Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 9, 2023 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:30:44

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #649

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of Lotus Eaters.
	This is episode 649.
	I'm your host Harry, joined today by Dan.
	Hello.
	And today we're going to be covering how Californian reparations have been agreed at 1.2 million dollars.
	I'm hoping that's all together, although I'm sure you'll elucidate all of that for me.
	We're going to be talking about St.
	Neely of New York and also some of the stuff that's gone on with the Texas shooting.
	And then we're going to be finally covering based Robert Kennedy Jr.
	Is there such a thing as a based Democrat?
	You've got some work convincing me on this one.
	It's a relative scale, but I think you're warm to him.
	There are aspects to like about that man, I think.
	Okay, you've got a tough road ahead of you to convince me, but I'm open to it.
	We see we get there in the end, shall we?
	Alright then, so without any further ado, let's get into the news.
	Yes, so California has agreed reparations, and so I have decided as of today I shall be identifying as a Californian black man.
	So I'd like to greet you with a fresh what's-up and a boyashka.
	I believe that's the... May I have my pass, please?
	That's the way it's done.
	If you are as such, then you will hand me a pass to prove it.
	There you go.
	You have a pass for the duration of this segment.
	So, yes, California.
	For those of you who don't know, California is a failed state on America's west coast.
	They used to be fairly famous for making movies and growing oranges.
	But these days, it has descended into a socialist hellhole that produces sadness, profits for U-Haul and internet censorship.
	Speaking of internet censorship, we have been demonetized, so I encourage you to go over to the website and sign up at lotuseaters.com, where you'll find lots of fascinating premium content, such as this one, Broconomics No.
	20, which is looking at universal basic income, which is an idea not terribly dissimilar to the sort of hands-out that we're going to be talking about today.
	So, yes, have you ever been to California, Harry?
	I've never been to America.
	Oh, really?
	Oh, okay.
	I went to California once.
	How was it?
	I was surprised.
	Was it pre- or post-homeless camps on every corner?
	I don't know if there's ever not been such a thing in California.
	I went a long time ago, sort of back in early 2000 or something, and saw Britney Spears walking down the street.
	Was it still a red state at that point?
	Was it still a red state then?
	No, no, no.
	It had gone.
	I mean, they did have a Republican governor for a while, but that was Arnold Schwarzenegger.
	Yes!
	Yes, they did, didn't they?
	And for a long time it was a red state, as far as I'm aware, and then it flipped and now we're in the 60s or 70s.
	Oh, Reagan was from there, wasn't he?
	So he probably would have influenced it quite a bit.
	But no, it has descended quite a bit since those days.
	And, you know, this latest budget proposal... Well, actually, let's talk about the budget of California, because the budget of California runs at about 300 billion a year, and this proposal to give reparations would cost 600 billion.
	So, possibly, possibly not affordable.
	And in addition to that... I'm sure all those Hollywood moguls are happy to see their taxes double for the privilege of ending racism.
	Funny you should mention that, because a lot of them are leaving.
	Let's have a look at this chart.
	Oh, really?
	This is net domestic migration in the United States.
	And as you can see, people are going into Florida, Texas, and some other sort of sensible places, and they're fleeing out of California and New York.
	I will just make this argument very quickly, which is, in all likelihood, fleeing to these much better places and immediately ruining them by changing the voting demographics of these places.
	Texas, for instance, has a number of democratic strongholds in the major cities there, like Austin, which is a very deep blue city, as far as I'm aware.
	Well, I mean, all cities are basically blue at this point, aren't they, in the US?
	In the US, as far as I'm aware.
	Probably Europe as well.
	What would you say, actually, seeing as you say you've been to California, what would you say, because I've heard that the difference in California, like many places, is that the L.A., San Francisco, all of these places, deep blue hellholes, but the countryside is very red.
	Did you experience that?
	Well, I didn't spend that long, because basically I went to L.A.
	And then you thought, I need to get out of here as quickly as possible?
	Yes, I was so appalled, I then promptly went off to Vegas.
	Oh, okay.
	And spent the rest of my time there, which was much better.
	Well, actually, no, it was incredibly tacky, but I quite liked it.
	Yes, but no.
	So what have this task force in the US done?
	And this task force, which is recommending these reparations, they're not some joke committee.
	They're not, you know, some organisation that's sort of been self-appointed.
	This is appointed under the auspices of the Secretary of State Department of Justice.
	So it's a guy called Rob Benita.
	So he's the justice secretary for California and he's appointed it.
	We can have a look at the committee now.
	So there we go.
	So there's the sort of official website of it.
	And if we scroll down, we see the task force members who have decided that black people should get a 1.2 million.
	I thought you said this wasn't a joke committee?
	I mean, to be fair, most committees are.
	I don't know what the first thing that leaps out at you about this committee, but the first thing that I notice is they're all Californians.
	Well, that's a problem to start off with.
	So possibly they have some incentive to come down on this view.
	But they've published a report, so they were basically commissioned to go and look at The horrors of slavery and other forms of oppression that have kept their people down and then they have decided to award a monetary number against that that they feel is appropriate and there's lots of factors that go into it but it basically comes up to about 1.2 million in total for all of this.
	They've produced an executive summary.
	1.2 million dollars just to be split between all black people in California?
	No, each.
	Yes.
	I think in order to qualify for the full amount, you need to tick all the boxes that they've got on various kinds.
	And what are these boxes?
	Or are we going to get into those?
	We will get into that.
	Before we do, let's have a quick look at some of the discussions that they had.
	Here we are.
	Reparations are not only morally justifiable, but they have the potential to address longstanding racial disparities and inequality.
	The equivocal number from the 1860s for 40 acres today is $200 million for each and every African American.
	California Democrats applauding the move that takes them one step closer to giving more than a million dollars to each black resident, despite activists saying it's still not enough.
	How did I know?
	I could presage that answer at the end, because I was about to say, so as soon as they've got all of this money, I'm sure.
	Racism is fixed.
	They'll never ask for any money ever again.
	We can put all of this behind us.
	Finally, all the races in California can hold one another hand in hand and walk into a beautiful colourblind society.
	My understanding is that would be the case at 200 million.
	But as you heard... Are we sure it wasn't 400 million?
	200 seems a bit stingy to me.
	Not everybody is happy with the 1.2 million.
	Some do think it should be higher.
	And I think that comes from... Well, you know, if I had someone just offering me 1.2 million, I'd be like, oh, come on, mate.
	Come on, you're being a bit stingy.
	Yes, go on, pony up.
	I think what that comes from is during the Civil War, one of the northern generals, my understanding is a bit hazy, but one of the northern generals basically said, you know, come and fight for us and we'll give you 200 acres or whatever, 40 acres and a mule.
	I think that was the classic, yeah.
	Yeah, and this is a sort of, you know, a politician or a general basically making promises that he can't possibly keep, but that gentleman has remembered it and said, you know, 40 acres in today's money in California would be equivalent to 200 million, so...
	Well, this is all very, you know, reasonable.
	Very reasonable indeed.
	But if I remember correctly, the Rodney King riots, for instance, in LA, in California, in the early 1990s, they cost the state quite a lot.
	Oh, well the state doesn't have any money.
	So the state is about 1.2 trillion in debt.
	I thought they had 300 billion dollars a year?
	No, that's what they spend.
	Oh, okay.
	That's not what they make?
	No, sorry, that is not what they spend, that is how much they collect.
	They spend another 20 billion on top of that.
	So they're running this big deficit, and on top of that they've got these big pension liabilities, which is about 1.2 trillion, which they have no prospect of paying.
	Do you remember how much the George Floyd riots?
	Cost the US all in all?
	Oh, I can't remember.
	What on earth is going on?
	The city's collapsing.
	But, I mean, they were fiery but mostly peaceful, weren't they?
	St.
	Floyd tried to strike me down!
	Sure, shall we get into the detail of this one?
	Let's have a look at this article from The Hill.
	Have we got that one?
	Yep, there we go.
	So, if you want to get into the detail, The Hill have broken down what's behind it.
	So, they explain that Gavin Newsom in October of 2020 signed Bill AB 3121, which created the nation's first ever task force to study and recommend reparations for slavery.
	So their initial task was not to discover whether reparations are required, but to find out how much to recommend.
	This seems somewhat tilted.
	I assume they went into it with the assumption that there were.
	I mean... Oh, OK.
	Yeah.
	I mean, they produced a very large report.
	You can go and read it if you want.
	I mean, judging by this and the committee that we showed earlier, it's nice to say there's no bias in all of this.
	No, certainly not.
	The article goes on to explain, the task force is headed by nine members, five appointed by the governor, two appointed by the blah blah blah senate.
	A majority of the task force members are black, but I'm sure that had no bearing on No.
	On their conclusions in any way.
	Intra-racial preferences or anything like that.
	They don't exist.
	We live in the glorious Martin Luther King future.
	This task force was established at a time, the article reports, when the country was still grappling with the murder of George Floyd.
	Who had been killed by a Minneapolis police officer in May of that year.
	Very far away from California.
	I seem to remember, I watched the trial of that one, I don't think he was actually... George Floyd was actually murdered by the police officer.
	I know that they definitely convicted Derek Chauvin of it.
	Oh no, he was convicted of it.
	But the evidence didn't seem to come to that conclusion.
	I watched the evidence and it actually became clear when they showed the other camera angles that he wasn't kneeling on his neck and that he died of a fentanyl overdose and that came out in the coroner's report.
	But I can only presume that the jurors just didn't want their house burnt down at 4am.
	I'm sure it was a white man that provided the fentanyl.
	Quite possibly, yes.
	I don't think it was.
	But I just don't think the jury wanted to get their kids burnt alive at 4am.
	That's a reasonable concern.
	Although I remember there was an actual BLM activist in the jury as well.
	The article goes on to explain that the task force announced in March 2022 that any descendants of enslaved African-Americans living in the United States prior to the end of the 19th century would be eligible for reparations.
	So that means that 2.5 million Californians, about 6.5% of Californians are black, according to the latest data from the Census Bureau, and many of those are going to meet most of the requirements in order to get the cash.
	So, how much is being recommended?
	The proposal lists specific areas for reparations.
	Mass incarceration, Unfortunately, black people are quite unfairly incarcerated more, so that is one area that the report recommends that they should receive reparations.
	Discrimination in housing... So if you've been to prison, then you're entitled to the reparations, is that it?
	This seems like it's setting up perverse incentives, if so.
	I don't think it's even necessary to have been to prison, I think it's just because if you are part of a group that is jailed more, then that qualifies you for reparations.
	Carry on.
	Yes.
	They have an internal logic, I'm sure.
	The other aspects that they cite is unequal access to high-quality housing and health care and environmental injustices.
	So socioeconomic factors.
	Yes, yes.
	All of this adds up.
	So the incarceration one is apparently the committee has decided providing $115,000, $260,000 for each year residency in the state after 1971, which was the first year of the war on drugs, for each year residency in the state after 1971, which was the first year of the war on drugs, in order to make up for the fact that they information.
	As a result of the war on drugs?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	Yes.
	Because they explain that black men make up 13% of the population of the state, but 35% of those incarcerated.
	So therefore, reparations are needed.
	So just because there is disparity, we assume we fill in that nice big gap with racism?
	What other cause could it be apart from racism?
	Well, if there is one, they didn't mention it in the report.
	I'm just going by the report, so what can you judge it on?
	Also, they point out that black women make up 13% of the female population of the state, but are 44% of incarcerated women.
	I didn't know that figure, to be fair.
	So clearly there's something going on.
	They also cite housing policy that is also discriminatory.
	Let me guess, redlining?
	Yes, yes actually.
	That thing that stopped 60 years ago?
	That was one of the two big factors.
	The other factor they point out, which is a live issue today, is that the same home in a predominantly black neighbourhood as an equivalent home in a white neighbourhood tends to go for $48,000 less than the one in the white neighbourhood.
	So that is obviously discrimination.
	So if you are California and looking to buy a house in the next few weeks, make sure you offer $48,000 more than you would have done if you're buying it in a predominantly black neighborhood, because otherwise that would be discrimination.
	And for that, they are proposing that you get $148,000 to make up for that one.
	Also, environmental...
	So wait, did they just take the $48,000 and just add an extra $100,000 on?
	Pretty much.
	Okay, all right.
	I'm sure there was more of a process.
	This makes plenty of sense.
	There was a 500-page report, and I must say I didn't read it all.
	I did try to read the executive summary, but I don't think they quite understood what an executive summary was supposed to be.
	How could you bother to read 500 pages?
	I've tried to read long reports like that, and most of it is 490 pages of fluff, and you could condense it all down into about 10 pages.
	Well even the executive summary was 104 pages and executive summary is supposed to be like two pages and it looked like make work for academics to me.
	I would never hear of such a thing.
	Yes, no, I'm sure they were the right people for the job, to take a serious look at this.
	So, yes, the other thing is that there needs to be reparations for the fact that black Californians apparently have a lower average lifespan.
	Just those races and particles floating in the air targeting majority black neighbourhoods?
	Yes, the other one they cite is that apparently there was lower access to nutritious food.
	Because the food vendors in predominantly black areas tend to sell less nutritious food.
	So, reparations are also necessary for that.
	Carry on!
	Makes perfect sense to me.
	If any of our viewers are making any connections with any of this, I just want you to know, shame on you.
	Well, no, no, this is what the report says.
	I mean, this is all straight down the line.
	Those dots that you're putting together right now, absolutely shame on you.
	Yes.
	Now this isn't going to be paid out quite yet, because even though this was officially sanctioned by the top justice guy in California, and this report was sanctioned and there was a bill signed so they had to go and do it, and this is now the official recommendation, it does still need to go through the legislative and be signed by Gavin Newsom.
	But I kind of feel they made a bit of a rod for their own back because it is basically a one-party state.
	So now that you produced this report and you put a number to it, I'm not quite sure how you walk it back at this point.
	Because the normal thing is that you blame Republicans.
	I guess they don't.
	Yeah.
	I guess Gavin Newsom does just pay them out of his own pocket, I hope.
	But, you know, how is he going to do that?
	They haven't got the money.
	May I suggest borrowing it?
	That's never caused any problems.
	Yeah, but we're looking at 800 billion.
	800 billion to do this.
	And the report does add... Where is it?
	Okay.
	This is a very cautious initial assessment of what it will cost at a minimum.
	That's a minimum.
	Yes, so they're saying a minimum of 800 billion.
	Still, the panel recommends instead paying out a lump sum to eligible residents, the state begins with a down payment of a meaningful amount of funds as a first step.
	So pay them something and then worry about where you're going to get the rest of the money from later.
	Okay, seems like a good policy.
	And actually, I think it's quite sound.
	But, um, you know, why stop there?
	You know, seriously, why stop there?
	Because, um, you know, lots of whites were slaves in the U.S.
	as well.
	It never gets towards... No, no, no, no, seriously.
	Lies, lies, white supremacy, lies.
	Harry, I direct your attention to this book.
	This is White Cargo by Don Jordan and Michael Walsh and they tell the story of in the, and I'm reading from the blurb here, in the 17th and 18th century more than 300,000 white people were shipped to America as slaves.
	Urchins swept up from London streets to labour in tobacco fields where life expectancy was no more than two years.
	Brothels were raided to provide breeders for Virginia.
	Hopeful migrants were duped into signing indentured servants.
	"...unaware that they would become personal property and they could be bought and sold, even gambled away.
	Transported convicts were paraded for sale like livestock." So this is the part of the story that often doesn't get talked.
	Before the transatlantic slave, there was actually quite a thriving slave trade of whites being sort of shipped up and, you know, sent over there.
	Now, you know, some extracts from the book which is quite interesting because this is over sort of a 170 year period that this was taking place.
	Another quote from the book, some of these people were hardened criminals, but not all.
	Hundreds of girls sent over in the 1620s were probably child prostitutes dragged off London streets.
	In fact, James the first ordered that a hundred rowdy youths from Newmarket be shipped across to Virginia.
	And they were, in fact, just exuberant local lads whose horseplay had annoyed the King by making a bit of noise.
	So he just had 100 of them rounded up and sent off.
	Now, most shocking of all, this was a thing for quite a while.
	Kids from London streets would basically just be rounded up and put on boats and shipped over.
	And it wasn't just the British as well, loads of Irish went over as indentured servants.
	Now, indentured servitude is slightly different to slavery, and in theory it's better, because eventually you can buy your way out, at the end of your term.
	Unfortunately, in reality, it didn't tend to make an awful lot of difference, because most people tended to die before they got to the point where they could, in theory, buy their way out.
	Being serious for a moment, that is something interesting that I've read about.
	from Thomas Sowell when he was talking about the distinction between them was that historically if you look to the records people were actually more incentivized to treat their slaves better because they were a longer term investment whereas the indented servitude having a definitive cut-off point at which you can't use them anymore are treated more like disposable property that you can use up as quickly as possible and throw away
	Well, that's the economics of it, and to speak in purely economic terms, very impersonal economic terms, if you have a slave, that is an asset that is yours for life, whereas an indentured servant, you've got them for whatever it is, you know, four or five years, and beyond that you get no value from them.
	So your incentive is to give them the hardest, dirtiest job to get the maximum possible out of them, and you just don't care if they don't live beyond four or five.
	So, for instance, the Irish were lots of indentured servants, so they would be given the hard, back-breaking jobs.
	Yes.
	Very much so.
	And the casualty rate was ridiculous for them.
	So most of them never made it out of the indentured servitude period.
	So it was not just the one racial group that experienced slavery in America.
	And actually... And this isn't even to talk about the Arab slave trade either.
	Well, no, it's funny you mention that because, you know, I wanted to talk about that as well.
	I mean, that went on for, of course, many centuries beforehand.
	You often see those sort of paintings, don't you, of... In fact, I think we've got one here.
	This is... Yeah, so this is an image... You get many of these images, these sort of famous old paintings of, you know, the Barbary slaves, slave traders.
	who would head out from North Africa and they would raid the coastal villages of European towns.
	And they did this for many centuries.
	So, you know, we see here in this image, you know, a North African pirate who has obviously conducted a raid on a European village, snatched up whoever he could get his hands on, and is then selling them on to, you know, the Arabs.
	Yeah, and if you're going to talk about the trading of Africans as slaves, then I believe the Arabs as well had a far, far greater number of African slaves imported over a particular time period as well than the transatlantic slave trade ever experienced.
	Yeah, I mean, to be clear, we're not saying that the transatlantic slave trade wasn't evil and awful, of course it was.
	Obviously it was.
	But it is a small part of the overall picture.
	I mean, really what we're saying is that history is awful, and everybody suffered, and slavery happened in many places Although I do believe as well that if you look into the figures, modern slavery is actually, there's more people in modern slavery right as we speak right now than there was at any one particular time in history as well.
	Again, affecting primarily North Africa, especially states that have been intervened in by the US, you now have sort of open slave markets on a number of cities.
	All for democracy.
	Yes.
	Yes, but slavery has been one of those blights.
	In fact, interestingly, with the Barbary slave trade, just talking about that, you mentioned there were more slaves today.
	Another interesting thing from a historical perspective is more blacks have enslaved whites and the other way around.
	Oh, really?
	Because of that Barbary slavery.
	For centuries, the Barbary slaves would just go around the European coastline, Was it Biden who tweeted out recently saying that Muslim culture has been part of the US since the very beginning?
	Yes, I'm not sure if that's what he meant.
	If everybody was pointing out, oh well, you did go to war over the Barbary slave trade very early on, so it makes sense.
	But no, I mean, broadly, that is the interesting point, because slavery is something that has happened to all peoples throughout history.
	Every race has basically done it to every other race.
	The transatlantic slave trade was absolutely awful, but it was a small part of the entire picture of what's going on.
	You know, the only people who stand out in all of history, I would say, would be the British, because they're the ones who decided to end it.
	And they, of course, spent an awful lot of blood and treasure trying to stamp it out.
	For many years, when we decided that enough was enough, it was British ships who went out onto the high seas who went around enforcing this and trying to stamp out the slave trade.
	In fact, do you remember that clip with a British royalist and Don Lemon?
	I'll remind you of it.
	I think we've got it.
	Oh, OK.
	I don't believe I've seen this.
	Yeah, let's have a look at this.
	You have those who are asking for reparations for colonialism, and they're wondering, you know, $100 billion, $24 billion here and there, $500 million there.
	Some people want to be paid back, and members of the public are wondering, why are we suffering when you have all of this vast wealth?
	Those are legitimate concerns.
	Well, I think you're right about reparations in terms of if people want it, though, what they need to do is you always need to go back to the beginning of a supply chain.
	Where was the beginning of the supply chain?
	That was in Africa.
	And when, across the entire world, when slavery was taking place, which was the first nation in the world that abolished slavery?
	The first nation in the world to abolish it, it was started by William Wilberforce, was the British.
	In Great Britain, they abolished slavery.
	Two thousand Naval men died on the high seas trying to stop slavery.
	Why?
	Because the African kings were rounding up their own people.
	They had them on cages, waiting in the beaches.
	No one was running into Africa to get them.
	And I think you're totally right.
	If reparations need to be paid, we need to go right back to the beginning of that supply chain and say, who was rounding up their own people and having them handcuffed in cages?
	Absolutely, that's where they should start.
	And maybe, I don't know, the descendants of those families where they died in the high seas trying to stop the slavery, those families should receive something too, I think, at the same time.
	Fair points.
	I love that moment there where you can see Don Lemon nervously clearing his throat.
	So there we have it.
	Reparations are a good thing and the people who should be getting them are the British.
	I will be very interested as an off-note, if they do eventually get this, get these reparations, what is it, 1.2 million dollars each, well, that'll really shore up those socio-economic factors that we always hear about that cause crime, right?
	Well, certainly buy shares in Mercedes and BMW.
	Well, so I'll be really interested to see what happens to the crime rates of cities like Los Angeles and particular parts of it when they get all of this money.
	Anyway, let's move on to the portrait of a saint.
	- We can drop off a clip, I'm sure.
	So we can finally test out all of those sociological theories that are put forward, that are always put forward as if they are just 100% true.
	Very interested.
	Anyway, let's move on to the portrait of a saint.
	Last week I covered the death of Jordan Neely, who is a man who was terrorizing people on the subway, was put into a chokehold by a passerby, a good Samaritan, who was on the same subway car as him, aided by two other men, one of whom, just to be absolutely clear, was black, One of the people who was aiding him was black, and as a result of this altercation ended up dying, sadly.
	Nobody wanted him to die, these people were just trying to make sure that he was no longer a threat.
	to the other people on the subway car.
	Immediately after, lots of word came out speaking about how, oh, he was just a Michael Jackson impersonator, he was a sweet, tortured soul, he came from a very problematic and traumatic background, his mother was murdered by his stepfather, who, in rather brutal fashion, I've got to say, murdered her, strangled her, and then stuffed her into a suitcase.
	Oh God.
	Really?
	Wow.
	No, in fact, I think it was a briefcase, is what the reporting I've seen have said.
	Not much better, to be honest.
	No, no, not much better at all.
	In fact, worse.
	A briefcase would be smaller.
	And you've got all those filey bits at the top, so you would have had... Well, it's horrible, either way.
	Obviously a tragedy, nobody wanted any of this to happen, but...
	People immediately came out for blood.
	They started to throw vigils for this man, Jordan Neely.
	They started to protest on the streets of New York, chanting Black Lives Matter.
	All the usual suspects came out.
	AOC came out, as she does, showing her incredible microwave brain, saying that this was a murder before she had any idea what was going on.
	And there's just more information that's been coming out now, painting the portrait.
	We already had a lot of information painting this Jordan Neely bloke as somewhat of a dodgy character before all of this, before today.
	But a lot more information has come out since, just to show how much of a deserving of sainthood.
	This young man was.
	And then there's been some other stuff that I'll get onto as we get onto it, as there have been some consequences of this, and it really wasn't looking good for the mainstream narratives and the mainstream media, until, happily for them, what the mainstream media always wants to happen happened, which was a conveniently timed mass shooting happened in Texas.
	And they can pivot to that and the white supremacy that supposedly inspired it.
	So before I get into the full story there, I would like to point you to the website because, as Dan pointed out in the first segment, we are demonetised.
	We also do have now a donate tab where you can donate discrete amounts of money to us if you'd like to support us.
	But if you just want a membership, that'll give you access to all of the content that we've got on the website.
	They start out £5 per month.
	And for instance of the sorts of content that we put out, we've got this recent contemplations from Josh where he's talking about IQ and questioning how accurate it is as a measure of intelligence.
	He goes through quite a lot here.
	I'm not entirely sure that personally I agree with everything that he's saying in here, although he is much more read up on the subject than I am, but he definitely puts forward a very unique and interesting perspective.
	Well that's what makes it interesting, because he puts forward a challenging perspective.
	He does put across a lot of the genuine problems that come with getting people to take IQ tests.
	Just some of the issues like the fact that you can game these IQ tests.
	If you understand pre-taking the test what kind of questions are going to be coming up ahead, that could improve your IQ score in a way that's unnatural, so to speak.
	And also questions whether, you know, the IQ point itself is...
	Measuring anything that's particularly useful, but... Yeah, good video, that one.
	Yeah, that's the video.
	You should check that out.
	And without any further ado, let's get into the rest of this.
	So, this is the video that I did last week, talking about this new civil rights martyr just dropped.
	I basically went over all of the information.
	So, if you want a more in-depth discussion of that, please go and watch that video.
	And please watch it on Rumble, because they don't hate us like YouTube does, and Mr. Neil Mohan, who runs it right now.
	But, as I said, there is an insane level of narrative shifting and copium going on.
	For instance, yesterday, Calum and I watched this clip.
	I don't know if you've seen this one.
	No.
	This is from the Majority Report, which is Sam Seder's show.
	Nothing that you would be interested in watching, let's be perfectly honest.
	But this woman makes the absurd and incredible claim that not wanting to feel threatened or be assaulted on the subway in New York is a bougie attitude.
	If you don't- Hang on.
	Not wanting to be assaulted is a bourgeois attitude?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	It's a demonstration of an aristocratic mindset, you could say.
	So to be enlightened, you should want to be assaulted on the tube?
	Or at least accept it.
	Not necessarily want it, you don't have to just want it, but you just have to accept it.
	But if it happens, it happens.
	If it happens, then sucks to be you.
	And what if I'm standing by watching a mother and child being beaten on the tube?
	Should I just ignore that?
	Well, the man doing the beating is probably undergoing a mental health crisis, and you should probably do as- Right, so I should be supportive of him?
	Yes.
	Perhaps give him money?
	Probably, that might help.
	Right, okay, I will remember that.
	This might just be an aggressive sales tactic for the homeless.
	Right.
	He was beating you for your money instead of asking for it, you know, they're adaptive.
	Because I think the case in this case, I mean, he wasn't, you know, that Marine guy, he nearly wasn't threatening him, was he?
	He was threatening... He was threatening everybody on the subway carriage.
	He was having some kind of mental breakdown, he was talking about how he's not afraid to go to prison, which, judging by his track record that we'll get into, he certainly was not.
	Then he said, I'm not afraid to die, took off his jacket and threw it to the ground in a very aggressive manner, and from the stories that we've heard of this man, people on the New York subway system were probably Well aware of him.
	In fact, I saw a tweet.
	I've not included it on this, but I think it was Steve Saylor, if you're familiar with him.
	He pointed out from a New York Times article there was a point where it mentioned that he was apparently on a 50 scariest homeless people in New York list.
	So he was very... People in the city were very, very familiar with him, especially because he was so prominent as a Michael Jackson impersonator.
	And the mainstream media... New York has a 50 scariest homeless people list that it maintains.
	Apparently!
	Apparently, I can only assume it's very democratic where you all just vote for... I used to subscribe to the 50 best wine bars, eateries and pubs on Alder Street in London.
	Of course you did.
	It never occurred to me to subscribe to the scariest... You're wearing that jumper, with that shirt, talking with that accent, of course you did!
	But we had AOC demonstrating her immense, girthy, wrinkly brain, where she said, Republicans keep blaming mass shootings on mental health, but then defend the killing of the mentally ill too.
	These are not contradictory statements.
	No, not really.
	No, they don't have to be contradicting each other.
	You can say, mass shootings are blamed on mental health, and then if you don't do anything to help the mental health crisis, then if the mentally ill people assault you, then they might die.
	Have you got that chart that I've seen on Twitter, the one which is where to find mentally ill people, and it used to be in asylums and then prisons and basically- Oh I've not seen that one actually, that sounds like a very interesting chart.
	Because something happened in the US where they basically decided they were going to stop putting people in mental asylums and they were just going to let them roam the street until they committed enough crime and then put them in jail instead.
	That sounds fair.
	Yes.
	This is reparations.
	But then there was this New York Times article which was actually very interesting because at first I thought that this was going to be some kind of nonsense excusing it and it starts off like that because New York Times, it's been pointed out, have done this a lot recently.
	They'll start the first few paragraphs will be some woke nonsense saying, oh this really makes us think about interracial disparities and systematic racism and all that and then the rest of the article will just be going through the facts and explaining I'm explaining it in a very matter-of-fact manner.
	Is that because they have the stats that lefties only read the first paragraph?
	That's probably true, actually.
	So it starts off saying, Their encounter, captured on video by another passenger, has once again revealed the deep fault lines in the way New Yorkers and Americans beyond view race, homelessness, crime, and how some people seem to be treated differently by the police.
	The veteran Mr. Penny, who is the person who applied the chokehold, who is white, was questioned by the police but has not been charged with a crime for killing Mr. Neely Who was black, and obviously the implication there is supposed to be, can you believe this definitely wouldn't happen to a black person, even if in the black person's situation who was applying the chokehold, it would have been justified, in the same way that I would argue that this was justified.
	And certainly if you watch the full video, which is now out, you can see that the initial reports that were put out there of him being held in a chokehold for 15 minutes, don't appear to be true, and in fact they kept checking on him and they put him into the recovery position as soon as they were done restraining him and making sure that he wasn't a threat to anybody else any longer.
	And once again, this is not just a case of a white lynching, this was a team effort by three men who came from multiple different racial backgrounds because, shockingly enough, as far as I can tell, black people also don't want to be feeling threatened on the subway in New York.
	Or have their wives or sisters or daughters threatened as well.
	I mean, this is a natural thing for a man to do, to step up when, you know, when there is a threat to the people around you.
	If you can step up, you will step up.
	Rightfully so.
	It's just something that you do.
	And once again, if you're going to have all of these policies that make it so that the crazies roam the streets, like you're saying, commit enough crimes and then they get put in prison, well if you're still in the they're committing enough crimes position and the people around this situation are recognizing, "Oh, the police aren't here or the police aren't going to step up.
	They are eventually going to have to take matters into their own hands." That's how I see it at least.
	They also ask, "Was this a citizen trying to stop someone from hurting others or an overreaction to a common New York encounter with a person with mental illness?" This is just common.
	In New York, this is perfectly common.
	Just continue to let yourselves be terrorized by people who should be in an institute.
	To be fair, where that guy did go wrong is the only correct play here would have to have not been in New York in the first place.
	This is true.
	Yeah.
	This is true.
	But then if New York ends up completely ghosting itself and just becomes a ghost town... Well, in the last segment we saw the stats on where people are moving, aren't we?
	People are just leaving New York.
	But that does mean that all of a sudden hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers will have to go somewhere else.
	And other cities and other places will have to deal with thousands of New Yorkers.
	Well, we only want the ones who think that this sort of thing is bad to go elsewhere.
	The people who think that, you know, it's boredom and you should just accept it.
	Oh, they can stay.
	That's fair.
	And they also point out here, friends and family told the slain man's sunny and upbeat demeanour as he struggled after his mother's murder when he was a teenager.
	They're going through the narrative, etc, etc.
	But then we get to the part of the article where most liberals have already got their fill.
	Yes.
	And they switch off and they go, I am informed now, I can move on.
	Because it really does paint a picture, the rest of this article.
	So they say, outreach workers noted that Mr. Neely heavily used K2, a powerful, unpredictable synthetic marijuana.
	And I've never done any synthetic drugs like that in my life, but from the people that I know who have, Come into contact with people who do those kinds of synthetic forms of marijuana.
	They're really bad and can kill you, and will make you go completely crazy.
	Yeah, that's because you don't want to come into contact with them.
	People who take them go on schizo outbursts and try and hurt people.
	That's why you don't.
	It's the same as- This is what Peter Hitchens is always warning us about.
	Yeah, it's true.
	In June 2019, an outreach worker noted that Mr. Neely had lost considerable weight and was sleeping upright, like some kind of vampire horse.
	Yeah.
	Around that time, he was reported to have banged on a booth agent's door and threatened to kill her, according to the worker's notes.
	Then he was gone.
	At some point, Mr. Neely became a client of Intensil Mobile Treatment Team, one of the squads of mental health clinicians who minister to people in streets and shelters.
	In March 2020, the team had Mr. Neely taken to Bellevue Hospital.
	where he was kept for a week.
	According to the homeless outreach records, it was not clear what contact the team had with him after that.
	In November 2021, his aggression seemed to peak when he punched a 67-year-old woman in the street on Lower East Side, the police said.
	The woman suffered severe facial injuries, including a broken nose.
	According to court documents, he was charged with assault and awaiting the resolution of his case, spent 15 months in jail, though his family said the stint was shorter.
	He pleaded guilty on February 9th of this year, 2023, in a carefully planned strategy between the city and his lawyers to allow him to get treatment and stay out of prison.
	Which is always the fun thing, they want to keep these people out of prison.
	So he walked up to a 67-year-old woman and punched her so hard that it broke her nose, and the authorities are perfectly well aware of this and they thought that the correct response was to get him back on the streets as soon as reasonably possible.
	Yes, and this was one of 44 separate arrests.
	Which the news liked to point out was mainly for doing things like jumping the turnstiles in the subway, but also included violent outbursts against elderly people.
	To be fair, I did assume that he wasn't buying all of these tube tickets.
	No.
	No, he was not.
	He was to go from court to live at a treatment facility in the Bronx and stay clean for 15 months.
	In return, his felony conviction would be reduced.
	He promised to take his medication and to avoid drugs and not leave the facility without permission.
	Oh, well, if he's promised, then, you know... 13 days later, he abandoned the facility.
	Right.
	Okay.
	The judge issued a warrant for his arrest, and then on April 8th, when outreach workers approached him in a subway car at the end of the line in Coney Island, he urinated in front of them.
	When an outreach worker went to call the police, according to the worker's notes, Mr Neely said, just wait until they get here, I got something for you, just wait and see.
	Officers arrived and ejected him from the train, unaware of his arrest warrant.
	This just seems like a series of failed... This is just a series of failure on the city's behalf, as far as I'm concerned, to keep the streets safe.
	It really feels like the story could have easily have been that this thing didn't happen and the following day he pushed somebody onto the track or he...
	Oh, he tried to do that a number of times.
	Oh, did he?
	People found very quickly on Reddit a number of reports from people who'd been talking about him for the past ten years, almost, talking about how Michael Jackson impersonator normally is really nice, today he went schizo and tried to assault me, Michael Jackson impersonator tried to threaten to murder me, tried to push me onto the tracks, I saw him hurt somebody, I saw him just harassing an old lady, etc, etc.
	This has been going on for a long time, there's a reason He got 44 separate arrests.
	So hang on, something's just occurred to me.
	Oh, go on.
	Isn't he supposed to be black?
	Yes.
	So how is he a Michael Jackson impersonator?
	Excellent question.
	Now we're getting into the really, really important stuff.
	Right, we're getting into the deep lore of this one.
	No, but this article, as thorough as it is, shockingly, after you get past the first few woke sentences, does miss out quite a bit though.
	For instance, if we go to the next one, there was reports from the... if you scroll down, I just want to remember to get the source right for us, John.
	Thank you.
	New York Daily News.
	Like I said, they say 42 times.
	I had also heard 44.
	But they say on June 27th, 2019, he was arrested for punching a 64-year-old man in the face during a fight in a Greenwich village subway station.
	Excuse me, and... He tends to prefer fighting the older people, doesn't he?
	Generally vulnerable people, because he doesn't have an age limit.
	It can be very young people as well.
	For instance, he was also busted in August 2015 for attempting a kidnapping when he was seen dragging a 7-year-old girl down an inward street.
	And this man was still on the streets, and people like AOC are going, oh this is just a case of mental illness, we need to protect this poor baby.
	This is the thing that I cannot get with the left, is the people that they pick as their saints, why do they choose these people?
	I'll give you an example.
	I saw a video and it genuinely outraged me.
	It was basically this older black guy and I don't think he had a record or anything like that.
	I mean, he wasn't homeless, he was just this guy in one of the smaller cities and his thing was that he walked around with a piece of wood and he whittled it, he carved things into it and he had this like two-inch blade and he was always doing this and he was perfectly harmless.
	Anyway, this police officer basically pulls up behind him gets out behind him, orders him to drop the knife, and within about a second shoots him in the back.
	And that was a genuinely outrageous thing for a police officer to do against this completely harmless guy who's just whittling a bit of wood.
	Yeah, that's terrible.
	And yet the left did not pick up on that one at all.
	They didn't care.
	But that was a genuine thing that they could have picked up on, and the right would have been like, yeah, you're right actually, that was entirely wrong, and of course the cop got off.
	But they don't pick guys like that.
	They don't pick the genuine cases where, you know, police or whatever goes too far.
	They pick their heroes from these guys, who, from what you're telling me, is a total scumbag and a liability.
	Seems so.
	Well, judging from what you said there, I...
	Just on the spot, I'm trying to think of two potential reasons why they would choose these types of people.
	My first guess would be in a similar way to the way that Labour opened the floodgates for immigration in the UK for the reported, what was said was a rub the rights face in immigration.
	I feel like this is a case of rub the rights face into generosity.
	These are your new heroes, these are the sorts of people.
	And also, if they do choose their martyrs in a way that everybody can agree, at the same time, the left and the right, so to speak, then you're not going to have the partisan combat.
	The left always wants to be able to point to the right and say, see you're racist.
	There needs to be friction in order for it to be a story to generate the media discussion in order to...
	And to continue to promote the narrative.
	Yeah, so to give it the oxygen for the fire to burn.
	So that the right can turn around and say, well, obviously this guy was a scumbag, while it's sad that he died, it's not like he didn't do things that prompted the action that led to him dying, the left can turn around and go, you're racist, this is racial violence.
	So as a result of this mechanism, all the left's heroes are nutters, basically.
	Yes.
	Right.
	That's just off the top of my head.
	That's a reason that I could get it.
	Yes, and interestingly, on the subject of the narrative being pushed, the USA Today, as noted in this article, had said at the time that he was just a... they just reported on him as being a beloved Subway performer who grew up in a family of musicians who wanted to be remembered... who want him to be remembered as a human being.
	Well, no one's disputing that he's a human being.
	We're just disputing that he was not a very good one.
	Yes.
	And may have put himself in a situation where something like this was going to happen, and certainly the people around him, the city and the politicians around him, put him in that situation.
	But, the actual questions that people started to ask after this was the one that you just asked.
	Why is it that we always get these people shoved in our faces, and why is it always highlighting particular types of interracial violence when they want to promote these narratives, that being white on black?
	And somebody posted this meme.
	Endwokeness did.
	I saw that one.
	Yeah, if we scroll down.
	Elon Musk himself replied to this, and then all of a sudden Elon Musk started to reply to a lot of these things.
	So Endwokeness put Perspective as Everything with a graph showing the differences in interracial violent crime incidents in 2018, which shows that white on black was, next to Hispanic on black, the lowest figure.
	While also highlighting that the media always point this out, which the graph also shows that black and white is also the overwhelming majority of interracial violent crime incidents.
	Elon responds to it, and then immediately the cope begins.
	The cope begins to flow.
	So if we go to the next one... Well, two things on that.
	I mean, first of all, Elon Musk is, of course, an African-American himself.
	And the second point is, I mean, that chart is just interracial violence.
	I think black-on-black is by far the biggest.
	Oh, yes, very much so.
	But if you're talking purely about interracial violence, at least in 2018, this graph seems to show, and they got the source from the Bureau of Justice Statistics.
	And also the, I think there's FBI victimization surveys.
	There's also, there's plenty of ways that you can get this information.
	There's the CDC wonder reports, I think, which show the deaths that have happened, and then the cause of deaths, and then they'll give all of the figures related to that.
	This, they immediately came out with this cope thread.
	I say they, because they are the regime that operate in tandem with one another.
	They're a hive mind anyway, aren't they?
	The stooges all come out.
	No, no, no, go back to this, because I wanted to address this.
	This is a Kareem Kaur who presents himself as some statistician, some expert on data, etc.
	And the thread is just magnificent because I just want to point out the various ways in which he tries to change the subject and obfuscate what's going on.
	So he says, "This bar chart has attracted the attention of the richest man in the world.
	Let me walk you through how I would interpret it as a statistician and a human." So in media...
	It feels like he's setting himself up for failure here.
	Well, yes, but if you're a normie who's not encountered this sort of stuff before and you're still very susceptible to rhetoric then you can fall for this because immediately what he's saying, if you disagree with him, you're basically not a human.
	Okay.
	So that's the implication I get from there.
	And then he says later on, I'm sure this data is in many ways dubious, and the claim that the media exclusively focuses on white and black crime is untrue, but let's let that aside for now.
	So he's just poisoned the well immediately by saying, I'm not going to prove it, but this data is probably a lie, despite the fact the sources are right there.
	If you wanted to disprove it as a statistician, surely you should go into the sources provided on the graph and disprove it that way.
	But he didn't.
	And as a statistician, instead what he gives are clearly emotive arguments.
	For instance, saying, now I would suspect if the media did disproportionately focus on black and white crime, it would be because they have a good faith belief that the causal element in these particular incidents is anti-black racism, which suggests that If it is anti-black racism causing this, that immediately justifies the violence.
	Yes, that's not a statistical argument, as you say.
	No, that's a race-baiting argument, as far as I'm concerned.
	Then he asks, do we think that the primary cause of black-on-white crime in America is anti-white racism, or is it vastly more likely that it's because black Americans are disproportionately poor, and white Americans are disproportionately rich?
	How do you explain the black-on-black violence being even higher than the black-on-white violence?
	Also, I love once again the implication that white people are rich, therefore deserve it.
	It's a bit like the joke with Biden quite, isn't it?
	That black kids are just as good as, no, rich kids or something like that.
	No, I think he said black kids are just as smart as white kids.
	I think he tripped and said poor kids and then went black.
	Oh, that was it, yes.
	Um, the chart does even more than that, he says.
	It sets up the harm of crime as harm done not just to the individual, but to their entire race.
	There's an argument for stop noticing patterns, do not think of any self-preservation, ignore what's happening right in front of your eyes.
	I've yet to hear a statistical argument.
	Uh, you're not going to find one.
	Right.
	You're not going to find one.
	Framing all crime as a form of racial harm comes off as a white nationalist framing to me, and the presentation of this data leads the viewer down a merry path to white nationalist solutions.
	So, if you think too hard about this information, or if you notice what's going on, you're a racist.
	So once again, all of the argument that's being put forward here is just that you're a racist.
	And Elon Musk started to quote on more things, to respond to more things in the next one.
	This graph is showing that...
	What you said, the black-on-black violence rates versus the white-on-white violence rates, which shows that disproportionately white people kill themselves, whereas black people kill each other, and this came from the... If you just hover over that at there for me, please.
	That's a bit small, that.
	I'm going to have to lean in.
	Yeah, that graph was compiled by Data Hazard, who has a fantastic account on Twitter that everybody should follow.
	There you go, John.
	Nice one.
	All terrible things to happen, but it just shows the disparities in the way that these people die.
	Oh, the red bar is homicide?
	The red bar is homicide, the blue bar is suicide.
	Oh.
	Well, that's a bit striking, isn't it?
	It really doesn't paint a nice picture.
	And then he also commented on this one as well, and I can't vouch for the maths in this, but everybody's heard the meme figure 1350, etc.
	In this video, he claims that it's 1360 in reality, but I don't know if he's done the maths right.
	But Elon did still respond to this.
	He's basically just saying, interesting on all of these.
	And I just want to explain as well, I think the best way of combating these rates doesn't come down to any kind of white supremacist, white nationalist solutions.
	I think the way of combating these rates of violence, interracial and intraracial, would be better policing.
	In a lot of the places where this happens, they basically make it illegal to do measures that are proven to work.
	As much as it can inconvenience some people, and as much as some people complain about it, Until 2018.
	When New York City was doing stop-and-search on people, it was demonstrably shown to reduce rates of violent crime.
	Hang on, hang on.
	If these numbers actually are true, doesn't that completely fly in the face of what we were saying in the previous segment about, you know, because the Californians are now giving reparations on the basis that blacks are being incarcerated more, but if there's more violent crime going on, then maybe it's not discrimination, it's just law enforcement.
	Well, this is what they don't want you to notice.
	Right.
	And even then we live in a time where certain races are obviously preferenced in terms of the way that the laws are applied to them.
	So my solution is not to preference particular races in the way that the law is applied.
	My preference for this is to just have the law applied equally and then also do the things like stop and search which were shown in the New York City.
	So what you're What you're promoting is to reduce violent crime.
	Because, once again, we know that most of the crime that goes on within these black communities affects other black people.
	So if you want to help those people in those communities who want to build a better life for themselves, you make them safer.
	So what you're promoting is some form of rule of law and treating people as individuals?
	Shockingly enough, yes.
	Do you think America would go for that?
	Not this America.
	Right.
	Certainly not the one that exists right now.
	Perhaps some states.
	Perhaps some states.
	But the federal government in America right now would not want to do anything like that.
	But don't worry though, even though Elon is noticing these things, he is still at heart an SLIB because he tweeted this one out when Ian Miles Chong said, do you support illegal immigration?
	And everybody said no.
	And then Elon felt the need to say, but I think we should significantly increase legal immigration.
	No, Elon, I could go through all of the arguments about why that's bad, why that doesn't fix anything, why that's... We already have hundreds of thousands of legal immigrants coming into the country in the UK every single year, and it doesn't help anything.
	I'm really not even sure what the comparative numbers are at this point.
	No, it's absolutely ridiculous, but despite the fact that this was beginning to become the narrative, thankfully for the mainstream media, some guy went and shot up an outlet mall in Texas, so they could immediately pivot onto this.
	Now, I don't know this one, but what I do know is the media goes straight to it, and then they drop it very quickly if the shooter isn't white, so hopefully... The shooter isn't white, but he is supposedly a white supremacist, so they can keep the narrative going.
	If I get the name right, a 33-year-old Hispanic man called Mauricio Garcia who went to a Dallas suburb on Saturday and opened fire at an outlet mall and killed at least eight people, injured about seven others.
	Terrible, obviously a horrible thing to happen, but sadly I just know that the people in the mainstream media were on some level happy for this to happen so that they could distract from some of the things that were being discussed otherwise and they could immediately pivot back around to White supremacy, bloody bloody blah, systematic racism, white society.
	They say right now in this article, I think they are building the motive.
	Authorities had not released a motive, but the patch on the shooter's chest said RWDS, an initialism that stands for right-wing death squad.
	According to people familiar with the investigation, the phrase is popular among right-wing extremists, neo-Nazis and white supremacists.
	And while there is a great deal of evidence to analyze still, authorities have not reached any conclusions yet.
	Investigators are approaching the shooting as a possible hate crime.
	Biden ordered flags down at half-staff through Thursday in recognition of the shooting victims in a statement...
	What's the first thing that Biden and the Democrats are going to do in a situation like this, do you reckon?
	Call for a ban on guns, perhaps?
	Probably, yes.
	In fact, he expressed condolences for the victims and called on Republican members of Congress to support a bill banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, among other changes to gun laws.
	So, such a tragedy has happened.
	Hand over your guns, please.
	You want to protect yourself?
	Hand over your guns, please.
	So I think there's some potential merit for that and actually what Biden should do is he should lead by example and he should make the White House a gun-free zone.
	He should order the secret service to hand over all their guns and basically have no guns around him whenever he travels.
	That would be very impressive.
	That would be leadership, that would be.
	Certainly.
	And just for some interesting little tidbits at the bottom here, which might be relevant in a minute.
	So on the suburban street where the gunman's parents live, because once again at this point they hadn't identified him, several of their neighbours described him as a quiet person who didn't seem to cause trouble.
	He just seemed to be aloof, kind of disconnected, but he wasn't threatening, said Kevin Todd, who lives down the street.
	One neighbor said that she didn't know him well, but he would often honk his horn and wave when he drove past.
	The Garcia family had lived on the street for many years and were well-liked, neighbors said, adding that the gunman moved out of his parents' home earlier this year.
	And this may or may not be relevant as we go on, just because there is a lot of stuff going on right now in regards to who this man was, And what his motivations were.
	I'm not against the idea that he was a Mexican Hispanic who was a white supremacist.
	I do think these ideologies can sweep up a lot of people who don't just necessarily have to be white, especially when in America I believe that they often get counted as white people, the Mexicans and Hispanics and people of... Depending on the crime presumably.
	Yes, that can happen.
	So I'm not against the idea that he really was, you know, a supporter of Hitler, an anti-Semite, anything like that.
	But there are a lot of gaps and conveniences in the narrative which seem to be suspicious to me.
	I suspect there wasn't a strong ideological underpinning.
	I don't think he'd done a lot of reading.
	Well, perhaps he did, perhaps he did.
	If we go to the next one, just to dispel some myths, this image was going around a lot saying that this was the man who did it, Mauricio Garcia.
	If we scroll down, once again, community notes come really in handy now that they've been implemented onto Twitter.
	It points out that this mugshot included in the tweet is a different Mauricio Garcia from Dallas County.
	The man in the mugshot was arrested in 2022, he's 35.
	The perpetrator of the shooting was 33, so this is not the same person.
	If you see this image, it doesn't appear that this is the right person.
	Right now.
	But there is a big thread examining his social media, which wasn't on Twitter or Facebook or any mainstream social media outlet, but was instead on a Russian social media website that nobody has ever heard of before and has no content restrictions.
	It's called Odnoklassnika.
	I'm not familiar with that one.
	This person, Eric Toler, who, if we hover over his name, we can see who this man is.
	John?
	He is a researcher and trainer for Bellingcat, who, as far as I'm aware and as far as I've read up on, receive a lot of money from organisations like the CIA and the EU.
	So this is immediately something to be wary of.
	But he says some of the interesting things that he notes in here... If we just scroll through this, John, just because we can see some of the imagery that is on here.
	He had a YouTube channel which had that smiley face with the Hitler-tache.
	He had this, he had this...
	flat jacket by the looks of it.
	Keep scrolling down for me John, please.
	He apparently had these tattoos.
	This is all apparently from his public profile.
	Very fresh, but at the same time, you know...
	Had he joined a battalion in the Ukraine or something?
	Perhaps, but obviously depending on when the photos were taken, it might have been just taken right afterwards.
	It doesn't have to be that the photo was taken and then immediately posted.
	Could be an old photo, who knows.
	But if we scroll down a bit more, apparently these were all on there.
	He was a Timcast fan, Tim Poole fan, apparently, which doesn't seem to be related to much to do with all the rest of the right-wing death squad stuff, because Tim Poole famously is centrist.
	Scroll down a bit more for me, please, John.
	uh he was supposedly scouting the place out he had pictures of all of these guns and a receipt for them keep scrolling for me please uh yeah he had pictures of you know nazi imagery etc etc and he just uh here's his apartment as well he says it's the same apartment that he posted back in december of 2022 on his okay page because apparently there's a youtube video of him revealing it if we click on it and once again this might just be me
	Thinking about it too much, but this is from the 26th of December 2022, which would seem to contradict what was said in the Washington Post about him having moved out earlier this year, but it could just be misremembering on the person.
	But something to note, I thought.
	And he ends this by saying the Allen shooter was obviously a white supremacist neo-Nazi, basically announcing he was going to do a mass shooting for four months beforehand and planned his target weeks in advance.
	Posted in his handwritten personal diary, Everything I've seen shows that the most textbook Mass Shooter I'll ever find and tells you about it every step of the way.
	He'll be your reference point for decades on Mass Shooters because he shared it so much.
	And he adds one last thing at the bottom of this thread, John, if you wouldn't mind.
	Clicking on this and scrolling down.
	Yeah, here we go.
	Just that one.
	One last thing noticed by Jake Godin.
	The Alan Shooter was a big fan of libs of TikTok and signed off one of his posts with Heil Hitler.
	Now, Note that the start of this particular post just says, this post was inspired by libs of TikTok.
	Very interesting and convenient thing to find.
	And Ian Milestrong and a number of other people have started to ask questions.
	And once again, I'm not against the idea that all of this is legit.
	It does just seem very, very suspicious to me that CIA-affiliated news organization would unearth all of this on a Russian social media website that nobody has ever heard of.
	And it's all just on there for everybody to see this whole time.
	And he also just happens to share things from Tim Paul.
	And he probably just did like something from Tim Paul.
	I mean, the thing with popular media is that it's popular and lots of people like it.
	Including crazies.
	It doesn't have to be that every single person who likes a thing is, you know, a good guy.
	I mean, you can get bad guys who like things that good guys like too.
	I know, it's a big shot, but then you also get him just signing off, just saying, this post is inspired by Libs of TikTok.
	That's one of the major Twitter accounts.
	That's true, but it's a very convenient thing to just start a post with.
	As far as I'm concerned, it comes off a bit fishy to me.
	But once again, I'm not against the idea that all of this is legit, but there are these questions that Ian is asking, and he asks basically the same question that I did in the next one as well.
	And yeah, so we'll see more as it all comes out.
	We'll see what else happens in regards to this.
	But for the time being, obviously it is a complete tragedy what's happened in Texas and I do send hopes and prayers to everybody who's been affected down there because that is an awful thing to happen to anyone.
	And that's all I've got for there.
	What an unfortunate segment.
	Yes.
	I suppose that's news.
	Right, let's get into potentially-based Robert Kennedy Jr.
	So, before I get into that, first of all, I will quickly mention the website, because we have been demonetised by the evil Californians.
	So come over to the website and sign up there.
	We've got lots of interesting stuff, including this symposium on Wacophobia, anti-Westernism, which is quite an interesting segment.
	Right, so, Harry, I have found a Democrat that I like.
	It's true.
	Or more accurately, I should say, I found another Democrat that I like because I can't help myself.
	I absolutely adore AOC.
	Oh no, I saw a picture being bandied about.
	Just show the picture, John.
	I like this picture.
	I wonder why.
	Show the picture, John.
	Go on, John.
	Go on, John.
	There we go.
	You're such a coomer, Dan.
	You are such a coomer.
	For God's sake.
	I fully appreciate that.
	I mean, first of all, that photo is quite evocative.
	For those of you listening, she's tying back her hair with a sort of crooked grin on her face.
	This is very much the early stages.
	I'm bowing out.
	I'm gone.
	This is very much the early stages of socialism where, you know, promises are being made.
	And then later on, I fully appreciate that she... Do I have to bring up the Thomas Sowell quote?
	I fully appreciate that later on she'll be shooting me in the back of the head in a trench because socialism always goes there.
	But you'll still enjoy the good times while they're happening.
	There is that.
	But no, there is another Democrat that I liked for entirely different reasons.
	Robert Kennedy Jr.
	who is, you know, perhaps the sensible centre version of a Democrat.
	He's actually very much like what the Democrats used to be in the sort of 60s and 70s before they all went completely mad.
	Where you sort of disagreed with him on a few points, but you know, basically you had a lot of overlap and it sort of seemed very sensible.
	So we've got some clips to get into from RFK and I should warn you, he has got some sort of slight vocal issue that makes him sound like he's trying to do that Californian vocal fry thing.
	The teenage girls have started doing it out there.
	I'm pretty sure Californians just all have a particularly irritating twinge to their accent, and I'm sorry anybody from California listening to it.
	It's just something I've noticed.
	They've probably got a power cut at the moment, so they won't be able to listen.
	Let's do some background on him from Wikipedia, because of course, if you want to know something, you go to Wikipedia, because they know stuff.
	Wikipedia explains that Robert Francis Kennedy Jr.
	is an American environmental lawyer and member of the prominent Kennedy family, a 2024 Democratic Party presidential candidate, and an author known for conspiracy theories.
	Dun-dun-dun!
	Starting to like him already, actually.
	We've got one of his books in the office.
	Yes, I'm going to mention that.
	In April 2023, Kennedy announced his presidency for the Democratic nomination.
	Kennedy was born in 1954, so very nearly peak boomer.
	Peak boomer is 1956, but he's pretty close.
	He's son of Robert F. Kennedy, and he is nephew of John F. Kennedy, so JFK.
	Now, when he was nine years old, his uncle, JFK, was assassinated.
	1963 and when he was 14 his father was assassinated while running for the Democratic president.
	In fact his father had just won the nomination at that point so he was basically on the line to be the president.
	Would he have been taking over from LBJ?
	Probably, that would have lined up, I would imagine.
	Wikipedia goes on to explain that in November 2021, and I think this is the book you're mentioning, Kennedy's book,
	Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates, Big Pharma and the Global War on Democracy was published where, and I'm quoting from Wikipedia here, Kennedy alleged without presenting any plausible evidence that Fauci sabotaged treatments for AIDS, violated federal law, conspired with Bill Gates and social media such as Facebook to suppress information about Covid-19 cures, to leave the vaccine as the only option to fight the pandemic.
	Wow.
	Do they present any evidence to show that he didn't present any plausible evidence, or do they just state it?
	No, no, Wikipedia just asserts this.
	Oh, okay, alright.
	You know, that becomes a narrative.
	So I thought it might be quite interesting, actually, to... I have to affirm, he is still a Democrat, so he still believes... I have seen a clip of him saying that people who question the climate narrative should be thrown in prison.
	I don't know when it's from.
	Yeah, so it could be a while back he might change his views on it.
	He looks a lot younger than he would in these.
	But I thought what we could do is we could have a look at a couple of things and see if he doesn't start to grow on us a little bit.
	Let's have a look at the first clip about the Ukraine war.
	The answer to your question about how we got in this war goes back a long way, but I would say that the real story starts in 2014 when the US government and particularly the neocons in the White House and elsewhere
	Participated and supported the overthrow, violent overthrow of coup d'etat against the democratically elected government of the Ukraine and put in a very, very anti-Russian government.
	This prompted Russians who then believed that the U.S.
	Navy was now going to be invited into the Black Sea to have a port at Crimea.
	It prompted the Russians to preemptively Invade Crimea.
	At the same time, the government that came into the Ukraine began enacting a series of laws that turned the Russian populations of the Donbass region into second-class citizens.
	They illegalized essentially their culture, their language, and they began ultimately killing them.
	They killed 14,000 of them.
	And it prompted a civil war in the country.
	And the Russian response, which was illegal, I have no sympathy toward Vladimir Putin.
	Vladimir Putin is a gangster and he's a thug.
	But his response in the Donbas was not irrational.
	That is some very anti-narrative chat going on there.
	It certainly is.
	I don't know enough about Ukraine to comment on the accuracy of his figures about killing 14,000 ethnic Russians in the Donbass region, but it is very interesting.
	I mean, he is completely off the script on that one.
	I mean, you get completely closed down in online discussion of any sort and any sort of mainstream discussion if you add any historical context to the Ukraine conflict.
	To be fair, whether or not he is a democrat or not and has some crazy beliefs that I disagree with, you can definitely see that what he is essentially doing is breaking political kayfabe, which is why they want to label him as some kind of conspiracy theorist in all sorts.
	He gets a lot worse with this.
	Oh really?
	Yeah, absolutely.
	Let's throw in a quick one about Taiwan.
	I would stop looking at it as a threat right now and allow The Chinese and the Taiwanese to come to their own solution about what kind of relationship they have.
	And I think that if we stop our provocations toward the Chinese, that that would naturally de-escalate.
	So I'm not sure to what extent I agree on this one, because the Taiwanese issue is incredibly difficult to navigate.
	But again, if you listen to the way he's talking about this, he's not trying to be a warmonger.
	He's not trying to escalate into a conflict with China.
	Which, you know, certain elements of the, shall we say, the State Department of the US establishment is clearly very interested in doing.
	There was always a drive for more and more war.
	You know, let's keep the Ukraine war running for as long as possible, even though it's completely unviable, even though they are now basically snatching teenage boys off the street in Kiev and funneling them to the front line.
	I saw a horrendous video the other day Where basically a mother was driving, she had her two teenage boys in the back of her car, she was a Ukrainian mother driving through Kiev and the army stopped her and basically tried to wrestle the boys out the back of the car so they could be sent off to the front line.
	You know, that war is horrendous and he's speaking out against it and there he is talking about Taiwan, basically he's talking about de-escalation.
	...about not confronting China, about not trying to push towards the next war.
	And that is just extraordinary, because the Democrats have become basically the war party.
	You know, at this point, there is no war that they don't like, and a lot of, well, probably most of the Republican Party in the sort of... I would imagine they operate upon uniparty lines.
	Yeah, very much so.
	I'm sure the military-industrial complex pays off both sides.
	But I mean, the Democrats are especially captured, and you just never hear any of them sort of breaking party line on that.
	So there's two positions that are quite remarkable.
	Let's hear what he has to say on the economy, because that's also interesting.
	We have this obviously kind of never-ending debt spiral that's going to cause a massive crisis, whether it's not this year, maybe it's in five years or ten years.
	Right now it's projected Social Security will go bankrupt in 2035, 2034, around that range.
	So this is coming up fast.
	What are we going to be cutting besides defence, or are we going to be raising taxes to 70% do you think?
	I can't answer that question any better than I already have.
	I think there are targets for opportunity in the homeland security.
	I think once we stop fighting these wars all over the world, there's a lot less need for us to have a surveillance state at home.
	So the real cost in the military is $1.1 trillion a year.
	Not just the 800 trillion that shows up on the books.
	And I think those are targets for opportunity and I can't you know, I have to I need to study more the issue about how to how to get back into a balanced budget.
	I you know, one of the things I'd say disturbs me.
	Yeah.
	So, first of all, I like the fact that, I mean, he acknowledges the debt problem, he acknowledges the issue.
	He does talk about the sort of very heavy amounts that the US is spending on military and the surveillance state.
	Of course, a lot of that's getting turned against American citizens as well, so that's something I recognise.
	You know, he's not gone in there with the sort of the normal politician saying that he's got all the answers and he's giving these sort of smooth points.
	He does say that he wouldn't cut Social Security or Medicare and that's a red line for him.
	Well, you know, fair enough, but it's very, very difficult to address the sort of problems the US has with the spiral, the debt spiral they got themselves into.
	Yes.
	Without looking at those two things.
	But he's certainly not one of these politicians who is, you know, we cannot cut anything ever.
	He seems willing to make difficult decisions.
	And I didn't include all of it here because of, you know, obviously time pressures.
	But he goes on to talk about, you know, other things that the US has spent money on.
	So, you know, he points out that the US spent $8 trillion on the Iraq war.
	And not only did they get nothing for it, they got less than nothing for it.
	They destabilised the Middle East.
	It caused 2 million refugees to flood into Europe, and of course Europe is now destabilised as a result of that.
	And all the sort of, you know, well, the Iraqi lives and the US lives wasted in that.
	And, you know, 8 trillion spent on that for nothing in return.
	And another thing that I absolutely love that he's really sound on is, he talks about the 16 trillion that was spent on the scammed egg.
	16 trillion for nothing.
	Yeah.
	To basically just shut down the world to keep 90 year olds imprisoned in...
	16 trillion so that you can destroy the economy, so that when you do open up the economy, then there's not going to be many places where an extra 16 trillion is going to be coming.
	Certainly destroy the economy of small businesses.
	Of course, all the large businesses were allowed to stay open and accumulate market... Essential workers.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Media was allowed to go on, politicians were allowed to go on, government employees were allowed to go on, but small businesses were not.
	He talks about the insanity of sending 100 billion to Ukraine to prolong an unwinnable war.
	He also acknowledges inflation.
	You just make quite a good point on that.
	Let's listen to this next bit.
	The inflation that we've created from, you know, from just printing money Is making my friend Keith food twice expensive.
	So the cost of stables in this country was raised by 76% in two years.
	And now they're cutting his food stamps and bailing out the same month, $300 million, the Silicon Valley bank.
	We got it.
	I mean, it doesn't make any sense.
	And having this kind of conversation.
	How do we screw the poor to make sure that we can, you know, we can milk them while we're doing all of this crazy.
	It's like this country is acting like the alcoholic who is behind on his mortgage and who takes the milk money and goes into the bar and buys rounds for strangers.
	You know, that's what you're dealing with.
	That's a pretty good analogy.
	That is a really good analogy for what the US is doing.
	I like the acknowledgement that it's money printing as well.
	Thank God somebody within the system, you could say, acknowledged it.
	Yeah, they never acknowledge it.
	I mean, the Fed, crazily, they don't even acknowledge the debt.
	And here he is talking about all of these things.
	He's clearly being intellectually honest.
	So even though when we're going to come on a bit later, some of the environmental stuff, you and I are going to disagree with him.
	I think we can agree that this is a man who is trying to be intellectually honest and see things for the way they are.
	Right.
	Now, all of the stuff so far, that was the tame stuff.
	Now we're going to get into the spicier elements of some of the stuff we believe.
	Remember I mentioned before that his uncle, JFK, was assassinated by The CIA, when he was nine, and his father when he was fourteen.
	Now, he's been pretty clear that the CIA were involved in both of those assassinations, and he sort of strongly hints between the lines.
	I've not watched the Tucker segment, but I'm pretty sure I remember hearing there was a Tucker segment that pretty much confirmed it.
	Yeah.
	Let's hear, perhaps, why the CIA might have wanted to assassinate his uncle and father.
	My uncle realized that he had been lied to by Charles Bell and Alan Dulles and Richard Bissell, the heads of the CIA, as well as his Joint Chiefs.
	And he came out in the middle of the invasion when it turned against them, and he realized these men were being killed on the beach, and he said, I want to take the CIA and shatter it into a thousand pieces and scatter it to the wind.
	So he recognized that the function of the intelligence agencies had devolved And that they were they had become captive of the military industrial complex and the military contractors and their their function was essentially to provide our nation with a constant pipeline of new wars.
	Okay.
	Yeah.
	That is... You are starting to bring me around on him.
	Yeah.
	I'm not gonna lie.
	Yeah.
	So, I mean, he correctly identifies that the purpose of the CIA is to stir up conflict so there can be a forever war somewhere that the military-industrial complex can be feeding.
	He talks there about the fact that his uncle, JFK, shortly before he was assassinated, realized that the CIA was lying to him, and he told them that he's gonna break the CIA into a thousand pieces, and shortly after that he was assassinated.
	And then he goes on to say in another part of the interview that the first phone call his father made, because his father was JFK's brother, the first phone call that his father made after realising that his brother had been killed was he rang the CIA and said, did you do this?
	And obviously his father became convinced that CIA did kill his brother and then he ran, so Bobby Kennedy, he then ran for president and he got the Democratic nomination and he almost certainly would have been president and then he was assassinated just after he won the nomination.
	And it was pinned on a guy who was, um, this, this Palestinian guy, um, who, who fired 13 shots at, um, at, at his father, as the story goes, and has now been in jail for the last, you know, 50, 60 years, whatever it is now.
	Um, and his gun carried, um, eight shots, and he managed to fire 13 at Bobby Kennedy.
	Not only that, is he managed to shoot him in the back, um, even though he stood in front of him.
	And he's actually been to see the man in prison who is accused, who's being held in prison for having killed his father, and he's quite convinced that no, it was the CIA who killed his father and his uncle.
	Very interesting.
	And of course he got the motivation, because he said he was going to take them apart.
	Right, and now...
	The next one is even spicier.
	This is where, and I hope we don't have to edit this bit out for YouTube.
	If we do, come and see us on the website or come and see us on Rumble, because I'm going to have a word with our in-house team of people who know about how bad the censorship is.
	I've seen some YouTube channels get away with talking about certain things recently.
	We're quoting, we're letting him speak in his own terms, but this is eye-opening.
	Listen to what he says about this.
	We're going to get out of the vaccine business.
	And you're going to be left without a vaccine supply unless you give us full immunity from liability.
	And Reagan, you know, reluctantly signed that.
	And so today, no matter how negligent the company, no matter how grievous your injury, no matter how reckless their conduct, you cannot sue them.
	That caused a gold rush because now you've got a product that there's no downstream liability.
	You're immune from that.
	There's no upstream safety testing, so that's a $250 million saving.
	And there's no marketing or advertising cost because the federal government is going to mandate this product to 76 million American children whether they like it or not.
	And there's no better product in the world.
	And so there was a gold rush.
	And instead of three vaccines, we quickly ended up with 72.
	And now we're going to, you know, toward 80 right now.
	And there's no end in sight.
	And a lot of those vaccines were unnecessary.
	They're not even for casual disease-caused diseases.
	Here's what happened.
	Beginning in 1989, we experienced a chronic disease epidemic in this country.
	It is unlike anything in human history.
	We went from having 6% of Americans affected by chronic disease to 54% by 2006.
	And what do I mean by chronic disease?
	I mean neurological disease that I never saw when I was a kid.
	So he goes on to talk about the huge rise in neurological disease, food allergies, eczema, asthma, diabetes, and he asks the question, why do five of his kids have food allergies?
	One of my kids has got food allergies.
	It's bloody awful to live with.
	We took her to a kid's party, and she obviously ate something that wasn't have to, and she started turning blue, and we had to get an ambulance out to get a breathing in.
	It's really scary when it happens to a five-year-old child.
	I bet.
	Now, if that's something that...
	It was luck of the draw, and she was just born away, that's one thing.
	But if he's right, and it was something that we didn't know any better when we got injected into her arm...
	I'm going to be pretty bloody pissed.
	And, you know, he's talking about how these vaccines got legal immunity in 1989 and there was an explosion of them and chronic diseases has skyrocketed.
	So they are, he's pointing out, they are very least temporally correlated with, you know, the expansion of Big Pharma.
	So that is a fascinating can of worms that he's picking up there.
	And then of course, and again, I hope this bit survives the YouTube censorship, but if not, come and join us on the website to see the unedited version.
	But here he talks about Operation Warp Speed and this one.
	Wow.
	had to present its, declassify its organizational charts to show to the FDA committee called VRBAC when they demanded it.
	And Warp Speed went in and showed them the organizational charts.
	The agency running Warp Speed and Pandemic Response was not HHS.
	It was NSA, the National Security Agency.
	Avril Haines is the Director of National Intelligence.
	So she was running Operation Warp Speed.
	And who was manufacturing?
	It wasn't Pfizer and Moderna.
	It was 140 military contractors who, you know, had lines ready.
	And you say, you know, and then, you know, all of this clamped down on civil rights that we saw, the censorship, The closing of the churches, the closing of the right to assemble, the banning of jury trials against pharmaceutical companies.
	They crushed the 7th Amendment, the 1st Amendment.
	They closed down 3.3 million businesses with no due process, no just compensation.
	They obliterated the 4th Amendment.
	Yeah, no, that is incredible.
	The NSA was running Operation Warp Speed and he's got receipts for all of this stuff.
	So, I mean, you can go to, you know, the books he's published or his website.
	I can't wait to see the Wikipedia counter-argument.
	Yeah, well, the Wikipedia counter-argument.
	I mean, the stuff that he's saying there, that is from court disclosures or Freedom of Information requests.
	He's not making it up.
	All of that stuff, he's got receipts and evidence for all of that stuff.
	The NSA was running Operation Warp Speed.
	And what he said, I can't repeat, I'm not going to repeat it, but the stuff that he said about how a certain substance was produced by military contractors, I mean, wow.
	It's not great.
	Yeah.
	And look, for me, the pandemic is what got me into doing this in the first place, because I was so outraged by that period.
	And for me, you know, Politics is not really a question of right or left anymore, or blue team or red team, or anything like that.
	It's holding people accountable for the crimes of lockdown.
	And this man seems to want to do it, so you can see why I'm really warming to him.
	There are aspects to his policy which I won't show you any clips on, which I'm not a fan on.
	He is in the green lobby.
	He is anti-nuclear and he's just wrong on that because he thinks that nuclear isn't safe because of Chernobyl and so on.
	Modern nuclear reactors are perfectly fine.
	It's a shame that he can see past the propaganda in some places, but not in others.
	Yeah, but to be fair, if he were to smash the CIA, end the US's warmongering, and give us lockdown justice, I could handle there not being any nuclear power stations.
	I mean, America can afford it.
	They've got loads of oil and gas.
	They can do without.
	Yeah, I can take it.
	If we're going to go on trade-offs, then that's a fair trade-off um some other stuff um on the woke nonsense he's anti um men playing in women's sport if they just put on some lipstick so that's sensible um he does the whole bodily autonomy thing so he's generally in favor of um democrats being able to kill their own children in the womb but you know they're doing it anyway so again trade-offs um he thinks gender reassignment should be reserved for adults only um so he he's
	he gives them a little bit he He's still doing half measures in a lot of places.
	But it's better than the full-on lunacy.
	But I do believe, at core, a lot of problems in the world are caused by the things that he is mainly railing against.
	Final clip that I'm going to show you, him talking about the mainstream media.
	I mean, what is a newscaster supposed to do?
	Are they supposed to manipulate public information?
	Is their job Protect Americans from dangerous thoughts.
	Are the audiences, do they have such contempt for their audiences that they think that the audiences can't make up their own minds?
	And what is their whole vision about the traditional role of the American media as the guardians of free speech in the First Amendment in this country?
	Yeah.
	He sees.
	He sees the mainstream media for what they are.
	He sees the CIA for what they are.
	He sees the military-industrial complex for what it is.
	He sees Big Pharma for what it is.
	He doesn't see the eco-lobby for what it is, but to be fair... What do you think his prospects are?
	I think that if he won the Democratic primary, he would be assassinated just like his uncle and his father.
	There is no way they are going to let this man get into the White House.
	He's going after the military-industrial complex, the CIA and Big Pharma.
	Not a chance.
	So what you would recommend if he was going to try and run seriously, he would probably want to get some kind of private military contractor to defend him.
	Yeah, at minimum.
	I mean, the list of people that he's going after.
	I mean, I don't think it will come to that anyway, because as we know, Democratic primaries are more fortified than even the general election is.
	So they will make sure that he doesn't get anywhere near it.
	More free and fair.
	But his poll numbers are really good.
	And, you know, just as a hypothetical, I mean, honestly, I would have to stop and think if it was... I mean, I don't get a vote in the US election anyway, but if it was Trump or him, I'd have to stop and think, because I mean, I like both of them.
	But the problem is Trump still thinks that Operation Warp Speed was a brilliant thing.
	He thinks what he did on vaccines was brilliant.
	He's very non-committal on lockdowns, especially the early ones that he brought in.
	And, you know, I would hope that if Trump came back into office, he would go after the intelligence agencies after they did what they did to him.
	But I mean that guy had his father and uncle assassinated so I mean he's not gonna be messing around in the slightest.
	So really interesting character and I think Democrats should choose him and the CIA should not assassinate him because it'd be a very interesting election if that man went through.
	Please CIA don't assassinate him.
	Anyway while we've still got two minutes let's try and get through all of the video comments.
	So I remember you guys doing some videos on dating apps and like what they might reflect on society.
	And I always found it kind of weird that the Asian males are considered the lowest tier male option.
	Because, uh, I mean, all the places I've ever worked at in public areas, I've never seen a morbidly obese or really unhealthy Asian man.
	And I mean, I know theoretically somewhere out there there's fat ones, but I've never seen one.
	And I guess this is maybe Hollywood psy-oping people into thinking they're like really wimpy people.
	Honestly, couldn't say.
	As far as I'm aware, Japan actually has a fat-shaming culture in it, so that probably explains why you don't see many fat ones.
	Let's get to the next one.
	Alright, this time we're gonna look at the Western Madrone.
	This is a tree that grows all up and down the western coast of the United States.
	It has really good burning wood, so it's really only good for that.
	It also has these berries on it that are really bitter and only really good for making an alcohol, supposedly.
	So you can kind of see them right up there, those little guys.
	And they're pretty, uh, nice little flowers.
	And I'll try to show a picture of the actual berries.
	It's not the time of year for them.
	Oh, lovely.
	Very nice.
	Oh, those were the only two, so while we've still got less than a minute, I'll go through one of the top comments first.
	Matt P. Rip the mic stand.
	Three years of good service.
	Savagely murdered by Harry in broad daylight.
	Gone but never forgotten.
	Salute.
	Actually, I fixed it.
	So, there you go.
	Californian reparations, do you want to go for one or two?
	Yeah, let's go for Sophie, shall we?
	Hey, maybe the idea is they don't know inflation is so bad that in three years 1.2 million you can buy exactly three slices of bread and then everyone can have 200 million dollars a year.
	Yes, good point.
	Good point, yeah, very good point.
	On my comments, let's see...
	Excuse me.
	Letter M is for mostly peaceful, so step one, observe tragedy.
	Step two, report on tragedy.
	Step three, new information that was withheld initially manages to get to the surface.
	Step four, oh look, a new strategy, oh my science.
	Very good point.
	And finally, on the last section, La French Black Californian says, Robert Kennedy Jr.
	will be based enough when he realizes there's no reforming or taking over the Democratic Party and leaves.
	Yeah, possibly.
	There's probably nothing you can do at this point, but I appreciate that he's making the effort anyway.
	It's nice to see somebody talking about it who's not just one of us.
	So, thank you very much.
	That's all we've got time for.
	We'll be back at one o'clock tomorrow.

▲