see if Sam Harris is busy, but I don't think he'll come off.
I mean, I don't know.
I don't know anything about these things.
But it strikes me that the fact that he's saying that it's talked about as if it's a property of the soul is very interesting, because it is.
And it's always talked about as if this should dictate the physical consequences on the body, as in, you know, Well, I feel like I'm a woman, therefore I need to start chopping parts off my body.
But you only feel like you're a woman because of the way that your brain is.
It's not something that's transcendental about you that occupies your body.
It's something that emerges from your brain.
And if it could be that there's a chemical imbalance or a part of the brain that's constructed differently, then there's nothing to say that that couldn't be treated and then you would feel like a woman or feel like a man, sorry.
You know, whatever it's supposed to be.
I mean, that's a question.
I mean, people talk about genetic engineering and whatnot.
Neural engineering, I mean, if that becomes a thing in like 100 years, and you could just reconstruct your brain without killing you in ways you wanted, think of the things you could do.
Well, this is the thing about transgenderism that I've never understood, is the argument is always like, well, if Paul feels like he's a woman trapped in a man's body, then we'll give him oestrogen, or estrogen, however you want to say.
So he...
Becomes more morphologically female, and so he feels more female.
It's like, okay, but why not give him testosterone so he becomes more morphologically male and feels more masculine?
That's a good point.
Why wouldn't you do that?
If it works one way, why wouldn't...
I feel a bit like a woman.
Okay, we'll make you more male, and then you'll feel like a man.
Yeah, we'll give you testosterone.
And the thing is, it's not anything alien to his body, right?
He already has testosterone.
It's less likely to mess him up.
Exactly.
It's working in harmony with the natural, but I guess we'll say slightly abnormal...
Configuration of his body, you know, that rather than doing something radical to try and change it into a different configuration that has loads of knock-on effects, you know, why not try and make him feel more like he actually is rather than something that he feels he wants to be?
I've never understood that.
I've never heard that before.
Why has no one ever mentioned this in the transgender debate?
I don't know.
It's a fantastic point.
Well, I mean, I'm sure there's a reason, but I just don't know what it is, and no one's ever addressed it.
So it just sits there looking glaringly obvious to me that we would actually try and help them live in accordance with their true nature rather than the nature they wish that they had because they've got some sort of slight disorder.
But I'm no expert, so...
I mean, you don't even have to do it with chemicals.
I mean, you could just, you know, take, if some lad feels a bit feminine, just take him through something masculine in an experience.
Oh, yeah.
Because, I mean, naturally the body will produce more testosterone and things like that.
But, I mean, if it's because of a genetic deficiency in testosterone, then just give them hormone shots for testosterone to make them feel more manly.
Supposed to be fundamentally, no.
It harms leftist ideology.
Well, that's...
We'll do something destructive, so we'll do something destructive.
Exactly.
That would be supporting patriarchy.
Yeah.
Anyway, let's go for the next video.
Okay, don't worry.
Tell us afterwards, John.
Tell us afterwards.
I have a one-hour commute, one direction, 50 miles, 80 kilometers, and non-period units.
And I was wondering if you had any sort of suggestions for audible books or podcasts I can listen to that have to do with history or science or anything like that.
That way I can make back some of the time I lose since I lose two hours a day just for driving.
Preferably something I can download because I drive through an area that is very remote and so there's no service for most of the drive.
And so I look forward to any sort of suggestions you have for what I could listen to.
Do you want to say hi?
Where are we at now?
Well, I mean, I've got loads.
It depends what period of history you're into.
Well, first and foremost, go to loadseeds.com because we have history podcasts and all the rest of you you can download there.
Yes, we do.
But for books, I mean, it depends what you're into, but there's loads.
Some of my favourite authors, one of them is Tom Holland.
The history author, who has written loads...
I've read like four or five of his books.
They're all really good.
They're all, you know, publicly available on various websites.
And I mean, you know, unpaid plug, but I use audible.co.uk because it's good.
It's just good service.
And yeah, I listen to audiobooks all the time using it, the history ones in particular.
But it depends on the time period.
Where do you want to start?
But there are loads, absolutely loads.
I just Google whatever I want on YouTube.
If I want it on MP3 so it's offline, just convert it.
Anything by Tom Holland is a really good start.
You can download them, John, onto your phone.
Anything by Tom Holland is a good start.
Joseph Smith says, if it turns out the lab leak hypothesis was true, then the COVID-19 pandemic is literally the next Chernobyl, a natural disaster caused by a communist dictatorship.
Well, it's not even a natural disaster.
Well, in which case, I look forward to the HBO special on it.
Yeah, exactly.
Because the Chernobyl one was great.
Yeah.
Natalie Collier says, it's clear that China originated the virus and didn't warn people about the outbreak and were covering up by bribing the WHO, so governments around the world need to make a choice.
If the virus is not as bad as they've been telling us, then they need to own up to the damage to the economy.
The public's mental health and children's education that they went ahead and implemented with their asinine restrictions.
Or, if it is as bad as they've been saying, then China needs to actually be held accountable for what they've unleashed onto the world.
This isn't just because the virus started there, but because they tried to cover it up, bribe the WHO, and stockpile resources while convincing everyone else there was nothing to worry about.
And the fact that it seems that the Chinese Institute created a deliberately infectious virus.
That seems to be deliberately designed to target black people.
I mean, as I understand it, no one's even claiming that they didn't do it deliberately to make it more infectious.
Yeah.
No, they are claiming that they did.
I mean, but no one's claiming they haven't.
The only claim is just, did the Americans pay for it?
Which, I mean, good God.
Why would you?
Yeah, honestly, the amount of things China has done that would be actual grounds for war is astounding, and yet they're allowed to continue with impunity.
What's worse is that Fauci's given you your money to do it.
Alce Baez Nuts says Fauci's pressing therapeutic drug treatments in favor of making a vaccine is not new.
He did the same thing to the AIDS drug and let hundreds die while failing to make a viable vaccine, making him the de facto villain of the movie Dallas Buyers Club.
He should have been fired decades ago.
Yeah, but again, no one's going to, no one, there is no accountability for scientists when they do terrible things.
It's really insufferable because they really can do some horrible things and they're just like, well, you know, it's the science.
Well, I hate it.
I can't stand it.
If it was in any other realm of life, these people would be facing jail sentences.
But for some reason, it's because of scientists.
Oh, magic pass.
Tyler says, Alex Jones podcast.
So excited.
Would you ever be able to get him on?
Have you ever seen the leaks about Fauci working at the Proto Lab in Carolina for the gain of function before shipping it off to Wuhan?
Yes.
We covered it.
Thank you.
Just to mention, we have done two interviews with Alex Jones.
I mean, one in the studio.
Yeah, yeah.
Actually, did you go to the studio twice?
Yeah, twice.
Yeah, I did, yeah.
And also the election stream.
I don't know about getting him to the UK, though, for a studio interview here, because he might be on the banned list.
Yeah.
Because the UK is a...
I mean, are we allowed to travel?
How does this work?
No, no, maybe not afterwards anyway.
Oh, yeah.
Because, I mean, we banned, you know, Lawrence Southern, so...
For being ahead of the curve on pride marches.
Healthcare provider, Fauci hasn't treated a patient in what, like four decades?
Yeah, probably.
David Taylor, Brett Weinstein had a hang on ivermectin, which is very safe to use.
If it was proved that ivermectin was effective, then the emergency use for vaccines would have been denied by the CDC. Interesting point.
Andy D. On mates.
My work corporation mandates masks, and this is after subject matter experts like myself told them they were not effective.
Only an airtight seal and an N95 +, ideally N99, filters will stop something as small as a virus.
Yeah, I don't know much about biology, but I know viruses are very, very tiny.
Well, there's a simple thing as well.
Mask, if you've got a filter on it, means it can go out, can't go in.
In which case, what's the point?
If you've got the virus, you're giving it to everyone else.
And you see people wearing those, getting uppity about it, and just like, you're a moron.
And it's not like the virus only gets through your mouth, does it?
I mean, you can get through any membrane, right?
I don't know about that, but I just know the mask thing with the valves.
I mean, you see it, but you've got a little plastic there.
It's just so silly.
Yeah.
Cindy says, in the US, the only way they could get around the emergency authorization for vaccines was if there was no approved therapeutics available, and if at any time an effective therapeutic is available, by law, the emergency authorization for the vaccine will be revoked.
Guess we can't have Trump's Regeneron on the market, can you?
Luke says, hydroxychloroquine works against COVID. Trump, something else, Trump got right.
Yep, the glorious golden god emperor is getting more golden and more glorious by the day.
Sadly, it's because it was Trump saying that the left's resistance had to do all in power to try and discredit him.
I think that is part of it.
And that's the sort of front-facing social media sort of part of it.
And in the media, like, halo.
But there is, I think, also something a bit more nefarious going on underneath it.
I wonder how many infections and deaths could have been avoided if people would be more willing to swallow their pride rather than having to beat Orange Man.
Well, that's the thing, because Fauci knew that the Alvocrin or whatever, however many it is, the other one and hydroxychloroquine were both being used by doctors in three countries to great success.
Why wouldn't he come out and say, look, we've got some evidence to suggest this.
These are non-lethal treatments.
They're not dangerous.
So why don't we just give it a try?
Why wouldn't he come out?
He'd be the hero.
Oh, look, it works great.
Look at all these patients at the, you know, late-stage COVID. They're on life support.
They're about to die.
And then we give them this drug.
And look at that.
Not only are they healed, but they're no longer infectious.
Fauci could have been an absolute hero here.
Or it doesn't work, in which case they just die anyway.
Yeah, or it doesn't work, and then what have you lost?
You know, because you were dying.
What would the patient do on the bed if you were on the ventilator?
You take it.
Just give me it.
Give me any experimental treatment.
I'm goddamn dying, for Christ's sake.
What difference does it make?
But the point is, if Fauci isn't going to take that kind of action, then it looks malicious.
Armin says, Fauci's February email on masks is wrong.
Every healthcare worker knows that for certain diseases that enter via the mucous membrane, masks and eye protection work to prevent the person wearing them from being infected.
As far as I've been informed, COVID is one of these diseases.
Stinks of his stated desire to convince the public of this while ensuring that hospitals and governments could get enough masks based on the timeline.
For the record, for everyone here, I can state definitively that for certain illnesses, yes, masks can work, and the best information since February 2020 in my workplace is that COVID is one of these illnesses.
Well...
I'm not an expert, so I don't know.
Also, Carl, it seems like your breadphobia is overcompensation for your ability to self-moderate your carb intake, but then again, what do I know?
Well, you know, you should side with Satan if you like.
Yenil says, so Fauci has the inflammation to slow or even stop the spread of the virus, but chose not to say anything because of political reasons.
Who knows?
Who knows what his reasons were?
He knows.
He knows, yeah.
David Cooper, my conclusion on masks is that they are effective specifically in preventing the spread from asymptomatic cases.
However, a mask mandatory policy, because they make you touch your face a lot, the effect is likely small to nil, particularly in low prevalence areas.
Yeah, weren't there studies that showed that the masks had actually increased spread because of this?
I don't know.
I know there were some masks that were worse than useless.
So, you know, the biker thing, for example.
When they tested the through rate of that, so the number of particulates before and number of particulates afterwards, for the normal medical mask you see, the dentist one, it's like 30% get blocked.
For that mask, the one you see bikers wear, it gained 10% particulates.
So 100% in, 110% out.
Because the large ones just got filtered into being smaller ones.
Right, right, right.
Sean Kelly, so basically the grants given out by Fauci have had less scrutiny than getting a loan from a bank and could potentially be used for bioengineering a deadly virus.
Really builds confidence in the man's decision-making process.
Yeah, it's quite amazing.
Categorically, they didn't do this.
How do you know?
Well, they didn't put it on their website.
Could they have lied to you?
Well, you never know.
Because people never lie, mate.
The Chinese Communist Party wouldn't lie, would they?
I didn't put the genocide on the website either.
Todd Brickley, where do I sign up to sue Tony?
My entire life was uprooted by this asshole's lies and political games.
Great question.
Well, we didn't cover the statue bit, but okay.
Have we not got any comments from the Dawn Butler bit?
Dawn Butler?
There's nothing that's popped up on my screen, but I'll reload it and see if I can...
Yeah, the statue thing was quite long.
Unfortunately, we didn't have time for it.
Yeah, it was Dawn Butler.
I'll read it, don't worry.
So, Luke Robinson.
At the last election, Dawn Butler claims that babies are born without a biological sex.
It would be funny if she weren't a seat in the power of the UK. Did you say that?
Probably.
Almost certainly, to be honest.
Getting lunatics around the Labour Party.
Yeah, I mean, that's the thing as well.
It is hilarious, but these people still have seats.
Natalie Coiler.
Popular shows on the BBC. It's just like an egg.
They're born like a doll, you know?
It's just a plastic bit.
And the doctor gets out a part and it plugs in.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
It just grows as they get to about four or five years old, does it, Dawn?
Like, what happens?
LAUGHTER How does the lightning come?
That's just so stupid.
I'll tell you what, Dawn, I don't know whether you've got kids of your own love, but when you're changing their nappies, the thing is, depending on whether there's a boy or a girl, you've got to have different process.
Because, of course, because the mechanics of the junk that you have down there, it comes out of different directions.
So if you're changing your nappy and they pee, you've got to be aware.
Is that real?
Do they actually pee when you're in the middle of changing them?
Oh, yeah.
Bastards.
It's not a very clean thing to have babies.
I thought it was just a meme from TV. No, no, it definitely happens.
Thankfully, though, none of my children have ever pooed on me when I was changing them.
So, yeah, that has happened to my wife, though.
Honestly, it's not that bad, because all they drink is milk.
So it's not...
I'm not liking the subject.
It's just not as bad as it sounds.
Parents and their kids' excretions.
Popular show on the BBC that is racist.
I'd say Frankie Boyle's show is pretty racist to white people, but I don't think anyone would call that popular.
Oof, oof.
Yeah, I mean, there's also the, what is that, Crap BBC 3 put out?
I was going to say the Match Report, but that got cut, didn't it?
Yeah, but did you see the cultural appropriation thing?
Oh, it's going viral right now.
No.
So I was on BBC3's Twitter account, some white woman walks in and is like, hey, I'd like dreadlocks like this guy.
And she's like, yeah, it's Bob Marley.
She's like, yeah, you can't do that.
It's cultural appropriation.
And they kick her out of the shop, and it's played off as this dumb idiot white girl who's coming and asked for dreadlocks.
And it's like...
God damn much.
Defund the BBC. Defund the BBC. So, Luke Robinson.
How long before pictures of Welsh miners covered in coal dust get called out for blackface?
That's happened.
Yeah.
There was an American pub or something that had a picture of, because obviously it was Welsh people who'd moved to America, and had coal miners on the walls, and they were like, oh, how could you?
It's like, what are you talking about?
Or the Morris miners or whatever they are, the guys who dance.
Yeah.
What is that?
Is that Morris miner?
No, that's a car.
Morris dancer.
Morris dancer, right.
But they don't have blackface.
I'll spy these nuts.
The Welsh have always been diverse and we have always been at war with East Asia.
I tell you, man.
It's mad.
Birmingham's always been 30% Muslim.
Always.
Going back to the Crusades.
IJN. Kakao.
Wikipedia lists coloured engineering as a racial slur right next to N-word rigging.
What?
What does that even mean?
Well, the Welsh are bringing it back, okay?
Oh, because they're bringing it back?
Yeah, we've got BAME engineering this afternoon, kids.
Why?
Because Mark Dreyford says so.
He is this anti-racism.
Chris W. Gents, clearly you have to call this hypothetical new skit Bamergate.
I don't know when it starts and where it ends, though.
Ryan Bodrick.
BAME chemistry and BAME biology is going to be interesting in the name of anti-racism.
BAME biology is sounding a lot like a new word for race realism, isn't it?
BAME phrenology or whatever it is.
If you check the three dimples on the back of the skull...
But what are they going to do?
Start breaking out IQ graphs.
I mean, like, what's BAME biology going to be about?
Mark?
Mark Drakeford?
You've got to always do some guidance.
Tell us about the racial differences.
Mark?
I really like John's BAME criminology, though.
Like, good God!
Anyway.
So, Xander Miller.
Any Welsh petition is a mile long, especially when it includes place names.
Yeah.
We really should set up one that's just like, hey, Mark, stop being a racist.
I don't think...
Yeah, petition for Mark Drakeford to stop being a racist.
That's a great idea.
Am I not a man and a brother?
That should just be the title.
You know, it's irritating as well.
The petitions websites in the UK, they're run by the petition committees, or at least the UK one, as I imagine the Welsh one is as well.
And they'll argue with you about the wording.
I don't know if I mentioned this on stream before, but when Lauren Southern was banned, I wrote a petition to the petitions committee saying, hey, she shouldn't be banned, except I respected the pronouns, because we respect trans women, such as Lauren Southern.
Trans men, actually.
God, I just messed myself up.
And use the he pronouns.
And the petitions committee wrote back to me very angrily, being like, no, we can't use the he pronouns.
She's not a man.
I was like, oh, really?
Oh, really now?
You should have put in a complaint.
Got someone fired.
I argued with them for a while.
It was good fun.
Anyway, so, Tyber Fett.
If you set quotas to push BAME people for teaching roles, regardless of merit, then, of course, you need to arrange mentors because you don't know if they can do their job.
You've never checked in the first place.
Yeah, that's the natural consequence of the Labour Party.
They have diversity quotas, and it means that they don't have any good MPs.
Any of them.
Whereas the Conservative Party doesn't seem to.
The MPs they're getting through seem to be good.
No, but that's amazing, isn't it?
It's like, look, we're going to hire specifically non-white people, and we're also going to hire a bunch of mentors because we expect them to be bad.
But it's because you're hiring the people on the basis of their race, not on their merit.
Yes, and they're assuming that the non-white people will not have merit.
The assumption is prepackaged in there, which is why they've also introduced the mentors.
Hmm.
God damn it.
I hate going, oh, well, that's racist, because it's such a worn-out word.
But that's genuinely racist, and I genuinely despise it.
Could you imagine being the black teacher that walks in?
No, exactly.
And then imagine being the white mentor.
He's like, man, I just wanted a job.
You've got your various qualifications, you've been studying, you become an expert, and you're feeling like, yeah, I'm going to go and teach this thing.
And they're like, yeah, so we've got this white mentor for you, because we assume you're basically disabled.
Could you...
Could you imagine being down at the job centre and you're trying to find the job and you've done all these applications and they come to you and say, oh, we've got one for you.
Oh, what is it?
Being a mentor to a black person at school.
And if you reject it, we're going to cut off your benefits because that's how it works.
Yeah, yeah.
Why do they need a mentor?
Well, let's assume that they're stupid.
You know, like, it's so awful.
Like, if you don't accept the job we've given you as well, we're going to cut off your unemployment benefits or whatever.
Right, so I'm going to go and be a racial commissar or get kicked out of my apartment.
This is what they're doing to us, Britain.
This is what they're doing, and for some reason they're just allowed to get away with it.
You know, it sounds like a really good comedy sketch.
I mean, if BBC wants to actually make a good comedy show, I mean, they're not going to do it.
Someone else, anyone listening, should do this.
Just that character.
I mean, that character who gets given that job.
And it's just like, I don't know me either.
Like, I got put here.
I'm not racist.
I'm not trying to mentor you.
I'm just stuck here.
Oliver James says, Yeah,
I mean, I'm not pro, like, you know, splitting up of the UK. Wales would be in the kingdom anyway.
Yeah, I imagine we would, yeah.
It's more about the Scottish.
I mean, they're the ones who keep voting for the SNP. It's more about the fact that the devolved parliaments are just breeding grounds for separatism, and I'm sick of hearing about it.
Dear Celts, you're not being oppressed.
You're not being oppressed.
You're literally being given money.
You're literally being given money.
And if you consider that to be a form of oppression, we can always have a negotiation about not giving you money without breaking up the union.
If you want.
Gordon of Khartoum says, Callum, I remember you mentioning that you wanted to interview the North Korean woman who stood for the Tories in the previous election.
Any news on this?
We'd love to see it.
Yeah, I need to talk around for you, actually.
I think we have someone who messaged us and is saying they could organise it, and I can't remember what the status on that is, but it's going to be good.
Okay, Lucas says, Hey Carl, are you familiar with the work of Mary Midgley, a British philosopher?
You might enjoy her writing as she saw the dangers of scientism and blank slate reductionism 40 years ago.
I highly recommend her books, in particular Evolution as Religion and Man and Beast.
I have not, but I will take some time to look at those.
Thank you immensely for the amount of quality premium content you guys constantly produce.
My favourites are the enlightening articles in the Epox History Podcast.
Keep it up.
Well, thanks, Anton.
I really appreciate that.
We are working really, really hard on all this stuff, so it's really nice that the product shines through.
Henry Ashman.
Afternoon, lads.
Unable to listen live this week, meeting at 1.
I feel like the bread versus keto wars need to strike some sort of truce to take on a common enemy or for a common good.
How do we all feel about the meat and protein in general after all the vegans are mainly aligned with the wokers?
Yeah, that's a good point.
The combined protein chads can even have a meme-worthy catchphrase.
Do you know the way?
Honestly, I mean, we can probably stop talking about the keto bread wars because the keto forces have obviously won.
I'm just going to leave that hanging in the air.
Nah, it's a good meme, but...
We've been doing it a lot, so we probably need something new.
Finnish Special Forces.
I subscribed just yesterday after listening to all your podcasts so far since launch.
I've enjoyed every single episode and want to support your work and get access to the book club.
Keep it up!
I also wish the book Medicine-Free Life by Finnish doctor and author An-Anti...
It's finished.
Don't bother.
As someone who ran afoul of this policy for defending myself growing, it's always something that's kind of in the back of my head, as always thanks to the hard work.
Well, I teach my son that he's free to defend himself.
If someone hits him, then he's free to hit them back, and if he gets in trouble with the teachers, I'll talk to the teachers.
Personally, I'm a big advocate of self-defense.
If someone attacks you, defend yourself.
I mean, I've seen stories like this in school, where the principal calls in the dad, and he's been fighting back, and it's like, yeah, base son, what are you going to do to me, arrest me?
Yeah, exactly, no.
You can shout at my son, but that's, no, I don't care, I'm just going to give him chocolate.
Your son fought back.
Well, did he win?
That's my question, you know?
And if you didn't win, I'll tell them off.
It's actually a wholesome story from Russell Howard of all people.
He was talking on some comedy show and he says that he was in a fight and his mum pulled up by because she was in a car.
She pulled over, got out and started cheering him on.
Good.
It's just like, yeah, that's the way to deal with it.
Yeah, exactly.
But yeah, no, the official position of dadism is that everyone should be able to defend themselves, and if you're being attacked, you defend yourself to victory.
Anyway, we're out of time, so we're going to go and record the Alex Jones was right about some things podcast after this.
The some things are a lot of things.
So we'll be back tomorrow at 1 o'clock.
If you want more from us, go to lowseas.com and check out the premium content especially.
Sign up, that's what keeps the place running.
But thank you for tuning in.
We'll see you again tomorrow at 1 o'clock.
▲
Export Selection