Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Oct. 23, 2023 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:39:11

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #768

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Seaters 768 on today, Monday, the 23rd of October.
	It's the beginning of the week but October is almost over and that means payday is almost here so I'm thrilled about that.
	I hope you're all looking forward to getting your monthly cash injections watching at home and I'm today joined by Dan.
	Hello.
	And Connor.
	Hello, I'm not dead.
	People in the YouTube comments are going, where's Conor for the last three weeks?
	I didn't die or was sacked.
	Yeah, I went to Conservative Party Conference and then Japan.
	Both were very fun.
	Oh, sounds very lovely.
	Well, today we're going to be talking about Big Tech's censorship dilemma, the ethno-religious conflict that we shouldn't have to deal with, and I'm going to be discussing the real victims of America's fake racism narrative.
	Anything you'd like to add?
	Anything we need to plug before we get started?
	Well, really, payday is earlier in the month, isn't it?
	It's whenever the dividends come out.
	This sounds like high-level executive talk.
	This is why you're paid for Brokenomics and we just talk about comics.
	Yeah, I don't think Connor and I have any dividends accessible to us at the moment.
	So more than anything, Dan, that was just a flex that rubbed in our poverty.
	Thank you very much for that.
	With that, let's get into it before you make me any more sad.
	Well, I might do that with this segment.
	Because let's talk about the big tech's censorship dilemma that they've got going on with the EU.
	So we'll start with this tweet that sort of sets this up from a EU Commissioner, Thierry Breton, who apparently is one of the EU Commissioners.
	But it's not just him.
	So he's saying here, look, we've got to get this working group together to discuss enforcement of the Digital Service Act, the DSA.
	He's saying this is now law in Europe.
	It must be respected, you know, respect my authority kind of thing.
	Ursula's on it as well, another EU Commissioner.
	We're bringing European values into the digital world.
	That's more true than it appears at first glance actually, I'll come back to why.
	With strict rules on transparency and accountability in our Digital Services Act aims to protect our children, societies and democracies.
	I would briefly point out that as an EU Commissioner she's not elected.
	Well, can I also say that the idea of European values sounds farcical on the face of it, but it does give me hope, because obviously this is an attempt to conduct German-style control of the internet, but I hope they're very Italian in their enforcement.
	Well, yeah, yeah, I mean, European values, I mean, you just think sort of people marching with very high boots, don't you?
	Some of them.
	I think some of them having a siesta at the end of the day, so that's... It's Anglo values are the good ones, but everything that's come out of France and Germany has just been a disaster.
	Yeah.
	As of today, very large online platforms must apply these new laws.
	So, you know, that's basically the issue we've got.
	Actually, before we come on to why that's such a problem, I just want to plug something, which is...
	Our website.
	We have one, yes.
	So if you don't like watching on YouTube because YouTube are censorious bastards, as we are currently talking about, if you go to our website you can watch the podcast live, or you can watch it later, but you can watch the full version without all the censorship that we have to cut out because there are bits that we can't put on YouTube if we don't want to get yeeted.
	You also get an extra half hour of comments every day, which you can send in if you pay us, which please do, because it helps keep the business going.
	You don't need to pay, you can just watch it on there, and people should sign up and bookmark it at least.
	At least bookmark it, even if you do watch on YouTube, because one day you will wake up and we will just be gone because of this issue that we're talking about.
	Right, so this is the thing, Digital Service Act.
	Now, where's the scrolly thing?
	Here it is.
	Scroll down a little bit.
	And we get to what...
	So this is basically the big piece of...
	This is a scrolly thing.
	What is it?
	This is down on there and up.
	You can hit down and you can hit up.
	It's amazing.
	All right, okay.
	Tech works, granddad.
	Yes, okay.
	So now that I am not boomerying the tech anymore.
	Right, anyway.
	So basically this is the big piece of...
	The boomerang will continue as morale improves.
	This is the big piece of legislation that they passed at the end of last year, which...
	Now then, what they got to now is thinking, okay, how can we enforce this?
	Because basically this gave them, you know, all these new digital powers that they're all looking for.
	So, yeah, let's see what their justifications are.
	They're starting a Ministry of Truth.
	Well actually I'm aware of that they're creating a new part of the European Parliament or the European Commission in Brussels to be able to monitor this.
	I covered a bit of this last week.
	They're already looking to try and censure parts of Twitter and Elon Musk because of the fact that there is lots of differing, varying information Going on right now from the Gaza and Israel conflict going on right now.
	So you've got people from both sides saying this is happening.
	No, this is happening.
	No, this is happening.
	Contradicting one another constantly.
	We're in the middle of the fog of war.
	So who really knows outside of speculation from experts?
	And you don't know if you can trust the experts, but thank God Thank God Ursula von der Leyen, Terry Bratton and the rest of the European Commission have decided that they are the one true arbiters of truth and can tell Elon where exactly the information is.
	When you say who knows, their answer to that is the EU Commission.
	They're the ones who know.
	So depending on their subjective evaluation of some very, very Questionable facts that we get from both sides because they're in the middle of a war, so propaganda will be rampant on both sides.
	Thank God that Ursula von der Linde and the others have appointed themselves the arbiters of truth.
	Yeah, they do actually make specific reference.
	I'm going to jump around a bit now, but let's go to this one.
	So this is what that Ferry Louis, no, Ferry Britain.
	So he basically wrote this sort of long letter.
	Trying to explain, you know, why they're doing this.
	And it mentions that bit that you were talking about there, Harry.
	So let me quote from you.
	Events in the Middle East triggered by Hamas terrorist attacks in Israel have raised the stakes even higher.
	The widespread dissemination of illegal content and disinformation linked to these events carries the clear risk of stigmatizing certain communities and destabilizing our demonstratic structures, not to mention exposing children to violent content.
	So let's just deconstruct that.
	Democratic structures basically just means the far leftist, radical consensus that the elites have found themselves in.
	People who want to vote against the mainstream is what he's concerned about there.
	So democracy is defined as the cosy, comfortable system that they all operate in.
	And they're not actually even elected.
	Whatever the elites benefit from is democracy.
	Whatever they don't benefit from is fascism.
	Yes.
	Which is how it works.
	Yes, exactly right.
	But you know, just to break that down.
	Are you guys thinking of the Norm Macdonald joke when I just re-read this line?
	The events in the Middle East carries a clear risk of stigmatising certain communities.
	Ah yes, imagine what would happen if a bunch of radical Muslim terrorists snuck a dirty bomb into New York, detonated it and killed millions of people, committed hundreds of atrocities.
	Wouldn't the blowback against law-abiding Muslims just be absolutely terrible?
	Yes, and that's exactly what he's gone to here.
	The concern with the events in Israel is that it might stigmatise certain communities and destabilise our democratic structures.
	Well, if you didn't mass import those certain communities into your democratic structure, the democratic structure wouldn't be unstable.
	Yeah, well and also we don't have a democratic structure, we have a sort of elitist structure.
	Oh yeah, an oligarchy layered over the top.
	Yes, but the issue they've got, what sort of brought this up in the news for me, is because at the moment they are trying to put together an enforcement structure, going back to that first tweet.
	Where basically they've now set out the disinformation, let me go back now to the bit with the disinformation.
	He's just going to flash up the website every so often like subliminal messaging.
	Yeah, better than what they flashed up in Fight Club.
	So look, the reason they say that they're doing it is to counter illegal content with respect to this Hamas thing.
	So for example, presumably the videos of Hamas killing people, that is what they're sort of proposing it as.
	I don't even know if you necessarily want to purge that from the internet.
	Because, I mean, that's the reality of, you know, things like... I remember seeing some horrific footage leaked out onto the internet after the Manchester Arena bombing.
	Do we really want to purge that completely?
	Because, I mean, this is the reality of multiculturalism.
	Well, we don't, because it's the reality of multiculturalism.
	But the elites which wish to ossify the narrative and don't wish, they want to have total narrative control and also ensure that dissenters can't have any credibility to their claims, of course they want to expunge that.
	Yeah, what they're actually doing by Well they're trying to do it more subtly than just outright banning it.
	What they're essentially trying to do is ban independent journalism because those people who are going to go on the ground and risk themselves going out putting themselves in dangerous situations so they can get on the ground footage of what's going on, that footage due to the new standards set by acts like this will be deemed as either being extreme or too violent for consumption by children
	Anything like that will be laid over as an excuse for why they can't put it out there when realistically the actual reason is just that we don't want people outside of the elite consensus being able to report on this and go and tell people what's actually going on because if you do that then people might understand that they're being lied to.
	Well it's the whole mindset that these people have of the population of children, we need to protect them.
	So when they do actually talk explicitly in some of this about effective safeguards for children or however they phrase it.
	Yeah there it is right there on the screen, new obligations for the protection of minors on any platform in the EU.
	Bear in mind these are the same people that are signed up to the UNAIDS principles that says that minors should be able to access gender affirming care and consent.
	And these are the same people that would have stood by for years and years and years, allowed Twitter as it existed previously, under its previous safety standards, to exist without any of this kind of scrutiny, when, as we know, when Elon took it over, there was a massive controversy about the level of content on there that was depicting child sexual exploitation.
	Which he massively reduced.
	Yeah.
	Which Yoel Roth didn't when he was in charge and he wrote his PhD thesis on why children should be able to use Grindr.
	All of a sudden somebody comes and takes charge of the institution who says actually I want there to be a more, a greater measure of free speech allowed on the platform.
	That's all of a sudden when they want to protect children.
	Prior to that when there was actual child sex exploitation going on on the platform They either didn't say anything or they certainly didn't enact anything this far-reaching.
	My broader point is they actually treat all of us like children.
	They don't just treat the children like this, they treat all of us like this.
	We all need to be protected from information they don't want us to have.
	I mean, there's a whole bunch of stuff in here about, you know, misinformation and disinformation.
	Conor, you actually remember what the difference is, don't you?
	Yeah, the Biden administration, in their bill for AI rights, because they want total algorithmic control of the internet and government institutions, set out a series of definitions of disinformation, misinformation, and malinformation.
	And of course, everything in the American Basel states were operating by their definitions.
	So, misinformation is false information unintentionally spread, or intentionally spread, by citizens on social media.
	Disinformation is false information spread by an enemy state as a means of propaganda to demoralize the citizenry during wartime.
	This is why they say it's a threat to our democracy.
	And malinformation is correct information shared outside the appropriate context.
	Who sets the appropriate context?
	Well, the stakeholders that form this policy, which is the regime-appointed experts that say, actually, we want to achieve racial equity here, so you can't bring up FBI crimes.
	So I've been through these documents, and they don't make any reference, or at least very little, to misinformation or malinformation, it's all disinformation.
	But presumably, once you've given yourself a whole load of legal powers as to what you can do with disinformation, um which is you know um false information spread by enemy actors which you know in theory i can kind of see that it's very easy to then use that set of tools against misinformation malinformation and then it's a question of who do you who defines what information is inaccurate spread amongst your citizens within your within your sort of political debate and and who decides which information is true but unhelpful and therefore needs to be
	There's a few problems with that as well.
	First of all, obviously we know as with the Patriot Act, it was set up to originally police foreign actors and terrorists at work in America, and it just ended up creating the NSA to massively spy and surveil on innocent Americans.
	Then there's also the idea that, well, this malinformation, sorry, disinformation, obviously easily conflated, and they deliberately conflate the definitions because Types like CNN will say that you're spreading disinformation even if you're a domestic actor, just to sabotage you.
	But they'll also say you're under the influence of disinformation.
	For example, Trump being a Russian asset and the Russians won in the election.
	Or, if we will stand up and clap in the Canadian Parliament for an actual member of the SS, we can't fall for Russian disinformation.
	The implication being that only the Russians would spread the conspiracy theory that we actually stood up in front of cameras and clapped for the SS.
	But that's actually malinformation, isn't it?
	It would be, but they're not being honest about the definitions, and so even if they're only using disinformation as the pretext to crack down on this, they will expand the definitions just to surveil and censor you.
	But no, the point I really kind of wanted to drive to with all of this stuff is the enforcement mechanism that they're going to grant themselves.
	So basically what they're going to do is they're going to set up some sort of committee Which is going to be behind closed doors and reports only to the EU Commission.
	So it's reporting to... So we don't get to see who's on... Well, we might get to find out who's on this panel, but we won't get to see their workings, their discussions, anything like that.
	It reports straight to the EU Commission, like Ferry and... I have it on good authority, they report straight to Moloch.
	Quite possibly.
	Or if there's a difference, really.
	And they're going to be the ones deciding, OK, what is disinformation?
	And basically, they haven't published their criteria for judging, you know, to your point.
	So they can basically just say anything that they don't like now is disinformation and can be taken down.
	And they've given themselves a real teeth with this bill.
	So they've defined the group that comes in for special attention, which is these very large online platforms, they call them.
	So it's basically, it's who you'd expect, it's Google, Apple, Twitter, it's all of the organisations save for Twitter who are more than happy to go along with this and probably help to fund the creation of these commissions.
	Well, so that's the thing.
	I mean, this one I think has got, because I'm not trying to make any case that, you know, Google and Apple and Microsoft are not pro-censorship.
	They very much are.
	But I think they are pro-censorship, but they can define themselves.
	So this is a sort of battle of control.
	This is an alien versus predator thing going on, where the EU is trying to say, no, we will be the ones who define it, not you platforms, because we know these platforms are censorious.
	But the EU is trying to say, OK, well, we want to be the ones who decides what is censorious.
	So who guts and disembowels me, is my question, is the question that we're asking.
	Which alien monstrosity is about to murder me?
	Exactly right.
	And they're giving themselves real teeth on this.
	So they can now find these very large online platforms, 6% of global revenues, which is a huge amount.
	So take Google as an example.
	Google have got revenues of about 280 billion.
	6% of that is 17 billion.
	per fine per instance of disinformation that they've decided is is you know information they don't want out there um that google leaves up 17 billion please so so they're going to want that and then that then gets you into thinking okay so how is how is tech going to respond to this and this is the interesting bit of this at the moment which is why i wanted to talk about it which is um google can come at this in a number of ways um one they could just pull out of europe yeah that's not going to happen yeah
	the argument against that is um i reckon they've got about 60 billion revenues coming from from europe even though they're going to be a big deal of money It's difficult to tell because they report Europe, Middle East and Africa as one entity, but it's roughly 60 billion of revenue coming from the EU, I would have thought.
	Yeah, you don't want to lose that.
	But the problem is, let's play it out.
	Let's say they pull out of the EU.
	What are they doing there?
	Well, they are protecting themselves from the effect of this spreading elsewhere.
	Because if other regulators see that the EU has crossed the line, and all the big tech platforms pull out of Europe, that will basically stop this kind of level of censorship.
	The censorship will remain with the tech platforms where they want to keep it.
	They want to keep it with themselves.
	I don't know if that's going to play out that way, just because even if they do a temporary withdrawal, they will have to have some form of compliance infrastructure in the works in anticipation of this law.
	And so, if the EU implement this, other places will start to implement nearly unanimous laws.
	This is why everyone's doing the 20-30 thing.
	If it comes top-down from some sort of think tank or an international body, it ends up going everywhere eventually.
	So GWPR was an example of that.
	A version of it spread to the US government.
	There's something else to consider as well, which is if they do not pull out, and even if foreign countries do not implement these same censorship laws, then the organizations like Google, like Twitter, like Facebook, they'll all have implemented the new compliance facilities to be able to comply with all of this, and then that will just get applied to every other country anyway.
	Yeah, that's why I made this comment on this one, which is when she says we're bringing European values into the digital world.
	That is more true than it sounds, because the way software works is you don't want to have two parallel versions of the same sort.
	Basically, software is you put an awful lot of money into writing really good code, and then you basically run it across everything in the entire world.
	So if these EU censorship programs go into effect, even if it's just the EU, These big platforms will probably write their code in such a way that it applies universally.
	So yes, she is right.
	The European censorship values are effectively being exported to the entire world.
	They're building themselves a European banhammer, but all of a sudden every other country is going to look like a big juicy nail.
	And also it's not like they aren't eager to comply with this, because we covered this last year in October, but the Intercept expose on the Biden administration for how they conducted themselves during COVID, you've got the internal Slack channels and various texts to Microsoft, Meta and Twitter heads, where the Biden administration were making targeted requests to censor, shadow ban and outright ban posts and accounts, down to Anthony Fauci parody accounts with minimal followers.
	Yeah.
	All of the executives were happy to do so because they wanted the same trajectory of travel.
	They were just frustrated at the means of enacting it.
	So eventually, even if this does become a squabble between the EU and Silicon Valley, it's only on the means of immiserating all of us.
	They all have the same intention.
	Yeah, so that's actually my second scenario.
	So the first scenario is that they pull out of the EU, which seems drastic, but my point is, you know, if they're earning 60 billion revenues from the EU and the cost of implementing this is, I don't know, a third or a quarter of that, at some point they think to themselves, okay, is it worth this market as opposed to, you know, protecting the rest of our market?
	So that's kind of my argument there.
	You've said that the revenue that they get from the EU, for Google for instance, is about 60 billion euros.
	So, even if they do get fined for any reason, that's 6%, 17 billion, that's still in the green for them.
	Well, that's one fine at 17.
	That's one fine, but you can be sure that they wouldn't allow it to go past one single fine.
	Well, from their perspective, the risk calculation might just be that, well, even if we do make one misstep, which we'll make sure is only the one, Then we're still coming out in the positive.
	Yeah, 17 billion is a hell of a lot for one misstep.
	I mean, if you could afford to get it down to... I don't think they would allow themselves to make that misstep anyway.
	I think they would just go complete censorious.
	Yeah, well, this is the second scenario.
	The second scenario is Uber compliance.
	And what I mean by that is every time they get a takedown request, they just implement it without even thinking about it.
	I mean, anything that even looks like it might come close to the line, Have they specified that there's any kind of appeals process for these organisations if the EU potentially asks them to take down something that doesn't fall under their jurisdiction?
	Okay, so weirdly this document, this Act does include some capacity to, if a YouTube video is taken down for example, you've got new powers to be able to appeal it.
	Um, so there are, there are ways for the individual to appeal against the platform, if they feel the platform's made a mistake.
	There is no mechanism, once the EU Commission has decided that something has to go, for that to be appealed against.
	It is just gone.
	And as I'm saying, because the fines are so large, in this, in Google's case it'd be 17 billion.
	Of course, I think what's going to happen is they're going to go to Uber compliance, which is they just instantly take down stuff.
	Now, what that means is that the EU have handed themselves a tool where basically the big tech companies have to choose between either pulling out of the EU or doing whatever they say, whenever they say.
	And what they've done is they've given themselves this ability to remove anything and they're the ones who get to define what it is.
	So this is a basically total online censorship power for the EU.
	Well it's funny you also say compliance.
	Reminder, the people that are policing this sort of stuff, the same kind of elites, who many of whom were in Jeffrey Epstein's little black book on the calendar.
	So do we really believe that they care about children's safety?
	And I say this because we now have multiple instances where Instagram knowingly allows videos of young European women to be filmed without their consent on nights out to be preyed upon by potential illegal boat migrants.
	Instagram redirects people that are clicking on hashtags that direct them towards child sexual exploitation material to say, we know that this directs you towards this material, would you like to continue anyway?
	So they know it exists on their platform and face no repercussions.
	So all that happens is certain things are defined as needing policing and compliance.
	So Misinformation or disinformation, whereas the actual child exploitation material will go overlooked and that won't be fined.
	So Google can allow the most heinous stuff, meta etc, on their platform to still exist and not face a fine, but they can still police the exact narrative that both Silicon Valley and the European Union want to crack down on.
	So that's why I don't think actually the fine power is as much of a worry for them as you maybe make out.
	So there is bits in there along the lines of what you're talking about.
	So it talks about the risk that they're most worried about.
	Disinformation, obviously, that's a bit that's particularly concerned.
	Election manipulation.
	Which I've been told has never happened.
	Yeah, that's the funny thing, isn't it?
	Election interference has never happened.
	Well, it did in 2016.
	Maybe the Bush one as well.
	And then it never happened after that.
	But cyber violence against women is what you're talking about there, and harms to minors online.
	Again, defining harms very loosely there.
	Yeah, so if it was just those latter two, if this bill was all about cyber violence against women, you know, I'd still have concerns over who's defining that and all the rest of it, and harms to minors and children, and the illegal stuff like the child porn and the Hamas shooting videos and stuff like that.
	If it was just that, you know, I don't think anyone would have that much of a problem with it.
	I mean, there's still issues around the edges.
	But it's all this bit that, you know, which is the key bit, which is the disinformation, the election, what do they call it?
	Manipulation.
	Crisis response mechanism in serious threat of public health and security crisis.
	So the next pandemic, you can't question the narrative.
	Again.
	Yes.
	Right.
	As they continue to redefine climate change as being a health condition that you can actively suffer from, then any amount of skepticism will be continually deplatformed and censored, and you're told that not only are you spreading malinformation, you're actively hurting other people's health.
	Same with misogyny and incel violence, so there goes half your segments, Dan.
	Well, yes.
	Oh God, that's a shame.
	But yeah, so this is the tussle I wanted to point out.
	I'm not saying that Big Tech is not pro-censorship.
	They are.
	And the EU is obviously pro-censorship.
	But there is this tussle going on, to be aware of, where the EU is saying, no, we are the censors, and Big Tech is saying, no, we are the censors.
	And they're both kind of fighting over this rope at the moment as to who gets to be the ultimate arbiter of this censorship.
	It's better for us if they're squabbling, actually.
	That's a good observation.
	Uh, possibly, possibly.
	It slows it down.
	It slows it down, but not if their squabbles just result in the same thing anyway.
	Just, sure, a month or two down the line.
	Oh wow, I get an extra month of being able to say the things that I need to, but then, you know, by the end of it they end up stronger because they're both completely in collusion with one another.
	So there was a good outcome from this, which is the big tech companies say, though, this is too onerous and therefore we're going to pull out the EU.
	And that breaks the regulatory momentum on this kind of stuff, and also it fosters a whole bunch of new EU-based competitors who can then emerge, who will then be below the threshold, and all that kind of stuff.
	So that's a golden scenario.
	Don't think that's probably going to happen.
	The other one is that big tech responds to this by saying, okay, fine, we do our censorship, you do your censorship, and we both just censor together, which is probably more likely.
	Ultra-compliance.
	Yes.
	Bit of a shame.
	We shouldn't have to deal with this, should we?
	No, would be nice.
	Alright, then I suppose on to the next one.
	We can do the tab.
	Wonderful.
	Fantastic.
	Speaking of things we shouldn't have to deal with, are you aware there's apparently a war on in some desert someplace?
	I had heard.
	Yeah, I've been informed.
	I was on holiday when it decided to happen.
	And then my controversial take on this that is going to affect absolutely everything, considering people keep asking me, is I don't think babies that have nothing to do with it should be blown up.
	Thanks for the TED Talk.
	That's a really impactful thing that I can put on a placard.
	Don't I feel good?
	I haven't thought of it like that, but now you say it, I think I'm inclined to agree, actually.
	Yes, I know, it's a really contentious take.
	Overall, frankly, I don't care about the long-standing conflict that both of these religions that I neither ascribe to have.
	I don't want to pay for it, I just don't want innocent civilians on either side getting killed, but my opinion on that influences nothing.
	I also don't want People who seem to be very motivated on either side, particularly the side that's really happy about a bunch of innocent people being massacred at a concert marching through my city streets when they should have no right to be here.
	Unfortunately, the immigration policies of our elites that have been conducted since before I was born have brought this issue to our shores.
	And so I'm going to go through a bunch of videos that I've been seeing on Twitter recently over the last couple of weekends that show A lot of people very invested in the conquest of a terrorist state of some region in the Middle East, and hopefully the creation of a global caliphate, celebrating it in my home city.
	And when you say lots of people slaughtered at a concert, are you talking about the Manchester Arena bombings?
	Oh no, we couldn't mention that.
	We can't look back in anger, Dan.
	Oh yeah, you can't retaliate on that one.
	Because that one, we had to hold up candles saying don't look back in anger, but the other one, for whatever reason, there's an alternative.
	That one, in particular, the British security state had all sorts of psyops going on and ready to go in the background for when it inevitably did happen because they were already aware that they knew it was going to happen eventually, something like that, because our own state despises us.
	If only the security thinking that went into stopping it in the first place was as good as making us forget it after it's already happened.
	That would be fantastic.
	But then again, if you recognise that it's a problem, you wouldn't be able to manufacture consent for the immigration policy that is slowly grinding down Britain into multicultural sludge and makes us easier to control, which I find quite intolerable.
	I also think it's important to remember as we go through this that a lot of the people who are out on the streets that we'll be looking at in a moment celebrating this and protesting in favor of Palestinians are not themselves Palestinian and are from countries who have outright stated that no, we will not be taking any Palestinian refugees if Israel does just decide to pave over all of the West Bank.
	Yeah, so there's a two-fold on that one.
	One, lots of them are actually the children of first-generation immigrants, so they're kind of LARPing.
	Two, lots of them are committed to the global Ummah, which is essentially the international Muslim race as they would conceptualize it, even though various factions and nationalities of Muslims don't like each other, like the Jordanians and the Egyptians won't take in any Palestinian refugees because they know the kind of character the Jordanians like.
	Despite the Jordanians probably being the closest to having any sort of claim that they should.
	Well, that's a three-state solution, isn't it?
	Egypt gets Gaza and Jordan gets the West Bank, and both Jordan and Egypt are like, no way.
	There's no way we're taking them.
	Well, I think the people who are protesting for this right now in the West are mainly, one, doing it for ethnic solidarity reasons, and two, doing it because they know that whether or not they're coming from a country that their own countries wouldn't take in, say like the Egyptians and the Jordanians and other people in this country, They know that a massive influx of Palestinian Muslims gives them an even greater share of power in these countries because that's an even larger voting bloc.
	That's more people from Islamic territories that can join in part of their ethnic enclave.
	Oh yeah and that's definitely one of the two remaining motivations I was going to mention.
	One, pure political expediency.
	I mean, even Marx a couple of hundred years ago recognized Islam was a great vanguard revolution to be forced to destabilize a culture to make it easily capturable by his brand of socialism.
	Quiet part out loud.
	Yeah, yeah, essentially so.
	And also the sort of self-flagellation and white guilt of their browns, so they must be good from various leftists.
	And there is also a genuine anti-Semitism angle, because some of them do just want to hate and kill Jews.
	20 pictures that will make white liberals go, OMG, let's throw away civilization.
	Yeah, so have you considered we can't have borders because I am crying?
	Anyway, speaking of things that we can't tolerate, if you'd like to subscribe to the website for as little as £5 a month, you'll get content like this, which is Josh's contemplation series, which in this episode, he and Stelios explain Karl Popper's paradox of tolerance and how it is exploited for things like repressive tolerance by Herbert Marcuse, and go and investigate that in your own time.
	But here, on the topic of things that I can't stand, let's open with There was a giant call to prayer ceremony held outside Downing Street.
	Now, bear in mind, in this country, which has an official established church, the Anglican Church, we currently are arresting Christians for silently praying in their head on the wrong street corner if they're in the proximity of an abortion buffer zone.
	But you can, after 203 people from varying countries, including the UK, have been abducted by Hamas, after women have been raped, after people have been blown up, after people have been murdered at a pop concert, you can go out in response to that and say, Allahu Akbar, I guess.
	I can just say, thank God there wasn't a truck apiece on that street.
	Yes, well obviously we wouldn't wish violence on any of these men, but as we'll see, lots of the words they're using are wishing violence on us.
	I just want to demonstrate that straight outside the Hall of Power, we have a genuflection to a foreign culture, while also arresting people that are practicing our own national religion.
	The current Conservative government is not your friend because they are allowing this to happen literally here on their doorstep.
	But alright then.
	So then, flash forward to this past weekend.
	So we've had about 100,000 people descending on London.
	There are also other protests in Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds, Salford, Dublin, Cardiff.
	You know, the epicentres of multiculturalism where diversity is definitely the strength.
	They came to protest what exactly?
	Hamas not killing more?
	Because there is an undercurrent here that, again, even if you have legitimate criticisms of Israel, I don't want to be giving foreign aid to any country, I don't love Israel any more than I love India or Canada, for example, but part of the problem here is that this is in direct response to a bunch of innocent civilians getting butchered.
	So you can just imply that they're saying they deserved it, Well, in answer to your, in answer to your question, you know, why are they doing it?
	I think the, what you said, the sentence before that was, you know, a show of strength.
	I mean, this is, this is all a show of strength.
	It is, you know, we, we are, um, we are believers.
	Um, you know, look at how powerful and how many of us there are.
	The media collusion in this as well, it pisses me off, right?
	Sorry Conor, do you mind if- Oh yeah, do you want to go back to the title?
	Is that what you were going to bring up?
	I was going to mention that.
	The absolute disgusting lies being spread here by just framing it as Brits march for Palestine.
	Average British man.
	Brits march for Palestine.
	No, no, but foreigners that hate us.
	Let's call it what it is.
	They believe in a foreign ideology that is antithetical to the tradition and religion of England.
	And even if they are second generation immigrants, they would clearly be happier somewhere else because they're calling for an Islamic Republic.
	I suggest we give them what they want, not by bringing it here, but by permanently deporting them elsewhere.
	Because that is the only way you bring a peaceful resolution, which we all want.
	This particular conflict because they don't want peace they want violence and they're literally calling for it and I just wanted to include this particular article because the Daily Mail does some good on the ground stuff where they just compile a bunch of images from I mean look at the amount of people turning out for this.
	I would just like to say you didn't see the outrage here from people of this ethnicity when there were reports about the grooming gangs and they came out and said oh don't characterize all of us as this You know, this wasn't happening.
	It wasn't a show of solidarity for all the white girls being raped by Pakistani men.
	Yeah, there was a solidarity, an ethnic solidarity of silence.
	Yes.
	Because there's two ways to show ethnic solidarity.
	One, which is to go out publicly and protest in favour of all of the people that you associate yourself with.
	And there's closing ranks and keeping quiet about wrongs that you know people that you are associated with within your religious or ethnic group.
	When they've done something wrong, you stay silent about it.
	You shut your mouth because you know that that can reflect badly on you.
	With this, they know that they have Complete collusion with the media class and with the political class to get away with this because if you had any sort of similar protests going on, say for instance British groups decided to come out and protest in these kinds of numbers what goes on in Zimbabwe and what happens to the white populations of South Africa, the police wouldn't just crack that down you would have You'd have the riot police, you'd have the special forces come out waving guns at these people because it would be classified as an act of nationalist terror.
	It would be classified as an act of white supremacist, white nationalist terror because we are not allowed to show ethnic solidarity, we are not allowed to have ethnic preference, we are only allowed to have outgroup preference.
	And not just that.
	It disgusts me.
	The conspiracy of silence is mandated from the top because when you said shut their mouths, remember, Naz Shah, who after she retweeted a Noam Jones parody account saying that the women and girls who had been raped by Pakistani Muslims in cities like Manchester had to shut their mouths for the sake of diversity.
	After she had shared that, she didn't face discipline.
	She was appointed head of community cohesion by the Labour Party.
	This is sanctioned by the regime, so it is fine for Native British girls to be abused by immigrants.
	Or blown up.
	Yes.
	As soon as the immigrants come and march in the street for other people getting blown up overseas, then the police take a very light touch and actually, as we'll see, an even heavier handed touch to the people that showed up and went, oh, bit far lads.
	Yeah, I know.
	I was going to mention that as well.
	So no pride in apartheid LGBT plus for a free Palestine.
	Also, I mean, no pride in Palestine either.
	These people might be shocked to discover.
	Yeah, this is just a sign saying lambs for slaughter.
	Well, in Gaza, they do have a sort of gravity-assisted transition program for the teas at least.
	Oh, wait, it's in the Salford Keys as well.
	I went to university right here.
	This is the media city.
	That's for the BBC in the background.
	Yeah, some people I went to university with probably work there and were probably in this crowd.
	Well, yeah, I'd imagine a decent number of those people are administrators or employees of one of those two buildings.
	Future producers who will not be calling Hamas terrorists, as is the editorial mandate over at the BBC.
	Actually, I'm glad you brought the BLGBT thing.
	I'm going to skip ahead one link and go back to it because someone decided to show up Showing intersectional solidarity at the Trafalgar Square protest in London with an LGBT sign.
	And one diversity took the sign, the Progress Pride flag, and as you can see here, he nicks it off them and decides to run around and trample on it on the street.
	As Lois said, friend of the show, admiration isn't always mutual.
	Turns out they're not on board with the current thing.
	The only foreign aid that I would be in favour of was if we took our foreign aid budget and every time somebody waved a flag, which was like, you know, LGBTQ4Palestine, is that we immediately flew them out to, you know, Gaza and, you know, gave them a flag and said, you know, go give that a wave, see what happens.
	I couldn't endorse violence in that, Dan, but of course because I actually recognize what goes on in Gaza unlike these people.
	Well, you saying that implies that there would be some kind of guaranteed violence committed to that person for doing such a thing, and I thought that Palestine and other parts of the Middle East are better than that.
	This is what at least the protesters are trying to tell us, but excuse me.
	This is so sad.
	This is the capital of our country.
	It's on Nelson's column.
	Yes.
	And what we see here is a huge horde of, you know, people committed to it.
	Foreign barbarians.
	Foreign barbarians.
	Yeah.
	Basically putting on a show of force.
	on our central landmark.
	And desecrating it as well.
	I mean, they've decided to spray graffiti, leave litter everywhere, as TPU guys document.
	Go give them a follow.
	They're fantastic in doing this stuff.
	Absolute gentlemen.
	And they literally graffiti Nelson's column.
	You know, symbol of British victory.
	All of our heritage.
	No, Free Palestine, just graffitied on it after you're standing on it and throwing stuff all over it.
	Speaking of our capital city, that Sadiq Khan has made excellent, TfL, which I have to brave every day.
	There was a Tube driver who actually led a chant, Free Palestine, over the tannoy on the Tube.
	He's been since referred to the British Transport Police.
	I don't expect he'll lose his job, gonna be honest.
	I mean, maybe it's obvious, isn't it?
	Very difficult for a Tube driver to lose their job.
	They've got a very strong union.
	Yeah, again, why is there a population that exists to pack tubes out that you wish to placate for this kind of sentiment?
	Mind if I said, if I play some of the audio?
	Yeah, sure, please.
	Yes, of course.
	Well, as you said, there's a show of ethnic solidarity on display within this tube carriage.
	It doesn't matter about the character of Hezbollah and Hamas, it matters about, are we the same colour and are we the same religion, and are they furthering the same goal?
	Well, there's one thing about it as well, which is that they know that they can get away with it, and they know that on a certain level, there are white people, I know, shocking in London,
	on that tube carriage that they're on right there and they will know that on a certain level whether or not these people say that they are you know completely in favor of all of the current thing it makes them uncomfortable because there comes to a certain point when you recognize a tipping point in ethnic representation in your street in your city where your brain consciously or not will recognize hold up i'm in the minority in here
	I'm in danger here because you will recognize, one way or not, other peoples do not have the same behavioral standards.
	They do not have the same standards of, shall we say, a fair fight.
	Well, I went through that process.
	Whereas British people, generally speaking, in the Tucker Carlson way, the Anglo-Saxon fighting standards tends to be you take a man one-on-one in honorable combat.
	Foreign people have no aversion to ganging up.
	On other people.
	So you know that there is a certain aspect of this where they're taking a pleasure in cheering along this because they see it as a display of dominance.
	It's a display of dominance.
	It's an aggression against the native white population.
	Whether people want to say that you're reading too much into it, Harry, that's racist of you to think, Harry.
	That's the fact of it.
	That's the honest truth.
	It isn't reading too much into it.
	This image here shows basically in our central capital, if you say something objectionable, If someone says something objectionable and you want to stand up against it based on British values, you will be outnumbered.
	So this is a visual demonstration of what census data have been telling us for ages, and the violence that will come as a consequence is going to be inevitable.
	Yeah, so I was just going to say, you know, I went through this a few years ago.
	I started off living in very central London and eventually sort of kept on moving further and further out trying to find somewhere.
	um sensible i'll just put it like that and and eventually realized there is nowhere so even if you're moving out to um you know the end of the tube line you you can't get there you basically have to you have to give up and leave there are some very expensive and gated communities within london that still have somewhat yeah and and i know people population of the natives but they're ridiculously expensive Yeah, but I know people who live in those.
	What do they do when they want to buy a pint of milk?
	They end up leaving these gated communities and ending up absolutely surrounded.
	And I won't go into it now because we haven't got time, but I can give you some examples of these people who live in these gated communities who suddenly found themselves absolutely surrounded by, what shall we call them, urban or scholarly gangs.
	Well, all you need to do is go onto the ukdrill.com website to find a map that they give you of the territories of these scholarly gangs, which the Met Police are more than well aware of.
	These people write songs about these scholarly activities they get up to, and the Met do nothing.
	Well, let's speak about the Met Police, actually.
	And I'm speaking, funnily enough, as one of those people that lives on the fringes of London, because I live on the Kent side of it, where we don't have a tube line.
	And even then, you can start to see the diversity and enrichment Creeping in.
	So that's more or less where I ended up.
	Lord knows where I'll end up eventually.
	So the police did show up to monitor the march and they got chased off by a bunch of teenagers shouting.
	Yeah.
	Because they weren't willing to step in.
	Because fundamentally, there's enough of them to... If that was a Covid protest, with that many guys, they would be running in with batons and they'd be having a whale of a time.
	Specifically the Muslim woman that supported Terrorism and said kafars are drinking out of my cup would have been hitting them with batons.
	So this is why the police fundamentally, they either disagree with it.
	And there are elements within the police that, that endorse the message of the protest, which we know because they have been waving the flags.
	They dropped the English language requirement in some places.
	So they are just trying to conscript various foreign nationals that agree with the ideology, or they're so petrified with diversity, inclusion and equity indoctrination that they're worried about being perceived as racist.
	If they step in, even when abuse and actual objects are being hurled at them.
	And they did, they, they, they not only that there were people breaking the law here.
	This fella, decided to send the scaffolding.
	This is right near Tottenham Court Road, actually.
	I was there last night and it's, it's public street.
	He decides to climb up the scaffolding, a private building, comes down, the police holding his flag for him, just give it back and just say, Oh, naughty boy.
	Can I, can I speak for a moment on the subject of the escape attempts that you, for instance, Dan and some of your friends are trying to make of these particular areas of London, which are becoming completely, they're becoming an ethnic deluge.
	of mixed and multi-cultures who, it turns out, don't always get along with one another.
	Exhibit similar antisocial behaviour.
	This is one of the reasons that, while I understand the utility to a certain extent of, say, building more houses for the purposes of property prices in the UK, I am very against the idea because populations like this, when they come to our countries, they congregate I am very against the idea because populations like this, when they come to our And the more you destroy the green areas of Britain and you take the small rural areas and you continually urbanize them and urbanize them and urbanize them,
	At first, yes, you will find that they will be places where the exodus of people coming from towns and cities like London will be going to.
	But what you're creating is more and more nexus points for these kinds of populations to spring up in the few parts of Britain which are still relatively untouched by it.
	Well, I'm in favour of both deportations and building a few more houses.
	But I mean, there are plenty of things that you could do.
	I'm saying with the way that the country is at the moment, and with the potential of, who knows, a million plus Palestinian refugees coming in.
	God, if we do that, that would be ridiculous.
	There are some fairly low effort things that aren't going to be too triggering for the soft liberal establishment.
	For example, you could apply animal butchering laws uniformly, which is basically to say outlaw hallow meat.
	Yeah, you could do that.
	A couple of changes to the welfare system.
	that don't incentivize you bringing people in.
	There was a few things that you could do that would turn that mass influx into a trickle or possibly an outflow.
	One of the things you have to learn is they don't want to.
	And I'm not saying you, I'm saying to the audience at home, those who maybe stumbled across this channel and haven't seen our segments before, the police are there in numbers, in force.
	To protect these people.
	Yeah, that's what they're actually there for.
	Not to protect you from them.
	They endorse both the message and the means of the protest, and so they are applying the law intentionally.
	Well, ultimately, the police exist to make sure that you pay up your taxes to the state.
	And if the state feels that it can get more tax revenue by importing people, then they will support that as well.
	Even if said imported populations decide to just openly attack and fight with the police?
	Again, there's five minutes of this where they're just lobbing objects at them, punching them, surrounding them.
	Was there a report of how many of these people were arrested?
	Ten.
	Ten of a hundred thousand, by the way.
	You compare that to, again, the lockdown protests, which I try to go on as many of them as I can.
	The lockdown protests were uniformly peaceful and well-mannered.
	And we got attacked by the police repeatedly.
	And they didn't hold back in the slightest.
	And yet here we are with a bunch of group attacking them and they get the kid gloves.
	Yeah, well- Disgusting.
	TPUK again, five police were injured, only 10 arrests total.
	The Met Police decided to comment on this.
	They said, as you can see, the numbers in Whitehall have reduced dramatically towards the end of the day.
	We thank everyone for their cooperation.
	Only made one or less in relation to an incident last week.
	That was that was the prior one as well.
	Oh, one arrest!
	Oh, how victorious!
	That was a choice.
	Yes.
	Because we can see all the criminal behavior on display, on video.
	So you making one arrest isn't a victory, isn't a demonstration of low criminality in an orderly protest.
	It's a demonstration that you tacitly agree with the message and the means of conducting the protest.
	And again, they were disrespecting the cenotaph, the war memorial that allows this country, the men that fought for it, that allows the country to exist.
	The thing that honors them, Earlier they set up a massive Palestinian stand right by it, right next to Downing Street.
	It just displays relentless colonialism.
	Who was arrested?
	This is something interesting that happened.
	Who was arrested at the weekend's protest?
	This man shouting racist abuse in Whitehall.
	He was the only one, apparently, right?
	Tonight he's in custody, arrested on suspicion of inciting racial hatred.
	Now, of course, I know suspicion is the term used until you're prosecuted, but But what was he saying?
	That's quite interesting.
	It must have been pretty extreme if he was the only one.
	May Allah's curses be on the infidels.
	May Allah's curses be on the Jews.
	Right, okay.
	I don't think, I think that's cut and dry a little bit, maybe, but I don't think he was the only one.
	Excuse me for not thinking everyone involved was peaceful, prosperous and multicultural.
	Right, they can graffiti Nelson's column, they can protest around the Cenotaph, they can have a mass rallying protest and prayer outside of Downing Street.
	Nothing happens until This is something that Matt Walsh raised with Nikki Haley.
	So Nikki Haley complained, given that she's the war hawk on a presidential campaign at the moment, that all universities that support BDS or Hamas at this time, like Harvard where I think it's 30 student organizations signed a letter in support of the Palestinians, should be defunded.
	And Matt Walsh went Where were you for the last 30-odd years when they had anti-white racism on campus?
	Should that be defunded as well?
	It is only capable of the defence being mounted when you are playing within the intersectional framework of oppressed classes being assaulted.
	Yeah, just on that, Harvard have lost huge amounts of private donations in the last couple of weeks.
	It hasn't happened for the, to your point, it hasn't happened in the previous years when they've been advocating the other things they've been advocating against other groups, you know, for example, you know, white men, for example, none of that got them, none of that lost them a penny.
	It was only when all of a sudden everybody realized, oh my god, Harvard's discriminating against the Asians?
	Oh, well now they've gone a step too far for me.
	They can discriminate against white people all they like, but not my precious Asians.
	That might be something that you support.
	More Asians for Dan.
	Only the women.
	If I might say something slightly contentious as well that I'm sure will be clipped out of context but it's because our enemies like to smear us.
	We've heard endlessly for the last few years about white nationalism being on the rise and Charlottesville and anti-Jewish conspiracy theories and the like.
	How much fuel do you think it gives to the fire of said anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists if all of a sudden we only care about ethnic tensions, mass immigration, and racial hatred on university campuses when it targets Jews?
	Because it looks like the power structures only care about Jewish interests rather than a broad brush Um, commitment to the principle of anti-discrimination and non-violence.
	Again, as you said earlier, I'm not interested in ethnic conflict.
	I just think apply the law equally, but this is the outcome that you're going to get.
	Very careful with the fire you're playing with.
	You can't apply the law equally because then you'll get unequal outcomes and they can only be explained by racism.
	Like when Dan was saying, here's a few simple things that we could do to stop the inflow and turn it into an outflow.
	One of the other things that you could do, and I know this hurts some of My instincts, and some of your instincts, and certainly it hurts some of Josh's instincts, but we have some quite stringent business regulations within this country.
	Now, those business regulations are not applied evenly, depending on the ethnicity of the person who owns the business.
	If we were to begin to apply and enforce those evenly, you would find that your local row of 12 Turkish barbers in a row would quickly thin out, and the people there who are employing all of their cousins would probably decide it's more profitable to return home.
	Well, speaking of applying the law equally, let's look at one rally that was also had and whether or not you think this constitutes a call for violence.
	There was a there was a fella here.
	This is the Met Police responding to a clip.
	Scroll up slightly.
	There is.
	Stop.
	Right.
	OK.
	What's the solution to liberate people from the concentration camp called Palestine?
	Jihad.
	This is from the Hib Ut Tahrir demonstration.
	Now, if you're not familiar with that organisation, they're a proscribed terrorist organisation in Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Germany, China, not the UK though, funnily enough.
	And to read a little bit from their Wikipedia page, quote, once established, the caliphate will expand into non-Muslim areas through invitation, Immigration.
	And through military jihad, so as to expand the land of Islam and diminish the land of unbelief.
	Now, obviously, you're thinking, what far-right website was that pulled from?
	Their own documents.
	You can go and check them in the footnotes of the Wikipedia page.
	So, they're openly declaring war.
	They say, Muslim armies on their placards and their banners there, and the Met Police decide to... Nah, it's alright with us, Gov.
	The word jihad has a number of meanings, but we know the public will commonly associate it with terrorism.
	Noted Muslim scholars in the Met Police, we have specialist counter-terrorism officers here in the operations room with particular knowledge in this area.
	They have assessed the video, filmed at Hizat-ut-Tahir protest in central London today, and have not identified any offences arising from the specific clip.
	However, recognising the way language like this will be interpreted by the public and the visible impact it will have, officers have identified the man involved and will be speaking to him shortly to discourage any repeat of similar chanting.
	Let me just bring back that point that you made at the beginning of, you know, we are now arresting people who stand there on a street corner and pray silently.
	So they are sufficient biblical scholars, but they can work out that somebody needs to be arrested because of what they're saying inside their own head on a street corner.
	But this guy standing next to an Islamic army banner, putting out a chant which I can only presume is in favour of these terrorist attacks, you know, that isn't.
	Yes.
	Well, it's similar to how... How screwed up is this country?
	Well, it's similar to how, for instance, the ANC singing Kill the Burr was purely metaphorical.
	Yes.
	This is essentially Theresa May quoting her favourite Quranic verses.
	I bet if Tommy went out on the street and basically copied that speech word for word, but just changed the context to be, you know... This is what they were saying.
	Yes, it would be banned.
	He would be arrested and jailed.
	Yeah, John sent me this little video that he decided to tweet out from said organisation where some of the speakers at the protest were also speaking at their Britain conference.
	Again, prescribed terrorist organisation allowed to have an annual conference in Britain.
	The reason is the power structures agree with it.
	Hang on, I do actually agree with that bit though.
	I was going to say, I agree with the sentiment of what he's saying.
	It's just a shame you're only allowed to say such things in the UK unless you're a member of the more dissident faction of the Tory party.
	So for those listening, he's basically ranting about the UK will no longer be able to pump its liberal filth with LGBT filth and its feminist filth into the Muslim world.
	And presumably use NGOs to funnel money.
	So I actually agree with that.
	Yeah, sure, but that's only because he's going to reverse engineer the sewage pipe to allow all the turds from the Muslim world to flow straight into the UK, rather than turn off and destroy the pipe itself, which I'd much prefer to do so.
	But who are the police policing?
	Well, there was a gentleman who brought an English flag to a demonstration, and he just said, if I get any hint of racism, there will be people be arrested.
	So you can carry flags akin to the ISIS flag.
	I saw Callum did a tweet a little while ago.
	One chance and kill the Jews.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Curse upon the Jews.
	We need a global jihad.
	All of those things are just peaceful and scholarly.
	The curse upon the Jews part is maybe the one bit of the overstepping the line that might get you in trouble.
	But if you say anything else, you're fine.
	You've got to think, what's going on here?
	The police have been trained, so that's some young copper who's been through all his police training.
	All his police training is about the worst thing that you can do is racism.
	Global Jihad is a bit of a no-no, but you know, we can overlook it.
	It's kind of akin to stealing a grape from a greengrocer's.
	Well, you don't want to be racist, do you?
	But racism is the highest crime.
	And that is all of the programming that this young officer has been received since day one of signing up.
	We also, you are being institutionally gaslit because if you observe the fact the word jihad is synonymous with Muslim violence from an organization that deliberately says we're going to use military action to subvert the UK and make it part of the global Muslim caliphate.
	If you observe that is their intention because they say the bloody thing on camera then you will be gaslit into saying actually it's an internal struggle and it just means they're grappling with the I don't know exactly what group they came from.
	mind this is in direct response to an actual war going on and if you notice anything different you're the racist again it's just disarm you against putting up a fight against the cultural demographic change yeah very well so that is that it is all of this it is a process of disarming us against what's happening and here's the perfect example of that just to basically finish up on the the pub right down from trafalgar square there are a couple of lads that had the england flag in there now again i don't know exactly what group they came from
	this is not stated in any of the videos, et cetera.
	Big Baz walking through the door there to Stone Cold Steve Austin's music, I presume.
	But the police are just standing outside.
	They're not preventing the mob of banner-clothed youths, part of the protest, that obviously have the intent to besiege the pub and attack the occupants.
	No arrests happening there, when they're standing outside demonstrating their intent to attack.
	And it's because they are mandated to stand between them, but, frankly, It's hard not to suggest that they wouldn't rather be out of the way and allow the chips fall where they might.
	Well, I reckon it's probably necessary because Baz could take all that lot.
	Oh yeah.
	Let's be honest, I'm not trapped in here with you, you're trapped in here with me, lads.
	That would be that situation, because you just know that there's probably a row of four or five extra Bazes.
	And that's like, how do you quantify infinity?
	A phallic of Bazes, yes.
	Final one to mention, this is something that you forwarded to me, just in case you weren't convinced that your power establishment hates you.
	One of the Hamas leaders got a council house recently, he's been here since the 1990s.
	This is fugitive Mohamed Kassim Sowolha, and he fled to the UK in the 1990s and bought a council house and got a £112,000 discount on top of it.
	This is why you can't afford property in London, because as well as housing a lot of Somalis for free in London.
	They're also giving council housing to actual fugitives in your capital city.
	Well, let's not be unfair to Nima Parvini's lookalike.
	Let's read his CV.
	I was going to say Jihadi Q from Star Trek, Yep, so when he arrived in the UK, of course he, oh he didn't cut all ties, oops, he continued to work for Hamas, holding secret talks about revitalising terrorist acts in Israel and helping to launder money to support activities in Gaza and the West Bank, calling to a US Department of Justice indictment in 2004.
	So we've known about him in 2004, again, gets a council house.
	Recently, it's 2019, he took part in the official Hamas delegation to Moscow, where he met Vladimir Putin's Deputy Foreign Minister, served on Hamas's Politburo between 2013 and 2017, He was pictured with Ismail Haneyi, the leader of Hamas in 2010 and 2012.
	He later became director of Finsbury Park Mosques, where he took over after Egyptian Islamist Abu Hamza, you know, hook-handed man.
	So, obvious moderate, great representative of the community, I'm so glad we've imported all these people in here that want to destroy our country, and I'm really happy that some Middle Eastern ethnic-religious conflict is happening in my home city.
	Thanks very much.
	Alright, sorry about depressing you boys.
	That's alright, I'll depress us all even further because I think this actually ties in quite nicely with my segment and if it's going to go a little bit long, because we've gone a bit long so far, I reckon we maybe just extend the comments section a little bit.
	Why not?
	If we have to, we've got a bit more freedom to do that now.
	On the basis of anarcho-tyranny, the misapplications of laws, the complete asymmetry of the applications of laws, one of the things, if you've been paying any attention to American politics over the past few years, is that you know that supposedly a lot of young gifted black men, often architects, scholars, some people just going for a casual jog, have been murdered for no reason by both white men, civilians, and white police officers.
	One of the most successful pieces of propaganda that we've had over the past few years is the campaign to remember their names.
	Even in the UK, BLM and other organisations have had such an impact that we are able to know the names of many of these people.
	Al Jazeera, the most trustworthy of news organisations, has this handy-dandy interactive image scroller here, where you can know their names.
	Black people killed by the police in the US.
	So this is remembering the joggers, is it?
	This is remembering all of these people who were just on the cusp of winning a Nobel Peace Prize, or making some kind of breakthrough in science.
	To be very present, though.
	To be fair, if this was set up after the BLM protests, they probably all got quite a stash of Nikes at home.
	Perhaps, perhaps, but a lot of these names, some of them I don't remember, but then you can find the ones that you absolutely will remember.
	George Floyd, everybody knows George Floyd's name.
	George Floyd, what happened to him, his death, which I will not be saying was a murder, but his death was one of the things that kickstarted all of these protests in 2020 and all of the riots to the point where we had protests going on in the UK.
	They did not erupt into the same levels of violence, but for some reason, I, Connor, Dan, all know about the fentanyl and meth-assisted overdose of a former career criminal whilst in the custody of the Minneapolis, Minnesota Police Department, specifically Derek Chauvin, while he was being held in a restraint position that was actually pretty normal for what they're taught as police officers.
	Brianna Taylor, a woman who was in the apartment of her boyfriend, who was a drug dealer, who was being investigated by the police, who, when receiving a knock on the door from the police late at night, decided to, because he thought it was a rival gang, he decided to open fire, and she got caught in the crossfire as the police were fired back.
	Can I mention George Floyd very quickly?
	Because this is on Al Jazeera, and Al Jazeera is funded by the Qatari government.
	Yes.
	Are you saying that these people might be quite subversive and want to sow instability within the West?
	Well, in the recent Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Hamas did bring up George Floyd as an example of why the U.S.
	can't comment about racism.
	And the Chinese did the same thing at the U.N.
	when the U.S.
	mentioned about the weak concentration camps.
	So this is a crowbar for America's and the broader West's enemies to use to beat them over the head with a cudgel of not living up to their own standards.
	Michael Brown, let's not forget, the original BLM martyr, hands up, don't shoot, is not what happened.
	Michael Brown, a man who was trying to assault a police officer who had gunpowder residue on his hands after he was shot because he was trying to wrestle the gun away from a police officer, which Hate to break it to people, if you are in the process of trying to wrestle someone's gun away from them, and you are at such a distance where you can actively touch it, you are no longer classified as unarmed, as far as I'm concerned, because you have the potential, snatching that gun, turning it back on the person.
	But, we know these people's names.
	For some reason, I am in the position where I have to know the names of a few of these people, because it's so important that I know that Dante Wright was someone killed by the police but that's how successful this campaign has been and I think that we the dissidents should have a similar campaign that we really need to know the names of the people who have been victimized by those like Michael Brown by those like George Floyd in his previous career as a career criminal because
	Yes, they can make these handy dandy interactive picture galleries of here's all of the people that we say were shot by the police for no particular reason.
	They were just good boys that didn't do nothing.
	When you begin to look into it, you start to see that the misapplication, asymmetrical application of the law means that there are a lot more cases that you can find if you dig into local news of people who are white, who have been victimized by black communities, where the people who have victimized them have got off from it, and a lot of mistrials, misuses of the law,
	I would say, like with George Floyd's supposed killer, Derek Chauvin, who is currently languishing in prison and appealing for his sentence for something that, for a death that realistically, other than the the fact that he just happened to be there when it happened didn't have anything to do with him.
	Before I get into those details...
	You should visit the website.
	One of the things that we would like to do recently is have a debate now that we have the new studio that can fit more than two people in it at a time.
	And you took part in this debate on liberalism on Josh's show, Contemplations, where it's you and Carl v. Josh and Stelios, and I heard that things got a bit more heated than people were expecting.
	They were unexpectedly contentious.
	Myself and Carl enjoyed it very much.
	Josh did say he had a headache at the time, so he wasn't feeling under the weather, but we covered so much content.
	He does look a bit fed up here, doesn't he?
	What was your proposition that you were arguing?
	Oh, liberalism has basically destroyed everything.
	Okay.
	And Stelios is an ardent defender because he's still a political liberal.
	You say it like a slur.
	I love Stelios and we want the same world, I just think he's sorely mistaken.
	We went over exactly why each other's positions, we didn't think they were tenable, and we went over so much that we're actually going to do a part two.
	When you say liberalism, you mean liberalism in the English and European perspective, not the American perspective?
	Uh, Josh was defending the American perspective, Sedos was defending the political tradition, Carl and I were saying that they have politically metastasized and elongated, based on their original premises, into a universal acid that's destroying all traditions and social expectations.
	So liberalism is kind of societal autoimmune disease, where you lose your ability to defend against foreign invaders?
	Exactly.
	That's it.
	See?
	Dan's on side already.
	There you go, so if you're interested in watching that you can subscribe to the website for as little as £5 a month and I'll give you access to all of the videos that we've got on there and all of the articles.
	We do lots and lots of videos and lots of work on here that we put a lot of work into so you won't regret it, trust me.
	But what I wanted to highlight was I saw this, and this is from a case from 2021 that was judged in court last year at the end of 2022.
	But it really made me think that there are so many cases of situations like this where somebody was basically just defending themselves against an aggressive attacker who happened to be black, who happened to be from a protected minority, defends himself individually.
	In the course of defending himself, the other person ends up dead.
	And because of the fact that you defended yourself against the protected minority, you have to be punished for it.
	You need to be held up as a political persecution to let everybody know what happens if you mess with the order as it exists right now.
	Because I am yes, you are no, who are a great account that you should follow on Twitter, um, was involved, uh, posted this image.
	And this, this is a gentleman called Barry Washington Jr.
	And here's his TikTok, where he states, if your boyfriend white, you single to me, F Timmy can do.
	And he seemed to live up to that statement, which is that I will harass your girlfriend if you're a white guy, because I think that you're not going to do anything about it.
	So he decided he was going to take the F around route.
	And this gentleman here, Count Dankula by the looks of it, Ian Cranston, Count Dankula's American cousin, decided that he was going to administer a healthy portion of Find Out because he shot this gentleman because, as this headline so eloquently states, because he gave his girlfriend a compliment.
	I suspect there's a bit more to it.
	They're trying to position this in an Emmett Till situation, aren't they?
	Yes, they are trying to.
	Seriously, as far as you look into every single case of something like this, as far as I have looked into, Emmett Till is the only one.
	And that's going all the way back to Jim Crow era South in the 1950s.
	He's the only one.
	You could even remotely make a case for it being an unjustified murder and even then there are a lot of complications in it which suggest that the it's not justified but suggest that the case itself was a lot more nuanced.
	For instance the involvement of two black men in his murder.
	Right.
	People don't often report on that but iHypocrite has a number of good videos on it that you should watch if you want a better perspective of what was going on and people were saying in the comments something like this His compliment was actually hey wanna F and then got hostile after being told to go away and I decided to look a bit more into this and saw that people have been commenting on it saying that the United States government doesn't recognize a right to self-defense if the assailant is black.
	Let's read through a bit of these highlighted paragraphs from an article which I've got in the next link.
	This is the most relevant information though.
	So the sentencing, and this was going on at the end of last year, ends with what has been one of Central Oregon's most high-profile trials in recent years.
	It's been more than 14 months since Cranston shot Washington.
	An unarmed black man, unarmed always being a very very slippery term in these situations, Following an altercation between the two outside the Capitol Bar in downtown Bend, prosecutors have said the fight began between them after Washington flirted with Cranston's fiancee, Alison Butler.
	In the trial, Cranston's defense team argued that their client acted in self-defense, noting that, and there is no refutation of this, this is confirmed and if you look at the photos you can see he was bruised because of this, Washington had punched Cranston twice in the head before shots were fired and that Cranston feared significant injury if Washington punched him again.
	It's a Trayvon Martin situation.
	That it is.
	George W. Zimmerman caught him prowling around, he'd already been excluded from school because of burglary so he had a reason to suspect criminal activity.
	Let's not Forget as well that George Zimmerman was smeared outright by the media who later went on to admit that they had edited the phone call that George Zimmerman had made to the police by editing out all of the parts that made it clear that he wasn't a racist.
	They edited together different lines of the discussion to make it sound like he was just, oh he's a black guy so therefore I'm suspicious.
	He was providing a description to the police to be accurate so they could arrive on scene.
	And as soon as George Zimmerman asked Trayvon Martin what he was doing there, Trayvon jumped on top of him and started slamming his head into the concrete, at which point Zimmerman feared for his life and shot Trayvon Martin.
	But he was just wearing a hoodie, bro.
	If I was Barack Obama, I would have a son just like Trayvon.
	I believe Zimmerman was confirmed by a medical examiner to actually have skull fractures because his head had been slammed against the concrete so hard.
	Once again, all you need to do, what is best to do is to avoid going and looking at the mainstream reporting of these events after it's happened, after it's turned into a national sensation.
	What is best to do is try and find the local publications for where these incidents took place and you'll often get far more accurate reporting on them than anything that you get from somewhere like CNN which will do its utmost to avoid giving you the most important details.
	The Scott Adams line of course in this is get the hell away from them.
	But, you know, as we discussed in the previous segment... They're coming to you.
	Yeah, they're coming to you.
	Yeah, so I'll just carry on because there is more relevant information here.
	Prosecutors argue that the single shot that night came 30 seconds after Washington punched Cranston and criticized Cranston's choice to carry a firearm while he was drinking.
	Well, it turned out to be a good idea because if he was looking to defend himself, you take it, it's like having a fire extinguisher in your house.
	You don't want to use it.
	It's like having insurance.
	You don't want to use it but it's nice to have it just in case you do need to use it.
	The next line is mental.
	They pointed out that he appeared to be smoking a cigarette immediately after the shooting because this whole thing was caught on security cameras and I've seen a part of the footage and it is quite remarkable how they're just having a conversation and then out of nowhere Washington just Bam!
	Punches him straight in the face.
	And then does it again.
	And they miss out some context in here as well, even.
	But because of the fact he smoked a cigarette immediately after, that means he wasn't afraid of his safety.
	That's totally justifiable.
	He's obviously stressed because he's just had to shoot someone in self-defense and he's waiting on scene until the police and medics arrive.
	Yeah, I would smoke a cigarette.
	What they're missing out from here in this particular article, which I had to get from other sources, Was that Cranston's defense attorney said that he and his friends attempted to de-escalate the situation that Cranston fired his gun only to prevent Washington from punching him again.
	He also alleged that in those 30 seconds between the initial punch and him shooting him, Washington not only punched Cranston's friend but also pushed his fiancée, so the woman he was trying to hit on in the first place, he was assaulting her as well.
	Just a good boy, didn't do nothing.
	And the funny thing is, right, if this was a white guy who said, you know, went up to some random woman and said, do you want to F and started hassling, you know, if it ever came to national attention.
	And it counts as self-defense.
	Yeah.
	If it ever came to national attention, he would be smeared as, you know, lecherous and, you know, cancellation.
	And this is another MewE2 example.
	Round the clock BBC coverage of toxic masculinity.
	Yeah.
	It's like all that.
	It's all the time.
	The same circumstances are dependent entirely on the race of the individual.
	If you are an administrative managerial state that adheres to what I would consider to be satanic principles and you have a population which are basically your client population which you use to terrorise your political opponents whenever it's time for an election round, Um, you don't apply standards the same way.
	Why would you apply standards the same way?
	Oh, these people behave in ways that I find reprehensible?
	Well, too bad, they're useful to me, so I don't care.
	It's useful to point it out to the people who aren't initiated into understanding that double standards are there for political expediency, but if all we ever do is say, well, imagine if the roles were reversed, you're going to get that engraved on the Here Lies Conservatism tombstone.
	Yeah, that'll be your epitaph on your gravestone.
	There's more information here just because it's funny how it's always the emotive arguments.
	The facts do not matter, it's the emotive arguments of multiple members of Washington's family addressed the court in Cranston on Monday and shared emotional testimonies of the impact of Washington's life and killing.
	Washington had only recently... I don't care if you're a saint, if everything that you did up until the point of assaulting someone for no reason was you saved puppies, you fed the poor, you did this and that, Well, as soon as you enter into the situation, as soon as you initiate violence against someone and escalate it to the situation where you forced someone to defend themselves, they are completely justified in defending themselves.
	It doesn't matter if you lived a saintly life before, your actions determine the consequences.
	He certainly did not, and we'll get into that in a moment.
	Lawanda Roberson.
	What?
	His mother.
	We need to stop.
	She's named after a Pokemon.
	Right.
	Yeah, I know that this might be a somewhat controversial statement, but black Americans, like, man, what are you doing with names?
	Seriously?
	Lawanda?
	Lawanda Robeson.
	All right.
	Okay.
	And we'll get on to some more absurd names in a moment.
	His mother said it was clear that Cranston killing her son was a racist act.
	Being assaulted by a black man automatically equals you racist dope.
	Get your head kicked in for progressivism.
	Well, I love the next line.
	Interesting.
	I love the next line as well.
	Does anyone think that Cranston would have even noticed my son if he was not black?
	So if he was, say for example, a white man who had punched him twice, he probably wouldn't even notice.
	He'd be like, ooh, what's going on here?
	Yeah, take my girlfriend and have a good night, sir.
	No.
	No, that's not.
	And that other members of his family said they didn't believe that 10 years because he was found guilty, And he was given 10 years for this.
	At least 10 years without probation.
	He's serving multiple sentences on top of one another.
	So 10 years minimum without probation.
	And in order to get out, he's going to have to express remorse for having defended himself and his girlfriend.
	His fiancée.
	So they engaged, scheduled to be married for the next 10 years.
	He is not able to fulfill those vows that he was going to make for her.
	She is going to have to be, and I'm not going to say anything about her character because I'm sure in this situation that she's grateful that he stood up for her, that he defended her, that he defended her family.
	They're friends, but in this situation, it would be rare to find even the most virtuous of person who is going to wait 10 years.
	I hope she does.
	I hope he can get out sooner than that.
	I hope they can get married.
	But in the terrible situation like this, he will be very lucky if he doesn't get out of prison and his entire life is turned upside down, which it already is.
	And also with the US prison system, he's basically been subject to God knows how many rapes inside jail as well.
	For defending his girlfriend.
	Especially with the racial discolouration of his particular case.
	The black gangs in prison probably won't treat him kindly.
	And wouldn't you know, there was political pressure from it the second this incident came to the news, because Washington's death spurred protests after the shooting and during the entirety of the trial, with many pointing to the similarity between his death and other unarmed black men killed across the country.
	Yes, there are many similarities, that which they started it and they found out.
	They F'd the round, they found out.
	That's the only similarity between every one of these, because once again, apart from maybe Emmett Till, Every single one of these incidents is this.
	There's like a template.
	There's a template that they go on.
	Black man accosts white man, aggresses, escalates situation, finds out.
	Black man gets pulled over by police for parking violation, for speeding violation.
	White man would have got out of the car and said I'm sorry officer and obeyed what they were saying.
	Black man escalates the situation, gets shot.
	Every.
	Single.
	Time.
	Is this happens.
	And obviously this isn't the case for every single person, but when we get such a deluge of... KNOW THEIR NAMES!
	KNOW THEIR NAMES!
	Dante, right.
	What you're doing, Harry, is pattern recognition.
	I know.
	Dante Wright, for instance, shouldn't have been shot.
	Obviously, it's a mistake that the woman who shot him was reaching for her taser and shot him in the first place.
	But why did he escalate to the situation where she even felt she needed to use her taser?
	Why did he not obey the officer's instructions?
	These are the questions that you're not allowed to ask.
	And there's even better in the article that this all came from.
	Which is the henpecking female judge, imagine my shock, the one who sentenced him to at least 10 years.
	Yep, Judge Beth Bagley spoke to Cranston before announcing the sentence, saying that she imagined he would have acted differently on the night of the shooting if given another chance.
	Yeah, you'd have just let your girlfriend go off with another guy.
	Violently assaulted.
	If given the chance, that would have been the smart thing to do.
	I can't imagine how you couldn't want to do it differently, henpecking.
	Everybody here lost, some more than others.
	Yes.
	Who's that below?
	Is that the judge?
	This is the, this is the, this is Cranston.
	Oh, okay.
	This is the guy, this is the kid who went to prison.
	He's just a young lad as well.
	I know.
	Bagley ruled that Cranston's various sentences would run concurrent to one another.
	Oregon's mandatory minimum laws require that Cranston serve all 10 years of his sentence with no chance of parole or having the sentence lessened.
	Because he was- Yep.
	Found guilty, convicted- Right to self-defense removed because he's- Five counts related to the shooting including first degree manslaughter, second degree manslaughter, first degree assault, even though he was the one defending himself, and two counts of unlawful use of a deadly weapon.
	I don't know if it's possible because obviously this was a state court not a federal crime but day one someone needs to slide his case across President Trump's desk.
	Notice this black eye this is when he was arrested for the situation because it turns out that after getting caught on camera being punched in the face that he had a black eye from it so his side of the story is completely vindicated as far as I'm aware but once again you can never find it's never It's never an Emmett Till, it's never a Rosa Parks, it's never just an innocent person who had no backstory, no history, because this guy Barry Washington Jr.
	Had a bit of a character to him.
	Prosecutors in the homicide trial, and this is before the court case started, want to exclude evidence that they say could unfairly portray the shooting victim, Barry Washington Jr., in a poor light.
	Including synced videos of the incident, you know, those things that make it easier to tell what actually went on.
	They wanted to completely control the narrative and just lie.
	So video evidence of the actual incident is not allowed?
	They were trying to present an account of his behavior with Bend Police and a California conviction for eluding a police chase at speeds of up to 100 miles an hour, presumably taking after his hero Rodney King.
	The state is seeking to exclude evidence that Washington swore a police officer on the night he was shot, according to court documents.
	So this kid was already in a very agitated state, shall we say.
	The defense argues it's relevant information because it shows that he was angry on the night of the shooting and suggests that Cranston was justified in defending himself.
	The defense also filed documents that describe an August 16th, 2020 incident when California Highway Patrol officers attempted to stop Washington as he was driving in Citrus Heights, California.
	Washington ignored police, exceeding speeds of 100 miles an hour while driving through red lights as police pursued him for approximately five and a half miles.
	According to these court documents, officers apprehended him after he got a flat tire.
	So the only thing that stopped him was the fact that he got a flat tire and put himself in danger.
	I just want to comment on the level of evil.
	Let me just finish.
	At this point, officers say that Washington threw bullets out of the car.
	Officers say they also found a rifle magazine with ammunition inside the car, which Washington said he did not own or know about.
	It just happened to be there, Mr. Officer, sir.
	Yeah, I just wanted to comment on the level of evil of the of the state in this case, who are quite clearly trying to rig it and successfully rigged a trial to send an innocent man to jail for, you know, their client group.
	And that was done, obviously, conscious.
	Political persecution.
	We've got to remember that Kyle Rittenhouse, as much of a miracle it was that he managed to be acquitted, was the exception.
	In spite of the process of the justice system, he was acquitted.
	There were dozens of minor cases of Kyle Rittenhouse's that didn't get the same treatment, that didn't get the same media coverage, that did get sent to prison for defending themselves.
	Didn't get the same support from people, didn't get the same second amendment rights given to them.
	They were just all thrown in jail and just throw the key away.
	So this kid has lost at least 10 years of his life because he defended himself and his friends from a hostile black guy and there was the political pressure to destroy his life because blacks apparently can't be held accountable for their actions.
	The activists, as far as I'm concerned, the judge and the lawyers would prefer that you die to arbitrary random attacks and violence from blacks and uh then allow you to defend yourself because apparently black lives don't just matter they matter far more than yours ever could and here's some examples of that because Scott Greer who is someone i don't i don't think i follow on twitter and i know he can be a bit hit and miss this is actually a very good article
	from his sub stack where he talks about the case but he goes on after he's spoken about the case to list a few examples of other very similar situations.
	While an Oregon jury found Cranston guilty, a California jury couldn't reach the same verdict for two self-professed killers earlier this month.
	Fantasy Daycare.
	Oh, come on.
	And Le Monte Mims.
	Once again, we've got to stop with these names, guys.
	We've gone crazy here.
	Robbed and killed 71-year-old Ed French, a white man in San Francisco back in 2017.
	The fatal shot was caught on camera.
	The pair did not deny The legal team presented some very odd arguments to support this.
	The Cure's lawyer said that she was suffering a sickle cell crisis and opiate withdrawals, so she was literally in withdrawal and having a sickle cell crisis when she fired the gun.
	Additionally, he pointed to her low IQ and lack of adaptive functioning.
	So race and IQ is perfectly fine if it means we get to acquit black criminals, apparently.
	I mean this is double standards and I don't want to just go double standards but it is quite shocking just how far they can go if it's in defense of their precious client class.
	So they say that she couldn't possibly have been conscious of what she was doing.
	The argument apparently convinced some jurors.
	The two were only found guilty of robbery charges that covered French and other victims.
	It's now common for American juries, he says here, and district attorneys to absolve blacks of responsibility for their murders.
	And he highlights some examples that he gave in a Revolver article, so I'll just list some of these.
	Because this is just how far, how extensive it is, the misapplication and asymmetry of the way that laws in America are handled if you're black versus if you're white.
	Three black men involved in Ethan Liming's 2022 beating death saw their murder charges reduced to lesser offenses.
	One of the participants was only sentenced to 180 days in jail.
	A black man in Iowa was found not guilty of murder last year for his role in the death of his white girlfriend.
	He severely beat her and she fell from her apartment balcony during the assault.
	She died from the fall.
	The jury found that the black man was not responsible for the death, only for the assault.
	She made choices.
	Self-defense.
	So I'm glad to know that self-defense rights are given to some people in the U.S.
	A black man in South Carolina was found not guilty in 2021 after shooting and killing a white retired volunteer fire chief as the victim sat in his car.
	The shooter claimed the victim startled him and that was sufficient explanation to find him innocent of murder.
	A black man in Florida was sentenced to house arrest in 2022 over the fatal beating of a white man who called him a slur.
	Prosecutors felt the punch that killed the 77-year-old victim merited a lenient sentence because the victim repeatedly used possibly the most aggressive and offensive term in the English language.
	Because blacks in America, if assaulted, verbally assaulted, with the n-word, aren't expected to be able to manage their emotions, control their feelings, and be able to step over it and move past it.
	Yes.
	You are basically signing your death warrant.
	And the US state We'll sign off on it.
	They'll go, yep, earned it.
	If you punch somebody twice after telling them that you're going to F their girlfriend.
	And then punch their friend and then assault the girlfriend as well.
	That you're expected to shrug off.
	Somebody calls you a slur that you use yourself all of the time and in the rap music you listen to, death sentence.
	Yes.
	Well, it all depends on the color of the person using that word.
	And for one last case, prosecutors in Florida dropped charges in 2017 against a black man who beat his white math tutor to death after the victim allegedly used a racial slur.
	The prosecutor's office felt it had no competent evidence to rebut the defendant's claim that he was provoked into violence and said that the slaying was not done in a cruel and unusual manner.
	Now, I would consider that beating anyone to death just for saying a word at you is cruel and unusual, but apparently Florida Has done this twice.
	In Florida, it's a death sentence.
	Signed off by the state to say the n-word at a black person.
	I wouldn't recommend anybody do that anyway, because it's just crass and unnecessary.
	But even if you did, you could just claim it afterwards.
	You could basically just kill somebody with impunity and say, ah, well, they said the magic word.
	Or particularly if the judge slash prosecutors decide not to admit video evidence, as they keep trying to do.
	There you go.
	So yeah, they're not held to the same standards as you and I, and as far as I'm concerned, if things carry on like this in the U.S., the black communities talk about how they have the talk with their own kids, where you say, listen, police are going to be violent against you, they're going to want to try and kill you, they're going to do this and that.
	There's going to be a white equivalent, which is that the state are more than happy to assist Black people in victimizing you and if you do anything to defend yourself you will probably go to prison.
	So you're going to have to behave very cautiously.
	You might have to start doing that with your own children depending on the demographics of where you live.
	That's a shocking and horrible thing to have to say but it's just the truth of it.
	The only other thing I wanted to highlight was that at the moment
	Derek Chauvin has been in prison for a few years now and you have disgusting articles from the Mirror basically gloating about it because he is a political prisoner saying like, oh he's bloated, he's unsafe, he's balding, he's in a bed of concrete, he's constantly in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day for his own safety because of the circumstances of his imprisonment and his career as a police officer means that he's in constant danger but he is currently
	Going for appeal and we'll see what happens there because they're going to take it.
	The Minnesota Supreme Court said no we're not going to take this on so they're trying to appeal all the way to the US Supreme Court and they're using things like the fact that the The county courthouse it took place in was heavily fortified, there was jury intimidation, oh yeah, and one of the jurors who named himself afterwards as Brandon Mitchell was an actual BLM protester.
	So he did not get a fair trial, the political situation around this was not fair, and he is the figurehead, as far as I'm concerned, for the complete miscarriage of justice which characterizes modern day America, and a lot of the rest of the West as well.
	So we need to remember their names.
	There are people in the US and elsewhere who have been murdered, victimized, falsely imprisoned, just for the sake of protecting the feelings of violent criminals.
	And we need to remember their names, because as far as I'm concerned, they're the ones that matter.
	I so want Clarence Thomas to write the ruling opinion on that.
	I would love that.
	But yeah, should we go into the video comments?
	Video comment, and then we've got some written comments.
	Being your average Lotus eater, of course I code.
	I've been in the games industry for over 20 years, and I've been an indie developer for over 10.
	Yes, Gamergate really sucked for indies if you had the wrong politics.
	I also suffered trauma from watching Vaevictus placing individual trees for his Necromancer game.
	Dammit Carl, there are tools for that.
	Nice.
	Yeah.
	I suppose we always need people that are going to make different cultural products that aren't infected with intersectionality, so good luck.
	I just want fun games, so if you're making the fun games, that's good by me.
	We are releasing more games-related content very soon.
	We have two videos in the works that I hope you'll all be happy with.
	I mean, we're technically out of time, but I reckon we can run over a bit.
	Can't we do some comments?
	Yeah, of course we can.
	Yeah, we can run over a bit.
	So, Ethel Starn says, the Hamas footage should not be censored.
	They proudly published that and people should see the reality of what faces the West.
	Yeah, exactly.
	We saw the Holocaust images in school because it was understood that images are powerful.
	Same with images of Vietnam.
	The media coddling seems to start with Falling Man for one reason or another.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	I mean, that's where I'm in this.
	If we can be shown Holocaust footage all the time.
	Why can't we see what?
	What other groups do?
	Decidedly nothing from the Hold'em Order.
	Well, because one type of footage is used to tell Europeans that you're all guilty, and the other type of footage isn't.
	Yeah, which is you should not be opening your borders kind of thing, exactly right.
	Mr. Ward says, no surprise we suffer from perpetual energy crises when the world's government spends so much of our natural resources gaslighting the public.
	We need to switch to renewable oil spinning in its grave.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, I mean there's been a bit of that recently, isn't there, with the Russian thing.
	Although, maybe Hamas has ended the Ukraine war in the same way the Ukraine war ended Covid.
	No, because Biden's using a giant foreign aid package to give billions to both at the same time.
	Oh yeah, he's trying to bundle it into one bill, isn't he?
	Yes.
	Mainly because Kevin McCarthy got ousted as House Speaker over Ukraine funding.
	Yeah.
	Le French EU Reaper says, Ursula talking about strict rules around transparency and accountability is ridiculous considering her buying 10 billion doses of Covid vaccine.
	Yes, quite right.
	And let's just finish up with Mr Power who says, once again the state acts under a god hubris.
	EU, we now have perfect information, we can execute perfect judgment and we will never ever ever be wrong about anything ever again.
	How dare you think otherwise, you stupid pleb.
	So, one from the honourable mentions bit before I dive into the one from my section.
	This is Le French EU Reaper.
	Welcome back, Connor.
	Thank you very much.
	Nice name.
	Did you get to experience the Japanese degeneracy and will you cover it in a future video?
	Now, I did have a segment planned to talk about how we need to be more like Japan.
	But, of course, the recent events of Random Arab War took precedence, so I decided to cover that today.
	I've got it lined up for some point, not sure when it's pertinent, but actually, the degeneracy out there barely exists.
	It's an export.
	It used to be really notorious that they had the dirty panty vending machines.
	There was only one.
	I think they've got rid of those, anyway.
	I think there was only one as a novelty and it was blown up into a story, which, again, that's gross.
	Like, so is the vagina ice cream.
	But Japan, to give it in brief, all the trains run on time, very considerate, there are vending machines everywhere and no public bins, but there's no litter anywhere because people actually care about the places they live in.
	There is a deep cultural sentiment.
	Sure, they have their own social problems, I'll be going over that in the script I've got written, but they are basically the British of the East.
	Can you explain vagina ice cream?
	Is that some sort of thrush treatment or something?
	Vagina flavoured ice cream.
	Oh!
	I'm sure it tastes lovely, but it's just a bit weird to order.
	Anyway, point being, Athelstan, as it pertains to the word jihad, I'm a bit tired of seeing people like Majid Nawaz defend it as free speech.
	You cannot tolerate the intolerable.
	I will not defend the free speech of anyone who, given power, would impose censorship by the pain of death.
	Yes, maybe historically and theologically jihad has many meanings, but we know the common use for it in the modern age and we know what particular Islamists meant by the term.
	Part of this as well is that if your religion has a principle which allows you to lie to non-believers, taqiyya, in order to further the goals of said religion, I will not believe you when you say a more charitable interpretation.
	I'm going to take the least charitable interpretation, particularly because you describe yourself as an army.
	So, excuse me if I'm being uncharitable there, but I quite like my country to not be besieged by a foreign horde.
	Pete, not the one from the office, I'm sure, if jihad means struggle, crusade is a campaign for political social change.
	David's fault is just the will of God, and Mein Kampf is just my struggle.
	The Motten Bailey is a foundation of medieval architecture.
	Yes.
	Well, I mean, the Crusades were defensive wars, so let's not get too into that.
	So glad you're finally on my side.
	Grant Gibson.
	I wrote a community note over the weekend that said, it's not like you can be gay in Palestine.
	There's an LGBT for Palestine group.
	There was a link.
	I clicked it.
	Friends, the pro-LGBT Palestine group is located in Israel.
	Oh, that's amazing.
	They did have a chapter in Palestine, but all their meetings took place on top of a skyscraper, and then finished at the bottom of said skyscraper.
	Brandon Toms, the important question is, why should the native population be the ones to undergo an exodus?
	They should be fleeing across the Channel in terror, just like any other barbarians that invade.
	Yes, totally agree.
	Until such a time where our political class is replaced to facilitate that happening, and deporting them via trebuchet because it's carbon neutral, you can just only defend your family.
	But instead, the ruling class is trying to replace us before we can replace them.
	Yes, quite right.
	Harry?
	Alright, MC says, when Obama was elected, I was in school and lived in a mostly black area.
	Anti-white racism exploded.
	They talked about how it was over for white people and how they'd be able to get away with everything.
	In hindsight, it seems like they were right.
	It's never been more over.
	I'm sorry to hear about that.
	Kevin Fox, 10 years.
	Wow, you only get a sentence like that if you're A, white, B, put your feet up on Nancy Pelosi's desk.
	Isn't there at least still at least one Jan 6th guy still in jail awaiting trial over a thousand days?
	I wouldn't be shocked.
	Josh spoke to Jacob Chansley, go check that update out.
	Also, anyone see the Palestinian protesters invading the cannon building on Capitol Hill?
	Is that not an insurrection or is that just... No, no, that doesn't count that one.
	Differing standards for differing groups.
	Lord Nerevar, in a functioning system, Chauvin would now be immediately retried, released, and given a healthy stipend of cash for false imprisonment.
	Correctly for BLM.
	Yes.
	Because, uh, directly from Patrice Cullors, I would like, mate, she's got plenty of property to go around.
	Yeah, she's walking around naked as an art exhibition.
	Oh, don't remind me, God.
	But you won't be, because the system doesn't work, and Chauvin is a political prisoner.
	Damning evidence be damned.
	Kevin Fox, regarding not Chauvin, but the other officers present, a whole bunch of DA office prosecutors quit because they said there was no case to bring against the other officers, but the Biden-bought DA went ahead and persecuted and prosecuted them.
	Anyway, yes, I saw some reports regarding that as well.
	I was going to include them, but The segment was already going on for quite a while.
	Omar Awad, I remember when BLM burned down black neighborhoods causing untold damages and many businesses had to leave permanently.
	Unironically, blacks most affected.
	If only it wasn't also blacks most perpetrated.
	Very true.
	Adam Hack Davis, know the name should be replied to by know their crimes.
	The judge needs to be retried, retired as it obviously isn't fit for purpose.
	Always apply context to the so-called victims.
	That's very powerful framing.
	Yeah, George Happ.
	A lot of conservatives like Greg Gutfield failed the moral test when it came to Chauvin.
	They cheered as an innocent man went to prison to appease the mob.
	I think many too will be scared to defend him.
	Sajid Javid tweeting justice hashtag BLM on a slap his bald head.
	Yeah.
	Brandon Toms, like Trump said, they're after you, he's just in the way.
	And finally Fuzzy Toaster, the way they like to report these things, a black man could attempt to murder someone and then the intended victim could manage to wrestle the weapon off them, happen to kill them in the struggle, and they'd be charged with premeditated murder of an unarmed black man.
	The only thing this tells me is efficiently hide the evidence.
	I can't support something like that, but the sentiment of what you were going for before that was absolutely right.
	I think that's all we've got time for.
	We've already run over a little bit, so thank you very much for sticking around with us for these extra eight minutes.
	I hope they've been worthwhile, and we're back again tomorrow at one o'clock English time.
	Until then, take care.

▲