All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 25, 2024 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters
01:30:31
The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #1008
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
*Music* Hello and welcome to Club Med of the Lotus Eaters.
This is the 25th of September, 2024.
For those who are audio listeners after the fact, you're not going to get that, but Stereo... Stereo Sicario isn't going to be a permanent fixture of the show.
Return of Stereos.
Hyrule, everyone.
I got very good comments, so maybe... Maybe.
Someone asked who was castrating the office cat with that anaesthetic.
That's very good.
Anyway, we're joined by Stelios, Josh and myself.
Connor, we're going to be discussing how America's politicians are planning for a possible mass casualty event.
Very afraid.
The Met Police admitting to two-tier policing and Sausagegate.
And given Stelios is presenting that, I'm concerned.
With what Sausage Gate is going to entail.
It's the fateful stripy jacket day as well.
So you know we're in for something.
Our most delightful ice cream salesman is going to be here to bring us only the most tasty of memes.
Anyway, something else you've brought us, Stelios, is Islander issue 2, which is still on sale.
I'm going to hold this now, as you can see.
Maybe it's in focus.
It's still on the website.
It's going to be for another three weeks.
Is that right, Samson?
Okay, excellent.
I've basically got that confirmation.
We all know about as much as each other.
But what I do know is there's some great essays in this.
You've got more essays than you did beforehand.
It's only 15 quid.
And because it's going to be printed to order, you should get it within two or three weeks rather than...
Excellent, first batch has already gone to print, the voice of God tells me, so you should be getting them soon, if you've ordered it and your country isn't rubbish and stops it at the border.
Remember, limited run, so you can't get it after we stop printing it, and then issue three will come along with all new things.
Ooh, it's even got a bit of poetry in the back, as you can see.
Oh, oh, can't read it yet.
Gotta read it to... I like how...
You say, if your country is rubbish and stops it at the border.
So anyway, on to immigration.
Yeah, anyway, yeah.
Funnily enough, they can stop magazines, but not Infinity Africans.
Yeah, brilliant.
Anyway, my show's also up at three o'clock today, because it is a Wednesday, and I'm going to be chatting to the lovely Ayaan Hirsi Ali, herself an immigrant who actually quite likes the respective countries that she lives in, like the US, Netherlands, and UK, and would like to keep them that way, about Islam, immigration, Christian revival.
So go, and be sure to, if you aren't already a subscriber already, Can I have the magazine first?
Sorry, I need it as a comfort blanket.
watch that live and we'll address comments and things like that.
But without further ado, Josh, take it away with the news.
Can I have the magazine first?
Sorry, I need it as a comfort blanket.
It's like my totem of confidence.
And also I need to shell it in a bit.
But I America's politicians seem to be a little bit scared and today I'm going to be looking at their preparations for a mass casualty event.
I'm going to misspeak when I say that because I keep on saying it wrong for whatever reason.
There's lots of interesting things about this and I'm going to discuss lots of the implications of this because I actually think it's a very interesting and important topic as well as the fact that there are lots of things about The discussion around it and the reporting and who's involved in it that I find interesting and I'd be very interested to see what you guys make of it because it sort of gets my spidey senses tingling, my political spidey senses that is, and I feel like there's something going on here.
There's something more to it than what it's presented as.
But first, Islander.
It is the best magazine ever to exist.
Particularly the last piece in it is very good, and that's not because I did it, but it's only for sale for a short amount of time.
You'll want to read it.
You'll be kicking yourself.
The government can never censor this.
It can take down our website.
It can take down our videos.
It'll never take that magazine away from you.
So if you want something permanent, you want something that is lasting, you want something that is beautiful, get this magazine.
But with that out the way, I have noticed these articles in recent weeks.
So here is the Washington Post.
Scarred by violence, lawmakers plan for possible mass casualty event.
And the byline is, Congress must ensure it can continue to govern in the aftermath of mass violence, a bipartisan group of the House members argues.
What violence are they referring to?
Is this January 6th?
No, as in, they're anticipating there to be violence.
They're expecting there to be future political violence and potential mass casualty events of lawmakers.
Just vaguely?
Vaguely.
But it says, scarred not scared, so that would imply in the headline, I know it's Washington Post so the standards are low, that something has already happened Hence why they're expecting another thing to happen.
So I will be coming back to this article because it's not as unprecedented.
It does validate that with some of the direct quotes of the people involved in the push for this constitutional change and I'll be coming back to that once I actually explain a little bit more about it.
But Politico also picked up on this as well with a very long article.
I'm not going to read any of it because I want you to have brain cells left.
But it goes on and on and on, lots of pictures.
Obviously a lot of work has gone into this, and another left-wing outlet as well, one that I tend not to read very much, is Newser as well.
So all of these three outlets have written articles within a couple of days of each other, and that always makes me think, hmm, something's going on here.
And particularly because the constitutional amendment that we're talking about, the one that wants to, well we'll talk about the details in a second, but basically prepare for a mass casualty event of members of congress, was in the works from March.
So here's Derek Kilmer who's one of the people sort of proposing this bill.
This is the 7th of March.
Is he a democrat or a republican?
I believe this guy is a Democrat.
It's a bipartisan thing, by the way.
So there's two Dems and two Republicans associated with it, who we'll talk about in a second.
And also another person.
This is another Democrat.
This is on his website, but the key thing is the date here.
7th of March again.
And here is Bill Track.
7th March, it's introduced and is now in the committee stage.
So you'd think, well, why is this being discussed now all of a sudden in September, when this is something that happened back in March?
Because that seems unusual, doesn't it?
Could it be the lead-up to the election, perhaps?
Well, It could also be this, that the committee has heard about it and is making a big deal about it.
So this is, if you're listening, it's testimony before the Subcommittee on Modernisation, Committee on House Administration and the House of Representatives.
That last one being the most relevant because of course the House of Representatives is where all the people proposing the bill are members, and so it makes sense that they're proposing a bill to talk about, well, what happens if we're all killed?
We need to keep the function of government going, basically.
And I'm going to talk a little bit about who's proposing it.
So, from the Democrat side, it's Representative Derek Kilmer, who is a representative for Washington.
And just a little bit of tidbit, ...for who he is.
He's ranked among the most bipartisan members of Congress, so he's least likely to vote with, you know, the fringe wings of the party.
He is generally accepted as someone you do work with.
Yeah, seemingly so.
He's the most willing in the Democratic Party, or one of the most willing, to work with the other side, which I think is quite a symbolic thing for a bipartisan bill.
Then you've got Emanuel Cleaver II, who is a Democrat for Missouri.
I'm probably mispronouncing it because everyone always calls me out on it but that's how I pronounce it as an English person, right?
And he belongs to the Congressional Progressive Caucus so he's from the more progressive wing of the Democratic Party and on the Republican side you have Brad Wenstrup who is from Ohio and William Timmons from South Carolina both of which have publicly defended Trump but are just sort of your run-of-the-mill Republican Conservatives.
Not really particularly of note, but it is worth mentioning that both Kilmer and Wenstrup are actually retiring at the end of the year, and if we can go back to this first article... gone too far!
Here we are.
This Washington Post one.
They actually have quotes from them talking about their reason for trying to push for this constitutional amendment, which we're going to go into in great detail.
I've got the words there that we can read directly.
So he says, it should be somewhere in the body of the text.
I've just pulled it out.
Derek Kilmer says we've seen a 300% increase in threats against members over the last seven years according to the Capitol Police.
In an environment where we have seen growing tendency towards political violence imagine, horrifically, a baseball practice where someone has bad intentions and better aim.
Of course this is a reference to the 2017 baseball attack isn't it?
I was going to ask actually whether or not Steve Scalise is in support of this given he was the congressman that was shot at the congressional baseball game.
I've not seen much pushback against this to be fair, although it hasn't been introduced into the house yet and so there's not really been much publicity of the pushback.
People might privately have objections to it but we just don't know yet.
But he continues to say you can literally flip a majority for three or four months which I think is a frightening incentive for political violence.
Now I actually think that this is quite a good argument.
He might be a Democrat, sure, but that is a good point that if a shooter were to take out a significant portion of Congress it could flip the balance and those three to four months could be seen as a justification to someone who is willing to do that.
to push things in whichever side they're from and so that does actually seem like a legitimate reason but it is interesting that this is being considered now of all times because it's a pretty formal acknowledgement that political violence is now a very very serious problem in America Well the grilling of Kim Cheadle after the first Trump assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania was broadly bipartisan.
It did have representatives like Ayanna Pressley and Jasmine Crockett trying to insist that DEI is a good thing and actually that more Democrat lawmakers are having their lives put at risk because Republicans say that certain people that DEI hires But AOC even had some solid contributions because I think she realised, as did many other Democrats, that if Trump is in the crosshairs, as Biden urged people to put him in there, that they are next on the list.
It's just a matter of ranked priorities.
And they are on the list from people who would retaliate if their Republican counterparts were to be shot.
Neither of them want to particularly put their lives on the line so they may want to defend people of all political stripes even though they still do the rhetoric which puts Trump's life in danger.
There's common interest here because basically they suffer from the same danger.
They can do something about it together and yeah it sounds plausible.
Yeah, I do think so.
Although, once we read the thing, I have lots of questions that we can sort of break down what could possible ulterior motives be and things like that as well.
Because there are some, there's a little bit of devil in the detail there, let's just say that.
Always.
Always, yes.
So representative Brad Wenstrup was talking about the 2017 baseball attack.
I can't get my words out today.
A violent domestic terrorist attempt to assassinate Republican members of Congress.
And this is the guy who actually treated Steve Scalise at the event itself.
And so he's got a very specific reason to have a sort of bone to pick with this sort of thing.
He had names in his pocket, descriptions in his pocket.
This was a clear assassination attempt and he decided to use murder or assassination as a tool for political change.
He wanted to wipe out the Republican majority and change the balance of power.
I would contend that's an insurrection by one person.
Interesting use of words there, isn't it?
So it is also worth mentioning as well, the Republicans involved in this bill have defended Trump and the legal challenges brought against him, saying that they're farcical and politically motivated.
So that is also worth bearing in mind.
So it's not necessarily that he's using that word to side exclusively with the Democrats here.
To be fair, I don't think they have much of a choice here.
None of them.
They don't have a choice on the matter.
Because if anything happens either way, It's gonna escalate.
I have my suspicions.
I'll put it this way.
We are approaching the time of an October surprise and things are not necessarily looking good for the Harris camp even though I do think there's still a significant cohort of morons out there that could put her in the White House over Trump.
Okay, given how the Mayor of DC and Nancy Pelosi stood down the National Guard ahead of January 6th, and then they used January 6th as the pretext to lock up anyone being given a guided tour of the Capitol by the police as a political prisoner,
I wouldn't be shocked if this is just the legislation that the current administration can use in the interim period before either Harris or Trump are inaugurated to further clamp down on the Republicans and their supporters following some inexplicable event.
I mean, let's be fair, and I don't think it's too conspiratorial to say, there are still questions around Thomas Crooks and Ryan Routh, how they got Trump's schedule, how they got so close to the venues.
It's not impossible that there were, as Crooks' phone records show, some sort of intelligence agency involvement.
So it's also not impossible that an event could happen between now and the election or after the election, and then pieces of legislation like this could say, well, this put Congress at risk, therefore we need to take these emergency measures as part of the Constitution to crack down on this.
And one final thing as well.
A little while ago, end of last month, there was a New York Times op-ed that said the Constitution is dangerous.
And the main point of that article was that there has not been a new amendment introduced for 50 years.
And this is getting in the way of rolling out all of these entitlements given to clientele groups in the name of rights.
The fact that it's a new amendment rather than a bill makes me feel a bit uncomfortable.
Yes, I get that same impression as well.
Yeah, but I want to go back to something you said about the questions about the two would-be assassins.
Obviously there are questions, because especially when it comes to Trump's second attempt to his life when he was in his golf course.
A lot of people have said that this was a spontaneously organized golf game.
So how did he get the information to be there?
I think he is known for playing on his own golf courses.
Maybe he was just there at the right time.
It is possible.
Yeah, it's possible.
All of that's probabilities.
Yeah, all of that's probabilities.
But I really don't think that Even if that is the case and there is something inside that coordinates things, if that's the case, I really don't think that everyone in Congress and everyone in the House of Representatives would just know of it.
I'm not saying you are.
I'm introducing another angle into the conversation because It's also their lives that are at risk.
So if people are playing dangerous games, they are using a lot of these politicians also as bait.
To sort of respond to what you were saying just a second ago, I think From the evidence that I've looked at so far, the most likely thing is that things like the intelligence agencies that are responsible for Trump's security detail are just complacent and they're dragging their feet about giving him the right resources because he's been critical of them and they are sort of dispassionate, to put it
lightly about having to protect him at all because... I would agree, but given that certain members of Congress investigating it haven't ruled out the possibility of a mole, it makes me concerned that between now and then there is the perverse incentive, either through complacency or active coordination, to have some kind of event that would manufacture consent for Congress under a new article of the Constitution to cede to themselves more censorious powers.
I can certainly see it being a very likely thing.
So anyway, let's get on to the body of this proposal.
Section 1.
Immediately after taking the oath of office, an individual who is elected to serve as a representative of the House of Representatives shall provide the House of Representatives with a list of at least five designees to take the individual's place in the event the individual dies prior to The expiration of the individual's term of office.
The individual shall ensure that the list only contains the names of designees who meet the qualifications for service as a representative in the House of Representatives.
Is that going to be made public around the time of them campaigning?
Is that going to be listed on the ballot paper underneath them?
Is it going to be like John Fetterman's case where when he had his stroke people thought his wife was just going to take over or like Biden who was absent the recent cabinet?
So this brings up one of my questions about it already.
So how would temporarily filling vacant seats with these chosen people by the members themselves affect the democratic legitimacy of the house in the first place right?
Considering that these replacements aren't directly elected by the people unlike all the other representatives does that not further denigrate the legitimacy of the democratic process which may well actually be the motivating factor for some people to engage in these mass casualty events in the first place.
Is that not unintentionally making the problem worse by making Congress less democratic than it was before in the first place?
Well it's like the idea essentially that JFK was shot to get Lyndon Johnson in because he complied more with what the powers that be wanted to do in terms of legislation.
The other alternative question that I would have is if someone is on that list of five replacements and gets selected During the months that they're serving as the congressional replacement in the House or Senate, can they also run to be the replacement while they're serving?
So, if that's the case, is there not the incentive to have the person who has listed you killed in a mass casualty event, you then get put in for two or three months, and you say, well, I've been put in for two or three months now, so I may as well run to be the representative full-time, and get ahead that way?
It seems like it, yeah.
So I'm going to read section 2 and 3 together and then ask some of the questions because I'm running out of time slowly.
So in the event of the death of a representative, the chief executive of the state involved shall, not later than 10 days after the date of death of the representative, select an individual from the most recent list of designees provided by the representative
whose seat is now vacant as provided by section one and the speaker of the house shall immediately fill the vacancy with the individual selected an individual designated to take the place of a representative shall serve until another member is elected to fill the vacancy pursuant to a special election then section three says during the period of an individual service under section two the individual shall be treated as a representative in the house of representatives for the purpose of all laws rules and regulations including
For purposes of Section 1, in the event of the death of an individual designated under Section 2, the Chief Executive of the State involved shall select an individual from the most recent list of designés provided by the individual designated under Section 2 as provided by Section 1.
Yes, lots of bureaucratic language here.
And the Speaker of the House shall immediately fill the vacancy with the individual selected.
So one of the questions here is how do they pick, because they're selecting five candidates, How and why are they gonna pick the person that they pick?
Surely they would want to pick the most qualified, but surely then you're empowering a specific person a lot more than otherwise, and if they don't like, say, the person who's currently assuming that office, is there not an incentive for them to take the mass casualty event in their own hands and replace a large swathe of the Congress, or at least what they are able to do within their state?
Especially if there is someone on the waiting list who might fulfill a certain quota and if you're a delusional progressive who thinks that there should be by fiat a certain number more diverse congressmen or even ones of a particular religion and you think I could bump off this congressman and get my guy in there would also be the incentive to do that.
It's not good.
I also think it's very ambitious to have this 10 days for someone to be replaced because in a special election The average is 136 days and there are states that can do it much quicker than that.
So the discrepancy there is actually quite small and although I see what the at least stated justification is, you could just focus on speeding up the special election and avoid a lot of these Criticisms that you could make of it being undemocratic and potentially introducing perverse incentives to kill off representatives that are not seen as serving interests of whichever person might be doing it.
What do you think, Stelios?
No, I'm... I'm covered.
Don't have something to add to this.
Okay.
And also, it's worth mentioning, is it really that different to the clause in the 17th Amendment that allows governors to appoint temporary Senate replacements, of course this is for the House, until special elections are held?
Because that's done in the Senate and that, of course, is already an amendment.
Why does it have to be its own thing, its own amendment?
And is it potentially going to have other things inserted in it that provide undue power as well?
We don't know.
But it's one thing that I've noticed and I read about, and the fact that lots of left-wing outlets all of a sudden started talking about it and pushing it, that I found interesting.
It seems to me to be signalling some sort of shift in the way politics operates.
What that actually means, I suppose we'll have to see.
Excellent.
Wonderful.
Samson, I'll let you get the next tabs up.
We do have a dollar rumble rant from Lucian Jaeger, but the actual content of the rant, I don't know what that means, and I am concerned because it asks us to Google a thing, so I am not going to read that out just in case it's something that comes back to bite me in the arse.
Koala facts.
It's not koala.
It's spelled differently, so I don't know what that actually means.
I read it as koala.
Yeah.
I'm gonna Google it against my better judgment.
Oh, unless he means koala because the koalas have that particular STD.
I did think of that.
That might be it.
Okay.
I can't really find very much.
There we go.
I don't have no idea.
It's okay.
Anyway, thanks for the lead.
Thank you very much.
Do I need an islander shill at the start, by the way, Samson?
I've broken the thing.
Samson's punching his microphone.
Do you want to get the page up?
That's OK, lads.
We're professionals over here.
That's fine.
Before we start, sorry, could I have the other one?
OK, I was going to give it to you at the end.
It's OK.
I'll leave it.
It's all right.
It's a bit late now.
We've got an interim.
Just go and get yourself a cup of tea.
Getting a view behind the curtain.
I know, yeah.
As if Stelios' singing wasn't enough.
Right, ladies and gentlemen.
Oh, well.
So the Met Police have just come out and admitted there is two-tier policing, which we always knew, and they've admitted that they're going to make it even worse.
Now, if you don't know what I'm referring to, it's their truly anti-racist action plan that they've published in the last two days, which, the short version, before I get into some of the quotes and drive you all mad, is that we're going to be paying increasing amounts of money as British taxpayers to set up diversity and inclusion inquisition panels to ensure that every Met Police officer is sufficiently brainwashed with the current thing
And if you make a single off-colour joke, in the most literal sense of the term, you will be sacked, and there are incentives for your peers to dob you in for promotions.
That's true.
So to get to the rank of inspector, you've got to have reported one of your colleagues for something, which is not good for building camaraderie, is it?
If you've got to be a grass.
And I don't think people want to work with people like that.
Even when I was a young child, snitches get stitches was a prescient phrase, and it's only aged like fine wine.
Now they get promoted.
Because they're promoting the diversity thing.
Yep, and they're going to be even more encouraged to do so.
But before we get into that, if you want something made by competent people, we are selling Islander at the moment.
Remember, if you're on YouTube, we actually don't have any YouTube monetization, so in order to keep the lights on, you can subscribe to LotusEaters.com for as little as £5 a month to get all the fantastic content we do behind the paywall, including my show on a Wednesday.
But also, we sell physical magazines.
It's quarterly.
Rory puts a fantastic amount of work into all of the art that you see on the cover and inside.
It's £15.
They send them according to batches.
The first batch has been printed, so it should be shipped to you if you've already ordered within two or three weeks.
I think it only runs for another three-ish weeks, so get it while you can, because it won't be reprinted, and it has fantastic essays in there from Charles Cornishdale, Stefan Molyneux, our very own Carl, and even some poetry from this fella right here, so... Who?
Never should have come here.
Anyway, go and pick that up, but let's get into it.
So, Mark Rowley, the demented little dwarf that is heading up the Met Police, He was the guy who just threw away the microphone, yes.
Very resentful.
Didn't give good vibes.
No, no, no.
He's a deeply petty man.
Essentially, for those who don't remember, I think it was a Sky News journalist, four people, put out his microphone as Mark Rowley walked out of a contentious Cobra meeting with a very upset Keir Starmer and said, are we going to end two-tier policing, sir?
And he smacked the microphone out of The reporter's hand, and then insisted that he didn't do that, and then also suggested he might extradite Elon Musk for allowing people on X to spread misinformation.
That's very, very embarrassing.
Both domestically and internationally for the Met Police, isn't it?
Strangely, really pathetic short people were on London.
So we had Cressida Dick, Mark Rowley, Sadiq Khan, just fundamentally unimpressive people were on My Capital City, and you can tell.
But anyway, Mark Rowley, this was an article In the BBC, the sort of state propaganda's mouthpiece, and there was a few quotes in here I thought I'd pull out before I read through the actual report myself because you guys don't have time to read these reports.
There's nothing else I love doing more than reading a really boring report and telling you what all our money's going to be spent on.
Anyway, so the aim is for the Met to become a, quote, truly anti-racist and inclusive organisation.
according to sir mark rowley remember he's a knight of the realm and he said black londoners have been let down by the met over many years and while we continue to take steps in the right direction there remains a long way to go and there is more work to do action not words will rebuild trust in our service so we must now remain focused on delivering real change this scene and felt by our communities and our workforce stelis would you like to come in before you punch me uh no no i wasn't i don't want to punch you no that i don't want to
You see, I get particularly frustrated when I hear people having this rhetoric because it reminds me a lot of people in the university.
It's people who constantly want to virtue signal.
They think that their bottom is safe.
And they want to play nice with other people's jobs.
So he doesn't look to me to be someone who would be a diversity hire when he was hired.
But now he wants to talk about diversity hire and make a truly anti-racist police.
How about resigning if you actually believe in all these things?
Resigning and giving your position to someone else you think requires more representation.
How about that?
Have you considered he's basically one of the many philosopher kings stewarding us into the progressive utopia and therefore he's okay?
He's a policing Peter Dinklage isn't he?
Because in the same way that Peter Dinklage said he didn't want any more Dwarf actors after he became a dwarf actor.
He doesn't want any more white police officers or male police officers after he's already got to the top.
Well he says exactly that.
He says the Met want to better represent the communities it serves and is working to recruit to retain a more diverse workforce.
AKA, only black people should be policed by black people, apparently, according to the Met.
All new recruits are being trained to understand the experience of black Londoners and other communities across the capital, according to the Met.
Remember, by the way, communities is a dog whistle term for non-white and religious minorities in Britain that the government have imported.
But if you complain about that and you notice that there are ethnic distinctions, you are far right and a racist.
Tensions over stop and search have included the treatment of two black athletes athletes team gb runner bianca williams and her partner portuguese sprinter ricardo dos santos two met constables were sacked in october 2023 after a disciplinary panel found their actions during a highly distressing stop and search amounted to gross misconduct and another one that's mentioned here which i want to bring up is a 15 year old black girl called child q strip searched while on her period um at a school in hackney in 2020 Now, the child's mother has claimed that she was strip-searched because of her race and sex.
They were looking for drugs and found none.
It was obviously very traumatizing for the child.
The problem is she was strip-searched by two female officers.
So why would they profile her for her sex?
It's strange, isn't it?
It's almost like they're trying to pull a grievance out of their behinds, isn't it?
Yeah, they're trying to curb our intersectionality in there where it isn't.
Also, if you were going to profile people based on, let's say, levels of criminality in the capital, it would be black men because they commit the overwhelming number of the stabbings.
But we're not allowed to notice that either because that's also racism.
No, it's only due to discrimination.
And so, here's an example.
So we've got the report here.
I think we've got it open.
Fantastic.
I'm just going to scroll down and read some quotes from it and see what you make of it, gents.
The main quote that I pulled out here was something that Harry Miller discussed with me when we last did Deprogrammed for New Culture Forum, which you should watch.
There's some great insights.
And they quote in here from Sir Robert Peel, who founded the British Police.
In 1829, when he established the Metropolitan Police Act, he said, Now, what that has been taken to mean in the present day is that there is no hierarchical arrangement between the police and the public.
They are on essentially the same level, except the police are in possession of this new orthodoxy, and so they can reciprocally indoctrinate the public.
If they reflect the public, therefore they have to impose a new ideology on the public until the public and the police are saying the same thing.
So rather than the police being at the service of the public, the police essentially just have to brainwash the public by policing thoughts.
Or, in addition to this, there is a different conception of who the public is.
There's a different conception of who us are, and who they are.
You do see this, actually, because when people talk about, particularly the right, they say, well, they aren't truly British, or they don't represent us.
So they're trying to pick and choose who is actually British, rather than representing everyone.
And people on the left do this.
Of course, yeah.
They're trying to ideologically redefine Britishness as a set of values which are multicultural, liberal, pluralistic.
And so if you don't assent this new post-Blair redefinition of British identity, you are outside the box of British identity.
You're far right.
And it's actually... A xenomorph.
Well, it's your racism, right?
It's your noticing differences, which is causing the new minorities that are imported into London to commit crime in the first place.
Because if they were just felt welcome, they'd be as British as you and me and wouldn't go and stab each other with machetes.
But there you go.
Well, I've not felt welcome before.
I've not stabbed anyone.
No.
Normally I just leave.
Well, curiously, the Sikhs and the Boy Scouts carry knives all the time and they manage not to break out into duels.
I wonder if it's something to do with culture there.
So, in New Met for London, the Met Police set out their commitment to renew a culture of policing by consent, become anti-racist and build a Met that is inclusive, diverse and representative of the city we serve.
Through this London Race Action Plan, a thing that I'm actually having to read out, And a critical part of our company and culture plan, we are underlining the commitment to tackle racism in all its forms.
This plan is specifically and deliberately focused on our black communities, capitalized B there, acknowledging the history and the trust deficit, but there will be benefit for all in the service they receive from the Met.
London is one of the most diverse cities in the world.
Yeah, that's the problem.
The diversity gives the city its depth and breadth, its character, its heartbeat.
We will only succeed if we have a Met where we can all thrive, 3D contribute, and know that we'd be treated fairly.
But London is also an unequal city, and black communities in particular face barriers in education and employment, homelessness, criminal justice, and mental health.
as recognised by the mayor in City Hall's Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Strategy.
They're disproportionately more likely to be victims of crime, which ought to be of deep concern to all parts in civil society.
Black men are 13 times more likely to be murdered than their white counterparts, and black women are 66% more likely to be reported as victims of domestic abuse, and it's a scandal that needs urgent attention.
By who?
Who's committing the crimes, Mark?
Wasn't it an actual majority of violent crime is committed by black Londoners which represent 14% of the population of London?
So I think it was 14 and I think, what was it, 63% of gun crime?
I can't remember the exact figures but it's a significant portion.
Well, ethnic minorities in the UK are vastly overrepresented in robberies, sexual offences and stabbings.
And contrary to what people believe, this is logically possible.
And logistically possible.
We'll get Tariq Deshid on the case, I'm very sure.
They also say diversity strengthens organisations and is particularly essential in public services.
Oh, and all of those that are being run so wonderfully right now.
Yeah, you know why, Conor.
Because you have diversity of competent people and also incompetent people.
You need incompetent people.
Yeah, not anymore.
We don't have any competent people there at all, do we?
What they mean, diversity, again, is one of these buzzwords.
Just substitute it for non-white.
Because that's what they mean.
So they're saying, non-whiteness strengthens organisations and is particularly essential in public services.
So this plan, along with many other government plans, especially ones by Sadiq Khan, is to just South Africanise the UK.
So that's what this is going to be.
This is going to be policing according to racial lines.
So what I've sort of heard is that if we are policed by lesbian, Islamic, black amputees, there'll be no problems.
The policing will be perfect.
It'll be perfect for those constituent groups.
It'll be really bad for, you know, the law-abiding indigenous population.
Who might get a bit upset at a protest and say something a bit naughty that they probably shouldn't have done, but then they'll get longer sentences than actual sex offenders.
But don't worry, no tear-to-tear justice here.
They also say, we fully recognize that our plan will not go far enough, fast enough.
We're committed to becoming an anti-racist, pro-inclusive organization, and we recognize the need to evolve our communities throughout.
So they're fully hooked up to the ideology.
It's anti-white.
Yeah, it's just the ideology dialysis machine.
Like, this is all of our institutions on life support, and they're just constantly pumping, like, mental morphine through themselves.
So they say, here's some outlines about what they're going to do.
Our Positive Steps mentoring network has supported 1,500 ethnic minority officers and staff, and has been recognised as best practice by the College of Policing, who are currently policing more thought crimes than they are actual burglaries.
Since 2021, positive action workshops for black officers have seen pass rates for promotion increase from 68 to 75 percent.
Since 2021, all new police officer recruits receive community-centered training, including inputs to improve cultural awareness informed by the lived experiences of members of the black community.
Okay, to boil that down, they're by fiat increasing the number of non-whites in executive positions.
They've already been brainwashed with sort of critical race theory style ideology that blames all shortcomings of various non-whites in the UK on a conspiracy of racism by the white majority and now all the new recruits, white or otherwise, are going to be taught this ideology too so they're going to be policing along those lines.
There is also another dimension to this that in order to pursue these racial quotas basically They're lowering the standards to such a degree that the people they're recruiting are mentally incapable and sometimes physically incapable as well of doing the job of policing.
They've also reduced the English language requirements as far as I'm aware.
Which I feel like you've got to have a good comprehension of the English language because actually it's what the laws are written in and if you're going to enforce the law you need to be able to read what the law is.
But the major concern and the major goal of the police as well as the state, first and foremost, is ensuring public safety.
The very idea that people can do this and this not affecting public safety is just ridiculous.
You need to be stupid to believe this.
There's always a question of whether they care.
They carry out their client groups and again they're committed to this mad idea that human nature is just a product of economic and educational circumstances and so all they need to do is censor people pointing out cultural differences and there will be no cultural differences and then all crime will stop.
Yeah, I mean you say this and I agree up to a point but I don't know one thing about this.
They can't ensure the public safety of their client groups because their client groups are directly incompatible.
Yeah, but they think the incompatibilities are because of the existence of the host population.
Exactly.
Yeah, that's true.
So what they do is they react with a rhetoric that demonizes yet again the native population.
Yes.
But that doesn't address the issue of how to police these communities.
They won't.
And they won't.
And essentially what happens is that they will progressively turn their backs towards some of those communities and will just end up siding with a dominant of those clients.
They're basically like a doctor whose prescription for a drowning victim is more water.
They're making the problem far worse.
Little do they know that what they're doing is the source of the problem.
Yeah, well they think this is just the sort of birthing pains of a utopia.
So, they're kind of apathetic about whether or not a few more black kids get stabbed by other black kids, because they think if they just crush the far right, no black kids will stab each other at all.
It's not like there's ever been tribal conflict in Africa before we showed up or anything.
Or they just care about how to handle it from a communicative aspect.
This goes to our debate whether they're actual humanitarians or not.
I'm willing to think they're more Machiavellians.
It seems you think they're true believers.
I think they're true believers because they're too stupid to be the savvy.
I mean, being Machiavellian doesn't mean that you're necessarily smart.
You have to be a bit crafty to re-engineer all of society, but I do think they truly believe in this sort of we're-all-equals-deep-down-human-nature BS.
I love this disagreement we have about it, because it's really rich.
Well, I think, so I just think that they're fully hooked up to ideology at this point, per this sort of stuff.
So the Met have committed to trialling a new approach to deployment and briefing which seeks to recognise and address drivers of disparity in policing areas with a higher proportion of ethnic minorities.
Basically, the only police presence in these communities, ethnic enclaves, is going to be people from there, so they're the most likely to apply the law in a very partisan fashion.
So infinity grooming gangs in London, basically.
Could be an outcome, given what I covered with the Rotherham trial where the families themselves knew about the grooming committed by their own family members and said nothing and still showed up to the trial saying I love you dad.
Mmm.
Very gross.
Establish a culture and diversity youth advisory panel.
So a bunch of brainwashed young leftists are going to tell the police how to police things.
A culture, diversity and inclusion shadow board of more junior officers and staff has been set up.
The board examines new approaches, checks and tests, thinking and practice, tests thinking, and ensures that these will be both operationally viable and well received across the organisation.
Recently, this has included reviewing the London Race Action Plan and challenging the support available to those actively calling out poor behaviour.
So they're increasing support for people that complain about microaggressions from colleagues with the additional incentives of getting promotions.
Because they say, promote reporting by staff and officers of any racist behaviour and victimisation and encourage use of our anonymous reporting mechanisms when preferred and continue workshops to eliminate victim-blaming language.
So they've predefined you as a victim if you complain, you don't need to provide any evidence, and if you contest the fact that they are claiming to be a victim, you are victim-blaming and to be censored.
We see the exact same thing from the non-crime hate incidents, because if you file a non-crime hate incident, you're anonymized, you're defined a victim, and this black mark against someone's reputation, which can sharpen a DBS check and prevent them from getting a job, is put there without any evidence ever being needed.
And they came straight from, 2014, After the Met Police, after a long period of consultation, adopted the findings of the McPherson Report, which is what originally decreed the Met Police, without any evidence by the way, being institutionally racist.
I mean, just... What a trainwreck.
Just looking at someone's accusation and treat it as sacrosanct testimony.
This is why I think they're true believers, because they're operating basically like the Soviet Politburo now.
I mean, some of them ran a very strict regime to imprison their political enemies, and it was very expedient for them.
But there were people that Solzhenitsyn details as being imprisoned in the gulags, that were members of the Soviet Party, that even after they had been imprisoned, they knew they were innocent, and by pure ideology alone, swore to their guilt under false pretences.
I think some of these people are really brainwashed.
Well, let's remember that when the Soviets rounded up all the kulaks for being class traitors, they starved.
So, there is that.
Yeah.
Better be careful how they decide to police along racial lines, though.
I think, though, that there are two tiers, because you have the true believers, but you also have those calling the shots who really use this as a very powerful weapon, and it is an effective weapon, because essentially what is going on is that They're destroying the rule of law.
They're after the rule of law by subjectivizing legislation, and they are subjectivizing legislation by introducing the notion of psychological harm.
And they're expanding what counts as psychological harm.
So they have said that we are introducing such a system, we're creating such a status quo, where the accusation itself is evidence that the person who Accusers is psychologically harmed because if he weren't psychologically harmed or if she weren't They wouldn't accuse so I think that it's a very smart system It's a very very immoral system, but a very smart system that not a not a stupid one would ponder
So I think, to hash this out, I think both factors are at play here in the characters of Mark Rowley, who obviously wants to pull the ladder up after him, because he's a white guy at the top of his profession and feels very insecure about it, otherwise he wouldn't have smacked the microphone out of his hand.
But then there's also characters like Sadiq Khan who have signed on to this.
But Sadiq Khan has clear anti-white grievances.
He's just an anti-white racist.
And so I think both people are at play here.
Yeah, but Sadiq Khan also is one of the chief champions of the EULA's laws and used two Range Rovers to go to Liverpool.
Oh yeah, he's a deep, deep sinner.
I don't know exactly if he's a true believer.
I think he's definitely a true believer about how all white people are racist and therefore he resents them.
I think he uses the prevailing paradigm to also give himself advantages, but there you go.
The only commitments I would agree with here, and it's funny you mentioned the grooming gangs, is this.
There's two.
Number one.
The Met intend to target offenders who perpetrate offenses which disproportionately impact members of our black communities using the full range of policing interventions which include safeguarding and diversion to help break the cycle of offending.
Now, I'm not a fan of directly policing according to race, but were they to honestly look at the perpetrators of crimes against black people, they would come up with Well, it wouldn't be all that pasty, let's be fair.
Well, yeah.
It's a well-known phenomenon that most crimes are committed within racial groups, right?
There are some that disproportionately target other groups, sure.
Like blacks to Asians in America.
And blacks to whites.
And blacks to Jews.
And, yeah, you get the gist.
But, yeah, it's going to be a lot of black people getting arrested if they're protecting other black people.
But, I don't think they mean that.
No, they don't.
I think they mean hurty feelings.
They do.
Yes.
And then the other one, which was interesting, and I was surprised to find this in here.
Carry on using specialist resources to identify and target the most serious, violent, and sexual offenders, and those who pose the greatest risk to women and girls.
Now, if you were being honest about this, this would lead to a crackdown on the grooming gangs, because even under complete professional useless person Rishi Sunak, they established a grooming gang task force, thanks to Suella Braverman, and found at least 4,000 victims and 1,500 perpetrators.
And those cases are all hopefully proceeding.
Seven of them were convicted very recently, thanks to Charlie Peter's work, which I covered last week.
However, the moment that the stats start looking a little bit... diverse, those are gonna be buried.
They're gonna be thrown under the bus, and that 2020 Home Office Report stat, that obviously the Guardian and the like ran, saying, well, white people were responsible for the overwhelming majority of sexual offences, it's like... Per capita.
Now do per capita, and now do the specific crime of gang-related child sexual grooming, and then you come up with some very indicting statistics about the Pakistani community.
But there you go.
And we all know this will happen, this sort of statistics being buried, because we've got a foreshadowing of it here.
Quote, continue our work to protect migrant communities by working closely with key stakeholders to obtain and review available data so we can take an evidence-based approach and design interventions including joint training with migrant hotels to spot exploitation.
Did you catch that at the end?
I did, yeah.
Migrant hotels spot exploitation.
So, it's not that they have broken the law by breaking into the country.
It's not that they are committing criminal acts by dealing drugs and working in the cash-only dark economy with Deliveroo.
It's that the poor beset-upon asylum seekers are somehow being coerced into crime by the native population.
So we need to intercede in that relationship and stop them falling afoul of the epidemic of British crime.
And this is one of the reasons why in Europe it isn't illegal to share crime statistics when it comes to the various groups, ethnic groups, because the establishment allows them being published, but also tries to steer the narrative that interprets them as being solely economic at nature.
Why?
Because the punchline is we need to tax you more, native people, because that's the only way.
This is an economic problem.
We'll get money from you.
We'll give it to them.
And eventually it will stop.
And so long as they keep on, carry on engaging in crime, it's solely because they haven't had enough of money.
The economic explanation as well just doesn't work because on average the ethnic groups that are most likely to be in poverty are Bangladeshi and Pakistani and they're not the most likely to commit violent crimes for example.
Other than of a sexual nature.
Yes, they're over-represented there, but other groups that are less deprived actually commit violent crime more.
But also, if you take the City of London out of the GDP per capita calculations in the UK, the rest of the UK is collectively poorer than every single other US state, but the rates of violent crime are the highest in London, among a particular demographic.
So it's not necessarily poverty, because otherwise all throughout English history we'd be having the same number of stabbings and acid attacks as Sub-Saharan Africa, but we don't.
It just so happens that when you import loads of Sub-Saharan Africans, you get Sub-Saharan Africa.
And also, it's funny you bring up the EU... the Europe stat.
Yes, it's because they believe that there's an infinitely fungible human nature that can just be remedied by turning the economic dials, but at least they publish theirs.
And we don't publish ours.
Centre for Migration Control has decided to do some Freedom of Information requests and found that migrants are 34% more likely to be arrested than British nationals.
This was from 26 police forces.
They've collated the data in 2023, and the rate for British nationals being arrested is 1 in 94.
The rate for migrants being arrested is 1 in 70.
And they found that 369,000 arrests of non-UK nationals took place last year.
That's 19% of the total arrests.
And that's exceeding the, let's say, 16% in the census data that says that Britain is a migrant population.
It's probably on parity now.
And this isn't also counting, obviously, all of the border interceptions from illegals that are met, which would add another 40,000.
There are also lots of cases of people not being caught, and if you belong to a community whereby they don't cooperate with the police, that's going to push down the number as well.
So I imagine they're even more over-represented than that figure suggests.
And that figure is going to be driven down thanks to the Met's new London Race Action Report because the entire purpose of the report is to protect non-whites, religious minorities, and people with a migrant heritage from ensuring that you have outlier statistics like this which look like the Met Police are institutionally racist, which they've already been defined of ...ahead of time.
So, I'm just gonna wrap this segment up with, uh, you're gonna be paying for this!
You're gonna be paid for the Met- paying for the Met Police to sit behind a comfy desk all day with a tea and biscuits, monitoring your Twitter feed for offensive posts, meanwhile, um, non-white criminals and migrant criminals can just have free roam, because the police just don't care, because they don't want to be called racist.
We've got lots of rumble rants, which is wonderful.
Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen.
Glad to see all those coming in.
Lucian says, all good fellas, no worries.
Thrednor says, anti-racism policing.
Whites and Christians will be arrested for being white and or Christian and sent to tolerance camps until they stop being white and or Christian for the greater good.
So thank you for the five dollars.
Hey, don't repurpose that phrase to be evil.
They were the good guys in Hot Fuzz.
You should watch our Hot Fuzz Lads Hour, by the way.
It's very interesting.
Yotun, $5.
Hello guys, love the podcast.
I know he's not on now, but I appreciate Dan included abortion with the crime stats yesterday.
We always seem to forget these numbers when unaliving comes up.
Yes, quite.
Also per capita is quite damning there as well.
See Margaret Sanger's letters, I suppose.
$10.
Keith Kaiser.
Good to see the lads on the lotus eaters again.
It was an amazing experience to meet Connor at the Reform UK conference.
Oh, very nice to meet you, my friend.
And watch his fringe segment.
Here's to more hard work from all of you.
R plus Leo toast.
I assume that's meant to be a...
What's it called?
A little icon thing?
An emote?
That's the one.
Cheers, Samson.
You're the one that spends all the time on Twitch.
Yeah, good to meet everyone on Reform Conference.
There will be all footage of that coming on my show next week, including footage of the panel where I was asked what was the one thing that Reform should do to win by 2029, and decided to just counter-signal Nigel by saying mass deportations.
That's good fun.
DragonLadyChris, thanks for getting me addicted to GeoGuessr, guys.
You're welcome.
I'm gutted I wasn't there for that, because I actually caught up on that labs hour, and it was so funny.
I'm gonna do it again, I think.
I'll do it again.
Good man.
The Last Russian.
Two dollars.
By fiat, they're increasing diversity.
Connor, please clarify the acronym.
Or is it just an offshoot of fiat currency?
No, fiat means like by demand, decree.
So, yeah.
Lucian, as well.
Don't have to read it aloud, boys.
To clarify, the brain of a koala is smooth, not a single wrinkle.
Didn't realize autocorrect changes koala to cola, which is a drink from a video game.
Well, there we go.
Thank you for the clarification.
I thought it was koala.
I'm glad to be vindicated.
I thought you meant that Kamala is riddled with STDs like a koala bear.
So it turns out I was right.
Amidia Kamala, yeah.
She wants to lay off the eucalyptus.
On with the serious news.
Right, so, we need to say this in advance.
This segment is for fun.
We don't intend to belittle the gravity of the situation in the Middle East.
We're just making fun of Kyistama.
We also want the sausages back.
So, the UK has a new government, for those of you who don't know, since July the 4th.
And that means a new PM and a new Foreign Secretary.
And it's two and a half months now that they're very long.
They're very long months.
Anyway, they have some very serious proposals to make about how to end the conflict in Gaza.
And here we have someone talking to Netanyahu, who says, Sir, Sir, some clown called Lamy is outside.
He's demanding we cease fire in return for some sausages.
Somehow I don't think that the Israelis are too keen on getting some sausages.
Right.
There's a layer to this joke.
There's a layer here because it's like the movies where you start with an event and then the whole movie goes on a flashback and says, OK, let us look at the events that led to this.
David Lamy's entire career has been one long trajectory to getting sausages.
Right.
So.
We had a very unfortunate press conference back yesterday.
This was his party conference speech.
This was meant to be the headline.
I'm PM now at my event.
Corral the troops.
Yeah.
And he just put his foot in his mouth.
And also, so imagine that if you care about being a leader of the party and being a leader of the country, and you're in that, let's say, event, you do care about what you're saying.
You do care about your image.
That's if you're not a robot.
You're entirely enzoned.
Aren't you?
You're wrapped, you're covered.
Yeah, so let's look at... Linked to... Let's look at his surroundings.
Let's look at what he said here.
Call again for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza.
The return of the sausages.
So he's calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and the return of the sausages.
Do we all remember when...
He was just hungry.
Do you remember when Liz Truss was, God bless her, a bit hungover, and she decided to do a very excited speech on pork markets, cheese, and how it was a disgrace?
She styled it out and made a meme out of it.
I don't think Keir can pivot on the fly and is going to be able to live with one down.
Right, so I'm asking myself, what on earth was he on about?
Because I want to give him the benefit of the doubt.
I want to see what he meant by sausages.
So I think Rachel Reeves was in the cabinet saying, "What is going on here?" Yeah.
Keir Starmer turns, says breakfast.
So some people have given their interpretation of what was in Keir Starmer's mind.
Maybe he was thinking about Star Wars.
They have here the meme.
For those of you who don't listen, they're making a parody out of the Return of the Jedi and they have the Return of the Sausages.
Sausages with lightsabers.
You plumbed the depths of Boomer Twitter for this segment.
It's not something that is beneath me, I must say.
Right, we have more memes here.
Return of the sausages.
We are a serious podcast, ladies and gentlemen.
Exactly, yeah, we need to understand what the PM of the country was... What was it?
Worst PM ever, spelled worst?
Hey, I made that pun.
Oh, I didn't realise, sorry.
But yeah, the funny thing about this and the important political pertinent thing is that this is the main thing coming out of the Labour Party conference.
It's not they have serious ideas and they're very serious people, it's sausages.
Well it's relentless corruption around Taylor Swift tickets and his wife allowing some gay Labour lord to buy her clothes like some sort of cuckold.
The defence for said corruption, the party members as of just recently voting against the government's own motion to strip them of the winter fuel allowance so their own base hate them and now Here we see... No, no, please finish your sentence.
I didn't mean to distract you.
That sausage looks interesting, doesn't it?
Please finish your sentence.
I feel slightly nauseous.
Why?
You have the PM of the country dressed like Obi-Wan Kenobi yielding a light sausage.
yeah what what but i'm actually your point rare i'm lost for words To add to your point, Josh, I think, yeah, that was the only thing that came out of that conference.
Especially when Labour's record on Israel and Gaza has not appeased either camps.
But if you ask yourself, what else do they have in mind?
Basically, freezing pensioners.
Battery farming foreigners.
Yes, calling far-right anyone they disagree with, which is about 84% of the country right now.
Just alienating all the population, closing down pubs and calling them for closing down earlier.
What else is it?
Also, and I suffer from this policy that they're putting forward, they have scared the landlord somehow.
And everyone who is a tenant right now is facing essentially a trouble because everyone who has Apartments that they're renting to tenants, they have been scared by the things that Stomma is about to do or he has caused panic and now they're selling everything.
So it's classic left-wing, you know, stupidity.
Oh, I'm gonna save the tenants.
Yeah, by how?
By making all the landlords sell their houses.
Well, they don't understand supply and demand, let alone basic economics, and so this is bound to happen.
But I would like to see Keir Starmer go back up on stage and sort of redeem himself by paraphrasing Yoda saying, pigs lead to butchers, butchers lead to sausages.
Speaking of paraphrasing Yoda, and Yoda was the teacher also of Luke Skywalker after Obi-Wan departed.
Yeah, Yoda's sort of like Tony Blair to Keir Starmer's Luke, isn't he?
We have here another meme.
Keir Starmer is close to Jabba the Hutt, yielding another light sausage.
I'm disappointed that Jabba the Hutt was not, of course, photoshopped to be Angela Rayner, but I should have given him some ginger hair.
Can someone explain... or David Lammy.
David Lammy would be Yoda because he's so wise.
Can someone please explain to me why Star Wars has been brought into this?
I mean, it's just meme-worthy.
Return of the Jedi.
Return of the sausages.
Yeah, return of the sausages.
Return of the Jedi.
You know, I understand the point of the joke.
What is the relevance of Star Wars?
Because if he said the sausages strike back, people would make memes from the Empire Strikes Back.
That's his second speech, Stelios.
He hasn't said that one yet.
The sausages strike back.
A new sausage, you know.
The phantom sausage.
That's the Tory party conference.
Yeah, and then it's attack of the...
Attack of the Sausages.
Revenge of the Sausages.
No, Revenge of the Saxon Sausages.
The Sausage Wars.
Exactly, yeah.
So did he have dogs in mind?
That's another question I have.
Potentially.
Maybe there was.
I mean, we see a sausage here.
I imagine furries would be welcome at the Labour Party conference to be fair.
So maybe someone was like a sausage dog.
Who knows?
Right.
So you know what I hate?
Absolutely.
I hate people presenting us with problems, but not solutions.
Now there's a problem.
You don't have Islander number two, but I do have the solution.
Here's Irelander 2.
And visit our website, Irelander merch, featured products.
You can see our wonderful t-shirts.
We have coffee mugs.
Yeah, we also have all sorts of sizes for t-shirts.
So it's small, medium, large, extra large, triple XL.
You name it, we have it.
If you eat a lot of sausages, that's probably the size you're going to need.
Legal disclaimer, the larger shirts do not work as functioning parachutes.
Right, so there's something to ask about Keir Starmer's speech because it seems to me that it isn't particularly natural.
He seems to me that... You don't say?
Yeah yeah, yes Conor, exactly.
So it seems to me that he is someone who is literally not rehearsing his speeches and he just constantly has a voice in mind telling him, now act emotionally.
Hang on, you're implying Keir Starmer has an inner monologue?
I don't think he does.
I think Keir Starmer is basically a Dalek, isn't he?
Let's be honest.
Tony Blair's Davros.
So we have here a meme saying, don't say sausages, don't say sausages!
But honestly, you're the leader of a country.
You're the leader of the UK.
You're in your party conference.
You're leading the country.
And you just are not in the zone.
Just think of sausages when you're talking about hostages.
That is why you should never do public speaking on an empty stomach right there.
Right, so here we have a very funny thing showing, addressing some people's question whether he is reading from a teleprompter and we have... It does sound like it.
Yeah.
I call again for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza.
The return of the sausages.
The sausages.
You don't listen, we have a video to show a teleprompter and someone putting a sausage in front of the... Tom Cruise is looking a bit different there, isn't he?
Yeah, so he really must think about sausages, you see this.
Honestly, yet again, I'm going to repeat it because you're a leader of the country, you're on a party conference, everyone is looking at you.
All Twitter is looking at you, and you're talking about sausages.
The funny thing is, his family are vegetarian as well, so they don't even eat meat.
Well his wife's Jewish, isn't she?
So yeah, they're not kosher either.
They're pork.
So it's the most haram food he could have thought of.
He spends one day away from his wife, And he starts talking about sausages.
We have another meme that I found very funny.
It's one of those, you know, game show hosts.
Game show hosts.
Which you're dressed to present a study on.
Exactly, yeah.
It's one of those games where they ask people and we have Keir Starmer being asked, you know, how to face the Middle East crisis and he says sausages.
Have you had a fun morning putting this together by any chance?
Yeah, of course.
Yeah, why not?
But honestly, just imagine, because if you're a diplomat and you have power and you try to, you know, get people on board and you say, sit down.
We need to have a meeting right now.
And, you know, the meeting is going to be, it's going to last some time.
Meeting, one might say.
You need food and drink.
So basically you say, just bring the sausages.
Maybe that's what he meant.
We need to return sausages on the diplomatic table.
I'd like to think of them just flying over Palestine and Israel, just carpet bombing them with, you know, frankfurters and bratwursts.
Right, so now we may be looking upon the only popular policy of Keir Starmer.
Because essentially everyone is particularly feeling unwell that Greg's sausages are being under threat.
So we have here Greg's, the nation's favourite, hostage rolls.
Four pack.
No one makes hostage rolls like we do yet.
Exclusive to labels.
Don't scroll down, that one's got its head cut off.
Yeah, so basically, people just wouldn't have it.
So there was massive rally here.
We have here people outside of Greg saying, free the sausages.
Carrying all these signs, free the sausages!
They're just humanitarians.
They're really concerned about our, you know, foreign aid budget being used.
Keir Starmer found precisely what he needed in order to appeal popular.
Because his popularity was close to 16 percent.
It was 20 somewhere there.
Now I think it's more.
He won the Greggs vote with this.
Winning back the Red Wall, yeah.
Yeah, so now he's leading the movement, you know, Sausage Lives Matter.
These are just getting terrible.
We have him kneeling in front of a plate of sausages with some lemon... Is that lemon or onion?
Fried onions.
That's a fry hard.
If you have a bit of fish, do you squeeze an onion over it?
What are you, Shrek?
Stelios just walked in eating an onion raw.
The fish don't cry, Josh.
You don't want to put an onion in front of a fish.
Why would you do that?
Maybe you can't tell.
I need to read this super chat.
Today's podcast has proven that despite his claims of being a classical liberal, Stelios is in fact an anarchist.
I'm a sausagist.
He at Keir Starmer actually, actually understands the vibes of society, right?
And we have here, everyone is understanding him as the supreme leader by when he is wielding a wurst.
They have the supreme leader gear.
I mean to be fair, he's got the body type to be thinking of sausages a lot of the time.
That's an update on the sausage situation.
Yeah.
Right.
Now, I'm wondering what he eats, because you mentioned him as a vegetarian before.
Maybe he doesn't eat meat, but I beg to differ.
Is this Haitian cuisine?
Yeah, he is going full Haitian general mode.
So he asks him here.
We asked a hundred people.
Name something you cook on a barbecue.
You said hostages.
That's general barbecue from Haiti.
Just straightforwardly from there.
Right.
So, but you don't cook them alone.
You need to have the dish needs to have some seasoning and some things that you put it with.
So maybe they say maybe it's beans and hostages.
Jokes are funnier the more you repeat them.
Yeah.
I've never seen him that happy in a picture before, blimey.
He's scary when he smiles, isn't he?
isn't he?
- Right, so we have the pun of a gentleman here who I don't know who he is. - Some loser, probably.
- Yeah, but I think, Josh, do you wanna read it out?
Some people have been grilling Keir Starmer, saying he's one of the worst prime ministers.
To be frank, I think his speech was a banger.
Yeah, just tell us about Josh's puns.
Were they good, were they bad?
Tell us what you think.
Spreading evil to the world.
Your honey's Mr. Freeze.
I mean, Mr Freeze will have no mercy about this situation.
I'm afraid my condition has left me cold.
Do your pleas of mercy.
Pleas of sausages.
Always winterize your sausages, Stoke.
Stay cool, sausage boy, or something.
Conor, what do you think of Josh's puns?
I think all of this is going to be clipped out of context.
Conor, what do you think of Josh's sausage puns?
Do you like them?
Agonising.
It is agonising, that's the point.
I'm spreading misery to the world.
Right, so now...
You know, I really like movies about sausage negotiators, especially, you know, when you have, you know, Bruce Willis is playing in a lot of them.
He's in possession of sausage negotiation.
I've read books about how you negotiate about sausages to free them because you need to establish, you need to establish a sort of reciprocal communication.
A link, one might say.
A psychological link, yeah, with the captor, the captor of sausages, and you need to sort of, you know, establish, you need to sort of convince them somehow.
Get them out of their bind.
Exactly, yeah.
So if Die Hard was shot, I want the detonator or I'm going to kill more sausages.
That's from Die Hard 1.
Yeah, that was a great movie.
Great Christmas movie.
Great action movie.
It would have been better if it was about sausages.
Have you watched it?
Yes, I have watched it.
I don't remember that line.
You don't, you don't, yeah.
We hear another meme saying, yes sir, he's barricading himself in, he's taking two sausages.
Sam's genuinely coughing.
I mean, do you prefer DEI police or that kind of police?
You know, sausage negotiators?
I don't remember this part of Four Lions, to be honest.
Right, now there's a question here, because there's a spectre haunting British politics.
Oh, that last one.
The spectre of pork.
And we have here, you know, a good meme, you know, we have here Starmie here with sausages.
The meat sausages, yeah.
Yeah, I love the meat sausages.
We have pork markets.
We have Ed Miliband eating here something, I don't know what it is.
Bacon sandwich.
Yeah, okay, yeah.
And we have David Cameron hugging a pig.
He's a university girlfriend.
I really don't know why.
Hey, we've all been to university.
Right.
And so you don't go against Big Pig.
I remember this.
You don't go against Big Pig.
And if Keir Starmer thinks he's going to go against Big Pig, he's going to ask, you know, what is the charge?
Returning a sausage?
A succulent sausage.
Do you know the original guy died recently and apparently while he was in hospital in his deathbed he asked for a sack of wine to be replacing his drip.
So he had a whole sack of wine before he went out.
I really want to do the side by side of when he died and a photo of Keir Starmer and it's welcome back, whatever that guy's name was.
You've not seen those memes?
I'm sure I have.
Someone dies and is born on the same day.
But honestly, I mean, just think of it a bit, because I think that these two and a half months have been absolutely horrendous.
Of course, yeah.
And, you know, this is basically the only occasion we had of laughter, you know, just make fun of him.
But still, things are very grim.
And it has been disastrous two and a half months.
So usually you don't have parties that start in the first two months, they see their popularity rates plummeting.
And this has happened here.
There's no grace period for them.
They have alienated everyone.
Well, it's because they're headed by a robot sausage man.
That's why.
Yeah.
Look on the bright side, boys.
Things can only get better.
Right at the end.
Now on this, I think, I think we... It's a wrap.
Sausage lives matter.
Okay.
Butter also needs to be added to it.
But sausage lives matter.
Do we have any video comments, Sash?
We have some... We do have some Rumble Rats as well, yeah.
We have some Rumble Chats here.
Okay, LastRussian, $2.00.
Stellios, what a quality segment.
Excellent.
Thank you.
Thank you, LastRussian.
TheShadowBand, for $5.00.
Enjoying this 2010s-era meme energy on this segment.
Glad somebody did.
TheShadowBand, $5.00.
FishCry, Josh, don't squeeze an onion on them.
You really don't hate it that much, this meme thing.
I mean, come on.
Uh, Dragon Lady Chris.
Really, Josh?
You couldn't have mustered up more puns than that?
Ketchup man.
I don't deal in condiments.
Threadnaughts, for five dollars.
Stelios should sing all his promotions for Islander while riding a giant sausage like the bomb in Doctor Strange, love.
How I stopped worrying and learned to love the sausage.
Lovely.
And Connor's Smug Mug.
Keir thinks of sausages because of the shape.
I mean, honestly, memes are fun.
That's true.
On with the video comments.
On the topic of socialization, though, I noticed something additional.
In school, we treat boys as defective girls.
Sit down.
Shut up.
No roughhousing.
And we're learning socially.
Then in adulthood, we treat women as defective men.
Get out there.
Compete for status.
Be a breadwinner.
Fight.
And now, since COVID, we have an entire generation of children socialized entirely by Twitch chat and Joss Whedon quips.
I was walking by some kids playing the other day, and no joke, they communicate entirely in Twitchisms.
They'd say, thanks for the biddies, instead of saying thanks.
Or go, hooray, when a friend would join them.
Most dystopian thing I've ever seen.
Yeah, what's happening is that the sex's roles have inverted because they're aiming at just eliminating sex entirely, rendering it cosmetic.
So you're basically just some unisex grey goo.
It's not fun.
Definitely not.
I was on GB News recently, actually, talking about toxic masculinity findings from a Family Education Trust report, because I think it's, what was it, 34% of schools from an FOI request had formal toxic masculinity.
Fuck off!
glasses.
Great.
Love that boys are being brainwashed by the state.
I also said exactly the same thing as boys are treated as faulty girls in school and women are treated as faulty men in the workplace.
In a podcast last Thursday, so we're on the same wavelength.
On our breaking news, Michael Gove has been appointed editor of the Spectator.
Fuck off!
Michael Gove is an editor of the Spectator.
Oh, that's... .
Shall we... You see?
You've got to go against memes.
I know who I'm going to text after this.
It's like appointing Himmler at the... You know what I'm going to say before I say it.
I forgot what it's called now.
Those trials that happened after the war.
The Nuremberg trials.
It's like appointing him the judge.
I was going to say it's like appointing Himmler the editor of the Jewish Chronicle.
Oh, for fuck.
Alright.
This man is the architect of exactly everything that's gone wrong with the conservative government for the last 14 years.
And is trying to run a containment effort in the current leadership election.
And now... Presumably Paul Marshall, because the unheard of bought The Spectator, has appointed him the he- Which means that we're not gonna get rid of him.
Bloody hell.
I don't think Douglas Murray's gonna be too delighted with that, but there you go.
Anyway, on with the next one.
I can hear the ghost of Keir Starmer, what's happening?
There we go.
Dan, I loved your review of Margin Call.
Not only do you need to do one for the big short, you need to make it a trilogy and show the day after by reviewing Too Big to Fail, starring William Hurt as Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson.
Okay, we will forward that to Dan.
Cool hunting video, and also, I like those films, so I'd be happy to do that.
Joshua Moore.
On with the next one.
And I am back, after finishing up my local council campaign in Sydney, which I came fourth place out of seven, which is not too bad considering that I came from a minor party.
So what happens now?
Well, I'll probably be doing a couple of videos here and there, mostly showing you around Sydney as I planned, and also talking to you about what's happening here in Australia.
I won't be doing too many, but I'll keep it brief, of course, and I'll probably go into a bit of detail about what's happening with this current government and just how bad things have gotten under Albanese and the Labour Party.
Might be of interest, I'm actually doing an interview with a friend of mine, Justin McGovern, who is an Australian national talking about the immigration stuff in Australia for New Culture Forum, so that'll be in a couple of weeks.
Have a look!
On the next one!
Hey guys, I just wanted to know, what do you guys think of two dissident historians on YouTube, Zuma Historian and Tick History?
I know that Tick History has been referenced from time to time on the show, but he seems to be a bit of an ANCAP.
Thoughts about that?
And Zuma Historian came up a lot during the whole Churchill vs. Hitler debate not that long ago.
What do you think of him?
Cheers.
I really don't know them.
I really don't know them.
So I've watched Tick History and Tick's video on the Nazis was interesting, his video on David Irving was interesting, but his video on Nazism was poor.
Very poor.
And it was sort of just second-hand James Lindsay-isms, which wasn't that well-researched.
As for Zoomer Historian, I've never seen his content.
I know a couple in the office like him.
I just muted him because he kept trying to countersign me under all of my posts accusing me of containment and I just thought it was kind of annoying.
I've watched videos from both.
I like history more generally and watch lots of YouTube history stuff.
I have my disagreements about how some things have been presented from both people.
Although I like Tick History's World War Two Autism because I don't know that much about all of the details of it and the fact he's zoomed in a lot is filling me in in one of my sort of dark spots I suppose and I like that there is an ANCAP historian.
It shakes things up a bit, makes it a bit more interesting because it's a very rare position for a historian to have and of course you know being very anti-government myself I have my sympathies.
Excellent.
Right, we'll go to the written comments.
Charles Diemer loves Stelios.
There we go, you've got an admirer.
Thank you.
Ruda Day, the lads are all very pretty today.
Thank you very much.
Alex Ogle, the two lotuses with the dirtiest sense of humour teaming up against the most straight-laced one.
Which glee will ensue?
I mean, I'm the... You guys have very dirty humour.
Yeah, hang on, wait.
Yeah, I was gonna say, which of us... Stelios is pure.
Which of us has a dirtier sense of humour?
Really?
Okay, fair enough.
Are you really asking that?
Well no, I thought you were more Alan Partridge than necessarily just crudeness.
I rely on that, but I'm not above it.
Fair point.
Eloise, Stelios' segment made me smile, thank you.
It's nice to have white pills and some levity sometimes.
Chase Ball, Stelios' laugh adds years to my lifespan.
Thank you.
You can just watch Spider-Man 1 for more of that.
Yeah, but what about my singing?
Is it helping people?
Yeah, Stelios is gonna start singing us in.
Connor, did you like my... I thought it was lovely.
I felt like I was at my Nan's wedding.
Okay, yeah.
I really believe you.
You exude sincerity at the moment.
I felt like I was on a cruise and I was lounging around, you know, in the cocktail bar and, you know, a suited man came on stage with a piano in the background singing a tune to all the pensioners.
I mean, if it is for, as I told you before, I don't know if the people heard it, if we're going to recreate this, I'm going to lose the tie and have a captain's hat.
There is a clip out there of us duetting What Is Love, Baby Don't Hurt Me.
Isn't that the only time?
You're going to start looking a bit more sort of... what's it called?
Where they have the builder and... The village people!
Yeah, it's going to be a bit like that, isn't it?
You can be the Native American.
I can imagine you in a big feathered headdress.
I grow my hair out.
It sort of goes like a headdress.
It's very strange.
Why did they have, I mean I know because they're all gay, but it's like they had an Indian, a feather not dot, a builder, they had, and then just some guy in leather.
It's really odd.
It's like your average neighborhood leather man.
No, there's a policeman as well, but there's a dude just in leather chaps.
It's really odd.
The 80s, man.
Do I google this?
Do you not remember this?
I need to get a picture to refresh my memory.
Yeah, there's a leather guy just on the end for some reason.
He looks sort of like a Nazi, doesn't he?
Madonna used to wear Nazi outfits as well.
He's wearing like an SS hat, isn't he?
Oh.
It looks like it, but like a leather hat.
Argentinian village people, is it?
Anyway, Justin B, speaking of Labour Conference, are we going to get analysis in your ear since Callum isn't around to suffer for us?
I don't think we're going to do the sort of compilation that Callum used to do.
No one hates their life enough to sit and watch the whole thing.
I've watched quite a lot of clips, but I just... There isn't much more than what we said in the segment.
We gave you sausages.
There's a lot of embarrassing cringe of where they get booed by their own people and things like that, but... I'm not gonna sit there and edit it, necessarily.
I've seen people being turfed out, which has been hilarious.
Yeah.
Nick Taylor, if I wasn't going to buy Islander after Symposium was yeeted for another paywall, I will acquiesce, but if Josh's poem is gay, you'll be hearing from me in the comments.
It's not.
Yeah, it's not.
I've edited it.
It's good.
Americans Politicians.
This is your segment.
Do you want to do your comments or should I?
You can read them if you'd like.
Okay.
Arizona Desert Rat.
Policing by consent.
Police.
Hey mate, you're suspected of murdering someone.
I assume this is for mine.
Do I have your permission to arrest you?
Criminal.
No.
Police.
Well, I don't have permission to police, so I won't.
Arizona Desert Rat.
What I'm wondering, do we get to know the alternatives we are electing?
Well that's the thing, that's not necessarily been fleshed out so you don't necessarily know which five people could potentially replace them and you also don't know who's going to be picked of that five and one can presume that you could just put lots of names that people are unfamiliar with and they'll just be names on a ballot and you won't even know any details about them.
So also it's creating a massive barrier in that Sort of researching one candidate is already doing pretty well for yourself in terms of engaging with the democratic process.
If you have to research six, that's just expecting too much of your average voter in my opinion.
Are they also going to be given a retaining stipend or something like that?
I don't know.
I would presume that they're just a name on a list and they get nothing for it until they actually assume office.
Right.
Understood.
Rue the Day.
Can't help but notice there seems to be a mass casualty event every time something needs passing.
I think she's probably referring to the likes of the Patriot Act and 9-11.
Yes.
Never let a good crisis go to waste, was what Obama manual said.
Wasn't it?
From the Obama administration?
Hell Harbour's another one.
Curious that.
Andrew Narog, I think the reason it would be an amendment rather than a bill is that the proposal modifies the appointment of representatives which is laid out in the constitution.
Understandable.
Baron Von Warhawk, I find it amusing that after all the chaos I stirred up with the 2020 riots, the assassination attempts, the drag queen story hour, and four years of terrible decisions, it never occurs to them to just stop.
At no point do they think they need to change their decisions and let the public cool down.
And so they want more laws and bills to protect themselves from the chaos they created.
Yes, because they've defined their ideology as correct ahead of time, and it's just that the people who resist it are the ones slowing down the implementation of utopia.
There's actually some misinformation there.
His name is Baron von War Kiwi.
Oh, sorry, I must have just read it.
Filled in the gaps, yeah.
I did.
He's been downgraded.
He's flightless now.
Derek Power, I'm going to translate words like misinformation and extremism and racism as being the equivalent of saying, you've got cooties and other childish nonsense.
We're being governed by toddlers, how depressing.
Quite.
As I went over in my recent episode on populism ideology and the Ideology of the state, rather.
Anytimes they say racist or misinformation, it's you just putting a false consciousness upon the voting public that implies anything other than we're all equal deep down.
That's why they say populists are divisive.
Chris Rees.
So white British population of London is at its lowest, but racism is rising.
Who's doing the racism then?
Maybe the new arrivals?
Nah, gotta be the non-existent white.
It was you that put out the graphs about the hate crime data, that not per capita but overall there are more hate crimes committed against white people than there are against any other group, isn't it?
Yeah, the raw numbers but not per capita.
Whites are the main victim of hate crime.
Am I right in thinking that Jewish is encompassed within white as well?
They didn't specify it as its own category.
I didn't look into it specifically.
Okay, so it might be looped into there, especially recently.
Paul Neubauer, technically accusations are evidence.
I think what you meant to say is that they're treating accusations as proof.
I don't think an accusation is an evidence.
Like, hypotheses are not evidence.
You need evidence to support the hypothesis.
Not only is there a presumption of guilt, but any attempt to deny the accusation is a form of hate.
And Colin P., if you question an accusation of witchcraft, you must be a witch.
Seders, care to do your ones?
I'm heavier than a duck, though, so I'm not actually a witch.
Right, so base tape.
Kier was probably just hungry.
Quick, someone donate some sausages to the Labour Party.
That'd be listed as a hate crime, I'm sure.
Yeah, but they will give them sausages at a Taylor Swift conference or something.
I'd like half of that.
Will Lord Ali provide the Labour Party with sausages?
He's bought them everything else.
I mean, I don't know whether you saw the podcast yesterday or Monday, I think it was Monday, where I showed the picture of, I think it was a group of nudists in a meeting, in like a conference, it was just like the Labour Party conference without the donated clothes, and they returned them.
Given Lord Alley's, let's say, weekend exploits, I think he has a very different set of sausages in mind.
Jimbo G. Oh, it's okay to jail the gammon, but we must release the sausages.
Did you like this pun?
That's so terrible.
Henry Ashman.
Given Lord Alley paid two and a half thousand pounds for Stammer's glasses, you'd think he'd get the prescription right enough to read it.
Scathing.
Good.
Sausages are even funnier because neither side of the conflict are too keen on a good pork sausage.
Henry Ashman, Starmer, definitely won't style this out for a meme.
He's more likely to ban sausages than arrest all butchers and sausage meme posters in a rage given he's a petty little man.
I mean, yeah, just think of it.
He was just denied access to two pubs or something.
He's just waging war against Pat Bowman.
He's going to introduce a bangers and mash tax.
Yeah, yeah.
Harmful drinking is a problem now.
Well, supposedly, I had a lot of flak online from leftists saying, that's misinformation, it was only a health secretary that said it, it's not official policy.
It's like, yeah, but people within the camp are proposing this sort of stuff, does it not speak of how out of touch they are?
It's like, no.
It's because they're getting their official guidance from the World Health Organisation.
Do you remember when Canada tried cracking down on drinking and then also legalised heroin?
Yeah, well, back in the day, if you remember the Hugo days, he wrote an article saying the government will come for tobacco and alcohol.
And lo and behold, three years later, it's happened.
Roman Observer, let's be frank, if any political party manifesto was just sausages, who wouldn't vote for them?
I'm not keen on them.
I'm not really keen on pork.
No, you don't like a good sausage.
No, I think it's tasteless meat.
Bacon.
Good sausage, Greg's sausage roll.
Lamb is top, right?
Lamb is top meat.
You're spiritually Middle Eastern, aren't you?
No, clearly not, because I'm not a fan of pork.
You don't like pork, you like lamb.
I'm spiritually Mediterranean, see?
Good man.
Lamb, beef, chicken, pork.
No, no, no.
Chicken, beef, pork, lamb.
How is lamb bottom?
Lamb is the most innately flavoured.
Lamb is a bottom, by nature.
Right.
Beef.
Duck.
I can't eat ducks.
Joe... I like ducks.
I eat the animals most that I like the most.
I feel too... I've fed too many.
I feel too bad.
Joe Schmo.
Oh, come on, Conor.
Don't be a wiener.
Bleach Demon, last comment, we shall eat at the breakfast table.
We shall gnaw on the sausages.
We shall munch on the black pudding.
We shall chew on the mushrooms.
We shall never surrender a complete breakfast with sausages.
Toutier-quier.
And on that, thanks very much, gents.
Talk to us over.
I'll be back with my show in half an hour, speaking to Ayan Hirsi Ali.
Otherwise, we'll be back tomorrow at 1 o'clock.
▲
Export Selection