Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Sept. 27, 2024 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:34:14

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #1010

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	intro music Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Islander Shillers, Have you bought Islander yet?
	You really should buy Islander.
	It's available on the website.
	Look, look, on the website.
	I'm Harry, I'm selling you Islander.
	You better buy it.
	Islander, buy Islander.
	Islander.
	You better buy it or I'll find you.
	I'll come to your house and I'll find you.
	And you can find it on the website.
	In which you can give us your address.
	Islander!
	So I can find you if you don't buy it.
	You can also buy shirts and things like that.
	Also, there's a Gold Tier Zoom call coming up at 3 o'clock where it's going to be me and Carl sitting and answering all of your beautiful questions.
	So please direct them all at Carl.
	He's far more interesting than I am.
	And I'm Harry, your host.
	Joined today by Bo.
	And special guest, Tim!
	How are you doing?
	Thank you.
	Yeah, lovely being here.
	Where can people find you?
	Oh, well, on my stuff.
	Fashion Performance, YouTube, that kind of thing.
	That'll be it.
	Fantastic.
	And today we're going to be talking about Labour's evil plot to ban fun.
	Because they really do hate fun.
	Do you think Keir Starmer is a fun guy?
	Would you like to go for a pint with Keir Starmer?
	No.
	No.
	We're also going to talk about Ukraine and Russia, which should be very interesting.
	Then we're going to talk about election season.
	Bo, you've got some special paraphernalia for it, don't you?
	Well, we'll keep it as a surprise.
	And Cole's already worn it once.
	Sounds wrong.
	Yeah, I was going to say.
	Maybe we should clarify what it...
	No, we'll leave that off in the air.
	We'll leave that for the audience to decide what it is.
	And so, with that, let's get into the News A and let's talk about Labour's plot to ban fun.
	So, in Britain...
	We have a glorious culture.
	A glorious, wonderful drinking culture.
	We like to go for a pint at the weekend with the lads.
	Some people like to go for pints every night with the lads.
	And I found this amazing clip, which I think sums up British culture.
	Now this is, I will admit, an Irishman.
	It does look like such a North FC game.
	It's like an AI-generated North FC.
	This is Irish Baz, with presumably miniature Irish Baz in the making.
	I mean, look at the shape of this lad.
	What an absolute tank of a child.
	And here's what we like to do on the weekends.
	Look at his hand on her.
	Yeah, he knows what he's doing.
	Is that Stout?
	Is that Guinness?
	That's Guinness.
	Now, the only thing that's missing from this is he should have a lit fag in the other hand, but we'll forgive him.
	He's only young, he's learning.
	He's had a few of those, hasn't he?
	Look at him go!
	It's a bit bad because he's not that old.
	I don't know how old that kid is.
	No, I don't recommend this.
	Of course.
	I remember being...
	Random Irish noises.
	So I think that is a picture.
	Picture that as the life of the average British man up till about 1990.
	That's what we were all doing, really.
	We don't admit it that often, but it's true.
	And the culture, that isn't just unique to the British Isles, loads of places in Europe, there's a heavy, heavy drinking culture and has always been.
	In Germany, there's been a clip going around of some amazing German bar wench where she's been carrying about 10 plus pints all in one go.
	For Oktoberfest.
	Yeah, for Oktoberfest.
	It's incredible the amount of precision that that must take.
	But there's a reason that we like doing this.
	Obviously, I don't recommend that children like him do it, but we like having fun.
	It's nice to have fun, isn't it, chaps?
	Yeah, when you're not under some sort of house arrest.
	Yeah.
	And also, I will say, from my own experience, I don't know about you guys, but also working in a bar, at a pub, behind the bar, is kind of a rite of passage.
	It gives you lots of social skills.
	It certainly did for me.
	Makes you more resilient.
	It makes you more confident, it helps you to understand social dynamics a bit better.
	So we've got a long, long history of The Pub, and we also have a long, long history of Shilling Islander, which you should buy, again, on the website.
	£14.99.
	Buy it now.
	But, there are some people who do not like the pub.
	And they do not like the idea of people socialising, because it might be a threat to them.
	You're talking globalists?
	Globalists, yeah.
	If you've got- Muslims don't like booze, do they?
	If you've got a bunch of working class British lads going to the pub, enjoying themselves, maybe talking about how rubbish the country's been getting recently, That's not great.
	Getting rowdy and having a laugh should be illegal, really.
	I mean, there's no place for it in our modern world, is there?
	According to the blood-sucking vampires that make up our government, yes.
	And that's where I come to Keir Starmer, who in 2021 had this happen to him.
	That man is not allowed in my pub!
	I'm not going to physically touch him!
	That man is not allowed in my pub!
	Get out of my pub!
	Go on!
	That's the pub landlord who is desperate to try and kick Keir Starmer out of his pub.
	That man is not allowed in my pub!
	Get out of my pub!
	Go on!
	How can you man either?
	Get out of my pub!
	He's the British government of Secret Service.
	Maybe ask the guy first.
	What an embarrassment.
	So that was Keir Starmer being kicked out of a pub in Bath.
	I've seen that clip before.
	It was back in 2021 during the Covid era.
	What was the guy's beef with Starmer?
	Was he like a Corbynista or was he a Tory?
	I don't know.
	Does anyone know?
	Do you hate him from the left or from the right?
	So I'm going to assume Corbin Easter, or maybe it's just the fact that Keir Starmer supporting lockdowns hurt his... It might just be something to do with that.
	But I will say, I think that on the start of Keir Starmer's fun-sucking vampire villain origin story...
	That on this day, Keir Starmer swore that he would take revenge.
	On this day?
	Yeah, it could be, couldn't it actually?
	This is it.
	It's happened to me.
	This is it.
	All pubs must die.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Yeah.
	And that seems to be the policy that Labour is pursuing incrementally, bit by bit.
	They want to destroy pub culture and they want to destroy the pubs because they've been doing all sorts to try and slowly strip away the social aspect of it, strip away the fun, and most importantly for the pubs themselves, strip away the profitability of it, which could put lots of pubs, which a lot of them across the country are already struggling and going out of business already, could put even more out of business.
	So the first thing was this ridiculous suggestion that to improve the health of the nation, they're going to do an outdoor smoking ban, which will affect obviously Outdoor parks and communal areas but also pub gardens and again one of the things that Brits like to do is go out into a pub beer garden on a weekend, have a pint and a smoke while they're at it.
	The government has said that they are also going to be resurrecting Rishi Sunak's
	flagship smoking bill you know the one that means that 14 year olds can't buy cigarettes at any point in their life which some have suggested would lead to the ridiculous idea of you're going in as a 70 year old to get a pack of fags and you get id'd and rejected so you go outside and you ask the 71 year old oh mate can you get me a pack of fags please mate that is what would that would happen wouldn't it that is at that age yes from that age you can't it's absurd as it would get
	And I've been ID'd the exact day on when you was born.
	A ridiculous and unenforceable law.
	Labour, despite the fact that the Tories said, well, we'll shelve this because this is one of the most unpopular policies ever and is stupid, and we'll probably just create an underground tobacco industry, a black market for tobacco.
	Are they going to ban, like, snuff and, like, hamlets and chewing tobacco?
	Are we allowed chewing tobacco?
	Probably not.
	The tax from cigarettes pays for the NHS like six times over, doesn't it?
	Well, yeah, they mention in here.
	They mention here, so, uh, Keir Starmer says he could go further in urban smoking in outdoor venues.
	Labour wants to create a smoke-free country, and measures to achieve this will be done in consultation with businesses that could be affected, which means that it won't.
	It won't be done because smoke-free country obviously means that businesses that could be affected will be affected negatively, so they'll all turn around and say no.
	And Keir Starmer and Labour will say, too bad we're doing it anyway.
	And the article goes on to say that our smoking claims about 80,000 lives a year.
	How many does obesity claim?
	Are we going to ban fat people?
	That would probably actually be more productive.
	An estimate suggests it costs the NHS in England about £2.6 billion per year.
	But I looked into it and it makes the government back about £8.8 billion a year in tax and tobacco duties.
	So, yeah, the idea that that's the reason to do it is bollocks, frankly.
	And they die earlier, no pension.
	You haven't got to pay a pension.
	Because as far as the evil managerial bureaucrats are concerned that govern this country, the NHS is the perfect excuse to ban literally everything.
	Anything and everything can potentially cause harm and therefore can potentially put a strain on the NHS.
	So therefore it's the perfect excuse.
	But not to just increase the population using the NHS exponentially, endlessly.
	Not that.
	Not gonna stop or ban or curb that in any way.
	No, no, not at all.
	And pay no mind to the idea that the people coming into this country from the third world are far more dysgenic than the average Brit and much more likely to have degenerative diseases or preventable diseases that put strain on the NHS and the sheer number of them alone would be enough to do that in the first place.
	No, we can't do that.
	Mass immigration is a policy that has to continue at all times into perpetuity.
	It must be infinite.
	So we're going to take away pubs and cigarettes from you.
	Okay, GuidoFox was also reporting that they'd heard rumours that nicotine pouches, like these Nordic Spirits as well, could be banned.
	They spoke to the Department of Health and Social Care, and a spokesman said to them that the Tobacco and Vapes Bill will be the biggest public health intervention in a generation, improving healthy life expectancy and reducing the number of lives lost to the biggest killers.
	You'd have to deport a lot of people if you want to get rid of the biggest killers.
	What are nicotine pouches?
	What is that?
	I don't use them myself, but I assume that it's flavoured tobacco, like this.
	Like chewing tobacco?
	Possibly, yeah, because it says Nordic spirit, mint flavor, cool mint, and it's got a strength label.
	So I've never used it.
	Either way, anything tobacco related, it looks like they're just going to get rid of.
	And they say, alongside introducing a progressive smoking ban to ensure the next generation can never legally be sold tobacco, The bill will also stop vapes and other consumer nicotine products, including pouches, from being deliberately branded and advertised to appeal to children.
	Together, these measures will help stop the next generation from becoming hooked on nicotine.
	And again, if these are the sorts of excuses being used, when it's always the NHS, they will start doing it to alcohol as well.
	Eventually.
	The audience has pushed back at me when I have said this before, but the point of the matter is that they are trying to reduce places and opportunities for people to socialize in a healthy way, and they also just hate fun.
	They hate you being able to go outside and see your friends.
	They locked you down for near on two years to prevent you from going outside and seeing your friends after all.
	So the NHS can always be used as the reason For why?
	Oh, well, we got rid of the smoking.
	But now we need to look into how many deaths alcohol causes per year.
	What strain does alcohol put on the NHS?
	Every week from people coming into A&E on a Friday or Saturday night, for instance.
	So sorry lads, we're just gonna have to cut it.
	Well, it's definitely the trend, isn't it?
	Of anything and everything they want to, just endlessly banning things.
	Do you remember when they've got a problem with even fizzy drinks, right?
	Really sugary drinks.
	That's a problem.
	The thing is, it actually is a little bit of a problem, right?
	If you drink too many fizzy drinks forever, your likelihood of getting diabetes goes up.
	If you do smoke loads, your likelihood of getting emphysema or lung cancer, stroke cancer, whatever, does go up.
	If you drink loads, then there's loads of liver, kidney, whatever.
	I get it, but- But just by banning it, you're not actually improving people's behaviour or getting them to behave in a more healthy way.
	Right, the point I was going to make by saying all that- Yeah.
	There's a broader point about, is it the state's job to tell you what you can or can't do?
	Well, arguably no, of course.
	Libertarians would say small government, wouldn't they?
	And things like sugar tax, all that kind of stuff.
	Absolutely, it should be education.
	It should be addressing poverty.
	I'm that guy that said it should be addressing the inequality, surely.
	That's what's going to stop people doing these things that are totally harmful.
	Certainly, I would say if you're going to do these sorts of things, because again, like at the beginning, I don't encourage you to get small children and feed them a pint of Guinness.
	But when you're old enough to be responsible and make the decisions for yourselves, you should temper moderation in your own behaviour.
	That's what you should do if you want to be a healthy person.
	Because do you think- Such a liberal!
	I'm for all small- all under eights to smoke a pack of Marlboro Ritz daily!
	I've never said such a thing!
	Not once have I said such a thing!
	What I have said is they need to be going back down chimneys.
	Right.
	Yeah, we agree on that.
	Alright, there we go.
	So there's some common ground right there.
	But if they really wanted to make the country healthier, is the government in conjunction with this going to start handing out free gym passes?
	Are they going to nationalise gym memberships for everybody?
	They'd have the money to do it, surely, if they saved all of this money for the NHS.
	Up to potentially billions of pounds per year.
	So give everyone a free gym membership!
	Have a fat tax, where if you weigh a particular amount, you're not allowed to get access to particular services.
	No, they won't do that, because it's not about health.
	It's about taking away opportunities for you to socialize in environments where the government can't spy on you.
	You remember when Johnson, he initially talked about keeping fit, didn't he, during Covid and stuff.
	And it just disappeared.
	Because I remember my wife saying, this is my Isac Chiropractor.
	She was like, this is amazing, we're going to get this massive push to get everyone like, you know, we're going to get reduced gym memberships and everything.
	The government's really going to push this, I think some countries do.
	And it stopped.
	And she was livid, my wife.
	She was like, this was such an opportunity to get people outside, exercising outside.
	That stopped, didn't it?
	They masked off benches and stuff.
	allowed an hour outside at a time I think that was the curfew that you had to get people walking you could have people outside socializing you know whatever distance but they stopped it I always remember thinking why did Johnson stop that what was it because he was pushing it and then he literally stopped someone said to him no we're gonna stop this maybe people live too long got paying too many pensions I don't know It is like an hour in the yard, like in prison.
	That's all you're allowed out.
	23 hour lockdown, you've got one hour in the yard.
	Really small yard on your own, you've got to walk around and around.
	I think the ultimate goal is, it's obviously not about money, it's not even about the NHS, it's not about health, I don't think.
	It's about power and control.
	Do you really think that?
	Yeah, yeah.
	This particular government you think is about control?
	Nearly all left-leaning governments, a big part of it, a big part of the leftist paradigm is to have an ever bigger government.
	Yeah, of course.
	And the tendrils of its power and control are ever extended into your life.
	A bureaucracy, of course, lacks agency.
	So one of the things on the left is to say, well, you want more bureaucracy, because obviously rules, they work, don't they?
	But in doing so, agency goes out the window.
	You haven't got any agency anymore.
	Whereas on the right, of course, it's about agency.
	It's about people making their own life decisions.
	Of course, I also genuinely just believe that the sorts of people making these decisions are anti-social and don't enjoy and are envious and spiteful at seeing other people enjoy themselves.
	Because their lives are so grey, and full of bureaucracy, and joyless.
	Why should anybody else be able to enjoy themselves?
	I'm gonna take that away from you, because I'm in the position to do so.
	It's just pure spite, isn't it?
	You're talking about senior ministers, and people in the civil service.
	High up in the civil service, those types.
	Yeah, again, do you think that Keir Starmer... It's not intentional.
	Do you think Keir Starmer, who is a man who has no discernible personality, has fun?
	Do you think he can have fun?
	I don't, personally.
	His fun is different to our fun, isn't it?
	His fun might be sitting down and, I don't know, reading a book or something.
	He's got to have some fun.
	He was asked what his favourite book was, and he said he doesn't have one.
	He didn't dream either, did he?
	Remember that?
	Yeah, he doesn't have dreams.
	He never dreamt.
	Yeah he's never dreamt.
	Is that possible?
	Well I don't know.
	Is that physically possible?
	He said I've never had a dream.
	He is a bureaucratic automaton designed purely to occupy space in the civil service and has been elevated to the position of Prime Minister.
	Having never dreamed, that doesn't compute with me.
	That's like saying I've never imagined something.
	It's like saying that, right?
	Like Matt Rycroft.
	Perfect for government, you're right.
	So Matt Rycroft, he runs a civil service.
	He's the guy, remember, he's out front of all the DNI stuff and everything.
	You can put people like that in front of an agenda and they will conform to it.
	They will do exactly what you want.
	So this guy, you can control him completely.
	Whatever the controlling thing is, he's going to do exactly what you push him, whereas maybe other more popular leaders probably wouldn't.
	Do you want to make your point?
	I can't believe someone would have never dreamt.
	Never had a dream.
	How is that possible?
	That's what he said, yeah.
	I once remember Michael Owen saying, I don't really like films.
	I don't really watch any films.
	I've watched like 10 films in my whole life.
	And I remember thinking, you don't like stories.
	You don't like fiction.
	You've got no imagination.
	speaks volumes about your entire character, if you don't like stories, if you don't like... It's like I've never dreamt.
	Well, that opens up a massive vista of questions to me.
	How is that possible?
	I love that this affects you so much.
	I will say, at the very least, films are a specific medium of storytelling.
	Yeah, I was about to say that.
	You could turn around and say, well, I just don't like the way that they tell stories with films.
	But not dreaming.
	Yeah.
	What's the actual biology of that?
	I don't know how... Okay, I've got to get over it.
	Leave on, leave on.
	I doubt he has an inner monologue.
	I doubt he can spin an apple in his head anyway.
	Anyway, so one of the other ways they're going to try and ruin everything is to potentially force pubs to close early.
	So this was something that was spoken about at the Labour Party conference in Liverpool where the public health minister, Andrew Gwynne, So the government was considering tightening up the hours of operation of bars and pubs as a part of an attempt to improve health and combat anti-social behaviour.
	A Department for Health spokesman said that it's categorically untrue, but that's a direct contradiction of what the Public Health Minister was saying, so one of them is lying.
	Gwyn told the Labour Conference the Mission Board is working on a five-point plan looking at smoking, obesity, alcohol, inactivity, and clean air.
	So maybe they are going to nationalise gym memberships.
	Maybe they are going to make a fat tax where you're not allowed to be over a certain BMI.
	But I doubt it.
	I doubt it.
	I reckon this will only stop at the, we're going to ban all of this stuff and there will be nothing proactive added to this.
	Three barbells for every household.
	I mean, if they want to come and drop off a squat rack and Olympic bar at my place, I'd be very, very grateful.
	Yeah, a Smith machine in every house.
	Yeah, maybe.
	Maybe some adjustable dumbbells, leg extensions, leg press, you know?
	State-mandated number of reverse curls every day of your life.
	We need to grow the forearms of the country.
	It's like in 1984, where you stand in front of the video screen and you have to do exercises, and if you don't do it vigorously enough, it immediately calls you out on it.
	See, I don't think the government would do that, though, because if you do improve your health and you go out and exercise and you become stronger in body, you also tend to become stronger in mind, greater ability to motivate yourself, greater ability to think for yourself, so there's no way the government... What the government wants is you stuck in your pod, eating grass all day, hooked up to the 24-hour coom chamber.
	That's what they want.
	They want you to be able to hook your brain up to the cloud so that you can experience porn 24-7.
	Is that right?
	Whilst eating soy.
	Yeah, whilst eating soy.
	On your own.
	That's absolutely what they want because then you are no threat to them.
	At all.
	Of course, carrying on.
	Gwyn insisted Labour is not the fun police or the super nanny.
	Yes, yes you are.
	And he said the current health of the nation is morally reprehensible.
	And then Chief Medical Officer Professor Sir Chris Whitty.
	Do we all remember him?
	Is he in jail?
	Is that man not?
	No.
	Is he at liberty?
	No, he's the chief medical officer and he's been knighted.
	Yeah, he warned ministers that 60% of the NHS budget will be eventually spent on preventable diseases if current trends continue.
	An increase from today's 40% again, you know, importing dysgenic migrants has nothing to do with this.
	It obviously is all to do with the fact that you are still allowed to go outside.
	There's also potentially going to be a sin tax according to The Sun.
	They've been reporting on it that industry insiders have heard talk of a minimum unit pricing that would up the price and duty hikes as well.
	All of this will potentially cut even further into pub profits and they say in here currently 35% of hospitality businesses are not making a profit and 500 pubs shut last year alone.
	Addressing a booze and fag duty hike, a Whitehall source told The Sun, And this always comes back to the customers, because pints across the country get more and more expensive every single year.
	which is not saying anything at all, which means that it probably will happen.
	And this always comes back to the customers, because pints across the country get more and more expensive every single year.
	Look at London.
	For a single pint.
	That's absolutely ridiculous.
	Funny, I don't drink all that much.
	Like, I don't ever keep booze in the house, for example.
	But when I do go out for the odd drink, in Swindon this is, in Wiltshire, I'm always surprised at how cheap it is.
	Because I'm used to London prices.
	Oh, I bet.
	I'm used to buying two or three drinks and it's twenty quid.
	Or more.
	You go somewhere in Swindon and you buy four pints and it's like £8 something.
	You're like, whoa, really?
	Wow, okay, that's another four.
	All of the pints, all the pubs around the country now are at the same price that London price would have been like 30 years ago.
	So it always comes back to the customers at the end of the day.
	But I guess we don't have to worry because as has been reported, you know, there are studies calling for the government to introduce smaller pint limits.
	So this would be the two-third pint.
	It's not a pint then?
	Yeah, the two-third pint.
	Yeah.
	So this would be the upper limit that you'd be allowed to sell.
	This is a Cambridge University academic study that is calling on the government to stop serving beer in pints.
	The study found and...
	Hold yourselves, gentlemen, because this might shock you, that alcohol consumption dropped by 10% when pubs shelved pint glasses and served customers with glasses two-thirds the size instead.
	So if you serve people less beer, they'll drink less beer.
	If they went home and were creative carling, like I used to, and sit on the sofa and have another 16 tins.
	Have a box of wine and have it at home.
	That's taking the business away from the pubs, though.
	Of course it is, but it's only 12 pence a pint they make on this, because of the tax.
	They only make profit at 12 pence a pint.
	Yeah.
	It's very small.
	Well, if they increase the duty hikes and everything, it'll go down to 9.5 pence per pint.
	That's what they're saying.
	So it will ruin pubs.
	I was reading Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy the other day, and right at the beginning of that, they go in the pub and buy six pints or something, and he pays with a tenner and says, keep the change.
	And the barman, like, can't believe it.
	He's like, really?
	Are you sure?
	I can keep all of this money?
	That's painful, what you've just told me.
	So, the Labour government haven't come out yet and said they support this, but guess who did?
	Guess who did?
	A former Tory cabinet minister.
	came out and said that he supported this.
	So, you know, even with this, you've got Labour saying, a bit too much.
	Tories, though, Tories turn around and say, fantastic idea.
	Why?
	Brilliant.
	Because there was nudge.
	Obviously, we had the nudge units under Cameron, but this is the nanny units, isn't it?
	So we've gone a step further.
	We're not nudging people.
	We're literally telling people, aren't we?
	You won't be able to buy a pint anymore.
	You can't buy a pint in England.
	That's fighting talk right there.
	I'll kick off right now.
	Set the studio up.
	Imagine though, if we couldn't do that.
	So you go, I'll have a pint please.
	No, you won't.
	You'll have a two-third pint.
	I'll tell you when I used to get offended when I was drinking massively.
	Literally, 30 seconds.
	I used to go to Germany a lot, and in those posh hotels, my wife always liked the posh hotels, you know what I mean?
	I never did, you know, but fine.
	They would only serve you in half pints.
	It used to anger me so much.
	I'm in Germany and I can't... It just feels like a waste of time, doesn't it?
	I'll order 12 then, just as a starter, you know what I mean?
	Before she's having a shower, I'm necking it down to the bar.
	I'll have a pint, please.
	Oh, you can do half pints.
	Give me seven then, quickly, you know what I mean?
	I thought this was Germany.
	Give me a Stein.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Give me a big old two meters over there.
	I'm one of those girls to bring it to me.
	You know what I mean?
	Let's just do that.
	But yeah, half pints used to really offend me.
	And if you can't order a pint in England, I mean, what's the point of England if you can't?
	This is on getting angry now.
	Yeah.
	The world can't- I'll be over here in my zone.
	This is what I mean though.
	This is what I mean.
	It's a part of our culture, and I genuinely attach it to the British and the English mentality, that we like to go out, have a drink, have a pint.
	It's something that's special to us, and this is just another way that Labour is going to flatten down our culture.
	Because they're just going to take it away from us and then we can be the same as all of the rest of the globalist, managerial outposts that have been replacing the nations.
	It really is part of the culture, we sort of hinted at it at the beginning, but even when you go back to ancient times, like Tacitus talking about the ancient Germans, Talking about how they're into their beer.
	I mean, beer is a really ancient thing.
	Ancient Egyptians brewed beer.
	And even through sort of the 18th and 19th century, whole industries helped with the Industrial Revolution because of breweries and beer.
	It is a massive part of our story, of our culture.
	It wasn't as strong, was it?
	So it was a way of... You could drink without getting ill because it was... Small beer.
	Yeah, that's right.
	It wasn't that strong at all.
	You could drink it all day, couldn't you?
	You'd drink small beer all day because... We should bring that back!
	We should bring it back!
	We're here all day.
	day yeah so you know that's that's what everything's going on right now we've got footage that nick dixon showed of labor catching somebody drinking two-thirds of a pint after about nine o'clock that lamby in there For God's sake!
	ugh.
	Brilliant.
	Angela Rayner, not impressed.
	Not impressed.
	And the only response I can say to this is just do what Jeremy Clarkson is doing right now.
	Just ban Keir Starmer.
	Ban all of Labour from every single pub in the country because they should be punished.
	They really should be punished for this.
	There you go.
	Nice fun one to start the day off.
	I'm angry now.
	Well, perfect.
	Let's get on to it.
	Oh, haven't you got some, um... Oh, yeah, sorry.
	There's a load of rumble rants.
	Bloody hell, there's quite a lot of rumble rants.
	Thank you all for sending them in.
	I'll get through a few of them now.
	So, uh, that's a random name for a dollar.
	Says, when I was four years old, my dad would let my sister and I take a sip or two from his beer.
	Grew up to be a teetotaler and my relatives in the Balkans just don't understand how that's even possible.
	Yeah, that's a random name again.
	All of these issues with the NHS could be solved by having everyone pay based on their health.
	The Obestogenics could pay proportionally based on how much of a dead weight they are to the system.
	There's an interesting and unique solution.
	Dragon Lady Chris for $5.
	Nicotine pouches are just chewing tobacco in a little filter paper pouch, slightly neater to deal with than a wad of loose leaves.
	Fair play, we've got that answer now.
	That's a random name again.
	Everything you said about the bureaucrats is correct, Harry.
	I went to school with a lot of politicians' kids, and they have no individuality, no personality, are small-minded, petty, socialist, tyrannical.
	Yeah, yeah, I'm not surprised.
	Hugh, you can always tell by the way that they behave, by the things that they prioritize, that that's who they are on a personal level.
	Hugh at 76, everyone dreams, it just depends on what period of sleep we wake up in as to whether we remember them or not.
	No, no, Keir Starmer doesn't dream.
	I refuse to believe that that man has a soul.
	Uh, Glee 77, uh, 777.
	Uh, the big BMI tax will also affect those who are jacked.
	Pay up, Harry.
	See, I'm, I'm, in between, I'm jacked and fat.
	How about that?
	Bald Eagle 1787.
	Harry, they're gonna ban everything that normal people do after the smoking and drinking bans.
	Gyms will follow, then obesity will overrun the NHS, which will lean, lead to more, uh, money being wasted funding it, probably.
	That's a valid point.
	being able to recreate images and sounds in your mind is not universal.
	People that cannot do this also cannot dream it as it relates to IQ.
	Not all IQ people can do it either, but no low IQ people can.
	And Peter J. Harvey, beware of the quiet people for they are the ones that are unpredictable and uncontrollable.
	It's easier to control outspoken people as you know what they might do or actions that they would take.
	Is that paraphrasing Jack Sparrow?
	That feels like it's paraphrasing Jack.
	That's a valid point.
	It is a valid point.
	Anyway, let's talk about Ukraine.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	Well, my thing about Ukraine... Are you introducing this?
	No, you just started.
	Oh, sorry.
	Okay.
	No, I'm on a bit of a mission here to break down the nuance between the Ukraine and the Russian war.
	Because I think people have a very, and I did as well for a very long time with a very reductive argument of, and I was the opposite, but people will say, well, Putin bad, Putin invaded Ukraine.
	So if someone invades another country, that's a bad thing.
	I mean, we've done this lots ourselves, haven't we?
	But no one seems to think that we're that bad, although people do.
	I mean, the people in the countries we invaded do.
	Yeah, of course.
	And now they're coming here.
	So, you know, who'd have thought that might happen?
	If we go to other countries... Well, I did two tours in Iraq, and I always remember thinking, when I was flying over Iraq, thinking, if we're telling people in Iraq that we're here because our way of life is better, at some point, they're going to come over to our way of life, aren't they?
	And that's, obviously, I was over Iraq 2007.
	You know, I watched... I don't want to go on too much of a tangent, but I watched Full Metal Jacket yesterday.
	And there's some great bits in that where, um, I think they're doing a bit where they're interviewing all of the soldiers for a film crew that are going through Vietnam, and one of them talks about how, you know, all the people in Vietnam that they're liberating aren't grateful to them, they hate that they're there, they despise the people, and he goes, uh, you know, I guess they must prefer being alive than being free.
	Yeah.
	crazy because that's what we always do we go into some place and we bomb the hell out of it and we say don't worry you're free now yeah well I mean the Hussein family were a crime family of course forget that yeah but they obviously kept that country together and they kept the whole region together Now, whether it was methods that we wouldn't use, I think this brings me to my next point, of course, Bo.
	It's almost like it set you up for it.
	The issue is, I don't think people, and I'm one of these people, I'm trying to learn as deep as I can by reading multiples of sources, we don't understand the Russian way of thinking.
	We apply our own Western thoughts to Putin.
	And it's completely, I've read a book by Philip Short at the moment called Putin, which is a great book to read or podcast when you're doing some gym work or whatever.
	But it's a very in-depth look at Putin, and you realise Putin and the people he goes through, especially in the KGB, they're just not the same as the way we are.
	They're not the same as us.
	Even the way we look to these people, we're looking at them still through a very Western lens, and it's not a Western lens.
	And I'm trying to get people to understand the historical significance, which is brilliant that you're here, of Russia, and is it Kievan Rus', where the principality that started it?
	Yeah, pretty much around the Kiev area.
	Back in what, the 9th century and the multiple of tribes that then went out of course from there into the steppe lands, wasn't it, in the forested areas and Moscow grew up as one of the main sort of areas and stuff like this.
	But people don't realise that.
	And so when we look at the Russian-Ukraine war, of which I am not an expert at all by the way, You have to look at it from Putin's point of view of why he thinks that Ukraine is so important to him.
	And he really sees it as the birthplace of Russia.
	So how do you argue with that?
	And who are we to argue with that?
	Because we see it as a buffer, don't we?
	So we say, well, and I used to say this a lot, Putin doesn't want NATO on its doorstep.
	And when we look, and I'm going to say this as well now, When we look at America and bringing in democracy around the world, of course, everyone must want democracy, of course, and if they don't, we're going to give it to them and they're going to love us for it.
	Freedom is the only way.
	Exactly.
	There's another great line from Full Metal Jacket where one of the squad leaders they're speaking to says, we're here because in every G is an American waiting to get out.
	Right.
	That's the mentality.
	It probably is.
	He would not want freedom and jeans and Pepsi or whatever it might be.
	But the truth of the matter is, I mean, we're forcing it, aren't we?
	But when we look at how many US bases around, I mean, what has Ukraine got to do with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization?
	Let's be honest with you.
	I mean, are we just spreading this now to everyone?
	With the EU, you can kind of understand.
	NATO?
	Really?
	So there's all this stuff.
	But also Russia hasn't got any bases next to America.
	And if you had Russian bases in Mexico and Canada, I think you could sort of understand America going, well, we want these places.
	But it doesn't.
	So I think Putin has a point.
	And whether we like to think he has a point or not, let's look at whether, let's pretend he does.
	Put yourself, this is what he used to do in the military.
	Let's red team stuff.
	Let's think about what the enemy thinks, because that's really the only vote that matters.
	Not what we think, right?
	Because I couldn't care less what we think, because the enemy is going to think differently.
	Let's put ourselves in the shoes of the enemy.
	We want to see Russia as the enemy.
	Russian people the enemy?
	Since when were Russian people the enemy of us?
	I just, I'm absolutely, you know, I speak to Russians online.
	They're not the enemy of us.
	So obviously Putin wants to keep Ukraine within the sphere of influence of Russia, as he did with Georgia, South Ossetia.
	We all know the history of that stuff.
	Very reactionary to his wars.
	Something happens, he goes in, solves it, might leave a few people there, comes back out again.
	I don't think people fully appreciate the sort of history and the significance between Ukraine and Russia.
	That's where I'm coming from.
	And why are we not educating people on this?
	Why are we just saying Russia going into Eastern Ukraine bad, that's it, he must be the bad person?
	I think because the State Department and the Pentagon hawks need it to be that way.
	The Blinkens, the Newlands.
	I think the one point you made I think is very very interesting is that the Russian view of the world is different to Western Europe and America.
	Yeah.
	It's a fundamentally different worldview.
	In fact, to the point almost, where it's cliche, where people have said that for hundreds of years about the Russians, say that during the 19th century Crimean War, is that, don't try and understand the Russian mindset, because unless you grew up Russian, you won't.
	Yeah.
	And we mentioned this on camera about the, the Tucker, Tucker Carlson, Putin interview, which I thought was very, very interesting.
	And I actually did a bit of content with Apostolic Majesty, go on LotusEaters.com to check out one of the older Epochs episodes, where we broke down, we spoke for a couple of hours or more, breaking down what Putin said in that interview.
	Yeah, I saw that one.
	And again, you're going back to the Kievan Rus', you're going back the best part of a thousand years of history.
	People don't understand it.
	Just one example.
	In the 14th century, the Mongols annihilated Kiev.
	They completely invaded and occupied Russia, Novgorod and stuff, and the Duchy of Moscow.
	generations, the Golden Horde.
	Okay, in Western Europe, we have got none of that.
	That's just not in our psyche, that's just not in our history.
	That's just one tiny example. - Well, to add to what you're discussing, what it sounds to me like you're both saying is that in Russia, they have a much longer historical memory where they see themselves as the inheritors of an incredibly long lineage of a civilization that was gifted to them by their ancestors, whereas in the West we're explicitly and purposefully taught to think whereas in the West we're explicitly and purposefully taught to think almost the
	Well, certainly not in that way where our ancestral memory is disconnected from us, where we're told that most of your history was wrong, most of your history was evil, you need to cut yourselves off from it, you need to dismiss it.
	All of your ancestors were all bigots, cowards, slave owners of some form, and what history you do learn is already taught in these very, very broken up modules.
	To protect it.
	you'll learn maybe a bit about the Civil War, you'll learn that Henry VIII had a few wives that he wasn't very nice to because he wanted a son, and very, very little else.
	Maybe the Norman Conquests.
	So you don't get a sense of your own history as being this long connected story leading to you and your family and your descendants.
	To protect it.
	Yeah, because it breeds complacency and it breeds apathy towards your own history.
	Whereas the Russians don't have that.
	So we might be able to understand it a bit better if we had been raised in a more similar way like they do.
	But we're not here.
	I think the point you're making to me is completely valid.
	I couldn't agree more with you.
	to be forced to accept that history started when Putin invaded Crimea or after that.
	That things started there, the story, the narrative started there.
	It couldn't be more silly, really.
	I think we can all understand young minds capitalising on this.
	And when I talk about young minds, I'm not talking about young people.
	I speak to young people all the time who've got a far greater sense of history than some old people have.
	It's the inability to look deeper into an issue, to maybe listen to a podcast or listen to one of your epochs or something and just say, what is this?
	Let's just break this out.
	Why is Putin so intent on having presence, having some kind of aspect of Ukraine influence basically?
	I mean if you go back to what Yanukovych obviously being ousted in the what's 2010 I mean I think the actual and then coming into Poroshenko and Zelensky of course if we actually look about Crimea and why he wanted to keep Crimea and if Crimea was on it people didn't realize Crimea was leased from Ukraine for £90 million a year from about 2010.
	It was leased.
	It was leased before that, in fact.
	It went on to a lease that was going to expire in 2042.
	People don't realise that Putin had leased it from Ukraine.
	So I want this Crimea era.
	I want it.
	And then when Yanukovych was ousted, of course, in the Euromaidens in 2014, wasn't it?
	And Poroshenko came.
	And you saw Poroshenko leaning west again, as Yushchenko had done previous to Yanukovych.
	And he thought, I'm going to lose control of Crimea.
	And Sevastopol.
	When we look at it in a very sort of strategic way, as Putin obviously does, he thinks, well I can't have that.
	So I know it's going to happen.
	They're going to stop this lease.
	It was for a gas deal as well that was involved.
	We're going to give you cheap gas to Ukraine.
	So he said, you know what, I'm going to put my little green men in there and I'm just going to secure the territory.
	I'm not saying anything's right or wrong, but I can say we can understand it if we look deeper into the history.
	You've got a naval base there.
	Vast expense.
	So what Ukraine did is they went, all right, we're going to stop the water flow.
	And Crimea is reliant on water from the northern Crimean canal, for example, that is in the eastern area of Ukraine, above Crimea.
	So they blocked the canal, so they didn't have any water.
	So now he hasn't got any water in Crimea.
	So now he's got to go and secure that water source.
	Well, eventually we do, we go into, that's what he does.
	We think, all right, we're going to, we're Russians, we're going to go and secure that water source.
	We're going to secure some mineral wealth and some gas aspects of, you can see how it builds.
	It's not just a case of, we're going to go and take eastern Ukraine.
	So the Russian bear was being poked rather than the Russian bear is innately aggressive and mad.
	So I'll say about NATO as well.
	I think one of the common things I used to talk a lot about before I started reading deeper into it was the NATO expansion or EU expansion like this.
	We can see if NATO keeps walking up to that border.
	You know, I mean NATO people say NATO is already on the border.
	Yeah, so he doesn't want it even more on the 1200km border, does he?
	He already knows NATO's on the border, on the northern states and everything, so he doesn't want that to be exposed.
	So he hasn't got a buffer.
	And whether we think NATO is compliant and it's not going to invade, it doesn't matter what we think.
	It's what Putin thinks.
	And Putin doesn't think the same as us, in all the Russian people, you know what I mean?
	Their history is of him being invaded, isn't it?
	We haven't been invaded since 900-and-something.
	You've come out with some facts and figures.
	1066.
	I'd say a thousand years or whatever, you know, we haven't technically been invaded.
	They have!
	That's the problem.
	And where were they invaded?
	Across the Ukrainian areas, across the whole of Eastern Europe sort of thing.
	So they are very worried about that and he just wants to make sure that border is secure.
	I used to reduce my argument down to that, NATO expansionism.
	But it's more than that.
	It's deeper and more historical than that.
	And I don't think we live in a world right now, or a scrolling Instagram, whatever it is, that allows that kind of depth of research, all that understanding.
	I think as a nation we're capable of it because we realise, we should realise, how the English, especially the English, are being reduced.
	How the pint was a classic example.
	Can you imagine that?
	I mean, you can imagine when that flag, the English flag was out someone's window, wasn't it?
	A white van man's window.
	Emily Thornberry, remember her post on that?
	And she had a go at that, didn't she?
	I mean, this is the Englishman that is being reduced now.
	English history is being... So we should be invested in looking at other people's histories, let's just say, in this particular case, Russia.
	Why are they doing this?
	Why is Ukraine pushing against it?
	Why is Ukraine leaning to the EU?
	What's that about?
	But we don't.
	We just say, Russia bad.
	How am I, a 20-year veteran Royal Air Force officer, actually sort of being like a Putin apologist here?
	I'm not.
	Yeah.
	You know what I mean?
	But it's weird.
	Do you think it's weird?
	Why am I doing it?
	Just because I open my eyes a little bit and go, right, what's the detail?
	What's it about?
	Let's flush it out a little bit.
	And I'm angry at that two-thirds point.
	But that's what I get whenever I say anything like this.
	You get immediately accused of being a Putin apologist or you're being paid by Russia or something.
	It's like, no, I'm just I'm just talking about history.
	I'm just talking about reality.
	Trying to, yeah.
	Or attempting to.
	Exactly, yeah.
	Because if you look at the relationship between Kiev and Moscow.
	Yeah.
	Just that.
	Sure.
	And let's say just the 19th and 20th century alone.
	It's a very, very, very involved story.
	Crazily involved story from the Russians.
	What Lenin did, Lenin's settlement with Ukraine.
	How Stalin treated Ukrainians in the gulag system.
	If you read Solzhenitsyn, there's all sorts of stuff all about Ukraine.
	Even ever since 1989 when the Soviet Union collapsed.
	Just from 1989 until 2014 or whatever.
	That window of time.
	Massively complicated relationship.
	Hugely.
	Really, really complicated thing.
	And bound up with a thousand years plus of baggage.
	But no, you have to, we, you know, the State Department and our Foreign Office and the Pentagon and the politicians say, no, you can only really think about this in terms of since 2014 or whatever it is.
	And Zelensky's a new Churchill, Putin's a new Hitler, and he must have endless money, and they'll stay there until the job is done.
	And that's one of the things, that's just one more example of how low resolution it is, and deliberately so.
	They all try out the same line.
	It's obviously the agreed line, literally, is as long as it takes.
	Yeah, they do.
	Or Putin's Hitler and stuff, that kind of labelling, don't they?
	For as long as it takes until they win.
	What are you talking about?
	Yeah, what do you mean winning?
	Well, again, that was basically Churchill's whole thing after Dunkirk, was to just carry on the fighting however you can until, essentially, America can come in.
	or well in the second world war it was until america and the russians can come in but now we're against the russians again so i think the idea is again again you paint putin as a new hitler and then you keep the war rhetoric hot you make sure that there is a division where rhetoric is consistently ramping up until it does eventually come to on the ground actual conflict between maybe the other western nations not just ukraine And Russia.
	And then you have, in the people's mind, this idea that, yeah, they are evil incarnate, the people that you're fighting against.
	I mean, the same thing was in the First World War as well, wasn't there?
	There was an atrocity propaganda that the Germans had been going through Belgium and, what, spearing babies, or something.
	So there's always, in the ramp-up to war, this kind of atrocity rhetoric or this us-v-them mentality rhetoric that's ramped up to get the population ready for if there is combat.
	Yeah, but the idea of having endless money, essentially, staying there until, as long as it takes, until your job is done, until there's victory.
	So, you're talking about surrounding Moscow.
	Well, that's what they were saying.
	Taking Moscow, yeah.
	With divisions.
	Well, that's the ultimate goal, surely.
	That's not going to happen.
	Ukrainian armoured divisions and infantry divisions are going to surround Moscow, storm the Kremlin and remove Putin.
	Well, you've got to remove Putin somehow.
	It's not going to happen.
	But you saw Sergei Lavrov, didn't you, in the UN General Assembly, was it, recently?
	When he's talking, when David Lammy was addressing him.
	As a black man, David Lammy was addressing him because he's black.
	But look at the intellect, look at the delta of intellect between those two men.
	I mean, Sergei Lavrov is the longest-serving Russian diplomat since the Tsarist era.
	If I consider David Lammy's intellect, I might get us banned off the stage.
	I'm not hating on the individual, you know what I'm saying?
	I'm not the kind of guy that does that.
	But it just is ridiculous that he's addressing literally the president of a Slavic nation and he's talking about slavery.
	It's his only point of reference.
	And it always has been.
	But you don't take it to the UN, do you?
	And use it as a leverage.
	I stand here as a black man.
	Well, for a start, you're sitting down, mate.
	You know what I mean?
	I said the way that I view this is that you can tell when you watch somebody like David Lammy give that speech, or any other leftist, the way that they intone their voice, the pauses that they give, in their head, There's swooping camera angles, there's a swelling of an orchestral soundtrack.
	It is true.
	They think they're in their high school films giving a speech to the bully that makes the bully realize, I've been wrong this whole time, I need to change my ways.
	That's how they see the world.
	It's high school nerds, which are good people, who are them, versus the jock bullies who are bad people.
	That's how they see the world.
	Well, it's interesting being left and right.
	If you look at, they found it in America, didn't they?
	All the right guys were like lifting and trying to get themselves jacked because they know what's coming.
	And all the guys on the left were sitting in the basement eating like Wotsits and stuff, you know, which we've all done many times.
	But no, that is one of the things.
	So I think my thing here, that's it really.
	It's just, let's delve into a bit more of the history, look at the Russian people, look at their point of view and literally try and go there.
	It's like, what does it mean for Putin not to have that warm water port?
	What does it mean?
	Like, why are we not... Who blew up the Nord Stream 2 pipeline?
	That went quiet, didn't it?
	Come on!
	Well, there was the reports that I... No, I'm joking.
	I'm joking.
	I'm totally joking.
	That's what they want us, right?
	Oh yeah, of course.
	I spoke to an AFD dude once, and he literally did... Peter Bowringer.
	I did an interview with him, and I asked him about that.
	And he actually did do that.
	And he wasn't joking.
	He was literally like, um... Seriously?
	Uh, can't talk about that.
	Uh, yeah.
	Well, there were the reports that came through.
	I think it was... Yes, weird as hell.
	There was the Wall Street Journal articles from a few I think last month or the month before where they were trying to pin the whole thing on it being it was a Ukrainian inside job but Zelensky wasn't in favor of it and it was come up by some general and three other guys when they got drunk one night who thought it would be a really great false flag and the whole story actually There's about three countries in the world that know how to do that.
	It was done by a pair of diving instructors.
	On a yacht or something, wasn't it?
	On a yacht.
	Were these people trying to do it?
	Except they were saying, no, you shouldn't do it.
	And again, there was a lot wrong with that story.
	There's about three countries in the world that know how to do that.
	I was going to say, you need a submarine program, right?
	You need professional frogmen.
	You need only a few people could have done it.
	It was done by a pair of diving instructors.
	On a yacht or something, wasn't it?
	On a yacht.
	On a yacht.
	Yeah, I saw that.
	Yes.
	And they managed to get into...
	It's exceptionally complicated.
	They managed to sail into foreign waters in the dead of night.
	But one of them got caught on a flash from a speed camera, I think.
	If I remember the story correctly.
	And one of them...
	The whole thing made no sense.
	That's why they put these things out, multiple stories, to get us all talking about other stuff, whereas the truth is, to do that, you need a military that can do that.
	And that is expensive equipment, it's expensive training, and it takes an exercise off whatever coast, Norwegian coast, whatever it was at the time.
	Sorry, the chat is cocking an eyebrow saying, did Diddy do it?
	Sure.
	Did he do everything else?
	Throw that on his wraps.
	We love talking about that.
	But one other thing I'd say about the idea of victory conditions, of Ukraine winning Yeah, yeah, it's a valid point.
	It's like, so like, there's these bits of the Donbass and bits of Eastern Ukraine that are occupied essentially by Russia.
	I don't see how short of a full-blown conflagration with lots of European countries or the American army actually sending in thousands of Marines or US infantry divisions and stuff.
	There's no way to really take that back off of Russia, Ukraine on its own, cannot, I don't think, take those areas back.
	It's not capable of doing it.
	You remember last summer there was this big offensive that they spent billions on, apparently, and it didn't go anywhere.
	They dug in five kilometres worth of trenches.
	The Russians, the actual, what's actually happening on the ground, the Russians manufacturing so much more artillery and stuff.
	It's like an artillery war in all sorts of ways.
	Yeah, it always was.
	They've got loads more armour.
	Loads more tanks than the Ukrainians will ever be able to field, really.
	There's not really any scenario where Ukraine can win.
	Well, haven't you spoken about why F-16s aren't flying over Ukraine?
	And we haven't spoken about the surface-to-air missile threat, the ground-based air defence, integrated air defence systems.
	I was an electronic warfare instructor.
	I don't talk about it all the time, but there's a reason that when you go against Russia, you learn about these things, because they are expert at electronic warfare.
	And someone like Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer or whoever our Prime Minister is or someone at the Pentagon, they don't like to talk about that Russia does have the biggest nuclear arsenal, right?
	It comes up every now and again.
	Oh yeah, there is a possibility of a sort of full nuclear exchange and a nuclear winter and stuff, yeah, but let's just not talk about that.
	Let's just talk about staying as long as it takes and keep giving Zelensky billions.
	Let's just talk about that instead.
	It's so low resolution that it's not making any sense.
	Well, I suppose it's not supposed to make sense.
	It's supposed to allow us to give on a lender-lease deal, all the weapons, and then we can start rebuilding our own.
	The money goes back into industry that I'm obviously banned from, which in a way is probably a good thing, defence.
	And then, even though I've been asked to rejoin the Air Force, but that's because they haven't got any instructors, so understand that.
	And then all of a sudden we're just rebuilding, we're employing people to make missiles, to make bombs in the UK, employ people, they go and buy TVs, they go to the supermarket, spend money, it regenerates the economy.
	We understand how it works.
	It's not saying it's a bad thing.
	It comes around all the time, doesn't it?
	Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Libya, whatever the next one is, Russia's the next one, Iran's giving the next one.
	It's a continual one, the spread of democracy around the world.
	I'll get myself banned for my own, you know.
	It's a lot more about the old money.
	I just think it's a money generation.
	You cannot have a standing army.
	This is the problem that the UK has at the moment where we've dropped down to such a... This is why instructors have gone.
	We can't get instructors in the fast jet.
	Our fast jet pipeline cannot It cannot, it's not, we haven't got an indigenous British fast jet pipeline right now.
	We cannot train people on fast jets because the instructors aren't there.
	We're sending students and instructors to America and Italy to train them because up in North Wales we don't have enough instructors to train our students.
	And we always said back in 2010 when we privatized the whole thing, you know, unless we actually look after these instructors and we grow indigenous instructor capability, we're going to lose this.
	And now I'm being called by the Air Force, have you thought about rejoining?
	I understand it.
	At the age of 50, you know, with a neck like a giraffe, do you want to get back in a fast jet cockpit?
	Not really.
	But let's have the conversation because I still believe that we need to be looking after our own military, looking after our own... We just have to, unfortunately, and I have that thing in my head that, you know, I'm always a bit self-sacrificed.
	Fine, let's have a think about it.
	It's a dangerous world and leaving ourselves wide open is a stupid thing to do.
	It is and we're not encouraging young people.
	We're taking away the nationalism of the young.
	Is that the right word?
	The patriotism of the young.
	We're saying that it's not right to have a white skin.
	You can't have a pint in the pub anymore.
	I mean I'm sounding like One of these guys, you know, raging on about stuff.
	But the truth is, I still believe if we lose that in our own country, we're never going to get it back.
	And we're never going to get it back.
	All we do is be flooded with a lot of immigrants.
	We dilute the whole nationalist feeling that we used to have.
	We won't have that.
	I'll tell you what, when the country becomes 50% non-English, we'll just have to invert our own flag, won't we?
	It's going to be that, unfortunately.
	So, in summary, I think we need to look a bit deeper into the Russian thing.
	Because it's probably happening to us on a different kind of scale.
	And try and work out what actually is happening there.
	And I must admit, I haven't even looked at the comments.
	I do think it's a really good point you made, and I've seen lots of people make it, and I put a lot of stock in it, that we're giving them, Britain and America and other countries, giving them lots and lots of materiel, and it's to clear out our stock, so we have to spend big budgets on getting all the new stuff.
	Lifex, you've either got to destroy it or you give it away.
	You know, you lend-lease it.
	You go, I'm going to lend you this, and if you use it, you pay me for it.
	Which they are going to use it, of course.
	That means we can build more.
	I mean... That whole dynamic has also got baked into it the loss of an entire generation of Ukrainian menfolk.
	And this is the awful thing.
	And thousands of Russian soldiers.
	We're not even talking about... They're just, they're just completely expendable.
	But it is that.
	Badness.
	But it's always been done like that.
	Disgusting.
	I know, that's the thing, I get that as well.
	By people who are there saying we're doing the right thing.
	The right thing.
	Like, you think it's the right thing.
	I'm sure the families in Ukraine and I'm sure the families in Russia don't think it's the right thing to do.
	And I always say winning was not doing it at all.
	Yeah, right.
	Winning was having a conversation in 2014 and going, we're being pushed into this, aren't we?
	And we're being agitated by Russian troops in East... Of course we are, we understand that and we're shelling...
	As a final point, I think, to close off this conversation, if that's alright gentlemen, I will say winning would have been an actual serious peace talks at the beginning of the conflict that were going on in the early 2022.
	And that were cut off because of the fact that Ukraine, yes, did manage to be a bit more successful in pushing away the Russian forces than they were expecting to at first, and also because of agitation and encouragement from people like Boris Johnson, who went over there and said, we will give you all the support for as long as you need, into perpetuity, forever.
	We will support you forever.
	And as you say, what does this mean?
	This means that an entire generation of Ukrainian men have to go to their death, and if you actually look at the Foreign Affairs article that was talking about that, there was a remarkable amount being put on the table, even by the Russians, because the Russians did not want an extended, dragged-out military conflict in Ukraine.
	Probably because they were worried, rightfully so, that if it went on long enough, that America would try to involve itself more and more.
	into it.
	They even said, there was no guarantees made of course, but they even said that they were willing to speak about Crimea at the time.
	And so the fact that we basically went in and sabotaged those talks, or at least our government did, shows that the government do not care about peace, they do not care about a settlement, they only care about aggression towards Russia.
	That's how I perceive it.
	And if you watching this, if you hate Russia, and you want us to, you know, win a military conflict against Russia, you know, that's your business.
	I do not want generations of men to have to die, and I do not want generations of my own countrymen to get sucked into it either.
	That's my view on the matter.
	All at the low, low price of an infinite amount of Ukrainian blood.
	Brilliant.
	And with that, let's go into some of the rumble rants that have been sent in, and then we'll go on to your segment to finish this off, Bo.
	And, um... Let me scroll down... Here we go... Alright, so that's a random name again.
	He's been very generous today.
	Says, The Eastern European mentality is simple.
	We like strength, order, and straightforwardness.
	This is why most of us don't even see Putin as a dictator.
	To many of us, he's a patriarch of sorts.
	This is the same, I've got friends from Eastern Europe, one of them is Ukrainian, and he is very much the same, he typifies all of those traits that you laid out there.
	I quite like the Eastern European mentality because of the straightforwardness.
	If they've got something on their mind that they want to say, they won't dilly-dally or dance around it, they'll tell you, which I respect and appreciate.
	Communism, or Soviet communism, is in living memory.
	Oh yeah, he's in his 50s, so he grew up in the Soviet Union, and he misses it!
	It's something you don't expect to hear on our side of the pond, but he basically just says that, oh yeah, the streets were clean and people behaved themselves.
	I miss it so much.
	By the 1980s people only sometimes disappeared.
	I have mentioned that to him, and he was sort of like, eh, hand wave.
	Eh, well it never happened to anyone I knew.
	So, you know, okay, if that's how you feel about it, that's a random name again.
	Also, as post-commie societies, it is a ruthless and lawless place, therefore someone like Putin isn't needed if you actually want anything to get done.
	It's crazy how many people buy into American propaganda.
	EC was here for $1, says, do you know how Victoria Nuland first came into being?
	She was an elf once, taken by the dark powers, tortured and mutilated.
	A ruined and terrible form of life.
	Glad to get an origin story for her.
	That's a random name.
	When the war in Ukraine started, I was speaking with a tenured history professor at a university who said that Putin was a war criminal, and without skipping a beat, followed it up with, if I was in charge, I'd nuke Moscow.
	And that is the mentality of our ruling class right now, to be honest.
	Dragon Lady Chris says, Bow, do you have a recommended reading list on British history, or at least your top three?
	I always say Sir Charles Oman on British history.
	Is that available on Amazon?
	Is it easy to get hold of?
	It would be, yeah, yeah, yeah, you could get it.
	Sir Charles Oman?
	Oman, yeah, it doesn't sound very English, but he was a history professor at Oxford.
	Alright.
	The very end of the 19th century, early 20th century.
	Is that a multi-volume series?
	Yeah, yeah, well, yeah, he wrote on all sorts of things, so, but particularly ones on just sort of an overview on the kings and queens and things.
	Also, you know, we're not particularly fans of Churchill the politician here, but he was a great, he was a great writer.
	Oh yeah.
	He's got the history of the English-speaking peoples.
	And it's also superb in many volumes any others potentially more recent volumes that you know you don't wanna I said this recently you don't really want to read stuff recently like someone like Neil Ferguson Niall Ferguson Someone like that.
	They're not to be trusted They're not to be trusted.
	Read stuff that's pre-1960s.
	Read stuff that's pre-WWII.
	That's why I always recommend Oman, because it's actually pre-WWI.
	So there's no hint of guilt.
	I'd imagine it must be quite patriotic in that case.
	It's just straight down the line.
	This is what happened.
	Yeah, I will say... It's unapologetic.
	I have read one Neil Ferguson book and didn't think it was that bad.
	I thought his book on Empire was alright.
	Very sneaky.
	Well, still, for a modern historian on English history- There'll be poison pills in there, trust me.
	He is not the worst.
	He's not the worst, okay.
	He's not the worst.
	Okay, carrying on.
	That's a random name, again.
	Spoke with a co-worker two years ago who used to be in the Canadian Special Forces.
	Told me with pride he had colleagues who were currently in Ukraine fighting the Russkies.
	The West is playing with fire.
	Well, it dep- I suppose it depends if they're there as Canadian special forces or if they are being hired as independent mercenaries.
	If they're there as Canadian forces, then yeah, that is pretty dangerous.
	WinPillSeeker says, perfect time to recommend the exquisite series Young Stalin by Bo on History Bro.
	A true thug and an action-packed bit of history, intrigue and spycraft.
	It's like a Bond movie where the bad guys won.
	I don't shield my channel enough.
	There is a channel on YouTube called History Bro.
	It's pretty brilliant.
	It's one of the best channels on YouTube, basically.
	Basically is what it is.
	He's pulling the brow folk, so he must be telling the truth.
	And there's, I think, a five-part, or maybe it's more, maybe it's an eight-part series, one of the early series I did, all about Stalin from his earliest life through to the Russian Revolution.
	So just that period of his life, which is action-packed.
	He was a terrorist, basically.
	And on that, I'm actually listening at the moment to Apostolic Majesty's series on Stalin's grand strategy from when he became basically dictator of the Soviet Union through to the Second World War.
	Do you appear on that in the second or third episode of it?
	No, no, I don't think so.
	I don't think so.
	Well, that's a shame if you didn't.
	But you have appeared on his channel as well.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Check out History Bro.
	Yeah, and AM's on my channel once or twice a year or there.
	But yeah, it's kind of someone who ever said that to mention that.
	If you are interested in Stalin's early life, what made the man?
	By 1924, is it when Lenin dies in 24 I think, and Stalin becomes the leader of the Soviet Union basically.
	What made that person?
	How is he a monster now already at that point?
	I think that's an interesting thing to look at.
	Because I think it stands for one of the most evil people ever to have lived.
	Wonderful.
	Would you like this for yourself?
	Can you just scroll down a bit?
	Can I scroll down?
	What is it?
	I can never see it.
	Okay.
	Alright.
	Alright then.
	So it feels like election fever has actually kicked in.
	I don't know about you guys, but in the last few days, or at some point this week, I sort of felt like, oh, the election is actually here now.
	You know, at Christmas, at some point in early or maybe mid-December, you suddenly start feeling Christmassy.
	I suddenly started feeling electiony.
	It's suddenly getting real now.
	Because it's in early November, right?
	So it's only like four, five weeks away.
	So it is upon us now.
	It's only going to start ramping up.
	So, you know, I just thought we could talk about the Donald a little bit.
	I need some words.
	I'd forgotten that you brought that with you.
	I need that.
	This is Karl.
	Karl owns this.
	This isn't mine.
	He's lent it to me.
	He stole this.
	It's a great cap.
	It's a great cap.
	Tremendous.
	Wow, what a great cap.
	First time I saw this cap I said, the best cap.
	Go shoot with the Islander.
	I've got to shoot with the Islander real quick.
	Here you go, in your MAGA hat.
	Go on.
	Buy the Islander.
	It's a great magazine.
	I'd better take that off.
	Silly.
	That's crazy.
	That's ridiculous.
	Buy The Highlander.
	You can buy it on our website.
	LotusEaters.com.
	Second edition.
	There's loads of really good people in it, isn't there?
	Morgoth.
	That alone is worth buying it.
	I'm in it.
	That's brilliant.
	You're in it.
	Yeah.
	Are you in this one?
	Because you were in the first one twice.
	I was in the first one twice, so they thought I'd take this one off.
	I'll be in the next one.
	We don't want to overload.
	I'll be in the next one.
	Dr. Salvini.
	Charlie Cornishdale, aka Ren.
	Dave Green.
	Stephan Molyneux, the Stephan Molyneux.
	Anyway, it's good.
	It's honestly really good.
	So buy that.
	So we've got Stephan Molyneux and RawEggNationalist, that's two egg-based creators in there.
	Can't say fairer than that.
	Okay.
	Chat want me to leave the house.
	Come on, don't give the people what they want, Bo.
	We're a bastion of democracy in a lawless world on this planet.
	People in America wear them in the most ridiculous way.
	I see people wearing hats like that, right?
	That's how I wear mine.
	You really look like you should be catching Pokemon in that.
	Yeah.
	Worn like that.
	You teach me and I'll teach you.
	Gave away that I actually know the song.
	You travelling across the lands, Bo?
	Searching for a way.
	Stop that!
	There's enough of that!
	Okay, let's talk about Trump.
	Put up the first link I've got there.
	Ready?
	So, Trump's saying... Trump is funny though, right?
	Yeah, he's funny.
	So he... Well, just play this link.
	Let's just watch the whole... This happened and we all saw what happened and we see what happened.
	Kamala was...
	A total disaster.
	Yesterday and at every other interview, she's been just a free fall.
	I don't know what the hell's going on.
	She can't do an interview.
	She doesn't want to do them.
	Something's wrong.
	Let's just take a look.
	Let me just see.
	We have a little video.
	You know, we spend all the money on these screens.
	We want to use them a little bit.
	Let's play it just for a second.
	Thank you.
	The Kamala word of the day is clearly story.
	It is, your story and the story of our friends before you is really, that's the American story, right?
	in telling your story and being so strong in the way you do it and both of these stories for you to tell these stories this story is a story that is sadly not the only story it's unbelievable it It's simply unbelievable.
	It's like a child who learns one word and then they struggle for the next thought and it never comes.
	But maybe this daytime talk candidacy will work.
	It's all emotion, but not a very good one.
	Certainly not an articulate one, Laura.
	That's on the Jumbotron at a Trump rally.
	So Trump's just finding his favourite Fox News clips from last night's broadcast and playing them at his rallies.
	Yeah, playing her tapes.
	I just think it's funny that Trump's sort of fluid enough, lucid enough to do that at a rally.
	Can you imagine someone like Joe Biden?
	Who is still the president.
	Yeah, apparently.
	Apparently, yeah.
	Somehow.
	Um, but yeah, let's play the next little bit.
	Only, I think, from about where it is actually.
	Play that one?
	And then... No, the next.
	No, the next.
	The next one.
	Yeah, play that.
	Former President Donald Trump is on the campaign trail in North Carolina looking to win over voters in the battleground state.
	That's right.
	Earlier, Trump laid out some of his plans to improve job growth.
	But during his remarks, he took a moment to issue a warning to foreign leaders following a recent briefing about Iran's ongoing threats to assassinate him.
	If I were the president, I would inform the threatening country, in this case Iran, that if you do anything to harm this person, we are going to blow your largest cities and the country itself to smithereens.
	We're going to blow it to smithereens.
	You can't do that.
	Trump went on to say he would not be shaken or intimidated by these threats.
	He did get in in 2016 by saying crazy stuff.
	Right.
	Uh, stuff that he didn't actually end up following up on.
	All sorts of things.
	Well, I saw a lot of people complaining about that in particular.
	That is very strong.
	Yeah, well, it is very strong.
	It is very strong.
	Blow up whole cities.
	That was the rhetoric during his first term as well, if I remember.
	This is why today he says that Putin and Gaza, all of these wars going on in the Middle East and in Eastern Europe at the moment wouldn't have happened under him because under his presidency he did talk tough.
	And he said that was a deterrent.
	Do you remember the name Qasem Soleimani?
	Remember that dude?
	So he was head of the Iranian, what do they call it, not the National Guard, the Summit Guard, the... What's the word?
	The Republican Guard or something, wasn't it?
	Yeah, yeah.
	So in other words, one of the most important guys in their security structure.
	And Trump did a hit on him, right?
	They did a precision strike on his car.
	Blew him to bits.
	And so the Iranian establishment will never forget that.
	Right?
	It's like having something like one of your senior generals or the defence secretary or something killed by a foreign nation.
	You don't ever forgive or forget that.
	So, sort of no wonder Iran would want to assassinate Trump.
	Islamic Revolutionary Guard, right, yeah.
	So yeah, that's Soleimani guy.
	Trump blew him to bits, right.
	So no wonder they would want some sort of retribution for it.
	But that's the nature of being president, is that at some point your Pentagon guys are going to come to you and say, we advise that you do this or that.
	Killing people.
	There's no way to be president and keep your hands absolutely stain-free of blood.
	But the language used as well does appeal to a voter base.
	That doesn't have that much time to enter this nuanced, complex arguments that you might have on here.
	And I'm not saying our arguments are nuanced here at all.
	But when you're literally looking at a soundbite on NBC or Fox or whatever it is, what was it they said?
	They remember like one or two words from each speech he gives, don't they?
	Like, people remember Stalmer saying sausages, don't they?
	They don't remember anything else he said, but they remember him saying, rescue the sausages.
	And it's that kind of thing.
	So when you say something dynamic like that, you remember that one thing.
	Like, he says something about Kamala or whatever, and people remember that one thing.
	And that's why he does it, because it connects, it links.
	A lot of this stuff doesn't otherwise.
	I mean, it's quite bellicose.
	I quite like it.
	That's fresh.
	I mean, I'm not a fan of the Israeli government.
	Don't take that.
	But yeah, I really don't like the Iranian regime.
	Many people do, really.
	I don't think Iranians are that best politically.
	Right, yeah.
	So the Mullahs of Tehran, yeah I'm glad Trump's bellicose against them.
	Perhaps, what did he say?
	Annihilating cities or something, what did he say?
	Yeah.
	I mean, smithereens.
	Blowing whole cities to smithereens.
	That is a bit crazy.
	Yeah, but he's not meaning that.
	Yeah, I know, I know.
	That's the intent, isn't it?
	That's what I'm saying.
	We're in election mode now.
	Yeah, of course we are.
	It's election fever time.
	It's great, it's great.
	Put more Kamala on there, because that's what the Americans need to see.
	This is what you're going to get next five years with Kamala.
	Just let her speak.
	Let her speak.
	Imagine if you've got someone like Kamala or Gavin Newsom or AMC or someone.
	They wouldn't say something like that in a million years, would they?
	That's the best they've got now, isn't it?
	Gavin Newsom, imagine that.
	My goodness.
	Let's move on to Trump on immigration.
	The next link.
	So, HuffPo thinks that even the word re-migration is completely beyond the pale.
	Using the word re-migration, let alone the concept, just using the word itself is absolutely fascist.
	So when, as part of the post-WWII agreements that we had with the Soviet Union, we remigrated, deported all of the Russians back to Russia, who were in the West at that point, even the ones who we knew were going to get killed.
	Were we fascist at the time?
	Because I thought we beat the fascists.
	I think we are fascists.
	It doesn't need to make any sense anymore, does it?
	Everything's fascist.
	They just use these words.
	Like someone at the Huffington Post.
	Yeah, they don't care what they mean.
	They're not interested in historical facts or things that make sense now or anything.
	It's like racist, isn't it?
	Everything's racist, everything's fascist.
	Trump said something and there's a slight window to call him Hitler, so let's do that.
	Yeah, exactly that.
	This is the word of the day, isn't it?
	Yeah, if you scroll down a little bit further, you'll see... Yeah, let's read that tweet.
	Trump put, As President, I will immediately end the migrant invasion of America.
	We will stop all migrant flights, end all illegal entries, terminate the Kamala phone app for smuggling illegals, revoke deportation immunity, suspend refugee resettlement, and return Kamala's illegal migrants to their home countries.
	How do you do it though?
	You are that, you are the poster boy.
	and towns in minnesota wisconsin michigan pennsylvania north carolina and all across america mega 2024 um yeah good how do you do it though yeah you are that you are the poster boy how do you me re-migrate people um it's actually much easier than people yeah it's much easier than people make it sound Really?
	Well yeah, they could do it.
	I mean, they remigrated all of those migrants that were sent to Martha's Vineyard in a day.
	So it's actually very easy, it's just whether those in the political establishment have the desire to do so.
	They can, in America anyway, a strong president, if he controls Congress and the Senate, could pass legislation.
	You know, things like the Patriot Act, for example, springs to mind.
	Where they're sort of saying, here's a piece of law, but what it actually says is we can do anything we want.
	Right.
	You can pass laws that say that.
	That say, oh no, we're gonna give the power to, uh, the, um... ICE?
	ICE, yeah.
	Probably the people doing it.
	Or Homeland.
	Yeah.
	Or whatever, or the FBI or whoever saying, no if we want to deport you, we're gonna deport you.
	So why are we?
	Why is this migrant thing hitting all these Western nations at the same time?
	Because our leaders want it.
	Yeah, but why do they want it?
	What is it about?
	So is it about boosting GDP?
	Obviously not per capita, but... Well, I believe... It might be a bit to do with that, might be a bit... Polluting the national identity?
	It might be genuine, true believers for the ideology of multicultural globalism.
	Do we really believe that?
	Because there has to be a unifying reason.
	I think there are some true believers.
	I think there's also just malicious reasons for it.
	I remember... Are we allowed to say Katie Hopkins on here?
	Katie Hopkins, when she was Daily Mail, she was talking about the Save the Children boats, wasn't she, from Italy, that went to Italy to pick up migrants, to bring them back, so it was safer than letting them try and come across.
	And then the Save the Children boats put these, obviously the migrants there, put them all across Europe because it was the most, well, the most efficient way of making a lot of money at one time was the movement of people.
	So I guess there's people that are making a lot of money, I'm not saying politicians, I'm saying that people move.
	Politicians are probably making a lot of money to back more channels through it.
	It is a very, very salient, perhaps the most salient question.
	Why?
	How have we not answered it yet?
	I can understand the Nord Stream thing, because alright, people are going to obfuscate and everything, but this is not difficult.
	There's got to be a reason why we're flooding all the countries with these people.
	It's got to be something to do with GDP, as well as the cultural Marxism, of course.
	I think it is more ideology, that they see something... Conservatives?
	It was a Conservative government.
	Well, they weren't Conservative, but I know they weren't.
	But, you know, someone like Secretary Mayorkas, or here, somebody like Keir Starmer, I think they do buy into the idea, the very idea that someone like Robin DiAngelo will say that there's something wrong with whiteness, there's something wrong with Western Civilisation.
	Western Civilisation itself is a terrible thing.
	and should be dismantled.
	I shouldn't be allowed to be the leader or the hegemon of the world in any way.
	It should be prevented from doing that.
	One way to do it is to dilute the very population.
	I mean it sounds crazy right?
	But it's in their own words.
	It's what they say they're doing.
	The Frankfurt School developed a lot of it back in the 40s and been implemented in many many different forms essentially as a bulwark against fascism.
	There's the idea that if you let a European country stay its own, maintain its own demographics, so Germany stays a German nation, England stays an English nation, that this will just inherently breed fascism and imperialism and so these populations need to be diluted to prevent that.
	It doesn't answer America though, why it's happening in America.
	Japan's got immigration issues, isn't it?
	Japan.
	It's started to.
	It's an interesting phenomenon.
	Yeah.
	It's an interesting phenomenon.
	Never used to, yeah.
	It used to be a homogenous society, isn't it?
	But now it's... So it doesn't answer America, why America's doing it.
	And this is the thing.
	All I'm saying is there has to be a reason somewhere and I don't understand what it is.
	Why allow it?
	It didn't happen a decade ago.
	Well, a decade plus.
	And even pushing it as hard as they possibly can in places like Sweden or Ireland.
	It's weird, right?
	hotels putting people in there giving them money to be here and stuff like we want to give them cash do we want them to integrate you want them to get jobs and work and is that the reason that we're boosting gdp because of the low birth rates i mean this is you guys should you should guys should have this you should put people on here and work this out you know that's it i'm working while i'm working on something for that but it's a lot of research right and i've not got around to writing maybe your critical comments will tell us move on a bit with some of the
	There's more on Trump and re-migration where he was on the phone to a Fox News reporter just saying a lot of the things he said in the tweets saying I will finish the wall and I'll reverse the 1.3 million people Kamala basically let in over the last few years.
	I'm just going to send them home basically.
	Play the link where it says BBC, the BBC on Trump.
	So, of course, the sort of lefty establishment media going crazy that Trump sort of dare mention.
	You know, it's funny to just watch them spurg out, you know, an actual leader talking about policies that don't lead as fast as possible to our destruction as a people, as nations.
	Or even the new Republic, the next link, if you want to quickly click on the next link.
	Get rid of that.
	It's terrifying.
	It's a terrifying new plan.
	Ethnic cleansing.
	Yeah, it's ethnic cleansing.
	They have no idea.
	They just go immediately to the top tier of the most... They have no idea.
	That's the next thing.
	Not having your country flooded with infinite Venezuelans or Mexicans, or in our case, Bangladeshis and Somalis or whatever it is.
	Not having your country flooded with them as fast as possible is ethnic cleansing.
	Make it make sense.
	It's clearly the first step in a multi-step plan to invade Mexico.
	For some reason.
	They were asked about this, weren't they, at a Biden press conference.
	Well, actually it was Biden's press secretary.
	I can't remember her name now.
	Diversity hire lady.
	Black lady.
	Can't remember.
	Oh, Corinne Pierre thingy bob.
	Oh, not that one.
	She did the Davo thing where one of the journalists said, do you not think, you know, two assassination attempts on Trump, do you not think when you say that Trump is a threat to democracy, this is causing people to try and take him out?
	And she turned it around and said, well, I think your language is threatening, actually.
	Yeah, yeah.
	I'm going to do a YouTube thing on it because it was so 180 out straight away.
	Language is so important to them and they manipulate it so well.
	I saw that clip and I thought, that's so dumb.
	That's like when a seven-year-old is trying to argue with a parent.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Like the rationale for not eating their greens or going to bed early or something.
	I know.
	It's like, no, you're... Yeah, you're forcing me to do it.
	Yeah, yeah.
	It's you're making me do this.
	Yeah.
	It's crazy.
	Okay, so that's the Trump side of the equation.
	So Kamala, luckily we're running out of time because what I actually had lined up here was all sorts of examples of just her cringe, her endless cringe train.
	It is.
	As someone mentioned earlier, she's done very, very few interviews or appearances since she became the candidate.
	I think as of about eight days ago, she'd done one, but she's done one or two more since then.
	Anyway, she went on Oprah because of course it's the easiest softball, whatever you're going to get, Kamala going on Oprah.
	And like every time, every time she appears in public, it is, she's just like a cackling witch.
	It's just a cringe fest.
	It's just an absolute cringe fest.
	Won't even bother because we are running out of time.
	Won't even bother.
	Just look at it.
	I mean, she's so obnoxious.
	No one likes her.
	No, she hasn't done anything.
	She hasn't done anything.
	It's like she hasn't done anything in the last three years and now she's promising to do stuff she had the opportunity to do but never did.
	Has she been asked what her actual policies are?
	She hasn't, has he?
	No, Oprah didn't really push that.
	She hasn't got anything.
	And once or twice when they do ask her, like they had someone in the audience ask her about policy, and she just rambled on, just gish gash, just a word salad of nonsense.
	I assume the policies then will simply be a continuation of the Biden administration policies.
	Whatever the Biden handlers We're telling Biden.
	They'll just be telling her that now.
	Because she's part of the same administration.
	Whoever they are.
	And she's been saying that, oh, we're going to turn the country around.
	You're part of the reason.
	I know, she's the issue with it.
	That's going to undo what I didn't do.
	And I did have some clips, just compilations of her saying the same things over and over again, about being unburdened by what has been.
	But it's so obnoxious.
	I'll spare our audience.
	She's said that, hasn't she?
	To be unburdened by what has been.
	I know.
	It's obviously her soundbite.
	Like a story.
	She's got a few others of them.
	Yeah, like keep saying stories.
	She's got a couple others of them, like talking about how she grew up in a middle-class family.
	Right.
	I'm from a middle-class family.
	Have you worked out whether she's either black or she kept flip-flopping between the two, didn't she?
	Sometimes she does a black voice, like an urban black voice, and that's what it was supposed to be.
	Other times she plays that down and it can be very sort of mid-Atlantic.
	When she's in Georgia or Alabama, all of a sudden she's from Da Hood.
	Oh, I see.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Well, one of the last things I have to end on, which for me, was where she flipped for me from being just a completely phony and obnoxious cackling witch to someone of pure evil.
	On the one year anniversary of January 6th, she came out and played this from the beginning.
	It's only the first 40 seconds I want to play.
	Samson.
	You can use the mouse.
	Use the mouse.
	It never really works.
	I've got one here.
	Mouse walls.
	There we go.
	I've got it.
	I've got it.
	There we go.
	I've got a mouse.
	They often ask about the state of our democracy about January 6th.
	Certain dates echo throughout history, including dates that instantly remind all who have lived through them, where they were and what they were doing when our democracy came under assault.
	She's in serious mode.
	Dates that occupy not only a place on our calendars, but a place in our collective memory.
	December 7th, 1941.
	September 11th, 2001.
	And January 6th, 2021.
	I was waiting for that.
	God.
	What a disgusting thing to say.
	Go on and watch it, it gets worse.
	She gets indignant, she gets a bit angry.
	It's like, you piece of... So the first one's an actual declaration of war against the country, the second one is essentially the same thing.
	Both, you know, mass casualty events.
	January 6th.
	Yeah, which was a mass trespass event.
	I wrote an article, what is it, a couple years ago now, Kamala's Fever Dream, where I talked about this.
	I said it's sort of stuck in my craw, really, that she's sort of spitting in the face of America's war dead yeah stomping on the face of her own war dead I read a quick excerpt from it I said I suspect international embarrassment Kamala Harris hasn't spent much time or energy reading accounts from that morning in 1941 ie the Japanese sneak attack on Pearl I suspect she hasn't listened to many of the survivors' eyewitness testimonies.
	I suspect she even revels in their loss and trauma as they were nearly all straight white males.
	I suspect Harris holds their pain in extremely low regard.
	She must do.
	How else can she hear the accounts of trapped and doomed men knocking on the bulkheads and half-sunk ships?
	Or the burn victims whose white flesh simply sloughed away from their bones?
	Or men who were blown into tiny chunks?
	How can she equate that with the trespass of January 6th?
	The only explanation is that she cares nothing for the truth.
	She cares nothing for the victims and the survivors of Pearl Harbor.
	She cares nothing for US history.
	She cares nothing for those among us who see through her sickening narrative.
	She is happy to look us in the face and gaslight us in the most appalling way possible.
	I go on and on and on to say... Read it, it's a good article.
	I go on and on and on just to say that...
	They're divorcing themselves from reality, divorcing themselves from history, being unburdened by what has been.
	Very, very deliberately.
	Because for their lives to work, for their narrative to work, relies on people not knowing history properly.
	The idea that Pearl Harbour, you can equate Pearl Harbour or 9-11 with January the 6th, that only works if you don't know anything about Pearl Harbour or January 6th.
	Yeah, of course.
	So they don't want you to.
	That's the only way that disgusting liar can work.
	And once a people are divorced from their history, then they're just like a piece of driftwood.
	They can be anything you want them to be now.
	You can lie to them endlessly, egregiously.
	And they've got no way to say, oh, that doesn't make sense.
	Those two things don't equate because you've robbed them of their history, their past, and their heritage.
	So that thing she keeps saying of being unburdened by what has been is actually extremely pernicious.
	It's evil.
	I hadn't thought of it like that.
	Yeah, it's good.
	So she's not just an annoying DEI hire.
	She's evil.
	Bonhoeffer theory, isn't it?
	Evil people are predictable, but the stupid ones, you've got to really watch out for them.
	Sadly, we're led by stupid evil people.
	And with that, I think we should finish up.
	I'll read some of this.
	Samson, do we have any video comments?
	We do, and it's because it's only a goal, too.
	We can run over a little bit.
	Um, yeah.
	I'm actually recording something after this.
	Yeah, I don't think we've got much time to run over.
	So I'll read through these rumble rants and we'll go through one or two of the video comments.
	So, uh, that's a random name again.
	Thank you very much says, Hats in America work the same way they do in Mario games.
	Putting a hat on gives you powers.
	The mega hat gives you extra charisma and allows you to catch illegal aliens in your Pokeball.
	True story, I swear.
	So you might want to keep that hat close at all times.
	BaldEagle1787, if you watched that Kamala interview, you can even see Oprah was uncomfortable with the rambling and incoherent sentences.
	I can believe that.
	That's a random name.
	Does these next two.
	So a lot of the NGOs bringing barbarians in are financed by Soros and Co.
	This is actually true.
	GDP go up is the reason they give, but in actuality it's to replace voters and prevent any European ethnostates.
	Thank you very much for your comments there.
	That's a random name.
	by dividing the population via mass migration.
	Step two, use the chaos to grab more power or justify more power.
	Step three, implement agenda 2030, net zero, etc.
	The WEF is trying to order 66 us.
	Thank you very much for your comments there.
	That's a random name.
	Let's watch some of these video comments.
	Fear.
	The city is wrecked.
	I need to re-watch these films.
	Let us ease their pain.
	Release the sustenance.
	Oh, God.
	Oh, God.
	Amen.
	Oh, God.
	Oh, oh, oh.
	Who makes this?
	Who makes it?
	Very well... Oh no, it's meat-free!
	No!
	Oh, good God, Richmond, what are you doing?
	Thank you, Samson.
	Move on to the next one.
	Guns?
	So it turns out the oldest outdoors channel on YouTube is housed right there on the island with you.
	Fieldsports Britain just celebrated their 15-year anniversary.
	They are explicitly not a political channel.
	But they do feel the effects of politics, and I think there's room for a fruitful collaboration if you're interested.
	Sit down.
	Interesting.
	Thank you.
	Any more?
	You remember this outfit, do you?
	Well, it turns out that this is honorary doctorate regalia.
	Which this man has been awarded by our one of the top universities, Technology University of Conus, in 2017.
	So anyway, here's some medical misinformation for you according to Pinterest.
	Massage your diaphragm line to calm down.
	Massage the diaphragm line of your foot to calm your tits.
	Okay.
	I'll keep that in mind.
	Gravitas.
	Regarding the discussion the other day of what constitutes an ideology, I think I have a working theory.
	To me, an ideology is a totalizing worldview, which is a construct of pure, hyper-rational reason.
	This is juxtaposed with almost every other system of ideas, which, rational or irrational, is still made up of a contingent morality, predicated on observations of external reality.
	This is actually why I don't consider religion to be an ideology, because it's a pre-scientific attempt to negotiate and identify the true nature of external reality, which makes it a contingent moral system.
	Kind of a word amusing, but hey, food for thought.
	Keep your stick in the ice.
	I think that's actually a very reasonable explanation of it, and what you're describing there is what I would call pure ideology.
	Because you can be ideological, still integrate it with the actual real world.
	But yeah, that's a pretty good definition.
	California Native Flower Friday.
	So today guys, we're gonna look at Anemone Occidentalis, which is a really interesting one because the flower is pretty and all.
	But what's really cool is when it goes to seed, and it looks like this.
	So, these are just the seeds with what's called an achene on it.
	I learned about this just five seconds ago.
	And it's typical of buttercups.
	I don't know if others are like this, but to me this looks like something out of a fantasy video game.
	Look very nice.
	Yeah, I like that.
	Need some more flowers.
	Hey guys, I'm working on a sequel to my first novel, Final Flight of the Reinegger.
	Go and grab it, cscooper.com.au.
	But yeah, I'm working on a sequel and I'm sort of developing the philosophy for it and really sort of gravitating toward Aristotle's philosophy.
	Have you guys done at any point a crash course on Aristotle?
	Or if not, could you point me to one?
	And are you planning to make one in the future?
	Pretty sure Stelios on Contemplate, not Contemplate, what was it called?
	Symposium.
	Stelios' Symposium.
	I'm pretty sure he talked about Aristotle.
	I think it was Aristotle's ethics, was it?
	His ethics?
	Stelios and I did a two-part video on Aristotle's politics.
	The politics, okay.
	I think Karl has spoken about Aristotle as well, possibly on the website, but I don't know if he's done any sort of crash course.
	Stelios and I, on the Symposium, kind of did a very short, short being like two hours long, overview of what can be found in the Politics, although we were nowhere near comprehensive because that is a very thick book.
	And Aristotle has a lot of writing.
	And I can understand the appeal for a crash course, we might have to do something like that, because Aristotle is very dry.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Very, very dry.
	But we'll think about doing something like that.
	Also, Bo, have you actually sent anything in to CS Cooper yet?
	Not yet.
	Because I know he wants to see about publishing a book for him.
	Not yet.
	No, I'm working on it though.
	You need to.
	I am working on it.
	You need to, ooh, ooh.
	Hopefully, it'll still be weeks away, but it's going to happen.
	I've said that on camera now, so it's got to.
	No, I'm working on it.
	People hold you to it, Beau.
	Being a purely democratic system that we are at, of course, we need to hold you accountable.
	Anyway, thank you all very, very much for tuning in to this episode of the podcast, The Lotus Eaters.
	I hope you've bought your Islander so far.
	If you've not bought your Islander since the beginning of this podcast and now, I will find you and I will leave it at that.
	And if you're a Gold subscriber, Tune in in a few minutes, 25-26 minutes for the Gold Tier Zoom call and I will talk with you and so will Carl.
	Anyway, thank you very much.
	Thank you, Tim.
	Thank you.

▲