Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Oct. 5, 2022 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:30:42

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #495

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters for the 5th of October 2022.
	I am joined by Carl.
	Hello!
	And today we're going to be talking about the Jesus of Twitter.
	Oh, come on.
	Our Lord and Saviour has come, Callum.
	It's come back down.
	It keeps happening, and also Andrew Tate destroying Piers Morgan, which is...
	Didn't have that on my bingo card, but okay.
	Oh, yeah.
	Otherwise, let's trust in Christ.
	So it looks like we may have a new messiah, a new social media messiah, in the form of Elon Musk, as you may have heard recently, has decided, no, actually, I'm going to go ahead and buy Twitter.
	The stocks have been frozen.
	I actually earned two Twitter stonks.
	I bought them specifically for this occasion, actually.
	Conflicts of interest out of the way.
	Yeah, so Elon Musk...
	You've made a whole $3.
	Yeah, conflict...
	No, no, no.
	I'll probably get around $9-y dues out of this if everything goes according to plan.
	So yeah, that's my financial investment in the subject revealed.
	I'm going to get $10-y dues if Elon's money.
	But that's not the reason.
	He's not sponsoring this podcast, unfortunately.
	He could if he wanted.
	So really, what this is is just the accumulation of a very strange series of events that we have covered previously on.
	I'm not going to summarize.
	But we're going to go through, like, the steps directly leading up to him just saying, look, I'm just going to buy this.
	Because I think it's become apparent that it wasn't 4D Chess, actually.
	It's become apparent that actually the legal process is more difficult than even Elon Musk thought.
	But it is, I think, going to play out in our favor, and he may be responsible for the resurrection, as it were.
	So if you're a Christian, don't get angry at me.
	I'm recalling Elon Musk the new Jesus.
	But the point is, I think, a fair one.
	And I have laid out exactly how all of this goes.
	So I wrote a deep thing back in June or July, June, about how elites are captured.
	Because I studied the critical race theorists and looked at how their ideology was formed, how it worked...
	And how they ended up getting the elites on their side, and so how they ended up getting billions of dollars funneled into their personal bank accounts so they could buy mansions.
	And it turns out that I think I'm completely vindicated.
	Just to go through a few of the points, right, just to show you how accurate I think this is, it begins with the positive vision of the moral community, which in Elon's case, of course, is...
	Twitter being the town centre of the world and everyone should have free speech on it.
	The ideological weapon needs to be crafted, which is of course the presupposition that one should be able to speak freely and the idea that social media is a human right, as Jack Dorsey has said, which plays into many existing presuppositions and properly articulates them.
	This creates the double-edged narrative, which...
	Frames at once the moral and immoral community, and as you will see as we're going through this, it's very evident to everyone involved who the immoral community is in this.
	The left is controlling Twitter, and of course the moral community are those free speech, honestly it's the right wing, because they're the ones being censored.
	You get this double-edged narrative where the right's been censored by these evil leftists, and that's true.
	The attracting of the attention of elite allies, which has been done, as I will show, and the demonization of the immoral community, as in, we shouldn't censor people, and the people who want to censor you are bad people.
	Totally true.
	And then, of course, the long march and clearing them out, because Parag Agrawal's time as CEO of Twitter is probably not long for this world.
	You can see that Elon's going through it now.
	You're out.
	And then you get the material legitimization of the distant ideology, as in free speech warriors are going to materially benefit from this.
	So this is why Elon takes the place of the Lord and Savior and Messiah.
	But anyway, so going back to sort of mid-September, Elon Musk and Twitter start getting into it.
	Elon says, no, you're committing fraud.
	You're hiding the number of bots you have.
	It's all a big lie.
	I'm pulling out the deal.
	And Twitter's like, no, we're going to sue you to make you buy us.
	And at the time, this was like a remarkable Uno reverse card.
	You know, like, what?
	Okay, can you do that?
	And it turns out they can do that.
	Do you now have to go to court and tell us how many bots you've got?
	Yes, well that's the thing.
	This is actually more difficult than you might expect.
	But there was a whistleblower from Twitter who alleged that there was a meddling on social media platforms by foreign agents and that the number of active users is not what Twitter claims.
	And of course this opens Twitter up to lawsuits from advertisers who are like, you charged us X. On the promise of why users and you lied.
	So that would be bad for Twitter.
	And so Musk tried to pull out and they got in a huff about it.
	And then, so, okay, well, it comes to then discovery because the court date was set for the 17th of October.
	And Parag didn't really want to hand over his stuff.
	He delayed and obfuscated as much as he could.
	I think it's the next one, John.
	Yeah, it's just...
	But yeah, so Parag just tried to get out of it, basically.
	Citing personal reasons that I don't want to hand over my things.
	It's like, hmm, okay.
	But then Elon basically did the same thing as well.
	Saying, hang on a second, actually, this is more complex than I thought it was going to be in.
	This is quite difficult.
	And so if you go to the next one, you see with the trial looming, the whistleblower accusations start piling up.
	And it becomes difficult to actually prove any of this.
	Because it turns out that Twitter doesn't really know how many bots they've got.
	Yeah, well, this was the problem.
	Yes.
	I mean, Elon identified that their way of finding out how many bots they had, I think they sampled, like, 100 users, and went, well, five of those are bots, so we've got five out of 100 bots.
	Yeah, and it's actually quite difficult.
	But no, it was the point of, you've not even really tried?
	Yeah.
	Like, you can at least take a sample of 50,000 to run through that, and then we'd have a much more accurate estimate.
	You could, but even then, like, it's difficult for Twitter to be able to estimate it.
	Right.
	Because actually identifying bots is not as easy as you think.
	And so Elon's been finding it difficult to actually find solid proof that Twitter is like 90% bots or whatever he's trying to claim.
	And so this Twitter attorney, as they say, told the judge it was a struggle to get documents from data scientists that Musk had used.
	So not only a Twitter not being forthcoming with data, but of course Musk isn't either because I imagine that he's actually not getting the results that he thought he was going to get.
	And so they did not get any solid evidence that the accusations that more than 5% were bots.
	And the attorney for Twitter...
	Sorry, no.
	Attorney for Musk said that Twitter had...
	No, the attorney for Twitter...
	Sorry, I'm getting this right.
	Twitter had encountered a pattern of delay and obfuscation when it comes to what Musk has learned from data scientists that had studied Twitter data.
	And Musk, in turn, said that they were refusing to hand over material about monetizable daily active users and things like that, and active user minutes.
	And, of course, he made the points about the Twitter whistleblower, but Twitter was just like, well, it's just a disgruntled former employee whose allegations have no merit.
	The problem for Musk is actually that he can't just walk away from this, even if the judge would side with him.
	He would still have to pay a billion dollars.
	And it's like, well, just close it then.
	May as well just buy it at the agreed price.
	May as well just cut all the formalities.
	And so he has.
	He's decided to just close the deal at $54.20 a share, if you get the next one, which was filed on Tuesday, which meant Twitter shares were up more than 22%.
	And yeah, I'm going to make a tenner.
	Well, no, I'm going to make about...
	Well, no, it is about £10, actually.
	This is nearly one-to-one, isn't it?
	I'm going to make about £9.
	Woo!
	Like, basically Nancy Pelosi.
	Just if we don't look at everything else you invested in.
	Well, yeah, I mean...
	GameStop, how's that doing?
	I bought $100 of Googling and went down 25%.
	Who could have known?
	So, anyway, the deal apparently could happen as soon as Friday...
	Sources familiar with this is called CNBC. And the stock has of course been halted and can't be traded now because apparently this is all on the go.
	So it looks like it's actually going forward.
	And so it looks like Elon Musk is going to privatize Twitter.
	I imagine this will only make it better, frankly.
	Because, hopefully, we'll all be back.
	I'd love to see Alex Jones, the God Emperor, me, of course.
	Milo.
	Like, there are loads of people.
	Like, Gavin McInnes.
	Like, all these people who spent all of this time radicalizing in the wilderness.
	And the leftists have been not interacting with them, so I've completely forgotten even how they were.
	But if you go back to 2017, 2018, when they all sort of got erased from the internet, these people were actually a lot more moderate then.
	Yeah, yeah.
	In the last couple of years, these people, I think, have radicalized to a degree.
	They've become more right-wing, but the leftists have become more left-wing in the absence of any moderating force.
	Yeah.
	So the collision is going to be...
	It's going to be exciting to watch.
	Beautiful.
	I'm really looking forward to it.
	So we've got an article from CNET to explain why he decided to buy out.
	Musk's lawyers sensed that the case wasn't going well based on what happened in pretrial hearings, Bloomberg reported.
	Citing a person familiar with the matter, whoever that is.
	Getting a merger agreement is also tough and the legal bar to do so is high.
	And so some analysts were saying that his chances of winning seemed unlikely.
	So this is basically the easiest thing for Elon to do.
	To get what he actually wants and not be left with just a billion dollars in debt for nothing.
	So he may as well own Twitter.
	And so it's got everyone treating Elon Musk like he's Twitter Jesus.
	Unsurprisingly, because of the...
	This was from earlier in the year, so back in March, when he first announced all of this.
	People started...
	We got to see all Elon Musk's text messages, because the Twitter reveals were like, okay, we've got to hand it over for Discovery.
	And so we've got some very interesting people.
	I mean, there are lots of people I've just never heard of, like Will McCaskill, an Oxford philosophy professor, Matthias Dopfner, CEO of Axel Springer.
	I've never heard of him.
	Larry Ellison, the Oracle co-founder and former Tesla board member who offered a two billion stake for him.
	I'll give you two billion.
	But interestingly, Joe Rogan messaged him and he says, quote, Are you going to liberate Twitter from the censorship happy mob?
	See what I mean about the demonization of the immoral community?
	We know who they are.
	Everyone knows who they are.
	And Twitter is being oppressed.
	In need of liberation.
	Elon, ride in on the white horse.
	Come on, man.
	Uh...
	Jack Dorsey has some very interesting things to say, which plays into the idea that I think a lot of people have had.
	It's like Jack Dorsey is actually kind of a hostage at Twitter, or was before.
	I know this is a long-running theory you've had.
	Well, actually, I think there's more evidence from this, because Dorsey seems to be kind of based, actually, when it comes to social media.
	Takes the alarm off, you gotta push the left, it's a fucking...
	Kind of.
	He had said that Twitter, a new platform is needed.
	It can't be a company.
	That's why I left.
	What does that mean?
	Well, Twitter shouldn't be a company.
	He shouldn't have incorporated it.
	He shouldn't have...
	Oh, it should be owned by one man.
	Well, no, actually.
	It should be private?
	It should be owned by nobody.
	He says, I believe it must be an open source protocol funded by a foundation of sorts that doesn't own the protocol, only advances it.
	A bit like what Signal have done.
	It can't have an advertising model.
	Otherwise, you have surface area that governments and advertisers will try and influence and control.
	If it has a centralized entity behind it, it will be attacked.
	This isn't complicated work.
	It just has to be done right so it's resilient to what has happened to Twitter.
	That's a very based position, actually.
	So he identifies the problem.
	So if you're going to have something like Twitter, it shouldn't be controlled by a particular entity.
	It should just be open source and available to anyone to be able to access it however they want.
	Because if it's open source, you can program your own plugin.
	And so you can just have your own front end.
	And so that's remarkable, like open mindedness actually from Dorsey, which goes to show more.
	Again, I think that he was kind of imprisoned in, like with Zuckerberg and Facebook.
	I don't think Zuckerberg is actually like the censorship happy lunatic.
	I think that he's riding a dragon that he can't control.
	And I think Dorsey was basically in the same thing.
	But anyway, if we go to the next one, there's a bit more as well.
	He had publicly said in April that he didn't believe that anyone should own or run Twitter, and taking it back from Wall Street is the first correct step.
	So that's very, very interesting.
	We also got some funny interactions between Parag Agrawal and Elon Musk.
	Right.
	So Musk had texted Agrawl saying, oh, I've got a ton of ideas.
	Just let me know if I'm pushing too hard.
	I just want Twitter to be maximum amazing.
	And Parag replied to this saying, well, look, you've been criticizing Twitter publicly.
	Calling us a floundering platform.
	Oh yeah, why do you think I'm buying it?
	And this is unhelpful and an internal distraction to which Musk simply replies, what did you get done this week?
	What was the answer?
	Well, he didn't give him time to answer, because this was in the discussion of, are you going to join the Twitter board?
	Which Musk wisely avoided.
	And he just says, I'm not joining the board, this is a waste of time, we'll make an offer to take Twitter private.
	It's like...
	Oh god.
	What did you do this week?
	Nothing.
	None of these people do anything.
	They just sit around and get paid.
	Exactly.
	What did you get done this week?
	I love the way he's speaking to them like he's his boss already.
	That's hilarious.
	But yeah, so anyway, there are more interesting things about the text between Jack Dorsey and Elon Musk that came out.
	For example, Jack Dorsey calling Facebook a swamp of despair.
	Which is amusing, because there's an Elon Musk account on Facebook that's verified that it's not Elon Musk.
	Eh?
	Yeah, exactly.
	How did that happen?
	What?
	What does it post?
	I don't know, but it must be...
	I don't know, who's running it?
	It's just an Australian S-poster.
	Possibly.
	But Jack Dorsey tweeted, text messaged Musk saying, look, there's a verified account in the Swamp of Despair over there, referring to Facebook.
	But that's very interesting because this, again, speaks to what I was talking about in The Deep Think.
	The...
	The elite, quote-unquote, the people in charge, they are all on the same team, in a way, because they're all in the same class, but they are still rivals.
	And so they do act in coordinated manners when the elite class sort of dictates it, but they do still have these fracture points between them.
	And we should be aware of this.
	Taylor our message appropriately in particular times.
	But Elon Musk tweeted out, Elon famously left Facebook and withdrew SpaceX from Facebook and leaked the pages, says John.
	I didn't know that, actually.
	Right, okay, so I didn't know.
	So that's why it can't be him.
	Right, okay, so he tweeted out that the acquisition of Twitter is an accelerant to creating X, the everything app.
	Like I said, I don't think it's just 4D chess, but an everything app.
	What do you think of that?
	Depends who runs it.
	Well, it's Elon Musk.
	I mean, if, like the Polish, we have a benevolent libertarian king in charge.
	We'll get to that in a minute, actually.
	So, yeah, Vox had an interesting article about this, being like, Elon Musk texts with Twitter billionaires, show what it's like inside the boys' club.
	It's like, yeah, they talk about billions of dollars in the same way that you talk about £100.
	You'd be like, okay, I'll chuck in 200 quid.
	Okay, I'll chuck in 2 billion.
	Because that's just the scale on which they work.
	It's just a different number of zeros.
	There's a good game you can play to get in this mindset, which is if you take the income of whichever billionaire you fancy and then translate their costs per average to the average salary in the United States or Britain...
	You can start thinking like them.
	So if you want to buy a new car, it's five pence.
	Or you want to buy a new Ferrari, it's five pence.
	If you want to hire a secretary to work for you, that's ten pence a month.
	Or something like that.
	That'd be ten million dollars, wouldn't it?
	But that's the thing.
	It's not exact.
	I'm just making these numbers up in my head.
	That's a hell of an expensive secretary.
	It's two pence a month or something.
	Right.
	You'd do it right now.
	If it was you, you'd be like, yeah, okay.
	500 secretaries would be 10 pence a month.
	Exactly.
	But this is the point.
	It means so little.
	And it's actually really understandable once you translate it into your own world.
	So Vox, and you can tell that Vox obviously being a communist rag, it's just like, oh my god, money.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Oh god, success.
	Us at Vox who are worth millions.
	Yeah, exactly.
	They say these behind-the-scenes exchanges reveal how quick and easy it is for a relatively small circle of moneyed elites to throw in billions to help buy a public company that is used by hundreds of millions of people and serves as a place where individuals gather to find a community around common hobbies, beliefs and goals.
	Except for right-wingers who have been systematically removed from it!
	They're not part of the community.
	Exactly, they're not part of the moral community as far as Vox is concerned.
	But this is, you can see there's a shift in the tide here.
	And they say it's a powerful tool for disseminating news and information.
	Exactly, which is why you shouldn't have Monopoly on it.
	And on the plus side, Elon Musk probably won't have a bonfire of the verified check marks, disappointingly enough.
	But that would be really amusing if every leftist verified journal was just...
	Banned from the site.
	It's so funny.
	Well, you don't need to.
	I mean, number one, they'll all say, I'm leaving.
	They won't.
	But they'll leave for a week.
	But then if you just start verifying everyone instead of just your mains, that checkmark becomes worthless.
	It'll just become a sea of everyone is checkmarked.
	Yeah, but I would love to see the seething of them just actually getting proactively banned.
	Why?
	Leftist.
	Leftist.
	Anyone who supported the banning of Donald Trump should be banned.
	That's what I'd do.
	Look at that tweet.
	Banned.
	Look at that tweet.
	Banned.
	Give them a message, retweet, saying Donald Trump should be back on the platform!
	Yeah.
	Billionaires' interest in helping to buy Twitter wasn't just about wanting a piece of the pie in terms of equity.
	Tech suggests that for many Musk circles, it was important to have a say in what Twitter would look like in the future.
	A free speech town square where they'll conveniently continue to have the biggest megaphones.
	Cope and seethe?
	Elon Musk is not in control of how many people follow Elon Musk.
	But Twitter isn't charge.
	Why shouldn't they have a say in what Twitter will look like in the future?
	It's a free market, isn't it?
	It's a private company.
	It's a public company.
	They can do what they want.
	But this leads us to a nice cartoon by Bob Moran.
	This is, like you were saying, the libertarian king.
	Power to the people.
	This is exactly an example of this kind of power dynamic in action, actually.
	The king with the people against the nobles...
	And he finds a disaffected class of nobles who will then support him against a much larger class of nobles who oppose him.
	And it is just very interesting how this is just an immutable power dynamic in human relations.
	This was like in feudal Europe.
	This has been like in ancient times.
	It's like it now.
	It's the way that the world works.
	And then you get one of my particular favorites is Michael Tracy.
	I like Michael Tracy quite a lot, just as a journalist and commentator.
	But I love his posts about this.
	Whatever barely noticeable adjustments Elon Musk might make to Twitter's content moderation policy would be the final death blow to our democracy.
	My latest for the Washington Post.
	Well, the next one.
	This is just like 1938 when Hitler annexed Sudetenland, but now it's Elon Musk annexing Twitter.
	He blended in perfectly.
	Or the last one, good news, all women are going to be banned from Twitter.
	Love it.
	Love it.
	So anyway, good news on the Twitter front for right-wingers who have been banned from Twitter, basically.
	I suppose on that, we'll move on to the persecution in real life.
	Oh, good.
	Persecution in real life, I should say.
	Oh, really?
	Did this person post something on Twitter?
	Yeah.
	Well, I mean, Elon Musk can't do anything about the British police, can he?
	No.
	So, I suppose if Elon Musk can fix us online, he can't fix us offline.
	It's the British, at least.
	Elon Musk, how much to buy the British police?
	Please.
	Which would be good, actually.
	The libertarian King Musk would be decent.
	I know that's a Stephen Fry and Laurie joke, the idea of the privatization of the British police force, but he could actually solve them.
	How can it get worse than this?
	In case you're wondering what I'm talking about, it's the fact that it just keeps happening.
	We'll start off with Caroline here, we just newest news on latest person persecuted by the british police for not being a leftist i was gonna say right okay before we go any further right i feel like we've covered the story before yeah because it was a different one a few weeks ago right Yeah.
	A few weeks before that.
	Now this is going to be a middle class woman who has gender critical views that is being bullied by the police.
	Bingo.
	You've got it in one, Carl, because it just keeps happening.
	I don't know who Caroline Farrow is.
	She's a good friend, but she's just writing here her story about what happened to her.
	How it started, no warrant.
	I opened the door to this and it got pushed open to come in.
	You can see their police officer, who doesn't have a warrant, pushing open her door to break his way into her house illegally so that he can arrest her.
	Got myself a turf here.
	Yeah, the reason for this being that she'd said, well, not left-wing things online.
	Right.
	How it finished being frisked and whisked off to be taken to the cells and shown some memes posted by somebody else.
	Not even your own memes.
	Meme police are like, did you like and retweet this?
	Yeah, you're not even going to be showing your own memes.
	So all those jokes about we're all going to be at the Nuremberg Trials and they're showing our memes on the board and we're all laughing with each other.
	No, they won't even show our memes.
	Show other people's memes.
	At least they'll be funny when we're being marched off to the gulags.
	Apparently not, because it's just not even relevant.
	If we go to the next link, she has the full story there, and it just gets more and more absurdist the more you read it.
	So she says, well, start off tea time.
	I was doing a roast chicken.
	Knock at the door.
	Two coppers.
	There's been an allegation of harassment and malicious comms and we've come to arrest you.
	Oh yeah, this is modern Britain.
	Well, actually, they come to the door and said that there's been an allegation we can come in.
	I said, do you have a warrant?
	They said, we don't need one.
	And this six foot three bloke forced his way in.
	Very British, this.
	100% illegal.
	This isn't anything that would happen in the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany.
	This is what Britain should be like.
	You don't need a warrant to break in.
	There's been an allegation that you've been ideologically non-conformist on the internet.
	And we're not even...
	There's another aspect to this, because all of that is obviously horrific.
	But the allegation...
	We haven't even got to charges.
	There's no crime.
	The thought crime hasn't even got there.
	There's just, we think you've committed thought crime, therefore we're just going to destroy the rule of law now?
	Break in without a warrant?
	What are you going to do about it?
	Well, actually...
	It's the most shameful thing.
	They seized all my devices, including my work Chromebook and my homework iPad.
	Why?
	In case she tweets some more things, I guess.
	Which will upset my ten-year-old with autism even more because all our Harry Potter audiobooks are stored on there and she can't do homeschooling anymore.
	Good job, police.
	Why do you need the electronic devices?
	Real threat to the realm here, wasn't there?
	Keeping in mind, the only reason British police usually take electronic devices is because of terrorism or some other serious crime.
	His Majesty's plod really doing the job here.
	It has to be something actually serious for them to justify this, and they're doing it on the basis of someone made an allegation that you did a wrong thing.
	And they were happy to just do this.
	Which, again, I think is illegal, but whatever.
	Anyway, I got frisked, shoved in a cop car, and taken to Guildford, Nick, where my wedding jewellery, my study earrings, and my watch were taken off me.
	Yeah, because that's dangerous stuff.
	Yeah.
	A few hours later, the solicitor came in and I was interviewed.
	Custody Sarge was a bit embarrassed.
	Sorry about this violation of the rule of law and the fact that you haven't actually committed a crime you've been charged with.
	He told me that emailing people malicious messages was a crime.
	The PCs told him I hadn't actually emailed anyone.
	Right, so we're off to a good start.
	Nobody in the room knows why you're there.
	I agree with you, sir, but I haven't sent any malicious emails.
	The police were telling their sergeant, actually, she's not here for that.
	Nobody in the room knows why they're there.
	We've arrested her, we've broken the law, we've just destroyed the idea of warrants, and what have we done this for?
	We don't know.
	Well, I've allegedly written some insulting messages on the internet.
	But that's the point.
	God forbid.
	You've got nothing else to do with your life.
	What if we just do all these terrible things for no reason?
	What percentage of burglaries are solved?
	We'll get to that.
	Yeah.
	So, um, the PC's told him he hadn't emailed anyone, but allegedly wrote some insulting messages on the internet.
	Those were their words.
	I got shown loads of posts from Kiwi Farms, from Real Mutter for Ya and KitKat.
	I was asked to explain a cartoon that KitKat had posted.
	So this was before Kiwi Farms got deplatformed, then?
	Yeah.
	I explained that I wasn't responsible for these posts.
	KitKat was, because KitKat posted them.
	That's how the internet works.
	I don't know what smoke the police have been smoking.
	This is absurd.
	The police burst in.
	You're under arrest.
	Screw your constitutional rights.
	Have you seen what's on Kiwi Farms by someone called Kit Kat?
	Have you seen this?
	You're responsible for this.
	What the hell are you talking about?
	Are you Kit Kat?
	I'm a 40-year-old mum.
	I'm cooking dinner while you're talking.
	But that's the point.
	The police are like, have you seen Kit Kat's posts?
	I'm like, are you just showing me your posts?
	Is that what this is?
	You just weren't getting enough likes.
	So you're like, well, you've got to arrest some people and show them it.
	We've deduced that real mother Fiyar is you!
	Are you a mother?
	Very interesting.
	Husband was furious.
	Videoed the whole encounter.
	No kidding!
	I don't mean to laugh, because this is tragic, but like...
	No, this is what I mean.
	We've read multiple stories, like you mentioned.
	Every couple of weeks, there's some horrific circumstance, but at least some of it is legal under the ridiculous laws.
	None of this seems to be legal.
	We just don't have any kind of law anymore.
	What?
	I'm just...
	Have you seen Kit Kat's posts?
	I just love the police have discovered the internet.
	They've decided that she's posting on YouTube.
	Maybe she is, I don't know.
	When read my rights, I was told that it could be used as evidence against me.
	I replied that women don't have penises.
	Anything you say can be used against you in a court of law.
	Women don't have penises.
	Police start reddening in the face.
	How dare you?
	What are you going to do about it?
	I really love it.
	It's like Solzhenitsyn on the way out.
	It's just like, yeah, well, Stalin is an asshole.
	I'm going for death anyway.
	Anyway, I put my side of the story to the coppers.
	I asked people not to speculate on who reported me because they will claim harassment.
	Probably kiwi farms at the point.
	But there's the thing.
	Some rando apparently reports them.
	They don't face any recompense for this clearly false report.
	The innocent individual gets arrested with no warrant, their house busts into, their electronic device is stolen, and then interviewed about KitKat's posts online, and the person who alleged this is just sat there drinking champagne.
	Kiwi farms of all places.
	But it's swatting on another level.
	At least with swatting, there's a line of logic that can be followed.
	It's a very British form of swatting, yes.
	Yeah, but with swatting in America, a person has gone, okay, we have a legal duty to respond, we have to respond in seriousness, whereas here, there is no duty to respond.
	There is no duty to respond illegally, never mind with force like this, and instead they just go along with it because a complaint was made.
	We checked the IP addresses of Kiwi Farms and it was targeted at this house.
	I would be like, okay, well, that at least makes some sense.
	It's still illegal.
	At least it's logical illegality.
	Yeah, exactly.
	At least it connects.
	The police got offended by something on Kiwi Farms and said Caroline Farrow's door was kicked in and she was arrested.
	Yeah, Dankula.
	That's what happened to Count Dankula.
	The police were offended.
	But at least he had posted it.
	I mean, they're not even alleging that she posted it, right?
	If they'd said, look, your IP address comes to here.
	So, okay, it might be you, it might be your husband, it might be your kid.
	Who knows?
	Like...
	But they're not even...
	What's the connection?
	This is why I've got to cover it.
	There is no law in this country anymore.
	I'm giving up.
	This country is doomed.
	If this cell of police are allowed to act...
	Memes on Kiwi Farm.
	Have you not seen KitKat's posts?
	I'm actually feeling pretty harassed and anxious right now, as one might have imagined.
	Whereas the person who made the complaint just gets away with it.
	No recompense.
	I got the feeling from the copper who checked up on me in the cells that they were pretty embarrassed about the whole thing after they realised what they'd done, presumably.
	I asked the police in the car, is this what you joined the force for?
	Arresting mothers for being insulting to their persecutors on social media.
	And of course the police were a bit red.
	Why didn't they just cite tweets that she'd sent that were less flattering about trans people?
	Um...
	Because that would have been at least something that connected her to...
	Because they've been told not to do that, because that's not how they should follow the law.
	So instead, they're just making up the law, and that's how they're going to follow the law.
	So it doesn't exist.
	Kiwi Farms posted something.
	I suppose we should thank people for getting into the platform then, really, couldn't we?
	Fewer British mothers will be persecuted if Kiwi Farms doesn't exist.
	What are the police doing?
	They just check Kiwi Farms.
	If we go to the next link, we can see she's been on Mark Stein's show talking about this, and I really love Mark Stein.
	Really, he is becoming the British Tucker Carlson.
	And we'll enjoy some clip of this, which is where he mentions that obviously this isn't standard procedure.
	None of this makes any kind of legal sense in the slightest.
	Let's play that.
	You were then arrested and taken to Guildford Police Station, which we might be coming to and we might do a mass demonstration out there, because this goes on every week up and down the realm.
	And the thing is as well, what was really weird, so I've never been arrested before, and it is quite shocking, so they were saying, can you lift your legs up?
	And I wasn't lifting my legs up correctly because I wasn't quite sure what I was supposed to be doing.
	And they said, oh no, we need to lift them up this way because we need to check your socks for drugs.
	And I'm like, like, half an hour ago I'm in my kitchen cooking roast chicken, and now you're checking my socks for drugs.
	I mean, I understand that it's standard procedure, but it was just real.
	No, it's not!
	No, it's not standard procedure.
	They've chosen to do this to you, and that is what is so disgraceful about these pseudo-poppers.
	Sir Robert Peel, the founder...
	Of British policing.
	Wouldn't regard that as standard procedure.
	The other thing, it's very brave of you, even to come on television and talk about it.
	Our friend Samantha Smith from Telford came on TV to talk about her experience with the West Mercia police, and then they went round and bullied her and intimidated her the next morning for daring to come on television and tell the truth about these third-rate coppers.
	Okay, so all I was watching was average Kiwi Farms user cooking the chicken for dinner.
	Cops burst in.
	It's like, show me your socks.
	Why?
	You've got drugs on them.
	What are you talking about?
	You must be a drug dealer.
	Why?
	Because KitKat posted stuff online.
	Who's KitKat?
	This is the most deranged thing I've ever seen.
	None of it makes any sense.
	There is no law in this country.
	The police are like, well, why are you even here?
	Because you don't think women have penises.
	That's why.
	The Taliban make more sense than this.
	How about this logically coherent?
	All of this stems presumably from the fact that she doesn't think women have penises.
	And now it's like, right, you're a drug dealer.
	Look at you, 40-year-old mum.
	You're posting on Kiwi Farms and smuggling drugs in your socks.
	Your mum's a drug dealer.
	Your autistic child's been using it from your iPad.
	What's this, Hogwarts?
	Sounds like drugs terms to me.
	Oh god, this is such an embarrassment for these cops.
	Well, it's an embarrassment for the whole country.
	Like you say, it would be funny if this was a one-off and we could just, you know, stupid story, right?
	But this is so common, and as Mark rightly says, he says he's going to organise some kind of protest outside.
	It's got the kind of discombobulated theme to it that a Monty Python skit would have.
	Yeah.
	It's genuinely Monty Python-esque.
	It's like arresting a mum for having drugs because someone posted something on the internet.
	About women not having penises.
	About women not having penises.
	It's literally like a crazy Monty Python.
	Imagine trying to explain any of this to Margaret Thatcher.
	Imagine trying to explain any of this to anyone five years ago.
	Yeah, yeah.
	But...
	But it comes down to the point as well.
	If you go back five years and explain, look, people would be arresting mothers for claiming women don't have penises based on evidence other people posted on the internet, you'd be like, you are insane.
	That's obviously never going to happen.
	Yeah, it will.
	But there's just also the point that the police have been continuously told from multiple sources within and without the government, stop doing this.
	Like, this happens so often.
	There have been ministers, chief police coming out, just keep saying, please stop.
	You're making the entire policing service look like it needs to actually be abolished, because what you're doing is just persecution.
	And treat the law like the law on suspicious salmon.
	For people who don't know, in England, it is illegal to carry salmon in a suspicious manner.
	Nobody knows what that means, nor the police, who just don't enforce the law, because what are you talking about?
	It probably made sense in 1627, when the law was probably enacted.
	It was an 1800s law about illegal fishing.
	The idea of the suspicious aspect is you having a legal fish, but it still makes no sense, even in the language of the day.
	But if we go to the next link, we can see the police and crime commissioner for that police force has issued a statement.
	We've mentioned her before, if you remember her name.
	She also believes in biology, so she's going to be investigated by her own police force soon enough.
	She's probably the one on Kiwi Farms.
	Yeah, she's KitKat.
	Those who know me know that I have no fear and no favour when it comes to holding the police to account with their own force.
	However, I would not be right for me to comment further at this stage with an ongoing police investigation.
	It is important to respect the due process.
	There's no respect of any law.
	What are you talking about?
	Yes.
	And I will be keen...
	Where's your warrant?
	I don't need a warrant.
	I assume you might.
	What are the charges?
	We don't need to tell you that.
	Yeah, you don't have any.
	What's the evidence?
	None.
	Nothing connects you to any of this.
	I'm in Czechoslovakia then, am I? Pure Kafka.
	I'm just really annoyed by what you said about women and penises.
	Yeah, but she says, I will be taking a keen interest in the outcome.
	And she has previously berated her own police force for being retarded.
	But the thing is, it doesn't seem to be getting through their skulls, does it?
	And if we go to the next link, we can see again, as you mentioned, of endless stories.
	Once upon a time, there was a story about Harry Miller and how he was visited by the police for liking a limerick.
	And the police came around and said, we need to check your thinking.
	And this all went to the way of the High Court.
	The High Court itself came out and said, stop, get some help.
	Like, what is wrong with you?
	Police.
	The High Court have done that.
	Your own police and crime commissioners have done that.
	Harry's going to be on on Monday, by the way.
	Yeah, it's going to be good to have him on, because I'd love his opinion on all this, as it just continues.
	The next link, of course, being that the Hampshire police were denounced by their own force for investigating a gay swastika.
	Didn't he post the trans pride flag in the...
	Four times?
	Yeah, yeah, four times, yeah, yeah.
	And so the police went round, and we then...
	So the police went round!
	Hello!
	Of course they did!
	With no understanding of what had actually happened.
	Again, they were just confused.
	They were like, we were told that there was something offensive.
	Like, what do you mean the gay swore sticker?
	The gay what?
	Is that why we're here?
	And their own police force, like their chief of police, told them, stop.
	For the love of Christ, you're gonna ruin us.
	Sorry, but it's...
	We go to the next link, we can see that the police again were told, we are not the thought police.
	Oh, really?
	Says who?
	The new Her Majesty's Inspector for the Constabulary itself, telling literally everyone of the police force four months ago, fucking stop!
	Please, stop!
	This just keeps happening!
	Why can't we start firing those police who do act as a thought?
	String them up, frankly.
	Like, you're not doing anything right.
	You've been told a million times from everyone to stop, and you're not doing it, in which case...
	I don't know what kind of punishment is the right thing for you at this point.
	If it happened on the internet, just don't.
	That's the answer.
	And if you have the next link, we can see, well, what are they doing with their time?
	Well, nothing.
	I mean, this is the state of British policing, which is they will literally just break the law to arrest you for saying women don't have penises.
	There's a housewife on the internet.
	Quick, get her.
	But people actually do break the law.
	Do whatever the hell they want all the time, I guess.
	We have here the news that police in England and Wales pledge to attend every home bluggery.
	Which you might be thinking, what do you mean you weren't?
	Hello, there's been a burglary.
	Can you come round and dust for prints?
	Is that really my job?
	Burglary?
	I don't know.
	Hate crime?
	I'll just hang up.
	Are you KitKat?
	The police just don't.
	Just don't investigate crime, ever.
	Here's the data to prove it.
	In the year of March, the Home Office figure shows that...
	In the year 2 March.
	Sorry, the year 2 March.
	6.3% of robbery offences and 4.1% of thefts in England and Wales resulted in charges.
	So if you want to rob someone...
	So 95% of robberies are just going un-investigated.
	If you're exploring a career in being a professional burler...
	No, we do not promote...
	I'm just saying, you have a 95% chance of not being caught.
	And I don't want to say that.
	I want to be able to say you have a 95% chance of being caught.
	Crime doesn't pay.
	But the reality by the Home Office, they're telling us...
	Like it was when I was younger.
	Like when the police actually investigated crimes.
	And...
	And in case you're thinking, well, at least I'll have my prints on file if I commit a burglary, and then, you know, there's some risk and not so much reward.
	No.
	Recent figures found that police attendance of burglaries in London have fallen below 50%.
	There is a more than 50% chance the police won't even dust for prints.
	Toss a coin like now and it's not going.
	If you want to rob a place to toss a coin, that's your chance of even being investigated.
	And then your chance of being caught is, I don't know, pick a short straw from a thing of toothpicks.
	Yeah, yeah.
	That's your chance of actually getting charged with anything.
	That's not even your chance of being prosecuted and then sent to jail or any kind of crime.
	That's just charges being brought against you.
	It's just absurd.
	It's just madness.
	That's a clown country.
	Mr.
	Hewitt said the forces had struggled to attend all the burglaries because of limited resources.
	Oh, really?
	We just don't have the resources.
	We don't have the manpower, the time.
	We're too busy at Kiwi Farms looking at KitKat's posts.
	Too busy kicking the doors of chicken-cooking mothers.
	What's that, chicken?
	In case you're wondering about whether this is some right-wing obsession of a distortion of the reality of the kind of resources that are being wasted, it's not.
	It's long since evidence that this isn't.
	We have news here from 2019.
	Sadiq Khan's £1.7 million a year Police unit on hate crime brought six trolls to justice in two years.
	Six trolls to justice.
	Justice.
	What justice?
	Did you think that these people have posted women don't have penises, have been charged and given prison sentences, and you're like, well, that's justice.
	Trolling is now a crime.
	Yeah.
	That's the reality.
	So pathetic.
	And yet, if you check out any of the media, where do they stand on this?
	Where does the state media stand on this sort of thing?
	Well, we have news in 2016, which was that hate crimes, prosecutions, falling, despite rise in reporting.
	The more hate crimes that get reported, the less that actually get prosecuted, because it turns out people just keep reporting things that aren't crimes.
	Yeah.
	This person said something offensive to me on the internet.
	How could he be allowed to get away with that?
	Except the numbers just keep going up.
	The next link here, we have the news from 2017.
	Rise in hate crime in England and Wales.
	It was up 29% that year alone.
	That's rookie numbers.
	We can do better than that.
	I think we can.
	We can go check out the Couts.
	We've been doing way better.
	We check out the Scots.
	What have the Scots been up to?
	Transgender hate crime is up 87% in Scotland.
	If you go to the next link, please.
	You can see it.
	There you are.
	Jesus Christ.
	The proud, tolerant Scots who are most obsessed with this stuff are somehow also the most transphobic, except that no one's getting charged with a crime because there are no crimes.
	But weirdly, it's not the Scottish police, the woke Scottish police, kicking down the doors of mothers.
	And they will be doing some.
	Well, yeah, it must be.
	Not the only ones.
	However, the next link is the funniest one.
	Just the failure of reporting here as well.
	Reports of LGBT hate crimes rise more than 50% this year alone in West.
	I don't know what's going on with the title.
	Where's West?
	West.
	Is it the West?
	The entire West of the world.
	I thought there might have been a town or something called West.
	This isn't a spelling mistake.
	Oh.
	This isn't...
	They have an update.
	This is 8th of August this was published.
	This hasn't just gone up.
	That's Bristol regional news, isn't it?
	No one's bothered.
	If you scroll down, actually, John, we can see in the article itself, as they say, 50% in West.
	They mean in the West country.
	Presumably.
	Just in West.
	BBC Pigeon.
	At least in the West, in the first sentence, is something that...
	BBC Pigeon, otherwise known as Bristol.
	Anyway, so they say in here, individual reports of such incidences rose 38% in Avon and Somerset, so that's Jacob Rees-Mogg doing his work, 72% in Gloucestershire, just the north of us, and in Proud Wiltshire, 149% it has gone up in our homeland here.
	God, it feels good to live in the Shire.
	Anyway, because again, none of these are crimes.
	Most conservative area of this part as well.
	These things keep getting reported, but none of them get charged with anything because there's no crime.
	It's just people whining online.
	It's just muffills, endlessly.
	And it's glad to see some speeches in regards to things like this.
	Tory party conference happens to be going on, and I know it's this speech from Suella Braveman, who says here something quite based, which I've been saying for a while, actually.
	To those who dismiss political correctness as a Conservative's obsession, I say this.
	The grooming gang scandal is a stain on this country, and it's what happens when political correctness becomes more important than criminal justice.
	I mean, that's great, but you guys are in charge.
	You have the overwhelming majority in the Parliament.
	Legislate.
	Legislate.
	It's been 12 years.
	Punish these people.
	It's been 12 years.
	It's been 12 years.
	Over a decade.
	Legislate.
	Punish these people.
	Make it so that they literally suffer something for allowing this to go on.
	Your right-wingers in America are like, ah, Trump only had four years, he can't get...
	And he still didn't do this, this, this.
	They've had 12 years, they've done literally zero.
	Conservatives have also, at this point, got the power of God in this country.
	And in case you're wondering what the public are like, I'm sad to say, this is not an uncommon position for the public to support such crap and other radical nonsense.
	And we'll play one person here, who I just, I'm sad to say, is not actually as uncommon as you want.
	We'll play her talking about her job as a nurse in the NHS, caring for the public.
	Let's enjoy.
	The way you want to treat them.
	And it eats you up.
	If you are there to do a job as a compassionate person, there are no resources and you are told persistently on the news that, you know, care homes are being ring-fenced.
	It's a lie.
	And I'm sorry, but if you have voted Conservative, you do not deserve to be resuscitated by the NHS. She's smiling.
	Yes.
	She knows this is a shit test.
	She knows that she's pushing this way too far.
	And she did get fired for this.
	Yeah, which was the right thing to do.
	You can't have someone who's actively talking about killing patients as a nurse.
	Believe it or not, the NHS is not meant to show political favour in that way.
	Weirdly enough.
	Political genocide.
	I mean, you know, I might agree to this if I don't have to pay into the NHS, actually.
	Yeah, healthcare is a right until you disagree with me, in which case, death, says the NHS workers.
	So, you know, it's right that she's gone, but not as uncommon as needs to be, in my opinion.
	And in case you're wondering, all of this stuff is thanks to these retards.
	Endlessly, just going back to them.
	These idiots run the country still ideologically.
	This is just my perfect example of how stupid they are from the recent conference.
	This is a lady arguing here that the more we increase benefits, the more we increase the economy.
	So the more welfare goes up, the more economy we get.
	So if we increase welfare to infinity, we get infinity economy, and then we'll never have to beat China ever again.
	What is wrong with the Labour Party?
	I don't know.
	It is really, really a problem how stupid they are.
	And if you want to enjoy...
	How would increasing benefits increase the economy anyway?
	Because these people would have money and then they'd spend it in the shops and that increases the economy.
	They must know that the people they're taking money from have less money than they can then spend it.
	I don't know.
	We print the money to give the benefits.
	I suppose we do, don't we?
	So if we just print more money and then give it to the benefit holders.
	Theoretically, it's underpinned by taxpayers.
	But if we just keep printing the money infinitely and giving it to people who claim benefits, they'll spend infinite money in the economy and then the taxpayers will have infinite money.
	And everyone will end up as trillions.
	Pure Zimbabwean economics.
	It's sub-child levels of stupid.
	Yes.
	The things we're dealing with.
	And if you go to the next link here, you can see the full compilation, in case you want to go and check out on letters.com.
	These are so good.
	And we'll just end off, just to remind ourselves about why we're in such a mess.
	The British police act like this and get away with it.
	And it's because the geniuses in the Labour Party still run this place.
	And we're just going to enjoy two more clips from this for fun.
	There's one in here of a Labour Party minister.
	Who came out and told everyone her horrific story of how one of her constituents is literally freezing to death.
	And this is before Ukraine, because she can't pay the energy bills.
	So what's her solutions?
	Nothing, really.
	Just the more green shit.
	Let's find out then.
	Why?
	Last April, on a cold spring evening, I knocked on the door of a constituent.
	When I reached out to shake her hand, it was purple and freezing cold.
	Already back then, she was afraid to put the heating on, struggling to get by on the small pension that she had built up through a lifetime of work.
	As energy bills and inflation rise even higher, I often think of her.
	And we will not waver in our support for Ukraine.
	This is a meeting.
	Thank you.
	Fracking is dangerous, it is bad for the planet, it won't even reduce our bills, and with Labour it will not happen.
	On climate change, the costs of inaction today will mean far greater costs tomorrow.
	I refuse to leave our children to pick up the pieces of our failure.
	I will be a responsible Chancellor.
	I will be Britain's first Green Chancellor.
	I mean, this is what we're dealing with.
	My constituents are freezing to death.
	And I'm against global warming.
	Yeah, but also more green stuff.
	I won't allow the extraction of more energy to bring down the price.
	I want to just make it worse.
	Great, great.
	And then the last one here, just to give you more insight into the infinite money glitch people, we have a lady here telling us about women's so-called work, which was rather funny.
	This is a feminist union representative trying to represent women.
	Okay.
	Let's play.
	The fact is that women's so-called work That is undervalued.
	Until society values cleaning, caring, catering, doing sleepings to care for other people's elderly or disabled relatives, doing extra unpaid hours to cover an emergency, doing split shifts and working on social hours, we will continue to have unequal and unfair pay.
	I just love it.
	Women's so-called work.
	I might just clip that.
	Like, cleaning.
	It's like the Bernie Sanders.
	The American people are tired of women.
	Yeah.
	It's like, yeah, what's after that, Bernie?
	Women's so-called work.
	Yeah, and if you want to go and enjoy more of that, I suppose, go over to thelasers.com, but it's just the point there of, how are we in this mess?
	And it's because of these people who genuinely think they have found an infinite money glitch.
	That's how dumb they are.
	Still control the police force through the laws that were passed, and nothing is happening.
	But they also ideologically control the Conservative Party, because the Conservatives are idiots.
	I watched Suella Braveman and Michael Gove and a few others on a conference panel, and it was like 2013 Libertarian YouTube streams.
	I'll probably do a thing on it.
	It was really low interest in the left.
	It was just like, oh God, we're nothing.
	Painful.
	But even when you change the laws, there's so little force from them that the police will just break the laws anyway and don't care.
	And frankly, Britain just looks like hell on earth if this continues.
	So, the thing I didn't have on my bingo card was Andrew Tate destroying Piers Morgan in a live interview.
	Like, who would have predicted at the beginning of this year?
	Like, you just don't know what's going to happen throughout the rest of the year, do you?
	New Year's rolled around.
	God, I mean, wild.
	I kind of love it, to be honest.
	Yeah, I mean, there is the, you know, the sort of Joker-esque aspect of chaos.
	Like, are we going to have lockdowns?
	Who knows?
	You know, it could be any crazy thing.
	Like, I mean, literally, you don't know.
	Elon Musk is going to buy Twitter.
	Okay, well, bad, you know.
	So, like I said, Andrew Tate, like, just, and I didn't know who Andrew Tate was before he got deplatformed, really.
	I'd heard the name, but I'd never watched anything by him.
	He just seemed like just some internet shark jock, so, you know, who cares, right?
	But then he got massively deplatformed, and so Piers Morgan was like, I'm going to talk to this man, because my show is called Piers Morgan, uncancelled.
	By Piers Morgan.
	Piers Morgan on every other piece of...
	Surface.
	And every other surface, yes.
	And then projected onto the ceiling.
	In fact, there are adverts in every town with Piers Morgan, Piers Morgan written on them.
	Yes.
	And so this, I think, ties in well with recent contemplations that Josh did.
	Talking about human consciousness, which Piers Morgan doesn't seem to demonstrate, because if you...
	I mean, I love the description as well.
	The nature of consciousness itself is like, Piers, I might send you this.
	You know, like, you are such a backwards person that you are trapped in just this weird, like, he's trying to occupy every single political position at once.
	And it makes him look like he just doesn't think.
	So if you want to support us, go and watch that because that's really good.
	But let's go on to the actual clip, right?
	So they put this clip up yesterday.
	The entire interview hasn't been released yet.
	So I don't know whether Piers Morgan does perform I can see four, five Piers Morgans.
	There's a Piers Morgan on the roof there.
	Oh yeah, yeah.
	Five.
	People who don't know, it's a game you can play with a show.
	When the banner comes up, you'll see at least two more Piers Morgans as well.
	It's just remarkable.
	Excellent.
	Absolutely remarkable how much one man's name can be displayed on the screen.
	We haven't seen the full thing.
	It hasn't been released yet.
	But it's remarkable that this is what they decided to clip together and put out.
	So I thought we'd go through it.
	So this is Piers saying, look, I'm talking to known misogynist Andrew Tate.
	He's a really terrible guy.
	And this is how he describes how he's a terrible guy.
	Andrew Tate's the most famous man you've probably never heard of, but the chances are your children will have.
	Videos of Tate have been viewed billions of times online.
	He's built an enormous following of mostly young men, and this is often scandalous views about women that have made him notorious across the world.
	Views like this.
	So, I think my sister is her husband's property, yes.
	When a bride is walking down the aisle to marry the groom, the father walks next to her and gives her away.
	True or false?
	Yeah, that's true.
	Sorry, who did the research for this segment?
	Like, for all of the...
	An Andrew Tate fan?
	Like, you had...
	How much manpower do you guys have?
	Because you guys have loads of money.
	Millions and millions of pounds.
	And you could have looked over the internet, I mean, endless hours of content of him slipping up or saying stupid stuff.
	I mean, that's the reason I'm not a huge fan of him.
	And you went with that.
	Yeah.
	You went with the reality, which is that, yeah, the father gives away his daughter a wedding.
	That's one of the reasons that the daughter takes the husband's name.
	And he's like, look at this.
	As if no one in this country has ever got married, so they don't know.
	As if women aren't aware, that's why they want to.
	But also, all relationships contain some form of property element.
	My father, my mother, my girlfriend, my daughter, my car.
	My woman.
	Exactly.
	You have a relationship with someone, you have some claim of ownership over it.
	So, yeah.
	Like, there is a kind of property dimension to the ownership.
	And, like, it's not like the woman's like, yeah, well, someone's husband.
	No, my husband!
	That's my man.
	Exactly.
	You have ownership over the husband.
	So it's like, Piers, that's just not like the dramatic own that you think you've got there, but okay.
	So let's get into it.
	Let's go, Piers.
	Do you respect women?
	Absolutely.
	Why wouldn't I? Do you think that 18, 19-year-old women are more attractive than 25-year-old women?
	I think there's attractive people.
	That's a loaded question.
	I don't know.
	Well, it's not really, is it?
	You know why I'm asking you.
	Of course I do.
	But I can't sit here and say...
	For the benefit of viewers who don't know why I'm asking, you said this.
	In general, this is also one of the reasons men find youth attractive.
	You want to blow up the internet?
	I'll blow up the internet right effing now.
	The reason 18 and 19-year-olds are more attractive than 25-year-olds is because they've been through less dick.
	People say, oh, you can't say that, but yes, I can.
	A 19-year-old is more attractive than a 26-year-old woman, and I'll tell you why.
	Because that 26-year-old has talked to more guys, been to the club more times, been effed and dumped more times, more arguments, more mess, more for me to clean up.
	Is he wrong?
	Yeah, I don't...
	I mean, he's putting it very crudely, but there's less baggage with someone who's younger and has had less partners.
	Yes, and it turns out that men have a preference to marry women who have not been had by every other man in the town.
	But even if it's just like, oh, people who are 25 on average have had like one more, or something like that, right?
	He's still correct.
	It's not necessarily even about whores.
	But in the sort of modern era that we're talking about, this is actually a critique of the sort of promiscuous feminist culture in which we live, and how it's actually doing women a disservice, right?
	Because what Tate's saying here is, look, if by 25 you've had like, you know, two dozen partners, then any other woman who's slightly younger than you becomes more attractive than you.
	And the thing is, it's like a 25-year-old...
	It's not judgment.
	That's a reality of how does this play out.
	Exactly.
	And the thing is, it also logically follows then that a 25-year-old who has only had like one or two partners is more desirable than a 19-year-old who has had like 20 partners or something, right?
	So it is actually a critique of...
	Promiscuity from the position of a man who is looking for a high-value woman, which of course is his entire brand.
	Now, like you say, he's framing it in a vulgar way, but okay, internet shock job.
	Who cares?
	It's still not wrong, and it's not women are bad.
	This is a critique of behavior of certain kinds of women compared to others.
	And the lie that is being told that you can F a million people and it'll have no impact.
	Yeah, and then you'll find Mr.
	Wright settle down and have a nice house with a family and a bunch of kids and a dog.
	It's like, that's not going to happen.
	Actually, once you've gone through that many encounters, you become an unappealing prospect for a lot of men.
	It's true.
	And so Piers Morgan, getting his panties in a bunch about this, replies with this.
	That is misogyny.
	Why?
	Because you are encouraging a mindset about 25-year-old women that makes them sound out to be infinitely less desirable than 18, 19-year-olds and having effectively been having too much sex to be taken in a more respectful way.
	Yeah.
	That's not misogyny, Peter.
	No, there's no misogyny here.
	This is why watching this interview, I'm not a big fan of Andrew Tate, as mentioned previously, but he looks so good out of this because of how dumb Piers Morgan is.
	But you can see the dumbfoundness on Tate's face as he just looks at him going, what?
	That's not...
	Yeah, I mean, the good quote, why?
	And Piers has then got to explain in a really fumbling way.
	He doesn't know why, because it doesn't make sense.
	You're saying that a woman who sleeps with 30 guys is less attractive than a woman who's only had, like, one or two partners or is a virgin.
	That's hatred towards women.
	It's like, is it?
	Don't think it is, actually, Piers, you moron.
	As in, like, the thing is, what Piers is saying here, right, is that we have to value the whore as much as we value the Madonna, right?
	This is the most radical feminist position.
	This is the eternal, like, the final form of the feminist position is that nothing a woman can choose to do is ever wrong.
	Because all of this is completely within a woman's power.
	These are not things that are intrinsic to women.
	It's not intrinsic to womanhood to debauch yourself by having 30 partners by 25.
	That's not something women have to do.
	It's not something women have always done.
	It's a product of the sort of debased modern culture in which we live.
	A woman has control over this.
	Yeah, there's something in that, though, that makes me feel like they're fallen and they're dragging every woman down.
	You're not a real woman until you've done 30 guys like me.
	There probably are women who think that.
	And also, it's not misogyny to critique, like, an individual woman, either.
	Because he's going, well, this woman and that woman.
	It's like, but I can't commit a misogyny by critiquing that woman without critiquing that woman.
	Misogyny is critiquing all women all the time.
	So it just doesn't make any sense.
	I suppose we'll get to that.
	Well, yeah, we will get to that in this clip.
	Well, firstly, even if that was the case, that wouldn't be misogyny.
	Well, what did you mean by what you said?
	That's not misogyny, because it's not anti-women.
	I'm saying that an 18 or 19-year-old woman would be more desirable.
	It's pretty anti-25-year-old women.
	Anti-25-year-old women, we can argue, but not misogyny.
	Well, that's misogyny, then.
	No, no, no, it's not.
	Being anti-any woman at all is misogyny.
	The final phase of feminism!
	This is what I mean.
	Piers Morgan is so dead-brained.
	He could be interviewing Hitler, and Hitler would look good out of it.
	You're a moron.
	You're an actual moron.
	Being anti any woman at all is misogyny.
	That is incredible.
	So in Piers Morgan...
	Am I just saying that?
	I can't.
	It's so ridiculous.
	But I never thought...
	Again, just on my bingo card, it wasn't there.
	Piers Morgan, no woman can ever do anything wrong.
	Ever.
	In all of history.
	And I just thought we'd give you a few examples of women who also did nothing wrong.
	My favourite, I think, is...
	Not according to us.
	According to Piers.
	My favourite is Elizabeth Bathory, actually.
	If you think that Elizabeth Bathory torturing hundreds of girls and women between 1519 and 1610 in, it wasn't Transylvania, it was somewhere near there, then you're a misogynist being anti any woman at all.
	She's said to have begun killing daughters of the lesser gentry who were sent to her gyneceum, however it's pronounced, to learn courtly etiquette.
	The use of needles was also...
	Oh, sorry, they were sent to learn courtly.
	I thought she was killing them to learn courtly etiquette.
	No, no, no, no.
	It's not usually what you call.
	And there were many witnesses who showed that they were horribly tortured and then just marked in unburied landmark locations and things like that.
	But she did nothing wrong.
	And the example you gave was Irma Greasy, who were the hyena of Auschwitz.
	She used to rape the inmates and also picked out the most pretty female inmates to be gassed because she was jealous.
	I'm not criticizing her.
	I don't want to be a misogynist.
	God forbid Piers Morgan calls me a misogynist.
	If you think the hyena of Auschwitz is a bad woman, you're a misogynist, says Piers Morgan.
	That's right, I'm a feminist.
	Elizabeth Bathory was rumored to have bathed in the blood of these young girls to keep her skin young.
	That's great.
	Women's empowerment.
	Women are vastly underrepresented in torturous murderers.
	So she's really breaking a glass ceiling that has kept women down from murdering children.
	I mean, we're giving extreme examples of why Piers is an idiot.
	It's evident.
	We're allowed to critique women based on their behavior, right?
	You are not actually committed to being pro-woman in every circumstance.
	Women are capable of doing things wrong because they're actually human beings with agency.
	I can't believe that.
	Say this to peers.
	And therefore, they can make moral judgments, making women moral agents in themselves peers.
	And I would actually contend hatred of women is actually reducing them below the status of moral agents.
	And it's not treating them as equals to not hold them to account for things they do wrong.
	But I love how he's got so extreme.
	He's taking the female version of the ridiculous 4chan joke about everything being anti-Semitic.
	You don't use kosher salt, it's pretty anti-Semitic.
	I mean, this is the most extreme feminist position.
	If you oppose anything a woman does...
	You don't believe the hyena of Auschwitz was stunning and brave?
	That's pretty misogynistic.
	Andrew Tate's just sat there like, what?
	Why did I come here?
	I'm going back to Romania.
	So, Piers has completely fumbled his own position, as we'll see.
	Not when I'm saying that women are beautiful and attractive at a certain age.
	You're saying 18, 19 years are more attractive than 25 years.
	Well, then ageist, perhaps, but misogynistic, absolutely not.
	But you just accepted it was misogyny.
	No, I didn't.
	You said it was misogyny.
	I'm telling you, no, it's not.
	If a 26-year-old woman is watching this and has heard those comments...
	Yeah.
	Would you just say to her, look, I'm sorry, I shouldn't have said that.
	No, I won't.
	I will say that I am sorry that that offends you.
	However, there's a large contingent of the world.
	That doesn't mean you're sorry.
	No, I'm not sorry.
	That's the point I'm making.
	I'm sorry if that offends you.
	However, there's a large contingent of the world that believe that, and I was mediating for a conversation.
	I love that Piers just can't get it.
	What do you mean you're not sorry?
	That doesn't mean you're not sorry.
	He's like, I know, I'm not.
	Again, with the research, the planning, of all the things you could have tried to get on Andrew Tate, your researchers came up with, yeah, well, he said that 18-year-olds are more attractive than 25-year-olds.
	And you sat down and read all that and went, yeah, I can get him on this.
	And then you've got to the point where you're like, what do you mean you're not sorry?
	Expecting that he was going to say sorry.
	No, you idiot.
	Well, that basically means that Andrew Tate is a member of the Taliban.
	What?
	Parts of the world that believe that about 26-year-old women are parts of the world where women are not allowed out on their own.
	They have to wear full burqas.
	They're not allowed to drive cars.
	That's nothing to do with me.
	Is that the kind of world for women that you...
	I was mediating a conversation.
	I'm asking you what you think.
	I don't live in a country where that happens.
	You're using that as the excuse for why you're not sorry for saying it.
	Is that there are parts of the world where this is fine?
	My question to you is, well, do you think it's fine?
	I don't think it's fine.
	I live in a world where...
	You don't think it's fine?
	The reason I... This isn't that hard, Andrew.
	You can simply say beers.
	You know what?
	With the benefit of hindsight, I wish I hadn't said it like that, and if a 26-year-old woman is watching, I'm sorry I said that, because that actually is blatantly misogynist, and even though that's a view held by other parts of the world, it's not a view I share.
	Now, I would respect you more if you said that, than if you try and say, well, it's said in other parts of the world, so I'm not sorry.
	That's the stupidest thing.
	Amazing.
	Because, I mean, like, the argument that, as we've laid out, the argument about security, blah, blah, blah, it's obvious there's light and day.
	So, let's say, it might as well be, do you drink water, Andrew?
	And he's like, well, yeah.
	And he's like, well, you're basically a member of the Taliban then, because they also drink water, so why wouldn't you agree to this Taliban stuff?
	And he's like, what?
	I don't live in a country where the Taliban rule things?
	What are you talking about?
	It's actually even worse, because essentially what Piers Morgan is saying, look, if women can't be...
	Discount prostitutes.
	We need Sharia.
	Yeah, then you want the most extreme form of Sharia, don't you?
	And Andrew Tate's just like, no, no.
	I mean, there is a middle position where perhaps we don't live in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, and actually women take their own sort of personal sanctity a bit more seriously.
	The Taliban controlled Afghanistan.
	Not every woman has to wear a burqa.
	The law was passed, but most women just don't do it.
	And it's fine.
	The Zoomers just don't enforce the law.
	But let's assume that they did.
	Piers Morbid is actually more extreme than the Taliban.
	But let's assume they did, and it was how Piers is characterising it.
	Like, there is a middle position between rampant promiscuity and the Taliban...
	Beers.
	Beers doesn't see it.
	I just can't fathom this.
	But one interesting thing...
	Again, I'm sorry to...
	Imagine actually writing those questions and then thinking this is going to work.
	I'm sorry to keep lagging on it, but the sheer stupidity to think that you're going to get away with this.
	You've sat down with your team for presumably quite a few hours beforehand.
	We're going to fly this guy in, pay for his trip, settle this up.
	But remember, this is the best part of the interview that they could find.
	This is like an hour-long interview, I think.
	The whole thing's even more stupid.
	Yeah, exactly.
	I mean, we might do a follow-up when they release the whole thing to see how ridiculous it becomes.
	But what I love about this is Tate said, contingents of the world who believe this, right?
	This doesn't mean Islamic countries.
	Pierce just instantly goes, oh, you mean Muslims?
	They are part of that contingent.
	I think more than just the Muslims understand that promiscuity is not a good thing for women.
	Exactly.
	He's assuming that everyone in Britain is fine with women being massively promiscuous.
	There's no problem there.
	Obviously, these are British values.
	Women should have a double-digit body count by the time they're 20, I mean.
	Obviously.
	Yeah, all of China believes this, presumably.
	Yeah, exactly.
	It's mental.
	It's like, Piers, this is a general conservative position that almost the entire world shares, including, like, probably more than half this country.
	But anyway, so...
	The final...
	No, this isn't actually the final one.
	There's another point that is worse, right?
	Because Piers is like, right, how can I stand on the dead body of a teenage girl to make Andrew Tate look bad?
	Now, you think, hang on, Piers, how does that make Andrew Tate look bad?
	And Piers is like, just watch.
	That doesn't tell me what you think.
	Then you need to understand why my content existed in the first place.
	My content existed because I tried my very hardest to be an absolute and not a realist, especially with uncomfortable truths.
	I was pointing out that very uncomfortable truth.
	Is that a truth?
	It's an uncomfortable truth in many parts of the world.
	It's not a truth that I'm happy about.
	An inquest this week found that a 14-year-old girl, Molly Russell, died from an act of self-harm while suffering from depression and the negative effects of online content.
	The coroner said she was exposed to material that may have influenced her in a negative way and, in addition, what started with depression had become a much more serious depressive illness and she very sadly took her life.
	That's absolutely disgusting.
	Right.
	Her father's campaign for better protections against potentially dangerous social media algorithms, right?
	It says that the particularly graphic content she saw romanticized acts of self-harm, normalized her condition, and focused on a limited and irrational view without any counterbalance of normality.
	First of all, what is your response to that?
	Nothing to do with you.
	That's the first thing.
	Yeah, it is nothing to do with me.
	The fact that a 14 year old girl took her life is truly sad.
	The world we live in today is...
	The fact that something like that happened is almost mind-blowing to me.
	That's truly sad.
	I actually feel sad inside to see something like that.
	Got nothing to do with you.
	Then why are you bringing it up, Piers?
	Because this is his tactic.
	Yeah.
	You may remember when he was on CNN. This is literally what Ben Shapiro called him out for.
	I was going to say, you remember the Ben Shapiro thing.
	Yeah.
	You will stand on the graves of the kids at Sandy Hook.
	And he kept saying it.
	And then Piers Morgan was like, how dare you say that I do that?
	Well, I've seen you do it repeatedly, Piers.
	What are you literally doing right now?
	How dare you?
	Well, you keep saying that, but you do it.
	He's continued the tradition.
	But that's the thing.
	I looked into the Molly Russell story, right?
	All it does is reinforce my position that teenagers shouldn't have access to the internet.
	Have you got the link to the Guardian article?
	So Molly Russell's family had given her a phone and then noticed a change in her behaviour in the last 12 months of her life.
	She was watching Andrew Tate.
	Nothing to do with Andrew Tate.
	This was in 2017.
	Personally killed her.
	Andrew Tate isn't even famous at this point, right?
	So, she'd become more withdrawn and spent more time alone in her room, but she appeared to be normal when she was with the family.
	Of the 16,000 pieces of content saved liked or shared by Molly on Instagram, here we go, 2,000 were related to suicide, self-harm, and depression.
	She'd last used her iPhone to access Instagram on the day of her death.
	Two minutes before, she'd saved an image on the platform that carried a depression-related slogan.
	Right, so, teenage girl was given a phone, accessed Instagram, spent all the time in the room, going down a rabbit hole of depression-related content, and eventually it caused her to commit suicide.
	Andrew Tate, what do you have to say about this?
	I wasn't there.
	I'm not involved in this in any way.
	Like, kids shouldn't be on the internet, maybe?
	Like, that's nothing.
	It's such a disgusting thing.
	Like, again, it just makes Andrew Tate look good because he comes up with, well, that's horrible.
	Well, that's the thing.
	Andrew Tate has done nothing in this interview other than stand there and go, what?
	Peter Morgan is just digging a further grave.
	Yeah, it's mental.
	It's amazing how he's managed to out CNN himself as well.
	Because his show on CNN, at least there was some propriety to it.
	This is almost comedic.
	It is comedic.
	The whole thing.
	It's like if you were writing an Onion sketch about a terrible interviewer who would just make stuff up and they'd bring up a dead kid that had no relevance to you.
	Don't think women should be whores?
	Well, you're a misogynist.
	Aren't you just a member of the Taliban?
	Yeah.
	With the name of the show's host everywhere.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Like, they're just in a self-obsessed lunatic world.
	I bet we could find an Onion sketch that was done in, like, 2010 that would look a lot like this, actually.
	Probably.
	I bet we could.
	But the thing is with the Molly thing, she'd been binging on these self-harm videos, and just, you know, it was terrible.
	And so Andrew Tate basically ends like this.
	And honestly, again, if you're trying to make Andrew Tate look good and reasonable, well, good job, Piers.
	But I don't think that was the point.
	Let's watch.
	What has come clear to me in the interview is that a lot of things you say you wouldn't say now that you've said before.
	I'd say them differently perhaps.
	Yeah, right.
	So to me that's an acceptance.
	Not just that you want to get back on platforms, because maybe that was one of the reasons you were no platform, but that you've recognized and understood the potential harm to the wrong kind of impressionable mind by some of the things you've said.
	Would that be fair?
	I think that's 80% fair.
	I recognize and understand that with massive fame, You have to be more careful about being misconstrued.
	Like I said earlier, 1% of people misunderstanding you doesn't matter with a small audience.
	It matters with a very large audience.
	With power comes responsibility.
	I still believe the things I say.
	I do not want to be a negative force for the world.
	I also understand that I am a man who's lived a very difficult, nuanced life, and I am capable of making nuanced points that may be misunderstood by teenagers.
	However, that can be said about anybody and everything.
	Every opinion online can be misunderstood by children.
	Trying to protect children from the Internet is a very interesting subject in and of itself, because I would argue that 80% of the content on the Internet can be negative or detrimental to a young mind that doesn't understand the world.
	That Piers Morgan showed by bringing up Molly Russell.
	That had nothing to do with Andrew.
	But reinforced the point that he made there.
	Again, Piers, it's so foot in mouth, I just can't get over it.
	I did love the subtle shade there, though.
	Well, it doesn't matter if 1% of your audience misunderstand you when you've got a small audience, but then when you get a large one, there might be some journos.
	LAUGHTER And they're really special.
	But yeah, so that's the clip that Piers Morgan's team decided was the best showing that they had with his chat with Andrew Tate.
	Again, I'm not an Andrew Tate fan.
	I've never really watched any of his content.
	I don't really know any of his opinions.
	So all I know is what Piers Morgan's showing me, and he doesn't seem like an unreasonable lunatic.
	Like Piers Morgan.
	Like Piers Morgan, yeah.
	Who's...
	Blown himself into the egosphere, putting his name everywhere, and is now getting guests on so he can tell them, aren't you a member of the Taliban?
	And they just sort of look at him befuddled and go, what the fuck?
	What are you smoking?
	I just don't think women should be really promiscuous, Pierce.
	That's gold.
	Let's go to the video comments.
	A lot of left-wing demands remind me of that terrible Trivium fella from the Phantom Toolbooth where he convinces well-meaning folk to do trivial tasks like fill wells with eyedrops or erode mountains with a chisel.
	One of the left's greatest powers is that they've convinced their opposition that they have to fulfill the left's goals.
	Look at how the Tories are spending all their time trying to meet climate goals or do equity nonsense rather than, you know, clear out the left like they're supposed to.
	I've never even heard of that.
	No, me neither.
	But it is kind of cool.
	Like, the Tories spend their time chiseling a mountain for no goddamn reason.
	We're all stood in the village like, how does this help us?
	What are you doing?
	We've got real problems here.
	Yeah, true.
	I saw this presidential election image and thought it was a s*** post.
	The reason I thought it was a meme rather than genuine?
	It came up on the page of a fictional drama podcast I follow, announcing a voice actor playing a role.
	Covid, climate change, US elections, now Brazilian elections.
	You can't make sending unsolicited nudes illegal and then force political news into non-political channels.
	Yeah, they can.
	We have an interview, well, clips of an interview of...
	What's her name?
	From YouTube.
	Susan.
	In which she literally just says, we started forcing all of this stuff before it became those little banners.
	It was instead videos being forced into everyone's feeds of political content because she didn't care whether or not you liked it.
	She didn't care whether or not you clicked on it.
	It was important to her.
	Her fee-fees and every other executive has now taken this on.
	And of course it's been mixed with political...
	For some reason the British police took it on.
	Yeah, but it really is the reality.
	It doesn't matter if you click on it or any of those little headers.
	It doesn't matter if they do anything.
	It is just to make people feel better.
	Here's my puppy.
	Thanks for all y'all do.
	Seriously, you make a huge difference in my life.
	I listen to your podcasts all the time, especially when I'm doing my art.
	And I just want to say thank y'all.
	Can we get some video comments of the art?
	And if we get more puppies as well.
	Sure, but like...
	Good trade.
	Yeah, good trade.
	But like, I'd like to see some of the art, because I can see, you know, on the side, but I'd like to see more.
	Yeah, thank you.
	The skull looks good, but also...
	I like dogs.
	See the next one.
	Just when I thought that the left couldn't get any worse with the semantics, I heard embryonic cardiac activity.
	And they're admitting that there's a heartbeat, but they're using semantics to say it's just activity.
	We all have an active heart.
	That's what makes us alive.
	Yes.
	It's not embryonic.
	Yeah, but that's the point, isn't it?
	Does it have to be embryonic?
	It's just the active heart, I think, is enough.
	Yeah, that's some weird code.
	Yeah, I've never even heard that, but that's a great point.
	The next one.
	For COVID. Even worse than that, I was forced to wear a mask the whole time I was there.
	God.
	I don't know what to say.
	That's just ridiculous.
	Yeah, we don't talk about COVID in any way, shape, or form at all, thank God, when we talk about ridiculous crap that's going on in our pub.
	If you go to a hospital and that wasn't down in PAP, it's just a lot.
	Yeah, I don't have my papers.
	Hospital, I pay for this!
	Yeah!
	The next one.
	Tony D and Littlejohn with him of The Legend of the Lotus Eaters.
	From Auntie Sonnen comes the story of Finland.
	And there's a ton of stories there, but I picked this one.
	It is the story of a serial murder by the name of Matty Hapja, who terrorized Helsinki in 1890.
	He was caught by the police, but he could give no reason for why he committed maybe up to 25 murders.
	Eventually, he hung himself in prison.
	And they say his spirit and that of his final victim wander the streets of Helsinki looking for peace and redemption.
	Why'd you do it?
	I don't live in Finland, mate.
	Long nights, you know.
	I'm so sick of sitting in saunas and then jumping in the ice again.
	I'm not doing it for another night.
	I'll kill anyone who suggests it.
	I've missed those videos.
	Bald Eagle says, Closing all possible back doors in the system, including removing everyone's system accesses at their own.
	You don't fight this much unless you're providing cover for someone or something's going on in the background.
	However, I'm waiting for the feds to forcibly install their own people into the company, citing national security risks put by radicals and white supremacists speaking uncensored.
	Possibly I'm more inclined to believe that it's just...
	It's not as deep as that.
	I think it was just difficult for Musk to actually prove his case in court.
	And so Twitter were like, are you going to give us a billion dollars?
	He's like, no, I'm just going to buy it.
	That's why things happened.
	S.H. Silver says, interesting, this is coming around the same time the Supreme Court is hearing a case about Section 230 and And how much platforms can restrict content?
	Yeah, that's interesting, isn't it?
	Because, like, if Musk buys Twitter, they can be like, oh my god, you know, we've got to apply or restrict or whatever, you know, we've got to change the rules, so Elon Musk can't just allow Donald Trump back on to say the election was stolen, basically.
	But don't give Musk credit until we see change in action.
	It won't be enough for Trump to be allowed on, but also the exiled thought leaders like Alex Jones.
	What about me?
	Ha!
	We don't need any more gay porn, Carl.
	Say that now.
	What would be your first action to get back on?
	Thanking people who are kind to us, I think.
	It's not going to be Milo's.
	Oh, sorry, was that too wholesome?
	Well, yeah, Milo's is going to be a lot less wholesome, isn't it?
	Yeah, it is, yeah.
	Milo's is going to be funny.
	I can't wait.
	You should be quoting Leviticus or whatever.
	Honestly, though, it may be as quick as Friday.
	This week.
	So, it, like...
	So...
	Okay, I've got to be ready.
	I'm just saying...
	Take the evening off, lads.
	Yeah, I'm just saying...
	Could be a good weekend.
	My wife's like, what are you doing?
	Come and spend time with the kids.
	It's like, I can spend time with the kids every other weekend.
	It's just going to be fun, Russell.
	I'm looking forward to it.
	The thing is, like I said, he's previously said, look, I'm just going to allow him back on.
	I was like, okay.
	Rick says, Jack Dorsey, of all people, recognising me for an open digital town square where everyone has a voice with no authoritarian madman shutting everything down whenever someone spouts heresy.
	I'll admit, I didn't see it coming, and I won't forgive Jack for his many and very varied unwise decisions up until this point.
	By all means, credit with credit to you.
	Well, that's the thing.
	I still think this is the same as Zuckerberg.
	I think they're on dragons that they didn't expect to be riding.
	I really didn't.
	What?
	I'm just imagining all the fun we're going to have.
	Just all the verified checkmarks, all the replies are now just going to be filled with...
	They'll be complaining about it, they won't be able to get away from it, they'll post something, the ability to stop comments will be deleted, so they just have to face the public.
	God, yeah, that'd be great.
	Callum says, the elites are like a cabal of dark elder.
	They're a little diving into their society and law, and you can see a lot of the parallels.
	That and the debauchery they do.
	I bet it is.
	Radcheck was right.
	These commies think that taping the company private violates their rights as users of the service.
	They're not shareholders.
	They're not even paying customers.
	I'm a shareholder.
	They're not even paying customers.
	They're the product.
	They're upset that they're going to be giving their attention to Musk for free to sell to the highest advertising bidders, bidding advertisers, and they don't have the willpower to quit their addiction.
	Pure comedy.
	Yeah.
	Who was it that when Elon Musk announced, right, I'm quitting Twitter, shut down their account for like 12 hours?
	Talcum X. Sean King.
	Yeah.
	I'm gone.
	I'm not gone.
	Shut up.
	None of them will leave.
	No, of course not.
	No matter how many Nigel Farage's get put under there.
	This is Trump brand heroin.
	I'm not using that.
	There you go.
	Do you want to use Hunter Biden branded crack?
	No, I'm not.
	Actually, that's...
	I'm going to get my crack from elsewhere.
	Thomas says, I once talked to my missus about her so-called work around the house, and when I woke up two days later in a hospital bed, she confided that she didn't agree with my estimation.
	That happens multiple times as well.
	There was someone else, some other feminist in the union representative, who just told us about how women were worthless, and it was like, what?!
	What's going on?
	I've had this conversation with my wife, because she's like, you don't appreciate what I do around the house.
	I'm like, no, I really do.
	Because I would have to do it all myself, and I would hate to have to do all of this myself.
	It's not going to work.
	But, you know, if some bigoted right-wing man said women basically do nothing, right?
	You'd be dumb, but whatever, right?
	But to have the union representative of a huge amount of women who work in this industry, and that representative to say that basically you don't do any work...
	Thanks, Labour.
	I don't know what to say.
	Honestly, I do think it's profoundly important what women do in the home, especially with raising kids.
	I'd rather it be my wife with the children than just some rando in a bloody nursery.
	Really?
	You don't want a sexual degenerate, mentally ill, purple-haired person?
	What, a 21-year-old who hates children has never really met one?
	No, I don't.
	No.
	A lot of people, in fact, are pointing this out.
	Not feeling well tonight, so I'm in bed.
	Wife is currently doing the dishes and putting the kids to bed.
	If I were to go and call what she is doing so-called work, I'm sure she would upgrade me from sick to dead.
	So-called work.
	I wouldn't have the balls to say it.
	My wife would bloody explode.
	It was the Labour Party, Sam.
	I'm just quoting a feminist, darling.
	Simplicicus says, why have the Tories not repealed or amended section 127 of the Communications Act?
	Police investigating mean tweets is wrong, but if the law changes and it stops, well, the eternal question, isn't it?
	Why aren't the Conservatives doing something?
	And they can just do it.
	They can just do it in a day.
	Like, literally, they could just, right, this afternoon we've done this, this afternoon we've done that, this afternoon we've done the other.
	I would have this country fixed in a week.
	Thomas says...
	It's annoying.
	People say that, like, if I was emperor, but in this country you can do that.
	Parliament is sovereign.
	You can do whatever you want.
	There's no constitution stopping them.
	And they've got a large enough majority that none of their opponents can stop them.
	Just rebuild this entire place.
	Like, I would have the entire country looking like Trumpton in a week.
	I swear to God.
	Thomas says, we don't need a warrant.
	That's why the British need a Second Amendment and presumption of self-defense, even against the police.
	An armed society is a polite society.
	Don't even get me started.
	Alexander says, Yeah, I think if we've seen nothing else, it's that the military and the police will happily do whatever the regime says.
	The institutions.
	Yeah.
	Sorry, but the institutions are run by the regimen.
	It'd be interesting to see if Donald Trump in January actually had some kind of plan and did try to, what the military would have done.
	But you have to have the right people in place.
	I guess we'll get to see in Brazil, won't we?
	General Haiping says, Carl, oh yeah, because they're dangerous weapons.
	Carl, people dealing with police in desperate situations will literally do anything if they somehow think it'll get them off the hook, or they can prosecute the police for violence against them while in custody.
	Beating themselves, swallowing random things, using anything as a potential weapon on the officers.
	Oh right, you're thinking of the jury.
	Yeah, he's like, come on, think it through.
	It's like, yeah, but also, there's a certain...
	type of woman in Britain who's 40 years old, has kids, has a house.
	Who shouldn't have been arrested anyway.
	Who shouldn't have been arrested.
	That isn't going to do that.
	Yeah, but it's not even a point.
	You can understand this is a procedure of taking someone to a cell.
	But you shouldn't have got anywhere near this.
	And that's more the confusion about the whole thing.
	And again, this very different view on things.
	This is why I keep pointing out that we're not a social contract society.
	I can actually predict a lot about the woman who's been arrested and her domestic life and her behaviour because of the social texture of this country.
	It's kind of indefinable.
	There's no reason to have taken a jury.
	She's not going to start mutilating herself with the jury in order to get the police in trouble.
	That might happen in America with random crackheads or whatever.
	It's not going to happen here.
	You can make the argument.
	You can make the argument.
	She's never going to do it.
	No, but there are the occasional person you think are never going to do it, and they do.
	And therefore, that's why the rule is applied to everyone.
	But either way, it's just fundamental that none of this makes any goddamn sense.
	The point you're thinking about sending her to a cell, you should already know what you've done is deeply illegal, and none of this needs to happen.
	Yeah.
	But what I'm saying is judgment can be exercised on the part of the officers.
	You've got a 40-year-old mother...
	Who's like, you know, middle class, perfectly, you know, she's not a wreck, right?
	She's not like...
	There are reasons as to why we ended up here.
	It's because things go wrong when you think, oh, they'll just deal with it.
	No, no, that's what I'm saying.
	Like...
	It is proper for the police that, like, you didn't need to check her socks for drugs.
	She obviously didn't have any drugs.
	Like, you know, living in this country, you know the sort of patterns of behaviour of 40-year-old mothers, you know, and you can tell by the condition of them.
	Like, if she's got, like, you know, she looks really haggard and she's got, like, You know, stained teeth and she's got cut marks on her arms or something.
	Okay, maybe check her socks for drugs.
	Someone sleeping rough who clearly has symptoms of heavy drug use.
	Exactly.
	But she's a perfectly normal, middle-class looking mother who's cooking a chicken.
	I understand what you mean, but the rules are the rules, and there are reasons as to why you get to this point, but the logic of how we ended up in clown world country is something else.
	Lord Nerevar says, I was horrified reading the story of the woman arrested for someone else's words.
	So many things wrong here.
	Is it okay for a male police to manhandle a woman in online comments that she didn't even make on nothing but an allegation and without a warrant?
	Why are we doing this over effing speech anyway?
	Total lawlessness, as Callum says.
	Yeah, it's ridiculous.
	Omar says, telling someone to lift their socks to check for smuggled memes sounds like someone asking how many weeds you've injected.
	Have you seen a meme before?
	Is it in the room with you right now?
	Yeah, I mean, that's what this is about, fundamentally.
	Yeah.
	Do you have any more memes in your wallet?
	Yeah.
	No?
	What?
	Sorry.
	George says, you can put a mental patient against Piers Morgan and he'll come out as the good guy.
	Tate barely got a word in, and much like Morgan's interaction with Tommy Robinson, he acts like an inquisition demanding an apology, which is only a confession and will earn you no forgiveness.
	I don't know how people can watch him without exploding.
	Yeah, I mean, I'm baffled, frankly.
	I'm gonna forward an image to John about that.
	It's just the...
	There was a form of protest in the comments which people are just listing every time Piers Morgan interrupted.
	Yeah.
	And it's now become like a way of protesting is just endlessly listing that list.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Piers' interruptions.
	Just be like, you are a prick.
	Lord Sverig says, could Piers be playing 4D chess?
	He is a moron in all political directions, making me think that he feigns stupidity to get views by people searching for a reliable cringe cow.
	Yeah, you can see the comment here.
	This is great.
	And it's a full-ass list.
	You can see there's read more under all of those.
	But it's just post after post after post, and it's a huge list of just interruptions.
	As you can see, I mean, the text is already taken up by 1.30.
	Jordan says, I find Andrew Tate to be a bumbling prick 90% of the time, and yet even he is somehow able to debate Piers Morgan and come out the winner.
	Like I said, I don't know much about Tate, to be honest.
	I only know what, like, everyone in the media is saying.
	He's like, oh, he's evil.
	He's obviously just fairly evil.
	The idea that he's evil is...
	Obviously.
	I don't think his views on the world actually map to reality.
	He's so...
	In the clips I've seen that from his accounts get posted at me before he got banned, he would be so vulgar on the nose and sometimes out there it was just like, that's not true.
	Where it was silly.
	But that's the thing.
	If you wanted to take him down and you were going to do an interview trying to do that, like Piers obviously was, you could find stuff, but instead he found that.
	I was like, what?
	Well, like I said, I've never really seen any of his content, so that was pretty much the first extended piece of Andrew Tate talking that I've seen, and nothing he said there was wrong.
	Exactly right, but if I wanted to take you down, I could clip things out of context and know how to build a case, but if instead I came to you and went...
	Yeah, by the way, you don't think equality is the ultimate right in which we do everything.
	You'd be like, well, obviously not, you moron.
	I'm not a communist.
	Maureen says, people like people without excess baggage.
	The more you something is, the less it is worth.
	Logical.
	Good Lord, Morgan.
	Stop being a wet sock and let the guy finish his sentence.
	That's exactly it.
	That's exactly it.
	The more baggage you accrue, the more difficult it becomes to find someone who's willing to accept you with the baggage.
	Try not to accrue that much baggage.
	It's not that hard.
	It's not even that offensive.
	It's just common sense and good advice to young women.
	The end point being ultimately true.
	Just shut up.
	Yeah.
	Because Morgan, every time you open your mouth, you seem to put your foot in it.
	Otherwise, we're out of time.
	So, if you'd like more from us, we'll be back tomorrow at one o'clock.

▲