Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 9, 2023 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:30:15

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #672

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Seaters episode 672 on today, Friday the 9th I'm your host, Connor, joined once again by Carl.
	Hello!
	And today we're discussing, is Mel Gibson making a new movie?
	Hopefully with slightly less profanity than his phone calls.
	Gender-affirming care being banned in many places, so in the words of Ashtar Kaur, we're winning, lads.
	And the UK's floating migrant hotels, which we're all going to be paying for.
	I just hate it.
	Yet again we're going to talk about how the government is screwing us.
	Sorry folks.
	We've got to do it, because if we don't, no one's going to.
	Jump into it, I suppose?
	Yeah, I guess we'll jump into it.
	So, there's a question.
	There's a spectre that haunts the internet.
	And that spectre is the question, is Mel Gibson making a movie?
	Right.
	When was the last time you made one?
	Not that long ago, actually.
	I can't remember the name of it now, but when I was researching the segment, he did release one relatively recently.
	But it obviously gets no coverage and, you know, because he's pretty much persona non grata at this point, for reasons that we'll explore.
	But the internet really wants Mel Gibson to make movies.
	certain movies about certain subjects and so there's a lot of um wishful thinking should we say on their part right about the movies that he will be making and this this is something of a fact check on these things um so we'll get into it but before we begin if you want to support us go and watch our podcast on they live i did a an hour long breakdown with callum probably more than an Long breakdown with Callum about the politics and philosophy of the famous film They Live.
	I absolutely love this film and I think Mel Gibson may be trapped in this slightly, actually.
	This is why I've brought this up.
	Because I think he's got some glasses on that are showing him the world in all sorts of ways.
	And in fact, we'll get on to it then.
	So there are a lot of quotes from Mel Gibson, apparently from Mel Gibson.
	Like this one.
	Now this one is possibly true, like I couldn't find a source for this, and there are lots of quotes.
	Now this is one of the lesser quotes that are going around.
	Right.
	So this quote says, it's an open secret in Hollywood, these people have their own religious and spiritual teachings and their own social and moral frameworks.
	They have their sacred texts, they are sick, believe me, and they couldn't be more at odds with what America stands for.
	That's not the worst quote that's been attributed to Mel Gibson.
	No, if it were not coming with any of the other baggage that he has been accused of before... I think a lot of it's true.
	If you were to say this regarding Hollywood being run by a bunch of Satanists, then that would be totally non-controversial.
	However, I don't think that's religion he's talking about, therefore that's the contention.
	And it's certainly not the limit of what he's been saying about these things.
	Right.
	Because, I mean, now this actually does sound like something Mel Gibson would have said, although in this particular case, I couldn't find a source for this.
	I couldn't find an actual authentic I mean, if he didn't say this, it's not an inaccurate summary of his thoughts, is what I think is the most charitable way of saying this.
	But it does sound very much like the sort of thing he'd say.
	And I'll play a couple of clips that have been resurfacing recently to show you that this is definitely something, I mean, if he didn't say this, it's not an inaccurate summary of his thoughts is what I think is the most charitable way of saying this.
	Let's play the first clip 'cause he's famously not a fan of Hollywood. - When I came over here, I was, oh God, I was in my mid-twenties.
	Right.
	The first time I really came over here.
	You know, I had a whole bunch of weird paranoid suspicions about what the hell was going on because there was a lot of stuff I couldn't understand.
	Right.
	And nobody was really bothering to explain it to me.
	They don't.
	And I formed a bunch of Opinions about the town and about the people in it that were like Surely that couldn't be because a Whole place can't be like, you know weird town you know where the stranger wanders in and and all the people are in the bar and they all shut up when he looks at him and and They tell you don't go into the house on the hill and it's like that.
	Mm-hmm And then you go away and you think, no, I was wrong.
	I mean, that's insane thinking.
	I'm paranoid.
	I imagined that stuff.
	That couldn't be the reason for why so-and-so was acting like.
	Could it?
	And then you find out later on the track that you were exactly on track with a lot of this stuff.
	Not specifically on track, but that you could, that some of your worst nightmares were real at the time.
	And you think, I mean, don't get me wrong, I think Hollywood looks gross from the outside.
	Yes.
	And this is something that Harry and I discussed in our coverage of Mulholland Drive.
	And when I say our coverage, I mean Harry patiently explaining to me, who was very confused about the nonsensical plot of that film, what it really meant.
	And if he were alluding to, for example, the casting couch as practice, as David Lynch was hinting at back in the early 2000s.
	Well, as Harvey Weinstein famously showed exists.
	Yes.
	So if he was alluding to the fact that there is a conspiracy of silence around exploitation, then he would be bang on about the sordid nature of Hollywood, and you as an outsider coming in there and objecting to that, being looked at as the only stranger in a bar in a Western saloon.
	Again, I'm not that familiar with Mel Gibson's career aside from a couple of movie appearances.
	I'm going to assume that he wasn't referring to that.
	Well, that clip is clearly decades old.
	The place that posted it said it was from the 90s.
	I haven't been able to verify it, but it's clearly him giving his opinion on Hollywood.
	And, I mean, back then, it would have been an open secret in Hollywood that the cast and couch existed.
	I mean, you have lots and lots and lots of former child actors coming out and saying, well, I was surrounded by predators, actually.
	Corey Feldman, specifically.
	And Elijah Wood.
	We've both said this and so it seems that actually Mel Gibson is speaking to something about Hollywood that was real and is true that there was a kind of disgusting, was I say, quote-unquote.
	Likely still is.
	Of course.
	A disgusting and corrupt culture of exploitation as you say and this is from a later interview where you can see that he's crystallized his thoughts on it somewhat.
	Right.
	Let's watch.
	I've got full of the whole industry.
	I mean, it's a very strange place.
	Holly weird wood.
	But it's... it's an odd place.
	And you imagine all these horror stories there that you think, boy, it seems as if I'm being sacrificed over here.
	No, that couldn't be true.
	And then you realize that it is true.
	And you have to... I just left for a while and took a couple of years off.
	Bought a place down in Australia and started digging holes and putting up fences.
	Birthing cattle and all this kind of stuff and it was it was fun.
	You know, it was fun.
	It was it was great.
	And it was a good breather, you know, yeah, and then of course they did the combat war combat lethal weapon.
	Yeah, it wasn't bad.
	Was it good?
	That was all right.
	So the the he's a apparently he's a spiritual man.
	Apparently he did make passion the Christ.
	Yeah.
	Well, yeah, exactly.
	And so for him to say you're being sacrificed.
	Seems to be an allusion to some kind of Satanism, or something like that, in Hollywood.
	And, I mean, we've seen the Met Gala...
	We've seen... We actually got suspended because we criticised Sam Smith's choice of attire at the Grammys.
	Yeah, we did get a strike for that.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	So, I think there is something funny going on in Hollywood.
	Observably so.
	And I think that Mel Gibson has observed that thing.
	And he has made the mistake of speaking publicly about it.
	And so, from this, people start ascribing The most hardcore forms of conspiracy theory.
	To Mel Gibson.
	You'll see this.
	There are quotes in here that are, as far as I can tell, not Mel Gibson quotes.
	Quote, Hollywood is drenched in innocent children's blood.
	I was introduced to these practices in the early 2000s and was threatened with serious repercussions should I ever speak out.
	And I don't just mean my career, my life was threatened, my family's life would be in danger, I can only talk about now as those people, those industry executives, they're all dead now.
	They see the blood of a sexually abused infant as the ultimate prize and say that it's highly enriched.
	Pretty radical conspiracy theory there.
	Yes.
	Hollywood elites kill innocent children and drink their blood, which is...
	A popular conspiracy in QAnon circles.
	Now, I looked around for the source of this particular quote.
	Like with the other one, I couldn't find anything.
	And I could find a spokesperson for Mel Gibson saying, no, he had never said or written such a statement or anything similar.
	Okay.
	So, categorically denied by Mel Gibson and the people who represent him.
	And the thing is, Mel Gibson has said a lot of things.
	A lot of things.
	Right.
	And so, it's understandable why people would attribute these quotes to Mel Gibson, in the absence of any actual evidence of them, and take it as a kind of extrapolation of what they think he believes.
	The only thing I'm familiar with Mel Gibson having said before, so excuse my ignorance, was one, the famous phone call of him screaming at his ex-wife, and two, some long-running jokes about antisemitism, but I don't know exactly what he said.
	Well, if we go to the next one, There are a few things that Mel Gibson has said.
	I shouldn't laugh, but that was quite good timing.
	It is kind of funny, to be honest.
	So if you scroll down this, John, you'll see that initially it's people saying that he has said...
	Right.
	Okay.
	Right.
	Now, I'm personally not bothered about the hearsay.
	Oh, didn't he say something about Winona Ryder?
	Yep.
	She says that he had said various things that were considered to be anti-Semitic.
	Something now, yeah.
	And the most damning one that we can confirm seems to be in July 2006, when he was drunk and got arrested in L.A., Quote, after informing Gibson who was drunk that he would be detained, the actor says, uh, effing Jews.
	The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world.
	And then he asked the police officer who was arresting him, are you a Jew?
	And he happened to be a Jew.
	Right, so he's got something in common with Seth Rogen going around asking for... Ah, you would do, yeah.
	It's pretty weird, right?
	And there are other things after this, but this is... So, in the light of that...
	It becomes less unrealistic that in private he may have been ranting and raving about Jews.
	Right.
	Now, after this, Gibson's publicist issued a statement to the New York Times saying Gibson says, quote, I acted like a person completely out of control when I was arrested.
	I said things I do not believe to be true, which are despicable.
	I am deeply ashamed of everything I've said, and I apologize to anyone I may have offended.
	So.
	Sure.
	Apology accepted.
	And you can keep scrolling down this just for a minute, John.
	Because this does go on for quite a long time.
	This is what I'm saying.
	Drunk words are often sober thoughts.
	I don't wish to defame Mr Gibson's character because I don't know him, but there is A record here that would look very bad to the Anti-Defamation League.
	Yeah, the ADL are not fans of Bill Gibson.
	Probably don't spend a lot of money on his films.
	Probably actively trying to stop him from making new movies.
	He's not going to Jonathan Greenblatt's birthday party.
	Not this year.
	But the internet does think that he's making a movie about the Rothschilds.
	Oh dear.
	Who better to direct, eh?
	Who would be more fair and charitable?
	Look.
	It's rare that I'm worried about saying something cancelable.
	I'm going to take the Jose Mourinho rule here of I prefer not to speak in case I am in big trouble.
	Yes.
	Well, this is the thing, isn't it?
	Again, there are elements of the internet who are anti-Semitic, and so a rumour begins that Famous anti-Semite Mel Gibson will be directing a movie about the Rothschild family and this became news.
	Turns out this is not true.
	So a tweet posted on the 3rd of January included a message which claimed Mel Gibson is directing a film about the Rothschild family and hitting the new world order.
	So it's kind of peak boomer conspiracism.
	Right, so Kanye West was waiting by the phone for a callback.
	Basically, yes.
	Right.
	The claim, however, that Gibson is directing a film about the families without merit, according to the person who's apparently making the film.
	Okay.
	In 2019, reports emerged that Mel Gibson and Shia LaBeouf... Why Shia LaBeouf?
	So, Shia LaBeouf's had a very weird few years.
	So he did the he-will-not-divide-us thing with Trump and got driven mad by 4chan.
	Then CIA decided to accuse him of touching her up, and then he had a mental breakdown and converted to being a dogmatic Catholic.
	Right.
	Okay, maybe it's not so unrealistic that it would be him then.
	Possibly not.
	But it was described, the film Rothschild, they were supposed to star in, was described by Variety as, quote, a dark comedy about the New York super-rich.
	And this went down well with, well, one Jewish group, the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism, which said, Mel Gibson's vile racist comments about Jews make his casting in this role utterly abhorrent.
	Yeah.
	So, yes.
	I will phrase this very carefully.
	His history of antisemitism may mar his ability to create a film which is palatable to modern audiences.
	However, if that were not the case, and he were just purely focusing on child exploitation, there could be the angle- Oh, this film isn't about child exploitation.
	No, no, no.
	This film's about the Rothschild family.
	Well, um, are you aware that one of Epstein's most recent financiers was one of the Rothschild heiresses?
	So there is a critique of one of the modern Rothschilds which could go down that avenue, but perhaps Mel Gibson might not have been the best person to make that nuance.
	Yes, of all the people to get to do that film.
	Wouldn't have been my first pick.
	No.
	And according to Gibson's publicist, again, this long-suffering Alan Nirob, who has to keep putting out these statements, I think that is a Jewish name as well.
	I did think that, yeah.
	He told the Daily Beast in 2019 that the film was completely unrelated to the Rothschilds.
	I'm told this film was about a fictional family, hence the name Rothschild.
	Why didn't you choose a fictional name?
	That's... right.
	And not the Rothschild family to which you're referring.
	Completely unrelated to your premise and angle.
	Charitably.
	What?
	That was, uh... Who's gonna buy that?
	Perhaps a poor selection?
	Why would you have chosen all the names?
	Why not Smith?
	Or Jones?
	But in an email to Newsweek, Nirob said his client would not be directing nor was intended to direct a film or any upcoming films about the Rothschilds, including that while Gibson was initially offered a role, if it were to be made, it would not include Mr. Gibson.
	So it sounds like someone had some words behind the scenes saying, you do know who Mel Gibson is, right?
	And so Nirob came out and was like, yeah, no, it won't be him, actually.
	He will not be directing, nor has ever intended to direct the film, and he will not be present in it.
	So that was just one from a couple of years ago that I thought was amusing.
	That why would this?
	I mean, the thing is, it seems, because it was, was it the New York Times?
	No, Daily Beast, and it was the New York Times.
	Sorry, it was The Times, was reporting on this.
	And so it sounds like it was something that started happening, and then people started hearing that it was happening.
	They're like, we're not gonna let Mel Gibson make a movie about the Rothschilds, are we?
	Seems a bit wild.
	And then it stopped happening, right?
	So I have no idea what that means.
	I'm not going to draw any inferences from it.
	I'm just going to say that that's something that apparently happened.
	Anyway, recently, the reason I started thinking about Mel Gibson was because Elon Musk replied to a blatantly anti-Semitic tweet about Mel Gibson.
	Do you want to see the tweet?
	Okay, what was it?
	Scroll down a little bit.
	Why do adrenochrome?
	You can do adrenochrome or you can hate the Js.
	Which way, Western man?
	With a picture of a very buff-looking Mel Gibson.
	Dear.
	And what was Elon's response?
	Quote, Gibson is really that buff these days?
	That was possibly ill-advised.
	Yeah, he got in a lot of trouble for that.
	I think he ended up deleting that tweet as well.
	For reasons I think everyone can understand.
	But, the reason I think Mel Gibson has been trending recently, and he has been trending, is that apparently he's making a documentary about child trafficking in Ukraine.
	Right, that's interesting.
	We've actually covered that a little bit before because there is, as part of the surrogacy industry, a large trade where women are impregnated and then give birth and ship the babies overseas to rich, liberal women who don't want to stretch out their figure in order to have children.
	And when the Ukraine war broke out, there are now de facto orphanages of these kids who've just been abandoned because they couldn't meet their quotas.
	So that's something that's worth criticizing.
	Well, the founder of Our, which Our is a non-profit, Tim Ballard, suggested in January this year that Gibson was involved in an upcoming four-part docuseries talking about child trafficking out of Ukraine.
	Ballard said he was speaking at a conference in Utah in January and he said, quote, Mel, you've got to help me.
	This is going to be expensive.
	I won't ask you for a direct donation, but can you help me film this?
	Let's film what is happening so we can get people to understand so they can support us.
	And if you can go to the next one quickly, he said this on stage.
	This is the.
	This is the conference where he says this.
	But, again, he just says it.
	There's no evidence of it.
	And if we go back to the article, the question is, what has Mel Gibson himself said about this?
	Nothing.
	The reports of him taking part in this haven't been confirmed, and there's just nothing to it.
	Although, the movie will apparently star Jim Caviezel, who was the Jesus in The Passion of the Christ, and a friend of Mel Gibson.
	And Carrie Lake tweeted about this as well.
	If we can get to the last one.
	Sat with Mel Gibson.
	We talked about the tragedy on our border, the horrific child trafficking that was happening the day this photo was taken.
	And she praises him after that.
	So, is Mel Gibson making a movie?
	Indeterminate.
	There is no evidence to suggest he is making a movie about the things that certain elements of the internet really want him to make movies about.
	I would suggest Netflix is probably not going to pick up the distribution deal.
	Yes.
	And I suspect, really, there's not really anything happening here.
	Really is happening is that there are a bunch of people who are more conspiracy minded and I don't use that as an insult Who view Mel Gibson as a vehicle for their ideas and the desire to see these ideas publicized?
	Because he seems to be mildly sympathetic at the very least to the position that they hold and so they are essentially I don't want to say creating fake news, because that sounds like they don't believe what they're saying.
	They're trying to manifest it.
	I think so, yeah.
	I think, in a way, they're trying to manifest this.
	And I think, I mean, I think they probably have sincere beliefs, as much as I might disagree with them.
	And so I don't, I don't mean, maybe there are some that are malevolent, but I think the reason that a lot of people have been talking about this are because they wish that this was the case, and I don't think it is the case.
	So, very sensitively, we'll leave that one there.
	Okay, I actually have some indeterminate good news, so that's a for once.
	So there is an intolerable trend, as we constantly hear about, of child mutilations, chemical castrations, surgical alterations, in the name of trans ideology.
	We of course find these things objectionable.
	The evidence that they treat underlying gender dysphoria is scarce to the point of non-existence, and we would very much like to see that no longer exist.
	And fortunately there are, I'm happy to report, Multiple states and countries which seem to be preventing this on the legislative level.
	There are outright bans of child gender transition surgeries and cross-sex hormones and puberty blockers and so I'm going to go through the places that are doing that today and hopefully some developments that are happening in the UK eventually as well and how the people on the ground that are pushing this can learn from this and we can take our wins where we can get them.
	It's a sad standard that we have to consider protecting children at this level a win now but Given the alternative, it's definitely a win.
	Yes.
	So, I wanted to do an update.
	So, as you know, Florida was one of the first states to do this, to Ron DeSantis' credit.
	As of yesterday, two days ago now, perhaps, his gender-affirming care bill, air quotes, has been blocked by a Clinton appointee judge.
	So, Robert L. Hinkle of Federal District Court in Tallahassee ruled specifically that three transgender children with cases brought by their parents can be prescribed puberty blockers despite Ron DeSantis' new state law.
	Quote, gender identity is real, Joe Tinkle wrote, adding that proper treatment can include medical health therapy followed by puberty blockers and hormone treatments.
	You see how the medical mental health therapy is only going in the direction of affirmation and then surgical and medical interventions.
	Florida has adopted a statute and rules that prohibit these treatments even when medically appropriate.
	This is the point.
	Not sure it is medically appropriate, that's the question.
	Exactly.
	So one of the families involved in this litigation has a child as young as eight years old.
	I have an eight-year-old son.
	It would not be happening.
	No, no.
	A just society would place these children in protective custody and place their abusive parents in actual custody, but unfortunately one of the features of the devolution of powers in the US is that things do get Stuck up in the courts.
	And so this is a hurdle that must be overcome.
	But let's look at a map from ABC News as to which states and places in the US have placed bans on what they call gender-affirming care.
	Genital lobotomies.
	This is 18 states now, so Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Utah, and 14 other states are considering, or have already tried to introduce, similar bills that block, in part or in whole, quote-unquote, gender-affirming care.
	I'm sorry just to my Texan friends, but, uh, purple state.
	That's all I'm saying.
	We'll get into the exact details of what's happened in Texas because that is, again, the courts and not necessarily the legislature because Greg Abbott, who is usually quite tepid, is actually doing something quite good on this.
	He's just being obstructed by, well, appointed but unelected.
	This is a great map though, right?
	What I like about this map is this is, it may as well be a map of the moral versus immoral states of the United States.
	And the colour code is inverted, so for our audio listeners, the states which have gender-affirming care are in green, whereas the ones that have banned what they call gender-affirming youth care are in a deep red.
	And it corresponds, ironically enough, with the particular parties that are governing these states.
	So, something to point out here, to the Americans, that's 32 states in total.
	Now, not all of those 14 are going to have their legislation likely to be passed because their local state legislature is governed by the Democrats, so the legislation has been brought forward.
	This is now a majority of states that are pushing back against this.
	Excellent.
	The Overton window really has shifted in favour of protecting children, so it's interesting, but... Crazy!
	Just, Americans, should you protect your children?
	You know, a third of the states are like, well...
	Not on our watch.
	It's depressing.
	California and New York.
	It's equally depressing that we even have to keep talking about this, but the continual keeping up of the pressure is what's changing the conversation, so sometimes it can feel a bit tiring.
	Again, it's useful to take stock and see how far we have actually come, and when I say we, I am of course lending credence to the people that have been really pushing the needle on this, like Matt Walsh and all the folks at Daily Wire and the like.
	So well done, everyone.
	There's a quote from this article as well.
	Crazy!
	Absolutely crazy.
	Yeah.
	As if.
	So let's go to the Daily Wire's reporting on this as to which states and why have their different reasons.
	Just a quick breakdown.
	So Florida, Utah, Iowa, Mississippi, Tennessee, South Dakota, Indiana, Idaho, West Virginia, and Kentucky have all banned puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries for minors.
	So they've gone the full spectrum.
	Florida, as I've already said, have had that influx as of the last couple of days.
	Alabama tried to ban everything, but again, a federal court blocked the puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones part, but the gender surgeries remains in effect.
	Okay.
	That's something.
	Yep.
	Again, we'll get onto shortly how the puberty blockers have Zero scant evidence as well, and they're just as bad as the surgeries, weirdly enough.
	Well, they render you infertile, and you have a massively increased chance of, like, osteoporosis and other things like that.
	Yes.
	And also, because the way your hormones interact develop your cognition, you don't get out of the state of arrested development of prolonged adolescence.
	So, technically speaking, you wouldn't be able to consent to the later surgeries if we were doing it on a cognition basis, rather than an arbitrary age basis.
	And so, they permanently impair you mentally.
	So, they're horrible.
	They're evil things.
	Just as a quick thing, weren't these drugs used to sterilise... We'll get onto that.
	Yes, we have a detailed report from Wall Street Journal that came out this morning, funnily enough.
	Arizona also banned the surgeries, but they kept the puberty blockers and hormone access in place.
	So that wasn't because a federal court blocked it, that's because Doug Ducey's pretty much useless and now he's gone.
	We've got Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, so that'll probably...
	Go out the way.
	Georgia banned the hormones and the surgeries, but not the puberty blockers, for some reason.
	Thank you, Brian Kemp.
	Arkansas had their ban blocked by a federal court.
	Sarah Huckabee Sanders, however, President Trump's former White House spokesperson, who is now the governor there, has added another law in that makes it easier to file malpractice lawsuits against doctors who provide gender treatments.
	So that means they're so liable to being sued, that the amount of surgeries will go down and hopefully the insurance companies, particularly with the new expose that Matt Walsh has done as well, where they've exposed that WPATH's letters fast-track people who aren't even gender dysphoric to get gender surgeries, hopefully that means that they won't be covered enough where the practice will shut down de facto.
	But that's happening sort of in the UK, so we'll get onto that a little bit later.
	An Austin judge blocked the Texas directive from Governor Greg Adler To have the Department of Family and Protective Services investigate parents subjecting their children to abusive gender transitioning procedures.
	So, he said, have the law enforcement step in, monitor the situation, take the kids away from their parents if they're trying to socially or medically transition them, and the federal court stepped in and said, no you can't do that.
	Right.
	So, if, again, any other practice like force-feeding a child drugs or sexually abusing them, you would think that law enforcement would intervene, and they absolutely should, but for the special exemption of trans ideology, they don't have to step in.
	So, again.
	That's not the fault of the Texas Legislature, it's the courts.
	In Ohio, a bill was introduced in February to ban puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and gender surgeries.
	The bill also says that children must be screened for abuse and comorbidities, mental, before being diagnosed with gender dysphoria.
	Nebraska, North and South Carolina have bills to ban puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgeries for minors that just haven't passed yet.
	And New Jersey, Michigan, Oregon and Hawaii have bills proposing to ban all three procedures.
	But of course they're Democrat strongholds, so they're unlikely to pass.
	But good on the Republicans in the state legislature for at least trying to propose this and move the conversation along.
	And to show you the manipulative framing of how this is being spun by the corporate press, I thought I'd go to this one.
	Because recently, this was in West Virginia, this is the governor, Jim Justice, great name, and this is when's it at the time of writing.
	Can you scroll down please, John, just so I can get the date right?
	This was on late March.
	He signed a bill banning, quote, "...gender affirming care for minors." The bill outlaws those under 18 being prescribed hormone therapy and, and this is what they say, "...fully reversible puberty blockers." So it's a lie.
	It is.
	It also bans minors from receiving gender affirming surgery, something physicians say doesn't even happen in West Virginia.
	Then it doesn't matter if it's being banned, does it?
	Yes.
	But... it's not happening, but it should happen, and it's a good thing, is their logic.
	If it's not happening, then it's no problem to ban it.
	Yes.
	Then what are you complaining about?
	And just speaking on what you've already said about the idea that puberty blockers are fully reversible, number one, no.
	Abigail Schreier documents this very well in Irreversible Damage.
	But we also have this Wall Street Journal article that was published today that I thought summarised the evidence in a way that would provide a good source, rather than me just talking off the top of my head, but...
	It's all pretty disturbing.
	So, did you know?
	The Department of Health and Human Services has claimed that puberty blockers are reversible.
	This omits the evidence that, quote, "...by impeding the usual process of sexual orientation and gender identity development, these drugs effectively lock in children and young people to a treatment pathway, according to a report by the NHS, which cites studies finding that 96 to 98% of minors prescribed puberty blockers proceed to cross-sex hormones." It's an inexorable journey.
	If you put them on one, they're going to have a sunk cost to then buy into the other.
	Because they've been told that this is the only route to feeling better about themselves.
	And at the end of the day, you've kind of already screwed up their biology as well.
	Yes.
	So now you only have one way forward.
	Yeah, you're only committed to the position.
	And when it comes to its fruition, with the cross-sex surgery, and you're still not the man or woman you wanted to be because you have the memories of who you were, it's no wonder that these people tragically have such a high suicide rate.
	The FDA in 2016 ordered AbbVie to add a warning label that children on Lupron might develop new or intensified psychiatric problems.
	Oh wow, really?
	So it actually induces further mental comorbidities.
	So not only does it impair brain development and inhibit your ability to consent to things later in life, such as the surgeries, which I don't think you can consent to anyway, but that's another conversation, but it also might add additional mental health complications.
	Also, the FDA has approved these medications to treat prostate cancer, endometriosis, certain types of infertility, and a rare childhood disease called genetic mutation.
	Caused by genetic mutation, so that's precocious puberty, I think it was that.
	Right.
	Did you know they've never approved them for gender dysphoria?
	I did not know that.
	The FDA has never licensed chemical castration drugs, puberty blockers, for treatment of gender dysphoria.
	And this is because the Dutch study didn't find that either.
	The Dutch study that everyone bases it on didn't treat for suicidality, it treated whether or not they worked.
	But it's simply been transposed as the go-to evidence for why you should treat with puberty blockers.
	The drugs, led by Abfies Lupron, are prescribed to minors off-label.
	In a bracket, they're also used off-label for chemical castration of repeat sex offenders.
	So we are treating children with the same punishment as the paedophiles that prey on them.
	I just... oh god... it's just...
	You know, I've been preparing Hangout to do behind the paywall, because there's no way we could put this outside of the paywall.
	Which is just looking directly at the effects of all of these things.
	Yeah, I've been researching it for quite a while.
	Yeah, I've got a bunch of things that are just the most horrific things.
	I'm probably going to call it hell on earth or something like that.
	Because going through this is just awful.
	Yes.
	If you have not selected someone to sit on that, I am more than happy to contribute.
	Yeah, we can definitely do that.
	Because it's harrowing.
	They also found that the Centre for Investigative Reporting revealed in 2017, bear in mind, 2017 was before these were widely used as gender-affirming care drugs, that women taking Lupron experienced 10,000 adverse events reports when they were children.
	Jesus.
	So that's a horrific high rate of adverse event reports.
	And also we know that increases risk of infertility, cancer, osteoporosis and other lifelong debilitating conditions.
	So the idea this is being given to children is evil.
	It's literally used as a sterilization drug.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	For criminals.
	Yeah.
	So back to the individual states.
	Montana's going even further than just banning this.
	So they've also banned TikTok.
	Oh, very base.
	As a vector of transmission for trans ideology.
	And also because they've complained, of course, that ByteDance is beholden to the Chinese Communist Party.
	And so they've been stealing your data.
	And we also know that they're specifically tailoring the Western algorithm differently to the Chinese algorithm.
	Yes, yeah.
	I believe the Chinese algorithm is more educational, whereas the Western algorithm is more geared towards ideology.
	Because they understand that this is a demoralization tactic.
	Yes, and for anyone who doesn't remember, the Chinese Communist Party is the party of Mao, who have been engaging in a 100 year long ideological war with the West.
	Yes.
	So, don't forget, these are our enemies.
	Yeah, they're outsourcing a cultural revolution to us and laughing as we commit suicide.
	Quite literally, unfortunately.
	So, users and ByteDance have actually brought a lawsuit against this, so again, this is something that's being held up in the US courts, so don't blame your legislature, they are taking action, it's just judicial activists.
	They said, by banning TikTok, a forum that plaintiffs and hundreds of thousands of individuals in Montana use to engage in constitutionally protected speech, the TikTok ban unlawfully abridges one of the core freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment, attorneys for the company wrote in their complaint.
	So the complaint is mainly on the ground, the legislation, that it collects data from users and devices from the Chinese Communist Party, and the complaint against it is that by taking this platform down, you're stifling our free speech.
	They're not going- No, not the free speech of the Chinese Communist Party.
	Exactly.
	So they're not going to prevent another platform from snapping up the same... Content?
	Yeah, not even content.
	It's the way in which TikTok distributes its content in the 30-second videos.
	If Instagram did the same thing, even though Instagram has since, from the Wall Street Journal expose, been exposed as a trap of pedophiles as well, seems to be a thing of image-based platforms.
	But if Instagram did the same thing, they wouldn't shut down Instagram for the same reasons, because Instagram Even though it acts probably in the interest of the Chinese Communist Party, is not owned by them.
	But the byproduct of banning TikTok is that it slows down the spread of gender ideology.
	Because it used to be on Tumblr, and now it's definitely on TikTok.
	And Montana also decided just to define a woman in their legislation.
	Because that's something that we need to do in 2023.
	They said, in human beings there are exactly two sexes, male and female, with corresponding types of gametes, states the law, previously known as Senate Bill 458.
	The law states that a female is someone who, under normal development, has XX chromosomes and produces or would produce relatively large, relatively immobile gametes, or eggs, during her life cycle, and has a reproductive and endocrine system oriented around the production of those gametes.
	That's obviously true.
	The only issue with this is that Republican Senator Carl Glimm, who is the primary sponsor of the bill, said the bill is necessary because sex and gender should not be used interchangeably in Montana code.
	That would be sensible in the law.
	His direct quote, though, is, I hate to say it, but they're right about that.
	Gender is the expression, the social expression of biological sex.
	But it's anchored to it.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	It's completely conceptually anchored to the physical reality, the biological reality of men and women, males and females.
	But the attack will be, well, they are obviously actually different things.
	One can be male without being a man, one can be female without being a woman.
	And that's true, that's what boy and girl mean.
	So, they are right on that, and we need to be aware of it.
	The rest of the quote though is, biological sexes are mutable, you can't change it, there are only two biological sexes.
	Implying that gender is itself mutable and not binary, which is a problem of framing.
	He seems to have absorbed the sort of 2015 position.
	No, no, but the problem is gender is mutable.
	The expression of your masculinity does change.
	But not outside the binary biological sex paradigm.
	I agree.
	I agree.
	So that's why they need better framing, is my critique.
	They definitely do.
	But they're not wrong at all in what they've said there.
	It's a set of social...
	Associations to your biological sex, and you can perform the role of man or woman, less or more, corresponding to your sex.
	But the issue is he has left an open goal to say, if gender is mutable, then I can take myself outside the sex paradigm.
	He does need to stress that it is anchored and built upon the biology.
	Yes.
	Alabama have done the same thing, as well.
	So the Health Health Committee voted along party lines to approve the What is a Woman Act.
	I just like how it's become a meme.
	In a joke way, it's been taken up and run with.
	And send the legislation to the full House of Representatives.
	The bill defines a female and woman as an individual whose biological reproductive system is designed to produce ova, and a male and man as an individual whose biological reproductive system is designed to fertilise the ova of a female.
	The bill states that it is important to distinguish between the sexes with respect to athletics, prisons, or other detention facilities, domestic violence shelters, rape crisis centres, locker rooms, bathrooms, and other areas.
	Carmary and Dee Harvison Anderson Harvey, Alabama state director human rights campaign, in a statement on Wednesday called the bill the LGBTQ Erasure Act.
	Okay.
	Well, no.
	Again, hate to sound like the LGB Alliance here, but the TQ Plus are grafted onto the former acronym, because the former acronym concerns sexuality, and relies on a biological recognition of appendages relating to men and women, because if you're same-sex attracted, you're attracted to the same sex, and so the TQ Plus undermines the former, and so no, it's not the LGB TQ Plus Erasure Act, it's just the TQ Plus Doesn't Make Any Sense Act.
	And that would be quite sensible.
	I'm beyond even arguing that.
	Yeah, if you think that, that's fine.
	You're a lunatic.
	You're a lunatic who wants chocolate chips.
	Yeah, I know.
	This is the thing.
	We can't come together with the people who want to lock the breasts of a 16-year-old girl.
	There is no reconciling this position.
	Yeah, I just don't agree with you on anything here.
	Montana have also banned Drag Queen Story Hour.
	Again, just shutting down the transmission vectors.
	They are the third state to enact a law surrounding drag performers, which is HB 359, which defines them as male or female performers who adopt a flamboyant or parodic feminine and male persona with glamorous or exaggerated costumes and makeup.
	Minors are prohibited from attending drag shows on public property.
	Businesses that violate the law could face a fine anywhere between $1,000 and $5,000 for the first offence, between $2,500 and $5,000 for the second offence, and $10,000 for the third offence with a 10-year statutory limit.
	Schools and libraries would be fined $5,000 for each story hour heard.
	So they could have been slightly more nuanced on this because there are going to be people who say, well, what about something like Widow Twanky?
	And I'm like, yeah.
	Pantomime dames.
	Yeah, exactly, pantomime dames.
	Yeah, that's true.
	And there's an obvious substantive difference between a pantomime dame and the highly sexualized performances that we have seen videos of in strip clubs or wherever.
	But at the end of the day, if you're not prepared to concede that there's that distinction, then it's all gotta go.
	Yeah, no, I agree with that.
	I don't want to ban Wideo Twanky and Pantomime, but... But if you guys are going to make the conflation as a Trojan horse to get close to children, I'm fine with Panto just not being... Then it just goes.
	And you've ruined it.
	That's what it comes to.
	Yes.
	Tennessee have tried to do the same thing, but they've suffered a setback.
	Again, judicial activists.
	So the judge has blocked the Tennessee law.
	This time it was a Trump appointee.
	Right, okay.
	So he has blocked it on the most obtuse liberal standard imaginable.
	So he said, in Tennessee, he's blocked the law, intended to protect children from being exposed to adult cabaret performances.
	The law creates an offence for a person who engages in adult cabaret performances on public property Or in a location where the adult cabaret performance could be viewed by a person who is not an adult.
	The definition of adult cabaret performance in the law includes male or female impersonators.
	The U.S.
	District Judge, Thomas Parker, issued a temporary injunction against the law because he said it was too vague and could be a violation of the First Amendment.
	The law came before Parker after Friends of George, a self-described LGBTQ theatre company based in Memphis, filed a suit challenging the law.
	So he was saying the definition of obscenity here is too broad.
	I would suggest that we know what we see.
	And also, there are certain acts which are not speech.
	This is the problem I have with the... The Free Speech Coalition is someone who represents the porn industry in obscenity cases, and I think there's a definitional difference between expression and speech, because there are certain acts that you couldn't do in Times Square and get away with legally, versus shouting in Times Square.
	And this should be one of them, I would suggest.
	It shouldn't be outside of the bounds of normality and decency to ban sexual acts or acts that are imitating sexual acts in public spaces so children aren't exposed to them.
	Yes.
	And that's not a free speech issue.
	No, I don't think it's a decency issue.
	No.
	So this is an annoying thing that this person's done, but again, things are being changed slowly on the state level.
	And I would like to say as well, credit to Matt Walsh and James Lindsay specifically, because they had input on this original law.
	And this was where James Lindsay first raised the spectre of the drag pedagogy paper that I've gone through before.
	So, more awareness is being brought to this.
	And because more awareness is being brought to this, Go on to this one.
	The Human Rights Campaign, the people responsible for the Corporate Equality Index that convinced Anheuser-Busch to hire Dillon Mulvaney, the largest LGBT lobby in the world, have declared a state of emergency.
	Good.
	Well, I think it's hilarious, they think they can act like a government.
	But, of course, all of the largest hedge funds and international institutions have given them that power to strong-arm- The state of emergency, we might not be able to transition children or expose them to Horrific shows, okay.
	Yes, or indecent acts on Pride floats.
	I mean, it was quite funny, so DeSantis... Why was that the emergency for them?
	Yeah, well, back to your thing of when DeSantis said we should give child sex offenders a death penalty and they said that's transphobic.
	What an odd thing to say.
	The idea that when DeSantis bans public sexual acts and then Pride in Florida say we have to shut it down because there might be children present.
	What were you doing all along?
	So, state of emergency, because you can't be sexual around children.
	Right, very strange.
	So, let's jump continent to Norway and Sweden.
	So Josh will be covering a little bit more of this on a weekend segment on Sunday, going into the details of each country, specifically France, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, a little bit of the UK.
	But I thought we'd just touch on this a little bit.
	This is from Dr Debra So, who's booked The End of Gender.
	Harry and I plan on covering soon.
	And she writes, Now, there is an issue here, because it sounds to me much like the lack of substantive evidence is why they have rescinded this.
	Good.
	But it means that they will still be conducting clinical trials to try and fabricate the evidence under the false premise that this will treat gender dysphoria, even though The idea that you can change sex is itself an incorrect premise, and so no treatment based on that premise will ever help someone.
	Right.
	So they'll still be conducting it in clinical trials, but fortunately lots of children will be spared these exercises because they'll no longer be used as an intervention to ameliorate their gender dysphoria in the general population.
	So that's a positive development.
	The Netherlands, France, Sweden and Finland have all likewise reviewed the Dutch protocol.
	And they've said what I said a little while ago, which is it doesn't actually address suicidality, it just confirms that puberty's blockers work.
	And one participant during the Dutch Protocol died from surgery complications later on.
	Are you not familiar with this?
	No, but it's fine.
	We'll talk about it another time.
	Yeah, that's totally fine.
	So it cites the UK here as well.
	Just so we know, if we move on to the next one, Josh has already covered the fact that the Tavistock Clinic has not quite closed.
	If you scroll down to the... there we go.
	They've got a stay of execution until about August, so they will still be operating even though they were told to discontinue their operations because of the likes of the CAS report.
	So for commentators, I know Tim's brought this up before, Tim Paul, Jordan Peterson, they haven't quite discontinued it as we'd hoped, but Hopefully that continues going on.
	Speaking of Tavistock in the UK, The Telegraph came out recently and found out that mermaids were setting the guidelines for Tavistock.
	Oh, were they?
	Yes, they were directly involved.
	So Susie Green, the chairman of Charity Mermaids at the time, was part of a task group reviewing services at the Tavistock Importment Clinic.
	The service specification outlines the treatment for children.
	Transgender children, they say.
	Included details on how hormone blockers will now be considered for any child under 12.
	Miss Green, who works for Gender GP, an online service which prescribes cross-sex hormones, had taken her own child, who was born male, to the US for puberty blockers before their 16th birthday.
	On their 16th birthday, she took them to Thailand for cross-sex surgery.
	So, what does the dad think of it?
	No mention of him being in the picture.
	Weird, that.
	Yes.
	As we know from Jeff Younger and other people, the Canadian fella featured in What Is A Woman, it is usually the devouring, borderline personality disorder manifesting mothers taking their children away from the fathers who desperately do not want them to be castrated.
	The Tavistock claimed that it did not have emails or minutes of meetings with Ms.
	Green.
	But after the Information Regulator threatened court action, it released more than 300 pages showing Ms.
	Green had direct contact with Dr. Polly Carmichael, Tavistock's director, and demanded to be re-regarded as a professional so she could refer children herself to treatment when their GPs refused.
	Ms.
	Green has no formal medical training.
	She held an advisory role on two of the studies that the clinic was involved in on the long-term effect of gender identity.
	So they're just lying to mutilate children.
	In 2018, the NHS updated the informed consent section to state that age alone does not determine capacity to give consent.
	I would agree.
	I don't think anyone of any age can consent to this, specifically if puberty blockers impair their mental development.
	But you don't think that.
	Instead, you think that children should be able to consent.
	It is concluded... If it is concluded that a client has sufficient autonomy and understanding of what is to be offered, plus other key eligibility and readiness criteria have been met, they can consent to the treatment.
	We already know that WPATH...
	has pre-scripted letters to give to transgender clinicians, to give to insurance providers in the U.S.
	that say, I have gender dysphoria, therefore I need the treatment, even if you have not had a formal diagnosis of gender dysphoria yet.
	Matt Walsh exposed that this week.
	The involvement with the service specification came as mermaids were putting pressure on the Tavistock to lower the age for cross-sex hormones to 14, Dr. Carmichael revealed in an interview at the time.
	So, as we spoke about yesterday with Childline and the like, we have a deeply entrenched ideological NGO class interfering with the medical establishment and harming children.
	Now, fortunately, public opinion has been against this.
	The Guardian are crying about the fact that less than half of Britons support LGBT trans-affirming child therapies.
	They placed 28th on a list of 30 countries for people agreeing that teenagers with parental consent should be able to access gender-affirming care.
	Only Hungary, which has banned the process since 2020, and the US, because of various states already mentioned, recorded lower levels of support than Britain's 47%.
	And a good bit of news.
	47% of people in Britain?
	Yes.
	God, that's disgraceful.
	I think they are yet to understand what this situation does.
	Yeah, they probably have no idea what they're talking about.
	Which is why Matt Walsh has been very effective in raising this issue, and for example, my own dad last year thought, oh, there must be people in the wrong body.
	You just think it's weird, so you're against it.
	This year, he's turned around and gone, no, after everything that you've said, after your interview with Richie, I've changed my mind.
	What they're doing to these people is barbarous.
	It's medieval torture.
	And speaking of Richie Herron, if you'd like to go over to our website, you can watch my interview with him.
	It's free, but of course, we are demonetised, and On YouTube, so if you'd like to pass £5 a month, we can continue bringing in guests like this.
	This was a harrowing interview as well, man.
	It is one of the saddest experiences, I think, of my life, and it doesn't even come close to what Richie's been through.
	And I'm glad to call Richie a friend offline now, and I really hope he does better, but everything he went through, utterly avoidable, and there is blood on the hands of his now-dead physician and everyone that pushed him along this path.
	And congratulations to him for dedicating his life to trying to stop this ever happening to anyone else.
	And there are some positive developments on this front, because Richie, in the while, has had something in the works.
	He's launching a judicial review against the UK's adult gender clinics, as well as the child transition services.
	The aim is to challenge the failure of the NHS to provide appropriate treatment and safeguards for adults suffering from gender dysphoria.
	So, Paul Cothrane, who I believe is involved in the legislation, he is filing a notice to the UK Secretary of Health, which is Steve Barclay, and Minister for Women and Equalities, which is Kimmy Badenoch, informing them of the action, and they're awaiting a response within two weeks.
	It's filed in conjunction with the father of a 21-year-old autistic man, who has redacted his identity, who has been booked in for imminent genital removal surgery at an adult gender clinic.
	So, despite him having the comorbidities of autism and probable depression and the like, much like Richie, who also had autism and OCD, he is going to have his testicles removed.
	That's just harrowing.
	And if we go to the last one, this is their crowdfunding website, and it gives more details on their case.
	The legal team is being represented by Jeremy Higham KC, the person who represented N1 Kira Bell's case against Tavistock.
	And it says, We're bringing you judicial review against the service specifications maintained by the NHS, which determine the treatment which adults who suffer with gender dysphoria are given.
	Currently, they don't require psychological involvement, so don't require a psych assessment.
	If you have gender dysphoria, you can just be pushed along the inexorable path.
	They require clinicians to affirm the young person's belief about gender identity.
	We're also asking that the CAS review is extended to cover young people to the age of 25 years old.
	Obviously, the threshold for when your brain is fully formed, and...
	Again, some wiggle room about whether or not people with mental comorbidities at any age can consent to this, but that conversation will be held down the road.
	And you can donate and sign up to their email list for updates here.
	So I thought I'd just provide you an update, a positive development on some of the legislative efforts that are going against this horrible trend, which is damaging children and vulnerable adults.
	There, of course, should never be another Kiri Bell, Richie Herron, Chloe Cole.
	And well done to everyone who is working to assure that that is the case.
	Well, I don't have any good news for the final segment.
	The question that I just continually have going around in my head is why do I feel like I've been mugged?
	I feel every day that I've been mugged.
	Literally someone's come up to me, threatened me, and stolen my wallet.
	That's how I feel every single day of my life.
	Because immigration, illegal and legal, is just a perennial issue in Britain.
	And the Conservative Party with a massive 380 seat majority just will not do anything about it.
	They won't touch it for some reason.
	And so the country is in decline, everyone can see it's in decline, everyone can see everything's falling apart.
	All the services are massively overloaded, all the roads are massively overloaded, all the trains are... just don't even get me started.
	You know, everything, the house prices, rent, everything is being ground down by the sheer number of people who are using it.
	And the Conservatives are doing very, very little.
	But before we begin, if you want to support us, go and watch Thomas Dowling's return for a premium podcast with Stelios, debating modernity.
	How is modernity working out?
	Not great, I would argue.
	And I think that's Thomas' argument as well.
	And Stelios, I suppose, feels like he has to defend something about maternity.
	I haven't actually had time to watch it yet, but I could hear them arguing when they were recording it.
	So, I bet it was good.
	Anyway, let's begin by taking a look at the average boatload of migrants.
	This is the UK Border Force picking up some refugees.
	See a single woman or child there?
	Not even that, they look delighted to be broadcasting this on social media.
	Yeah, of course they are.
	This is an adventure for them.
	Yes it is, as Callum has spoken about previously.
	But this, when I say this is literally average migrant boat, I'm not joking.
	According to the government's own statistics, nine out of ten of them were male.
	In the whole thing.
	So, okay, 9 out of 10, 90% male.
	So, where are we putting them?
	Well, we're putting them in hotels, but we'll get to that in a minute.
	There's a big protest in Bexhill recently, because, of course, Bexhill's just a small town on the coast, on the south, and they were going to put 1,200 asylum seekers into a form of prison, and so the people of Bexhill were like, not on my watch.
	But what was really annoying is the Conservative MP is a Mr. Merryman.
	And he did not oppose the plans to have this put in his own constituency.
	Line go up.
	Yeah.
	So the Conservative MP they voted for has been like, yeah, no, I'm okay with it.
	Our policy is to move asylum seekers away from hotels.
	They're costly and not safe in terms of people being targeted by modern slavery gangs.
	Then why incentivise them to keep coming here?
	That's the concern.
	I hate it.
	I would rather see people being housed in more humane situations, where there is something to do, does not blight hotels and the areas around them.
	Well, you could just deport these illegal immigrants.
	That would be the first thing I would have done.
	They have no entitlement to be here.
	No.
	They literally have no case to be here.
	And they broke into the country.
	So anyway, moving on.
	The Conservatives, as you already know, back in March, are housing migrants, tens of thousands of them, in 400 hotels across the country, which means that of the 48 English counties, 42 of them are housing foreign interlopers.
	And this is something that is costing us huge amounts of money, and so we were trying to save money, and so we were putting the migrants four in a room.
	Four men in a room in a hotel.
	And so the migrants started protesting that.
	If you go to the next one, John, there was a protest last week outside of the Pimlico Comfort Inn where 20 asylum seekers essentially camped on the street protesting.
	It ended the night before this article with rumours that the hotel gave in because the hotel just capitulated and gave them extra rooms.
	Because why not?
	Why wouldn't you?
	The government's gonna pay for it.
	On the arrival to the hotel, they were told that four people would be sharing a room with two bunk beds, leaving many to worry about their safety and lack of space.
	What safety concerns have they?
	Top and tail might be a bit too close.
	Yeah, but what's unsafe about having to live with your fellow migrants, fellow refugees?
	You're all just fleeing war, aren't you?
	And persecution, so we are told.
	But the government has got a solution to this.
	Are you going to just tell them to share the rooms?
	Just be like, could you just do it, please?
	And they're going to be like, oh, yes, sir, mister.
	It's not unreasonable.
	Oh, right, okay.
	We wouldn't want to offend the sensibilities of the seafaring insurgents that we are paying millions every day to put up.
	No, Robert Jenrick is right.
	It's not unreasonable, but these aren't reasonable people.
	They literally broke into our country and they're demanding our money.
	I think the reasonable thing is to sink the boat.
	I think that the reasonable thing would just be to turn them back to France.
	Which is something we're not doing for some reason.
	But yeah, so this is directly a decision.
	A decision?
	Decided what?
	We're gonna ask them not to do it.
	Okay, they're not gonna listen.
	Like, they don't respect you.
	They don't take orders from you.
	They're here to get our money.
	And so anyway, on the 9th of May, the Conservatives are like, well, maybe if we just stick them on barges, that'll be the solution.
	And we've covered this before, so I won't linger on it.
	But each vessel will house 500 single male asylum seekers.
	Which describes almost all of them.
	In various places like Portland and Dorset.
	So we're just gonna have pirate marauders.
	Yeah, basically.
	Sailing off the coast of England.
	Yeah, I mean, I don't know why we're treating these adult men like they're children.
	Like, they're being treated as if they're incapable children.
	Well, they have...
	Wayfared their way from wherever they've come from, managed to Viking their way across the sea, and now they're looting our tax money.
	So I don't think they are children, actually.
	But the Conservatives are like, right, so that's one plan, but that hasn't solved the problem.
	Maybe we should just extend that plan, which is something they announced earlier this week.
	Because the next one, John, is going to be like, yeah.
	So why don't we just get more of these?
	Why don't we increase the size of the pirate fleet?
	Look, if you know you don't have to let them in, you know that.
	So all I can assume is that you want them here, and that you are pretending to try to deal with the problem.
	to try to quell public outrage about the fact that we are being bled dry in our tax money and having our cultural fabric deteriorated while also benefiting from the fact that loads more people are coming here whether it's your spreadsheet or whether it's because you're getting a kickback in some way from the contracts doled out to the hotel providers.
	There are 112,000 people apparently occupying these barges and hotels Just saying.
	But the question, so you remember they were like, well, it's not safe for us to live with our fellow migrants.
	The Conservatives got another plan.
	Got another plan, right?
	They're going to make them sign a code of conduct.
	Or else.
	Right.
	Migrants housed on barges face code of conduct and will be kicked out if they break rules.
	They won't be kicked out of the country.
	No, they'll just be left to roam.
	Exactly.
	They'll be kicked out of the barge.
	It's like, well, where are they going to go?
	This is wild, right?
	The code is designed to prevent antisocial behaviour.
	Really, all these young men from foreign parts are exhibiting antisocial behaviour.
	Who could have predicted that?
	Lisa Nandy.
	And will not apply only on board, but when migrants leave and travel to town for visits, a senior Home Office official has said.
	The official was speaking to residents via a Zoom meeting, a public meeting, said the asylum seekers would be free to come and go, just as they are allowed to do in asylum hotels, but would be escorted in and out of the secure port at Portland like holidaymakers disembarking from a cruise ship.
	Put her on a jolly.
	Put a pin in that.
	Literally, this is a holiday residence.
	That's the penalty.
	Don't abide by the code.
	£9.10 a week deducted.
	We're gonna take your pocket money away.
	withdrawal of supports comprising food, housing, and cash of £9 a week.
	That's the penalty.
	Don't abide by the code.
	£9.10 a week.
	We're going to take your pocket money away.
	Yeah.
	I just wanted to get married and have a house, man.
	The incentives.
	They're so strong.
	I just wanted a quiet life, and you just won't let me because you want to create human battery farms.
	I hate this place.
	The government stressed that such action would not be ruled out.
	Really?
	It's not even going to be the first thing they do?
	I mean, I would have had lashings in the public square.
	But they're like, well, we might take away your pocket money.
	I would have deported them by a trebuchet.
	They're not children!
	Exactly, they're not children.
	So, like I said, they're going to be treated like holidaymakers embarking from a cruise ship.
	So why don't we just put them on cruise ships?
	Sorry, have you seen what the barge is called?
	No, what was it?
	The Bibby Stockholm.
	Oh, yes.
	Stockholm Syndrome.
	Are you having a laugh?
	No, what's having a laugh is we're actually going to put them on the cruise ships.
	Oh, okay.
	Because, I mean, they've come all this way.
	We're acting like we're paying for their holiday in Britain.
	If you just go to the next one, why don't we just put them on the cruise ship?
	Like, why not?
	We have actual cruise ships that the government could pay for for a bunch of foreign interlopers to live on for as long as they want at the expense of the British taxpayer.
	Why don't we put them on the cruise ship, says Rishi Sunak?
	And that's a great question.
	You have literally, literally humiliated us all this way.
	Why not just go that extra step further?
	Yeah, all of the onboard entertainment will generate so much GDP growth.
	Well, I mean...
	Then, why not just sail them round to the south of France?
	And have them have a Mediterranean weather.
	A nice holiday, at our expense.
	I just... I think I'm going to go mad, right?
	Anyway, Rishi Sunak has revealed that we're going to pay for a thousand migrants between them.
	500 migrants each on one of these cruise ships.
	Now, it costs you thousands of pounds to go on a cruise ship, and the government ain't going to pay for it.
	But, if you just cross the border on a small boat, Honestly, for the price of a flight to France and a rubber duck to flow over on, you will have bed and board and holidays for the rest of your life.
	And yeah, and that's the thing.
	All of this is indefinite.
	There's no time limit in any of this.
	There are so many perverse incentives here.
	It's just like, what are you doing?
	I can't help but laugh, because this is just absolute clown world, right?
	The vessels will be thought to be heading to Merseyside and Teaport.
	That's it.
	Okay, great.
	At least it's somewhere.
	Not near me, but then up the coast.
	Aren't they just where Rishi Sunak has created these new freeport zones as well for low capital investment?
	Possibly.
	I didn't think about... Teaport definitely is.
	I didn't think about checking that.
	That's a strange choice.
	There's definitely something going on there.
	Because if you've attracted loads more investment and regulation exemption and then you're sticking a boat full of human capital in the area, there's something going on there that...
	Pricks my ears up.
	Quite possible.
	I didn't think to cross-reference it.
	But, uh, I just... Cruise ships.
	Just actually... They're being given a cruise.
	I hope these cruise ships have swimming pools on them.
	Heated swimming pools.
	They've got luxurious beds.
	I just... My wife's like, can we go on a cruise?
	I'm like, no, we're not illegal immigrants, darling.
	We can't afford a bloody cruise.
	What, in this economy, we've got to pay for their cruise.
	You've got to understand, sweetheart.
	Just a bunch of Somalians clapping for the Mickey Mouse nighttime dinner show.
	Oh my God.
	But anyway, thank God someone is standing up for this.
	It's Sadiq Khan!
	What?
	They're not going on barges and cruise ships on my watch.
	Oh, is it because he found out the proportion of Indians that are now coming over?
	No, it's because he views it as being beneath their dignity.
	I'm joking!
	Sadiq Khan says, I oppose these plans on the strongest possible terms.
	I am proud of London's history of providing sanctuary for those who seek refuge.
	I'm concerned that vulnerable people fleeing appalling circumstances... I tell you what, Sadiq, we'll go back to the first video.
	You point out to me the vulnerable person who's fleeing appalling circumstances, because all of them look like very rough-looking adult men.
	But anyway, they would not have serious access to the support they need.
	They're going to be on a cruise ship, Sadiq.
	Don't know what you're talking about.
	With their safety, health, and well-being put at serious risk.
	As if these are just a bunch of children.
	Right?
	Is it because London's not safe?
	No, he wants them in London, not on the barges.
	Oh, right, okay.
	Right, right, okay, okay.
	Yeah.
	So he's going to block the barges.
	Not going to be in London.
	Not in his backyard.
	But then Sadiq has been quite open about the fact that he just literally wants more immigrants.
	If we go to the next one, John.
	Literally, there's just no limit.
	Now, at this point, we know that 40% at least of London is first generation immigrant.
	I live there.
	You can tell.
	And the census data shows it.
	And so Sadiq Khan's like, yeah, so London needs more immigrants.
	I'm never going to be able to own my own place anywhere near.
	I don't even want to live on a tube line in Central, it's horrible, but even the Greater London Boroughs, which are still kind of quaint and nice and have birdsong in the mornings I can walk to work with, I'm never going to be able to have a home there.
	You've priced me out of literally my ancestral homeland.
	I hate you is all my call.
	Well, Sadiq Khan, so that says, I have no hesitation in saying we need more migrants in London.
	He doesn't give a limit.
	I mean, London is somewhere like 8.5 million people at this point.
	It's grown a million a year for the last couple of years.
	It's been wild.
	You can see that London is packed to the gills when you go there.
	So, I mean, what does Sadiq plan to do?
	Some sort of mega city where he just starts building upwards.
	They're already building that in Ealing.
	Of course not.
	Lewisham, there is actually less, there are more tower blocks than there is sky space between the tower blocks.
	Yes.
	Park the social benefits to our city from migration.
	Park the cultural benefits to our city from migration.
	Because there aren't any.
	Yeah, exactly, because, I mean, what would they be?
	I've spent the morning with some of our city's leading businesses who create jobs, wealth and prosperity.
	They've got a skills shortage and a labour shortage.
	Record migration.
	Labour shortage.
	Yes.
	Why?
	I happen to have noticed, this is something purely observational.
	When we went to cover the Queen's funeral, a lot of security there.
	The crowd, overwhelmingly ethnic English.
	The security providers, overwhelmingly not.
	And so, when I keep hearing that we keep importing nurses from overseas, we have lots of people in private contracted security from ethnic minority backgrounds.
	I do wonder if importing incompatible cultures and people with differing lifestyles who have never paid into the point of access to public services is kind of manufacturing this endless consent of never having enough security or public services to meet demand.
	It's almost like, by importing all the people, that's the reason for the shortage.
	Quite possibly.
	But Sadiq Khan does say that, look, I want the power to control London's borders, devolve to cities like London the powers to have regional shortage occupationalists, so I can be in charge of deciding how many people come into London to help our economy.
	So he wants to be King Sadiq of a satellite state?
	Yeah.
	And he wants there to be literally no limit to the number of migrants London will take.
	There are labour shortages, don't you know?
	He's been calling for rent controls in London for years now, though, right?
	I mean, like, literally every year.
	They don't work.
	Yeah, exactly.
	A, they don't work, but B, why do you need rent controls?
	Where is the demand coming from, Sadiq?
	So I want to cram as many people in as possible, but I also want to have manual control of the rents in a way that will not work and will find itself simply bleeding out in other areas, right?
	I mean, he literally says, London's private renters are facing a triple whammy with rising rent spills and the cost of household essentials putting major strain on their finances.
	Which is why I've called for more immigrants.
	He says he wants the government to implement rent controls in London.
	It's mad.
	If only we knew why we needed this.
	So, why are so many migrants coming across the channel?
	I mean, it's not just the migrants, but we'll get to that.
	Because the French are afraid of them.
	Now, you've got people like Steve Laws, good lad, go follow him on Twitter, saying, look, you can see that these people, you can see the dock in the background, so they're not leaving from a remote location, so you can, on the back there, right, you can see they're just on the French beaches, leaving, and so the French must be turning a blind eye.
	No, that's giving the French way too much credit.
	Turning a blind eye would imply that they aren't mortally afraid of the migrants.
	The French have already surrendered to the migrants, which is literally what some reported yesterday.
	The French have apparently decided to refuse to intercept small boats because there's been a string of violent attacks on the police.
	And so the police are like, zut aloh!
	Waves of white flag!
	And have just given up.
	As well, who's selling them all the boats?
	Well, that's a great question.
	I mean, we spent, what was it, 250 million?
	Telling the French, look, here's all this money, stop them coming, and the French are like, we can't, we have surrendered, mon cherie.
	They are proactively letting them through.
	Yes.
	The cops are happy to tear gas them and slice their boats on the beaches, try and stop them from leaving the shores, but as soon as the migrant boats get into the water, those inside become increasingly violent.
	Do they?
	And the police don't want to approach them for fear of getting hurt.
	Guns.
	Border force sources say.
	Yeah, I mean, I thought... Guns.
	I thought there was a sort of form of projectile weaponry that we could have used in this circumstance.
	But of course the French, decades behind us.
	Centuries behind us.
	Just a former bullseye contestant standing at Calais chucking darts at them for all I care.
	Just deflate the bloody things.
	Nope, the French have surrendered.
	So France is now a migrant country as far as I'm concerned.
	But the thing is, there are no other things that can be done.
	Apparently the Dutch signed a deal with Morocco saying, look, can we just send you these illegals back?
	And that didn't have any effect.
	Literally less than 10% of the Moroccan nationals the Dutch immigration officials asked to provide emergency travel documents for were forcibly deported.
	So sanction the countries that keep allowing their citizens to pour into these countries.
	Why are we trying to pay France rather than bleeding dry every single country that sends their... We had a deal with Albania!
	No!
	Declare economic war on Albania for all I care if you're going to keep letting your people come over and invade!
	Declare actual war?
	Well, yeah, sure.
	But anyway, right, so what's the problem?
	The problem is European Convention on Human Rights, which is the Council of Europe that is responsible for this, not the European Union.
	We are still members of the Council of Europe, if we can get to the next one.
	This is just from the University of Liverpool, if you could go back, sorry.
	Where they're just saying that basically, technically we could ignore it, because it's not like the Council of Europe has any enforcement mechanism for anything, but for some reason we don't.
	We've actually got a really great record of doing exactly as they say, even though we complain about these things.
	So we say, please can we not do that?
	And they say, no, you're gonna have to do that.
	And we're just like, okay, well, I guess we're just gonna have to do it.
	We could leave at any time.
	We could just ignore it.
	We're also holding ourselves to a set of legal bindings, which we don't have to be in.
	It's like the Conservatives complaining about the Equality Act, but still keeping it in place.
	Yeah, they could leave this, they could leave that, they could do the other, they've got the massive majority, this could all have been done by lunchtime yesterday.
	But nope, and it's because the lefty human rights lawyers are like, well, here's a piece of paper that says you're still going to do it, and judging from your record, you're going to comply, and therefore we're just going to keep doing this and you're going to keep paying.
	How much do you think it is?
	So last I heard, it was about seven million a day.
	Well, the government tell us it's six million a day, but there are other costs that they're not adding to that.
	Right.
	If you go to the next one, this is the... It's only six million.
	Yeah, only six million pounds a day.
	Which is three billion a year and rising.
	Now, I bet this is way under-costed.
	There's going to be many more ancillary costs that stack up on top of this.
	But even this is just what the government tells you.
	Six million a day.
	Did you have a day off yesterday?
	Sit around, put your feet up, watch some TV, maybe play some video games, had a beer maybe, and six million pounds was shoved into the pockets of the hotels, the bureaucracy, and the migrants.
	You were sat there, thinking you were having a nice day off, and they were taking £6 million off us collectively to give it to a bunch of wayfaring foreigners.
	I want to see if the date that mass migration started via the small boats, and they were giving them this money, if JD Sports stock just keeps going up.
	Probably, yeah.
	Anyway, so just to put a cap on this, that's the illegal immigration.
	There are, of course, massive, massive, massive amounts of legal migration.
	Honestly, I don't know why people illegally immigrate into the country.
	I'm going to cover these statistics in depth on Monday because, thankfully, Jeremy of Migration Watch decided to give us the press embargo release of that, so thank you very much.
	Right, OK.
	Yeah, well, what we have from The Times here is that Migration Watch did a study on just legal immigration because the Conservatives in the last two years have decided, actually, we need a net migration of over 500,000.
	So that's a total migration of 1.16 million and then 1.23 million, I think it was, this year.
	The previous year was 606,000 net increase.
	Yeah, and in 2021, it was 506 or 505, something like that.
	And that was out of 1.16 million.
	And then this year, it's been more.
	And next year, it's going to be even more.
	And it's just going to keep going on.
	And so Migration Watch is like, well, look, we can add up numbers, actually.
	Numbers add up.
	And if this keeps adding up, we will have 16 million new people by 2046.
	And that is despite the birth rate continually falling.
	And so they have said, we're going to need 18 new cities the size of Birmingham to meet housing demand.
	They think it'll be between 83 and 87 million people in the UK.
	And that's based on the undercounted population statistics, which Dan has already been through, where he says that there's at least a couple of million people here that we don't know about.
	Absolutely.
	Which Tesco's has been telling us, because they've been feeding them.
	And also people like the Waste Disposal people will say, well look, we're serving many more than are on the books.
	But there we go.
	So yeah, you are being mugged.
	You are absolutely being mugged every single day of your life.
	Whenever you take a day off, millions of more pounds go out of the public purse at your expense.
	Hey, I dropped a new Zelda video, and I think you should check this one out as well.
	It's on my Rumble page and YouTube page, and I think you're really, really gonna like it.
	Oh, by the way, if they decided to reboot X-Files, PLEASE get them to cast Tucker Carlson as Mulder.
	Who should play Scully?
	What's your best pick?
	Tucker is way too old to be Mulder.
	Mulder, okay, right.
	Listen, Zuma.
	Mulder was like a late-twenties FBI agent who was unpopular in the FBI for being a kook.
	Right.
	But, like you say, he's always on something, he's always bright, you know.
	And Scully is the straight man, to his kookiness, and she is a very professional, very attractive young woman, who is regretfully assigned to essentially watch him, to make sure he doesn't do anything crazy, and get sucked into it, because of course, the truth is out there, right?
	Right.
	Tucker can't be way too old, Craig.
	Come on.
	I don't know who could do it, but I don't know who Scully would be.
	Leave a comment below, I want to know your thoughts.
	And a reboot, if anything, is just terrible.
	Just go and watch the old X-Files.
	It's really good.
	So one of the lies they keep telling us here in Australia about the referendum is the fact that the referendum is there to recognise Aboriginal people as Australians, which has already been done since the 1970s.
	This voice to Parliament, which is actually a separate Parliament for Aboriginal people, is racist by definition, no matter what people say.
	Where still, most Aboriginal people don't even know anything about this voice.
	They haven't been told what it's about or what it is.
	So they are creating, as far as I understand it then, a fractionated ethnic-based parliament for Australian Aboriginals to have them governed by separate laws?
	Well, I mean, we have it for the Scots and the Welsh, so...
	Tony D. and we, Scurvy Joan, here with another tale of South Jersey Pirates.
	You know the story of Bloody John Bacon.
	Him and his men committed a Long Beach Island massacre in 1782 during the Revolutionary War.
	But Bacon also was a pirate, and he took many a treasure, and they say he buried it along Barnegat Light in South Jersey.
	If you can find that treasure, you can avenge them sailors.
	Arrgh!
	That's cool, though.
	Do you want to do the comments?
	Yeah, can do.
	Sure.
	Andrew Narok.
	Ah, Colin Connor again, one of my favourite viewers on the podcast.
	Oh, cheers, thanks.
	As for that first Mel Gibson quote, can't that be said of leftism in general, religious texts, moral frameworks, etc., and what place on earth is more left-wing than Hollywood?
	That's a good point.
	And that's why it sounds like something Mel Gibson may well have said.
	Yes.
	I am going to do something soon, a premium podcast, on the current assertion that all of leftism is Gnosticism, because there has been a turtles-all-the-way-down approach taken to say that leftism is a re-articulation of ancient religious ideals.
	Not really, no.
	So that warrants exploration.
	But it is clear that intersectionality and capital W Woke is forming a kind of secular religion.
	At least in practice, if not having any metaphysical appeals.
	Rue the Day.
	Disclaimer.
	But... I don't know what that means.
	Sorry.
	Kevin Fox.
	Hang on.
	Disclaimer.
	For legal reasons, I disavow everything said in this episode, be it based or true.
	I don't know what he's referring to, though.
	Um... Let's keep it that way.
	Okay.
	Kevin Fox.
	People decried Gibson playing William Wallace, but then he turned out to be the perfect Scotsman, a drunk racist.
	But he hasn't done any smack that we know of, so... Yeah, true, he's not a parent.
	Might slightly undermine it.
	The letter M is for malpractice.
	I think I'm going to make a new fictional movie about a wizard family.
	I think Potter would be a good last name, you know, as in Beatrix Potter.
	Yeah, I'm sorry, that Rothschild thing.
	So yeah, it was just about a different family.
	Shut up.
	Shut up, come on.
	Yeah.
	Omar Awad, chat GPT, write me a script about the Rothschilds family in the style of Mel Gibson.
	I might do that after this.
	If it's not happening, we can make it happen.
	Sometimes the internet is a wonderful place.
	Just want to say, right, I'm not in favour of racism or anti-Semitism, but, man, this, that would be something that would... I would be funny.
	Be surprised if chatGPT allowed you to.
	Yeah, it probably won't.
	It's intersectionally lobotomised.
	Lord Nerevar, if Mel Gibson can actually make this film, it will blow the lid off Hollywood as we know it.
	Not the hero I expected, but I'll take it.
	See, that's what a lot of people are hoping for, but it's not going to be the case.
	I don't think it's going to turn out as you want.
	No.
	I have to confess, having some serious doubts, The Hollywood Swamp seems to be so entrenched that even if Gibson does manage to make the film, I doubt it would see the light of day.
	I hope, as always, to be proven wrong.
	It's not going to happen.
	No.
	That was why, you know, it's a lot of wishful thinking on a lot of people's parts.
	And I also kind of, like...
	I just don't really want it, because one, I'm not within the subculture that would enjoy seeing the chaos, and two, when Kanye came out and said his rather contentious opinions about the mid-century Germans, that's all that could be talked about for about three weeks.
	That is true, yeah.
	And I'm just not that interested.
	There's other stuff.
	Derek Power.
	Honestly, it all goes back to what was said in South Park.
	Either you can make fun of everyone or make fun of nothing.
	The same goes for critiquing and questioning anyone or anything.
	Of course, you can and should try to do these things civilly without malice, but I'm tired of any group claiming immunity or special privilege from anything less than saintly reverent.
	Risto.
	To be completely against Mel, if every super-rich investor you met was Jewish and vocal about it, it might create some paranoia that might manifest as a rant during a drunken stupor.
	So this is the interpretation that lots of black musicians have, I think?
	Well, that's a Kanye interpretation.
	This has been a very long history.
	I don't know if you're aware of it, but Michael Jackson got caught in a lot of antisemitism scandals, so did Ice Cube, and this is why loads of them flirt with Farrakhan at some point in their careers, and it seems to be because they have the belief that there are music executives which are disproportionately Jewish and music artists which are black and this is the source of a black Hebrew-Israelite style conflict borne out in the American black and Jewish communities.
	Glad it's not my problem.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Although, it... I mean, like everything from America, it seems to be imported over here at some point, so... Baron Von Warhawk, when it comes to Hollywood... Mizzy goes into a bloody synagogue.
	Oh, Jesus, Mizzy.
	Well, no, he already jumped over the orthodox church.
	Yeah, I know, but his defence of that was probably fair.
	I just did that to everyone.
	He probably does do that to everyone.
	Yeah, I'm an equal opportunity scumbag.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Baron Von Warhawk, when it comes to Hollywood, it should be noted that fellow actor James Woods, voice of Hades and Hercules, was also asked how evil Hollywood is by a fan, and he responded with, multiply your worst fears by a hundred.
	I mean, I do get the feeling there's a lot of evil in Hollywood.
	I wonder why James Woods isn't working today.
	That's a great answer.
	Multiply your worst fears by 100.
	Wait, wait.
	Oh my God.
	It's 100 times worse.
	I mean, I really think it's bad.
	Well, the story's on the set of The Lost Boys.
	Yeah.
	Athelstan.
	I love Mel Gibson's movies.
	The ones he directs are even better than his acting roles.
	I think it's impressive that he puts his faith first in his art in an environment that hates it.
	However, I'm conflicted by his seething hatred of the English as portrayed in The Patriot, Gallipoli and Braveheart.
	Not to mention the stuff he said to his ex-girlfriend.
	Clearly a conflicted man who hopefully finds grace.
	I think that's actually a very good take on it.
	Authentic Scott.
	Well, and Aussie.
	I mean, I don't know if anyone's familiar with the concept of £10 POM.
	I actually looked him up.
	He only went to Australia when he was 12.
	So he's not really an authentic Australian.
	But he is raised in the culture at the time where the Australians were very hostile to the English, because there was a lot of English immigration over to Australia.
	But there was the phrase that was repeated, and I know this was a common sentiment, because I've got family that went from England to Australia.
	This phrase was repeated in a recent BBC drama, and There was an Australian man talking to an Englishman who'd come over for work, and he said, do you have black people in England?
	And he said, yeah.
	And he said, over here, the English are the blacks.
	That was the attitude.
	So, might be a source of it.
	Joe Dabok, somehow when Mel Gibson talked about being an outsider in that clip, I don't think he was talking about being an immigrant.
	He's an Australian, if memory serves.
	Sort of.
	Yeah, yeah.
	That's not what I meant.
	He's not part of the culture.
	Yes.
	The man does also seem to have a complex around his father.
	When he's sober, he usually doesn't say the most anti-Semitic drivel, but when he's drunk, he spits out everything old man Gibson believed.
	Same... I don't know what that... Same with Seda... Seda... Vang?
	Vacker?
	I can't pronounce that word.
	On an award show several years ago, Robert Downey Jr.
	ripped into Hollywood for their hypocrisy, R.E.
	Mel Gibson, and I got the impression Gibson might well have supported Downey's rehab.
	The only rumour I'd heard about any new movie out of Gibson was it was going to make one about the casting couch specifically for paedophiles.
	It was interesting, Robert Downey Jr.
	as well evaded cancellation because it was suggested he was the leaked insider that was blowing the whistle on child abuse at Nickelodeon.
	Oh, really?
	Yeah, because Dan Schneider...
	Never.
	He's the guy who ran pretty much all the Nickelodeon kid shows.
	That's why the logo was a foot.
	And in all of the kid shows, there was a lot of foot stuff.
	He had a foot-shaped swimming pool, and Jeanette McCurdy in her recent book alludes to the fact that she was abused by a senior executive at Nickelodeon, which is why she had a horrible time as a child actor.
	Yes.
	All allegations, of course, we wouldn't libel anything.
	On the second segment, Athelstan, the most harrowing statistic is the 40% suicide rate both before and after operation.
	We'll get into that, I think Josh wants to do a Contemplations and Stats at some point, but roughly about right.
	So the operation doesn't reduce the chance of suicide, and yet we've continued to push children down the path of an almost 1 in 2 suicide rate.
	Lord Nerevar, I totally understand the need to take issues like the trans one step at a time, but we also need to be looking ahead now.
	I'm afraid we aren't going to have very long to enjoy the victory of banning surgeries, although I enjoy it while I still can.
	We have to advocate against it in schools, for restitution for affected people, and for prosecution of those pushing it on children.
	We have to nuke the ideology from orbit.
	I said this to my dad, we're in a race against time, legislatively against technology, because what's going to win out?
	Is everywhere all at once going to ban this practice, or are we going to get artificial wombs and 3D printed meat appendages first?
	I fear it's going to be the second.
	I'm worried the transhumanism is going to win out.
	Diogenes.
	They should frame TikTok as a drug.
	It is not social media.
	It's a heavily refined and targeted addictive substance with advertising and reinforced behavioral loops tailor-made to each user.
	It's like if cigarettes were marketed like that Black Mirror episode where you're constantly surrounded by screens and have to skip ads.
	It's the 50 million merits.
	It's very clear this shouldn't be allowed to exist.
	Yet when I say that about pornography, everyone gets upset.
	That would be quite funny.
	Because isn't there at the moment a mass protest movement from Armenian parents in the US that got attacked by Antifa because they said, wait, you're putting this stuff in our kids' schools?
	We're Islamic, we don't like that very much, thank you.
	No, the Armenians are Christian.
	Oh, are they?
	Yeah.
	Oh, I didn't know that.
	There we go.
	That's why the Turks persecuted them.
	Ah, that does make sense.
	Joan of Arc, ever notice that, when it requires consenting to sex, 15-17 year olds equal teenagers, young adults, whatever, but when the left needs to pull at the heartstrings, they're kids?
	Yep.
	Well, they want to make that age flexible as well.
	Yep.
	Because if you can consent to one mutilation of your genitals, you can consent to something else in their logic.
	Which I, of course, do not agree with, because I am not a nonce.
	Omar Awad, the difference between... Uh, clitorectomies.
	...clitorectomies and trans surgery is marketing.
	The only thing left after trans egg-cracking is the shell.
	Nobody wants your genocide-affirming care, seethe and cope.
	I got into this with bloody... What's that fat historian guy, Mike?
	I can't remember his surname now.
	The fat middle school history teacher, who's now like a woke activist, got into it with Tommy Robinson.
	I can't remember his surname.
	But anyway, someone had posted a meme that was Elliot Page wearing the, you know, defend trans kids, and Someone had just rechanged the text to, you know, castrate autistic kids or something like that, because that's what they're doing.
	And then he was like, no, they're looking at them promoting Nazi ideology.
	He's like, no, they're just saying, call a thing what it is.
	That's what's happening.
	Yeah, you're the one who's in favour of it, you lunatic.
	That's just gross.
	Captain Charlie the Beagle.
	Connor, I sympathise with your despair regarding not affording a house in your ancestral home.
	I'm in the same situation.
	I'm being passed out of the market of my community as well, and I live in a seaside town, not a major city.
	Hold fast, things have to improve, I hope.
	Just the numbers have to go down.
	Yeah.
	Brian.
	Man who shares my last name.
	Good man.
	When a large boat full of poncers arrive in Kent, Labour see new voters, Tory see GDP, and the Lib Dems see new boyfriends.
	It is, it is.
	I'm glad Reform UK have at least adopted the framing of net zero migration.
	That is.
	Net zero's not enough.
	Zero.
	Absolute zero.
	Net zero implies that the number of people in the country doesn't change.
	Right.
	It has to be absolute zero.
	The total moratorium is an outflow.
	Right.
	That makes sense.
	Jonathan Crowe.
	I absolutely feel like I've been mugged.
	The economy is in an utter state, as it is, but it's absolutely never enough for these plutocrats.
	Everything they do appears aimed towards enslaving us.
	I don't see anything changing soon, and with all the black pills as of late, part of me is wondering how bad it has to become before something snaps.
	Great question.
	It will only get worse.
	Tyler T. I'm not even in the UK and this segment is causing me pain.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, it wasn't fun.
	It's just so insufferable.
	That's a good point.
	Yeah, that is a good point.
	Have you... I forget what this is.
	to Ukrainian has now permanently registered to the government that they can host someone.
	That's a good point.
	Yeah, that is a good point.
	Have you...
	I forget what this is.
	New York have started suggesting that you should rent out your bedrooms to the new migrants coming across the border.
	Oh really?
	Yeah.
	And this was apparently inspired by the original UK bedroom tax that said if you're not using a spare bedroom you should be increasingly taxed for it.
	Insufferable.
	I'll need to look into that before I explain more but I've heard that this week and it's mad.
	Anyway, we're running up on the end of the show, so thanks very much for watching.
	You can catch us again on Monday at 1 o'clock.
	We've got some live streams as well at the end of the week that we'll be announcing.

▲