Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 21, 2021 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:33:03

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #180

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters for the 21st of July 2021.
	I'm joined by Carl.
	Hello!
	And today we're going to be talking about how there was a little bit of a beef fight between Fauci and Rand Paul, and Rand Paul came out on top.
	Oh, Rand Paul absolutely pinned him, and Fauci is an obvious liar, but we'll talk about that in a minute.
	Also, YouGov looking a lot like propaganda, which I always knew there was a little bit of self-selection going on.
	I didn't realise how bad it was until the most recent poll and then looking back at the previous ones around specifically COVID and who's involved with that.
	And also the Conservatives going mad and deciding that they're going to criminalise whatever they feel like, I guess.
	But not only that, they're not just criminalising stuff.
	They're also being pulled in two directions and they need to figure themselves out.
	Yeah, but it also has nothing, like, there's no coherent line of like, oh, we're criminalizing this stuff because conservatism or something.
	It's not even that, it's just random stuff.
	But whatever, we'll get into that.
	The last thing I want to mention is just all the premium content we have on the site, because there's bloody tons of it, and people should enjoy.
	And we're very proud of it.
	Yeah.
	Josh's latest one was really good because, like, who knows what the hell was going on in South Africa, so we kind of set Josh right, figure it out.
	And so he's written a big analysis about that because it's a very complex situation and not a very nice one.
	I liked Hugo's defense of Scrooge McDuck as well.
	I found that amusing.
	There was a weird thing where, like, Jeff Bezos was like, he went in space, of course, because for some reason all the billionaires are doing that now.
	And he turned around and said, well, I'd like to thank all the Amazon customers for paying for me to go to space.
	And everyone was really outraged.
	I'm like, who the hell do you think paid for him to go to space?
	Like we, the Amazon Customs.
	But of course we pay for it.
	You think he got the money?
	Yeah, exactly.
	I mean, he's not Richard Branson.
	He didn't get a bailout from the government.
	I also love all the Fantastic Four memes about that.
	You can see him, and then there's just like the Hulk and the muscle guy and all the rest of it.
	Good memes out there.
	Anyway, so go and check out the premium content on the site.
	Loads of stuff there.
	South Africa thing, as you mentioned.
	Very good.
	And of course, Epochs, Contemplations, and various other premium podcasts that we do.
	Let's get right into Fauci's.
	Tell me about this.
	Fauci lied in Congress to Rand Paul, and previously, and this is now provable.
	And so I figure that we'll just go through it, right?
	So this is a Daily Caller article from January the 21st of this year, where we found out that the National Institute of Health in America granted more than $3 million to non-profit EcoHealth Alliance.
	You remember that's Peter Daszak's Very Honourable Peter Daszak.
	The Right Honourable Peter Daszak.
	The Right Honourable.
	He's going to be from now on.
	Yes.
	He, of course, used this money, funneled it to Wuhan Institute of Virology to study bat coronaviruses over the course of six years prior to the pandemic.
	They gave them annual grants to EcoHealth from 2014 until 2020, when the relationship was terminated.
	Their own records show...
	They were engaged in gain of function research during that time period, which gain of function, as I understand it, is modifying viruses to make them more infectious.
	Seems sensible.
	Seems like the sort of thing a responsible person does.
	But yeah, so they did this from October 2014 to January 2018.
	But between those, sorry, from 2014 to 2018, gain-inflection research was banned by the NIH over concerns over the risk it posed.
	Which makes sense, really.
	Anyway, and so in June 2021, we learned from Fauci's emails that That Fauci was aware of this, that even though they were not supposed to be doing gain-of-function research, that they were.
	As reported by The Federalist in emails acquired by BuzzFeed News, Fauci conversed with NIAID Principal Deputy Director Hugh Ancelos, which is weird, in a conversation labeled Important about an article detailing the gain-of-function research occurring in Wuhan through the Wuhan Virology Institute.
	I'll skip it over, but basically Fauci knew.
	And he had previously in 2012 defended the concept of gain-of-functional research, even if it was likely to cause a pandemic, saying, in the unlikely but conceivable turn of events, what if scientists become infected with the virus, which leads to an outbreak and ultimately triggers a pandemic, Fauci wrote.
	Hmm.
	What if?
	Scientists working in this field might say, indeed, I have said, that the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks.
	Hmm.
	Gain-of-function research, as you know, is juicing up naturally occurring animal viruses to infect humans.
	I mean, it just sounds like the sort of thing a supervillain would do, doesn't it?
	And this is in 2012.
	This is in 2012.
	Oh no, sorry, sorry.
	Ran Paul then came back at him during one of his prior Senate hearings, saying gain-of-function research, as you know, is juicing up naturally occurring animal viruses to affect humans.
	To write the truth, the US government should admit that the Wuhan Virology Institute was experimenting to enhance coronavirus' ability to infect humans, he said during one of these Senate committees.
	Fauci then denied that the supervirus creation by...
	Ralph Baric, which is Xi's mentor, Ms.
	Xi, Dr.
	Xi.
	The Bat Lady.
	Yeah, the Bat Lady in Wuhan Virology Institute.
	He's her mentor, Xi Zhengli, sorry, the Wuhan Virology Institute.
	And Fauci apparently had said to Rand Paul in this meeting, in the Senate hearing, Senator Paul, with all due respect, you're entirely, entirely, completely incorrect.
	Just lies.
	Just lies to his face.
	And it's not like Rand Paul is just some layman like I am.
	He's a doctor, a medical doctor.
	He has a doctorate in actual medicine.
	So it's not like he's some layman.
	The NIH, and literally this is his quote in the Senate, right?
	The NIH has not ever and does not now fund gain-of-function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
	Direct quote from Fauci.
	Direct quote.
	Obvious lie.
	We have the evidence.
	You said you had.
	Previously.
	Yes.
	In 2012, he's like, yeah, that's a good idea.
	Now, no, we've never done it.
	You've lied to Congress.
	You know you've lied.
	It's an open lie, right?
	And so he also denied money was funneled to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases to non-profit EcoHealth Alliance to study these bat-based coronaviruses in China.
	So he's just lied about that too.
	I mean, we have the NIH's records.
	This is what they're citing, the actual funding records from the NIH. But the thing is, and we'll get to in a second, in the papers that they have, they cite their funding sources, and it's from the NIH. It's like...
	Why are you just lying?
	Like, why is it such an obvious lie?
	But anyway, right?
	So this funding ban was lifted in 2017.
	So they were allowed in 2017 to continue, and then in 2020 it was stopped.
	So the gain-of-function research, as they say, is important in helping us identify and understand and develop strategies and effective countermeasures against rapidly evolving pathogens that pose a threat to public health.
	Yeah, sure.
	Sounds convincing.
	Fauci defended lifting this ban.
	He was in favour of lifting the ban.
	It's never happened, even though it has happened.
	And they wouldn't do it, of course, even though they have done it.
	But if you're going to stop them, if you're going to remove the ban on doing it, Fauci's in favour of that.
	Everything about his position is totally inconsistent.
	Fauci did not warn Trump administration officials in 2017 before the ban on game and function research was lifted, and he said, let me explain this just a little, because whenever this comes out, there's always the pushing back and forth in the press.
	So, like, NIH now is going to do dangerous research?
	No, as a matter of fact, it's exactly the opposite.
	Even though, remember, in 2012, he said, wow, this could be dangerous, but I think the risk will be worth it.
	And now he's like, no, it's not dangerous.
	It's the opposite of dangerous.
	Who do you think we are, Fauci?
	Do you think we're morons?
	Because it sounds like you think we're morons.
	And so he just talks about the framework, blah, blah, blah.
	It's not very interesting.
	But then he gets caught in his lies.
	Now, this is a fantastic article on PJ Media, where the author, Stacey Lennox, has gone through all of these studies, and that must have been terribly boring, but has picked out the important stuff for us.
	So the first study she found was in 2015, published in Nature.
	Now, this is one that Fauci and Rand Paul have been arguing over in the Senate hearings.
	Both Dr.
	Xi and her mentor, Ralph Barak, From the University of North Carolina are listed as authors.
	It discusses the creation of a, quote, chimeric virus.
	The virus the team started was with a SARS-like coronavirus that was circulating in horseshoe bats in China.
	It was not infecting humans at that time.
	They joined it with the backbone of a mouse-adapted SARS virus and successfully infected human airway cells using the new virus.
	This is called gain-of-function research.
	Don't know why you'd do that.
	Isn't that kind of what we're looking for as well?
	Yeah.
	And this is the thing that they've never funded and also we're funding and it's totally worth it, but also it's not dangerous.
	Yeah.
	I mean, it's a great example as well of him holding every position, as you've said in the past, being like, you can see here he's holding every position on funding of the lab and also if it's worthwhile.
	And also, it's just a great example of when he's talking about masks, for example, holds every position.
	Not worth it, totally worth it, don't do anything, do everything.
	Yeah, such an obvious and transparent liar at this point.
	But she says, most interesting is the note in the acknowledgement section of the study.
	During the Senate hearing, Paul directly asked Fauci about supporting gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab, and Fauci responded, note, we have never funded gain-of-function research in the Wuhan virology.
	However, research in this manuscript says it was supported by grants from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease and the National Institute of Aging and the U.S. National Institutes of Health.
	So they just say it in their study.
	Yes, we were funded by the NIH. Fauci.
	They were never funded by the NIH. Who's lying, Fauci?
	Why are they lying?
	Why would they be lying?
	Why would they make that up?
	Why have you lied in 2012 if that's the case?
	Yes.
	She also found a study in the Journal of Virology from 2016 that lists Dr.
	Xi and Dr.
	Danzak of the EcoHealth Alliance that had been funded by USAID previously.
	In the funding section of the study, it states that the National Institutes of Health provided funding to Peter Danzak and Zheng Li Xi under grant number and then, you know, whatever the grant number is, R01A blah blah blah blah blah.
	And it's like, okay, so we know that they did.
	There's concrete evidence that they did.
	They, in fact, have told us that they did.
	Why would Fauci deny this?
	Why would he think he would get away with denying this?
	Because the media will cover for him.
	Because the media will cover.
	And we will talk about that in a minute as well.
	So the last payment to the Wuhan lab through the NIH was on May 31st, 2019.
	And as Tucker Carlson noted, Dr.
	Daszak was proudly discussing the creation of chimeric viruses in December 2019.
	He says, coronavirus is pretty good.
	You can manipulate them in the lab pretty easily.
	It's spike protein.
	Spike protein drives a lot of what happens with the coronavirus zoonotic risk.
	You can get the sequence, build the protein, and we worked with Ralph Baric at the UNC to do this.
	So, Dr.
	Xi's mentor, again.
	These are all the same people, all the same people being funded in exactly the same way.
	And then he just explains on how this is well done, blah, blah, blah.
	And so then Fauci takes to Congress and just starts lying to everyone's face.
	This is one senator who just says, well, look, is it the same S1 spike protein?
	Now, I don't know what S1 spike protein is, and I don't care.
	But the point is, DASAC seems to have admitted, yeah, this is what we use because it works.
	And let's watch the clip.
	That led to this, an S1 spike that looks very similar, if not exactly, to what's on the COVID-19 spike.
	What are you referring to, Senator?
	Can you please be more specific?
	Yeah.
	Do you know what you're talking about?
	So I'm talking about the S1 subunit of the current COVID-19 spike.
	What about, I mean, are you talking about an experiment?
	Are you talking about a paper that was published?
	So I'm talking about viral research that was done using NIH funding with the North Carolina lab, and Dr.
	Xi developed this S1 subunit spike that looks exactly like what we have On the current COVID-19 spike.
	Yeah.
	Is that not true?
	No, I'm not sure exactly what you're referring to.
	Are you referring to the paper of Barrick and Shi and Nature Immunology?
	Is that what you're referring to?
	I need to know specifically...
	Yeah, so Dr.
	Barrick and Shi printed studies on this S1 unit that was basically the development of the key to the door that specifically took the original SARS virus and made it so it would bond to the human lung cells.
	No, there was no gain.
	If you're referring, Senator, to gain of function by the definition...
	Okay, that's not my question.
	Would you agree that the spike that was developed there is what's also on the current COVID-19 virus?
	Yeah, but that's irrelevant to anything until you have a context in which you're putting it.
	You're talking about an S-1 and a spike.
	In what context?
	If you're talking about a paper That was written by them?
	But you agree or disagree that it's the same spike?
	I'm not sure what you're talking about, Senator.
	I'm really not sure what you're talking about.
	Liar.
	Absolute liar.
	And not just because factually we have all of the information, we know that it is the same thing from the same paper.
	We have all of this confirmed.
	That's not the only reason I would call that man a liar.
	I would call him a liar because look at the way he's defending himself.
	I just don't know what you're talking about.
	Yes, you do.
	Yes, you do.
	And if you don't, then why are you in that job?
	How can you be considered to be an expert on this?
	If that senator knew...
	Are you referring to this paper?
	But I don't know what it means.
	I don't know what you're talking about.
	Exactly.
	It's such an obvious dodge, and it's so cringe.
	And so, yeah, this was embarrassing.
	But then Rand Paul took to it.
	And as I said, Rand Paul, being a medical expert, knows about this kind of stuff because it's his field of expertise.
	And he had him absolutely dead to rise.
	I just want to play Rand Paul.
	It's about a minute and a half.
	But it's Rand Paul absolutely nailing every point correctly.
	Let's go.
	On your last trip to our committee on May 11th, You stated that the NIH has not ever and does not now fund gain-of-function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
	And yet, gain-of-function research was done entirely in the Wuhan Institute by Dr.
	Xi and was funded by the NIH. I'd like to ask unanimous consent to insert into the record the Wuhan Virology paper entitled, Discovery of a Rich Gene Pool of Bat SARS-Related Coronaviruses.
	Please deliver a copy of the journal article to Dr.
	Fauci.
	In this paper, Dr.
	Xi credits the NIH and lists the actual number of the grant that she was given by the NIH. In this paper, she took two bat coronavirus genes, spike genes, and combined them with a SARS-related backbone to create new viruses that are not found in nature.
	These lab-created viruses were then shown to replicate in humans.
	These experiments combine genetic information from different coronaviruses that infect animals But not humans to create novel artificial viruses able to infect human cells.
	Viruses that in nature only infect animals were manipulated in the Wuhan lab to gain the function of infecting humans.
	This research fits the definition of the research that the NIH said was subject to the pause in 2014 to 2017, a pause in funding on gain of function.
	But the NIH failed to recognize this, defines it away, and it never came under any scrutiny.
	Dr.
	Richard E. Bright, a molecular biologist from Rutgers, described this research in Wuhan as, the Wuhan lab used NIH funding to construct novel chimeric SARS-related coronaviruses able to infect human cells And laboratory animals.
	This is high-risk research that creates new potential pandemic pathogens, potential pandemic pathogens that exist only in the lab, not in nature.
	This research matches, these are Dr.
	Ebright's words, this research matches, indeed, epitomizes the definition of gain-of-function research done entirely in Wuhan, for which there was supposed to be a federal pause.
	Boom.
	Everything about that is, as far as I can tell, completely true, and he has him absolutely banging his sights.
	So Fauci lost his bloody mind.
	Let's play the next clip.
	Dr.
	Fauci, knowing that it is a crime to lie to Congress, do you wish to retract your statement of May 11th where you claimed that the NIH never funded gain-of-function research in Wuhan?
	Your microphone.
	Senator Paul, I have never lied before the Congress, and I do not retract that statement.
	This paper that you are referring to was judged by qualified staff up and down the chain as not being gain of function.
	Let me finish.
	When you take an animal virus and you increase its transmissibility to humans, you're saying that's not gain-of-function?
	Yeah, that is correct.
	And, Senator Paul, you do not know what you are talking about, quite frankly.
	And I want to say that officially.
	Dr.
	Paul to you, bitch.
	You do not know what you are talking about.
	Why are you getting on your high horse, Dr.
	Fauci?
	What are you so upset about, Dr.
	Fauci?
	We know you're lying.
	We know you're lying.
	Everyone can see you lying.
	Ran just laid that out.
	Perfectly.
	He's being a perfect elected representative as well.
	The purpose of an elected representative is not to control the people, but instead to control the system.
	Because there are going to be a lot of unelected people that run the place, like him.
	He's the kind of person that needs to be held accountable by an elected representative.
	But look at the fear on his face.
	You can see that he knows he's been screwed.
	It's like, oh, that's not gain-of-function.
	You know it's gain-of-function.
	You admitted it in the previous one.
	You know that's gain-of-function.
	They're all saying in all of their papers, this is what gain-of-function research is, and we're doing it.
	We're splicing these two things together to make them affect humans.
	This is what it is.
	Everyone knows.
	And then found to be like, oh, you don't know what you're talking about, Dr.
	Paul.
	You know, this isn't gain-of-function.
	You're a liar.
	You're such a transparent liar.
	Let's play the next one.
	This is your definition that you guys wrote.
	It says that scientific research that increases the transmissibility among animals is gain of function.
	They took animal viruses that only occur in animals And they increase their transmissibility to humans.
	How you can say that is not gain of fungus?
	It is not.
	It's a dance, and you're dancing around this because you're trying to obscure responsibility for four million people dying around the world from a pandemic.
	And let's send Dr.
	Fauci...
	I have to...
	Well, now you're getting into something.
	If the point that you are making Is that the grant that was funded as a sub-award from EcoHealth to Wuhan created SARS-CoV-2.
	That's where you are getting.
	Let me finish.
	We don't know.
	We don't know if it did come from the lab, but all the evidence is pointing that it came from the lab, and there will be responsibility for those who funded the lab, including yourself.
	I totally resent the lie that you are now propagating, Senator.
	Because if you look at the viruses that were used in the experiments that were given in the annual reports that were published in the literature, it is molecularly impossible.
	No one's saying those viruses caused it.
	No one is alleging that those virus caused the pandemic.
	What we're alleging is that gain-of-function research was going on in that lab and NIH funded it.
	You can't get away from it.
	It meets your definition, and you are obfuscating the truth.
	Boom.
	Got him.
	Absolutely.
	The cope from Fauci there.
	You're saying that I funded the creation of SARS-CoV-2.
	No, that's not what he said.
	And as he points out, no.
	You were not allowed to do this.
	You funded it.
	Therefore, you did it.
	Therefore, you're responsible.
	And you need to be either sent to jail or...
	Well, he does.
	I didn't include Rand Paul talking about the punishment, but it is five years in jail and a big fine, apparently, for lying to someone else.
	Deserve those five years.
	Oh, God, yeah.
	You can enjoy them.
	Absolutely, and I hope Rand Paul pushes this really hard.
	And also, him saying, you're trying to say that these bat coronaviruses infected people.
	It's molecularly impossible.
	He didn't say that.
	He's saying that there was chimerically created in the lab, which is what all of the evidence suggests, and what their own papers say, and it was funded by the NIH. And Fauci's like, you're lying, you're lying.
	Unbelievable.
	Unbelievable.
	Anyway, let's move on.
	So the Washington Post, of course, of course, is already playing defense for Fauci, because why wouldn't they be?
	You don't know what you're talking about, is their headline.
	No, he knows exactly what he's talking about.
	He's crystal clear.
	He is absolutely in no way wrong about this, as far as I can see, and various other websites and, you know, journalists and things that have looked into it.
	But they say, the Washington Post fact-checker examined Paul's previous claim.
	That's what they have to say.
	Yeah, exactly.
	No, no, no.
	The Washington Post commissar disagreed.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	He examined Paul's previous claim that Fauci had overseen NIH funding of gain-of-function research in Wuhan and found it to be exaggerating and misleading, awarding two Pinocchios.
	Then you're lying as well.
	So you're all lying.
	Right, okay, that's fine.
	And so, yeah, you found this wonderful Babylon Bee article that was just mocking it, really.
	Debate erupts between trusted medical doctor and Fauci.
	Yeah.
	Better than the Washington Post, though.
	It's very true.
	And so, yeah, it's just a really amusing article.
	But that's exactly where we are at the moment.
	Fauci has been caught directly in a lie.
	All of the evidence is against Fauci.
	None of the evidence is in his favour.
	And he has to try and obscure, get indignant, call other people liars, while trapped in his own lie.
	He needs to be punished.
	I agree.
	That's awful.
	That's absolutely awful.
	But so well done, Rand Paul.
	Like, hero of the Republic, right there.
	Like, that is absolutely spectacular.
	Well done.
	Let's get on to YouGov.
	So YouGov have published another poll in which they're saying that everybody wants COVID passports.
	And I find this a bit dubious.
	I don't know a single person who wants a COVID passport.
	Me neither.
	I have no idea.
	But I just want to put this in context.
	So we've had periodic protests against COVID measures that are considered tyrannical throughout the UK. It's all been labelled the anti-lockdown protesters.
	But it's not just that.
	There are people against just government involvement mandating this, that and the other.
	And as you can see, there's some drone footage in the first link of just one of these protests.
	I think this is the one me and John went to film and observe.
	And it's absolutely huge.
	Colossal.
	Nothing on the media.
	None on the media.
	You would not know about this if you just read the corporate media.
	And it's not just a one-off either.
	Like, if we go to the next one, this is, what was it, the other day?
	Outside Parliament on Freedom Day to protest the vote on mandatory vaccine passports to go into pubs and whatnot.
	Even though if you have a negative test, then you're still not allowed.
	Because this isn't about COVID. No.
	Because if you've got a negative test, that proves that you don't have it.
	So why wouldn't you be allowed in?
	Because you need the vaccine.
	Okay.
	So this has been going on endlessly.
	And, well, that's one data point we can point to of a lot of people upset about this.
	You can point to the other data point of the lived experience of people in the UK who don't know anyone who's in favour of vaccine passports.
	And then we can see the fact that these are still popping up and going up.
	So we go to the first image.
	There's just some other stuff that's coming up over the weekend in which all across the country these are going to continue.
	Yeah.
	Bristol, Hull, Glasgow, Scarborough, Northern Ireland, Dublin, Channel Islands, of all places as well.
	Plymouth, Canterbury, London, Birmingham, Cardiff, Manchester, Norwich, and Leeds.
	If you live in any one or near any one of these places...
	They'll be taking place.
	And not only that, you probably have a moral obligation at this point to get out and actually join them.
	Because if not now, when?
	So we'll be, I think John's saying we're going to be sending some people down to film some of this because it's just never ending.
	And also we have the, what is it, 250,000 people have signed that petition to say we shouldn't make the unvaccinated second class citizens.
	So I mean, there's just all these data points in the UK of just like, okay, there's a mass movement, unlike many movements you could ever point to that seem to get mainstream coverage.
	And that's one thing.
	So where are the 70% of people who are in favour of all this?
	I don't know.
	Because if we also just look around the world, like we've got the next one, you've got France.
	Same situation going on.
	We've got the next one, we've got Canada.
	Same situation going on.
	Just big protests, big movements against this sort of thing.
	It's not just a blip or something.
	Again, literally people stretching for miles.
	Thousands and thousands of people.
	And yeah, here's the YouGov poll, if we can get it up.
	71% of Britons support people being required to show proof of double vaccination in order to get into nightclubs.
	I just don't believe you.
	I just don't believe you.
	Who?
	I love the idea that 90% of 65-year-olds are like, yeah, my children or my grandchildren have to be vaccinated to go into a nightclub.
	No, no, me.
	I need to go to the nightclub.
	It's not going on.
	Also, 57% of 18, 24-year-olds support that.
	Don't believe it.
	No one believes this.
	This is just obviously not the case.
	Your sampling is unbelievably bad.
	If it was a one-off, maybe you could try it off just being, oh, we've got bad sample size or something.
	It's not.
	There have been a lot of mockery of this.
	So we go to the next one.
	You've got Richard Tice mocking this.
	Extraordinary.
	Within hours, most big controversial government policy announcements.
	YouGov come out with a supportive poll.
	Never one that disagrees with the government.
	Coincidence.
	Really makes you think, doesn't it?
	Yeah.
	Of course, there's another mocking, which I really enjoy.
	So we go to the next one.
	Breaking.
	YouGov poll found that 137% of Brits support vaccine passports.
	But I also mentioned here the Minister for Vaccines.
	He's the co-founder of YouGov.
	Nadim Zawi, the Vaccine Minister and the founder of YouGov.
	And they keep getting polls that totally, overwhelmingly support their initiatives.
	Wow, this is just really, really democratic.
	This isn't Banana Republic stuff or anything like that.
	Who knows?
	We're not the only ones to notice this.
	Nudge Farage noticed this on the show he did recently, the Talking Pints thing, which I'm really enjoying, by the way.
	Oh, he's doing brilliantly.
	He's doing brilliantly.
	So let's play the clip in which he mentions about this.
	And here's the funny thing.
	You have your view about lockdown and about our essential freedoms and what the limits of government are.
	And I'm very much with you on those.
	And many at GB News.
	Not everybody, perhaps, but many at GB News are on that side.
	And yet you look at these YouGov polls, and I, sort of every Sunday I see them in the Times or the Sunday Times, and I look at bewilderment I can't believe that this country that I'd always thought was one of the great beacons of liberty and evolving since Magna Carta,
	this relationship between the individual and the state that left us way freer than the rest of Europe, or frankly the rest of much of the world, our common law evolutionary system.
	Have they just all been scared?
	into thinking this is so deadly that they have to just do everything government says and not question anything.
	Because if you believe YouGov You know, there's a growing number of us feeling like this, but we're not in the majority, are we?
	If you believe YouGov, that's the point, though.
	Yeah.
	I mean, I've signed up to YouGov's polling system, because I know that that's what politicians are looking out there for.
	Might as well be in there, right?
	To try and make it a bit more paste and red-pilled.
	Yeah.
	And surveys, I think your wife also did this, and the surveys you get are never about politics.
	No.
	She always gets very, very tepid things, because my wife is basically far right.
	What would you think about this brand of shampoo?
	I don't care.
	Yeah, that's exactly the sort of thing she gets.
	Yeah, utterly pointless stuff.
	So there's a question of just, well, how are they sampling the people responding to the questions of the day, in this case, about vaccination, passports, or lockdown, or so on and so forth.
	You know, the kind of things that the Minister for Vaccines might be having a...
	Relevant subject.
	Yeah, so I thought we'd just go through a whole bunch of the polling on stuff like this.
	Let's see if you can find a pattern.
	So remember the last poll, 71% of the public support vaccine passports.
	Okay, so we get the next one up here.
	The majority of Britons say face masks should continue to be mandatory, both public transport, 71%, as well as shops.
	I literally yesterday went down to London, well, the day before I went down and then came back today.
	No one on the train had masks on.
	71% still support it.
	No one.
	Well, okay, no, that's not true.
	I saw one or two people, but, you know, out of...
	71%!
	Out of literally hundreds of people, hundreds and hundreds of people on the trains, one or two people had masks.
	Yeah, I love the idea that you've got three guys in the corner with the masks who are just holding signs like we are 71%.
	So let's go to the next one, in which there's another poll here.
	71% of English adults support delaying the lifting of lockdown by four weeks.
	So this was back in June.
	What?
	Doubt it.
	Nearly three quarters of the population, eh?
	Really?
	Really?
	Who believes that?
	So then we had a little bit further back, in which in April they were talking about the vaccine passport being real or not.
	And as you can see here, you have 70% support the idea of a vaccine passport system being rolled out at the time.
	Interesting.
	And then if we go again to April 1st, 71% of Britons believe that under-16s should be vaccinated against COVID-19.
	What?!
	Who believes this?
	No way, no way.
	Who believes this stuff?!
	There is no way.
	I don't know anyone who would sign off on that, because it's just like, look at the death numbers, and for under 20, well, for under 30s, it's tiny.
	Well, the average age of death is 82.
	I know, but it's, I mean, the chance of death from COVID is an exponential, gets higher when you're older.
	And when you get younger, it becomes tiny, which is why for under 20s, it's not really a concern for the government.
	It's less than 0.1%.
	Under 16s?
	What's going on?
	71% of the British public support vaccinating under-16s in April.
	If you were to round off to the third decimal point, it'd be zero.
	Yeah.
	You know, like, that is ridiculous.
	There's also criticism whenever a Conservative minister says, hang on a second, we might be doing something a bit weird here.
	So we go to the next one.
	This is back when Rishi Sunak had some criticisms of what was going on.
	Despite Rishi Sunak's complaints, the vast majority of the public, including Tory voters, would rather lockdown last longer to significantly reduce COVID case numbers 71%.
	Again, 71% of the public agree that we need to lockdown harder and to have stronger measures against freedom.
	Interesting that it's always that goddamn number, isn't it?
	So we go to the next one.
	There's another YouGov poll on this issue.
	Tougher action is needed against coronavirus to prevent a catastrophe, as scientists advising the government said.
	Last week, 71% of Britons said that they would support the UK going into another national lockdown.
	Oh, I bet.
	Nearly three quarters of people in Britain are like, you know what, we need another lockdown.
	That's what they're all thinking, no doubt.
	This was December 29, 2020.
	You can see all of these polls, I put them in chronological order, just going backwards.
	Always the same group of people.
	Bull.
	And then we have one more here, I just want to demonstrate.
	So this is in September 23, 2020, in which a strong majority, 71% of Brits think that the second national lockdown would be either very or somewhat effective against reducing cases.
	I'm just like...
	Wow, 71% of people are really tuned into YouGov, aren't they?
	I'm not trying to take the mickey, but why is it 71% every goddamn time?
	I ended up looking up different polls for COVID, lockdowns, I did vaccine passports, all that stuff, and eventually I just went, hang on, I just did 71% and I got a little more, and I was like...
	What?
	It's like they're asking 15 people in the office or something.
	And so you always get, like, you know, the sort of, the six that aren't interested and say, right, that's the 71% or five or whatever it is.
	You know, and, yeah.
	71% of the YouGov office.
	Yeah.
	Believe in this.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Every single poll on COVID, it's the guys in the office make the decision.
	So, just to be clear, even if, let's for a second indulge in the wild fantasy that nearly three quarters of the country agree that we should all be tyrannised forever because of COVID, let's assume that's true, and they're not actually just fiddling the numbers in the back end, which seems much more likely, doesn't it?
	It doesn't even matter because YouGov is representative of nothing.
	YouGov is representative of a self-selected Twitter group.
	That's internet polling.
	Internet polling.
	You sign up and then they send you polls and if they don't like you they send you polls about shampoo and if they like you then they'll send you polls about...
	Presumably COVID, but it could just be their own office.
	But that's the point, isn't it?
	This is self-selecting polling.
	People have to choose to sign up.
	And one of the great examples of why self-selecting polling is worth nothing is when a few years ago now...
	A group of social scientists, if we dare call them that, decided to study how many women were getting raped on campus, and they did a self-selected email poll, much in the same way as YouGov, and it came back that something like 25% of women on these campuses had been raped, and they were like, wow, that doesn't seem right.
	And obviously all of the feminists said, oh, there we go.
	There we go.
	There must be 25% of women have been raped.
	And the authors of this poll had to come out and say, look, this is not proof that one in four women has been raped on a college campus in America.
	Some reasoning here, do you really think US college campuses are worse than the Congo in a civil war in which rape is being used as a weapon?
	Yes, that's literally their opinion.
	That was literally what their statistics showed.
	And so they came out and said, look, don't use this.
	Of course, everyone had used it, and that part of it had gone nowhere.
	Because, of course, the problem with self-selection is that people who are interested in that subject, say women who may have been raped, are more likely to even care about this and then give them the information they're looking for.
	And people who haven't will just ignore it and you don't get that data.
	This is why you need a randomised polling of the public.
	To have any kind of reliable polling, this is nonsense.
	YouGov means nothing.
	The idea that 70% of the public support COVID vaccine passports, lockdowns, endlessly.
	Like, no one can believe this.
	No one is dumb enough to believe this.
	But the mention earlier that the vaccine minister for the Conservatives was a co-founder of YouGov, causing him a little bit of concern.
	I decided to look up on him on theywork4u.com.
	Turns out it's a little bit worse than that.
	So if we can get this up, so you can see him there.
	We go through the images.
	The first image is just him, so you can see that he's the vaccine minister.
	And if we go to the next one, this is on his Wikipedia page, in which he was the co-founder of YouGov, and also their CEO from 2005 to 2010.
	Fine, whatever, you know, he could be involved in that.
	I don't know.
	That looks like fortification there to me, but carry on.
	But then 4th of February 2019, he was still doing consultancy for YouGov.
	As it says here, employment and earnings.
	YouGov PLC, research and consulting, address, so on and so forth.
	In February 2019, you were still doing consultancy for them, and now you're the vaccines minister.
	And every single poll that has anything to do with your job is like, you're doing a fantastic job, sir.
	God bless the Tory government clacking down harder.
	Obvious Banana Republic stuff.
	There is no way you should trust a government-run polling system.
	It's obviously going to give you exactly the polls that the government want that you'd have.
	End of story.
	Yeah, I don't know what else to say.
	It just looks unbelievably suspicious, which is why this one got such fierce backlash this morning to the fact that it's like, come on, you cannot say that 71% of the British public support COVID passports?
	Are you nuts?
	Or lockdowns?
	It's such a stupid thing to say.
	Like, it was harder when the lockdowns were going on to figure this out because you couldn't meet people.
	But now that you can, no one...
	You can see that 70% of the public are not wearing their masks.
	Also, just the chatter.
	Like, when I was walking around Swinton the other day, you can hear people just talking about the whole thing and being like, yeah, they're all just lying to us or something like this, right?
	Yeah.
	Where they're just, like, the government just making stuff up.
	Yeah.
	And they are.
	You gov.
	And we know exactly how.
	One of the government ministers founded an internet polling company that gives the government exactly the polls they want that would justify all of the tyrannical lockdowns and various other measures they're trying to implement.
	There's also the fact I looked up, I should have included this, which is YouGov share price, because you can publicly buy shares.
	It's been taken up quite good.
	Oh, has it?
	Yeah, incredibly well.
	Anyway, that's that.
	It wasn't very long, I just wanted to talk about this.
	No, no, no, that's fine, because we have...
	We've got to talk about how the Conservatives are going mad.
	And they're going mad, just to be clear, because they're trying to serve two masters.
	And you can't serve two masters without, obviously, a contradiction.
	This is, I think, probably Machiavelli, one of his dictums, you can't serve two masters, but it's doubtless ancient, because it's obvious.
	And so let's begin with those massively popular things, such as nightclub jabs.
	You won't be allowed to go into nightclubs unless you have a COVID passport.
	Everyone's furious about this.
	The only people who seem to be in favour of it are the government and the Labour Party.
	Don't worry, 71% of the public are in favour of it.
	Exactly.
	71% of Westminster are in favour of it.
	So Boris has said repeatedly that he wants to lift the restrictions.
	It's so weird how he...
	He's like Two-Face or something like that, right?
	He flips a coin.
	And he's either, you know, libertarian, English patriot Boris, or communist Boris.
	And so you can get various contradictory statements.
	Boris is like, oh, we need to lift all of England's COVID restrictions, despite the rise in cases, because if not now, then when?
	Good point, libertarian Boris.
	And so all of the limits about how people can meet and what social distancing rules are all that are over, and their face coverings are optional, which they were before.
	But only fully vaccinated people will be allowed to enter nightclubs and other big events by the end of September.
	Why has the scarred-faced Boris come out and been like, yeah, so you're not allowed to go near each other.
	Why?
	Why are you doing this?
	Who's pulling the strings here, Boris?
	It's mad.
	So everyone in the nightclub industry is like, what?
	You can't do this.
	The entire sector has apparently reacted to that anger.
	Michael Kill of night...
	Yeah, I would too if the government were just like, death to your industry.
	Yes, that's exactly what they're doing.
	The Nighttime Industries Association calls it an absolute shambles.
	Stock markets across the UK have dropped sharply on the fear that rising cases will hamper economic recovery, blah, blah, blah.
	And Keir Starmer is like, well, lifting restrictions is reckless.
	Who asked for your opinion?
	Like, nobody likes you, Keir.
	Go away.
	And so they're going to start trying to obviously vaccinate children because they need it for no reason.
	And in Scotland, of course, everyone's looking at all the Celtic areas are looking at England, getting on with life.
	And I imagine they're like, right, OK, can we maintain these lockdowns for much longer?
	OK, well, we're going to start loosening them as well.
	And so, the main response to this from the Conservatives who were resisting this were people like Ian Duncan Smith who were like, well, I mean, this hasn't been very well thought out.
	I don't care if it is.
	I don't care if it's the most brilliantly thought out plan the Conservatives have ever come up with.
	It's immoral, you retard.
	Sorry.
	Like, it's immoral to do that.
	Cambodian killing fields weren't very well thought out.
	Yeah, exactly.
	If they were better organised, I might be in favour of this.
	Like, it's awful, right?
	Because this is creating second-class citizens.
	And this was a statement that Boris came out of.
	Again, we flip the coin and we get the evil Two-Face.
	Oh, breaking.
	Boris Johnson says, some of life's most important pleasures and opportunities are likely to be increasingly dependent on vaccination.
	Are you insane?
	You are literally going to create a caste system.
	You are going to create two-tiered second-class citizens.
	People who have either, you know, there might be a risk from the vaccination because of, I don't know, blood...
	Clots or something like that.
	They might have blood problems, whatever it is.
	Or they just might not want to have the government force them to have something in their body that they don't want to have.
	You know, my body, my choice, if that matters.
	Can we get friendly libertarian Boris to pop up and go, yeah, that's a good point.
	At one point, that would be nice, wouldn't it?
	No, no, Libertarian Boris was killed.
	Well, he pops out from time to time.
	It depends how the coin flip goes.
	It's just the coin flip on this one being like, no, you second-class citizens don't get access to pubs and nightclubs and restaurants and opportunities that will be increasingly dependent on vaccination.
	Like, this is the Soviet Union, and you're going to be asked for paper pleas?
	What's stopping him from doing the Australian Nothing!
	Nothing at all, because the government's gone mad and has run totally mad with power, right?
	And so, yeah, let's carry on.
	So there is at least going to be some kind of rebellion in the Conservative Party about this.
	Oh, thank God.
	Some of the...
	I say actual Conservative, but some of the members of the Conservative Party are like, should we be running Soviet Russia?
	Is that how Britain should be run?
	Do we need every...
	Is that why I joined the Conservative Party?
	One man says yes.
	Exactly.
	The party leader says yes!
	The leader of the Labour Party says yes!
	And the Greens, the Liberal Democrats, and all of the other parties, apart from, like, you know, the Reclaim Party, Reform Party, and the Heritage Party.
	They're the only ones who are like, this is tyrannical, we should stop this.
	I have no idea that you go to, like, Tory conference, and you're doing, like, interviews, like, why did you join the Tory party?
	To institute a caste system, why us?
	Why did you join the Tory party?
	To make sure that everyone had mandatory papers and guards on every corner, actually.
	That's right.
	I'm a conservative.
	It's just...
	It's ridiculous!
	And so, yeah, so a bunch of Conservative MPs are believing that Boris might actually face a rebellion over this, because at least 42 MPs have signed a cross-party Brick Brother Watch declaration against COVID status certification to deny individuals access to general services, businesses, or jobs in recent months.
	But why is this even on the table?
	Boris, what are you doing?
	Why are you being the mad king who's decided one day to be nice and happy and fluffy and the other day to tyrannise your own subjects?
	Why are you doing this?
	Who's making you do this?
	And the thing is, I think we could probably guess because of the G7 or whatever it was that was in Cornwall that infected Cornwall with a bunch of coronavirus, but what are you going to do about that?
	It's not important.
	Who cares about the virus?
	Yeah, exactly.
	We're busy controlling people over here.
	But anyway, so the issue is going to be raised today, in fact, in the meeting of the 1922 Committee of Backbenchers, which is now led by three sceptics of COVID passports.
	Sceptics.
	I'm not sure about these COVID passports.
	Exactly.
	I'm not sure.
	Will there be an oddly rollout of these COVID passports?
	Because then I would be okay with this too.
	I'm a Nazi sceptic, don't you know?
	Exactly.
	It's mad.
	Keir Starmer is apparently undecided about which way Labour will vote.
	The goal is open, Keir, right?
	It's a massive open goal, because it's not like he hasn't already said that COVID passports are un-British.
	He has.
	He was like, well, I mean...
	It seems like the sort of thing China would do.
	He didn't say that, of course, but that's exactly what I'm thinking.
	Well, the social system's going to be like, I've got to do it, though, can't we?
	Yeah, exactly.
	How can I resist this?
	More increase in control.
	I feel so bad for...
	I mean, there are a lot of people who vote Labour because they don't know about the insanity of the party, let's say.
	And then they're thinking, like, why are they not being the opposition?
	Remember the pub landlord?
	It was just like, come on, you're meant to be the opposition.
	Oppose him?
	Yeah, he kicked him out.
	And then Keir was just like, nah, I just love sporting lockdowns, mate.
	But I really agree with everything that he's doing when it's tyrannical.
	It's like, oh, thanks, Keir.
	So yeah, anyway, Keir Starmer had called them un-British, but he doesn't know what he's going to do.
	I might vote for it.
	It's quite un-British, but I'm in favour of it.
	Is that not Labour policy?
	It's anti-British, based?
	I mean, that's them, isn't it?
	I'm surprised he didn't say based.
	I love the idea that in Labour HQ, that's how they live their lives.
	It's just like the cringe and based meme, but, you know, like bizarre over reverse.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Steve Baker is one of the main opponents.
	Steve Baker is the mythical libertarian, the sole libertarian in the Conservative Party.
	Who we hear is a libertarian but never does anything or is useful in any way, shape, or form, which basically summarizes libertarianism.
	There is nothing I can do or conservatives can do if Labour continue to decline to oppose the government's illiberal policies.
	There we go.
	Libertarians, there's nothing we can do.
	Thanks, Libertarians.
	What good is that?
	What good is that?
	What point?
	Unbelievable.
	And he's like, this is really all about Sir Keir, who described this policy as un-British.
	Good.
	Good.
	I'm glad we've established that.
	The Prime Minister is un-British.
	The Conservatives, broadly, are un-British.
	The Labour Party are un-British.
	And the one guy who's appealing to, like, you know, English values of liberty is like, there's nothing I can do.
	Great!
	I'm only an MP. Yeah, I'm only an MP. Nothing I can do.
	Dunno, Steve.
	Dunno.
	I wish there was something.
	But a former minister is braced for another U-turn.
	This is an anonymous minister who they spoke to, saying, My sense about the government is that they've become a racing car that always ends up at the same spot they started at.
	Drifting to the right, then straight back and onto the stands again.
	It's just reacting to this, reacting to that.
	A scientist or a public opinion poll?
	Public opinion poll.
	Whatever the vaccine minister has paid them to make.
	Yeah, whatever the vaccine minister wants to have happen.
	There is little sense that there's a clear plan.
	We've changed it so often.
	There is no clear plan.
	This is the problem.
	Again, the Conservatives trying to serve two masters.
	They're trying to appease the Labour Party.
	Now, I find that bizarre because they can absolutely dominate the Labour Party on everything that they do, which we will talk about shortly, because when they actually get it into their mind to go, oh, no, wait, there is actually something British that we should do, some pro-British action we should take...
	They all just vote, and then it goes through, and the Labour Party is just there.
	They're screeching like a bunch of children.
	Now, that's how things should be.
	Every day.
	Every day.
	Not just every day.
	Five or six times a day.
	How many pieces of legislation did Tony Blair pass a day?
	Five a day, I think, at peak.
	Right, okay, do that.
	Do that.
	Every day, five times a day.
	I want to hear...
	From off in the distance, from the Labour Party screeching all the way from Westminster.
	That's what I should hear every goddamn day, right?
	But anyway, turns out we're going to get those vaccine passports.
	It's going to happen.
	Boris has been like, yep, no, it's going to happen.
	People will need to be fully vaccinated to get into nightclubs and crowded venues by October.
	Boris Johnson has confirmed.
	So, the coin...
	Oh, the evil face.
	God damn it.
	So you get it 71% of the time.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	The Prime Minister put clubs unnoticed and that is he bizarrely warned of the continuing risk posed by nightclubs.
	Ah, yes.
	All of those old people died because they were out clubbing.
	If only Boris had shut the nightclubs sooner, we wouldn't have 150,000 COVID deaths.
	It's so stupid.
	It's so transparently a lie.
	I'm surprised Fauci hasn't come up and given his endorsement to Boris at this point.
	But he says...
	And the thing is, right, this came 17 hours, exactly 17 hours, after he gave the legal order for them to be able to reopen.
	So he's like, yeah, open up, open up.
	And then the coin lands.
	Oh, not in the nightclubs, though.
	You need your vaccinations.
	Well, it was great freedom day.
	I was like, right, okay, the freedoms come back.
	And then just in the evening, how about I just spoil everything?
	Great.
	Couldn't you have just taken the afternoon off, Boris?
	Anyway, so this is obviously the contradiction.
	And the Prime Minister told the press conference that from the end of September, being fully vaccinated will be a condition to the entry of nightclubs and venues, other venues where large clubs gather.
	And on pubs, he added, I don't want to get into a situation where people are asked to reduce papers, which I mean, I assume the mirror means produce papers, to go anywhere, to enjoy any of the pleasures that they do, but do not rule it out.
	Okay, so we've got a few seconds of the brief happy face borrower.
	Yeah, I don't want that.
	I don't want that.
	We know you don't, but you're doing it.
	So why are you doing it?
	Like, I don't want that, but I'm going to do it.
	Well, then who's got the gun to your head?
	Tell me.
	Tell us.
	Who's putting the gun in your back, Boris?
	We need to know so we can deal with them because we need our elected representatives to actually do what they're elected to do.
	Anyway, so this probably won't even work, as the Royal Navy have found out recently.
	One of our flotillas, it's nice to know that we still have flotillas, actually, to be fair.
	So more than 100 cases of the coronavirus were reported aboard the Royal Navy's new aircraft carrier and its escorting group of warships, despite the fact every single naval person, every single sailor on these boats has been double vaccinated.
	Every single one.
	100 cases of coronavirus.
	Oh, we can't have people spreading coronavirus in nightclubs.
	You've all got to be double vaccinated.
	That doesn't stop it.
	What now?
	You didn't stop it.
	Didn't work.
	No one's even trying to claim that getting double vaccinated means you can't get the thing.
	It's meant to be that you can't die from it.
	Yeah.
	So then, what is any of this argument?
	None of this has anything to do with the spread of the virus.
	Yeah, and at the end of the day, if 87% of the people have had one dose and then 69% or something nice have had two, then...
	I couldn't help myself.
	Then what's the problem?
	You know, the death rates are just not reflective of the fear and the control that's being imposed on us.
	And of course, as you brought up earlier, the petition to Parliament, if we can scroll down, John, so we can see how many people have signed it at this point.
	239,000.
	This petition will be linked in the show notes and we'll put out on our social media.
	Go and sign it.
	You have to sign it.
	You have to.
	We have to be able to show that there's a huge, huge number.
	And 230,000 is good, but it should be a million.
	So make sure that you share this with your family and friends, everyone you know, post it on every social media.
	Email it to people.
	Email it to parliamentarians.
	Get them like, look, we're all signing this.
	You should sign it.
	If you don't sign this, I'm not voting for you again.
	I need to be able to see your signature, my MP, on this or else.
	This is what we should be doing.
	We'll skip over the YouGov stuff because I knew that you'd done this.
	And so yeah, just going into the other things that the Conservatives have done.
	So this is absolutely mad.
	I don't know why they think that this is a good idea.
	Now...
	To be clear, nobody hates journalists more than I do.
	And I think I have more than enough reason to hate journalists for what they have done to me in the past.
	And what they've done to my friends and the people I care about and the general country at large and the public as it is.
	So I don't like journalists.
	I think they're generally a...
	It's a class full of scum.
	Absolute scum.
	They're dumb.
	They're awful.
	I'm not a journalist.
	I'm a commentator.
	John's calling me a journalist.
	I resent that remark.
	You don't work for BuzzFeed.
	Yeah, exactly.
	I don't work for BuzzFeed, exactly.
	And for some reason, the Home Office has decided that, yeah, maybe we should have anything that embarrasses us come with a 14-year jail sentence.
	It's like, wow.
	As much as I hate journalists...
	I don't think we should be locking them up for over a decade for embarrassing the government.
	I know, I have to say it.
	I don't know where Steve Baker is on this.
	Oh, silent libertarians, once again.
	But maybe, just maybe, just because the government's embarrassed by a leak, this obviously being talking about the Matt Hancock leak, they're like, right, so someone should go to jail for 14 years for that.
	No.
	Why?
	Like, this is obvious corruption by the state.
	Yes.
	This has been mentioned in Yes Minister multiple times, because I believe they're also doing this under the Official Secrets Act.
	They are.
	They want to do it.
	It's like, right, okay.
	That is literally the joke within the civil service.
	Whenever you guys mess up, you're just like, ah, Official Secrets Act.
	What are you going to do about it?
	Exactly.
	Like, that's your code.
	That's exactly what it is.
	And so...
	You should not cheat on your wife.
	I mean, that'll work.
	Well, yeah, yeah.
	I mean, you've got to wonder, though, considering Priti Patel as being the one who's proposing this, I wonder who she's up to...
	Just going to say it.
	Oh, good point.
	Anyway, so yeah, of course this was endorsed by Priti Patel, and they're arguing in the consultation, because it's currently going through a consultation at the moment, that the disclosures can be worse than spying because the work of a foreign spy will often only be to the benefit of a single state or actor.
	But if something gets leaked to the press and we look silly, that's to everyone's benefit?
	And so that's bad?
	It's to everyone's benefit if Matt Hancock gets fired for being a philandering liar.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, it is.
	But that's good, because we're the public, and you want things to benefit us.
	Why are you acting against our interest in your own?
	It's like the term public interest they use all the time when you get in power.
	It's like public interest.
	What's to use the public?
	Me and my friends.
	Yeah, so they're calling on Parliament to increase maximum sentences, and the Home Office claims that there's now not necessarily, quote, a distinction in severity between espionage and the most serious unauthorised disclosures, including onward disclosure in the press, which means that they have erased the distinction between a spy breaking into the House of Parliament and stealing some papers or something, And a journalist being leaked something by a minister and reporting it because it's in the public interest.
	Such as cheating on your wife.
	Such as cheating on your wife.
	Such as breaking your own coronavirus restrictions, which was the main problem.
	And this is essentially going to be criminalizing a great deal of important journalism.
	And again, I hate the journalists, but maybe they shouldn't be locked up for telling us what's happened.
	Because it's so rare when they actually do something useful...
	I'm actually going to agree with Ian Hislop here.
	It's not a pretty press, but it's a free press.
	Yes.
	They print a lot of just lies, outright lies, and they know they are, but you can just not buy it.
	Yeah, and so that's awful.
	The Daily Mail and The Guardian are somehow on the same page on an issue.
	I mean, that's how bad this is?
	The Daily Mail and The Guardian both agree that this is probably a bad idea.
	Probably shouldn't do it.
	Again, Steve Baker, do you have anything to say about any of this?
	God, I'm so sick of these libertarians.
	If you're a libertarian, you should be angry at them too, because you've got a very strong ground at this point to argue from, being like, well, let me tell you about civil liberties, if you don't mind, would be nice.
	And so finally, I guess we'll, oh no, no, not even finally, we're continuing on.
	So Boris apparently didn't want the lockdowns, as we hear from the Alcibiades of the Conservative government, Dominic Cummings.
	He's not nearly handsome or athletic or successful enough to really be...
	Still, he's not slept his way to the top, hopefully.
	He hasn't won any wars.
	He hasn't conquered any cities.
	But he is making life difficult for the Conservatives, which is fine to be honest at this point.
	I actually hate the Conservatives now.
	But it's not making anything better for anyone, really.
	But apparently, and I love this, Boris was restricted.
	Again, we get the light-faced Boris.
	The two faces.
	Comes up on the good side of the coin.
	Boris was reluctant to tighten COVID restrictions as cases rose last autumn because he thought the people dying from it were essentially all over 80, Dominic Cummings has claimed.
	Well, that's because that was true.
	That's the NHS data, isn't it?
	Yes, that's exactly the NHS data.
	And he said, I no longer buy all this NHS overwhelm stuff.
	Because it wasn't.
	It was nowhere near being overwhelmed.
	Do they have the screenshot in here?
	No, but David Lammy's got that and we'll go to that next.
	The thing is, you can see it's in a WhatsApp chat where he's just like, average age of death with COVID. We'll get the David Lammy up.
	I love David Lammy's response to this.
	Can we go for it?
	Tens of thousands have already died by this point.
	Boris Johnson's a total disgrace.
	And what did he say?
	I must say that I've been slightly rocked by some of the data on COVID fatalities.
	Right, okay, so Boris is about to cite some facts at us, David, you fat prat.
	The median age is 81, uh, is 82, 81 for men and 85 for women.
	That is above life expectancy, so get COVID and live longer.
	It's not wrong.
	It's not wrong at all.
	Hardly anyone under 60 goes into hospital, 4%, and virtually all survive.
	I no longer buy all of this NHS overwhelm stuff.
	Folks, I think we need to recalibrate.
	Well, if only the Prime Minister could be reached to tell him this information so he could change the course in which the country is going.
	It's a shame he seems to be absent, doesn't it?
	If only Boris got elected to the leadership of the country, because then he'd be able to enact this kind of plan!
	You're the Prime Minister!
	The thing on my mind is just like, I wonder what the response was in here?
	Because you only see the message from Boris.
	I mean, we're assuming this is true because it comes from Dominic Cummings, who's been releasing a whole bunch of these.
	And therefore, I'd love to see the response underneath.
	Like, what was the response to this?
	What was the counter-argument?
	Yeah, what are they going to say?
	Well, I mean, the data does say that, but fear-mongering.
	But Boris, what about my vaccine stonks?
	I have got a lot of money invested in this, Boris, so you're going to have to get everyone vaccinated.
	But anyway, moving on.
	So COVID is not ravaging the country.
	I don't know why I have to say that.
	Just hasn't been for quite some time.
	Recent data shows that despite rising case numbers, the seven day rolling death rate is just 40, compared to 654 on December 26th, when it was close to the current rate of 45,000 new infections a day.
	So back in December, when we had the same sort of rate of infections, it was more than 10 times higher, probably like 13 times higher.
	And now it's much, much less important.
	Death rates in England and Wales are currently, and this is just general death rates in England and Wales, currently 5.2% below the five-year average, according to the Office of National Statistics.
	Take the win.
	COVID accounts for 1.2% of the deaths.
	Why are we talking about this?
	I'm more interested in talking about heart conditions or whatever makes up like 30% of the deaths.
	Lung cancers that make up probably another...
	Like if you were the health minister, that would be the thing.
	I'd be like, why?
	I'm not interested in talking about COVID. My God.
	Why would I? I imagine more people die from falling down the stairs at this point.
	This is ridiculous.
	Hospital admissions are a quarter of what they are or what they were at the same point during the last comparable wave.
	The NHS is fine.
	Most people aren't dying of COVID. Most people aren't even getting sick from COVID. It's a really small issue, and yet vaccine passports.
	This must be about money.
	For some reason, though, this is not the end of it.
	I don't know why the Conservatives have gone absolutely barking at this point.
	Fake reviews online are going to be criminalised, apparently.
	So meme reviews, because that's what that is.
	Oh, you went on Amazon and posted a meme review?
	Well, that's illegal now, son.
	Why?
	Who demanded this?
	It must have been.
	I've got to think of Amy's Baking Company from Kitchen Nightmares, in which she's complaining that there are fake reviews online, saying my business was bad.
	That's all that comes to mind.
	Because I can't think of why else you'd be upset about joke reviews.
	Are there reviews for Pfizer vaccines or something like that?
	AstraZeneca vaccines?
	Look up the HQ, I bet it's got Google reviews.
	Exactly, right.
	So, I can only assume that this is the vaccine company saying we don't like people posting stuff, like, you know, any effect that our vaccines may have had on them that were unexpected.
	Anyway, moving on.
	For some reason, wolf whistling is going to be criminalised now, because we've got a Labour government.
	I guess Prime Minister Jess Phillips has finally taken control, and it's going to become a specific crime.
	Wolf whistling.
	Because I'm a conservative.
	Right.
	Who's harmed by the wolf whistle?
	Like whistling at a woman.
	Ugly chicks who don't get whistled at.
	If it was unwanted contact...
	Vicky's laughing because she obviously gets wolf whistled.
	But if it was unwanted contact over a period of time, then you could already...
	The harassment already covers that.
	Because if you harass someone, you didn't have to do it physically.
	Like, that's already there.
	But the wolf whistling one time, that's a crime now.
	Mad.
	Anyway, moving on.
	Migrants are arriving on our shores in record numbers.
	Illegal immigrants, of course.
	Yesterday, 430 migrants arrived on our shores.
	This was a new single-day record.
	This year, all of last year, we received 8,000 illegal immigrants.
	We're just sailing across the channel because apparently we still don't have a navy anymore.
	They're all ill with coronavirus, I guess.
	And this year, to this point, we've had 8,500.
	So we've had more than ever before, and they're not stopping.
	And Keir Starmer decided to weigh on on this, and you can imagine how ridiculous this point was.
	The Conservatives just voted to make it harder to give a safe haven to children fleeing violence and war.
	They should be ashamed.
	You've got a picture of these children?
	I don't have a picture, but there wasn't a single child.
	The front page picture of what was the day when most of them came.
	It's just this massive guy who's clearly in his 40s with a big beard and chest hair going...
	Yeah.
	It's like, what the hell is this invader doing here?
	It's a child, don't you know?
	He is obviously part of an invasion force.
	And so the Conservatives did something about this, and of course Labour were furious.
	The Nationality and Borders Bill actually went through, because remember, Conservatives, you have a stonking majority.
	They can't stop you.
	They can't stop you fixing things.
	Labour tried to block it, but of course they were outvoted by 94 votes.
	Nowhere near stopping it.
	Nowhere near.
	They had absolutely nothing.
	Is this the Rwandan solution?
	Nearly.
	We'll get to that.
	I mean, yes, it includes that, yeah.
	But this is the thing, though, right?
	Notice that every Labour MP voted to have more refugees.
	Every single one.
	They don't care about the border integrity of the country.
	Refugees.
	They're not legitimate.
	Illegal invaders coming across the channel from France.
	Because France being the adult men invading the country from France.
	Like they're legitimate refugees.
	They didn't vote for them.
	They voted for the people in France who just want to go for it.
	Yes, who already have safe harbour in France.
	But anyway, the bill includes clauses to allow the UK to be able to send asylum seekers to a safe third country and submit claims at a designated place.
	Of course, we're going to be sharing or we're considering sharing the processing centre with Denmark in Rwanda.
	Based Denmark, good idea.
	And revived speculations about the Ascension Island Processing Centre as well.
	To be honest with you, I'd definitely go for a random one.
	And interestingly as well, this allows provisions for us to simply put them in jail.
	Look at all those children.
	See all those children?
	All of them?
	Any women?
	Children?
	No, they're all adult men.
	But the bill will allow authorities to prosecute thousands of asylum seekers who illegally come across the channel with sentences of up to four years.
	It will introduce life sentences for people smugglers and enable asylum seekers to be processed offshore and give the Border Force new powers to prevent crossings.
	Good.
	So, good conservative face, evil conservative face.
	Just serve the good one.
	Serve the right thing.
	Don't do what Labour want.
	And they literally can't stop you.
	But I love the Labour cope on this as well.
	We'll finish on this.
	So Labour MPs all voted against this, of course, because they want foreign men to invade our country for some reason.
	The Shadow Home Office Minister, Bambos Charolambos.
	Is that real?
	That sounds like a parody.
	That can't be real.
	Is that actually his name?
	Probably.
	Bambos Charolambos.
	Labour Shadow Home Office Minister.
	I'll Google it.
	That can't be true.
	That must be a joke.
	It's probably just a...
	Yeah, it's real.
	What?
	Okay.
	So...
	Bambos Charalambos?
	It's a funny name.
	It's also the Shadow Minister for Immigration, apparently.
	Yeah, exactly.
	I wonder if he's an immigrant...
	He said, oh, it was riddled with holes, fatally flawed and will not work.
	It won't work because a glaring omission is the lack of bilateral agreements with France and other countries.
	Well, that's the point, isn't it?
	If we criminalise crossing, we don't need an agreement with France, and we can deport them to Rwanda, which I'm sure will go brilliantly.
	Anyway, Labour described the bill as unhinged and attacked ministers for trying to put themselves above the law.
	Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Okay, Labour.
	We get it.
	You are the party of open borders.
	And unfortunately, well no, actually the Conservatives have done something about the borders here, which is nice.
	They've done something actually conservative for once.
	But yes, anyway, one interesting thing from this as well is that, of course, with all of these migrants coming along, people can just ask them questions because there's no procedure.
	And one group of people arrived on a border force vessel, which included a boy of eight and a girl.
	There was one child and one woman.
	Why is that newsworthy?
	Exactly.
	Why is that newsworthy?
	Because it's not common, is it?
	No, but one African migrant, I wonder how many safe countries he had to pass through to get to bloody Dover.
	This is not the first nearest country, is it?
	Anyway, he told photographers that the group had paid £3,000 each for the 10-hour crossing, and now you're going to jail.
	Stay at home.
	It's a good solution.
	You're safe in France.
	You're a liar if you come over from France.
	If you're a legitimate refugee, then we'll give you a safe haven.
	If you're a liar, you'll get jail.
	And you're wasting your money.
	Don't come.
	Just don't come.
	Anyway, that's that.
	Good.
	Let's go to the video comments.
	71% of women and children.
	Morning, Lotus Eaters.
	So I have a question for Carl today.
	I believe as a dad you should know the ins and outs of at least three power tools.
	So, can you name me three power tools and their functions?
	No.
	Do you have power tools?
	No.
	I know.
	Because I pay people to fix things.
	Because you're bad at it?
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	Well, I'm somebody who works with technology, and I read books.
	I mean, don't get me wrong, I love, I absolutely love watching people make things.
	Like, on Facebook, Facebook constantly is getting my attention.
	It's like, hey, would you like to watch this woodworking video of a guy just making a joint or something?
	I'm like, yes, I would.
	And I just sit there and watch like three minutes of them making this joint and then varnishing it and I'm just like, wow, that was beautiful.
	And I'm like, what was I doing?
	Explain your two of the manor house, you'll enjoy it.
	I really would, yeah.
	Hey guys, if you'd like to discuss Cuba's extremely capitalistic cigar industry and how a combination of rioting, government transfer and several years of terrible harvests are going to essentially bankrupt the country, Give me a shout and we'll talk about it.
	It's quite interesting.
	To be honest with you, I wouldn't mind investing in Cuba's cigar industry because I like Cuban cigars.
	Why are they so special?
	Is it just because of the embargo?
	Yes, it's because the Americans said no Cuban cigars in this country because you're communists.
	But the leaves are not special at all.
	I don't know.
	I mean, I don't know the ins and out of it, but I know why you can't have Cuban cigars.
	And so I went to Greece a few years ago.
	Why don't smoke?
	That's why I was asking.
	It's a unique thing.
	I went to Greece in like 2012 or something, and they had Cuban cigars everywhere.
	I was like, oh, wow, this is great.
	So it was nice.
	Good afternoon, gentlemen.
	When a wokis rages about racism against the non-English, can you respond as such?
	Well, I wasn't advocating for importing these people as immigrants.
	If you are so concerned about the treatment of immigrants and their descendants, why, then, do you advocate that they must migrate to England?
	You can respond like that.
	Yeah.
	And in fact, there's a stronger argument as well to say, well, look, I thought this was a white supremacist country and you want brown people to come here.
	You're literally advocating for them to be tyrannised?
	I thought we were all racists.
	What are you doing?
	Let's go to the next one.
	Yeah, it's kind of quaint.
	Although I guess make them shorter next time because I presume that's Michael who's had to speed it up.
	I think we're going to have to start imposing a rule that one video comment per day from one person.
	As well.
	Yeah, because it just seems unfair that you're taking up time that will run on to other people.
	It's not specifically you either.
	Not you personally, but just generally because it happens with a few people.
	I think we probably should have that as a rule.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Regarding the Lancet, I think it's important to point out that they are also responsible for the article that linked the MMR vaccines to autism that caused so much, how shall we say, excitement in the social media world.
	They don't have a stellar reputation.
	They should be banned from social media for spreading this fake news.
	Let's just be banned.
	No, I mean if we just apply the knowledge of, well, you spread misinformation.
	Oh, absolutely.
	Well, then the Lancet is banned, isn't it?
	Yeah.
	I don't know how on earth that's considered a respectable organisation after all that.
	No, it's absurd.
	Especially after what DASAC did with them.
	Again, like leveraging this institution in order to lie to everyone.
	Yeah, I did.
	And what?
	It's mad.
	And then there's a sign, what was it, that letter in which a bunch of scientists sign.
	Oh, we've got a thing in the Lancet.
	After Daszak's thing, you would think you want to distance yourself, like, miles away.
	If you think I'm being persuaded by that, you're wrong.
	Let's go for the next one.
	Well, now that everything's cleared up about my citizenship, eh?
	Maybe you can answer a question as to what empirical evidence there is for a person being born a homosexual.
	And no you can't use any of the arguments that a theist would use to prove the existence of God.
	I don't know.
	I've never really looked too deeply into the data about the genetic parts of it.
	I've no idea if it's genetic or not.
	I've seen studies and stuff that show that younger brothers have got a 30% increased chance of being gay, and so I'm happy to believe it's something that happens during their lives.
	Are you the younger brother?
	No, I just find it funny, the idea that you can have the younger brother being bullied into being gay.
	Well, no, that seems to be what it might be, actually.
	So, it seems it could be behavioural.
	If you bully a guy, you can make him gay.
	I love the idea that you've got some guy in the army who doesn't fit in, and you'd be like, right, you're the gay one.
	I don't know.
	Like I said, I'm not an expert or anything like that.
	John's saying it's fetal hormone levels, but...
	Okay, well, I don't know.
	So, yeah, no idea.
	Not my area of expertise, sorry.
	So I think I'm slowly being radicalized by Michael Malice, because as much as I don't want him to, he makes perfect sense to me.
	Because I don't see a world where government doesn't slowly devolve into some form of fascism.
	Because, in my opinion, we have the best founding documents that you're ever going to get here in the U.S. But if the opposition just doesn't care about what it says, I don't know how that helps us in the long term.
	So, thoughts?
	Well, that's the same with any political structure, to be honest.
	Unless there's genuine and sincere belief in the thing and adherence to it, then it won't work.
	Nothing can work.
	This is all based on our consent and cooperation.
	And that's why the Democrats, what they're doing is so evil.
	And this is why I can never forget Beau's formulation of it.
	When they're saying, look, we're going to pack the courts, we're going to do this, we're going to open the borders, we're going to do that.
	Essentially, what they're doing is laying out the instruments of the dismemberment of the Republic and saying, this is what we're going to do.
	I mean, it should probably be considered some kind of treason, in a way, because it kind of is.
	And it's basically saying, we do not commit to democracy as it is, and we won't cooperate with people who do.
	So you're anti-democratic and probably shouldn't be trusted.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Carl, Watch Attack on Titan.
	I've never seen it, but my sister, who's a hardcore leftist, has, and she's been very confused of late after having watched it.
	Okay.
	Also, yeah, I'm waiting for that body pillow.
	I got the Daily Wire subscription, and all I got was Andrew Klavan's memoirs.
	I could have preferred and used the tears mug instead.
	Why go there?
	You get an Andrew Klavan body pillow.
	That would be awesome.
	I'd sign up for the Daily Wire for that.
	Oh.
	Do you see that we're under attack by, what is it, NPR or whatever?
	No, what happened?
	And they were trying to allege that they're disinforming their readers because they're trying to hide that they're conservative.
	And it was like, in what universe is the Daily Wire trying to hide that it's conservative?
	Like, under every single article, they have, we're the fastest growing organization in conservative media.
	It was like...
	And NPR's like, yeah, you're not being clear about your bias.
	And it's like, you're NPR? What's your bias?
	Oh, we have none.
	Come on, why are you going off to the Daily Wire for not being open about conservatives then?
	It's clearly because you don't like them, which clearly makes you not a conservative.
	They all call themselves conservatives every single day that they broadcast.
	Every person says the word, I am a conservative in some way.
	Yeah.
	Well, I think it'd be more trying to go after the articles, but the articles literally have a message at the bottom, you know, we're the fastest growing thing and conservative media support us here.
	And if you don't know what the Daily Wire is, then what can you do?
	That's mad.
	They're as clear as crystal.
	If you can't be sure of the Daily Wire and conservative, you can't be sure of anything.
	Let's give it the next one.
	So, it seems Boris is hell-bent on the COVID passports.
	Now, I can remember the daft git that is Andrew Marr, who's twice my damn age, mind you, and who's had two pricks, had a doctor on the BBC explain to him that a vaccine doesn't stop you from spreading the virus or you from getting the virus, which means regardless of vaccine passports or not, you could literally have a pub full of COVID-positive people, which makes your passports utterly redundant.
	Or an entire warship full of people who have got COVID, even though they've all been double vaccinated.
	Not that it matters, because none of this is about actual prevention of the coronavirus spreading.
	This is obviously about personal control.
	I do have to wonder what's going to happen to those sailors' careers, because my understanding is, if you're in the army, there's a big concern about the long COVID effect of your combat performance.
	So, I wonder.
	Because then there's the question of, like, if you get it, do you just keep it to yourself?
	And be like, nah, nah, never had it, mate.
	Because...
	I wouldn't even get a test, to be honest.
	Let's go to the next one.
	So I live in one of the locations that has fires very frequently, and I've known lots of people who've lost their homes and been devastated and been evacuated a few times, and it's always like, oh, this year my house is going to burn down and I'll lose everything.
	And so it's really frustrating when I see all the political people in the cities that are just deciding that, you know, we should save the forest, we should push for minimum wage, when it's like, no, we need to clear out parts of the forest because this is what leads to people dying and losing everything.
	I would love to just cut off the coasts of California and then just have us govern ourselves in the rest of, you know, not crap California.
	Honestly, I really hope that the Republican areas of California can secede from the state of California to become their own new California or something.
	Maybe form a republic of some kind.
	I don't know.
	But honestly, she's absolutely right.
	Trump said this a couple of years ago, didn't he?
	Where he's like, well, they're not clearing the forest.
	And everyone's like, oh, clearing the forest?
	And then there's a mass of wildfires and all the experts are like, well, they should have cleared the forest.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Trump wasn't the author of the idea of clearing forests, you muppets.
	Like it's age old.
	Exactly.
	And he'd obviously been told by an advisor, well, what they do normally is clear the forest, but the Democrats haven't been clearing the forest, and now we have fires.
	When it comes down to it, I mean, when you look at voting patterns as well, the biggest divide in every country in the West is between the urban and the rural.
	And this is why I find the attacks on the electoral college so strange, because it is essentially the urbanites wanting to take the power because we've got the most people.
	It's like, yeah, but you guys have no idea how to manage the majority of the land in the country.
	Your cities are disgusting.
	Yeah, you can't even manage the land you do have.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Why would anyone want to be run like you?
	Anyway.
	As you can see, Carl, I caught your discussion with Destiny.
	I think the important thing about thick concept human roles is that they turn us into somebody that other people need, which isn't just useful for society, but is also ennobling to the individual.
	I'm happy to see you exercise your right to bear arms, but 30 degrees is nothing.
	Talk to me when it hits 40.
	And Callum?
	That oil guy is a difficult one.
	I haven't forgotten your request, but it's going to take time.
	Yeah, I knew it would be a difficult one, so don't rush it.
	You made a great point there, though, and that is something I should probably emphasize, as in what it does is imbue you personally with meaning to be a part of someone important in someone else's life.
	It gives you meaning.
	Uh, hey there, leather seaters.
	It's Anti-Propaganda here.
	So, I just made a video on my channel discussing that on Jimmy Dore's latest livestream that happened today, he went off about how he got COVID and then got a shot for COVID in his neck and that his neck became stiff and that that stiffness and pain spread throughout his whole neck and that it didn't go away until his personal doctor gave him ivermectin and, uh, combined with another drug, which I forget off the top of my head.
	How is he not banned for that?
	Yeah, I'm genuinely surprised.
	But I did hear that he had a severe side effect from it.
	I didn't know how he got rid of it.
	Hmm.
	You know.
	Godspeed Jimmy Dore.
	He's the last leftist I like listening to.
	Which I've never thought I would have said.
	Hello, Lotus Eaters.
	Today at CNN, we got this very strange cassette in the mail.
	Have a listen.
	It's Ted Cruz.
	Hello, neighbor.
	Oakley-dopeley, neighborino.
	But dad, I'm a vegetarian.
	I don't eat animals.
	But Lisa, animals are so delicious.
	There's the animal we get bacon from, the animal we get ham from, the animal we get sausage from.
	Dad, that's all the same animal.
	Very strange.
	What was that?
	I don't know.
	I mean, it was a Simpsons bit.
	A magical animal, yeah.
	I have no idea what the point of that was, but okay.
	Let's go to the next one.
	The Biden regime excusing themselves from banning citizens by saying that, oh no, they don't do it.
	It's Facebook and the other social medias that do it.
	Let's go.
	Isn't that just like the mafia boss saying that the grunts that do the bloody work and actually make people disappear, that's the same thing.
	They've recused themselves from their responsibility, even though the order obviously came from the top.
	Yeah, this is like the private companies in China.
	It's like, if a private company...
	I don't know how the situation works with social media over there, but I'm just going to say, for example, that you have, like, what is it, WeChat or Weibo or whatever?
	If they ban everyone on there, the Communist Chinese Party didn't do that, that's just a private company exercising their rights in terms and conditions.
	Oh, yeah, that's exactly how China works.
	Bull.
	Absolute bull.
	Which is why I got really mad about that section of the White House secretary being like, yeah, we're just telling them who to ban.
	I was like, right.
	It's disgusting.
	Then you're a tyrant, you're violating the First Amendment, your knowledge limits.
	And they should ban them from all social media?
	Yeah.
	Thanks, Tarrant.
	Great.
	So you're admitting that the bans on other platforms are also not legitimate.
	They have nothing to do with the terms of service, which we already knew thanks to Alex Jones' team and Ryan Hartwig, who I should give a shout out to.
	Oh man, weirdly, before we go on, did you see the clip of Alex Jones from 2018 going around?
	No.
	Where he predicted the coronavirus pandemic and it all played out exactly as he said it would?
	I'll send it to you.
	It's really bizarre.
	It's like, wow, that is...
	Legitimately, he's like, they're going to make this coronavirus in a Chinese lab, and then it's going to get leaked, and they're going to lock down the whole world, and it'll be used as an excuse to take away all our freedoms.
	It's like, oh, bloody hell.
	We're going to have to remake the podcast.
	Yeah, I know.
	Alex Jones was right about part two.
	Hello, Lotus Eaters.
	Carlisle Fletcher here.
	And as a Russian Lit nerd, I'm really jealous of this word, Sobernos, which essentially means that the world does not stem from the self.
	Instead, the self stems from the world.
	Therefore, you Are more of a piece of larger humanity.
	You are more the collective than you are just a self-interested meat sack.
	It's more important for you to be a member of a spiritual community, a local community, or just a part of your family.
	And I was wondering if we had a similar idea in English culture.
	Yeah, thanks.
	No.
	Get off my property, it's mine.
	I didn't quite understand the question, so...
	Do we have a sort of collectivist view of ourselves?
	Not really.
	No.
	Which is why it's good.
	Yeah.
	Good day, lot of visitors.
	My message to the so-called anime fans in regards to the debate about subs versus dubs.
	There's only one correct answer, and it is...
	Reading the original source material in the second language.
	Observe.
	Dio!
	Well, here we have the pure elitism of where anime lies.
	I'm not expecting him to issue a fat war or something.
	I'm not reading Attack on Titan in the original Japanese, if that's what you're asking.
	You're not going to get the true experience, mate.
	I know, deliberately.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Happy Freedom Day, you wankers.
	I guess 2,000 years of British history has led up to this.
	This single moment.
	You are now free from your government.
	The Americans, we just said, we're free.
	The British are just, how?
	From who?
	Who said that?
	Uh, we can't say we did.
	God.
	There we go.
	That's it.
	I just noticed the Gustav gun in the background as well.
	See that?
	He's too busy looking at the Velociraptor skeleton and the T-Rex skeleton.
	He's trying to tell us something, but he's like, ooh, trinkets.
	I mean, God, we're not free here.
	Britain is not a free country.
	No, it's not.
	Most of you have probably paid to get into college, university, get your degree.
	For me, I've been getting a GI Bill from the American government after nine years of service in the Navy.
	And if I wasn't getting paid to go, I would never get a degree.
	Yeah.
	I mean, it's one of the difficulties in the UK because you do have to pay for it here, but only a small portion, and then it's only if you earn over a certain amount.
	So if you do still want to go and take a stupid degree in studies, you know, grievance studies, and then not earn over, what is it, $25,000 or whatever it is now, then you will never pay it back either.
	So there needs to be those economic things in the way of people doing grievance studies.
	Yeah.
	G'day, gents.
	I just finished a six-day fast.
	I've gotten down to my pre-COVID weight and I'm loving it.
	So, here's the new man test for everyone.
	Go to cscooper.com.au and grab your Cricket Chad shirt, use the promo code KARLCHADPRINCE I actually really like the energy of that.
	Shop.
	Oh, I found the shirt.
	Limited stock.
	£13.
	Two in cart.
	You gonna get one?
	Should I pay for both here or should I not?
	That is the question.
	Whether it is nobler for my wallet to suffer to test if I have the wits and voice to offer or should I slide past these worthless troubles and pay much less for content seen by others?
	I guess I'm supposed to say yes.
	To that question?
	Yeah, I didn't really get it.
	Don't worry.
	Is there audio to this or not?
	yes yep totally sign off on that For people listening, he was making the point of stop watching anime and go back to British comics from the war.
	Yeah.
	Weebs.
	The original way to enjoy anime is to watch the British stuff.
	Let's go to the next one.
	I just want to ask you guys a quick question.
	When was it that you guys or when was it that you turned away from the left?
	For me, it was around 2015 with the rise of feminism and leftist bias towards Islam.
	That turned me away from the left.
	Probably 2016, 2017, the rise of Trump.
	So I didn't even like Trump originally.
	I wasn't even like, oh yay, great, Trump.
	But I was just really anti-Hillary, and Trump just kept doing the right thing.
	And eventually I went and got my mag out.
	I was like, screw it.
	I don't think I've ever really been of the left.
	It's sensible.
	It's more just like, the Islamic thing was a big wake-up call, in which the left were just like, yay, Islam.
	I was like, what on earth are you doing?
	And then...
	What was the other thing?
	I suppose the one point that made me really anti-left was the reading of the book about Mao's Great Revolution, in which we're talking about them eating toddlers.
	And she's like, great.
	I used to sort of rampage across the Middle East.
	The Saudis and the Iranians are throwing gays off rooftops, and the left and the west is just like, yay, Islam!
	Yeah, yeah, it's like, okay.
	Hey Lotus Eaters, I have a question for you all.
	I wonder, how would you feel about returning to a divine right Catholic monarchy?
	You see, democracy is stupid, as it is the tyranny of the majority, who are often sheeple.
	God bless!
	I mean, you make a convincing case against democracy, but I'm not sure a Catholic monarchy is the answer.
	I just want to say yes for the meme and just be like, yeah, why not?
	It could be worse than this.
	We might end up with a based libertarian king.
	I don't know, why can't it be Protestant?
	Yeah, why not?
	To be honest, I think if you put Elizabeth II in charge of running the government, she wouldn't mess it up.
	How could it be worse than what we've got now?
	But I mean, she actually has an understanding of, I'll do nothing, and nobody can blame me.
	Good point.
	And then if the government does just do nothing, well, they don't interfere in society, society just gets along.
	Yeah, we can just get on with our lives.
	Yeah.
	So, it seems Boris is hell-bent on the COVID passports.
	Now, I can remember the daft Hey guys, I see there's a move today to make wolf whistling illegal as a misogynistic crime.
	I think then it's time for men to reclaim the wolf whistle in a sort of no-homo sense.
	Oh, yeah.
	Use it to say to other guys, hey, you're looking good today.
	No, I think that's a good idea.
	Bro whistles.
	Bro whistles.
	That's a great idea.
	So all these women are not getting wolf-whistled at, and this guy's wolf-whistled, hey, you're looking good, and it's, oh, thanks, bro, and all the women can just get left out.
	But you do it, and the feminist turns around and is like, hey, I'll take you to court, and I'm not whistling at you, you slag.
	Get lost, piglet, you know.
	uh let's go to the next one considering labor from the perspective of physics is that it would be energy expended not just making products but the actual process of learning to make products creative thinking and things like that and so as long as there's a lot of even complaining going on then i think that there's labor technically being produced so i think that as long as labor is outpacing money printer going brr we will not see hyperinflation in america there is some price seeking going on however unfortunately what's going to happen is an inflow of money into people's pockets is going to allow them to go after vice and whoever ends up making it out will probably be a little bit more financially sound that was a pretty good reaction yesterday about the uh fire alarm stuff
	hope everything is okay so i believe everything was okay because the fire alarm was a Yeah, it turns out it was a drill they didn't tell us about, but we were allowed to believe the build was on fire, so we were just like, alright, well, thanks for tuning in, bye-bye.
	What can we do?
	You see what's happening in Lebanon at the moment.
	No.
	Oh, no, wait, the government's collapsing, isn't it?
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	But, like, the hyperinflation's really strange as well.
	Like, there are multiple black market rates, and the government rate makes, like, I think it was a...
	If you buy a Big Mac, it's, like, 20 bucks.
	If you buy the official rate, it's a mess.
	I'm not buying a Big Mac for $20.
	But one of the weird things, I was watching a bunch of videos about this, and they're like, oh, yeah, it's because of imports and exports and all the rest of it.
	And just every time everyone talks about inflation, I just remember Milton Friedman being like, they're just trying to mislead you.
	It's all about the money printer going burr.
	Yeah.
	Like, fundamentally, the money supply is what makes money worth less.
	Yes.
	Because...
	Value is dependent on scarcity and supply and demand.
	I believe Milton Friedman, yes.
	The Lebanese government being like, oh, I don't know, it's just what can we do?
	It's like, stop printing money, you dumb mother...
	Read a book.
	I mean, I don't know.
	Omar says, come on guys, you're being silly about this YouGov stuff now.
	Of course you're going to get the same results when you ask 71 Labour voters.
	Completely legitimate results.
	Also, can we get a We Are The 71% shirt with three masked protesters on the background of unmasked crowds?
	Maybe.
	Two number nine say, all of my friends I've spoken to think that vaccine passports are wrong and we're 29.
	I doubt younger people would even sign a government poll, never mind being in favour of an ID or a passport.
	Well, yeah, exactly, exactly.
	Adam says, watching Fauci squirm after getting called out by Rand Paul is amazing.
	How is Fauci still on the US government payroll is beyond comprehension.
	How is he not in jail?
	It means he obviously lied to the Congress.
	Provably, we have seen the evidence now.
	Also just a communist in the British government, in SAGE. I still can't go about how she's still there.
	You would have thought day one you find out she's still a communist party member, fired from the state because this is a conservative government.
	What does SAGE stand for?
	What is it?
	Scientifically Advisory Group on Emergencies.
	Something like that.
	So literally the government is choosing a bunch of advisors.
	And it's a communist.
	It's like, I'm sorry I keep bringing that up, but I'm just dumbfounded how a conservative government can look at a communist member of the government and be like, that's fine.
	Let me flip a coin.
	Oh, libertarian Boris says, yeah, I think we should get rid of them too.
	But for some reason, evil Boris is just allowing it to carry on.
	I look forward to all the neo- You know what?
	That's what should happen.
	The white nation and the neo-Nazis, they should all join the civil service because what's the argument against them if you've got communists in there with them?
	They're just as bad as each other.
	They're like, oh, we'll have to get rid of the Nazis.
	Why?
	Because you've got the communists there.
	You're going to have to get rid of them too if we're being liberal about this.
	I just can't believe that the government would actually hire a member of the Communist Party to be advisors.
	Knowingly.
	No.
	It's not a secret.
	It was a mistake, sure.
	Sorry.
	Yeah, exactly.
	If it was a secret that she was a member of the Communist Party for 40 years, then okay, fair enough.
	Oh, we've just learned she's gone.
	Fine.
	That'd be the appropriate thing.
	Anyway, I'm not Edward.
	I'm not singing that tune.
	But anyway, George says, considering the UGov story, would you say there's any point in participating in the surveys if they're just going to make the numbers up?
	I suppose it's possible that 71% of Britons are uninformed cowards, but it seems unlikely.
	I mean, maybe 50 years ago it seemed unlikely.
	I don't know.
	I mean, it's not conclusive proof that they're definitely rigging it, but it looks like they're rigging it, don't they?
	Well, they don't have to necessarily rig it.
	Again, it could just be self-selection from Twitter.
	Yeah, there's that problem as well.
	And that's exactly right.
	But I just find it very absurd.
	Because I literally look up just COVID, lockdowns, just all different polls, and I went through the polls, collected the ones that were relevant.
	Just every time.
	I was expecting it to be a bit of a range, but loads of them were just 71%.
	I was just like, okay, this looks a little bit...
	A little bit.
	A little bit fishy.
	I mean, you know, when the dear leader's getting 99% of all the votes all the time, it's just...
	I'm not sure about this.
	Yeah, I'm starting to suspect.
	Yeah, the man is just starting paying attention.
	Azrael says, how would one determine the difference between gain-of-function research and good old attempts to create a bioweapon?
	I don't know.
	It sounds like a way of creating a bioweapon to me.
	Yeah, I don't think there is a difference, is there?
	Well, I mean, what are you trying to do?
	I'm trying to make this virus as infectious as possible.
	Yeah, so I can make a vaccine in case it comes out, but that just looks like a bioweapon.
	And that just sounds like a cope.
	Sounds like a lie.
	So the Iranians, I just want nukes for power.
	Peaceful purposes.
	What are you going to do with them?
	Power Israel.
	I forgot.
	Taffy says, I love the YouGov polls.
	They know I'm right-wing and they only ever ask me about biscuits and reality TV stars.
	Both are haram in my house.
	Again, my wife gets exactly the same thing.
	She wants to give her opinion on border controls and things like that.
	They asked me about cars the other day.
	I don't even own one.
	Email them, can I please answer a question about politics?
	Duffy says, ignore the man behind the 72 masks, cower in fear before the great and powerful science man, a man so infallible that any position he takes is right.
	That's brilliantly put, actually.
	That is exactly what, because when Fauci is saying to Rand Paul, you don't understand this, you don't understand this, he's just appealing to authority.
	He's saying that he does understand it, even though he's been caught in the contradiction and obviously lied.
	Over and over.
	He's unbelievably ballsy, frankly, to just get up and lie and then say, no, I don't retract my statement that was a lie, you're lying.
	I mean, that's a staggering, staggering thing for him to have done.
	It's a great way of putting the science as well.
	Yeah.
	Right, whatever position they take.
	Yeah.
	Very science.
	Much science.
	Science-y.
	Student of History says, Why is it that all these people start to stumble but have a goddamn smile across their weasel faces?
	Because they know they're getting one over on you.
	That's why.
	The reason they're grinning and laughing as they lie to your face and you have to buy it is because within the sort of framework they've set up, you can't escape the lie.
	lie they know it and they've got you north antonian knight says on the assumption that the majority of the world rediscovers its sanity do you think there will be a global trial along the lines of the nuremberg trials in order to bring justice against those who not only caused and allowed the spread of covid19 but also for those responsible for the reprehensible actions in dealing with the virus well i'm not going to hold my breath I don't think we're going to get Xi Jinping on the stand.
	No.
	Nor do I think that Fauci, or Daszak, or Dr.
	Xi, or any of the others.
	It was a...
	Darak, or whatever his name is.
	But yeah, we're out of time, aren't we?
	Ah, okay.
	We'll be back tomorrow.
	Yeah, tomorrow.
	I can never remember what day it is, apparently.
	Wednesday.
	We'll be back tomorrow, 1 o'clock.
	If you want more from us, go to Lozies.com.
	Loads of good stuff on there.
	If you want to get access to premium content, please sign up.
	It's how we keep the show running.

▲