Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 26, 2023 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:30:14

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #705

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Seaters.
	I'm your host, Elias, and I'm joined by Connor.
	Hello there.
	And this is episode 705.
	This is Wednesday, the 26th of July.
	Now we are going to discuss state-imposed friendship, Nigel Farage defeating Kurtzbank and ESG, and lawyers caught cheating the UK asylum system.
	There's plenty of stuff to talk about.
	There's lots of meat on the bone.
	We'll dive into it.
	Right.
	So I want to say that it's nice to be back to, let's say, to cold England, because Greece was incredibly It's hot and warm and I'm really looking forward for some English breeze here.
	Well, it's especially warm at the moment with all the arson attacks, but there you go.
	Yes.
	So let us talk about state-imposed friendship, because it seems to me that sometimes the government should let people do what people do.
	How very far right of you, Stelios?
	Without trying to constantly interfere to things that they are spontaneous, spontaneous emotions.
	And this I think is one of the major problem with statists is that they constantly think that they can force people in to do what people do regardless.
	And as they say, there are many nice sayings about the governments.
	Some saying that, you know, Ronald Reagan said that, you know, that the most terrifying thing is, the most terrifying nine words is when you hear people saying, I'm from the government and I'm here to help.
	Then another saying is that, you know, the government is perfect in solving, in giving solutions to problems that they create.
	But before we say more about this, you could visit the website.
	Where for only £5 a month you can gain access to all our premium content and you can check videos like the latest symposium I did with Bo and Josh on the conceptual psyops of wokeness and the linguistic subversion behind it.
	The reception of it has been really good and warm, and I think it's a very interesting topic to discuss.
	I know we discuss it on a daily basis.
	Check out more if you want.
	Now, so I came back and I saw this from Senator Chris Murphy.
	From Connecticut.
	So what he says is that if we go to this link by him says news today, I'm introducing a groundbreaking bill, the National Strategy for Social Connection Act.
	It creates a federal office to combat the growing epidemic of American loneliness.
	Develops anti-loneliness strategies and fosters best practices to promote social connections.
	Now, if we look at it, it says the Surgeon General recently declared an epidemic of loneliness.
	I'm focusing on epidemic because it has clear connotations to pandemic.
	Yes.
	So, we have an epidemic of loneliness and isolation in the United States, noting that social isolation and loneliness pose a significant risk to individual health and longevity, create economic costs for individuals and communities, and decrease community resilience Safety and economic prosperity.
	The National Strategy for Social Connection Act is a simple roadmap to begin addressing the epidemic by naming the problem, developing solutions, educating the public about best practices and improving data by the scope of this problem.
	Are you trying to bring me out in a rash allergic to managerial language, Stelios?
	Because this is hell.
	First of all, the mask-off moment here is that it's not epidemic.
	It is epidemic, not pandemic.
	And the reason is, it's epidemic to cities where people are packed into high-rises and stratified from their neighbours.
	You're not getting a loneliness epidemic in rural communities that are rearing each other's children and doing pod-schooling and have faith and family.
	So that's an interesting thing.
	Also, the bureaucratising of language here.
	Everything has to revolve around, how can we maximise prosperity?
	How can we maximise efficiency?
	This is what Ivan Illich calls shadow work in his book Gender.
	It's that in the economic framework of, he would say capitalism, I'm increasingly thinking that myself, of everything in the economy is towards generating abundance and exponential wealth.
	Then any time spent not at work, Is time spent recuperating maximally so that you can get back into work so that you're maximally rested to then go back to generating capital again?
	And that's how he's treating social engagement.
	He's treating it as it's only useful because the experts have validated it scientifically and rationally.
	And also, if you spend leisure time, leisure time is only justified by it allowing you to rest up so you can go straight back to work earning again.
	This is the worst heuristic in the world.
	I want to throttle him.
	They would say, what's your purpose in life?
	Just sitting there?
	Go out and work and be productive.
	Sure, but that's not the only thing either.
	And productive towards what?
	You should be subsisting towards your family, not giving up to the great Brahmin of money.
	I know, I'm trying to poke you.
	I have a reputation in this office about how I treat my co-workers.
	You're the trickster.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	So this bill would establish an office within the executive office of the president to combat loneliness and strengthen communities.
	Create an office of social connection policy to advise the president on loneliness and isolation and how these issues relate to the economy, public health, national security, the environment, and civic and community engagement.
	Form an advisory board within the office to convene stakeholders and whatever.
	Okay.
	But the important thing is that It requires a national strategy on social connection.
	And also he's putting it in the office of the president.
	So I don't want to get closer to Joe Biden.
	Nobody wants to.
	He's going to smell my hair.
	I'm not going to befriend an 80 year old man who falls over sandbags with dementia.
	Thank you very much.
	Also improve public education and awareness on social connection.
	Right.
	Yeah, because school was definitely the best place to put kids to have lifelong friendships and certainly not just make them hate each other and bully each other.
	And basically what we need is campaigns, information campaigns from the government telling us basically what we already know.
	If you want to be less lonely, you have to socialize with people.
	To socialize with people, you have to exit, let's say, your room.
	You have to basically contact other people, not just via a keyboard.
	Or a screen you have to go out, meet people, make some friends.
	And I think that this is something that is not basically evident.
	Maybe we need studies?
	No, I don't know.
	You know what I reckon this is?
	I think this is a giant state money laundering scheme because of all the money they printed under the pandemic.
	But via MMT, they're trying to take it out of the money supply.
	So what do you do?
	You set up a government program to tell you the obvious and then spend millions of pounds on the careers of bureaucrats to end up at just Go Touch Cross.
	That's what this is.
	It's a way to take money out of the glutted money supply to tell people to go have friends.
	Great, thanks.
	Thanks, Joe Biden.
	Thanks, Chris Murphy.
	Now, we have this article for you if you want to read more from the Washington Examiner.
	From right to left, government intrusion is never a good idea.
	If you want to check a bit more about it, you know, just have a read.
	Now, let's go on this bill here.
	Now, let's scroll a bit up and we'll go down there again.
	So, in the Senate of the United States, a bill to establish the Office of Social Connection Policy to establish a national strategy on social connection and for other purposes.
	Now, what I like here is the use of the word findings.
	It implies that, you know, these things were found.
	We didn't know them already, but they found them.
	There's the old Oren McIntyre phrase of, I'm going to butcher it, but every so often a progressive reverse engineers normal sexual and social norms out of degeneracy and acts like they've rediscovered Atlantis.
	That.
	Like, why do we need a committee to have friends?
	Something's gone very wrong here.
	Well, Something has gone very wrong.
	The question is what that is and who caused it.
	Yes.
	Okay.
	Now let's go to the findings.
	Now, Congress finds the following.
	Number one, the health of the nation is rightly measured not only by its aggregate wealth or global power, but more centrally by its shared vision and the bonds of connection that meet its people into a community.
	Right.
	And so you've spent the last how long sowing division between those communities by destroying faith, destroying patriotism, and instead stratifying people into intersectional identity groups.
	And you think people are going to feel at home with that rather than alienated and angry?
	Yeah, good job.
	This is brilliant because it shows a complete hypocrisy because I like the fact that they phrase it in terms of the nation.
	Yes.
	You know, we need a strong social fabric for the nation.
	The same people that constantly tell us that if you talk about the nation, you're far right.
	Or if you care about national identity, you're far right.
	If you like eating toast in the morning, you're far right.
	Yeah, Democrats accidentally stumbled across Burke.
	Yes, exactly.
	The same people, they phrase it in terms of the nation.
	Now, finding number two.
	The fraying of the social fabric is directly implicated in the growth of loneliness, decline of civic and religious participation, the disintegration of communities, rising economic inequality and precarity, falling economic mobility, rising rates of depression, anxiety and addiction, diminishing health and life expectancy, and rising levels of polarization and radicalization.
	Who calls to that?
	That'd be a great idea.
	Maybe it was packing people into cities, demonising Christianity, demonising white people and elevating up minorities as impugned from criticism, causing inter-ethnic and inter-sexual tensions, printing loads of money and locking down the entire civilisation for a couple of years.
	Failing to build homes and causing mass migration to cause pressures on the housing market, over-medicating American teens with birth control, Ritalin, antidepressants, massive over-prescription of opiates causing deaths from despair, and polarisation and radicalisation.
	Well, maybe hosting a giant bright red lit press conference where you call half the country the enemy of the people if you support Donald Trump.
	That might deepen polarisation?
	Or am I just a conspiracy theorist for all of that?
	Well, I think that's error 404.
	They cannot answer because now you're phrasing it in terms of nation.
	They cannot give you a response that doesn't imply that if you care about your nation and its maintenance of its national identity, you're a bad person.
	I'm surprised you haven't made a Terminator reference yet.
	These emotions do not compute.
	Your confusion is rational.
	But I like the fact that these are findings.
	They have to actually make studies.
	They have to find that the fraying of the social fabric is directly implicated into the growth of loneliness.
	Yeah, I've pondered my orb and come up with the obvious.
	Okay, these changes affect all of the people of the United States, but fall with particular force on the poor and marginalized, on children and adolescents, on individuals residing in economically disadvantaged regions, on veterans and elderly, and individuals without a college degree.
	Now, if we go to page 8, Now, we have a lot of suggestions of what this Office for Social Policy is going to do.
	It says here, assist the president in providing general leadership and coordination of federal research and development programs relating to social connection and loneliness.
	So a slush fund.
	Yeah.
	So let's go here also.
	It needs to have one or more representatives of LGBTQIA plus advocacy organizations.
	Right.
	Okay.
	Yeah.
	And let's end with this.
	More intersectional vanguardism.
	Great.
	Because these things cost.
	We should, we should mention this.
	It says here, authorization of appropriations.
	There is authorized to be appropriated to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention $5 million for each of fiscal years 2024 through to 2029 to conduct or support research on loneliness and social connections.
	So $25 million spaffed away on telling people to get friends.
	25 or 30, depends how they count it.
	Is it?
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Tomato, tomato, total bankruptcy.
	It's a lot.
	Now let's see here.
	Eugene McGarrel from Australia.
	He says, outside Australia, jurisdictions are beginning to realize the opportunity created from social connection policies.
	There is opportunity in social connection policies.
	The opportunity for people to socially connect.
	In the U.S., the Surgeon General's Advisory on the Nation's Loneliness Epidemic released a report on the healing effects of social connection and community.
	So do you know what this reminds me of actually?
	Do you remember when Klaus Schwab came out and said we're going to have a very angry world?
	Yeah.
	This seems like preemptive damage control for people getting really discontented at the controlled demolition of every nation's prosperity and actual organic sense of community.
	So this seems like an enterprise in institutional gaslighting.
	And it's also a way of saying that, well, listen, we cared about social connection.
	We did care.
	It's the other side that didn't.
	Yes.
	Don't tell that we didn't care because we have this office.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	Now let's look at some statistics here.
	Because it has to do with, this is a link from Science of People.
	It says, U.S.
	loneliness statistics 2023.
	Are Americans lonely?
	It says, loneliness is steadily rising in the United States, which has created the loneliness epidemic.
	2018 loneliness statistics show that 30% of older adults report loneliness.
	Survey data from 2019 shows that 58% of Americans often felt like no one in their life knew them well.
	In 2020, young women in the U.S.
	were most likely to report losing touch with friends.
	Most Americans are seeking more friendship and connectedness than ever.
	So, it has several statistics here.
	Let us see here on what age group is the most lonely.
	From baby boomers to millennials to Gen Z, young people, young adults and older adults all report loneliness.
	A recent study surveyed 2,000 plus people across the US from 18 to 89 plus years old.
	Researchers could not find any age-related predictors of loneliness.
	They found that living alone, having poor health, infrequent social interactions and being unmarried predict loneliness in all age groups.
	So being alone predicts loneliness?
	Yeah.
	Thanks for wasting all that money on asking people.
	So, there were researchers that basically said living alone increases loneliness, is a predictor of loneliness, a good predictor of loneliness.
	Having poor health is a predictor of loneliness.
	Not interacting frequently with people is a predictor of loneliness.
	Being unmarried is a predictor of loneliness.
	Now, I want to give you a pass to talk a bit about the institution of marriage and loneliness.
	What do you think here?
	It seems to me that there's a lot of thinking going on here.
	Okay, so, weirdly enough, I think there has been a lot of cultural programming against marriage, particularly for men, of where there's the old joke of, never wanna have sex again, get married, or you know, the husband's gonna end up sleeping on the sofa, or you get separate bedrooms, and that's kind of a boomer mindset.
	Particularly because the way we thought about marriage, particularly post-industrially, has changed of where you're two separate rational actors that come together to complete each other, either as soulmates or there's a kind of transactional nature.
	Let us maximize value.
	Yeah, genuinely, that's the Randian way of thinking about it.
	Whereas before, you were two members of a subsistence household and you knowably struggled together to make ends meet.
	And I mean, it might, given dire economic circumstances, look like we're going back to that.
	Literally, anyone with any sense who doesn't outsource all of their rational capacities to experts and need a statistic or a study to back everything up, you know, have intuition and a working brain, could have told you this.
	So this is why I think loads of the social sciences is just a slush fund.
	And that's why, and I'm sure Josh will be able to talk about this while he's here.
	He's not dead, he's just in the office.
	The replicability crisis in the social sciences means that loads of studies just Can't get repeated.
	That's why studies come out and refute them.
	Whereas this one, I mean, you're not going to have a problem replicating the findings of this one because it's just so bloody obvious you shouldn't have spent money doing it.
	But some other things are not bloody obvious.
	Connor, everything is obvious to you, but not to every other person, apparently.
	Here's what researchers found that having in your life may protect against feelings of loneliness, a roommate, good health, a spouse, frequent social interactions.
	So friends, a wife, Not being obese and dying means you might be slightly happier.
	Yes.
	I hate experts.
	So that's, that's the thing that there are constantly, continuously money given to studies that prove the obvious.
	Now let's look at the next clip.
	I want to show, I want to say that basically I think that this thing here is dangerous and don't do it.
	Don't do it.
	You don't need a study to, Let's find out that it's dangerous.
	Let's watch it.
	I checked the comments.
	They said that this person is alive.
	You don't need someone to tell you that this is dangerous.
	In the same way that you don't need people to tell you to pay money for studies that tell you, basically.
	You don't need people to get money from you and get taxpayers money to tell you that, for instance, you can cure loneliness by frequent social interactions.
	Now, this is also another thing that you don't need studies to tell you that there's nothing to be taken out of it.
	Let's watch.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	That's going to get censored for YouTube.
	OK, well, but the point is... Don't do backflips if you can't do backflips.
	Don't do backflips.
	Yeah, there's no thing.
	Now, but there's another point here to say, to be a bit more serious here.
	It seems to me that one of the major problems nowadays is that everything becomes a bit more statist.
	Managerial.
	Managerial.
	So there's a problem here because, for instance, we have people who are There is an underlying mentality that says that basically all problems can be outsourced to the government.
	And what I want to say is that basically this cannot happen and that this is a sort of...
	Hubris in managerialism, because there are some things that you just have to let people do themselves.
	Civil society is distinct from the government.
	I mean, last time I checked, we don't live in the USSR.
	There isn't a kind of continuity between civil society and the government.
	Well, you haven't been paying attention, Stelios, unfortunately, because pretty much all of these things are socially engineered and top-down.
	I wish we weren't, but that is very much the state.
	But this is the interesting thing.
	If you flip it on its head, lots of the policies of the corporatists and the state in the last century in many respects have deliberately undermined and atomized uh deliberately undermined communities and atomized us from each other everything from city planning to pharmaceutical regulations to social media regulations to deliberately funded state propaganda and and so we've ended
	up in a place where we are stratified and the state is coming back in to manufacture consent to justify this dependency that is it has induced in many populations who are you know hoping on welfare and and eventually universal basic income and the like And like you said, now it looks like they can come back in and clean up their own mess and say, well, we're the good guys.
	We're giving you the solution to the problem that we created.
	It's very perverse, and that's why we're ridiculing the state for trying to fix their own issue.
	But there is a serious loneliness epidemic.
	Deaths from despair are massively high, the leading killer of men under 45 is still suicide, and that peaks particularly around when men are unemployed or get divorced and they get dragged through the divorce courts, which is...
	again rigged against their favor so there are serious issues of alienation and social media addiction and a lack of relationships here uh 27 of men 18 to 30 report never having an intimate partner that's historically unprecedented so my heart goes out to you fellas if that's you
	but the government is not a solution to that because they actively hate you and have a perverse incentive to foster you continuing being lonely because if you do have a community you're independent from them and then they don't get paid and there are some things that there should just be left to society, civil society, because that's what they are.
	Okay?
	You don't force people in to be friends.
	You don't force people to, you know, to get married.
	It's not like, you know, for instance, it's not a child.
	You will learn to love him.
	Okay.
	Well, whatever.
	Let's keep that for another time.
	You know, that.
	There is a problem when we try to impose from the top down things that should spontaneously arise, things that arise from the bottom up.
	And I think that this is one of the things.
	But one interesting thing to say and finish with this, this segment, is that one of the things that governments do is that they completely disintegrate communities, because part of communities has to do with national sentiment.
	So, for instance, in Greece, we may say, you know, it's a Greek community.
	We don't call ourselves like that.
	We call ourselves Greeks.
	But within communities, you could say it's the Cretan community.
	There is a strong sense of bonding in these communities that has to do with commonality of origin.
	And it's tied to time and place.
	And this is part of the issue, and I'm going to say liberalism here, but you know what I'm talking about, of where if you think of people in universal abstract categories and they can be taken from one time and place and be as prosperous economic actors in any other time and place, Then you eradicate the sense of time and place that built those communities in the first place.
	And so you need to top down, engender communities to try and make people feel tied together, despite being capable of being anywhere men.
	It's just a contradiction.
	Exactly.
	And it shows us that, you know, mass migration can disintegrate communities.
	And the same people that advocate for, you know, completely open borders and for mass migration, it's a bit rich when they afterwards come and talk about, well, we care about the disintegration of community and well, Let's outsource all your friendship to us, all your social connection.
	We're going to tell you what to do.
	And I think we should finish with a blast from the past that illustrates how communities are being, let's say, threatened and harmed by mass migration.
	And this is a blast from the past.
	You'll understand why.
	If we see it's from Chicago, about the black community that was reacting furiously against All these resources that have not come to us, now you want to overly compensate for people who've never lived here before and they need to be taken care of first and foremost before anything else happens here.
	Why would any leader put our black communities already riddled with crime at further risk by placing unvetted non-taxpayers steps away from our seniors, our children, and our homes we've worked so hard on our own to secure?
	We are at war, people.
	Our communities are at war.
	They are violating our communities, and we asking that we have, we across the country, we asking and we're demanding for Office of Black America, or whatever you want to call it, to deal with issues like this!
	I did get placed on the wait list, but I was told that the immigrants were taking priority.
	That's a story that a lot of people don't know, and it just, it hurt me.
	I'm like, oh, wait a minute.
	I understand we need to be humanitarian, but these people are, that my participants are third and fourth generation Chicagoans, born, bred, fed, and raised here.
	My grandmother, Mayrother Carrington, rest in peace, always said, Craig, charity starts at home first, and then it goes abroad.
	Politically, having over 500 people in our community would completely wipe out any interest we have.
	Many of these migrants have been dumped in our neighborhoods without a plan in place to monitor and house them long term.
	I'm not selling nothing.
	And I keep telling people, you don't have to move.
	If you sell, they gonna come in.
	If we don't sell, we got to stand strong.
	That's right.
	You just didn't sign a key.
	I'll get you.
	Well, apparently communities that want to have a strong bond of sentiment that this bill says is integral for this part, they want to have...
	They react against mass migration.
	What do you make of this?
	They feel entitled to be in a time and place and have customs which best suit them.
	So it seems the intersectional coalition is coming apart at the seams when personal interests are threatened.
	I will state though that, and I am confident in saying this considering that woman had a feminist ribbon on her hat, these people will continue to vote Democrat because they'd like the migrants to be bused in somewhere else.
	So it's the old tweet meme that's been going around of Me sowing.
	Wow, this is awesome.
	This is so radical.
	Me reaping.
	No, wait, what?
	This sucks.
	Really?
	No, no, no, no, stop.
	Right.
	Should we proceed to your segment?
	Yep, fantastic.
	All right then.
	So the diversity, equity and inclusion protection racket that has been sweeping through pretty much every institution, subsidized by hedge funds like Vanguard, State Street and BlackRock, is facing legislative challenges.
	And their vanguard against this is good old Nigel Farage, who I think should capitalise on this victorious moment and his ability to leverage influence against institutions to try and shake up the UK political system a little bit.
	I'm a results-based man, so if the Conservatives want to reform in isolation, slim chance, but I'll hope for it.
	But if Farage wants to take a sledgehammer to the whole establishment, I'm here for it.
	Let's look at a victory as it's unfolding, shall we?
	To speak of a captured financial institution, you can go over to our website and pay us as little as £5 a month to get all of our premium content and watch Dan's latest Broeconomics conducted with Josh on the USSR and its economic structure and how it ran itself aground.
	One of my favourite stories from the USSR.
	It's one of those old, we pay you to pretend to work.
	We pretend to work and they pretend to pay us scenarios.
	Robert Conquest wrote, and I think it's in Reflections on a Ravaged Century, how the USSR's economic system, much like our own really, rather than actually generating productivity in order to meet the five-year plan targets, They didn't develop more goods, they just set up a factory for a left boot and a factory for a right boot.
	So it meant it employed more people making the same thing.
	Labour theory of value and action.
	Anyway, let's get on to this first article then.
	So this is the expose that originally broke exclusive to The Telegraph and originally Coots Bank, and this is something that Karl's covered before, had Leaked to the press that Nigel Farage did not have enough money in his account to retain an account with their bank because they're an elite bank, they've been open since I believe the 18th century, they've had royal patronage and so the minimum requirement to open an account, I don't know if it is still hold, Did he have an account and they closed it?
	Yes.
	So what happened then?
	that.
	Nigel Farage never said how much money he had.
	Kay Burley on Sky News today tried to get him to say so, to disclose his own financial information.
	He's not entitled to do so, and he didn't make this public.
	They did.
	They chose war.
	So he doesn't have to disclose how much it was.
	But it turns out- Did he have an account and they closed it?
	Yes.
	So what happened then?
	Didn't they check at the, let's say, requirements when he opened that account?
	How do you mean?
	That when you open an account, there are some requirements.
	You said at least a million pounds.
	So he opened the account and then- The implication was that his amount had dipped below the threshold to keep it open year on year.
	But that doesn't quite add up, and it's not shocking because that wasn't the reason.
	It turns out that a reputational risk committee had exited Farage saying he was, quote, not compatible with coots and not as inclusive as the bank.
	And so some of the reasons they cited in this article was that he'd retweeted a Ricky Gervais joke about trans people, He was friends with Novak Djokovic, who chose, he did an exclusive interview with him on GB News, who chose not to get the Covid vaccine.
	We can't say more about that on YouTube, of course.
	And his friendship with Donald Trump, and his stance on Brexit and Ukraine.
	And they even repeated the defamatory lie in here that he's taken money from the Russians, which was said in Parliament twice by Labour MP Chris Bryant, to absolutely no repercussions.
	So, they're just buying misinformation.
	But they accuse us of peddling it, of course.
	The document says, Fraud is seen as xenophobic and racist, and it repeats claims that he was a fascist in his school days and says he has said things in the past that are, quote, distasteful and appear increasingly out of touch with wider society.
	Oh, the irony.
	The bank repeatedly says, in the document, he meets the economic contribution criteria for commercial retention.
	So they did check the criteria, and it turns out he had enough in his account.
	So it's pure ideological persecution in these 40 pages.
	So they lied about him not meeting the £1 million threshold, and we'll get on to who they lied to at the BBC shortly.
	Coutts, whose customers include members of the Royal Family, is part of NatWest Group PLC.
	NatWest Group, after the 2008 financial crash, is 39% owned by the UK taxpayer.
	So, if you pay tax in this country, we have stakes in this bank.
	So, we're all technically shareholders, as far as the structure is concerned.
	So, they are failing the shareholders by persecuting Nigel Farage, in my opinion.
	And, of course, the government could do something about this.
	Maybe they will.
	Won't hold my breath.
	They've been making the right mouth noises about it, but if there's anyone that can pressure them into doing something On our behalf, as people that don't have as much pull as Farage, it's Farage, which is encouraging.
	So the actual documents cited Brexit 86 times, and they mentioned Russia 144 times, and Farage notes in this article written by him in the Telegraph, he's been refused an account by 10 other banks.
	Naked persecution.
	So the Coutts boss, Turns out that she's had a storied career of being a Remainer.
	Now, the Remainer is not the aspect that I want to focus on, but of course, Nigel Farage's involvement with Brexit, that's what hits the headlines, that's what gets the boomers foaming, because Brexit's been a divide in this country for the last eight years now.
	Time flies when you're not having fun.
	So this is Camilla Stowell, and she's the bank's managing director and head of private and commercial clients.
	She, quote, expressed concerns about the climate crisis, attended COP26 for Coutts, she was a judge for a diversity essay prize run by the bank in conjunction with Eaton, for children in the Thames Valley.
	So she's a fully on-board indoctrinated technocrat.
	And earlier this year, she congratulated Jess Brammer, the editor of the BBC News Channel.
	So you can already see the incestuous relationship between Financial institutions, government and state funding media.
	ESG.
	We'll get onto that shortly.
	Jess Brammer, by the way, used to work at the Huffington Post and The Guardian.
	And if you didn't know this, The Guardian is kept afloat, not just by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, but the BBC are the leading buyer of the print version of The Guardian and its sister paper, The Observer, every year.
	So if you pay the licence fee, which of course if you have a TV you definitely do, right?
	Um, if you pay that, your money is going on propping up the Guardian newspaper, which runs articles by Owen Jones and the like to actively destroy this country.
	The BBC is an insidious organisation and should be broken up and scattered to the winds.
	I will not elaborate further.
	So, this all got in public consciousness, and the NatWest boss, this was Dame Rose Allison, Issued a non-apology yesterday.
	There have been developments in this story since.
	So, in response to her statement, the board of NatWest initially said on Tuesday that it retains full confidence in Ms Rose as CEO of the bank, adding that she had proved over the past four years to be an outstanding leader of the institution.
	It also said that what she did does not reflect the values of the bank.
	So she separates her actions as an individual from herself as a representative of the bank.
	Yes.
	The bank board said that she'd made an error in judgment, which doesn't represent the values of the bank, which is utterly disingenuous.
	And then... The bank isn't inclusive.
	Well, we already know that inclusion is just a buzzword for repressive tolerance, which just means hit anyone from the right and encompass any movement towards the left.
	Interesting development, though.
	Late last night, early hours of this morning, Sir Howard Davies, who's the chairman of the bank, he told her to step down.
	Oof.
	Pretty quick turnaround.
	Life hits you fast, eh?
	So, doesn't reflect the values of the bank.
	Well, I thought I'd do some checking on that.
	And I went to Kootz's About page, and they've got an earnings report.
	So, they've got the climate bits.
	They're going to be net zero by 2050.
	They've got diversity stuff.
	And if you go down to their annual report... So, I decided to download the 2021 one.
	I've got it up here.
	And if you scroll down, they've got a section in here.
	If you notice this, through our collaboration with global asset manager BlackRock, So, the dark lord of ESG and member of the World Economic Forum themselves, we are able to set the investment strategy and the environmental, social and governance policy for our funds.
	There we go.
	Environmental, social and governance policy, for anyone who still isn't on the page, ESG is a woke social corporate credit score that by hitting certain criteria, such as funding your employees' gender transitions or doing carbon offsetting or in pointing activists to the board, accesses subsidies from the hedge funds that have created this in conjunction with the World Economic Forum, the UN, who set the sustainable development goals, and BlackRock, who are the world's largest hedge fund and have trillions in assets.
	Go watch Dan's Brokeconomics on BlackRock for that.
	Larry Fink in 2018 wrote a letter to Harvard Law School saying there's a deficit in world leadership because of President Trump.
	And so the private sector needs to step in and colonize pretty much every enterprise, public and private.
	And their goal is not to make money.
	Their goal is basically what?
	Social progress.
	Yes.
	It's complete market capture under the rubric of intersectionality and climate scaremongering.
	And it's to make it so that there is no other game in town.
	It's an ideological monopoly over the markets and it's to get or it's create a circular economy.
	This is what they call the donut economy.
	Currently, the economy has a big hole in the middle of sustainability where all the shortfall is.
	What they want to do is close that hole until it's a fixed pie.
	The people from the top can equally divide up and share out among themselves.
	You will earn nothing.
	You will be happy.
	ESG is the arm of total state surveillance and demiseration and total market capture.
	And this bank has signed up to it.
	I won't be happy then.
	No, no, you won't be delighted.
	But we are the carbon they want to reduce, so we might not be around for that, it seems, Stelios.
	And so this does, Dame Rose's actions do reflect the idea of the bank, and the reason is, if you're calculating ESG, some of your most prominent customer It's going to filter down to pretty much every customer eventually when they can accurately surveil you.
	Your most prominent vocal customers are liabilities for your ESG score if they're seen criticizing your bank from a right-wing position.
	And so, if you have a liability on your score from the actions of the customer, what do you do?
	You jettison the customer.
	And if every bank is signed up to this, and pretty much every bank is, go and check Excuse me.
	Your bank's website or earnings reports, you'll find ESG language in there.
	Whether it's climate, whether it's diversity and inclusion, whether they explicitly say ESG as this one does, you won't be able to bank anywhere because every single bank will see you as a liability unless some action is taken.
	And unfortunately, the UK government seem pretty much in lockstep with this kind of thing.
	So Farage went to war against the BBC over this because the BBC decided to inaccurately report that he had been below the earnings threshold to keep his account open.
	We already now know that that's not the case.
	So, John Sopel, he is host of the News Agents with Emily Maitlis from the BBC.
	John Sopel said, you must feel a bit of a Charlie if you're Nigel Farage and you claim that it's all an establishment stitch-up, that your account's been closed when it's just you're not rich enough for coot.
	You smug git.
	And Faraj, now that the big 40-page expose came out, tweeted back at him, Hi, John, who's the Charlie now?
	Looks like it's you for swallowing the Coots PR spin, and I look forward to your apology.
	So John actually responded eventually.
	He did apologize, so that's quite good.
	It's not coming up in the immediate replies, which is frustrating.
	But he did eventually decide to apologize.
	He demanded an apology from the overall BBC, and they did end up sending him a letter for that.
	He's also called for the ICO to investigate how his personal data was used by NatWest.
	So why was this leaked to the BBC when it should be confidential?
	And he's written to BBC director Tim Davey to ask for a formal apology from the BBC.
	Seems like the government are also interested in seeing if the bank bosses are persecuting the political opposition.
	So you can see Farage here leveraging his institutional pull, even as an establishment outsider, To make moves that will benefit the rest of us by tackling ESG.
	Very encouraging stuff.
	So here's Stoppel's tweet.
	Sorry about that.
	He did apologise.
	Dear Nigel, I've always believed when I get things wrong I own up to it.
	I got it wrong.
	Sorry, that'll teach me to trust reporting of my old employer.
	So he was formerly at the BBC.
	If your political views were even part of the reason why the account was suspended from Coutts, that is totally reprehensible.
	Let me say something.
	Please do.
	It's good if people apologize when they are mistaken, but at the end of the day, as you said before, there have to be some concrete results.
	An empty apology means nothing.
	So was that apology empty or do you think that he Well, I would say that he had a lot of hubris buying the institutional line, and so the only thing that could be done is now challenging the institutional power that made the narrative hegemonic and believable enough in the first place.
	And also, the other thing is, great, glad on your apology.
	When's the BBC going to get around to apologising to Cole for defaming him in the opening episode of the Disinformation Podcast?
	Again, not holding my breath, but there you go.
	So the other BBC director, Simon Jack, who's a BBC business director who wrote the BBC article about Farage, he's apologised.
	He said, the information on which we based our reporting on Nigel Farage and his bank accounts came from a trusted and senior source.
	Well, you shouldn't trust it anymore.
	Yes, exactly.
	However, the information turned out to be incomplete and inaccurate.
	I would therefore like to apologize to Mr. Farage.
	And Carl raises his ear.
	You literally just took the word of a lie, did nothing to check it.
	Utterly disgraceful.
	This should be career-ending stuff.
	Unfortunately, boss, probably won't.
	And they probably won't apologize to us yet either.
	Let's see what we can do about that eventually.
	So why did he believe them?
	What source was it?
	Well, it turns out it's Big Club, and we, and even Farage, aren't in it because, uh...
	So Farage thanked him for his apology, but he was sat next to Dame Alison, the woman who's resigned, at a dinner the night before he tweeted the claim about Farage and wrote the article.
	Okay.
	So they were sat at a dinner, just chatting, and she was discussing clients' confidential information and lying about it at a dinner party to a BBC journalist.
	So this was on the 3rd of July at the BBC Correspondents' charity now, the Grand Ballroom of London's Langham Hotel.
	Nice work if you can get it.
	But, you know, what she would be saying, I'm sure, it's all of the other accusations that weren't necessarily relevant to his account.
	The xenophobia, the racism card, all this ESG vocabulary.
	Yes, but they were obviously just sitting there smearing him as that.
	But that wasn't included as the reason, because they knew that political persecution, naked political persecution, looks terrible.
	And it does.
	Hence why this is what it's been led to.
	There's a really pernicious, We have a message here that says, you know, if you disagree with the ESG globalist agenda, we are going to attack you financially and we're going to take the steps to do so.
	And this is not just a threat.
	This was something like an attack.
	Yes, of course, yeah.
	And it's happened to plenty of people.
	It's happened to the Canadian truckers, it happened to British activists who must not be named, who, no matter how you feel about him, I think that's reprehensible and it's set a standard that means it's acceptable to everyone else.
	The thing is, though, I'm actually glad this has come out because it will not just wake people up to the perniciousness of ESGs and what will be coming for us if nothing changes.
	But also it dispels us of the notion of a neutral institution.
	No institution is truly neutral.
	If it's staffed by ideologues, they can use the cloak of neutrality to sneak in an existential threat to your way of life.
	So I would rather they held the value... Neutrality is not a neutral value either.
	Your liberal tolerance is actually a value.
	It's not just something everyone holds.
	So I'd rather they were explicit about their values and not every single institution was signed up and being bankrolled by BlackRock.
	I don't disagree necessarily, but I mean, it doesn't matter what they'll say on paper.
	If you look at history, you have banks, for instance, financing both sides of wars.
	what they truly believe, and so I could choose to shop elsewhere.
	Well, okay.
	I don't disagree necessarily, but I mean, it doesn't matter what they'll say on paper.
	If you look at history, you have banks, for instance, financing both sides of wars.
	Sure.
	So what they believe is making money.
	Well, sort of.
	I mean, now there's just a profit incentive in the ideology, but of course now some of them are genuinely bought and paid into the ideology as well.
	So if you're going to be a rampant ideologue and allow the forces of entropy to set in on civilization, I'd rather take my money elsewhere.
	It's just that currently there's no elsewhere to take my money, because the forces that are propping up ESG are so hegemonic, there's so much money behind it that pretty much every institution is bought on.
	But no, parallel economic structures, let's hope they get built on.
	It's good to say this because we should focus on this because very frequently you have people who support the ESG agenda who says that their political opponents are against the separation of powers and against neutrality, whereas they're doing the same thing.
	Yes.
	Well, they just think progress is neutral and beyond reproach.
	And so it's beyond debate.
	And so it's going to happen whether you like it or not.
	So if you stand in the way of the progress car, you're just a speed bump on our way to utopia.
	And that's how they're going to treat all of us.
	And there's no due process?
	No, of course there isn't.
	Why would you need due process for someone who is an impediment to the utopia we've already defined and trying to actualize into being?
	And another contradiction is that they frequently talk about procedural values rather than substantive values.
	And you know, they don't care about procedure now.
	No, of course not.
	It's a lie.
	It's very utilitarian.
	Everything's a means to an end.
	And that's what this is.
	It sets a horrific precedent.
	It just seems that they've jumped the shark on persecuting for arts because it was too high profile.
	So the actual BBC piece was released on July the 4th, the day after this dinner, and it quoted People familiar with Coutts' move claiming it had been a commercial decision to close Mr Farage's personal and business accounts because he did not have enough money.
	Both the BBC and NatWest declined to comment when the Telegraph asked what Mr Jack and Dame Alison had discussed during the meal, but now we have the apologies and the fact that she's been, well, sacked.
	She's resigned, but under pressure, under duress of course.
	And so we know that they discussed this.
	So, they're all doing background deals, the government part of this bank, the government owns the BBC, there needs to be state power stepping in on this.
	It's actually an acceptable thing to do.
	I'd rather that the government owned neither, but because they currently do, they can actually leverage something over this.
	So Farage now wants to know exactly who discussed his account.
	Not just Dame Alison.
	Everyone that was involved in getting rid of this.
	There are also 10,000 other NatWest customers who have claimed to be debanked over the course of holding an account with them.
	Just don't have Farage's profile.
	Set up a Facebook group for the fight back.
	He's included the link here.
	So it seems to be a swelling of public support behind Farage's effort.
	And there are customers writing to NatWest saying that everyone involved in this, not just Dame Alison Rose and Camilla Stowell, should lose their jobs.
	And that's why Farage has turned around and said, okay, here's my statement.
	Literally everyone, the CEO, the entire board, they need to be cleared out for their complicity in persecuting Farage and their willingness to persecute everyone else if they can get away with it.
	So he just says, sack them all.
	I mean, I'm very on board with this.
	Let's go to the government response, because that's been quite interesting.
	The government have now suggested that banks could lose their license if they discriminate against customers for political views.
	So Andrew Griffith, the Economic Secretary to the Treasury, has asked civil servants to explore adding free speech protections to banking licenses, according to a Whitehall source.
	The Treasury is preparing to enforce it by strengthening the Financial Conduct Authority's principles for business, Principle 6 states a firm must pay due regard to the interests of its customers and treat them fairly, and this will be updated to refer to political beliefs.
	Now again, it's almost impossible to staff this because you pass a law, but people who enact the law are more important than the law written on paper.
	So whether or not this will fix the problem, entirely different.
	I'd rather the whole ESG framework was dismantled, but it's going to be difficult, right?
	It's the people in charge of institutions.
	Exactly, yes.
	He who holds the levers of power actually has the power.
	David Davis, who's a Conservative MP, was nearly the leader of the Conservative Party at one point, backed Sunak, which is disappointing, but he has been good on Brexit.
	He's branded Coutt's decision to debank Farage as a thinly-veiled political discrimination and vindictive, irresponsible and undemocratic action.
	In response, Rishi Sunak said, in the short term, having consulted on the payment service regulations, we intend to crack down on this practice by tightening the rules around account closures.
	And this is actually something that Farage should lean on because Farage is a looming threat in the political mind of the Conservatives.
	Should he come back, he's probably the only man capable of galvanising the right to take votes away.
	That's why they entered into a pact with the Brexit party in 2019.
	And so if Farage leans on this at a time where the Conservatives are electorally vulnerable and already making concessions to their backbenchers, Who are more socially conservative like Miriam Cades.
	He can get some action possibly taken on ESG.
	All you've got to do is hammer the ESG point home.
	Larry Fink already knows from BlackRock that ESG is a toxic label because loads of the Republican legislators in America have been passing legislation against it.
	If it enters the political consciousness of the people in the UK that aren't always switched on to our show, it will become so toxic that even the pro-ESG people like Jeremy Hunt and Rishi Sunak will be forced to take some action on slowing the roll of it across Every aspect of society.
	That would be good.
	And Sunak himself has actually come out, and I'm not going to say to his credit, because I don't really credit him with much, and I don't know if the staffer wrote this either, but there you go, and tweeted, this is wrong, no one should be barred from using basic services for their political views, free speech is the cornerstone of our democracy.
	Now, well done to Suella Braven, Jack Rees-Mogg, Priti Patel, Lord Frost, Boris of all people, and of course Elon Musk, who backed Farage on this, but free speech, Mr. Sunak.
	Interesting.
	Abortion buffer zones mean anything to you, where you can be persecuted for praying silently in your head on a British street for the murder of the unborn?
	You're putting ESGs in digital currencies, undoubtedly.
	You've allowed the World Economic Forum to spearhead our AI response, the online safety bill, not repealing section 127 of the Communications Act passed by Tony Blair, which is what Count Dankula got prosecuted under.
	All of these things are on his watch.
	You could change these tomorrow, but you don't.
	So, excuse me if I don't believe the free speech defence.
	Again, it's not about the principle, it's about the man enacting the principle.
	And the mealy-mouthedness on this doesn't fill me with hope.
	But again, if anyone can leverage the government, it's Farage.
	Now, who do we think didn't come to Farage's defence on principle?
	Is there one political figure in the UK who has been curiously silent on this?
	Maybe a major party head?
	A prime minister-in-waiting, even?
	Ah, yes, of course.
	Keir Starmer.
	Keir Starmer decided to abstain from condemning this.
	And the reason is, he said he prefers Davos to Westminster.
	Direct quote.
	Dawn Butler from the Labour Party, a woman who lied about getting a letter of commendation from Obama.
	Typical race grifter.
	She, a little while ago, turned around and said that the career ladder should be a career escalator for black women and minority groups in the UK.
	So they're already trying to instantiate ESG in law when the Labour government come to power.
	So of course they don't want to come out and condemn their own framework.
	Because they're already bought into it.
	And Starmer made a statement yesterday.
	I think he said that he is going to smash the opportunity ceiling.
	Right.
	Yeah.
	Sure.
	Sure.
	Whatever.
	He should put the clause for people who embrace his ideology.
	Yes.
	He already said to the Pink News Awards, he wants to amend the online safety harms bill, whatever it is, to criminalize misgendering.
	So that's off the air.
	See you later, guys.
	And also, he wasn't sure about the percentage of women Well, yes, because he said that... Having something.
	Yes, the correct appendages.
	I hate YouTube with being censored constantly.
	And so it's not shocking that Labour have abstained on this, but I just wanted to finish with a bit of credit to a man who was beat up in the street the other day, which isn't good.
	Shouldn't do that.
	No, it's not.
	Aaron Bastani.
	Aaron Bastani gets it.
	I know.
	Lotus Eaters, Navarro Media, Predator handshake.
	He says, I think for Labour a better bet for the country than the Tories.
	But park that.
	Why would Starmer say this when polling so clearly disagrees?
	I think it was 71% of YouGov polling said that, well that might just be the typical YouGov number.
	The overwhelming number of people for YouGov said that this was wrong.
	Because he doesn't want to be seen to criticise NatWest.
	Labour is now the party of corporate interests and a professional managerial class.
	I couldn't have put it better myself.
	They are reserving the right to persecute you arbitrarily for your political views.
	That's why Labour has abstained, and that's why it's going to become a very dire circumstance should Labour get in.
	So this is my message.
	I don't have any truck with Farage's camp, beyond us knowing a few people obviously that work with reform and the like, but Nigel Farage is probably the man of the moment most uniquely capable of galvanising the British right and the 6 in 10 people who voted for Boris for Brexit and didn't get it and are now not planning to vote.
	So I would say take this moment of public prominence, not only hammer this issue, hammer the institutions who pretend to be neutral and persecute people who do not have Nigel Farage's platform, and it would be wonderful if you could perhaps come back into the fold and lead the reactionary vanguard to remoralise Britain.
	Just a suggestion.
	Right.
	Okay.
	So let's go to our third segment.
	Now, I want to say that, you know, I'm a migrant in the UK.
	Yep.
	Okay.
	And the reason I'm here is because I think that in the UK there were some opportunities that were absent in Greece.
	Were being the operative word.
	Yeah.
	And I never came here to defraud the UK.
	Here, I'm pursuing these opportunities.
	If they work, I'm staying.
	If I'm asked to leave, I'll be asked to leave.
	It's as simple as that.
	But there's also another issue because, you know, very frequently people may think that it's weird for me to talk about immigration, but it's not because I'm from Greece, as I said, and Greece receives a tremendous amount of migration pressures.
	And basically it would be completely hypocritical to me to think in different ways and apply the same principle differently when I'm talking about the UK.
	So I'm going to talk about the UK and I'm going to talk about a very weird case because it seems to me that this is a case where people try to defraud the UK.
	And this is something we should definitely talk about because very frequently we hear, you know, whenever we hear about migration, we constantly have the demonization of people who are against mass migration on the one hand, but we also frequently have the sort of sanctification of people who try to migrate.
	And I'm against that.
	And very frequently the rhetoric that goes against that says that, you know, I want to migrate and please open your doors to me.
	Very frequently it is misleading.
	It is an emotional rhetoric.
	Frequently it talks about, you know, horrors of war and Abuse and all sorts of this.
	But sometimes, you know, just because people say it doesn't mean it's true.
	And we're going to talk about one of these cases that seemed to me definitely be a case of trying to defraud the United Kingdom.
	Before we do this, let's go to visit a website and check out the latest comics corner.
	Yeah.
	Speaking of criminal enterprises, it turns out that if you review the early history of the comics industry, it might be funded by the mafia.
	I wonder if there are any analogs here.
	I'll leave it at that.
	I don't know, but I think that, you know, you're putting a lot of work to this with Harry.
	It's part one and I really like your series.
	Oh, thank you.
	Appreciate it.
	And I'm waiting for part two.
	Well, you're also waiting for us to cover Batman and Robin, which won't happen, but Seleos just wants us to do it so he can make Mr. Freeze references the entire time.
	Yes.
	Simple joys of life.
	Right.
	So with only £5 a month, you can gain a membership to Lotus Eaters and you can have access to all our premium content.
	So by all means, just help us and support us to give you our news.
	Okay.
	Now let's go to this story that seems to me to be a bit Preposterous.
	Now, before we talk about the two lawyers that received an enormous amount of money, and that basically they've done this, they received an enormous amount of money to make false asylum claims, let us see some asylum statistics.
	This is from the UK Parliament, from commonslibrary.parliament.uk.
	Okay, so research briefing, it was published on Wednesday, the 1st of March, 2023.
	Okay.
	And it says here about asylum applications.
	Okay.
	Now there's a trend and there is a sort of, sorry, where is it?
	The number has tripled in the last decades.
	So it says here, proportion of all migrants who are asylum seekers and refugees.
	Asylum seekers made up around 6% of immigrants to the UK in 2019.
	In 2020, when overall immigration was lower than usual due to the pandemic, asylum seekers might have made up around 12% of the immigrants.
	Sorry, I said decades before.
	It's four years.
	Sorry.
	In the year ending June 2022, the latest period for which we have estimates, asylum seekers and refugees made up approximately 18% of immigrants to the UK.
	This includes arrivals under the Ukraine schemes, the Afghan relocation and resettlement schemes, arrivals in small boats, other resettled persons and arrivals on family reunion visas.
	around 190,000 individuals in total.
	I love how they just smuggle in.
	Oh, Ukraine.
	Okay, temporary stay.
	Afghanistan.
	Well, you might be able to skew the people that helped us out and the British forces over there while we were occupying it and they're fleeing the Taliban.
	So sure.
	Hong Kong.
	Okay, well, Britain might screw that one up and we want to get them their homeland back eventually.
	Yep, sure.
	Albanians crossing the channel.
	Wait, what?
	Oh, those are just exactly the same as the people whose houses are getting blown up or their family members murdered by the Chinese government, are they?
	Yeah, thank you, you insidious liars.
	And by the way, there is a policy now, I don't know if you saw it, late news, that there is a kind of UK policy to send back say, prisoners from Albania to Albania, and that will cost around £4 million.
	Yes.
	They're going to send it.
	And the justification is that these £4 million are basically less than the amount of money that would be paid for these prisoners being housed in UK prisons.
	I could fire them out of a cannon at midnight for far cheaper.
	There's another issue here, though, that, you know, I think that it's wrong to see this just on economic terms, because, you know, if we just say, okay, it's an economic win-win, that could give the message to several countries to say, okay, well, let's that could give the message to several countries to say, okay, well, let's export Yes.
	They're going to be caught in England and they can't deport them all.
	They can.
	Yeah, they can be deported.
	They're going to be caught in England.
	They're going to be sent back and they're going to be picked and there are going to be money for that.
	Yes.
	So.
	That's a possibility.
	I like thinking realistically in politics, there are people who just think like bad people and they try to constantly make profit out of out of this all the time.
	So just saying this now, let's go back to the So it says, if including the British National Overseas Scheme in the category of humanitarian routes, up to 25% of immigration in that year would fall into that category.
	So from 6% of immigrants being asylum seekers to the UK in 2019, we move to close to 18 to 25%.
	Yes.
	Now, decisions and refusals.
	You have here several, you know, data you want to see.
	The percentage of asylum applicants refused that initial decision reached its highest point at 88% in 2004.
	Too low.
	Since then, the refusal rate has been falling overall and was at 24% in 2022, its lowest point since 1990.
	Also as well, if your claim fails, you are entitled to appeal and stay in the country while your appeal is processed.
	So, they're still here, they're just stacking up.
	What happened in 1990 and all of the 90s?
	In 1997, something happened according to Tom Harwood, and then magically immigration shot up.
	Did that something happen, have the name Anthony Blair by any chance?
	That would be interesting, wouldn't it?
	Can't answer that question.
	So, nationality of asylum seekers and refugees.
	In 2021, 42% of applicants were nationals of Middle Eastern countries, and 23% were nationals of African countries.
	This pattern shifted in 2022, with the largest nationality groups being Asian countries, 31% of applicants, and European countries, 24% of applicants.
	It's almost like there were other countries on the way they could have stopped in, if they were actual asylum claimants.
	Right.
	On to our news now, because if you have seen the story, it's preposterous.
	Let's see what happened.
	It says, lawyers charging £10,000 to make fake asylum claims.
	Special investigation exposes staff at immigration law firms briefing clients on how to lie to the authorities to win the right to stay in Britain.
	So basically what happened, from the Daily Mail, some Let's say reporters went to the offices of these lawyers and they pretended to be people seeking asylum.
	It was an undercover sting operation.
	Yes.
	And they heard several really interesting things.
	Now, it says here, lawyers are charging thousands of pounds to submit false asylum and human rights claims for illegal immigrants.
	Staff at solicitors' firms readily agreed to help an undercover male reporter posing as an economic migrant get refugee status.
	This was despite being told he had no legitimate reason to stay in the UK after arriving on a small boat.
	VP Lingajofi, this is the name of one lawyer, asked for £10,000 to invent a horrific backstory to use in the asylum application.
	In the video, he just says, I'll make something up.
	Yeah, we'll show the clip.
	It says this included claims of sexual torture, beating, slave labor, false imprisonment, and death threats that left him suicidal and compelled to flee to the UK.
	The legal advisor promised he could get a doctor's report to back up the story and produced antidepressants to be given to the Home Office as evidence of psychological trauma.
	Now let's watch the clip.
	On the part two of your case, why you can't live in India is you are a, we can say that the Indian government accused you of no Kalistani, you were taken to custody, arrested and you were ill-treated, tortured, On the part two of your case, why you can't live in India is you are a, we can say that the Indian government accused you of pro-Kalistani, you were taken to custody, arrested, and you were ill-treated, tortured, sexually tortured, and you were ill-treated, tortured, sexually tortured, and that's why you couldn't marry, and you were frustrated, you wanted to commit suicide, atmaatiyam, and your family sent you here.
	Please listen to me.
	You may not support Kalisdana, you may be a very pro-Hingostani, but I am only telling your story.
	The Putin in modern slavery condition is the only one who is a Christian.
	He wouldn't go out.
	He has to stay in a rotting body.
	Everything is given to him there.
	He has to work in hard labor.
	Breaking and working in the building sites.
	He can't escape.
	His passport, everything is taken away.
	Right.
	and they went to Punjab and they threatened the family, they don't give the money, they don't do this.
	And also they kept him in a brothel.
	He was cleaning the toilet and looking after the prostitutes and all that kind of thing.
	And then these girls are from Eastern Europe.
	This guy is working there more or less as a nanny for the women.
	I've got some psychological problems.
	Psychiatric report to say that you may do Atma Hathiya or if you don't...
	So you can get the psychiatrist reports there as well?
	I also have some medicines.
	Oh, great.
	If necessary, I will give him some medicine to show him to the immigration to say he's taken his medicine.
	What is it?
	Paracetamol?
	No.
	It's Citlopal.
	It's an antidepressant.
	I was a former medical student before I went to law.
	Right.
	Okay.
	So basically, what happened here, we had an undercover Journalists who went and pretended to be an economic migrant who came to the UK from a, let's say, a boat.
	And he says that I have no legitimate reason to stay here.
	and the lawyer tells him that basically, "I will make you up a story." Now... - What? - I mean, what do you make of it?
	It shouldn't exactly be shocking that this is happening because the asylum system has been gamed for ages.
	We saw the Liverpool taxicab bomber, for example, where he was convinced to pretend to convert to Christianity in order to stay in the country.
	People will just cheat the system if it's excessively permissive and also you will have, if you're allowing lots of people in here, and there's There's a reason these men running this firm are Indians speaking to other Indians, because they understand the particular situation going on in India.
	Again, Indians, not a country that is currently at war, just like to point that out.
	And so they can appeal to the liberal sensibilities of the people in the Home Office who are very universalist and exceptionally compassionate and ideologically driven.
	and leverage their specific cultural knowledge to import their friends or fellow countrymen if they have high in-group preference by making up the most compelling and extreme story that someone from the Home Office, not from India, would not be able to vet.
	So you've got essentially ethnic extortion rackets existing in the UK to transplant an entire population from one place over here and the legal system is just permitting it.
	Exactly.
	And there's an important aspect of the asymmetry of knowledge, for instance, because you said that they are talking about different countries, the people who are made, but how much knowledge do you have to have to know that India is not at war?
	You could probably just open your phone and look at a map.
	Yes, you don't need much knowledge.
	But the point here is that there is also the taking money to fabricate within quotation mark evidence.
	So who is making this kind of this piece of evidence?
	If he's talking about, you know, anti-depressants, it means that there are other people inside it.
	Somehow, you know, this person takes money and I'm sure that Perhaps some people might be getting money in order to produce these pieces of evidence.
	OK.
	So this person, he boasts a success rate, I think, of more than 90 percent with similar such cases.
	And a third outlined that he's finding ingredients of an asylum case.
	He said that he could use it to make it appear that the reporter feared his life in India, you know, as said.
	OK.
	So they say that, you know, basically this is a very rich lawyer.
	He has, I think, a Mercedes or a BMW with his own plates.
	And he's just rinsing the British taxpayer for his own lavish lifestyle.
	So let us move here and see, because this was an incident that many people saw.
	We have Rishi Sunak, your favorite.
	Yeah, this is a very interesting thread, because it actually goes through how he is allowing the problem to continue to exist, but pretending to do something about it.
	Exactly.
	And that's where I want to hear your opinion.
	So Rishi Sunak says, this is what we're up against.
	The Labour Party, a subset of lawyers, criminal gangs, they're all on the same side, propping up a system of exploitation that profits from getting people to the UK legally.
	I have a plan to stop it.
	You've been in the government, your government, 13 years now.
	Again, Peter Hitchens is definitely not a fan of me, but he did say the other day, someone responded, imagine what happens when Labour gets in power?
	And he said, they have been in power since 1997.
	This is a Blairite government.
	And under the Conservatives, record migration, not just illegal, as we've seen the statistics, but also legal.
	Net 1.1 million.
	If things continue as they have with migration being the leading cause of population increase in the UK because the birth rate is so low and you're immiserating domestic indigenous Brits to the point where they can't have their own families but still increasing the population through bringing in the third world, Migration Watch has already calculated you're going to need 15 to 18 new Birmingham's to accommodate the amount of adult migrants that arrive here.
	How is that acceptable?
	I'm less scared of the Labour Party Then I would be if you've done anything good about it.
	You haven't.
	But let's see what he says.
	He says, first, I recently passed laws that will mean if you come to the UK legally, you can't claim asylum.
	You can't misuse our modern slavery protection.
	You can't make false human rights claims.
	You can't stay.
	These laws go further than any government has gone before.
	Now, I take issue with this because it's what we said before.
	The people who are in charge of institutions are more important than the institutions in a way, because Any institution that we have, it is people who are in charge of it, and people can take advantage of it or not, or they can honor it.
	And I think that, you know, when he says, I mean, it doesn't make much sense what he says here.
	To say you can't claim asylum if you come to the UK illegally.
	I mean, there are all these asylum claims for so long.
	But we'll be overruled by whatever international commitment we're still tangled up in, like the ECHR, which he still hasn't gotten rid of.
	And if he wants to get rid of the ECHR, he said he'll fall back on the UN's 1952 Refugee Declaration.
	And in the phrasing of that, it says a refugee is anyone unable or unwilling to return to their country.
	Yeah, just don't feel like it, mate.
	That's fine.
	So, unless you disentangle us from the UN, Please do.
	They're an evil organisation.
	We're still going to be keeping the commitment that keeps these people coming in.
	That's why nothing will change with us.
	He says, second, I've secured the largest ever small boats deal with France, which will see 40% more patrols on French beaches.
	So there's more people that can stand on the edge of the beach and wave them goodbye as they come over the channel.
	Okay, so let's go here.
	Here is where, for instance, Fury as the Bar Council attacks Rishi Sunak after the Prime Minister criticized immigration lawyers exposed by the Mailers trying to help migrants falsely claim asylum.
	So they're covering for each other because they know there's a lot of money in doing it.
	Check this article if you're interested.
	Now, let's go here.
	I want us to watch this clip from GB News.
	Yep.
	What is this bloke called?
	Let's name him.
	This lawyer that you went undercover to expose.
	He's called what?
	He's called VP Lingardoyce.
	He lives in a large house with a Mercedes with personalized number plates.
	And he asked for 10 grand.
	Yeah.
	To create this horrific backstory.
	Nigel, this is appalling.
	It is appalling.
	And certainly anybody, any lawyer who's doing that should be struck off.
	Exactly.
	That guy should never work again after that one page in the mail.
	One lawyer in this investigation has already been fired, which is quite right.
	That's right.
	The Solicitor's Regulation Authority is looking into it, also quite right.
	I think the only important thing to say is it doesn't mean all immigration lawyers are doing things like this.
	But it's what, I mean, this guy's not here to defend himself, so we don't know.
	But the bottom line is, this is what a lot of people think about a lot of these lawyers, because people coming on the boat, they come across with nothing, they come across with no pay.
	And come on, Nigel, don't you, we all know that a lot of these lefty lawyers actually lead people into these circumstances, into these...
	Cover stories.
	Amanda, that's going too far.
	We don't do that.
	No, they do it because they want to give them, because they believe anyone who arrives here has the right to stay.
	Yeah.
	And they give them, they've got briefs.
	They get, they get Twitters, they get messages saying, say you're a sex slave, say you're gay, say this, and then you're not.
	We can't start targeting all immigration lawyers.
	I'm not.
	No, I'm not saying all of them.
	I'm not, there's probably three that are decent.
	But there's a, it's a great, it's a great industry isn't it, the human rights industry.
	Okay.
	So I've deliberately wanted us to end with this.
	Yes.
	It's a, it's a big industry, the human rights industry.
	Some of them I assume are good people.
	Yeah.
	So what I want to say is that, you know, again, you see how the event is getting covered.
	So we have a, let's say some preposterous news.
	We have people rush and say, no, not everyone is like that.
	Okay.
	But there's an issue here.
	The issue is that context matters.
	Imagine what would happen if some people, these reporters, they just wrote an article that said that there are people who do this, and they didn't have the video.
	What would the response be?
	The response from all other people would be that these are far-right, racist xenophobes.
	So it's not enough to make some, you know, some claims now that, you know, we're sorry.
	Yeah, this is preposterous.
	These people should lose their license because the whole thing is to be able to Pose these questions in the first place.
	You also need to circumvent their framing with direct video evidence, which is what James O'Keefe has been very effective with.
	Formerly at Project Veritas, now at O'Keefe Media Group, by exposing people from Pfizer and BlackRock and the like, by just catching them on dates, professing to being evil.
	Exactly.
	And what Rishi Sunak was saying before, that, you know, it's illegal to make false human rights claims.
	Well, they have been doing human rights claims for so long, And they were getting away with it.
	But the whole notion here is, how do you verify a statement?
	That is why context matters.
	And that is why it's important to tell people that, you know, it's not extreme to care about national identity.
	It's not extreme about caring about your country not being defrauded in these ways.
	So that's what I'm saying, that on the one hand, it's not enough for Rishi Sunak to say that, you know, I passed legislation, but keep operating within that system.
	Within that system that prevents you from posing these questions and talking about them in the first place.
	And also, if you have extra-national legal requirements that will overrule your legal efforts to stop it, I hesitate to believe you're actually trying to stop it if you don't disentangle yourself from that.
	And if you're only operating in the harm mitigation framework, as you said earlier, of where you're making a cost calculation to say, it's fine if we let them come over, because it's going to be less expensive to eventually deport them than it is to put them up for £7 million in a hotel and climbing every day.
	Exactly.
	Right.
	And just, I want you to see this last link here.
	And, uh, you know, if you want to see migrants housed on barge to get free festival and cricket excursions.
	Oh, you're having a laugh.
	For the floating prison, they're going to take them on day trips.
	First 50 migrants due to take up places on the BB Stock Mall in Portland, Dorset next week.
	You see, it's, it's, it's a really weird article.
	Just by all means, go and read it.
	They're on the taxpayer jolly.
	Great.
	I'm really glad I'm paying for that.
	Yes, Migration Watch.
	That's a good one to end on, actually.
	They currently have a petition to end mass migration to try and leverage certain politicians, including the new conservatives who have put out a proposal to lower mass migration by a number of about 400,000 minimum.
	The only frustrating thing is, of course, that it's good to get a start on petitions, but they can eventually just ignore it, as they have with every single manifesto where people have voted for lower migration and it hasn't come to fruition.
	So on that note, I think we should move to our video comments.
	One issue with the AI slash smart city systems going around and how they don't seem to account for how the diversity is going to interface with it.
	These organizations kind of rely on the population being rules-based and law-abiding, and that's not really how the new Europeans do things.
	And like anything that impedes them, they're just going to smash it up if they can get away with it and take what they want.
	And there's no one really in the decision-making centers that's ever going to hold them account because they're voter-based.
	It's not really a sustainable system as far as I can tell.
	Well this is another thing as well.
	You actually don't need nearly as many laws and prohibitions and whatnot if the enforcement scale is the community and if you have a prerequisite morality that is enforced at the civic and individual level rather than the state level.
	So, hypothetically, and this is going to sound silly, but if everyone were Christians you wouldn't need police.
	And so, of course, there's still the spirit of Cain that infests individual resentful people, and you're always going to have someone that ruins the order just for the hell of it.
	But if the vast majority of people had morals, you wouldn't need this level of state enforcement.
	And the hollowing out of morals means that the exact kind of people enforcing the legal social contract are morally bereft, so the contract will decay as well, eventually.
	And there's what Aquinas says, that if law was as strict as morality, everyone would be in jail.
	Right, let's go to the next video.
	Please jump.
	There's some interesting red pills surrounding the whales from Avatar 2.
	What with the idea that they're a race that's outgrown to need for violence.
	And they spend all their time being poets, song makers, and philosophers.
	Hence why they've exiled Pyukun here for being violent against humans.
	Their morality and wisdom mean nothing to the Skyboat people who are materialists.
	It only makes them easier to prey upon at the end of the day.
	I can't help but feel that there's a contemporary parallel that could be drawn from this.
	I haven't seen it.
	I haven't watched it.
	Honestly, it pissed me off that it took 13 years to shoot.
	No, sorry, I won't go.
	I might watch it with my dad at some point.
	Yeah, at some point, if it happens.
	happens.
	We got more, John?
	I think we have a...
	That one time Callum did a section on AI singing covers, well, it led me to the Soda Wars.
	Behold.
	So Zuckerberg wants the power to conquer Planet Mountain Dew.
	You attacked me on Planet Mountain Dew.
	Your men shot me and tried to kill my crew.
	Dew Blast!
	Rest in peace, Big Al.
	He ain't with us no more.
	Planet Mountain Dew went and started a war.
	Thousands of lives were lost before a ceasefire was negotiated by the fast food mafia.
	We'll have Skynet.
	Skynet will attack us.
	I'm not online enough to understand this.
	I touch grass.
	God help me.
	Sadiq Khan's campaign of mate is a great example of how the left can't meme.
	Remember when the journalist told the working class coal miners to just learn to code when they lost their jobs?
	It was easy to turn it back on them.
	That phrase is now considered offensive.
	This can be the same.
	I call upon everyone to meme it up just like this one picture from this show.
	You win if the left calls mate racist or sexist or any form of ism.
	Yeah, that's why you just co-opt it with Photos of the Grooming Gang perpetrators.
	That's what Cole's been doing.
	I went to see the Barbie movie on Friday with my wife and we had a really good time.
	She was dressed as Barbie.
	I was obviously literally me.
	The film was pretty good.
	Soundtrack was decent.
	The cinematography was good.
	Really enjoyed the visuals.
	The story was interesting.
	You have to really not be paying attention to get the message that the studio obviously wants because it is absolutely a feminist propaganda piece.
	However, if you pay attention, it goes so hard, you know, it actually becomes satirical.
	For example, all the car crashes happen while women are driving.
	Many such cases.
	Yeah.
	No, Barbie, I was on GB news this morning, arguing this.
	Barbie's the accidentally one of the most conservative films and the best advert for patriarchy in the last 10 years or so.
	And I'm living for it.
	Right onto the written comments.
	Then I must say that I haven't watched it.
	I, I wouldn't advise you pay money for it, but we'll do, we'll do a bros movie night.
	You know what?
	I'm announcing it now.
	As soon as it comes out, I'm probably going to do a detailed breakdown of the politics of Barbie for premium content people, because obviously people haven't got enough of mine and Dan's half hour.
	You can get two and a half hours of how Ken is literally me.
	Big, big category.
	Right.
	Let's go to the, to the comments.
	Biggy Bigfoot.
	I just wanted to say to Stelios that I really enjoyed the Gilgamesh episode and I hope there is more to come.
	Thank you very much.
	I think we'll, we plan to do most epics and by all means, give us more suggestions.
	Embezzle money from the taxpayers.
	So it's blood for the Blood God.
	He's given us a $200 donation, which is really, really generous, actually.
	Here's something for Stelios' welcome party.
	I have some work to do, so.
	Thank you very much.
	Yeah, it's greatly appreciated.
	Right.
	And thank you.
	Okay.
	State-imposed friendship.
	Okay.
	The White Wigan Survivalist.
	To be fair, Connor, Joe would not be interested in you.
	You're too old.
	But my hair's so eminently sniffable.
	Ross Diggle.
	Anyone notice that they're not bothered about loneliness and social connection with the elderly or disabled?
	They are...
	They aren't productive enough.
	Sod them.
	Maybe having wisdom, warmth, and humor to offer.
	They did mention them, but I'm supposing they're just going to institutionalize it like they do every other form of care.
	I think there should be more studies that are saying that, well, if you have wisdom, if you have warmth, if you're a personable person.
	You're not lonely?
	You're going to find people to talk to.
	Okay, Sophie Liv, well, maybe stop outlawing social clubs for men.
	Stop infiltrating and shaming people who go to any kind of nerd convention or other.
	Having hobbies where they actually meet like-minded people and form friendships.
	Just go away.
	And much of this is a self-solving problem.
	Yeah, I agree with this.
	Yes, absolutely.
	Just stop shaming people.
	Yeah, this is something that I'm going to raise with Helen Joyce because I'm interviewing her soon.
	I've read her book, Trans, and it's good on the medical science and Bad on social prescriptions.
	We're going to argue about feminism.
	In it, she compares how the feminists broke up men's only spaces to the decommissioning of segregation, the Jim Crow South.
	And it's like, right, okay, one, men and women are different in ways that white and black people aren't.
	Two, Do you think there might be a lack of sympathy from the manosphere for women, feminists particularly, having their spaces infiltrated by trans identifying blokes because you demolished their men's clubs and set the standard first love?
	Maybe we need to come apart so we can come together for a bit.
	I have to modify my statement because it came out wrong.
	I said you should stop shaming people.
	I won't say you should stop shaming people for being people.
	But for doing a wholesome thing.
	Because shame sometimes, you know, it's a human emotion.
	Shame is a fantastic tool.
	We don't actually have enough shame.
	We should know less about each other.
	Daystate.
	I'm not entirely sure if I'm convinced by the loneliness epidemic in men narrative.
	How many men do you know that would happily go live in a cabin in the woods and never speak to anyone ever again?
	Literally just Josh.
	Occasionally, I want this, but you know, I'm one of those people who fantasizes about it.
	And then after, you know, two hours say, okay, right.
	I want to go back to civilization.
	So I'm good working on my own, but like my, my leisure time, I don't, I don't spend it.
	And it's because I think men want to be needed again, message of the Barbie movie.
	Just ask Ken the time and you make his day.
	But Baystate continues, don't threaten me with a good time.
	Since the dawn of time, men have never feared societal rejection.
	Women and their children... I mean, not everyone.
	No, that's wrong.
	Exile was a form of punishment.
	I mean, there is a tendency for people to conform and that there is a strong tendency.
	I mean, not everyone has it, but I don't think it's the norm to not have it.
	You're displaying autistic privilege here, my friend.
	Women and their children, on the other hand, have always been dependent on society for survival.
	Like always, they're looking at men through the feminine lens because of the overwhelming loneliness problem in women.
	I don't think so.
	I actually think the men's loneliness problem is different from the female loneliness problem, but it's because women want to feel validated, whereas men want to feel needed.
	And I think men don't have enough responsibilities to feel necessary.
	Right.
	Omar Watt.
	Sounds like state-enforced Myspace.
	At least it didn't actively hate Tom.
	Robert Longshore, how long now will it take to get state-mandated arranged marriages?
	Don't threaten me with a good time.
	You know what?
	Okay, this is a serious, not just joking, it's a serious thing.
	I do wonder if there's a certain growing cohort among people of our age, both men and women, who would just accept an arranged marriage to get things over with.
	I'm not saying it's necessarily good, seriously, but there are some people that are just like, oh, just sign me up with someone.
	What they want is an arranged marriage to a 10, don't get me wrong, which isn't going to happen, but they do just want someone to play like interfering matchmaker and just match people up.
	But there's a difference here because the goal of marriage, you could say it's love and, you know.
	Sort of.
	Because with a friendship, the state imposed friendship, they tried to impose friendship, which is the end product.
	And the same, marriage is the means.
	Commitment is the axiom of marriage, and so it's meant to sustain through bad times.
	So love is not the only thing that exists in marriage.
	Love is grown throughout marriage.
	Do you want some comments from yours?
	Yeah, happy to.
	Paul Nirbhar.
	Well, if the government owns part of this bank, then it's direct political persecution by the government.
	Yes, which is why the government's probably not going to do much about it, because it's too useful a tool.
	And of course, the Conservatives, usually agreeing with the Labour Party, are happy to hand it off to the Labour Party.
	There are very few good Conservatives.
	Joe De Valk.
	During the 2008 recession, and in the years after, I wound up switching to a credit union because my bank penalised me for not having at least $300 a month coming in.
	I was literally paying as much in this porpoise fee as I was for student loans.
	Yeah, the American student loan system's mad.
	You can get compound interest.
	You can get interest on your interest.
	I mean, I don't think most people should be going to college because I think it's a useless indoctrination factory to propagate a managerial class.
	But if you take that degree and you can't declare bankruptcy on it, and you keep compounding interest, that's just... And you think that fat studies degrees are worth it?
	Um, only if we can invent new insults to mock them.
	Um, Chad Koala, that's a good name.
	In one of Victor Davis Hanson's books, I've, I've never read him.
	He commented that in ancient Indian warfare, warring armies would rip each other apart, but it was a convention that they wouldn't touch each other's farms.
	A taboo that would cause all hell to break loose if broken.
	Debunking political opponents within an increasingly cashless society would seem a similarly appropriate taboo to maintain.
	That's actually a good point.
	I like to quote Dave Chappelle, uh, taking a man's livelihood is akin to killing him.
	Comes back to the male dependency thing.
	Shaky Silva.
	It's unsurprising that the powers that would be would move on to banking as the next big step to control the populace since speech control has not been enough yet our financial systems are held up by faith alone.
	I wonder how long it could last when it's openly seen to be hostile at least to half the population's beliefs.
	See my Wile E. Coyote Economy video for more.
	And one last one from my section, Lord Narivar.
	The longer the Cootes vs. Nigel Farage thing goes on, I realize just how big of a deal it is.
	This is one of the first times in recent memory the right has actually won against the left in a major way, and even better, Nigel is pressing on the advantage.
	He's screwing NatWest for everything they have.
	He's ending careers of actual peers of the realm here.
	He seems to be literally dismantling the woke cage around a major institution.
	I've never seen anything like this.
	Yes, which is why he should keep this momentum up and leverage it.
	His influence in the political sphere, not just in being, you know, demolishing some of the sacred cows of the financial and media class.
	Right.
	Sophie Liv.
	Boy, this lawyer sure sound English.
	I wonder why he has no interest in protecting England.
	Ethelstan95.
	Those lawyers are a symptom of the problem and not the problem.
	The fact that the Home Office is so soft on illegal immigration, the fact that we pay for the fees of these asylum seekers, within quotation marks, and do not force them to leave while trials are being heard are the reason they do this.
	Everyone acts on incentives.
	The Treason Inn, civil servants, and Tory party have incentivized everyone from construction to traffickers and to lawyers to operate in this profitable industry.
	Yep.
	Thomas Howell, the whole criminal migration rants from lawyers is a bad faith interpretation of international and national law.
	On the schoolyard, it would be that Weasley kid claiming he was off ground in a game of tag because he jumped when you tagged him.
	He's like a Randall from Recess.
	Do you ever watch that show?
	No.
	The wheezy little kid that's going like, hehehe, hell on everyone having fun.
	Yeah, that exact laugh.
	Well done.
	There you go.
	Your Willem Dafoe Green Goblin laugh is an accurate impression.
	I've told you, I have a reputation in this office.
	Yes.
	Right.
	And Sophie Liv, it's okay.
	When the collapse comes, the refugees will again be refugees, but from England.
	Who would even want to put up with that weather if it wasn't for the money?
	We will be starving and cold, but hey, now when the entire elite move to Cancun, we can build a wall and reinstall the cannons.
	Yeah, if they do move to Cancun, I've never wanted sea levels to rise more.
	I will not elaborate further.
	Right.

▲