Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 19, 2024 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:30:23

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #832

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	.
	Hello and welcome to the podcast, The Lotus Seaters.
	I am joined by Connor and Bo.
	And today we're going to be talking about Hasan meeting a pirate, what is disease X, and 45 rides again.
	So, it's gonna be fun.
	I have no announcements, so I suppose we'll just get straight into the news.
	Which, um, this one's weird.
	Right, um, Hasan Piker, he's hanging out with pirates now.
	Which, I gotta be honest, before we get any further, Sort of approve.
	It's like, okay, at least you're doing something with your life, boy.
	I mean, I know that's sort of like saying like, oh, my son, he has a job.
	He's not unemployed.
	He's a burglar.
	I'd rather he was a meat than talking to actual terrorists.
	Well, I don't know.
	There's something about this I find interesting.
	So this is, we'll get this up on screen, which is, I think there should be a link before this, John, if I bug it up.
	No, I probably bug it up.
	Anyway, it's this chap here that he's having a chat with.
	And this chap here has his own social media, as you can tell, and he's a Yemeni.
	Now, of course, because people like Hassan have decided that they're now experts on Yemen, because... Sorry, I just got bored of that aspect of the internet.
	It's just like a foreign thing, I know everything about it, so okay.
	I mean, you're famously stupid.
	I mean, we're dealing with someone who has famously said that he is a propagandist.
	Didn't he say that he doesn't know anything on Piers Morgan?
	Yeah, so it's just like, okay, that's a thing.
	Are you suggesting that Hassan's knowledge of Yemeni culture and history isn't that deep?
	Is that what you're saying?
	I'm more just bored by, like, oh, I know everything about this, since you clearly don't.
	But he decided to interview this guy about Yemen.
	And just before we go, we'll translate this post here, saying it was a great interview to have him on, so that's good for him.
	He does ask him if he'd like to come to Yemen, to go and be a pirate, yar har.
	And Hassan's response is, ah, one day, one day.
	Really?
	Yeah.
	Yeah, you're not gonna do it.
	It's obviously a lie.
	Sam Hyde just shows up on the boat.
	He's just like, welcome aboard!
	The Yemenis are like our final weapon.
	So yeah, maybe that'll happen.
	Hassan Piker strikes me as someone that not only sort of exudes idiocy, but is also a complete coward, a moral coward, an actual coward in every sense.
	Of course, he's never, ever going to go to the Arabian Peninsula.
	That's sort of my... So there's some criticisms out there of this, which is don't talk terrorists.
	That's one of the main criticisms.
	But I think the more interesting criticism is that one, which is that, why are you interviewing these people if you're never going to get involved?
	You don't have the balls to go anywhere outside of your own house.
	Because it's just accelerating anti-Westernism.
	That's it.
	It's not like he's...
	It's not even that.
	Obviously, there's different factions in Muslim conflicts, but he just doesn't care.
	It's just that these guys are currently blocking the trade routes and making capitalism work slower, in his mind, so therefore approved.
	Gotta get on board.
	Know nothing about the place, know nothing about the people, but... You're making it inconvenient for America, so... America bad.
	The other thing is, if he's sort of Turkish or pro-Turkish, or his background, his ethnicity is sort of Ottoman or Turkish in some sense, they're sort of historically enemies of the Yemenis.
	It's just, yeah, I think it's what Connor was saying, just at the moment they're a thorn in the United States' side, therefore he's pro them.
	I doubt it goes any deeper than that.
	He did say America deserved 9-11.
	That is how shallow his thinking is.
	And evil, yeah.
	But getting back to the main criticism, the mainstream one, which is don't talk terrorists, I mean, maybe I'm biased, but I don't really care about this, and it's also something I think is probably natural As an end point of the internet, and probably is actually a good thing, which is that you can talk to your enemies regarding to whatever conflicts going on.
	That is actually kind of cool.
	I mean, thinking back to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, I mean, if you could directly talk to Iraqis and have them explain, no bro, we literally don't have WMDs.
	Saddam Hussein's voice, don't get me wrong, not the politest of chaps, but it has now become absolutely evident that that war was completely pointless and has made Iraq worse off and the entire region, and is still ongoing in an insurgency.
	So it's just like, okay.
	I think it actually is a positive that in the modern world you can go and talk to the enemies and find out that they are human, they do have mad views, they are a bit...
	Politically incorrect on a lot of things, but it is quite nice to actually just go and find out what the enemy think.
	That doesn't stop you being enemies.
	It doesn't mean you have to suddenly become best friends or something, but I think it's a natural extension of the internet.
	There's two arguments, aren't there?
	There's one, just never ever have any truck with terrorists ever under any circumstances.
	That's sort of a moral imperative.
	Then there's the other argument that, you know, dialogue is always Good, or that something is possible for something to come from a dialogue with your absolute enemies.
	I obviously think there's somewhere in between, right?
	Depends who you are, right?
	Because if you're the US government, something can be done.
	You know, there's like high-level stuff, you both own jet fighters.
	But if you're just an average guy, like, this is more about just learning about the world, which actually, you know, baby steps.
	I mean, this is up from just eating turkey dinosaurs.
	I think it's actually positive, because I'm thinking, for example, let's take the most extreme thing, in which Vice sent one of their reporters to go and live with ISIS for like a month, and then they would produce probably the best documentaries in modern day production, in which they just show off, yeah, this is what ISIS believes, this is how they live.
	It's like, okay, yeah.
	That's interesting.
	You learn something about the world.
	I can't help but think you're being a bit too charitable to Hasan, though.
	Yeah, he doesn't learn a lot about this in this interview.
	It doesn't go very deep.
	Did you actually listen to it?
	Yeah, I listened to the whole thing.
	I'm just saying I don't like this criticism of like, man, you talked to someone bad.
	Eh, I don't know.
	That just seems very old-worldy.
	Times have changed.
	But anyway, so this dude is famous because of this clip in particular, where he's around on one of the, I presume, commodeered vessels?
	Mihartys?
	I don't know why they don't take on the pirate aesthetic.
	To be honest, that would be really funny.
	Like the Pirates of Penzance style aesthetic.
	Yeah, I mean, they've all seen Pirates of the Caribbean.
	You know, they're on the internet.
	They know what's going on.
	I mean, why not?
	So he's not like a spokesman for them or involved in their group.
	He's literally boarded ships himself.
	Just a teenager with an iPhone.
	Yeah.
	He's just a goofy boy.
	No, he is taking part in this.
	So there we are.
	Some people have been arguing that he's just your average Houthi citizen.
	I mean, maybe.
	But the posts are pretty average.
	Ready for sacrifice and eager for martyrdom.
	I mean, the Islamic world, for all of its weirdness, I gotta be honest, I kind of respect that.
	Just the aspect they have of we love death more than you love life.
	It is actually a fearful thing.
	Do you get what I mean?
	No.
	Like in a fighter?
	I think if they want to be martyrs, the RA, the RF or the Royal Navy should oblige them.
	Yeah.
	Oh yeah.
	I mean, it's the best matters quote of all time, which is, if you want to die, I'll help you get there.
	It's not exactly that quote, but it's basically that.
	But there is something about it that's just like, okay, they're serious in a way that other groups aren't.
	Like, they are actually just like, yeah, I will die killing you and I don't care.
	Sure, they've got more conviction than the current American military that's doing the two mums adverts, but the cause that they're doing it for is objectionable.
	I wasn't talking about the cause.
	Yeah, I have heard that people in the Pacific War, Americans in the Pacific War against the Japanese in the late stages when there were kamikaze attacks, they said it was the most terrifying thing.
	You've got to kind of... It was genuinely terrifying.
	You've genuinely got to kind of respect the Kamikaze pilots because you guys are mental.
	On some level.
	I get what you mean.
	There's an aspect to it.
	Like guys in a fort who literally will fight to the death before surrendering.
	Anyway, that's all side point.
	Let's move on.
	Because they had the interview and he started asking about anime, of course, which...
	Isn't that insightful?
	I mean, the dude watches some specific anime called One Piece.
	That's about pirates.
	Okay.
	And he starts saying that the guy is like Luffy, which is one of the characters.
	Get back to that in a minute.
	Because the thing is, that was the framing of all of this, This is what people shared around, which is, man, he likes anime, it's so cool.
	And then people were like, oh, you know that main character you're comparing him to?
	He freed slaves.
	And the Houthis have a different view on slavery, which... They have the Islamic view.
	Which is, it's pretty cool.
	Anyway.
	Really?
	Yeah.
	They're pro-slavery, okay.
	I've read the Quran.
	But there we are.
	A lot of people started making memes about this.
	Interviewing Hitler, he loves dogs.
	Yeah!
	I mean, this is the thing.
	If you wanted to do interviews with people, I don't know what people were expecting from Hasan Piker, but he wasn't going to do the sit-down and be like, oh, so explain to me why your cause is actually just, and these are some criticisms.
	You were just going to get a guy who's like, what?
	You're anti-American?
	Me too.
	Which, yeah, there we are.
	Getting back to that slavery thing.
	I didn't know this was a thing.
	Because like everyone else, I know nothing about Yemen.
	Why would I?
	But apparently they have slavery.
	And they're... they're promotive of it.
	And for some reason, once this was found out by the online leftists who were obsessed with Yemen, they jumped on board with, actually, slavery's not that bad.
	But you just want to bask in for a minute.
	I mean, you got this guy here.
	What the West calls slavery in the Islamic world isn't really slavery.
	It's slavery with extra steps.
	No, it's more like a paternalistic relationship between two distinct social classes.
	But don't they think all social class is a marker of oppression?
	I don't know, actually.
	I think the Islamic view is that social class shouldn't exist.
	Well, leftists would think that...
	The abolition of slavery is the goal.
	True.
	It's kind, humane agency, respecting, and slaves have even created proper royal dynasties in many Islamic realms.
	Okay.
	You didn't have to tweet that.
	Yeah the bourgeoisie have a paternalistic relationship with the proletariat and suddenly all of Marxism just dissipates.
	I wonder what are the social classes referred to there?
	Is it that the Yemenis take sub-Saharan Africans as slaves?
	I mean in Arabia Historically, that's usually the thing.
	In modern Libya, they have open-air, castrated, black slave markets, still.
	Thanks, Hillary Clinton.
	Someone's gotta mine that oil.
	I don't know if the Yemenis are in slave... Sorry?
	What do they do with the slaves in Libya?
	Oh, they probably put them to work on the Belt and Road.
	So they're the ones in the cobalt mines.
	They have cobalt mines in Libya?
	No, they'll move them everywhere, won't they?
	Oh, I thought they were just slavery in Libya.
	In my head I was thinking Libyan plantations and I thought it's a desert.
	That doesn't make any sense.
	Yeah, they'll probably just sell them to other countries.
	Yeah, because for some reason all the Libyans have taken on that white suit and hat and a whole other thing.
	But I don't bring this up for no reason.
	I bring it up to make that point about Hassan here.
	Why?
	Genuinely, why are you even interested in Yemen?
	I mean, it is just kind of embarrassing.
	And you get this from both sides of the Israel-Palestine conflict.
	I mean, everyone's familiar with the hordes of Indians who are like, I love, I love in Israel.
	Israel is my homeland.
	I'm going to Israel.
	You're Indian.
	What are you doing?
	I don't get it.
	Genuinely, I'm just dumbfounded.
	If someone could explain to me why this happens, I guess, feel free to leave comments.
	And this is the opposite side you get here, obviously, where it's like, man, I hate America, so I'll defend this Yemeni tribe I've never heard of, nor care about.
	They do slavery?
	That's actually good, I guess.
	I mean, it's like JREG trying to defend the top-left position there.
	But, I mean, Memeology found this one, which is great.
	I mean, this dude here, he's a white guy, in case you're wondering.
	But he decided to turn his Twitter name into spaghetti.
	And he says, I don't want to entertain this whole hoothie slavery nonsense, but it's been going on.
	And then he writes this, like, massive blocko text, where he's just talking about how it's not real slavery.
	It's actually, slavery is abolished.
	And of course, just gets community noted.
	Why are you lying?
	Why are you doing this?
	What are you doing with your life?
	I mean, genuinely, if you're interested in the place, You have an interest in the Houthis or their cause or something.
	Cool.
	You know, go there, film it.
	Chat to the girl on stream.
	That's something.
	But just becoming a guy who's, like, slavery good, actually?
	What is the point?
	What is genuinely the point in what you're doing?
	I think the thing is when you've got some sort of intellectual or moral honesty, some sort of real framework in which to frame new things that happen in the world, That's one thing.
	But when you just, you have to revert straight away to just gymnastics, mental gymnastics, to make things make sense, because you've got no actual moral compass, then, well, you immediately end up like this, don't you?
	Trying to justify things that are unjustifiable, or things that contradict what you said yesterday.
	That's what a lot of, sort of, wokest leftists, socialist globalists, Yeah.
	But then you're dealing with something so far away from any type of what winning could be seen to be in your community.
	ethical consistency and truth doesn't matter as long as you're winning.
	That's actually something Walsh has said.
	But then you're dealing with something so far away from any type of what winning could be seen to be in your community.
	It's just... why?
	I mean, they are particularly obsessed with falling into this trap, as you rightly say, because of that reason.
	But it's just so strange, I've got to say.
	But anyway, getting back to Hasan, because they asked the pirate dude about that anime.
	Apparently, he responded, I don't actually care about that anime.
	I'm doing this for one piece, as in peace with Palestine.
	That's his concern.
	And you do get somewhat of a mindset here, at least from what he explains, which is that, unlike Osama Bin Laden, actually, he's a teenager who's obsessed with Palestine.
	And as a result, has just ended up doing what he's doing.
	It's like, okay.
	Average Arab world country.
	There we are.
	Hassan has responded to criticism of this by saying that he interviewed the Yemeni quote-unquote pirate yesterday.
	All he cares about is freeing Palestine, turns out.
	They're not part of a militancy, according to him, and he's 19.
	I'm so radicalised against twinks.
	Twink death cannot be accelerated fast enough.
	What?
	So, he's called him Yemeni Timothée Chalamet, right?
	Have you not seen the Age of Twinks thing that's come out recently, where basically it's celebrating young, like, fresh-faced, boyish-looking men as the apex of attractiveness?
	And so, this is like birth control brain, where they prefer less masculine men.
	So, that's what he's marketing it based on.
	He's trying to say, oh, look at this pretty boy terrorist.
	Isn't he really nice-looking?
	It's like, I can't wait for this paradigm to die.
	I've never heard of Timothy, whoever that is, before.
	He's the guy in the New Dune.
	Oh, okay.
	The totally unbelievable action hero, yeah.
	I have seen that, yeah.
	Yeah, exactly.
	So that's why he's saying he looks like him.
	He's like, oh, isn't he dreamy?
	Isn't he really dreamy Terrace?
	No.
	Dreamy Terrace.
	To be fair, actually, if you look back at Osama Bin Laden when he was younger, he does look better, but that doesn't really make him good.
	So, yeah, weird framing.
	But he goes on to say that he's just interested in the fact that he's not part of the military, he's just a 19-year-old.
	Yeah, I've had this question in my mind for a while, which is, you know the whole age of criminality debate?
	I think in the UK it's now like 10, so at the age of 10 you're liable for the crimes you commit.
	So if you do kill someone, like, no, you did kill them.
	You know what you're doing even though you're 10 years old.
	I do kind of hate the whole, like, oh, he's only 19 aspect to a lot of international conversations.
	So are most of the founding fathers.
	Yeah.
	The modern day America and the West, of course, where we baby ourselves until you're not really a proper man until you're like mid twenties or even thirties at this point.
	The rest of the third world doesn't deal in that factor.
	I mean, there was this guy I met in Afghanistan.
	We had a debate about what makes you a man of that certain age.
	And he said, well, guess my age.
	And he looks like 29.
	And he's like, no, I'm 17.
	The foreign world makes you grow up fast.
	It's surprising how often actual suicide bombers and things are very young, for me anyway.
	Because I'm old as dirt now, I'm in my early 40s, so a 19 year old does seem very young to me.
	But yeah, it's easy to be duped when you're that young as well.
	It's easy to be told, oh what you need to care about is Palestine and boarding boats.
	And you get someone, a callow child, a 19 year old saying, oh yeah that is what I think now.
	Yeah, you teach them that death is actually better than life.
	Yeah.
	That's what they'll do.
	I mean, speaking of this, I mean, he's an average 19 year old Arab from North Yemen.
	So what do you think his views are?
	Because people obviously just went and found his TikTok and were just like, hmm, OK, he's talking about how he wants to threaten the Jews.
	And then there are pictures of him with rifles.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, I don't know.
	I think he's probably the average Arab, so.
	Do you find it, you know, perhaps it's not surprising, surprise is probably not the right word, but that, you know, quite often a suicide bomber is 19 or 22 or something.
	You're so certain of yourself that you're prepared to do crazy stuff.
	Murderous stuff.
	Suicidal stuff.
	You're that convinced that you're correct.
	That your whole world view is that certain of it.
	Yeah, it takes, as I say, someone who's probably quite callow really, not really thinking for themselves properly.
	But again, back to Hassan, because like I said, I don't really find this criticism actually that interesting of him, to be honest.
	I mean, I don't think he's going anywhere.
	Don't get me wrong, he's going to go back doing nothing.
	But actually, this isn't a bad thing in the sense of like, man, he did something.
	At least he's done a thing.
	He may have done probably one of the stupider things, but the fundamental that I kind of end up agreeing on the idea that this was stupid is that he's not sincere.
	And these people are not sincere, as you say.
	They're just interested in the endless, I hate America.
	Well, Rift.
	So, what does he do?
	Well, nothing.
	I mean, I don't want to compare him.
	I hate to be that guy, but Lord Miles, as a point of comparison.
	I mean, whatever you think of Lord Miles, this is him, for people listening, with an RPG, apparently shooting an anime body pillow in Afghanistan.
	Now that I approve of.
	Yeah, like, dude is living his life.
	Look how janky that RPG is as well.
	Yeah.
	Why disapprove of blowing up the generosity?
	But it's the difference there between someone who's got, you know, as strange as Miles is, and I love the guy as a result, that he will actually go to the country, learn stuff.
	I think he's actually wearing a, I think that's a Hello Kitty Afghanistan shirt as well there.
	Yep.
	He's actually interested, whereas Hasan is so insincere.
	All these people are, where they're just like, oh, I want to talk on stream, and then you do nothing, go nowhere.
	You're just a commenter.
	You literally just comment.
	I mean, you might as well be a comment section.
	You don't do anything with your life.
	And we can see it in real time, because I thought I'd go and check out.
	Maybe he's been doing other stuff.
	Maybe he's been doing things on his streams.
	Because I don't watch them, because why would you?
	Just incidentally, is Hello Kitty Taliban friendly?
	Is it not haram, Hello Kitty?
	They apparently really liked watching Titanic, so... Really?
	There's that one scene they had to cut, because it's haram.
	Getting back to Hassan, I went and checked out his most recent stream, and I was watching some of it, and as you can see, the thing is eight hours long, so I don't really know who's doing this.
	But, I mean, the dude is still huge, somehow.
	There's a lot of low IQ people, genuinely.
	I don't know if it's even that.
	I think people watch it because other people's content is being played.
	Yeah, but they watch it so they can have some kind of emotional comfort blanket.
	So my feelings feel validated because Streamr has the exact same reaction to me.
	Oh look, my ceiling bird is chirping, basically.
	I'm not sure it's that, because my gut instinct was very similar.
	Something that has occurred on the internet, which is just part of the game, I mean we whine about it occasionally in the office and whatnot, is accounts that literally steal other people's content and then that's all they post.
	Oh yeah, Miles Chong, yeah.
	They never do anything, they never go and post something.
	If they actually do, that'll create something, like fair enough, and then you post other things, fine.
	But those accounts that literally just post other people's stuff.
	I mean, like, there's one recently that posted a video that was meant to be Turkic language, and it was like, oh, Turkic language sounds like this.
	And it was just no audio on the video, and then they got, like, 10,000 likes.
	And a lot of people were theorizing this shows that these accounts are also run by bots, and the people following them are bots.
	Who knows?
	But it seems to be that part of the internet is just instead people stealing content and then putting their face near it and that's the end of it.
	I think genuinely that's actually the pull of Hasan's stuff because I mean let's just check out a piece of content here in which of course he just walks out.
	So he's supposed to be in the bottom right hand corner and just isn't even doing that.
	bottom right hand corner and just isn't even doing that. - But rather that came to security of the Jewish people.
	They had to do.
	- That's madness to me.
	- Security was the one and only justification.
	- It's crazy.
	I've never understood, oh sorry.
	Get the audio off so people can hear you.
	Sorry, do you want to hear it?
	No, I don't.
	I mean, this is Johnny Harris talking about this, which I like Johnny.
	He's an interesting guy.
	I think his views are a bit nuts.
	But what am I looking at?
	There's nothing here.
	Yeah.
	A fair bit of reaction content I've seen, not that it's very much.
	Quite often, they're sitting there not saying anything.
	They're not even changing their expression or anything.
	But at least they're sitting there on camera.
	He's not even on camera.
	It's crazy to me.
	I don't know how and I've got no explanation for why someone like Hasan Piker or the Young Turks have got any sort of audience.
	I can't explain it.
	Because we're talking about them?
	No, they're much bigger than us, and have much larger reaches.
	Yeah, they do have big audiences.
	So, there we are.
	I mean, the rest of it, he is on screen, but he's literally just playing other people's stuff for eight solid hours, which, there we go.
	I think genuinely, he shouldn't be put in the camp of, like, weird socialist YouTubers, because I don't fundamentally think that's actually what he is, because the market for that, in terms of audience, seems to I'll just end this off with, um, obviously Destiny had something to say, being one of his old friends who is now disconnected.
	like that but people like Hassan seem to actually survive on just I watch someone else's thing put it on stream that's genuinely what he is he is a react streamer so there we are I'll just end this off with obviously Destiny had something to say being one of his old friends who have now disconnected he's offering a million bucks if he goes and meets the pirates hell I'd do it for a million bucks but Hassan's definitely There we are.
	As someone like Destiny, or Vaush perhaps, maybe it's the phenomenon that they've got a self-perpetuating spiral failing upwards.
	That you're well known, you've got name recognition, it doesn't really matter that your content is laughable.
	Or if there is no content.
	Or if there isn't any content, right.
	But you're known, you're like... Sam Parker's internet famous, right?
	Destiny's internet famous.
	That's...
	Enough!
	At least that's the message.
	I don't know.
	I'll end this off because I'm out of time, which is just to show a last meme, because, I mean, if these things are going to happen, let's get some laughs out of it, which is the East India Company here writing in ye olden days that Hasan is talking to pirates on Twitch.
	Very cool, but there we are.
	So, yeah, if you want to be a pirate, turns out you just find them online, like the Taliban, or pretty much any one of these days.
	Let's move on.
	Right then, I'm just going to nick the Elgato.
	Yeah, I just moved the mouse.
	Oh, right, okay.
	So, everyone's favourite supervillain menu meeting.
	You know what, I'm going to start that again because my brain's foggy.
	Sorry, everyone.
	Right, so anyway, everyone's favourite supervillain meeting has happened at the moment.
	This is the World Economic Forum for 2024 going on at Davos at the moment.
	This is their Itinerary of all the various panels about how they're going to talk about how they're going to control us all, which is good fun.
	This year, Chancellor Jeremy Hunt went and spoke with Albert Baller, CEO of Pfizer, and Sam Altman about investing in medical tech and AI, which I'm sure is going to be really good for us all.
	David Cameron decided to go on a Ukraine panel after Vladimir Zelensky went panhandling, seeking some more money.
	Great stuff.
	I mean, just a reminder, when we had Hunt, Cameron, George Osborne in government, as soon as they left government, Cameron went to work for a Chinese investment firm, Osborne went to work for BlackRock, and then when Hunt came back as Chancellor, Osborne's assistant, who also went to work at BlackRock, came in to advise the Treasury.
	So we've got This sort of nexus of the hedge funds, the WEF, the UN, really enmeshed in our government.
	Not great.
	The only positive thing that really happened was the Heritage Director and Javier Millet, who I've been quite sceptical about, went up there and just refuted socialism, gender ideology and the like to their faces, which means that they're occasionally inviting some dissidents, probably trying to capture them, but it's sticking it straight to the most fanatical people for the donut economy.
	The thing that I wanted to focus on isn't just the fact that we're ruled by a bunch of degenerates, because this is all the sort of insider stuff that's been leaked recently.
	Apparently, the prostitutes are overbooked for the area, and this happens every year.
	You think they saw the logistics for that?
	Yeah, well, yeah.
	Though, speaking of flying people in who may or may not be sex trafficked, it turns out that this year JP Morgan's star banker Mary A-Road is expected.
	This was after she's already dealt with Jeffrey Epstein a bunch of times, so really moral and great people go into this thing, including Bill Gates as well.
	Just, you know, I'm sure they're all in the up and up.
	But anyway, the thing I wanted to be focusing on is one of the main themes.
	Preparing for Disease X. You guys heard of this buzzword floating around recently?
	Yep.
	Okay, so Disease X takes its name...
	So this panel was actually about Disease X, had Dr Tedros on it, head of the WHO, he'll be coming up later, and the chair of the board of AstraZeneca, so Michael Demore, I forget how to pronounce his name, but the name for Disease X was taken from this book by Kate Kellard with a forward by Tony Blair!
	Because of course it was forwarded by Tony Blair.
	Tony Blair Institute obviously pushing for vaccine passports throughout all of lockdown, so this is just the excuse to do it again.
	Disease X This is an article for it on the WEF's website ahead of the meeting from last year.
	The article takes extracts from their podcast called Radio Davos.
	Can't wait to listen.
	It's from the author of the book, and her name is Kate Kelland, and she is formerly the global health correspondent at Reuters, Reuters who had the Pfizer head sitting on its board, of course, and now the chief scientific writer at the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations.
	Now, The EPI worked with the WEF to finance both the AstraZeneca and Moderna injections.
	So they're basically the lobbying and marketing arm of Big Pharma, which we're all going to pay for the next jab, of course.
	So that's always fun.
	She suggests in her book and in this podcast the following.
	So she says, to facilitate the global coordination and scientific work required to prepare for a future pandemic, She highlighted the need for a global pandemic accord as envisioned by the WHO, so Dr Tedros.
	What a treaty needs to do is set up a framework that allows us to be a couple of steps ahead.
	Kellan's book closes on a fictional scenario of disease X and how the outbreak is handled.
	Quote, some of the vaccine development projects go wrong.
	conspiracy theory, some of the populations are unhappy.
	Some places have to go into lockdown for a short amount of time.
	But because these decisions are being swiftly made and the people making them understand that taking risks is part of surviving these things and getting through it quicker and ultimately having a better outcome, those failures or those difficulties are overcome.
	So the ZXX comes along.
	We don't know what it is yet, but we're going to start preparing for it in advance anyway.
	And the WHO treaty allows the WHO to coordinate a global response that all member the states must correspond with, including lockdowns and mandatory jabs.
	Sounds really fun.
	Not like that's in the works.
	Oh wait!
	This is the WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty that we've talked about before.
	Now, the reason I bring this up is for people that don't know.
	This was drafted, and some of its drafters in March 2021 released an article and said that the main goal of this treaty would be to foster an all-of-government and all-of-society approach.
	That's encouraging, isn't it?
	Remember when we were called conspiracy theorists for saying they basically wanted a one-world government?
	Fun stuff!
	Alright, so what it does is it makes mandatory the international health regulations.
	These were last updated in 2007.
	But this was, so on the 31st of May 2022, the delegates of the WHO adopted five new amendments to these health regulations.
	And the amendments come into force under international law within 24 months.
	So that means May 31st, 2024.
	So that's when this applies to the UK, the US, etc.
	And the UK has not opted out of these yet, despite the UK voting against Dr. Tedros to become head of the WHO, because he's a Chinese puppet.
	So we voted into allowing ourselves Being governed by Dr Tedros, even though we said we didn't want to be governed by Dr Tedros.
	Great, thanks government.
	Under this, so they amend Article 1, so that means that the resolutions are no longer non-binding, they're binding.
	So if the government doesn't follow WHO mandates, they can be penalised by other member states, probably through fines or something.
	And this allows them to prescribe, I think this is under Article 18, the following.
	That the WHO can make you require medical examinations, proof of vaccination or of a prophylaxis, require vaccination or of a prophylaxis, so vaccine mandates, place suspect persons under public health observation, implement quarantine or other health measures for suspect persons, isolation and treatment for affected persons, tracing of contacts of suspect or affected persons, refuse entry of suspect and affected persons to affected areas, and implement exit screening and or restrictions on persons from affected areas.
	Travel lockdowns, vaccine passports, vaccine mandates, any kind of arbitrary restriction for any kind of health emergency they instantly want to say.
	And that's for the 196 member states.
	So- I'm confused.
	What do you mean?
	Why do they need this?
	Because, like, when COVID happened, we all just did that anyway.
	Yeah, what do you mean need?
	That's what I'm getting at.
	They just want it.
	There's also just the aspect of, well, I'm not sure this even How do I put this?
	You remember when COVID happened and basically every rule about the EU went out of the window?
	Like the free and open borders thing just ended immediately.
	Every single country just went into its own situation.
	Like, all of our governments would just do this anyway?
	Well, other than Sweden, of course, and certain US states.
	That's it.
	Yeah, and they can't have that.
	And also, if the governments decide to change in the interim and loosen up restrictions, then it looks really bad for WHO for giving bad guidance.
	So if it gives all the guidance all at once, then you've got no option to do these experiments that make them look bad.
	There you go.
	So, I've raised this as well because this happened a little while ago.
	There was a parliamentary petition, these sort of things happen for people outside the UK, where if the petition gets 100,000 signatures from members of the British public, the government have to debate it in a closed session of the Commons.
	Very few people turned up, but the petition reads, we're concerned that Parliament hasn't discussed and won't have a say on the 307 proposed amendments to the IHR and the five articles of the IHR that were adopted by the WHO in May 2022, and within 18 months of their adoption these come into force for the UK.
	So Parliament must be given the opportunity to vote on whether or not to reject the amendments that have already been adopted.
	The UK has not proposed any of the 307 amendments, so we're going to be Under the jurisdiction of these without ever saying we actually wanted them.
	There is a full video version of this that you can watch in your own time but I'm just going to read bits and pieces from the transcript because some of the interesting things that happened in here were worth covering and occasionally it's worth giving politicians a pat on the head when they do something nice right before they're all about to be unseated of course.
	So Philip Davis threw his lot in here.
	He said he can't help but be concerned by the thought of removing the word non-binding in the IHR.
	There's much that would suspend fundamental human and bioethical rights, as we've already heard.
	And at the debate in April, he was told by the then minister that it's simply not the case that the instrument will undermine UK sovereignty and give the WHO powers over public health measures.
	But he's not clear how national and parliamentary sovereignty can be upheld if the proposals are agreed to.
	He drew attention to Article 13, which requires all Member States to undertake and follow the WHO's recommendations, and recognise the WHO not as an organisation under the control of countries, but as, quote, the coordinating authority of international public health response during public health emergencies of national concern.
	So, the UK government has basically no say over when a health emergency is declared and what policies we're subjected to.
	And so, in response to the pandemic, The UK government said that they are supporting the process of agreeing targeted amendments of the IHR as a means of strengthening preparedness for and response to future health emergencies, including through increasing compliance and implementation of the IHR, and that they support a new legally binding instrument.
	So the UK government have already said, well, it won't override parliamentary sovereignty, but we're also going to make ourselves legally binding to following whatever the WHO say.
	Now, I know you've said this plenty before, Beau, but I don't think it's Overstating it to call this treacherous?
	To just sell us out to an international body that we didn't elect the head of, that buggered up the pandemic response last time and are basically promising to do the same thing again?
	But we also don't need them.
	It's like we have the ability to manage a healthcare policy in the UK.
	I mean that's suspicious, but yeah, better than they can.
	But we are also funding the WHO even after they keep screwing it up.
	But at least if it was actually within your own borders, you can hold the people to account.
	So that's the whole purpose of democracy, right?
	Like, if they're going to lock us up, at least we can throw them out at the end of it.
	Whereas if we give the power to lock us up to random guy who runs World Health Organization... Eh?
	What am I meant to do?
	How do I rebel?
	It seems like the Tories hate the idea of Westminster being completely sovereign.
	They seem to hate the idea or something.
	I don't know.
	Well that is certainly the vibe we've gotten from the Rwanda bill not adopting the amendments that allow them to jettison the ECHR and also all the kerfuffle with Brexit where they just didn't want to The couple from the EU, despite the British public voting three times to say, yeah, we want this to go through now.
	You know, don't take the piss.
	So Andrew Bridgen jumped in.
	He's just, he was the reclaim MP, now independent, and he just cited Dr. Tedros.
	So it really put us at ease at how Dr. Tedros has our best interests at heart.
	Because Dr. Tedros says, no country will cede any sovereignty to the who.
	And then he did say that obviously Dr Tedros is, well, not elected by the British people but also he has certain immunities.
	So the Director General, Tedros, he has the sole authority to decide where and when these measures are required and the proposals are intended to be binding under international law.
	The intent of the text is a transfer of decision-making currently vested in nations and individuals to the WHO when its Director General decides that there is a threat of a significant disease outbreak or other health emergency likely to cross multiple borders.
	And the kind of health emergency you might declare, as seen in this World Economic Forum article, that changed its headline, by the way, that John pointed out to me.
	The headline was originally, How Health Policy is Responding to Women, Digitalisation and Climate Change.
	So, great, thanks.
	White noise.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Typical intersectional buzzwords.
	What am I reading?
	Dr Tedros, the climate crisis is a health crisis.
	Right.
	So climate lockdowns.
	Just imminent.
	That's a promise, isn't it?
	And that was at the first ever Health Day at COP28 in December.
	So you see the narratives harmonising as the pretext to cede them ultimate power that you can never unseat them from.
	Has the saying or the axiom become ungovernable?
	Yes.
	I'm just going to refuse to go along with this sort of stuff.
	And if it means I end up in prison, you know, then that's what it's got to be.
	You know, sometimes.
	People used to not be afraid of that as much as they are now.
	People seem to be, our generation, seem to be fairly deracinated, be terrified of the idea that you might actually have to go to court for standing up for what's right.
	Well, people used to do it all the time.
	It used to be all the time that you'd go to protest something and yeah, you get arrested, you end up in court.
	Okay, well that's the price you've got to pay.
	I'm not going to wear a mask ever again.
	I'm not going to.
	If they want to jab me with something, they're going to have to have two or three blokes strap me to a gurney before that's happening.
	It's as simple as that.
	No, I'm not going to queue up to go in Tesco's one in one out anymore.
	No, no, no, no, no.
	Do it for the climate.
	Right.
	I mean, it makes even less sense.
	I have to be under house arrest because of climate.
	No, no, I'm going to go where I want.
	Yeah, so after the last century, deaths from natural disasters have declined 99%.
	No, it's seriously a climate emergency and you must be locked in your homes again.
	Just for clarification, lawyers out there, if you're watching, we're not advising anyone commit crimes, but I agree that all these laws are ridiculous.
	I'm just going to draw attention back to the parliamentary transcript for a minute, because this was a really interesting bit.
	So Danny Kruger, one of the new cons who voted against the Rwanda Bill, Should come on the show at some point.
	Needs to be less tepid.
	He asked, which minister is responsible for negotiating the treaty and the regulations?
	So, okay, well, we didn't get to propose any amendments.
	We don't have any say over what the WHO does.
	At least there's a minister in correspondence with the WHO, right?
	He says, is it him or a colleague?
	And Andrew Stevenson, who is the Minister for Health and Social Care, responded, the negotiations are being led by civil servants across Whitehall.
	I don't believe it's right to name those civil servants.
	Right.
	So we didn't vote for any amendments, we didn't vote for the guy who was doing it, we have no say on what the health emergency is or what the policies are, and the people currently negotiating on our behalf to supposedly make it a better deal for us, we can't know who they are, we didn't vote for them as well, and given the leaks that Stephen Edgerton has had coming out of Whitehall, I don't trust the competence of any of that either.
	Fantastic.
	Brilliant.
	About the only good thing that this mouth of Sauron said was, I can give a categorical reassurance to my right honourable friend, Mark Francois, that there is a red line for the UK government.
	We would never allow the World Health Organisation to impose a lockdown in the UK.
	That's a clear red line for us.
	I can't think of any minister who would agree to such a request.
	Jeremy Hunt.
	We will not agree in any circumstances to provisions that would cede sovereignty to the WHO.
	That includes the ability to make decisions on a national public health measure, whether lockdowns, which we just mentioned, or vaccine programs.
	Bravo!
	I don't believe you.
	I don't believe a single word of that so-called promise, because you've just signed us up to a legally binding mandate that means that if they say they can lock us down and jab us, we have to do it.
	It's just as per usual, it's all skin-saving rhetoric that no one's buying.
	Very frustrating.
	So ahead of this the WHO, sorry the WEF, they harmonise, during their conference they put out their transforming healthcare plan.
	It's mainly quite boring but there are a couple of interesting things here in the bureaucratic speak that links into the WHO plans and they said they want the role of wearable monitoring devices being taken up that can detect illnesses, schedule your treatments and authenticate to a quote public health surveillance database.
	that can authenticate whether or not you've taken your jab or something.
	Do you remember last year when Albert Baller was on one of those panels and he said, you're going to have some sort of consumable device that indicates to your physician whether or not you've taken the treatment.
	So you're going to be monitored even inside your own body.
	Great fun.
	And so they use a couple of case studies, and they use India's National Vaccine Passport Program, and then something called K-Health, which is an American AI developed with Mayo Clinic, with the Israeli healthcare services, who then coordinate with Pfizer to roll out the vaccine mandate.
	So this is all going to be constant monitoring, mandatory vaccines, mandatory lockdowns, rolled out under the guise of, of course, efficiency, inclusivity, and equity.
	Great fun.
	Now, back to Disease X. What's the UK's role in all of this?
	I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but if I told you they were already developing a vaccine for Disease X without knowing what Disease X is, at a former bioweapons lab in Salisbury, would you believe me?
	How do you develop a vaccine for something that doesn't exist?
	Great question.
	Do you want to hear the BBC tell you?
	Go on.
	Oh dear.
	The British government has unveiled a new vaccine research facility where scientists are working to prevent future pandemics.
	It's located at Porton Down, a high security research facility best known for its work on chemical warfare.
	Experts are preparing for what is known as disease X or the next pandemic virus.
	Our health correspondent Dominic Hughes was given rare access to the facility.
	The delicate task of protecting the nation's health.
	This is one of the laboratories at Porton Down where scientists are analysing current threats, new variants of Covid for example, and trying to identify new ones.
	Inside these purpose-built labs, more than 200 scientists working for the UK Health Security Agency are helping to develop and test vaccines against a range of diseases.
	It's vital work to keep us all safe.
	We've got in many respects the toughest job in the world, which is to protect health against infectious diseases and environmental hazards.
	And it is tough because we know that the risks of new and emerging infections, including those of pandemic potential, is increasing.
	For decades, scientists at Porton Down have been involved in medical research, as well as the work on chemical and biological warfare, for which the sector is perhaps better known.
	During the pandemic, laboratories like this one played an absolutely vital role in assessing how effective the vaccines were in combating the coronavirus.
	Oh, great work then!
	But as well as monitoring how effective existing vaccines are against new Covid variants, the new Vaccine Development and Evaluation Centre is looking at emerging threats for which no vaccine yet exists.
	One of those is Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever, a virus that is spread by the bite of an infected tick and is fatal in about 30% of cases.
	A serious outbreak occurred in Afghanistan in 2017, but the disease is widespread across Africa, Asia, the Middle East and the Balkans.
	Oh, why is it here?
	Changes to climate and the way we live mean viruses like this one could find a way to the UK.
	But equally, the next pandemic could be caused by a virus that has yet to be identified.
	What experts call Disease X. Dangers known and unknown.
	These scientists will be working to make sure we're prepared for both.
	Dominic Hughes, BBC News, Porton Down.
	On that very issue of Disease X, There are the known unknowns and the unknown unknowns and all this sort of nonsense.
	I just like the idea that these ticks are just coming in on the wind.
	One thing I will say, one thing I do know about is portent down.
	If no one's ever heard of that, look it up.
	Do your own research.
	I don't know if you've ever heard of it before.
	I used to live there.
	So for years, for years and years and years, it was just a byword for biological and chemical warfare, basically.
	It's where they developed VX gas and things.
	Things to keep us safe, yeah?
	The most dangerous things ever created by men, quite literally.
	Nerve agents, the worst of stuff.
	Well yes, you've got to do it somewhere.
	Do you?
	Yes.
	No, you don't.
	Because everyone else is doing it.
	Well, no, they didn't.
	Because, well, in the example of VX, for example, we created, like, the most dangerous thing ever.
	And we said, actually, let's stop creating this and not encourage anyone else to do it as well.
	So they sort of drew the line.
	You know, like, nuclear bombs, you've got the A-bomb, you've got the H-bomb.
	And in theory, you could have tritium bombs that are even more giant.
	And the whole world sort of said, let's maybe not do that.
	They did similar things with biological and chemical warfare.
	You don't have to.
	I don't see what's bad about that, because that's literally how you find the line.
	Okay, at least there is a line.
	The problem is when you develop that sort of stuff, and then you have, let's say, accidentally shoddy lab conditions, and then it leaks out of, let's say, a lab in Wuhan, then... Yeah, well it's not Wuhan.
	Sure, I still don't want it happening in my back garden.
	Do you know where Porton Down is?
	Yeah, Salisbury.
	No, it's not.
	I said it's Salisbury.
	It's next to Porton.
	Porton is a tiny village of 800 people.
	That's where I brought my first pet.
	Okay, great.
	I still don't think those 800 people should be at risk of something.
	Porton Down isn't even in Porton.
	Right, okay.
	It's next to Porton.
	It's fenced off.
	The roads in between it are fenced off, and then the individual buildings have additional fencing.
	Sure.
	You're not getting anywhere near that thing.
	Sure, great.
	The Wuhan lab was in the centre of Wuhan.
	Yes, I'm aware.
	A city larger than London.
	Yeah, I still don't think they should be...
	Testing very infectious diseases there, and then developing a vaccine for something that we don't know what it is yet, in conjunction with the WHO Preparedness Treaty, as the justification to lock us down and make us take said vaccine.
	I don't think there was a connection there.
	Like, they said they're creating vaccines for viruses that they literally listed, saying one of these could go viral.
	Specifically disease X. The pandemic stuff, of course, obviously.
	Who agrees with that?
	They literally listed, like, here's all the viruses we want to create vaccines for, because one of them could go viral.
	And then they said disease X, that's the whole point of the segment.
	Disease X, the vaccines are being funded by the same people that have got the conference going on at the moment that funded the last lot of vaccines.
	Yeah, I think there's a difference between that.
	There's people who want to lock you down for political reasons, and then there's people who are saying, there's all these viruses, one of them could become one that wipes out half of humanity, so let's make a vaccine for what we can.
	Are you saying the WHO and the WF plans are not connected?
	No, I'm saying Porton Down isn't planning to lock us down?
	No, but it's clearly the testing arm of the development of the vaccine for said disease X that they're using as the pretext to then bring this in.
	That gets very conspiratorial to me.
	They literally said, like... The BBC segment is titled Disease X, Callum.
	Yeah, but the segment played, here's this, for example, this tick, this virus.
	This is one of many viruses that could go viral, so that's why we in Portland Down are working to try and make vaccines for this.
	And then they also said, we're making vaccines for diseases that haven't even emerged yet.
	I don't think they actually did.
	They did.
	Do you want me to rewind it?
	I'm sure people can play at their own time.
	I didn't hear that.
	They genuinely did.
	After that, just a quick thing, they went on to do an interview with Dame Jenny Harries, if anyone remembers who that person was during lockdown.
	She, despite giving actual false data about Omicron, saying that there was a nine-day delay for hospitalizations to try and get another lockdown for Omicron, got damehood.
	So that's really good.
	Again, we have all these really, really accountable people.
	But again, you're a conspiracy theorist.
	If you notice all of this.
	So Forbes put out a fact check saying, what is disease X?
	Right-wing circle slam hypothetical pandemic.
	Disease X, a hypothetical unknown threat, is the name used among scientists to encourage the development of countermeasures, including vaccines and tests, to deploy in case of the future outbreak.
	The WHO convened a group of over 300 scientists in November 2022 to study the unknown pathogen that could cause a serious international epidemic, positing a mortality rate 20 times that of COVID-19.
	So again, we're saying, you're developing a vaccine in advance of something that you don't know what it is in conjunction with a pandemic treaty that mandates said vaccine. - Yeah.
	And you got the name from a book of the person that helped fund the last vaccine, Antony Blair, who's not very trustworthy.
	But you're far right, right-wing conspiracy theorists for noticing that.
	Same with the AP.
	A panel of healthcare experts discussed Disease X at Davos, but it's only a hypothetical illness.
	It's not like it's going to have any policy repercussions that we're currently funding, in a lab specifically somewhere, and doing a BBC thing about it.
	So this could all be scaremongering, this could all be useless.
	Or maybe Disease X might be this.
	Ah.
	Chinese scientists are at it again, and they've developed a brand new strain of COVID-type respiratory disease that they found in, I believe it was pangolins originally.
	They put it in humanised mice near Beijing, and it's got 100% lethality rate.
	I mean, that's what I'm getting at.
	Like, don't trust the Chinese with this stuff.
	Yeah.
	I mean, like, who puts a viral lab in the middle of Wuhan?
	What's wrong with you?
	Sure, but the... Sincerely, this is actually stupid.
	Sure, but when the WHO are coordinating with the Chinese, and the exact lab that's building the vaccine for the disease that they're all hypothesizing about is in England, Not a fan of that happening here either.
	There's clearly a coordinated effort going on here, so look forward to the Pandemic Lockdown Treaty, I suppose, and Disease X. Let's move on.
	Alright, let's talk about 45.
	Alright, right segment.
	Someone else!
	Yeah, no, it's just a lot to take in, all that Disease X stuff.
	But, okay, so I just thought we could talk a little bit about, or catch up with, the latest stuff in the ongoing saga of the Donald, and that 45 may well become 47.
	I got my fingers crossed.
	One of the things I would say, straight off the bat, is just most general terms about Trump.
	Obviously I favour him over Biden.
	Obviously.
	If you just press a button one way or the other I'm going to be smashing the Trump button until it breaks.
	But I remember before he became President, back in the 90s and in the early 2000s, he was I know we've got a lot of Trump, big Trump fans, Trump supporters, but, you know, it's just, put it this way, I find it odd that he's sort of the great white hope to save all of Western civilization, Donald Trump!
	If he asked me back in, sort of, you know, 1997.
	Ricky Gervais will save the West!
	Right, yeah, it's funny, but he's still good, obviously, you know, much more of a fan of him than the Democrat Party or anything.
	And, well, one of the things he said first time round, wasn't he, is that he was going to drain the swamp.
	That was sort of his big promise, wasn't it?
	Or that he'd lock Hillary up and things.
	And then when he got into the White House, he didn't really do any of that.
	Of course, he was very, very deliberately thwarted, I think, from doing a lot of it.
	But this time round, he is sort of promising to really drain the swamp.
	In fact, can we play this clip?
	Can you just play that?
	All right.
	9 volume.
	We claim our democracy from Washington corruption once and for all, and corruption it is.
	First, I will immediately reissue my 2020 executive order restoring the president's authority to remove rogue bureaucrats, and I will wield that power very aggressively.
	Second, we will clean out all of the corrupt actors in our national security and intelligence apparatus, and there are plenty of them.
	The departments and agencies that have been weaponized will be completely overhauled so that faceless bureaucrats will never again be able to target and persecute conservatives, Christians, or the left's political enemies, which they're doing now at a level that nobody can believe even possible.
	Third, we will totally reform FISA courts, which are so corrupt that the judges seemingly do not care when they are lied to.
	In warrant applications.
	So many judges have seen so many applications that they know were wrong.
	Well, at least they must have known.
	They do nothing about it.
	They're lied to.
	Fourth, to expose the hoaxes and abuses of power that have been tearing our country apart, we will establish a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to declassify and publish all documents on deep state spying, censorship, and corruption.
	And there are plenty of them.
	Fifth, we will launch a major crackdown on government leakers who collude with the fake news to deliberately weave false narratives and to subvert our government and our democracy.
	When possible, we will press criminal charges.
	Sixth, we will make every Inspector General's office independent and physically separated from the departments they oversee so they do not become the protectors of the Deep State.
	Seventh, I will ask Congress to establish an independent auditing system to continually monitor Our intelligence agencies to ensure they are not spying on our citizens or running disinformation campaigns against the American people or that they are not spying on someone's campaign like they spied on my campaign.
	Eighth, we will continue the effort launched by the Trump administration to move parts of the sprawling federal bureaucracy to new locations outside the Washington swamp.
	Just as I moved the Bureau of Land Management to Colorado, as many as 100,000 government positions could be moved out, and I mean immediately, of Washington to places filled with patriots who love America.
	And they really do love America.
	Ninth, I will work to ban federal bureaucrats from taking jobs at the companies they deal with and that they regulate.
	So they deal with these companies and they regulate these companies and then they want to take jobs from these companies.
	Doesn't work that way.
	Such a Public display cannot go on.
	And it's taking place all the time, like with Big Pharma.
	Finally, I will push a constitutional amendment to impose term limits on members of Congress.
	This is how I will shatter the deep state and restore government that is controlled by the people and for the people.
	Thank you very much.
	Now that's a few months old.
	But nonetheless, if he does even a fraction of that, That's brilliant.
	There's a few things in there, two or three or four things in there that, you know, people have been killed for less, for promising less.
	This is what I wanted to war game out a little bit with you.
	So I agree with pretty much all of this, particularly the constitutional amendment for term limits, because that will get Nancy Pelosi's Crypt Keeper looking backside out of office finally.
	The issue I have, like Schedule F sounds great, 50,000 federal agents that have all been marked for firing.
	Those people don't just disappear.
	And as you said, as you've written about before in your fantastic article on the JFK assassination, the intelligence agencies will not go out quietly.
	There's been a joke on Tim Paul's show of where there might be a reason why a bunch of presidents have promised to do things before have gotten in office and not done anything.
	Because as soon as they're sworn in, they sit down, the first meeting at the Oval Office is with the FBI director, and he just slides a photo of JFK across the desk.
	There's nothing, there's an understanding, nothing gets done.
	So, what happens if Trump actually fires all these people?
	He's got a giant constituency of his enemies that have now got free time on their hands.
	Yeah, I mean, when he got in the first time he was going to drain the swamp, wasn't he?
	And all he really managed to do was, he got rid of Comey at the FBI, he did do that, but you know, a great sort of political capital just to do that.
	Which he should have done on day one.
	Right.
	So, you know, how much will he be able to do?
	Assuming, let's say he wins in November, how much, with the best will in the world, will he be able to do?
	I don't know.
	You know, I hope that even if he does a fraction of what he said there, it's going to be, you know, a million times better than, you know, just letting the Democrats keep destroying America and the Western civilization.
	So, yeah, I thought we'd drill down into, because it does look like, the whole point of this segment, is that it does look like, assuming he doesn't end up in jail, that he will be the 47th President because he's going to win the Republican nomination.
	Right, at Iowa he got 51%, he's already got 20 delegates.
	DeSantis came second, he's nowhere really, 21%.
	So he's probably, he's almost certainly, for me, going to win that nomination.
	He probably will.
	There are a few states where it looks suspect, and that's because, so Nikki Haley got 8 delegates in Iowa, but that's because Iowa, you have to have registered as a Republican in order to vote in the Republican primary.
	A bunch of other states have opened primaries, which means Democrats and independents can just show up and vote for her.
	And like Reid Hoffman, who's the guy that bankrolled the E. Jean Carroll case, which was the definitely true rape defamation case that Trump was found guilty of not raping, but guilty of defamation for saying he wasn't raping.
	He's been supporting Haley and bankrolling her campaign, has been encouraging Democrats to go and vote for Haley.
	And so it looks like that there might be some states where the vote is fudged in Haley's direction as a establishment adjacent opposition candidate to Trump.
	So it's not like super secure.
	She's polling really high in New Hampshire, for example.
	It's really strange.
	So it's likely Trump will win, but it's not as guaranteed as people first thought.
	I'd put all my money on it that he'll win it because you just look at the past how it goes anyone that wins that highly in Iowa has never failed to secure the vote.
	We'll see but that's domination really.
	They haven't fortified it to the same extent though.
	If you go look at the bookies I mean you're right I'd bet my mortgage on it.
	Can we talk about, I mentioned before, I don't know if you want to, but Tucker Carlson has a theory about this that leads into what Connor's saying.
	Yeah.
	Tucker Carlson's theory, he did a video where he was talking about the fact, that state you're talking about, forget the name.
	New Hampshire or Iroh?
	New Hampshire.
	They're spending Nikki Haley's campaign a million dollars a week on Facebook advertisements.
	Yeah.
	And it's, they got footage of people who turned up to some of her events and they literally said, yeah, I'm a registered Democrat, but I don't like Joe Biden.
	I think he's ineffective.
	So I'm going to vote for Nikki Haley in the primary, the Republican primary.
	I said, what the hell are you doing here?
	So there's this plot that seems to be true, at least in Tucker Carlson's eyes, which is that you let this play out.
	Trump, obviously, is the one who is going to get selected, but then he gets imprisoned or deselected or whatever.
	And then Nikki Haley is the de facto winner because she's number two.
	And that's the plot to try and rig the entire thing.
	I did say, assuming he's not in prison.
	Assuming that gambit by his enemies... He can run from prison, but as long as he's still the RNC nominee.
	If the RNC pulls some chicanery... I thought it was if you're a convicted felon, you just simply cannot be president.
	Is that not the case?
	If you're clinically insane or a felon, I think you're not allowed... I think that's...
	Yeah, I'm not bringing any of this up to say I know anything.
	I'm just saying that's a theory that's out there.
	Even if Nikki Haley does well in New Hampshire, you know...
	In the rest of the country, in all sorts of places, Trump's got it sewn up.
	As a correction, I think you're right that you can't run as a felon, but if you win the election and then you are imprisoned, but you're technically the president incumbent, you can pardon yourself from prison.
	Really?
	I think that is how it works.
	I was listening to some constitutional lawyer a little while ago.
	You don't need to pardon because the president has got immunity.
	Just full immunity.
	Well, anyway, the Senate could then impeach you and then you could be tried in the Senate.
	But anyway, we'll see what happens.
	I mean, it seems to me, like I say, I bet my mortgage on it that Trump gets this nomination.
	Now, whether he wins in November is something else, you know, because even though, again, the polling looks good for him, Because Biden seems to be so unpopular.
	You just don't know, again, what shenanigans or chicanery or what fortifications might happen in November.
	But still, again, assuming he's not in prison.
	I would have thought, if you could take that out of the equation, I see him being the 47th President of the United States.
	Well as we discussed, I believe it was last week, there are a lot of Democrat states that are trying to pack their populations with illegals to try and move the electoral college votes more in their favour, and then at the border states there are also With the local state legislature having flipped slightly blue in places like Arizona, they're now allowing illegals, because you don't have to prove your citizenship, to not vote in local elections, but you can vote in only the federal election.
	So there will be quite a few maybe illegal aliens that try to vote, and they're trying to make it so that the Democrats have bigger say in the electoral college, because obviously the popular vote doesn't matter.
	Now, whether or not that means the same effect as 2020 with mail-in ballots, who knows?
	It doesn't mean they're not trying.
	I'm saying all of this again, hoping that Trump wins, obviously.
	Yeah, and of course there is, I've kept saying, haven't I, that assuming he's not in prison, that is a big assumption.
	Because as the fake news, as the corporate media woke news always says, he's on 90-odd charges in various places for various things he's up against.
	That's not nothing.
	And, of course, the justice system has been weaponized.
	That is also true.
	And he's partisan against him, certainly in New York.
	And then there's the question of him being deselected in various states.
	What is it?
	Colorado did it and somewhere else.
	Maine.
	Maine.
	And I think some of the other states are considering it.
	California has considered it.
	Not that that's going to be a swing state anyway.
	He's got a Supreme Court case coming up very soon.
	That's what we're going to get to.
	So the Supreme Court are going to have to make a judgment on that, it seems.
	From what I have read and seen, it looks like they'll probably do it quite quickly, sooner rather than later, which is good.
	I suspect, I wouldn't bet my mortgage on it, but I think the odds are that they would strike it down because there's more conservatives with a small C on the Supreme Court than not.
	So let's hope they'll strike it down.
	I mean, because their rationale is that he's sort of guilty of Like, fermenting an insurrection, which he's just not, he's obviously not, right?
	I mean, he said on that day a number of times, don't go and do anything crazy at the Capitol.
	He said patriotically make your voices heard, then he released videos subsequently when the guided tour happened that you should go home in peace and love.
	It's a matter of record.
	Right.
	Okay.
	And so his lawyers are arguing that even the 14th Amendment, which is the thing that says about insurrection, doesn't even It doesn't even give a definition of exactly what they mean by insurrection.
	So all that stuff is shaky.
	The fact that the state Supreme Court in Colorado went with that is so partisan, so nakedly partisan.
	Have you read the document that tries to let them justify kicking him off the ballot because they don't actually appeal to legal precedent.
	They appeal to various Merriam-Webster dictionary definitions of the world insurrection.
	It's farcical.
	It's farcical.
	So this is a question... So you'd expect the federal Supreme Court to strike him down and say that was wrong?
	Sure, but if this is all the pretext of them getting what they want anyway... I don't have the answer to this, but let's say the federal Supreme Court say, no, you have to keep him on the ballot because he's not guilty of this, he hasn't been found guilty by Congress or a trial.
	And then the states go, no.
	What happens?
	But the states refuse to abide by the Supreme Court.
	I don't know if they can, can they?
	Well, they can just break the law.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Suppose.
	Genuinely.
	I spoke to a friend recently because you see all that drama that's going down in Poland.
	And I was like, I don't really understand what's going on.
	So I messaged my friend.
	He says, yeah, no, it's actually mental.
	What's happened is that they've got this new prime minister and he's just decided that all of the judges that were appointed by the previous government are now invalid.
	Because he just doesn't like them.
	He obviously says it's because of the procedure in which they were put in.
	Bollocks.
	Just doesn't care.
	So he's now passing stuff that has been struck down by the courts, but he just doesn't care.
	It just goes ahead anyway.
	The police comply with it, for example.
	The government comply with it.
	And even the president has declared some of the stuff he's doing illegal, and he's just ignored.
	So I mean, genuinely, the country can just break down immediately.
	Yeah, I'm thinking about it now.
	There are examples in history of when... I think the Supreme Court told Andrew Jackson that he couldn't do a few things.
	He couldn't just do death marches of Native Americans.
	The Trail of Tears.
	And he just did it anyway.
	It was like, watch this!
	I think Jefferson, once or twice, was told he couldn't do something or other and he just did it anyway.
	So okay, alright, it's possible.
	That would really be sort of a wound in the Republic, wouldn't it?
	If the federal, the Supreme Court said to Colorado, you can't do this, and Colorado just did it anyway.
	That would be, you know, you're looking at... Colorado's like, states rights!
	You're very close to some sort of Civil War type thing going on.
	The Democrats have been gearing that up for ages because in their rhetoric, Biden gave the speech with the glowing red background from the bowels of hell and said the MAGA Republicans are threatening our democracy.
	So they've already marginalised the opposition as being outside the bounds of normal political discourse.
	So if they say we don't recognise the decision which keeps the candidate on the ballot that is overturning the democratic process itself, no, we feel entitled to just ignore that.
	They've got the zeal to do it.
	Most of this legal stuff is just the pretext of what they already want anyway, so I wouldn't be shocked if it happened.
	That's why I don't want to make a prediction, because we're beyond the bounds of normalcy.
	That's true.
	We are through the looking glass.
	Even if the election goes ahead right though, but who's going to accept it either?
	But the Democrats are going to throw a fit if Trump wins legitimately as well.
	Right.
	Yeah.
	Both sides are sure to contest whatever happens.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	It's very, it's quite worrying.
	I mean, one other thing I would say is that I think probably most of our audience are going to agree with what I'm about to say, but it does seem that It is just purely partisan politics that he's up against so many criminal charges.
	It just seems so transparent.
	I can't believe that sort of the mainstream corporate media... I saw a run with the story that he's just this, an arch criminal in some way.
	There was a documentary on the TV, British TV, just a night or two ago.
	It was obviously an anti-Trump angle.
	Just saying that it's unbelievable that he's not already in prison and stuff.
	Yeah, the propaganda, the anti-Trump propaganda is fully unhinged.
	It's not just partisan, though.
	As we've seen, as we were talking about Nikki Haley, it's just establishment.
	What they want is to ensure that the election is always a Hobson's choice between one candidate who favours the lobbyists and another candidate who favours the lobbyists even harder.
	And so there are plenty of Republicans who don't want Trump to be the nominee, despite him being the most popular in the party, despite him having the most votes of an incumbent president in history.
	It does seem to me, the reason why I played that clip earlier, and it is months old, that clip, it's not fresh, is that often people, when you talk about Jeff K for example, or even his younger brother Bobby, like why were they killed?
	Why were they murdered?
	Why were they such a threat?
	Who were they such a threat to that they needed to die?
	Well, that clip where he's talking about, I'm going to dismantle the power of the deep state, strike the intelligence services, I'm going to make sure that FISA courts can't just spy on anyone they want endlessly, da-da-da-da-da, and on and on and on.
	I mean, that's why he faces such vehement opposition from all sorts of angles.
	It seems to me.
	I mean, I'm not really sort of going out on a limb there.
	Seems fairly obvious that that's what's going on.
	Well Tucker asked him, do you think you could be assassinated?
	Yeah, what did he say?
	I vaguely remember that.
	That was a few months ago now, wasn't it?
	Yes.
	What did Trump say to that?
	I can't remember his exact response.
	Didn't he sort of fairly, essentially laugh it off?
	Well not laugh it off, but he was like, eh, well, I don't know.
	And then Vivek has since been saying to Alex Jones and the like that I'm in the race to be the safety net in case Trump either gets taken out or quite literally, you know, Decided to take a drive near the grassy knoll.
	Yeah.
	Speaking of, should we talk about VPs?
	And do.
	Because to be honest, I don't care about anyone else except Tucker Carlson being VP.
	Tucker won't do it though.
	He's already said.
	Maybe not, but I just look at everyone else and I'm like, I don't care.
	Because your point is entirely right.
	That's what you want is someone who would just go even harder.
	And everyone had this.
	You remember with Mike Pence where everyone was like, oh, he chose a great VP because, you know, if they take down Trump, Mike Pence is even more extreme.
	No, that was bollocks.
	That was lots of bollocks.
	Who had ever even heard of him before, as well?
	Came out of nowhere.
	So, now it's actually more serious?
	That he picked someone good?
	And, well, who is that?
	The thing about Vice President is that, obviously if the President themselves, for whatever reason, are no longer breathing, then you're one heartbeat away from the Presidency.
	Other than that, it's sort of a terrible position to be in.
	It's a ceremonial role at best.
	Yeah, okay, you're one heartbeat away from the big chair, but other than that, you've got very, very little power.
	I mean, you reside over the Senate and various administrative things, but you don't really get to set policy very much.
	You might be in the room, but you're on some level a joke.
	It provides momentum for your own presidential run later down the line.
	Yeah, there's that, there's that.
	I mean, even John Adams, the first VP ever, went on to be President.
	He said it was a terrible position to be in, being Vice President of the United States.
	Because in all sorts of ways, you're sort of actively excluded from decision making.
	But yeah, it's where it sets yourself up.
	I don't know who Trump will pick.
	Yes, there's been some talk.
	I hope it's not DeSantis.
	No, it won't be DeSantis.
	Or that Vivek fella.
	I hope it's none of them.
	It's possible to be Vivek.
	One of the names that's been floated for a while, apparently Trump has already chosen it ages ago.
	One of the names that's been floated is Kristi Noem, who's governor of I think it's North Carolina.
	She's put her foot in it recently.
	It's because she was quite good on COVID.
	People were saying Carrie Lake, but Carrie Lake's running for Senator of Arizona, so she's not going to do that.
	And then people have since been saying Vivek.
	At the event at Iowa when Vivek dropped out of the race and said, I'm throwing my weight behind Trump, he hugged Trump and people were chanting VP.
	And Trump said instantly afterwards, what a great guy.
	He's going to be working with us for a long time.
	Now that probably means a cabinet appointment, again if Trump's already picked it, but it's not like he's out of the running.
	I would love to see Tucker as VP, but as you say, I think he's sort of fairly categorically ruled it out.
	Although I did see him not that long ago, a few months ago, sort of arm and arm and sit on the fence a little bit on that question.
	Kind of said no, but didn't explicitly 100% rule it out.
	He did say he didn't think he'd be very good at it because he's a media man, that's why.
	Right, right.
	Which isn't saying, it's not looking the interviewer in the eye and saying, no, it's a hard no from me.
	He didn't do that, did he?
	It would be cool with Trump as president and Tucker as his VP.
	Because that's the flip side of my mind.
	It's the worst job in the world if you want to do something, but if you just want to get your message out there, free salary?
	I think you'd be great at it, but... You get a massive signal boost, your profile's ranged, and frankly, people kind of want Tucker to be president one day anyway, so... Like, what's the downside?
	I don't even get the downside for Tucker.
	Like, sure, you lose some money in running your own business, but...
	You can't change the narrative from outside the tent, because at the moment he's got probably the biggest non-mainstream media.
	Actually, saying that, does he need to do anything?
	If he became Vice President tomorrow, he doesn't have to be in Washington for anything.
	Couldn't he just sit in his bedroom and carry on making the videos?
	Well, he would have to be in Washington for briefings and things like that, but he could still probably do his show once a week.
	I think you could just do a Zoom call.
	The Vice President is, they've got, they have got various ceremonial obligations.
	They sort of, they're the, not the Chairman, but they oversee the Senate.
	The person with the gavel at the front of the Senate, that's the VP.
	So they do have all sorts of things they have to do in DC, but I think you're right though still, the majority of the time, the vast majority of the time, you could still sit at home doing streaming stuff.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, if you wanted to.
	Just move to Washington, do it slowly.
	Go do it in Tim Paul's studio.
	Yeah.
	Okay, I don't know if you want to do some comments then?
	send me one to your comments. - Hey folks, you know, I heard a comment yesterday.
	I just wanted to agree with.
	I wholeheartedly support the idea that you should have to be 35 years old in order to become a teacher of any level, at minimum.
	And for anybody who wants to say, well, what do we do in the meantime?
	I'd say get a fricking life and learn how to live before you try to teach other people how to do this.
	If you've got to be 35 to be president, you've got to be 35 to teach our kids.
	I mean, what's more important, being president or the youth?
	I think you should at least have a prior job in your field.
	But a lot of the old schoolmasters, they went from the military or were university lecturers or something like that.
	And so it meant they knew things rather than being fresh out of university grads that were just resentful because they had to do behavioural management.
	That was most of my teachers anyway.
	Yeah, that was quite a base take by him.
	I'd probably largely agree.
	It depends, doesn't it?
	Sometimes people a lot younger than 35 are very wise.
	Sometimes you get people in their 60s who still don't know anything.
	Like a lot of boomers, yeah.
	In theory, I agree with his general principle.
	You should probably be a little bit older.
	It's a bit more worldly to be a teacher, but you can do.
	Hi Lotus readers, Robert Arts Video here.
	I have a suggestion for the Conservative statues and it's my dad.
	I want a statue made of my dad.
	He's awesome.
	He's the best dad I could ever hope for.
	And why don't we just build statues of everybody's dad?
	Who's the best dad?
	Just throwing that in there.
	Something to think about for the dadism and I hope Carl can maybe answer that or add to that.
	That's what bench dedications are often for, aren't they?
	I'm just thinking how funny that would be if all of a sudden it became a British tradition that everyone made statues of their dad, sort of like when you see like rural Chinese people making their own coffins, so everyone has to do their own.
	That's a proper thing.
	I mean, what would the country look like exactly if everyone just had a statue of their dad?
	Like we've been taken over by the Weeping Angels.
	Yeah.
	It's just the inscriptions would be good.
	I don't know who that guy's dad is though, so sorry.
	Yeah, he's just appreciating his dad.
	Yeah, it's fair enough.
	In Roman times, the father of the household, the Pater Familias, had the power of life and death over all the rest of the family.
	And so, yeah, you sort of revered your father, even if you were consul of Rome, you still did what your dad told you to do.
	Even if you're a full-grown man, you're head of legions, but your dad tells you to sit down and shut up now, you're sort of obliged to do it.
	We've just completely lost that, haven't we?
	Abandoned all that sort of thing in our culture.
	Not for the best, really, is it?
	Almost certainly.
	I'd rather Josh's dad got a statue than Nelson Mandela or Oliver Cromwell, so I'm happy to vacate the two spots.
	Hey lads, I was just listening to Lads Hour and was very pleased that Beau brought up the idea of the Space Elevator.
	From my memory, the earliest potential one to be started is in 2040, though most likely we'll see a Lunar Elevator being constructed first, because it's a lot easier to do a Lunar Elevator than it is one from Earth.
	So yeah, Space Elevators are definitely on the cards.
	Interesting.
	There's a very good Arthur C. Clarke novel, it's all about a space elevator.
	I haven't even considered the idea of a lunar elevator, but yeah.
	We need to make new materials at the molecular level that are much, much stronger even than diamond and more elastic than elastic.
	Maybe we can do it in the future.
	Hopefully, I think we'll be able to do it in decades to come when we can create, on a mass scale, these sort of incredible materials.
	But just right now, I don't think it's physically possible.
	I just saw the Boyhood Wonder just spark in your eyes as soon as you said that.
	Pretty daring!
	Yeah, space elevators.
	I could just bang on and on and on about space elevators for a couple of hours.
	I'm surprised you haven't heard of a lunar one before, I'm honest.
	Well, I mean, yeah, you could do it on On any planet, I suppose.
	Do you know about George Bush's plans to set up a moon base?
	Which George Bush?
	George Bush Junior?
	Yeah, Junior.
	The second one.
	Right, yeah.
	W. It always just annoys me, but if it wasn't for 9-11, we probably would have a moon base.
	There would be cash in there to do it.
	Actually, have you ever played that?
	I'll go find you a game to send you.
	You'll love it.
	Okay.
	Play the next one.
	Alright, here's the sheep and lamb system, right there.
	There's the inside.
	A little heat lamp.
	A little lamb there.
	It's been negative 10 degrees.
	Hey girl.
	Hey mom.
	There you go.
	Built this out of an old duck shelter we had.
	We took the door and bolted onto the front.
	That was my wife's idea.
	I put straw in it.
	Then my wife also had the idea to put the heat lamp in there because it's been very cold.
	And yeah, as you saw, the water was right in front of it.
	Nice little shelter.
	Lambs are healthy.
	Oh, ain't ya?
	That's cute.
	Yeah, it's nice and wholesome.
	Yeah, I saw capybaras for the first time on the weekend, so I like, I like animals.
	Oh, really?
	Yeah, in person.
	How, how do they- Big guinea pigs.
	How are they real?
	Yeah, they're hamster dogs.
	There's actually a video I've seen of, there's just this open tray of guinea pigs in sawdust, and a capybara climbs into it thinking it's one of them, just takes up all the spa- I'm just rambling.
	Capybara are cute, yeah, for sure.
	What else is there to say?
	Send in more cute videos, please.
	All right, let's go to the comments.
	So Omar Awad says, I wonder how Hasan would react if pirates reenacted Sam Hyde calling him out.
	We're coming to kill you.
	Probably has a different vibe coming from the terrorists.
	That's such a good idea.
	I might try and message that kid now.
	Just be like, hey, come on.
	All right, all right.
	Would you like fun?
	You're going to have got some good ideas for it, too.
	He's probably going to set up a fiver or something.
	Would Sam Hyde go to Yemen?
	I think he might!
	I feel like if Hassan... Sorry, if Destiny's got a million dollars to spare... I mean, getting Sam Hyde to Yemen...
	I don't know.
	I mean, he's got money to burn.
	Burn at doing, you know, interesting things.
	Van Von Warhawk says, so Hassan Piker is comfortable talking to Islamic pirates, thinks New York deserved 9-11, and is always quick to hate on America.
	However, he is always quicker to cry out for American police and lawyers, all while hiding behind American libel liberal laws once certain Irish candy boxer men show up.
	Yeah.
	I mean, the guy's just a React streamer.
	There's a few of these on Twitter now because of the monetization of Twitter.
	It's become more prevalent.
	What's that one?
	I think it's, like, historical videos, it's called, the account.
	And a lot of what it puts up is just crap, like, just false things.
	It found, for example, this image of some guys in the Old West, and there's two of them, and they're holding a sign, and they're saying they're single or something, or Some weird thing like we're fertile or some crap like that.
	And he took it and then posted it being like, oh, this is gay men in 1870 America.
	No, no, it's guys looking for wives.
	You just... I just hate these accounts so much, but Hassan's one of them.
	Anyway, George Happ says, I mean, Hassan is basically a terrorist and the Turks are pretty OK with slavery.
	They did pioneer the word, after all.
	So I don't see why people are surprised by his sympathies for the pirate.
	Yeah, I mean, if he's sort of, again, pro-Turkish or his uncle, you know, decided for himself the Young Turks are sort of Ottoman, sort of, the original Young Turks are sort of ultra-Ottoman nationalist types.
	Yeah, pro-slavery then.
	Not a problem.
	wrong.
	Yeah.
	Ulsterman Rab says you will find that most of our men who fought and died in war have been very young.
	Only the very young are daft enough to charge a machine gun nest for warring inbred cousins.
	Case in point, I joined the Royal Marine Corps when I was 16.
	Well, how was Exmouth?
	It's true, quite a lot of, through the ages as well, but up to and including today, quite a lot of infantrymen, quite a lot of tankers, young, very young, You know, surprisingly young, to me anyway, sort of 19, 20 year old, in your early 20s.
	Because yeah, you're sort of more pliant really.
	You're more likely to do as you're ordered.
	When you're 20 than when you're 40.
	Yeah, so they've got the gumption for glory seeking and there were tons of 14 year old boys that lied about their age to go and serve in the First World War.
	Right, yeah.
	Yeah, it was a classic thing during the Troubles that there'd be squaddies over in Northern Ireland getting shot or blown up and they're like 17, 18.
	You look at the death lists from World War One.
	Terribly young, a lot of the time.
	Terribly, terribly young.
	18, 19, 20, 21.
	I'm going to look up what the average age is in Yemen, because I wonder if that's having an effect too.
	Because in Afghanistan, the average age we looked up the other day is 17.
	That's the average.
	Oh, the average of fighting age?
	No, the average age of a human being in Afghanistan is 17.
	Oh, okay.
	It's just like, okay, I mean, what do you expect to find in the average Afghan if the average age is 17?
	Also, when you're young, you know, I'm old enough now to be able to look back on it, but when you're young, even younger than you guys, and you've never been sort of terribly wounded or injured, you think you're invincible as a young bloke.
	You know, you've got way too much energy and testosterone and bravery, for want of a better word.
	You've got so much, you've got a massive surplus of it, right?
	You know, I can go and fight and die, nothing's going to hurt me, right?
	And then you lose a hand or something.
	And then reality gets in the way, yeah.
	But it does make sense that much, much younger guys are the ones most likely to at least volunteer to fight and die or blow themselves up or whatever it is.
	Alright, well let's move on to the next section.
	Yep. Garlic Goblin, what a hell of a name.
	It seems like the Tories hate the idea of Westminster being sovereign.
	Yes, globalists and war government types are like that.
	Based 8, given the state of our police force and healthcare policies, I've become radicalised into the belief that I do not want the government to protect me anymore.
	Give me a gun, some antibiotics, and leave me the hell alone.
	Ron Gibson, I'm with Callum.
	It's far too easy to go on the anti-vax stuff, but it's genuinely a good idea and it's a good thing to have a domestic capacity to make a vaccine so you don't have to rely on some Chinese-Russian product.
	And then he talks about the COVID-19 lab exists, uh, full genome for 2019.
	I haven't seen the source for that.
	To be fair, that wasn't my point.
	I mean, number one, this was the development station where they tested the efficacy of the vaccines.
	So clearly they didn't do a very good bloody job because the vaccines were rubbish.
	They didn't prevent transmission.
	They also didn't prevent death and hospitalization, significant numbers.
	And secondly, they don't even know what disease is yet, but they're using disease X as a pretext to implement vaccine mandates and also develop a new product they're going to make us buy.
	Like, not great.
	I just thought it was funny, interesting, ironic, weird.
	Of all the places, it's at Porton Down.
	You know, it's like, let's make up a peace treaty for the whole world and do it at Los Alamos, right?
	It's like that.
	Why there, of all places?
	But okay, okay, you're saving the world from biological warfare at Porton Down.
	Alright, okay, are we?
	Okay.
	I think it's because it's so secure.
	Like, I don't know if you've ever been around Porton Down.
	There is no way you get in there.
	It's a bloody thing.
	I knew someone who actually worked there.
	Okay.
	And he, yeah, he's, it's one of the most secure places in the whole of Britain.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Yeah, if you're going to have the appropriate facilities, sure.
	It's just really funny that that's the place if you were going to say that, well, you're a far-right conspiracy theorist for thinking something weird is going on here.
	Yeah.
	Animus.
	Nice pun.
	Connor, great work on the Davos review of Disease X. I hate the words conspiracy theory because they're just used to keep people from doing their own research and listening to what the elites are currently saying at Davos.
	We saw what they did last time.
	The power troopers are working on Lock Us Down again, and this time they don't want any countries like Sweden who don't play along.
	Quite.
	I mean, even the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation did a massive study that compared all of the policies in the US, and they said, well actually, lockdowns and masks didn't really work about the death rate or the transmission rate.
	The only thing that worked is the vaccine, which is the thing that we conveniently funded.
	Isn't that funny?
	Anyway, do we want to go on to some of yours?
	That also seems to make people... We can't say stuff like that, can we?
	We can, we're on the website.
	Oh, OK.
	Oh, right.
	Well, there's also just the access deaths thing.
	Yeah, all the heart attacks and the miscarriages, yeah.
	Which seems to be... Is it, sort of, beyond all question, it's just objectively true to say that they're linked, these access deaths and people that took vaccines?
	Are we in that place yet?
	Can we say that?
	Is that true?
	In inverted commas?
	Someone will know more than us, almost suddenly.
	It seems to be though, doesn't it?
	There's a strong correlation, it seems.
	Yeah, right.
	All the autopsy.
	I mean, there's been, what was that bloody documentary that I showed to Carl?
	Died suddenly or something, where they're pulling long stringy blood clots of fibrous proteins out of people's veins that cause them to have heart attacks.
	Brett Weinstein recently went on Tucker Carlson.
	He said he's estimated it.
	This is a big number, so I don't know, but about 17 million excess deaths that could be possibly traced back to the vaccine.
	So, smarter people than me.
	This is the thing, like, how do you find out and then what percentage is it?
	Because I did get bored, especially with the...
	There's a group of people who are so anti-vax and stuck in the COVID mindset.
	I should preface this with, obviously, we're all anti-mandate.
	You can take it if you want to, but there's probably risks.
	They're lying to you about there being no risks, blah, blah, blah.
	We're all on the same page on that stuff.
	But then there's a group of people, I find, that are still online, who are obsessed with the vaccines in a way that they seem to believe that everyone who takes them Is now dead?
	And obviously that can't possibly be the case.
	I mean, hundreds of millions of people ended up taking it.
	Probably the billions, actually, when I think about it.
	So what is the death rate?
	I just think you need to be realistic about what actually happened rather than what I see online sometimes, which is mental.
	But there's mental things to all sides.
	That's fair enough, that's fair enough.
	And I agree with everything you just said.
	The idea that a vaccine should be anything other than entirely good for you though.
	If there's one excess death it'll be like, well we need to have a re-look at this.
	I did medical science at university, and this was one of the things we looked at, which is just when is the procedure or treatment worth it?
	And for cancer patients, it was the funnest thing I ever did, considering how morbid it is.
	That might be a bit strange.
	But we were looking at breast cancer, and we had to calculate whether or not it was worth treating the patient.
	and we'd even go as young as like let's assume a baby has breast cancer and then you run it through the formulas and that's always been part of science and that's one of the things that was mad about the covid period in which they were like oh no there's no deaths everyone's fine everyone's hunky-dory they're all smiling i was like no There's always going to be a very small, hopefully a small number, always going to be some.
	So the adult way of dealing with these things is that, okay, we're going to make them and we're going to calculate the risk factor.
	And then we're going to apply that risk factor to the correct patient.
	Because the problem we ran into in this country, especially, was we were giving COVID vaccines to, how young did it go in the end?
	I think it might've been 10 years old?
	Six months.
	Six months.
	And if you run the numbers, I mean, sort of after 40, it's definitely not worth it.
	So why the hell are you going that young?
	And it's obviously corruption.
	I mean, what we went through during that period is horrific, but for some people I find online who just are stuck in that for a good reason because of what happened, but then going so far as to be like, I don't know.
	I mean it's a time bomb of some kind.
	Yeah I mean you get you get into like everything you get the extremes right and you get into some people who are just like you know what the MMR vaccine is secretly trying to kill us all.
	It's like no man like there's there's corruption there's bad science being implemented and quite frankly some evil stuff that went on during the pandemic but there's there's a faction of people I see online who just Need to pull themselves back into reality, occasionally.
	Imagine being a parent and being so scared that you okayed your six-month-old getting the injection.
	I mean, terrible.
	You aren't thinking about medicine, which is the result of someone lying to you and saying, oh no, it's just good.
	Stab the baby.
	That's it.
	Michael Henderson said, on the WHO treaty changes, I'm with Beau, just say no.
	Not even once!
	There's someone you forgot to ask!
	Briefly public!
	Yeah.
	I'll scroll down to you in a bit.
	Well, we're out of time, aren't we?
	Oh, pretty much.
	Alright.
	If people would like more, go to the website.

▲