Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 10, 2021 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:32:08

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #282

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters for the 10th of December 2021.
	I'm joined by John.
	Hello Lotus Eaters.
	And today we'll be talking about Andrew Neil's un-British solutions to the coronavirus pandemic and quite frankly that makes him un-British and also he's living in France now and as long as I can remember as well right now so that's also that but anyway so we're going to be talking about that also the Russian Rumble as you have titled it which is Yes, the military build-up on the East Ukraine border.
	And also the next Conservative leader, because it is getting into that stage, at least for the candidates and the MPs.
	So we ought to take a look at it.
	Some things to mention first on the website.
	The first thing here being the direct video Carl and Michael did, which is the It Doesn't Matter That Socialism Doesn't Work video.
	This is a response to Mike Pompeo's.
	And you can see the Cambodian genocide feels there.
	Yeah, a rather spicy thumbnail there.
	Yeah.
	It doesn't work.
	Yeah, we know.
	And also, that's not the problem, fundamentally.
	The problem is the mindset.
	But anyway, you can see all of Carl's arguments in that, so go and have a look.
	The next thing to mention is an article that we have up today from Simon Webb, The Balkanization of British Cities, in which he is talking about multiculturalism and, of course, the...
	Various ethnic ghettos we have in various cities throughout this country.
	The show's immense for people who don't know the name Simon Webb.
	You may know him from History Debunked.
	So History Debunked on YouTube.
	He does some good stuff on there.
	I think the last time I saw from him was him talking about the first black Britain.
	Oh, right.
	The BBC and the local authorities have put up a plaque to them and have made a huge story about it.
	And then eventually it just came down on the scientific basis.
	When the scientific evidence came out, it was like, they weren't black.
	Oh, dear.
	This is just made up.
	I was like, more fake history.
	But there we go, that's history debunked for you, so go and check that out, and also the article on lettuces.com.
	And the last thing to mention, which will be up, I assume, yes, I was right, 3pm after the podcast, which is this video, Critical Race Theory Explained Part 2.
	So, did Part 1, and now Carl's done Part 2 there.
	So, looking at oppressed people being special.
	Because the last one was the problem with civil rights as well, which, yeah, critical race theory has some things to say about it.
	Anyway, let's get into Andrew Neill, because Andrew Neill decided to do something stupid, as usual.
	What's new?
	Yeah.
	So, Andrew O'Neill is the un-British man of the moment, and I can definitively say that by his own arguments, because Andrew O'Neill has decided to release this article on the Daily Mail.
	I don't know why he's writing for them, but whatever.
	Okay, so he got a deal to write for them.
	He'd previously been angry that they'd written things about it, but whatever, you know.
	And he has it titled here, it's time to punish Britain's 5 million vaccine refuseniks.
	They put us all at risk of more restrictions, says Andrew Neil, so why shouldn't we curb some of their freedoms?
	Oh my god, that's so wrong on so many levels.
	Why shouldn't we curb some of their freedoms?
	Look in the mirror for a minute, Andrew.
	Anyway, so he says in here, last night I took a friend out to dinner near my home in the south of France, because he's in the south of France, because he has a home out there, and is currently out there for quite some time, I presume because he just enjoys it out there.
	So, again, I mean, living in the south of France, very British.
	At the restaurant door, we were politely asked for our vaccine passports, the QR code on our smartphones were scanned, and we were ushered to our table.
	This is, of course, because France's institute had vaccine passports.
	If you want to live a life worth living, as he will say later, then you have to have your vaccine and also prove you've had your vaccine.
	At every point.
	Papers, please.
	The check had taken seconds, a very minor inconvenience, when a new wave of coronavirus pandemic is sweeping across the continent.
	And...
	Yeah, because that's the real concern, right?
	Is the minor inconvenience of showing your ID. That's why people are upset about it.
	That's why everyone's bad.
	I don't want another minor inconvenience in my life.
	No, it's not principal points at all.
	And of course, the comparison I want to make and should be in your minds throughout this is because vaccine passports are papers.
	They are papers with your identity.
	And making British people carry compulsory identity papers, as Yes Minister would put it, is an insane thing for any British politician to ever say, never mind propose as law.
	And also for a British commentator to propose as becoming law as well.
	And you can also make the argument endlessly that, oh, we'll have compulsory identity papers.
	And that will lower crime, as he makes the argument that compulsory identity papers on COVID basis will lower the infections.
	There was a sense of safety in knowing that all of the other diners have proved themselves to be fully vaccinated, or had very recently tested negative, or had contracted the virus and recovered, because that's what the smartphone QR code does.
	And again, it wouldn't be very nice if I could get on the train and everyone in there did not have a criminal history, or they would not have it on there.
	Yes, absolutely.
	So, if smartphones are a bit rancher for you, you can print out a paper version of the vaccine passport.
	It works just as well, and also works just as well for the papers, please, metaphor, thankfully.
	It has been like this in France since early August, when vaccine passports became mandatory for cinemas, museums, restaurants, theatres, bars, clubs, planes, and long-distance trains.
	So, pretty much everything.
	If you want to do anything except go to the shop and then go home every night, then it's going to happen.
	It would be hard to imagine having a Yes.
	So, continuing, he says, At first there was some pushback, and we saw some of that.
	The French protesting by sitting outside and having picnics outside of the restaurants, for example.
	Good lads, but good for trying.
	And some argy-bargy from those who turned up at a venue but have forgotten their passports.
	Forgotten their passports, yeah.
	Now it's just part of the routine of living with the virus.
	I would question that from some of the footage I've seen.
	Yeah, I don't know what the situation is in France because I'm not French.
	But also, do you not see that as bad, Andrew?
	Do you not see how something that was unconscionable and a restriction on your freedoms has now become the norm?
	And you're like, oh, that's good.
	But I don't think it even has become the norm.
	I think he thinks it's the norm because he's living in a media bubble.
	Maybe it's because of the pace in France he lives, I don't know.
	So he continues, but vaccination substantially reduces the risk of serious illness and hospitalisation, which is why medical experts are unanimous in their view that more people who are vaccinated, the better chance we have of beating this virus.
	And again, you can make the argument, well, if we have compulsory ID cards, lowering crime.
	It's not the point.
	The point is the principal point.
	Yes.
	Also, people's worries about being vaccinated or not have nothing to do with whether it's effective in beating the virus, really.
	That's not the thing they're complaining about.
	It just shows a complete ignorance or willful ignorance of what the other side of this debate is.
	Yeah, this is why I find this article so astounding, because he's not addressing an opposition at all, really.
	And even in his own arguments, he contradicts himself and then proves himself to be British, which we'll get at two.
	So he says, Yes, because it's a sweepstake now, isn't it?
	We're all placing bets.
	Okay, so it took them to have vaccine passports to get to the level of vaccination that we reached without them.
	So we don't need them.
	Okay, but no, he says, the percentage of people with two jabs is now virtually the same on both sides of the channel.
	Again, Andrew, that means that we don't need them, because if it's got to that level in France and everything's fine, as you're mentioning, well then everything's fine over here, isn't it?
	Because we've got the same amount of vaccines.
	France has vaccinated more citizens with one jab than Britain, Germany or Italy, 50 million out of a population of 67 million, which percentage-wise is lower, but he doesn't mention that.
	There are still 5 million unvaccinated British adults who, through fear, ignorance or irresponsibility, or sheer stupidity, refuse to be jabbed.
	In doing so, they endanger not just themselves, but the rest of us.
	And this is the most outrageous thing I've seen in the whole argument, because it's the most paper-thin straw man I have heard all week.
	As if the only reasons to be sceptical, to be unvaccinated, are fear, ignorance, irresponsibility and sheer stupidity.
	There are no possible, no conceivable rational concerns as to why you might not want to be vaccinated.
	It's very, very insulting framing.
	But also, thanks to YouTube, I don't think we can go through this possible concern.
	So we'll leave that there.
	And I'm sure everyone can figure that out for themselves, because you're not Andrew Neal.
	We also cover this more on our website, if you'd like to go and check that.
	So he says, if they contract COVID, it is they who put the biggest strain on the NHS, denying the rest of us, with serious non-COVID ailments, the treatment that is our right.
	But not for the right of the people who aren't vaccinated.
	They don't have any rights.
	We're taking that right from them.
	But you have the right because you're vaccinated, but they don't because they're not...
	That's not how rights work.
	Anyway...
	We are all paying a heavy price for this hardcore of the unvaccinated.
	So, first and foremost, if we can scroll up right to the top just to take a look at his face again, because this has been mentioned, and not to be mean, but not the slimmest of chaps, and I'm not unsympathetic, we all have weight we could lose, but then you have to argue, these people are putting an undue weight on the NHS. So are fat people.
	Yeah.
	All of us being too overweight is putting weight on the NHS, therefore you shouldn't have the rights to go into a restaurant or a bar or a theatre or anything until you lose some weight, Andrew.
	Is that what you want to do?
	No, of course not.
	Anyway, but also just the science argument of this as well is just wrong.
	So he mentions, for example, that it's the unvaccinated or putting some unbelievable weight on the NHS. If we go to the next one, this is full fact.
	Again, so not exactly friendly to people who...
	I have concerns about this, but they say in here, so there's a claim from people like Andrew, about 80-90% of those in hospitals with COVID-19 are unvaccinated.
	The verdict, this used to be true, the figure is now more like 35%.
	I love the fact that Full Fact can never say false if they don't like the conclusion.
	No, and they had to go back, and you have to go back to when the virus is basically not a thing.
	Yeah, and used to be true is the same as false, just to be clear.
	so anyway moving on so we go back to the article so just on a on a scientific basis the idea that he's saying that they unvaccinated are scourging the nhs no so we'll put that to bed but whatever so as long as they can be numbered in the millions the nation will remain unnecessarily vulnerable to the latest variant no
	because as we just showed from the statistics the people who are vaccinated can also take up that capacity meaning more lockdowns more restrictions on our lives more lost jobs more failing businesses and less economic growth none of that is the fault of anyone except the government yeah all the government restrictions come from the government yeah absolutely It is up to them to do the lockdowns.
	Does it stop the virus?
	Did it help stop the virus?
	There is no evidence of that.
	Well, it's like saying to someone, you either do what I say or you get punished.
	Yeah, but even here, it's just like, here's the proposal for a policy.
	Okay, well, it didn't work last time, but we're just going to do it anyway.
	Right, okay.
	You are not taking this seriously.
	All of which will follow the government's introduced so-called Plan B of enhanced restrictions this week.
	Of course, there is a small number of people who, for medical reasons, cannot be vaccinated.
	So this is this, you know, one olive branch, let's say.
	A small piece of good faith glimmers through this foul article.
	Those in that category can be identified and helped with regular testing to make sure they're COVID free.
	So those who can't will just have to put stuff up their nose for the rest of their lives is the solution.
	But for the rest, it is simply selfish not to be vaccinated.
	We all have a responsibility ability to act in ways that don't just protect our own health, but that of others.
	He says, I am not, however, in favour of compulsory vaccination.
	Why not?
	Yeah.
	We just ran through your line of logic, which we're all used to, so that's why I'm not spending too much time on it, which is pandemic bad, and vaccines will save us.
	Not enough vaccines.
	The more vaccines, if we get to 100%, then the whole thing will be gone.
	It's not true, but okay.
	Therefore, make it that you have to have papers to go to a restaurant so more people take the vaccine.
	But I'm not in favour of compulsory vaccinations.
	Why?
	What's his possible argument?
	Is he going to appeal to the science trademark?
	No, he is going to appeal to it being un-British.
	He says, I was relieved to hear Health Secretary Savage Javid say it would be unethical to make jabs compulsory after some were misinterpreted to the Prime Minister's call for a conversation about way forward.
	He says, there is something very un-British about compulsory vaccination.
	But papers, please, to go to a restaurant, bar, nightclub, train, plane, all the rest of it, that's not un-British.
	Compulsory identity papers to be carried by every British citizen is not an un-British thing to do, but compulsory vaccinations, that would be un-British.
	It's like, Andrew...
	It's quite hard to see what line's being crossed.
	This is his only argument as well.
	Because we've laid out the typical part of just science, science, science.
	And it's like, that doesn't back you up anyway, but whatever.
	And then this is his argument for where the line is drawn.
	Because where do you draw the line?
	And he draws it on the basis of what is un-British.
	The compulsory carrying of identity papers is un-British as well, Andrew.
	Right.
	But he continues, I don't understand how you'd do it in a free society.
	The compulsory identity papers would be perfectly fine with a free society.
	Right.
	Are we really going to round up the un-vaxxed, strap them to a chair, and stick needles in their arms against their will?
	No!
	Because, as you rightly say, it would be un-British.
	And we even have an example of this, just in the world before COVID. Remember the Dark Times?
	The Dark Times?
	It's a long time ago now.
	So we're going to the next one.
	This is just a British medical journal talking about the idea of making MMR vaccines compulsory.
	Oh, right.
	MMR being far more rock solid on the point of this is really going to cause problems for your child if you don't give it to them.
	Also, you should really give it to them.
	And it's not compulsory.
	You don't have to.
	Really?
	Because, well, it's not the British thing to do.
	Exactly.
	And as mentioned in here, the uptake on measles, mumps and rubella vaccine in the UK is 94% for the first dose, but this drops to 87% for the second dose, which falls short of the 95% needed to produce herd immunity.
	And they're the argument, they're arguing about making it And this is laughter.
	Like, this is mocked by everyone else in this discussion here.
	Because it's absurd.
	And everyone rightly back, you know, Two years ago, whatever it was, saw this kind of idea as absurd.
	And yeah, Andrew O'Neill today is like, no, we need vaccine passports.
	They say in here, as mocking it, would parents still trust the NHS and healthcare professionals if GP data were used to decide whether a child was admitted to school or whether family were allowed certain welfare benefits?
	No such concerns these days.
	No.
	It's all been thrown out.
	If a school entry were denied, some parents may resort to homeschooling, and if vaccination were attached to welfare benefits, it would be the less well-off but determined parents who would suffer disproportionately.
	Again, such concerns.
	You don't hear them.
	Yeah.
	You never hear them.
	And this wasn't like 20 years ago.
	This is 2019.
	Yeah, you can see the date there.
	And then the last part here being the British part, because this is what happened.
	They welcome a recent House of Lords debate that favoured improving services rather than compulsion.
	Because compulsion on this basis was not right.
	It was considered not proper.
	Yeah.
	By the House of Lords.
	Because it isn't.
	Because it's not.
	And yet, two years later, we even have Andrew Neil calling himself a conservative, being like, yeah, okay, no, it's the proper thing to do.
	But, idiot.
	Anyway, moving on from this, this also brings into the other point which I wanted to mention, which I found funny, which is NHS staff can refuse to treat racist or sexist patients under new rules.
	So this was 2020.
	But who defines that as well?
	Very good question.
	They say it can also include homophobic, sexist, or racist remarks.
	It can get you barred from that care.
	They'll start looking through your tweets soon.
	Because I've also seen Tom Harwood and whatnot promoting the idea that not only should we bring in vaccine passports, but also if you refuse to get the vaccine, you shouldn't be treated in hospital.
	So that's why I'm mentioning this.
	It's like, same thing.
	Same goddamn thing, where you're just like, I'm just going to make some arbitrary rules about when your rights are taken away from you.
	Remember, you're forced to pay for the NHS. I saw him saying, imagine if you were forced to pay for your medical bills.
	I was like...
	We already do.
	Yeah.
	By definition.
	It's taken out of your taxes.
	Anyway.
	So also there's some people may be wondering, well, okay, no, it'll just be racists and sexists who get kicked out because, I don't know, maybe a leftist is watching.
	Well, let me introduce you to the king of the Islam race, Mr. Robin Lomlinson, or whatever other fake name we have to use these days.
	And, okay, he walks in.
	Now what?
	Because people have seen the footage recently in which he can't even go to, like, a chicken shop without the employees being like, nah, racist man, not serving him.
	Can you not?
	Wow.
	So, I can't imagine the nurses are going to be reasonable or liberal about the whole thing either.
	So, something to keep in mind.
	Anyway, also, moving on, we'll go to the next one, which is just to mention the fact that Andrew Neil, not the slimmest of chaps, but you can also look back to him in 2019 as well.
	I mean, just the difference in opinion.
	And there's him promoting an article from The Spectator, him being the editor...
	Michael, Biruk wants to let fat people die early.
	That's a bit rich.
	Yeah, and in here he also argues that if the NHS doesn't treat fat people, where will it end?
	Andrew, imagine if we made fat people carry around compulsory cards and they couldn't enter restaurants or so and so forth until they lost the weight.
	How about that?
	God save the NHS, Andrew.
	I mean, we need to do everything for the NHS. You need to lose the weight for the NHS because until then, undrew stress on the NHS caused by you.
	And no, not so interesting.
	And we're just using the same arguments that he's put up against COVID. It's exactly the same thing.
	But, you know, he would never agree to it because it would affect him.
	So if we go back to the article here, he continues, I would not go as far as Greece.
	Again, not laid out why.
	Just, it's un-British.
	It's un-British to do the vaccine passports.
	That's probably because it's a long flight, rather.
	But he would not go as far as Greece, which plans to fine all those over 60 who refuse to be jabbed 100 euros a month from mid-January until they agree to be vaccinated.
	Older people are more vulnerable than any other age group, and those who refuse to be jabbed are foolish.
	But the over 60s can be pretty bolshier.
	So what happens when hundreds of thousands refuse to pay the fines?
	Pretty bolshier.
	Bolshier, sorry.
	But I just, I love the argument here, again, there is nothing, this is why I find it absurd, that he is engaged with nothing, because his argument as follows for that part, why he wouldn't do this, because I'm British, but also because they might not agree to it.
	No one wants to agree to the vaccine passports.
	What's the public approval on that?
	Don't ask you, Gubb.
	They'll say 72% on whatever it is.
	I think, though, wasn't there a poll on this that was quickly taken down by GB News that showed something like 90% against?
	Yeah, who were just, like, bugger off.
	I think it was GMB who did that one.
	GMB. Yes, you're right.
	He also says, under Plan B, vaccine passports will be required for entry to nightclubs and at major gatherings, large venues.
	It will not be difficult to extend them, French-style, to public places, including restaurants, pubs, and bars, and essential shops.
	Yes, which is why we oppose them anywhere, because it is a small step from being like, ah, it's only nightclubs, it's only pubs, it's only the shop where you get your food, and now you can't go there, like Lithuania.
	It would give those of us who've done the right thing more protection from those who've not paused for thought.
	Like, that doesn't justify it.
	Again, there's no argument there other than just, I like it.
	Like, I just like these restrictions.
	And who's determining what is the right thing?
	Where does it stop?
	Because the government could determine for any kind of thing what is the right decision to take and what is the wrong decision to take.
	And the right thing will be doing what the government tells you.
	The wrong thing will be non-compliance.
	The right thing, Andrew Neal, is for you to carry that identity card.
	So we can find you on the spot whenever you commit a crime, like the Germans.
	Right.
	Or the fat passports, as we said earlier.
	All that too.
	I'm not impressed by those who claim that this erroneous assault...
	This is an erroneous assault...
	Egregious assault.
	Sorry, egregious assault on our freedoms.
	Liberty is not the same as unbridled license to do what you want, which is the road to anarchy.
	Again, he just says anything beyond what I accept is an egregious assault against liberty and freedoms.
	But what I have proposed, that's not an egregious assault on liberty and freedoms.
	Why?
	Because?
	Again, there's just nothing.
	There is no reasoning here.
	You can't shout fire in a crowded cinema if there is no fire.
	Real liberty for all involves a balance between rights and responsibilities.
	Yes, and rights are rights.
	They can't just be taken away because, well, I feel like it would be good.
	Yeah, real liberty is complying with what you're told.
	But real liberty, especially British liberty, is carrying compulsory papers.
	Again.
	It's a very different world to 2019, isn't it?
	There's no other argument in here other than just I like these kinds of restrictions.
	So my right to visit certain African countries is balanced by my responsibility to be inoculated against yellow fever before I go.
	You cannot practice medicine without being vaccinated against hepatitis B. Sure, you can put restrictions in place for stuff like that.
	For other countries, it's them who say you're not coming in.
	of their country not born there you're british you're not zimbabwean and the zimbabwe government say sod off borders closed you know simple as then uh number one based but also number two they're right but also on the uh hospital part i was like okay yeah yeah i can see the argument for a hospital part if you've got deadly virus that could uh spread there then you could make an argument but for just general life you don't have that right you have a right not to be vaccinated but i have the right to not have you near me on a restaurant or a plane
	No, you don't.
	Because they're free people living in a free country.
	Yeah.
	They should be.
	One final thought.
	Singapore has decided that the unvaccinated to end up in a hospital with COVID will have to pay for their own bills.
	We already do.
	The NHS. But whatever.
	Ignores that.
	And he says, I doubt I'd go that far.
	Again, why, Andrew?
	As you have laid it out, these people are destroying the NHS. We need to save the NHS. So make them pay for it.
	Yeah.
	Again, presumably.
	But then he decided to have a beef fight with everyone on Twitter about this because everyone's response was, the hell's wrong with you?
	Good.
	This is crap.
	So let's go look at the beef fight he had.
	So on Twitter he's fighting with people, which he says, for example, vaccine passports required for only limited venues and events in Scotland, so you can't compare the fact that they haven't helped in Scotland.
	Two, bringing them in.
	Scotland's not real vaccine passports.
	Vaccine passports have not been tried in a British country.
	Okay, they've only been tried in France, and therefore they're real vaccine passports in France.
	Okay.
	But we move on, so we also have him saying that they help the economy.
	So the lockdowns are a far greater threat than passports.
	Okay.
	So he's arguing that the passports solved the economic problems, as if it's not the lockdowns that cause the economic problems.
	And then he does this in another one as well.
	So we go to the next one.
	It's just him again making the same argument.
	I've explained how vaccine passports encourage more folks to get vaccinated, and that's helped the French economy recover more quickly than the UK. Except, it's not.
	Because, as mentioned, it's the percentage of people vaccinated, he's saying, therefore causes the fact that you don't need a lockdown.
	I also would like to say...
	Isn't that the opposite meaning of the word encourage?
	It's not like it's giving people the courage to get vaccinated.
	It's terrifying and threatening them into getting vaccinated.
	That is also a very good point.
	But just looking at the numbers, as mentioned previously, so we go to the next one.
	This is just the British numbers.
	As you can see, 89% of the British public have had a first dose, 81% second dose, 37.8% apparently have had three or four or God knows how many more.
	And that's of the population being 12 plus as well.
	And if we go to France, presumably this is 18 plus or 16 plus because of France.
	If we go to the next one, we just have on here, by comparison.
	So for the British, it was 89% of had the first dose.
	For the French, that is 77%.
	So less.
	Much less.
	And then on the second dose, 81% British, 70% France.
	So, we're 10 points up on the vaccine, so we don't need to do the vaccine passports by his own logic.
	Yeah.
	Because we've already reached the figure that he says is necessary for the economy to recover perfectly.
	Because the French economy is recovering perfectly because they've reached 70% vaccinated.
	Okay, so we're on 90%.
	Mm-hmm.
	So it's not the number of vaccinated people.
	It's the government interference in the economy.
	Right.
	So, it's just a liar.
	Anyway, so I thought we also just mentioned his last one here, because he's still autistically screeching at people.
	UK economy is stalling, grew by only 0.1% in October.
	That's before Plan B, output of services sector, including hospitality, was lacklustre, whereas vaccine passport France, the economy has surpassed pre-pandemic levels in October.
	Again, we're 10 points up on the vaccine.
	10 points up on people being vaccinated.
	It is not the people being vaccinated or unvaccinated that is harming the economy.
	It is the government interference in the economy.
	I also believe that's relatively selective economic data there because I seem to recall that actually the pandemic comparison of the UK economic growth was quite good.
	Significantly more than 0.1%.
	But anyway, mentioning the reasons, principal reasons why you should be able to do what you want and also why Andrew is wrong, I thought I'd end on a very good point that Carl raised on his Getter account, so if we go to this one, which is him making the point, it's, sorry, what the hell is wrong with Andrew Neal in the idea of why shouldn't we curb some of their freedoms?
	The answer to this question is very simple.
	Their freedoms are not ours to curb.
	We don't own them as property and we don't get to punish them for choosing not to take a voluntary medical procedure.
	These people are not our property, Andrew.
	They're not ours to do as we please.
	They are free people.
	And you allow them to take the vaccine or not as free people.
	Or they aren't free.
	It's a very un-British thing to do.
	Anyway.
	I'll send that there.
	Because I went over a bit.
	No, that's fair enough.
	So he wants the Russian rumble.
	Yes, so Russia is in the news recently because of a military build-up on the border of East Ukraine.
	So here we have a map where we're looking at Ukraine and you can see where it sits in Europe.
	It's way out to the east, next to the enormous space that is Russia.
	The areas highlighted in light green are disputed.
	Crimea has been occupied by Russia since its annexation in 2014, while there has been an ongoing conflict, a proxy war you might say, in the East Donbass region of East Ukraine.
	So I thought I'd run through a brief history of Ukraine so that our viewers from across the world can get a bit more of an idea of what this place is and who we're talking about.
	So essentially, Ukraine, the capital is Kiev, which is roughly in the middle of the blob that you can see on the map there.
	Kiev was one of the center points of the Rus civilization in the Dark Ages.
	The Vikings essentially came down from Scandinavia and they took over this area.
	Then following on from that, in later years the area was occupied by Cossacks, including the Zaporizhian Cossacks, and it was part of the Russian Empire for a long time, even though a lot of the people living in this region were nomads.
	Following the end of the Russian Empire in the First World War, the Russian Civil War started, which I believe you're quite well acquainted with, Callum.
	And during that period, Ukraine gained its independence tentatively as a separate Soviet of the United Soviet Socialist Republics.
	So it wasn't independent at all, but it was a separate economic unit for a long period of time.
	During this period in the late 1920s and 1930s, it experienced a famine known as the Holodomor, which has been quite accurately referred to as a genocide, which we've covered previously on our site.
	And millions of Ukrainians were forcibly starved to death, even though they were the ones growing most of the grain to feed the Soviet Union.
	It was a pretty bad time.
	And that was then quickly followed by World War Two, where again, a lot of Ukrainians died as the invasion of the Nazis went straight through Ukraine, and then the reconquest of the Soviets also went straight back through Ukraine.
	And we could go into the deep and tragic story of Ukraine in this period.
	But let's move on.
	So if we take a look at the demographics of Ukraine here.
	So this is just population density, including the Crimea.
	You can see that there is a concentration of population over in the east as well as in the rest of the country.
	Now, it's the East which is particularly controversial in recent years, because the East tends to be more ethnically Russian than Ukrainians.
	As we'll know from 20th century history, having different ethnicities living in large clumps within a country can be a justification or form justification for casus belli.
	The whole Lebensraum argument was predicated on the presence of ethnically German minorities living in countries outside of Nazi Germany, for example.
	Or just kill everyone and resettle the land as German land as well.
	Oh, yes, of course.
	Yeah, I'm not trying to say that the Lebensraum was a proper of Kassa's ballet.
	I hope it didn't come out that way.
	Right, so this became particularly prominent in 2014, when the so-called Ukrainian Revolution ousted their premier at the time, Viktor Yanukovych, who was pro-Russian.
	In response to this, Russia annexed Korea in a surprise move.
	So the island on the bottom that you can see there is now occupied by Russian soldiers.
	It's fully defended.
	I believe there's a military base there as well.
	Whereas in East Ukraine, there has been an ongoing proxy war.
	They have taken some territory, but the border has shifted.
	Since then, there was a Russian incursion in 2015 of conventional troops, and to this day, it is controversial, though likely undebatable, that there is a Russian military presence assisting insurgents in the region.
	So let's zoom into the modern day.
	The fun fact, the current Ukrainian premier, Volodymyr Zelensky, is a former actor and comedian.
	I don't know if you know this.
	He played the lead role in a Ukrainian political satire called Servant of the People in 2015.
	He then got elected premier.
	So he played the role of the president and then he got elected president.
	It's pretty unique in world history.
	Yeah.
	It's on Netflix if you want to go and see it.
	I think it's quite good.
	I've seen the first season.
	And it was also this person, Zelensky's phone call with Donald Trump, which caused the first impeachment attempt in 2019.
	But we'll skate onto that.
	So onto recent developments.
	Satellite images and military intelligence do show a significant build-up of Russian forces on the border with Ukraine.
	The US has said it would send reinforcements to NATO's eastern flank in the event of an invasion, which is suspected maybe on the cards by some NATO planners, as well as imposing severe new economic measures against Russia if an invasion were to happen.
	With an estimated 100,000 Russian troops already gathered within striking distance of the borders, the situation is the worst it's been since 2015, when Moscow staged a large-scale incursion into Ukraine, clandestinely sending tanks and artillery to encircle Ukrainian troops and compelling Kiev to sign a peace agreement in Minsk that has since come close to collapse.
	This is concerning the East Donbas proxy conflict.
	Latvian Foreign Minister Rinkević said, Work is already underway for a tough economic sanctions package, including the disconnection of Russia from the SWIFT banking system, sanctions on the Russian gas pipeline Nord Stream 2, and other economic sanctions.
	That package needs to be prepared so it can be applied reasonably quickly.
	We need to be able to target those who are helping Russia to get more revenues.
	So it's worth noting here that Europe is increasingly dependent on Russian gas.
	As Europe is obviously going green and trying very hard to move to green energy, we are still having to import a huge amount of fossil fuels from Russia.
	And this is what the Nord Stream pipeline is about.
	It's an obvious strategic weakness in one sense, but European planners are hoping they will get their green technology up and running soon enough that we won't be perpetually dependent on Russian imports.
	Ukraine is obviously worried.
	I think the Anglo-Saxon allies are more realistic and understand all the risks, Mr.
	Rosnikov said, adding that it was time to take steps to deter Russia before it is too late.
	Now, I think the Anglo-Saxon allies are more concerned by Christmas parties and booster jabs at the moment, unfortunately.
	But Britain has sent some military engineers to Eastern Europe recently.
	They sent them to Poland and Lithuania as we'll see next.
	The UK is to deploy additional troops in Eastern Europe amid tension in Belarus after thousands of migrants converged on the country's borders in the hope of entering the EU which we covered previously.
	The Ministry of Defence announced on Thursday that 140 military engineers will be sent to Poland, adding to an existing team of 150 that are already based in the country.
	A separate team of reconnaissance specialists will also be sent to Lithuania.
	Poland and Lithuania, along with their Baltic neighbour Latvia, have been under significant pressure from migration originating from Belarus and facilitated by the Lukashenko regime for a number of months, the Ministry of Defence said.
	I mean, this is an embarrassment for us, because at the same time we have the boat people, sea people.
	Well, yeah, I was going to mention that.
	Yeah, and where are our engineers?
	Where's our army, our navy, anything?
	They're all in Poland.
	Yeah, so this is a response to the Belarusian migrant crisis.
	Sorry, the migrants are not Belarusian, they're Afghan and Iranian and so on.
	And it's not a response to the build-up of Russian forces on the Ukrainian border.
	You know what's actually quite smart about this whole S-show with Belarus?
	So after the, let's say, the falling out, because I don't want to go into all the history of the different problems with Belarus, but let's say the relations of Belarus have gone through the floor, Belarus decided they would offer tourist visas to pretty much any Middle East and S-hole they could get, and they ran flights that were cheap.
	Really?
	So they just got them all to the airport, and they were like, oh, welcome to Belarus!
	Also, get on the bus!
	Wow.
	And they get them on the bus, drive them down to the border checkpoint, let them all out, and just have a bunch of army guys behind them.
	So it's like, well, you're not coming back.
	No, you're going over.
	Invade.
	Lukashenko then went and gave a speech and said, you can either go home or you can cross the border.
	Yes.
	But you're not staying in Belarus.
	You're not here on holiday, even.
	It's pretty, pretty direct what's going on.
	Because also he knows the dangers as well.
	I mean, you've seen them out there, and there was some friends of ours in the Polish parliament talking about it.
	There were shovels, like, hacking away at the border with the poles and everything on the other side going, why the hell would we take you?
	Yeah.
	But no, I just find it very remarkable that our military seems capable of protecting the borders of the EU against external migrants, but not the border of the UK against the EU, as we have thousands of migrants crossing into this country.
	Maybe what we should do is send these military engineers to Calais to build a proper wall so that they can't get to the boats.
	I'm sure Macron would love that.
	It's very strange anyway.
	So there was recently a summit between Biden and Putin, which I find quite amusing.
	This is usually phrased as President Putin facing down Joe Biden, but I feel like it's probably more the other way around.
	So they have discussed this issue.
	We don't know the details of what they've spoken about yet, but there have been numerous comments from outside.
	We move to the next article.
	Admiral Satouni Radekin, who took up the role of Chief of Defence Staff last week, said of the build-up of Russian troops, it is deeply worrying.
	The significance of the worst scenarios in terms of a full invasion of Ukraine would be on a scale not seen in Europe since World War II. And that's true just by the numbers.
	There are 100,000 to 175,000 troops from what we can judge by satellite footage.
	UK defence sources believe President Putin's likely objective is to invade and occupy eastern Ukraine in 2022 and then seek a diplomatic solution, including the creation of a pro-Russian state there.
	Mr Putin, who faced down President Joe Biden on Tuesday in a two-hour virtual summit, has previously threatened to invade in response to increased Western military support for Ukraine.
	Putin has also sought assurances from NATO that Ukraine, a former Soviet republic, would not be permitted to join the Defense Alliance, but to no avail.
	He has described such a scenario as a red line.
	So here we start to get a glimpse of what this is all about strategically.
	It's the invitation of Ukraine into NATO, which may happen.
	And Russia has this geostrategic concern that they don't want to be bordering a foreign alliance.
	So there's the complexity.
	Essentially, Russia is like, stay out of NATO or war, and some of NATO wants them to join, but the rest of NATO is like, I'm not dying for Ukraine.
	I mean, I mentioned I've seen some of the, as you mentioned, the French not wanting to get involved.
	So I saw a little debate yesterday, Ericsson Moore being in there, and he was just like, look, we've made no promises, we've made no guarantees, they're not a member, so if they get invaded, they're a problem.
	I was just like, well, kind of yes.
	They're not a NATO member.
	Not guaranteeing their independence.
	And therefore, we're not going to send men to die for Ukraine.
	And Putin probably doesn't know that.
	Well, I think it gets more complicated, and I'll analyse the whole picture when we get through the end of the coverage, but that's a very good point.
	And that's an absolutely justifiable position, I think, to stand on.
	Why should people in Western countries die for Eastern Europe?
	Do you want to die for Kiev?
	I'm sorry, not really.
	But you can also make a powerful counterargument to that, which we'll get to.
	Moving on, so Biden promised support to Eastern Europe, which I'm sure they'll be very happy with.
	Reassured the leaders that nothing would be agreed with Russia about the region behind the backs of its countries.
	Biden said, "Nothing about you without you," said Asta Skeskyrte, who sounds Lithuanian.
	We have said many times that we must be included in anything that is discussed in our region.
	Nothing should be discussed without us, says Linas Linkovicius, a former foreign minister and defence minister of Lithuania.
	The intentions of Russia are well known.
	They were always trying to split, divide, marginalise, so that's nothing new.
	We have to maintain unity and a principled decision, especially when we have this possible aggression against Ukraine.
	So you can understand the perspective of the Baltic countries and the Eastern European countries.
	They don't have big militaries.
	They don't have big economies.
	They don't really have a lot going for them, to be perfectly honest.
	And they are on the border to this country, which has a large military and was previously an occupying foreign power.
	So you can understand there is a great deal of trepidation when it comes to Russian military buildups in the region.
	But they've got the guarantees of the United States, effectively, defending them.
	Whereas Ukraine don't.
	Right.
	But there will be no US troops on the ground, some of our American viewers may be pleased to hear.
	US President Joe Biden has said that putting American troops on the ground in Ukraine is not on the table.
	He warned of severe consequences if Russia did invade.
	The virtual summit that he held with Putin was aimed at reducing tensions in the region after the major troop buildup.
	Ukrainian authorities have said Moscow could be planning a military offensive at the end of January, although US officials say it is not yet clear whether President Putin has made the decision.
	So is Russia actually planning to invade?
	We don't know, but spokespeople have essentially said there is no sense of an imminent threat, partly because the logistics arms and medical arms aren't there in the build-up from what they can tell from the satellite footage.
	So they don't think that Putin has decided on invasion.
	A Kremlin spokesman has urged everyone to keep a cool head, and Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov has warned that tensions could lead to a situation similar to the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, when the US and Soviet Union came close to nuclear conflict.
	I think that's a good point.
	Russia is already concerned by Ukraine's deployment of Turkish drones against Russian-backed forces in eastern Ukraine and by Western military exercises in the Black Sea.
	So is this just posturing?
	Russia does have an oversized military and it will use it to throw its weight around in the diplomatic arena.
	While military experts tend to focus quite rightly on the wartime application of military force, armies in peacetime are very expensive and must be used cleverly for a country to feel it's getting its money's worth.
	Using the presence of a large army to support Russia's geostrategic aims is one way to do this, whether or not you intend to use them.
	For a Russian leader, I think Putin is remarkably stingy with the lives of his soldiers, which, again, is a good thing.
	When you see previous leaders, you look at Stalin or Lenin, for example, the apocryphal quantity has a quality all of its own, very profligate with Russian lives.
	But Putin grew up as a KGB operative.
	He'll be well aware of the Soviet humiliation in Afghanistan.
	He witnessed firsthand the mess in Chechnya in the 90s.
	And I would say he tends to be a cautious operator on the world stage.
	His overt military inventions have been sharp but brief.
	Syria, Crimea, Georgia.
	We're all talking about short, sharp shocks, in essence.
	Each one calculated to produce maximal diplomatic benefit.
	Also Ukraine, as he's done before.
	Yes.
	Each calculated to produce maximal diplomatic benefit for minimal military expense or risk.
	This is a judo approach to geostrategy, minimal application of force for maximal leverage.
	And the tactic might work.
	It's not like we have any deep-seated attachment to Luhansk and Donetsk, is it?
	If we go to the next article, administration officials have suggested that the US will press Ukraine to formally cede a measure of authority within its eastern Donbass region.
	I was about to say never die defending something you can't pronounce, but then I realised I can't pronounce hardly anything in English anyway.
	An interesting analysis.
	So, decentralization of Ukraine and a special status for Donbass were laid out in an ambiguous European brokered peace deal in 2015, but that never took hold and the conflict just smoldered.
	More autonomy could formally give residents of that region more authority over some local issues.
	The administration officials made no mention of ceding any territory.
	Biden will also have to finesse Ukraine's desire to join NATO. The US and NATO reject Putin's demands that they guarantee Ukraine won't be admitted to the Western Military Alliance.
	But senior State Department officials have told Ukraine that NATO membership is unlikely to be approved within the next decade, according to people familiar with those private talks who spoke on conditions of anonymity.
	So I would suggest that by marshalling his armies in Eastern Europe, Putin is reminding the world that Russia still exists.
	I think a lot of Western observers tend to fall into the single player fallacy, or international relations people call it strategic narcissism.
	They approach international tensions with the mentality of a kid playing a single player video game.
	They assume that the adversaries are programmed into the game and not capable of human level decision making, not living in their own world with their own universe of priorities and concerns.
	It's this strategic narcissism which can lead many to overreact to the posturing of Russian or North Korean threats of force.
	They view these countries more like automatons whose red lines must never be crossed lest war be the inevitable outcome.
	But I don't think this is the case.
	Looking at the situation from a Russian perspective quickly shows that large-scale conflict and especially prolonged conflict would be disastrous for the world's 11th largest economy, whose GDP, lest we forget, is half that of Britain's, and whose population has been shrinking for 30 years.
	So, am I making any calls on whether there's going to be an invasion of Ukraine or not?
	No, I think it's entirely possible.
	I would be surprised if there is a large-scale intervention, but I am not an expert in the region, and we shall have to wait and see.
	What are your thoughts?
	Oh, just that we shouldn't die for Kiev, essentially.
	I know there may be some Ukrainian listeners and whatnot who are upset with that idea, but then would they die for Paris?
	And one of the answers is going to be no, because where the hell is that, you know?
	Yeah, there is also the argument that if there were a large-scale conflict there, the West's troops may not be forthcoming, but Europe's borders will likely be open, which would undermine any kind of sentiment of resistance.
	Well, this is the interesting thing from the polls as well, because they've said when the invasion took place and the annexation of Crimea took place as well, which is now a province of Russia, effectively, regardless of international recognition, that's how it is on the ground.
	And the Polish took loads and loads of Ukrainian refugees from the eastern region.
	They traveled through, they got through the border, and the Poles took them.
	And then the Poles were asked, by the way, can you take all of Mama Merkel's children?
	And they said, no, we'll take zero, number zeros.
	And if there are mass refugees from Ukraine because of some new invasion or something, it probably will largely stay in the east again.
	It didn't seem to touch us last time, so I would be surprised if it did a second time.
	No, absolutely.
	But it's worth pointing out that the West's attitude towards these, where we are very reluctant to engage in force, but very ready to open our arms at doors and borders, actually has...
	Well, only with certain migrants.
	Because, I mean, that's the interesting thing.
	The Ukrainians went to Poland because, well, think about it, you know, similar culture, kind of similar language, both kind of Slavic, so...
	The integration is not so difficult.
	There's some brotherhood and unity there on the basis that they're on the border and all the rest of it.
	Shared history.
	Where do we border Iran?
	What cultural similarities do we have with Iran?
	Linguistic similarities.
	We only seem to open our eyes for brown immigrants.
	Whenever someone has brown skin, there is pity and all the rest of it.
	But if it's white-skinned immigrants, we don't seem to have that same outreach.
	We didn't make a special effort to import tens of thousands of Ukrainians.
	I'm not so sure whether I'd say that's fair.
	So I don't recall any great reluctance on our part to welcome Ukrainians in the earlier crisis, for example.
	But we didn't make the same effort.
	You didn't see Mama Merkel being like, any Ukrainian that comes to Germany will just take them.
	That's what I'm getting at.
	It hasn't had the same media prominence, that's true, like the Syrian civil war.
	But I'm just, you know, I'm endlessly reminded, because there was no reasoning on Merkel's part to say any refugee or refugee, because as the EU ended up showing, a third of them, well I think it was two thirds, it didn't want it to be than anyone else, you can come here.
	What was that based on?
	It wasn't based on the status, it wasn't based on the situation, it was just based on the fact that it's just, we don't want to look like the baddies.
	And they didn't have the same response to Europeans in similar circumstances.
	That's certainly true.
	I do think that the Ukrainian conflict has suffered from a disgraceful lack of coverage.
	It seems to come up only when leaders have a reason to get involved with Russia, rather than necessarily out of any concern for the region or the people of Ukraine themselves.
	But yes, anyway, let's move on to the next segment.
	Let's move on to the next Conservative leader, sir.
	Police your bets, boys!
	Who's it gonna be?
	Who's gonna be the next Conservative leader?
	So, this story, in case someone hasn't been paying attention or has been asleep for the last couple of days, or maybe been at a cracking Christmas party and got so drunk they've forgotten what's going on.
	Let's mention here, the first thing to get off is the government decided to institute Plan B, as they called it, which is just a bunch of distractions, after being caught at a Christmas party or five.
	And this was part of the conference and was really funny.
	So the first thing we're gonna have is New Government Rules on Masks.
	Quote, if I'm in a theatre watching a musical, can I take my mask off to sing?
	Number 10, yes, there is a general exemption for singing.
	So could I walk through Tesco's without a mask on as long as I'm singing?
	Number 10 responded, essentially yes.
	So if you don't want to wear a mask and the mask mandates do come through on Tuesday and when they're voting on it, or if you just go in now and someone houses you, just sing.
	Just literally sing.
	Anything.
	Whatever you want.
	Number 10 sanctioned.
	We wish you a Merry Christmas.
	The entire country is going to erupt in Christmas carols from here until the end of the restrictions.
	So that's the punishment, essentially.
	Anyway, so they are taking the piss, as I said yesterday, and this is another example of it.
	No one has thought through anything, and they are just doing whatever they feel like.
	And if you don't believe me, then, well, you could always just try and guess the next government policy.
	Well, this is the thing.
	It's like arbitrary and tyrannical at this point.
	Yes.
	It's the worst of both worlds.
	You will sing in the Tesco's Comrade.
	Oh, no.
	Anyway, so if you want to guess on the next government policies, you could go over to a website, which Carl found.
	COVID-19 restrictions generator, and you can hit generate, and it'll pick random policies.
	Oh my god, this has made my day.
	There are some of them which obviously, well I say obviously, but you know, since what we've been through, sound fake.
	But there was one that I found funny that I got, which is restaurants and bars are open on weekdays, provided the windows are open, which I can't imagine them actually end up doing.
	We had this in the UK, we were just like, oh, we'll open the windows all the time.
	Only itinerant jugglers, descendants of Ronald Reagan, divers, and the homeless are allowed in hotels.
	In churches and shopping malls, there can be a maximum number of people.
	There's one person per 15 square metres.
	Between 10am and 12pm, only people older than 60 years are allowed in the stores.
	Didn't that actually happen?
	I think it was 6am to 7.
	Right, yes, that was a priority.
	Yeah, so, I mean, you can play with that and see what you get.
	Yeah, send us some cool ones if you find them.
	Predict the future.
	Because that's what's going to happen.
	Anyway, moving on.
	So we'll get back to the parties.
	Remember there were five?
	So there was one, and then there were four, and then there were five.
	No, seven.
	We're on seven now.
	So we waited another 24 hours.
	We've got two more parties out of that.
	Oh, no.
	Conservatives.
	I don't know.
	We'll be back on Monday, and what are we going to be on there?
	Like, 15 parties?
	Something like that?
	Oh, boy.
	Yeah.
	You thought it was just one and they can't stop themselves.
	So there are more details from the other parties that were also illegal.
	So have the government basically just been having a lock-in while we've been having a lockdown?
	So while we were locked down, yeah, they were drinking until the sun rises and then continuing until the sun went down again and then, you know, same cycle.
	So that's what they were up to.
	So let's move on.
	So this is the other point.
	The main party, the one that kicked us all off, apparently was actually pre-planned.
	And as you can see here, number 10 Christmas party that was planned was three weeks prior to the event and was planned through WhatsApp invitations whilst the UK was in full lockdown.
	So it wasn't like they planned this Christmas party and then the government was like, oh, lockdown, and then, oh, fucking anyway, we'll have the party, why not?
	No, they'd lockdown the country and then were messaging each other after they announced the lockdown.
	Oi, boy, you want to bring some Charlie or whatever?
	Because, I mean, apparently there was cocaine flowing around all the time.
	Oh my god.
	And then met up and had their Christmas party.
	So again, bad, bad, bad.
	And they are not going to get out of this, I don't think.
	But moving forward, so we'll go to the next one on this, which is Downing Street have decided not to go ahead with a Christmas party this year.
	Now they've been caught.
	So they were planning one.
	So they got caught with the seven last year, and this year they were like, we're going to do that one.
	So hang on, who is it attending these parties?
	Is it just MPs and Conservatives, or is it like civil servants, Whitehall, Downing Street, the works?
	No.
	Who knows?
	I know who knows, but everyone else knows who knows.
	Good.
	Mr.
	Cummings.
	Excellent.
	Yeah, so we go to the next one on this, which should be...
	Oh, it's Media Guido talking about this, saying he heard reports that there's a BBC party taking place as well.
	I think that there should be some before this, John, some links from Dominic Cummings.
	Sorry, I added them late, so that's probably my fault.
	Which is just that Dominic Cummings is mentioning the fact that...
	remember who's leaking all this what else I have oh my god because there's the funny thing them endlessly trying to say that okay no no party took place but also if they did we followed all the rules pick one okay and then I'm trying to continuously downplay the situation or just announce that they had seven because we'll dilute it by making it worse or doubling down on the restrictions there is no political strategy here yeah if I haven't made
	But then Dominic Cummings can just come out and be like, yeah, you know, I used to work for you, and I've got all of the hard drives that I saved whilst I was working for you, because I'm a very autistic guy, and I've been planning this thing for a long time.
	He is a human sort of Damocles, since they essentially palace-couped him.
	Yes, and I'm very impressed.
	It is not a diss at all.
	It is actually pretty amazing.
	Anyway, so we'll go for the first tweet from him on this, in which he says, Also, there's lots of pictures of the parties, which will inevitably get out, and invite lists beyond number 10 to other departments, dot dot dot.
	Just tweets that.
	It was like, okay.
	I mean, if we didn't know, we did know.
	But come on, if we didn't know, now we know.
	I get the feeling at this point, he's basically trying to raise the price.
	He's saying to the media, okay, I've got these pictures.
	How much are you offering me?
	10,000?
	10,000?
	Keep it 10,000?
	15,000 from the BBC? To be fair, the corporate media...
	piss money up the wall on these things.
	I bet for that tape, maybe it's a friend of his or him himself got paid like 10, 20 grand, something stupid.
	And those pictures, those would be very useful.
	Except there is one complication of forces.
	He mentions the invite list.
	The invite list, not sure they want to pay him for that because he, who went...
	But moving on, so this is the next tweet from him in which he says, Labour should be asking, you say you were repeatedly assured, by who were you assured and why haven't you fired them yet?
	In response to the MPs going out and being like, I was assured no rules were broken, but also I was assured there was no party.
	How can you be assured that there was a party and no rules are broken and also you were assured that there was no party?
	Morons.
	Yep.
	But okay, Labour doesn't have the stones to ask that one.
	But the point being, of course, who went to the party and with the Gido reporting that there was a BBC Christmas party as well.
	And the Telegraph have the list of names.
	The Daily Mail have the list of names.
	No doubt everyone else in the media has the list of names and they're all on it.
	They're on the bloody list.
	Oh no, they're not in bed with the media.
	They haven't been partying with the BBC and Sky News and ITV, have they?
	You know how they were all caught at Sky News breaking the lockdown rules?
	Do you want to bet they were also breaking the lockdown rules with the government?
	Yes, I'll take that bet.
	What are the odds you're offering?
	So Dominic Cummings, when he releases it, I guess we'll see.
	So there's that.
	But moving on.
	So if we go to the next one, we also have the fact that the elephant in the room, as Paul Joseph Watson says, is that most of the journalists who lobbied for lockdowns amplified the government's narratives on lockdowns were all violating the lockdown at their own Christmas parties, if not this one.
	Yeah, it was Kay Burley, I recall, who got particularly caught out for the most egregious pro-lockdown rhetoric and the most lockdown-regulation-breaking parties.
	She went to a party, and then the curfew came out.
	So then she went to another building in which they had a party, and then they went somewhere else to have a party.
	And she's still got her job.
	Yeah, she's still there.
	She got suspended, but she got taken back because no one really cares, because they don't consider the virus to be as risky as they say.
	Well, the virus is only dangerous to plebs, clearly.
	Yeah, and speaking of which, so you look at the rhetoric versus the actions, and Leo had a good joke, and I wanted to fit it because it's good.
	Anyone still following the COVID rules is the sort of person who ejects a USB drive before pulling out, which, true, true.
	So there's just, everyone's taking it as a visor.
	Do you do that?
	Are you one of those people?
	We're watching.
	We know.
	Do you check if the USB is safe before taking it on?
	Anyway, so moving on.
	So if we go to the next one, this is the other response.
	So they tried doubling down.
	That didn't work.
	So they're going to triple down, is the idea.
	Plan C is already being drawn up.
	Oh, is this yet another name for lockdown?
	The thesaurus has only got so much space at this point.
	Yeah, so they announced Plan B, like, yesterday, or whatever it was, and everyone was just like, get stuffed.
	So they were like, no, no, it's super serious, guys.
	You need to take the virus very seriously.
	Also, we're having two Christmas parties this weekend.
	Who's coming?
	It's so embarrassing.
	They're just like, oh, Plan C, guys!
	You need to take it seriously, guys!
	Nah, make me.
	Anyway, so also talking of Christmas parties that are happening this weekend and who's coming.
	Well, not this weekend, but Christmas Eve, as mentioned last time.
	This is the Christmas Rave, 10 Downing Street, which 1.1 million people are going to now on Facebook.
	Which is beautiful.
	And I did love some of the memes.
	There's a discussion section on here for people just to check out.
	And there's a lot of left-wiggers who have joined who hate Boris and their memes are crap.
	And then there are people who are interesting who are making good memes.
	And I took some of their memes and I didn't want to show their names because apparently there's weirdness with Facebook and we demonstrate it on Getter instead.
	So this is the first one.
	If we can scroll down on that so you can see the new slogan.
	Ha ha ha ha!
	Hands face, party at my place.
	Boris Johnson with a bottle of Jack Daniels and a Santa hat.
	A lot of lights behind him.
	There's also some good videos of people re-dubbing his speeches with a rave going on in the background with the music and all that.
	That's brilliant.
	Theresa May walking in like a robot, you know, all the rest of it.
	So we go to the next one.
	There's also another funny thing in there that I think is interesting, which I totally disavow.
	No one should ever do this because I'm sure it's illegal at this point in this country, which is lots of people are just spamming the Instagram accounts of everyone involved.
	Just being like, hey, also...
	Thanks for inviting me to the party on Christmas Eve.
	I'll be there with the wine and cheese.
	Nice.
	This is just someone doing it to Boris Johnson's Instagram account.
	And there are loads of people doing this, so whoever runs those accounts is having a laugh at the time.
	So cheer them up, send them a message.
	Don't, because that's probably bad.
	So there's the memes.
	And I thought we'd then move to, as mentioned, the next conservative leader, which apparently is getting more underway than we thought.
	So this is an article in the iNewspaper.
	Which says, Tory leadership contenders have begun manoeuvres on replacing Boris Johnson if the Prime Minister's position becomes untenable.
	Which is probably wise from a party perspective as well, which is that if he does end up stepping down, you want some candidates in place, so get that sorted beforehand.
	And also, he's not looking good.
	No, he's not.
	yeah so they say in here tori backbenchers told the eye uh newspaper that liz truss and the other front runner being uh i forgot his name rishi sunak has already been quietly wooing mps on the sidelines in a bid to bolster her position in the event of a leadership tilt all the knives are Quote from an MP, backbenchers think it's recoverable, but if it goes on more than six months, then it's difficult, they said.
	Six months seems like a hell of an overstatement.
	Yeah.
	Usually that's not the rule.
	The rule is usually, what is it, five days of consistent media coverage and a minister should resign.
	Oh my god.
	That's just something to keep in mind.
	anyway so they continue why does the media have this much power when they're they're just as bad they're still attending these parties they're the ones telling you all of these silly rules more often than the government i mean smear merchant on smear merchant violence right exactly the other funny thing is uh allegra christina aguilera whatever her name is allegra something yeah she's uh that lady she is the one who got caught on tape being an open lizard person and then resigned crying that she'd lost her 125 000 pound job not that she was caught
	but instead that she lost the job in my opinion um And the funny thing is, she used to be a smear merchant.
	Not just that.
	After she was done working for The Guardian, BBC, ITV, she then worked for Rishi Sunak.
	It's like the Curse of Sonorum at this point.
	Hmm.
	But something to keep in mind, and I'm sure when Netflix get a hold of this story and re-dub it in a drama, that will be part of the story.
	Because Rishi Sunak being the other person, apart from Liz Truss, who is front and centre.
	So they say in here, one of the principal private secretaries, not Rishi's personal one, he's smarter than that, has been going around canvassing support for him, asking, would you support Rishi if things fall down?
	Because I don't know what she...
	Maybe she had some dirt into people and they also had to get rid of her, but that's just speculation on my part.
	But again, you know, these things are very incestuous.
	Meanwhile, another MP said that Liz Truss, the Foreign Secretary, has been holding drinks parties with backbenchers.
	To earn their support.
	Could you not...
	Do a Zoom call.
	Do a WhatsApp call.
	Don't hold a fucking drinks party right now.
	Good God.
	Anyway.
	Okay, so that's party number eight.
	We got that one.
	Well, this sort of thing, you understand, they have to try and do it in person because that way it's much less likely to be recorded and leaked, which if you do it on Zoom, that has no security.
	If you do it on WhatsApp, who knows?
	We're kicking out the Prime Minister for having too many drinks parties during restrictions.
	Also, to replace him, we're going to have some drinks parties that you've got to attend so we can replace No, I think this is actually a really good point because it demonstrates there's certain types of business which you have to conduct in person.
	True.
	And also, again, not scared of it is this or the backbenchers because they're all having the drinks parties.
	But, you know, it's like that joke with Jon Stewart.
	So when Israel was conducting military operations in the Gaza Strip, one of the things they would do is they were getting criticised for bombing targets and not warning them.
	So they started dropping a bomb that would explode above the building and And they drop leaflets as well.
	So they bombed the location, but it wouldn't kill anyone as a warning bomb and then send the actual bomb.
	Which, you know, I get the reasoning, but at the same time it is ridiculous to say we're going to send a bomb so we can send the real bomb.
	And again, it's like, to replace the man who's having too many drinks parties, we're going to have a drinks party.
	Are you coming?
	Bring the Charlie.
	Anyway, so they say in here, a third Tory added, Trust is definitely trying to build up support.
	She has been having regular dinners with backbenchers.
	And responding to claims from supporters of Mr.
	Sunak that he is trying to build support, he said it's the first he's ever heard.
	They always say that, so that's worth nothing.
	A spokesman for Liz Truss said she insisted she is not canvassing people for the leadership.
	They always say that, so worth nothing.
	And there's also just the obvious point, it would be irresponsible not to have this sort of thing sorted before all of a sudden the Prime Minister resigns and then you're like, oh crap, what do we do now?
	Absolutely.
	The political winds are shifting.
	You need to respond.
	It's just if you actually want to provide stability to the party in the country, that does have to be done.
	Anyway, so we can also just look at the betting odds.
	Okay.
	Because, I don't know, it's always fun.
	I'll not bet myself.
	I disavow betting.
	No, of course not.
	We don't give financial or betting advice on this channel.
	No, but also I just don't like betting, quite frankly.
	But they are a good place to find out who they think is a good odds person.
	And in here they have Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss as the favourites for who's going to play Scorish Johnson.
	Rishi being higher than Liz in these odds for some reason?
	Don't trust Rishi?
	No, I don't think so at all.
	But he has a more prestigious position, I would argue.
	But Liz being more based is the person, or at least has demonstrated to do more based things, I should say.
	Not comments, but instead defunding Stonewall.
	Do you remember Rishi's sort of car crash interview, I think, with Andrew Neil on GB News?
	Yes.
	Ages ago.
	That was gold.
	Yeah.
	I mean, credit to Andrew Neil.
	When he wants to put in the work, he can get it done.
	Oh, he can be a good interviewer, yeah.
	Actually kind of nicely dovetails our segments, doesn't it?
	But, yes, so essentially Rishi came in expecting all of the usual left talking points.
	How quickly can you make us green?
	And he was instead asked, how much will it cost?
	And he was like, 2 trillion, 3 trillion, 4 trillion.
	And a huge amount was the answer, but he looked like a complete shower answering the questions.
	Absolutely.
	But anyway, that seems to be the two frontrunners there, so you can place your bets in the comments.
	How's Kemi doing?
	Kemi in here, apparently, is doing better than Rhys Mogg.
	Yeah, I can see that.
	Which is pretty cool.
	I'd back, Emmy.
	Still quite far down there.
	I would as well.
	Oh no, Mog seems to have topped her.
	Oh no, she was beating her on Bet365.
	But anyway, the political calculus, she works under Liz for a few things, so...
	Being a more junior minister, she's hardly likely to...
	No, no, she won't.
	Probably not wise either.
	Yeah, she is too early in her career.
	To wait a few years and then do it at a more opportune time, which I look forward to, but also just the only person that I can definitely trust, or at least hasn't double-crossed us all, compared to some of the others who have gone back on some of their promises.
	But Liz hasn't either, as far as I can see, except from the history that she used to be a Lib Dem and she went to the LGBT conference to have a look, but...
	Yeah.
	Anyway, so let's move on from that.
	So let's go to the next thing, which is Liz publicly having some interviews.
	And she had an interview with the BBC, apparently, and said she was too busy trying to sort out trade deals to hold a Christmas party last year.
	So throwing scorn at Boris.
	Liz Truss says she is not able to define what a party is after reports of Downing Street parties a year ago in lockdown.
	Look, if you have wine and cheese at your business meeting, everyone, then it's legal.
	Anyway, so moving on, we also have the responses.
	No one's mad about the idea on the left of Rishi Select becoming leader, which is why I'm against us.
	But they are very mad about this, trust us.
	Hysterical leftists will be hysterical leftists.
	It's not a perfect sign, but it is a good sign.
	And as you can see here, India Willoughby, her claim to fame, or the thing she has in her bio, is the only thing that defines her, is being the first trans TV presenter.
	I'm like, that's the summation of your life, is it?
	It's the only thing that makes you, you.
	In the world?
	The identity.
	But it's just the fact that people who put their identities as like, that's what defines me.
	It's the same way when you see people like, I'm a black queer, blah blah blah.
	She's like, right, okay.
	And she responded with, if Liz Truss replaces Boris, it will be like Hitler coming to power were effed.
	Which is always a good sign.
	So, there we go.
	There's the two people at the front row.
	I mean, that was a pretty quick Godwin's Law right there.
	Yeah.
	Everyone I don't like is literally Hitler.
	Literally Hitler.
	Well, you should be singing that next time you go into Tesco's and they ask you to put a mask on.
	Security guards said put your mask on.
	Everyone I don't like is literally Hitler.
	Anyway, let's end that there.
	Alright, thanks.
	Let's go to video comments.
	So I'd like to elaborate on the point that I made yesterday.
	I'm not so sure that we would see any technological improvement.
	It would be a technological dark age for the plebeians, for us normies.
	But for the super rich, powerful elite, they certainly would have all the technological advancements and stuff, while we would just be left with the scraps or the dregs in this plutocratic, technocrat, oligarchy, feudal state.
	Oh boy!
	It could be a cool story, actually.
	So this was in response, as I understand it, to the comment in which he asked, or made the argument that the left hates technology, which I'm not sure I agree with.
	I think the right is far more singing the Anprim anthem over here.
	But it's the claim being that they're after 3D printers, Bitcoin, they moan about the environment because they're bored.
	And all the rest of it.
	I think it's more that they want to control the space.
	So the fact that it is a wild west of a situation, they're uncomfortable with that.
	As soon as they get control of it, they'll be fine with it.
	I actually think there is a lot of good news in the technological developments that look likely over the next few years.
	I'm hoping to cover that soon.
	Because there's a lot of massive paradigm shifts coming in technology and communication.
	Yeah, especially with your background as well.
	We'll go to the next one.
	By this logic, water is wet.
	No, water is the thing that makes things wet.
	Water is neither wet nor can it make things wet more than can tin.
	Here you see the soldering of an electronic component, then the tin alloy solder wets the surfaces to make the bond.
	Wetness is not a thing, it is an interaction between two compatible surfaces.
	How do I know?
	Well, here is water failing to wet, of all things, a lotus leaf.
	Oh, good choice, lotus leaf.
	Yeah, well, fundamentally, when you talk about wetting from a science and material science perspective, you're talking about a different thing from the colloquial understanding of what is something that is wet.
	Wet is covered in water, if it's normal language.
	Wetting in science is a more technical term.
	But yeah, I know this has been around for a long time, and Callum looks like we need to call the Samaritans at this point.
	I appreciate you, Alex, and you've probably made some good points in that.
	I just, I don't care.
	And you know I don't care.
	Let's go to the next one.
	So I just want to give a timeline of the autumn in Denmark.
	So we locked everything up and everyone gets sick, but not Covid, with everything we didn't have because of the lockdown, including myself and everybody I knew, we got very sick.
	Then the nurses go on a strike because of poor working conditions.
	Our Prime Minister says, nah, you're not allowed to do that.
	Forcing them back to work, a lot of nurses quit.
	Now winter comes, people get sick with everything they didn't have the year before.
	So now we have a lot of sick people and a nurse shortage.
	But COVID is to blame and we need to vaccinate five-year-olds.
	Yeah, we also have the backlog as well.
	I'm not sure if she mentioned that in there.
	No, she didn't.
	You know, there are diseases that you can hold off for a bit, but not long.
	And, well, they all have to be dealt with now immediately because we've held them off.
	And then you have to nurture sorts it.
	I don't really know what to say.
	I just, you know, I can see her going insane and I sympathize.
	We're having the same problems, but thanks.
	Let's go to the next one.
	So recently my city voted to not refund the police and with the Pfizer CEO now recommending a four dose for the Omicron variant now.
	I think at this point, even though people are waking up a lot, I think it's about this time that we introduce a dadism and basically make them smoke the whole pack because two years of constant like, hey, we warn you, warn you, warn you and all this no, no, no.
	Yeah, I think it's about time we basically make them do it.
	I didn't really follow that.
	I didn't really get that.
	John, did you?
	No, okay.
	Sorry, mate.
	Yeah, I didn't quite understand that.
	No, I like the gun, so that's nice.
	That's all I can really say.
	So, go to the next one.
	So I'm gonna be honest, if you try making your own politics of video, you start to gain a lot more appreciation for Carl's politics of videos.
	Well done, man, for those, but, uh...
	You know how I said that my old iPad broke?
	Well, it broke just before I was ready to upload the politics of a second Titan.
	Meaning, I have to redo the whole thing from scratch.
	Enjoy my pain.
	Can you not just pull out a hard drive?
	Not easily, but I'm sure you can pull out a hard drive on an iPad and plug it into a new one, can't you?
	It's not something I've done.
	There is the Russian chap who fixes phones for a living who does some of these.
	I'm sure he can let us know if he does Apple stuff.
	Hopefully that'll save you some time, Harry.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Hey guys, regarding Carl's appearance on the Drinkers podcast yesterday, first I wanted to say, regarding The Witcher show, Netflix's Witcher show is Absolute Ass, and it's a digestive waste of the original plot.
	I actually made a 44-minute video on this point during the quarantine, which is called Circumcision with No Precision, which I think is a pretty apt title.
	And secondly, one fact that these writers can't escape is that you can only write characters as smart as yourself.
	And if you're a dummy, you're not writing a smart character.
	You're writing a smartass.
	Have you seen the Witcher Netflix series?
	I watched some of it.
	I can't remember too much, I'll be honest.
	I don't know.
	I quite enjoyed the first season, and I appreciate there are things there which I didn't like and which you might not like, but generally, I think, as far as modern pop culture goes, it's reasonably strong.
	The only thing that comes to mind that I remember is the special effects being pretty cool, which is usually the case for any high production series.
	I think it's quite hard to follow if you haven't played the games or you're not embedded in that mythology.
	And yeah, generally speaking, the story is a lot more simplified than the novels and definitely much.
	It's not as remarkable an experience as the games, but I still think it's pretty good.
	I enjoyed it.
	The only thing I remember that I really did like is there's a scene, I think it's in the first series or something, season or whatever it is, in which the attacking force that's attacking the witches with his guys, and they have this catapult, and they have to make one of the witches melt herself to turn into the ammunition.
	Oh god, yeah.
	And they fire it, and the special effects on that are just like, oh god.
	Yeah.
	No, that was really good.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Tony D and Little Joan with another legend of the Pines, the Lake House Restaurant Ghost.
	The Lake House Restaurant used to be called the Iona Lake Inn, built in the early 1900s.
	It is said to be haunted by the ghosts of the original owners, Lady in Black and the mysterious Victor.
	These days you can get a filet mignon for $44, but back in the days of Prohibition, you could get a beer and a prostitute in the basement.
	What, for less than that?
	Yeah, for how much?
	Come on, give us the details here.
	I wonder what the conversion rates are as well.
	But anyway, that'll be the next video coming, I'm sure.
	Thanks, mate.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Everyone's had COVID, you prat.
	It's like he's mocking us.
	Shut up.
	Oh, God!
	I've hit the loop like so much!
	The Labour opposition over there, in which he responded to it by saying that he welcomes the restrictions.
	God!
	Carl, give in.
	Just let it out, man.
	Just...
	This stupid ass!
	That's good.
	That's a good cut.
	Yeah.
	Carl does still get mad quite a lot of these things.
	I did see some comments that were criticizing me, saying I'm very blasé about some of the stuff now, but I just...
	I don't know, maybe I'll go back, but I'm in that Joker phase of just being like...
	Desensitized to it.
	Yeah, just laugh at it.
	Yeah, I don't understand that.
	I'm not the PM. But anyway, thanks.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Hmm.
	Can I help but feel that Guy Forms might have had the right idea?
	Is that it?
	That's it?
	Alright, okay.
	Well, I officially disavow Catholic terrorism.
	Let's leave that there.
	Let's go to the written comments.
	So on the Andrew Neill story, I have some comments here, so Henry Ashman, the quote, we don't do compulsory vaccinations point feels a lot like a conservative dismissal.
	Constructive dismissal.
	Sorry.
	Constructive dismissal in employment law, which amounts to, quote, we won't fire you slash make you redundant, but will make your life so miserable you'll leave of your own accord.
	How is that different from we won't make you...
	Get vaccinated, but you can't go outside unless you want to.
	Yeah.
	I did hear some horrible stories in Nintendo of how they do that.
	So they'll take a senior developer and have him in a closet, and they'll move his office, and then just make him do work that literally affects nothing until he leaves.
	They had various ways of doing that in Samsung, so you never get fired from Samsung unless you do something horrendous.
	But my understanding from my poor and patchy and unsuable memory, which is not at all reliable, is that...
	So one of the things is you would get given the window seat to start with, a sort of a warning that you weren't working hard enough and you might be transferred to a different team.
	And then if you got transferred, there was like a hierarchy of teams that were good to work for and bad to work for.
	And I seem to recall that at the bottom of the pile at the time was printing.
	So imagine you're an engineer, you spent your whole life working to do, I don't know, cool optics, build smartphones and that sort of thing.
	Well, if you fall afoul of the politics or you don't work well enough or something like that, you end up getting transferred out to printing and then down into all of the various departments in printing until you are basically so depressed with the work that you're doing that you leave the company of your own accord.
	I find it interesting that I think the window seat's the bad seat.
	Yeah.
	Is it sort of like they're showing you the door?
	Like, look out there.
	That's where you could go.
	Yeah, pretty much.
	Pretty much.
	It's strange.
	We like the window seat.
	So, Alpha of the Betas says, Andrew Neil built himself a nice little straw man, filled it with anti-vaxxers, lit it on fire, and danced around it like a maypole.
	You really have to admire the commitment.
	Yeah, I mean, I was...
	I mean, I shouldn't be, but he did a disappointing amount of work at GB News.
	Like, none at all.
	Well, he did how many episodes it was, but it wasn't what he was being paid for.
	Like, he got paid for months' worth of work because he then went off and was still getting paid.
	And, you know, there's all that criticism and that drama, and we won't go into that now.
	But the goal of the man to then turn around and be like, hey, you know, vaccine passports, because I live in France and it's working fine.
	But then to make no arguments.
	Like, he's currently acting still, as he has these bee fights with random people on Twitter, that he doesn't understand why he's wrong, nor any of the points being raised correct against him.
	It's like, look, you don't usually get this much blowback unless you've done something wrong, Andrew.
	I mean, this is just a dead fast rule of any interaction online, really.
	I mean, you don't get that ratioed unless maybe there was something a bit incorrect with what you were saying.
	Unless it's a dogpile from leftists or something, right?
	Like your opposition.
	But this isn't the opposition.
	This is his...
	It's random people.
	It's his followers as well.
	The people who have supported him in the past previously and now he's saying mad stuff.
	Anyway...
	M1ping says, my vaccine that needs constant boosters will only work if everyone near me provides documents showing that they also get constantly boosted.
	Yeah.
	I think the French are on, like, the fourth or something.
	Yeah, it's worth pointing out that you're only ever one missed booster shot away from being fully vaccinated as well.
	What, you're only one missed booster shot away from being an anti-vaxxer as well?
	Yes, that's it.
	That's what I mean.
	And a racist, or a Nazi, or whatever else.
	You're only on your seventh?
	Ugh, we don't serve you.
	Get out of here.
	Anyway.
	Omar Awad says these authoritarian lackwits have completely moved the goalposts from, quote, reach herd immunity to 100% vaccinated or were doomed.
	We're now moving to the point where even the word vaxxed aren't protected if they don't have all the additional vaccines and boosters.
	When the protected can't have all their freedom back, why bother getting vaxxed at all?
	I don't fancy turning my freedom and immunity into a subscription service based on how many additional billions Pfizer feels they need.
	Why stop at three shots when you can have nine?
	Why just have four?
	Just have an IV if you want to leave your home.
	Just have an IV if you want to leave your system.
	Yeah, so...
	Yeah, I mean, we kind of just had that conversation, really.
	Yeah, pretty much.
	Henry Ashman, I've been struggling to explain to my friends why vaccine passports rub me the wrong way so much.
	The argument that resonates most is they're useless, but they don't get why carrying papers is wrong.
	I can understand this because...
	I find this strange in a British context, though.
	Yeah, I remember, so again, when I was in Samsung, we were having these discussions, and one of the guys was like, so I reckon in 10 years' time, basically, your phone number is going to be everything.
	It's going to be your passport, it's going to be your personal ID, it's going to be your genetic information, your fingerprint, and everything.
	Did you say they're smiling as a Samsung employee or not?
	He was like, this is the inevitable way technology is going to go, so we need to...
	And it's kind of like, yeah, I mean, that might be the way, but that's probably why the younger generations are desensitized to it, because they already, to watch an age-restricted video on YouTube, are uploading their paper into there.
	They already have their credit card details programmed into their phone and all of this.
	Privacy has been so undermined that I expect the older arguments against ID cards and so on that perhaps resonate less with younger people.
	Yeah.
	I mean, there is some of that in the United States as well with the, what is it called?
	The social security number.
	I mean, CGP Grey's made a great video about this where they have the same culture as us and therefore the same cultural demands that, no, we will not carry compulsory identity papers.
	And when they brought through the social security number, everyone started using that as some kind of identity paper, even though it doesn't have an image of you or it also has like a note at the bottom saying, don't use this.
	But whatever.
	Well, yeah.
	The thing is, like, if we are...
	Once you have it, it just...
	If we're a well-constituted society, like a traditional British society, you can more or less trust everyone, at least to a certain extent.
	It's a bit like Japan.
	You can trust everyone to have the common sense that is native to that area.
	Like, everyone has the same sort of norms in common.
	And so you can just trust people and you don't need to ask for papers and things like that.
	And the argument is that the more people you can't trust, the greater...
	Like, the more people might be criminals and so on, then the greater the need for...
	Like, compulsory ID in this one.
	You can never trust the German.
	Even in singular numbers.
	Anyway.
	Henry finishes off by saying, even saying you're not allowed outside unless the government gives you a license to be out is baffling to them.
	Any thoughts on how to get the point across?
	Is it maybe worth a video on why mandatory IDs are un-British?
	Probably, yeah, that would be a good direct video.
	Yeah, I think that is a great idea for a direct video, actually.
	And I think the answer to that is it's all of the things that are downstream from mandatory IDs.
	That's the problem.
	Richard Lewis says, Yeah, I mean, that's good.
	I also saw Tom Harwood is very much in his camp, and I'm just like, oh.
	There are a few in GB News who are not nearly as conservatives.
	Well, Andrew has always had the out that he was working at the BBC, and he did do a very good job of this, and he does reserve credit for it.
	Which is when he was interviewing someone on the right, he would take the position of a leftist, because that's just how you should do these things under this.
	Yeah, and he destroyed, who was it?
	Oh, Ben Shapiro.
	When Ben Shapiro came on this interview.
	He made it embarrassing, but I don't think Ben Shapiro was wrong in his questioning, but that's a whole lot of conversation.
	Sure.
	Yeah, but you can see it there, right?
	Him endlessly being like the Republicans, have no ideas and whatnot.
	Ben took that because he's not used to the BBC's way of functioning because he's not British and he has no reason to think like a British person.
	Yeah, but it was a very effective interview strategy, if that's what you're looking for.
	He's always had that out, but if it is the case that actually, no, he is just a bit crooked in the head, then maybe that's something else.
	Paul Neubauer, how is being not vaccinated a threat to anyone, particularly when we have a neutral vaccine brewing in COVID itself?
	Well, that's the allegation, isn't it?
	Who was it that said...
	Was it Putin who said that Omicron could be a natural vaccine?
	A live vaccine.
	Yeah.
	Well, it effectively is.
	Well, we don't know that.
	Well, no, the entire virus is, by definition.
	If you had it, you're less likely to be.
	He is correct, and also 95% of the population here have heard the antibodies.
	Jimbo G. Andrew Neal has no principles.
	He allowed a guest on Question Time to pull out a bunch of pre-prepared signs that suggested he knew GB News would be an anti-woke organisation.
	And instead of being a yes-chad, he looked like he was about to cry.
	That's a very good point as well.
	We covered it, so I'm not going to go through it again.
	You covered it quite well.
	It's worth reiterating for people who may not have seen that one podcast segment.
	But a good thing to bring up again.
	He did look like he was about to cry.
	Yeah, it was like, let me back in to the left.
	I want the money and the privilege and the opportunities.
	Let me back in to the BBC. I want to be part of the old system.
	Exactly.
	Part of the club.
	That was pathetic.
	Free Will 2112.
	None of this on-off ever tightening set of COVID restrictions makes any sense unless there is a bigger agenda behind all of this.
	What that is we can only speculate on, but at the heart of it is a globalist authoritarian grab for more control over our daily lives.
	That's Free Will 2112.
	Yep.
	Can't disagree with that.
	This seems like a valid perspective.
	Do you want to do the Russian ones?
	Yep.
	Alpha of the Betas says, Poland's border is the UK's problem.
	Ukraine's border is the UK's problem.
	UK's border is immoral.
	Yes.
	That's a pretty good point.
	Good framing.
	Chad Koala says, Right now, I doubt Russia would go into Ukraine openly, but nevertheless, if Russia or China started crossing red lines, how well do you think the West's woke-infected militaries, backed up by our long-emasculated societies, will do under the pressure of sustained open conflict between major powers?
	I think this points to a good point here, which is that we're not very psychologically resilient when it comes to the idea of conflict.
	I think the soldiers will do a good job.
	The officer types are wasting...
	I'm not talking about the militaries themselves.
	I'm talking about the societies behind them.
	Oh, sure.
	It wasn't the US military that lost the Vietnam War, you could strongly argue.
	It was the US society that basically ticked out.
	What's his name?
	Schwarzkopf made a severe argument on this.
	He was like, we didn't lose the war, we beat the crap out of them!
	LAUGHTER The fucking politicians lost the war.
	Right, exactly.
	But it's this idea.
	So Clausewitz has this.
	Clausewitz calls it like the Trinity.
	You have, oh no, I'm going to get this mixed up.
	You have the army.
	You have the government.
	And then you have the people.
	I think that's how it is.
	Or maybe it's the economy.
	And essentially what he's saying is that you fight war until one of those breaks.
	Yes.
	So either it's the government that breaks or it's the economy and the people that breaks or it's the army that breaks.
	And that's the objective, ultimately.
	And what I'm saying is, yeah, I think, obviously, on paper, our militaries are very strong, and I think they will do the job, like you say.
	It's how much can they trust decadent and effeminate, like, feminized, infantilized populations and useless politicians to have their back.
	And again, Afghanistan, classic example of this.
	There is one point in that comment I just do have to disagree with, though.
	The idea that the Russians aren't prepared to do that sort of thing.
	I mean, they've already annexed Crimea and set up the civil war in the East.
	Well, I agree with him, because I don't think they would go into Ukraine openly, not because they don't have the will or the precedent, but because I don't think it currently serves their interests, well, best.
	But that's my speculation on it.
	I disagree.
	Yeah.
	A student of history says the really messed up part of the Ukraine issue is the simple fact that the US, Europe and Russia generally have no real issues and it comes down to the fear of the US and Europe pulling a Napoleon slash Hitler and the fact that all three groups have more geostrategic issues with a certain Asian nation being belligerent and bellicose with everyone.
	I think it's oversimplifying to say that the US, Europe and Russia have no real issues.
	I think there's a very complicated power calculus that goes on between those three.
	To say that this all comes down to the fear of Napoleon-Hitler invasion, this was kind of the argument that Stalin used, I think, or that is often used to describe Stalin's policy of security through territory in the post-war period.
	How valid is that today?
	It's hard to say, to be honest.
	Anyway, we do have bigger problems.
	I'd agree on that.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	SH Silver says, Remember how Trump was considered a Putin puppet?
	Yet Biden lifted sanctions on Nord Stream 2 and is just about to cede Ukrainian territory to Russia because he is weak.
	Trump may have been more amicable with Putin, but the interactions with the two were done as equals acting in the interests of their own countries.
	Biden may try to bluster, but he's acting from a position of weakness as his loyalty isn't to his country's interests, but to a nebulous global stability.
	I agree with much of that analysis, to be honest.
	I did prefer Trump's approach to Russia, where essentially, and he did this with a lot of countries, he basically took whatever America's foreign policy was, let's say it was a tug of war, and he just sort of let a bit of rope out to try to throw the other side off balance, if you get what I mean.
	And he did that with Russia, he sort of slightly extended this, okay, we can talk, we can trade, we want to do business, you know, we're Americans, we like trade and business.
	And I don't know, I thought that was a much more effective strategy than sort of Russia is our enemy, it's the Soviet Union with a different colour scheme, it's authoritarian, it's a gangster state, and we have to destroy it.
	Even though many of the parts of that analysis may not be wrong in themselves.
	And the gangster state and all the rest of it.
	Robert Miller says, Yeah,
	so I would classify this as the Russia Today narrative on that part of the world.
	And like many narratives, it's not wrong.
	It's not the whole truth, but it's not pure lies.
	Yes, there were conditions under which the ethnic Russian Ukrainians were placed in East Ukraine, especially regarding language.
	I think there was a measure so that Russian speakers were prohibited from applying from certain jobs and things like that.
	And so on, which also they add up to this situation that we see here.
	But to characterize this as relentless Western provocation of Russia, well, most things are neither relentless provocation of one side or the other.
	There's this escalation of provocation between both sides.
	And I think that's what we're seeing here.
	It would be wrong.
	This sort of leans into the strategic narcissism to view Russia as this amorphous, say, political thing that just responds.
	we're going to take one comment from the last because we're out of time so on the prime minister question uh charlie the beagle says i know kevin badenock is too inexperienced but i'd still love her for bpm who wouldn't firstly labor could claim institutional couldn't claim uh institutional racism or sexism also the tories can hold it with the progressives second trying to watch the foreign media try to condemn her for the sin of being a tory while she's at the same time seeming to be pro blm would be hilarious um yeah i mean she had she has this advantage
	of course of uh characteristics that essentially destroy intersectionalist minds because black people belong to them and so forth but But I don't think she should use that at all, especially in campaigning, because it comes off as Hillary Clinton.
	You've got to vote for me because I'm a woman.
	Right, exactly.
	That's not her argument.
	No, it's not really conservative either.
	But when the progressive media come for you, it is good to stamp on their balls, and you should.
	So she can do that.
	Anyway, otherwise we're out of time, so if you want more from us, go to lotusears.com.
	Please do subscribe to get access to all the premium content, and also it keeps the show running, because that's how we pay for it.
	But other than that, we'll be back on Monday.
	Thank you and goodbye.

▲