Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 4, 2025 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:31:18

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #1113

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
	Welcome to the podcast of Lotus Eaters for Tuesday, the 4th of March, 2025. I'm joined by Dan and Connor.
	Hello.
	And today we're going to be unpicking what is happening with Ukraine because I don't know if anyone's noticed, but it's a big quagmire of diplomacy at the moment.
	Then we're going to discuss how Europe has lost its mind over the prospect of Ukraine and a war with Russia.
	And then we are going to talk about what is quite a shocking but not surprising twist in the Eleanor Williams grooming gang hoax case, which I posted about this on Twitter the other day.
	I was like, what were the odds?
	Anyway, let's begin.
	So, there is currently a massive...
	I can't describe what I want to say about it without swearing.
	A continual series of fumbles when it comes to the diplomatic situation with Ukraine, and I thought we were trying to unpick them because the past couple of days have been tense, shall we say, for the European political class, and there's a great deal of contradictory statements being made, and what we can see from...
	What has been revealed is the profound weakness of Europe and their continual reliance on the United States, whether they want to admit it or not.
	I think it's worth going over that.
	But before we do, go and get Islander Issue 3. It has been out for one week, and we are already more than a third through the stock that we have of it.
	So get it before it's gone.
	I have a statement on what's happening with it, which is we've sold more than a third of it now.
	Half the copies that have been sold have already been sent.
	Just before we went live, apparently one or two champs have already started receiving their copies because they were in the UK, so they got it quicker.
	But the other half are US and Canadian orders, which will be sent out later this week.
	So you should have them very, very swiftly.
	So, to begin with the big news, that Trump has suspended all military aid to Ukraine because of the massive public meltdown, breakup, argument?
	I don't know what we want to describe it.
	Disrespect.
	That's one way of putting it.
	Trump, Vance, and Zelensky had in the Oval Office, and Trump has just said, well, we won't give you any more money, and that means weapons, and that means...
	He's actually done it now.
	He's pulled the trigger, it's stopped.
	That appears to be the case, doesn't it?
	Never pick a fight with a guy from Queens on camera.
	Yeah, exactly.
	In there, he was like, look, I can be the hardest guy in the world if you want, but I'm trying to get this done, and Zelensky's like, no, I don't believe you're the hardest guy in the world.
	It's like, okay, but now you don't have any money.
	Charitably to Trump, he consistently gave Zelensky an out.
	Vance went for the throat, and I love him for that.
	Zelensky was insistent that he wanted to pick the fight in front of the world's media, perhaps in a tactical move to have the EU break away from the US and over-invest in its troops and its resources because he knew the US weren't keen on doing so anymore?
	I think what he was trying to do is just leverage the power of...
	Public perception against Trump.
	Yes, and he miscalculated that, and Trump instead, to his credit, said, look, we're going to give you a minerals deal, it's going to be an economic and thereby security deal, you came in and you're not dealing with Joe Biden anymore because I don't have dementia or a sum with illicit financial investments in Ukraine, and so take what I'm giving you or I will walk away.
	Well, and I'm pretty sure in that same press conference he did say we will keep the weapon supplies coming.
	He boasted about sending javelins when Obama sent sheets.
	Earlier in the press conference, in the 15-minute clip that made headlines, a Ukrainian journalist had asked Zelensky, do you think America, or do you think President Trump is standing with you?
	And Trump says, well, I've brought him here.
	And Zelensky said, this is very telling of the sort of...
	Great men versus rules-based order dynamics.
	Zelensky said, America has stood with us as if the country itself has a duty to do so rather than just the leader or figurehead.
	But Trump, for his point, was saying, look, I've brought him here.
	I've consistently given them weapons.
	I've consistently said you have a moral case to defend your borders.
	And therefore, don't show me disrespect, because I'm already on your side, as it were.
	There was no need for him to pick that fight.
	You'll notice that Zelensky failed to distinguish between the rulers of America.
	He just viewed America as one homogenous whole.
	And Trump made the point of saying, no, our previous stupid president did stupid things.
	I'm not stupid, I'm not going to do those things.
	Anyway, so this is bad news for Zelensky, and it's pretty much the Trump card that Trump has to play, in fact, with Zelensky to get him to do what he wants.
	If you want American money and weapons, you have to play ball.
	And so Europe went into a little meltdown about this.
	I mean, for example, Keir Starmer told the Commons yesterday, I didn't know that.
	I didn't know that was happening.
	No, you didn't know that was happening.
	Because you're not actually that important in this.
	So Keir Starmer, the rest of them, headless chickens running around as if the world's on fire.
	The sky is falling.
	They don't know what's happening.
	Trump appears to be completely in control of this.
	And so they all just doubled down.
	They all just doubled down.
	They're like, no, no, we're...
	100% behind Zelensky.
	And it's like, okay, fine.
	I understand why you're doing this.
	It's your rules-based order that Zelensky is going to be upholding by fending off the Russians.
	I understand.
	But you have to understand your position in the web of connections here.
	And it's actually quite low at the bottom.
	Is it as easy as Europe is running on a lag?
	Because the way geopolitics with Western Europe and America actually works is Western Europe just does whatever US says.
	It's always been that way.
	And for a long time now, it's been the narrative.
	It's been the ideology-based geopolitics.
	Yeah, but the US has been advancing the globalist, rules-based liberal order.
	Yeah, and that's what I'm saying.
	Maybe Europe is just running on a lag.
	Kind of.
	But you've got to remember that these are the people that the US has created.
	The US deliberately wanted...
	The Europeans to have the international rules-based order that the US was setting up for its own advantage.
	And now someone who is not a part of that consensus has taken control of the United States and its direction and policy.
	Well, they essentially feel betrayed.
	They feel like the US has joined the other side.
	Yeah, the US wanted a version of Justin Trudeau in every prime minister and presidentship across the world.
	Yeah, because fundamentally every president going back to like the 40s has been part of the international rules-based order.
	But Trump is not one of their men.
	And now the Europeans don't know how to deal with it.
	And they are, again, it's not just for, it's for generations now.
	The Europeans have been sort of domesticated into this frame of mind.
	Do we know what Blair has said on this recently?
	You know, I actually haven't seen it.
	I've been looking out for it.
	Yeah, and it hasn't made big headlines.
	And I think that's quite telling.
	Because let's say that Mandelson, Peter Mandelson, is a proxy of Blair, who has only been given the ambassador position because...
	He gets diplomatic.
	Hang on a second.
	Let's get on to Mandelson and Blair in a bit.
	Yeah, but as for Blair, Blair is a rule setter rather than a rule maker.
	And the fact that he hasn't said anything should communicate volumes, whereas all of the other leaders of Europe are the sort of pale imitators of Blair going along his trail tracks.
	We'll get into it in a minute.
	We'll get into it in a minute, because you are exactly right on this.
	Blair is nothing if not a political realist as well.
	Anyway, so the European leaders decided to go in the face of their...
	Essentially their patron, the United States, and say, no, we double down on all of this.
	Zelensky came to number 10. Of course, the first thing he did after getting kicked out of the White House.
	They cancelled a subsequent press conference, didn't they?
	Yes, they did.
	A public press conference.
	Because Trump expected to get the Minerals deal, so he could say, no, no, no, of course, you know, we're all good friends.
	They're going to do exactly what they want.
	And so Zelensky decided to come to Starmer, and Starmer noshed him off under the table, as you might have expected.
	Starmer claims that everyone in the United Kingdom supports Zelensky and will die for Ukraine.
	Any man under 30 does not agree, for two reasons.
	One, we've had it drummed into our heads through the education system, but also just the news media for the last 20 years, that foreign intervention isn't bad and fails.
	Or, if you're not talking about the young British men The increasingly shrinking share of young British men That make up the demographic cohort you want to fight this war There's also a sizable cohort of the new diverse youth of the YOO-KAY-UK Who do not feel the UK is their country, let alone Ukraine And so would not fight that either I can't believe they won't sign up I mean, don't we have 200,000 men in hotels right now that we could be deploying to Ukraine as peacekeepers?
	Honestly, Keir, what are you doing?
	You're not thinking outside the box.
	Well, I mean, also, there's an army recruitment office in Swindon not too far from here, and I've walked past it a bunch of times.
	And it's quite clear every time I've walked past it in the last couple of years that it's not the white British that they're trying to recruit.
	That's something I'm going to do something on later on, actually, not on this podcast.
	But, yeah, anyway, Keir Starmer said, no, no, no, everyone in Britain absolutely loves you and wants to bear your children, which is not true.
	Anyway, so there was an interesting quote in here by...
	Professor Clark.
	But this is about the creation of a new coalition of the willing.
	Now, Conor, do you know where that phrase comes from?
	I do not.
	I remember.
	Yeah, you remember, because you're not old enough.
	Right, so the coalition of the willing is the name we used to describe the allies who were on board with the invasion of Iraq.
	That makes sense.
	Yes.
	And so, as you can see, these people are just living out.
	The past, they're not living in the present, and that went so well, didn't it?
	Well, actually, the tone of this whole thing is very reminiscent of the Iraq War.
	Exactly the same.
	The only difference is we've got social media now.
	And the bizarre hive mind that is created by this?
	No, we all have to do this.
	Okay, well, you can do that.
	So, Professor Clark, in a site in here, says, well, Keir hasn't actually laid out who the Coalition of the Willing is going to be.
	And as they say, it's being led by the UK and France, rather than the United States and Europe.
	It's going to be pretty much who you can expect, though.
	Everyone that Lonomous Zelensky quote retweeted on his damage control tour on Twitter saying thank you.
	Precisely.
	It's going to be Canada, it's going to be Britain, it's going to be France, it's going to be Italy, it's going to be Germany, blah blah blah.
	And so the Europeans are thinking, right, we will commit.
	We will be the ones who send the troops to guarantee the security of Ukraine, because all of this hinges on Zelensky wanting a long-term guarantee that there will be NATO forces in Ukraine to prevent Vladimir Putin from re-invading at some point down the line.
	And that's not something that Trump is prepared to commit to, and that's not something, frankly, I'm not sure that we can commit to.
	Because, of course, European militaries at this point are withered and old, emaciated.
	Lacking in material.
	It's also not necessary.
	So this is why I think it's ideological.
	Because the reason that Europe sabotaged any leverage they had against Russia is because they actively dismantled their nuclear capacity, pursued a net zero policy, ran into...
	Total de-industrialization of Britain, yes.
	Yeah, and Germany specifically, thanks to Merkel.
	Other than France, who still have nuclear capacities and are net exporters.
	And so they spent more on Russian gas exports than they did on aid to Ukraine.
	But if they're doubling down on net zero, they need the minerals that you would procure from Ukraine to build all your wind turbines and solar panels that don't bloody work anyway.
	And this is a net win for the Trump administration because they can station...
	Peacekeeping forces to protect American economic interests whilst not positioning it as we're putting American troops on the ground for forever wars.
	So Ed Miliband gets his minerals.
	Ukraine gets a peace guarantee.
	Other than the idea of total victory for Ukraine, so defending their territorial integrity, and protecting democracy so we're going to sock it to Putin in an abstract way, there is no advantage of doing this versus Trump's mineral deal.
	So I think it's pure just ideology.
	I really think it is, because Trump is just not one of their guys.
	I really think it's come down to that.
	I mean, that is an interesting point, actually, that Europe has spent more on Russian gas than it has on aid to Ukraine.
	So it is the classic, we're funding both sides.
	Only we're funding Russia more.
	My taxes.
	Somehow also my taxes.
	Yeah.
	It's that, every single war.
	So true.
	Anyway, so the concept of a new coalition of the willing is being floated, and, I mean, the only people who really could do it...
	Britain and France at this point.
	But if their populations are unwilling to go to war, what now?
	Well, I mean, you have to understand, the leaders of Britain and France have just got such a strong mandate from their own citizenry.
	It'll be very easy for them to rhetorically persuade them that actually we need to send our sons to die in a place that nobody could point to on a map.
	Anyway, so Starmer explains how this is going to work in here.
	He says that they're going to...
	Agree that France, the UK and others will work with Ukraine on a plan to stop the fighting.
	Oh, that sounds specific.
	Then we'll discuss the plan with the United States.
	Right, you're going to ask for permission when you've agreed what you're going to do.
	And take it forward together.
	Right, so you're not going to do anything.
	Right, that's what he's saying there.
	There's nothing there.
	I'm going to sit down with Macron.
	And we're like, should we do this?
	And we're like, yeah, that's a good idea.
	Let's go and ask Mr. Trump if he agrees.
	Then if he agrees, then we're going to do it because we literally are not.
	The only hard action he's agreed to there is that he's going to have two conversations.
	Yes.
	But I think this is actually quite clever from Starmer.
	And the reason is he's...
	Record disapproval.
	Same with Macron.
	Macron's forced into an alliance with literal communist parties to keep Le Pen at bay.
	But if they can look strong on an issue to the segment of their population whose mind is still trapped in the Second World and Cold War, more so than the American population who are actually, it's only a 2% margin, but more on board with Trump than they are with Zelensky and Europe, they can win back a bit of favourability and look strong standing up to America even though they're still doing America's bidding.
	And the greatest tell of this, and I don't think it's...
	Necessarily, Farad's writing these tweets, judging by the question he asked in Parliament.
	The greatest tell in this is Farad saying, for example, Keir Starmer can only look strong on the world stage because of Brexit.
	Now, he's claiming credit for the Brexit victory, saying the UK can chart his own course.
	But even when Keir Starmer's opponents are saying he is looking strong by standing up to...
	Putin and by proxy Trump on this issue, then he's pulled a bit of an optics blinder, because he doesn't actually need to commit to stationing any troops, because America dictates that, but he can look like, just willing to do so, he's now the stronger party in all this.
	And also, he did very well dealing with Trump the other day.
	He was bold-facedly lying to him, but it was an optics win, and it was a diplomatic win for stuff.
	And he pulled Chagos off.
	He did.
	And so, like, Starmer has done well recently, which is kind of frustrating.
	But anyway, so what is the plan?
	Well, apparently, there's going to be a one-month ceasefire in Ukraine proposed by the French, apparently signed off by the British.
	This wouldn't be a proper truce, apparently it would be in the air and at sea and on energy infrastructure.
	So, we're not going to send planes or boats and we are going to keep getting Russian energy.
	But it's not going to cover ground fighting.
	On the front line on the east.
	Which is where it matters.
	Has Putin agreed to this?
	No, this is the proposal they're going to float.
	Right.
	Putin has not agreed.
	Why should I care what Macron and Starmer have agreed if Putin hasn't agreed?
	Well, that's a great question.
	In fact, the question the British kind of asked, because we were like, no, we won't.
	Oh.
	Okay.
	But also, why would he agree to allow Europe and...
	Time to rearm Ukraine, yeah.
	Well, not just time to rearm, but particularly control of sea battles.
	Because isn't the majority of this conflict, not just about the land territory and Donbass and that, but it's access to the Black Sea and all of the trading routes?
	Because if Russia loses that to NATO, in their mind, they're going to be cut off from the rest of the world.
	So why would Russia agree to terms saying, hang on, you get to dictate terms of what's going on on the sea.
	This is part of the entire reason I'm fighting this in the first place.
	They're going to be annoyed by that.
	Theoretically, it would be a ceasefire, so it just means no more conflict at sea.
	Yeah.
	I mean, I'm just trying to steel man their position.
	In Putin's mind, he's going to get immediately suspicious of that.
	It's not a justification, it's just like, that's not going to work.
	There's no incentive for Putin to agree to this talk.
	It's like, why would I want to cease foreign war that I'm winning?
	This is increasingly looking like that Monty Python scene with the Black Knight.
	Kind of, yeah.
	Yeah, yeah, no, that's exactly it.
	But the point I'm making with this, though, is that there is no harmony on this ridiculous proposal, either.
	Britain's like, no, we don't agree to that.
	In fact, Luke Pollard, the Minister for the Armed Forces, says there is no agreement on what a ceasefire could look like.
	And, okay, so we don't agree with the French, so Macron is just wrong on this.
	There's already a split on all of this.
	Maloney has come out and said, no, Italy has rejected Macron's proposal as well.
	So the Coalition of the Willing...
	I mean, they're willing to do something, just not agree with one another, what that thing might be.
	I think we'll see a broader break with the Italians on this, given her personal friendships with Trump and Musk.
	Yeah, but she has been insanely hard-line about supporting Ukraine anyway.
	So she's trapped between two worlds.
	I mean, that's a cost of entry if you want to be a president or prime minister in Europe.
	No doubt.
	But the point is, she can't serve two masters.
	She's going to have to decide which one is...
	The one she's going to commit to.
	But she does say, I mean, I believe that everything must be done together.
	Europe and the United States sitting at the table with Russia and Ukraine to reach a fair and long-lasting peace, says the Foreign Minister of Italy.
	It's like, okay, that's great.
	But what we're seeing now is any resistance to Trump is completely disunited, right?
	Britain on one side, France on another, Italy on another, and none of them agree.
	And these are...
	Like, most of the major powers of Europe.
	Only Germany, as far as I can tell, has been keeping quiet.
	I'll quickly throw in how ceasefires actually work.
	The side that is winning proposes, and the side that is losing either accepts it or they don't.
	That's how ceasefires work throughout history.
	It's not that the allies of the side that are losing argue amongst themselves about a ceasefire and then just impose it on the winning side.
	That's not reality at all.
	They believe they're on the precipice of winning, which is why they're doing this.
	Which is mental.
	There's no incentive from this perspective, from this position, for Putin to go for the ceasefire at all.
	Do you think they actually think that they're going to win?
	I have no idea.
	Like, do they...
	I mean, I think they've got no choice, right?
	Because they're convinced that this is an existential threat to the liberal order, the rules-based order of Europe.
	Ursula von der Leyen just comes out and says explicitly that, like, if we allow this to happen, the rules-based order is over.
	and these people are not just supporters of the rules-based order they're born and marinated in it right for their whole lives for their parents lives you know their grandparents set this thing up and they can't imagine a world in any other way well yeah very true but it's already over because america doesn't buy into it anymore I know, but they can't accept that.
	That's why they're squabbling and desperately trying to come to an agreement, but I can't believe they haven't got an agreement.
	The point is, moving on, just for the sake of time, Starmer then came out and gave a very powerful speech in which he'll put boots on the ground and plays in the air and everyone's like, you meant it?
	It's like, well, only if America agrees to it.
	Okay.
	That's not very interesting.
	But, I mean, sorry, there is something interesting about this.
	So, at least, Keir Starmer wants to walk the walk.
	He's talking the talk.
	He wants to walk the walk.
	He just needs Trump's approval, which is why he went over and lied to Trump to butter him up and make sure he could get Trump on side.
	Again, clever move, as you pointed out.
	How's the rest of the Coalition of the Willing thinking of this?
	No, we're not sending troops, says Macron.
	Right, so the Coalition of the Willing is half unwilling, doesn't agree on what to do.
	Far be it from me to defend Keir Starmer, have you considered this is the French?
	Sure.
	And I'm actually genuinely shocked that Starmer has played this with such finesse.
	He's done really, really well so far, because he's actually made no commitments that we will be forced to uphold, right?
	So he said, no, no, we'll do this as long as Trump says so.
	We'll do this as long as Trump says so.
	So he has essentially offloaded the ultimate responsibility to someone else, but talked tough.
	In the media, so in the press, they get, Sama is going to do something good, but he doesn't actually have to do anything.
	That's because discourse is trapped entirely in the short seven years between 1938 and 1945. Of course, yeah.
	And so if you position yourself as Winston Churchill...
	Yes.
	Without actually needing to make the substantial commitments to deploying troops, then you look good to the commentariat, and so the perception is made that you're doing the right thing, even if you don't have to back it up.
	So it actually doesn't require Starmer to be that savvy of a political actor.
	He just needs to play into the incentives set forth, as you said, that have been created by the US State Department, USAID, etc., for how many years?
	And so he looks like the good guy, even though the...
	Chessboard has completely changed from the American end.
	A great example on how to recognize Starmer as the villain here is that when Trump came back into office, he brought back the bust of Winston Churchill, British hero, quote-unquote, if you agree with that.
	Starmer takes them down.
	Starmer replaces them with pictures of Yvette Cooper, vanity pictures of Yvette Cooper catfishing us.
	And so you can see that Starmer is just lying through his teeth to Trump.
	To play a plastic patriot, but it's useful for him to be able to get Trump on side.
	And he has done that.
	And he said nothing here that's going to upset Donald Trump.
	In fact, saying, look, if Trump gives a sign-off, we'll put boots on the ground.
	That's what Trump wants to hear.
	He's giving Trump the power as the sort of feudal liege lord, saying, look, we'll do whatever you say, my liege.
	You know, just say the word.
	I mean, he's not directly insulting him, but he is making it look like he's defying him.
	Exactly.
	While saying we're going to increase GDP. Exactly.
	We're going to do exactly as Americans say when they say it, but I'm standing up to Trump.
	It's very clever optics.
	It appeases the rah-rah boomers, but doesn't upset the hierarchy where America is the leader of the global hegemon.
	Exactly.
	Trump just hears the UK is willing to put troops if you say so.
	Oh, okay, great.
	I'll move on then.
	Anyway, Macron wants to send troops only after negotiations have been concluded.
	concluded which is uh not how ceasefires work again anyway so getting to uh mandelson mandelson uh the the prince of darkness again you're probably too young to remember no i remember this bit right um i used to call him the queen of darkness because which is probably more accurate um but for some reason uh probably this is blair's influence um
	made the u.s ambassador from britain and this will undoubtedly mean he is basically tony's like tony blair's man in the uh system here and he just came out and said look uh zelinski just has to accept the minerals deal and accept that this is the way to get a ceasefire with russia You're not going to get any further from that.
	And so in another startling show of unity in the Coalition of the Willing, the UK government came out and said, well, I mean, don't listen to our diplomat on what government policy is.
	I know we appointed him like a month ago, and that means surely we are empowering him to go over and speak on the government's behalf, if that's what an ambassador does anymore.
	And it's bizarre because that minerals deal basically is a security guarantee because it means American contractors operating in Ukraine.
	So if tanks want to roll past them, they've got to go over the heads of American contractors.
	That's if you aren't thinking in terms of parallel economic blocks, which I think Blair, via his institute and all the tendrils it has in Africa, trying to compete with the China's Belt and Road scheme, they understand that, whereas the likes of Starmer and all the European leaders are still intractably locked in the post-war rules-based liberal order, where they think it's about upholding democracy and human rights rather than economic security.
	So they think these things are mutually exclusive, whereas actually Mandelson, downstream of Blair and Trump...
	Understand that economic security equals military security.
	So, Mandelson, obviously, and any kind of Machiavellian realist analysis of this, but like, look, just do it, Silvinsky.
	You're not going to get anything else.
	Trump's clearly hammered his point home, and he will act on it.
	And so, Mandelson was just like, yeah, do it.
	And the UK government was like, no, we're not going to agree to that.
	Anyway, so, Vance came out and said, look, the only way that Ukraine is going to get troops on the ground...
	Would be to protect American interests.
	Because, of course, this is the America First administration.
	And so you have to give America an interest in your country.
	For example, if they're getting 50% of the profits of your mineral sales, then, yes, they're going to want to put troops there to make sure that Putin doesn't just come in and seize them and stop the flow of those minerals.
	So it's actually a security guarantee without being a security guarantee.
	It itself is actually kind of clever and would really work.
	And so this...
	He didn't say that...
	British and French peacekeeping troops would be not very useful because the countries haven't fought a war in 30 or 40 years.
	Because that wouldn't be true about Britain or France.
	We fought lots of wars with America.
	42 years since we fought a war without America, I think.
	That's true.
	I think he's referring to random pockets of Eastern Europe.
	He is.
	And he retweeted this saying, this is what I said.
	I didn't mention Britain or France, but for a reason.
	By the way, Vance is just...
	Phenomenal.
	I'm so glad he was picked as VP. He's doing great.
	I love the fact that he's prepared to wage war on social media over this.
	But anyway, so what's the outcome of this?
	Zielinski is ready to sign the Minerals deal.
	Womp womp.
	Yeah, exactly.
	So, I've...
	I imagine, now that the money isn't coming, in the next day or so, he's going to rush to whatever contract he needs to sign and get it signed.
	And then quickly leave Ukraine, because the Ukrainian mafia probably won't be very happy that he scuttled the cash flow.
	Yeah, he's stealing their profits.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Because remember, Ukraine is a mafia state.
	I tweeted this yesterday, being like, look, you know...
	People are saying, oh, you can't say Ukraine's a corrupt country.
	It got invaded.
	It doesn't uncorrupt the country.
	It was corrupt before it was invaded.
	It's massively corrupt.
	100% this guy's going to lose a no-claims bonus on his life insurance the moment these fellow elites in Ukraine get hold of him.
	He will retire to some gated community in California.
	Well, he better do it fast.
	Yeah, he should.
	But this...
	And then, you know, this is why Trump banging the table on elections and things like that.
	Your time is done.
	I mean, he hasn't actually done terribly, to be honest.
	I think Zelensky's actually done alright, all things considered.
	It could have been handled a lot worse.
	He's done alright in as far as the incentive set by the Biden administration and the global media, which was given legitimacy by the American hegemon at the time, allowed him to do so.
	But let's say that Trump was...
	In the White House, when the war had kicked off, and it still happened, even though I don't think it would have if Trump was president, do you think that he would have gotten away with that Vogue photo shoot a couple of months into the war?
	No, it would have been embarrassing.
	Or leading Ben Stiller around the Ukrainian...
	But this is the point.
	We don't like that, but from his perspective, dealing with what the chessboard looked like at the time, he's played it quite well, actually.
	For example, when he was having that conversation with Trump, and Trump was like, look, you've lost.
	He's like, You know, he's like, I know, I know.
	No, wait, I can't agree to that.
	He's managed to keep Ukraine in a fighting stance, right, against the Russians.
	Because it could have been easy enough, like, two years ago or something, if Ukrainian morale just completely collapsed and the Russians had just fled the country.
	He has done a good job from the perspective of where he is, whether you agree with the war or not, whether you want him to support or not, et cetera, et cetera.
	Well, he should have taken that March 22 peace deal then.
	Well, that would have been...
	Boris Johnson.
	Boris Johnson got in the way, didn't he?
	He should have told Boris Johnson to do one.
	Well, he should, but Boris Johnson is one of the primary patrons.
	That is what leadership would have looked like in that case.
	Sure, but the point being, whether you like Zelensky or not, you can't deny that he's done quite well in his position.
	But it does look like this thing is wrapping up.
	So, I mean, now that I've said that, it's going to go on for another 50 years and we're never going to get out there.
	But who knows?
	But that's, as far as I can tell, what is happening with Ukraine at the moment.
	Crashprone says, Has Dan been thoroughly rammed this Ramadan, or has everyone in the office Islamophobic?
	Not rammed yet, but I will keep you updated.
	Rammed?
	I don't know what it means.
	I assume it means eating a lot of bacon.
	I think it's a play on Ramadan.
	The Shadowban says new British nuclear weapons can protect Canada against Trump.
	Liberal Party leader Chrystia Freeland running to replace leftist Justin Trudeau said incredible that they think that we have access to our own nuclear weapons.
	Or that they work.
	Yeah, yeah.
	When was the last time they were tested?
	I'm actually deeply sceptical of the idea of nuclear war on the fact that this is going to be ancient technology at this point.
	I wonder if ours is just like...
	Bottle rockets that we probably pretend.
	This is the thing about North Korea, wasn't it?
	The tests kept falling into the ocean.
	It's like, right, okay.
	Binary Surfer says, Boomer Truth will clearly die in our lifetimes, but an interesting question is what will replace it, given that it's basically a religious conviction and there's a religion-shaped hole in our psyche.
	That's an interesting question.
	Not in everyone's psyche.
	No, no.
	Increasing share of Gen Z who want to caliphate psyche.
	I was going to say, I think that...
	In 20 years' time, the Zoomers are going to be radical lunatics.
	What do you mean in 20 years' time?
	I'm already there.
	Okay, sure.
	But the Zoomers will be radical lunatics in positions of power.
	So, you know, fun times ahead.
	I'm so here for that.
	Yeah, me too.
	You'll get like a tripartite soul of Zoomer radicals.
	You'll get Caliphate, Communism, or like Tradkath Monarchy.
	Yeah.
	Could be a lot worse.
	Anyway, that's going on.
	We're the Linky Linkies, Samuel.
	Thank you.
	Ah, we picked a bit at the end, but...
	Very good, very good.
	So, what's going on with Europe?
	Because it appears to have completely lost its mind.
	It's willing to defend everybody else's borders, but not its own.
	So, a slight continuation of your theme, Carl.
	But why don't we just start with this stirring video?
	It is worth playing this.
	Just to give you a...
	An idea of the tone and tenor of what's going on at the moment.
	Play that, Samson?
	Play again.
	The first priority of this government, of any government, is the security and safety of the British people.
	To defend the national interest, particularly in these volatile times.
	That's why last week...
	I announced the biggest sustained increase in defence spending since the Cold War.
	That's also why I met President Trump last week.
	To strengthen our relationship with tomorrow, an indispensable partner in defence and security.
	And it's why this weekend I've been hosting European leaders here in London to work together for the security of the United Kingdom, Ukraine and Europe as a whole.
	We are at a crossroads in history today.
	This is not a moment for more talk.
	It's time to act.
	Time to step up and lead.
	Right, so anyone with a buy-to-let mortgage in their portfolio, anybody who listens to Countryfile or Radio 4, has just masturbated themselves into a coma after watching that.
	It's the return of Winston Churchill.
	That is total boomer chaff, that is.
	Churchill famously insufferably nasal.
	Yes, yes.
	Actions, not just words.
	That's the sort of key message.
	And what was he talking about?
	He was saying the first priority is the security of the British people.
	I want you to remember that as we go through this segment.
	First priority, security of the British people.
	Okay, fine.
	Biggest increase in defence spending, strengthening our relationship with the US, hosting EU leaders, crossroad of history, time for action, plans for enduring peace.
	Now, the next link that I'm going to put up...
	Samson, don't show the next one to the audience, but...
	Oh, has it been removed?
	So...
	That picture of the leg?
	Yeah, in Mannheim.
	I'll just have to describe it, but...
	It's just a severed, pale leg.
	The leg of a young woman, maybe 14, 15 years old.
	A leg on the street of Germany, severed below the knee because a car rammed into...
	A crowd.
	So, we are...
	A car.
	Yes.
	A car.
	Just a car.
	A car, yes.
	Here we are from CNN. Two killed, 11 injured after car rams into crowd of German city of Mannheim.
	Now, again, we're going through the same routine that we always go through these things, which is to say, look, we have no idea who it is.
	Oh, no, we do.
	Oh, do we?
	Yes.
	He is a 40-year-old German citizen that they've named...
	Alexander.
	Right.
	So, because he's a German citizen, no questions need to be asked.
	Just a background of mental health difficulties, I'm sure.
	Well, that is the same story every time for the first few days.
	It is just a, you know, it's just a mental health issue.
	Now, maybe, maybe in this case, it is a sort of born and bred German native for, you know, 800 generations or something.
	Maybe it is, who is just having mental health difficulties.
	Sorry, I love this.
	The suspect is a 40-year-old German national.
	Ah, well, there we go.
	What does that even tell you at this point?
	Well, it tells you that he's administratively German.
	Well, the SPD brought in citizenship reforms last year that allow you to have dual citizenship, and it fast-tracks citizenship applications for foreign nationals.
	Now, again, we actually don't know if he recently received his citizenship or not, and we don't even know his motivation.
	However, basic pattern recognition from the past...
	It means that people, let's say, not unfairly, jump to the conclusion thinking this was another Islamic inspiration.
	And even if it is a mental health issue, it's because of this.
	It's because this sort of thing is a daily occurrence in Germany.
	So if you've got a mental health issue, if you're hearing on the news all the time that cars ram into crowds, if you do have a mental health issue, that's where it's going to push you.
	I don't think it is that.
	It's far more likely it's exactly what it looks like.
	But this is a sad point.
	Mannheim attack is daily news now here.
	While we're on the subject of Germany, very quickly, thank you very much to the lovely German person who sent us in a whole bunch of chocolates and little cakes and biscuits and things.
	Appreciate you very much.
	We do always appreciate our fans.
	You don't have to send us chocolate.
	You can if you like, but what you can certainly do is buy an island of three and that's how you can support us.
	Yes, get one of those, in fact.
	There we go.
	That was the lovely German who sent us, well, it wasn't the German, that was the chocolates that the lovely German sent us in, so I appreciate that.
	As someone who lived in Germany for eight years, the Germans do two things very, very well.
	Chocolate and sausages.
	Right, okay.
	I did wonder what the second thing was going to be, but okay, yeah, no, I will agree with you on that one.
	So yeah, you can buy Ireland of Three and support us.
	Interesting thing, you go to the BBC news page.
	Just bear in mind that last link was saying that basically the Mannheim attack is now a daily occurrence.
	The thing is, daily occurrences rarely make the news.
	Why would I report on something?
	I mean, it's not on there.
	It's not on there.
	It happened yesterday.
	It's not on there.
	OK, but fair enough.
	I mean, the BBC News does cover it.
	So let's go to world's largest iceberg.
	Let's go to world and then Europe.
	So we'll be specifically dialing down just on Europe now.
	For something that happened yesterday, okay.
	Conspicuous.
	Okay, if I scroll down far enough...
	Oh, okay.
	There was a live blog yesterday.
	There we go.
	Oh, there we go.
	The car drove into the crowd.
	Right.
	The car did it.
	If I go specifically to the Europe section and I go far enough down, then eventually we get some...
	And a poltergeist has taken over a Mini Cooper or whatever.
	But of course, it's not just Germany, because we used to get these sort of car attacks in Germany.
	Let's go to a tweet here from this chap, who is linked to something which is absolutely horrific.
	Samson, can you play this?
	This is shocking.
	This is just a random event that happened in this country yesterday.
	So if you're watching, if you're listening...
	Somebody who is just as British as you are goes up to the top deck of a shopping centre, picks up a large item of furniture and holds it over the balcony blinds and it's within inches of basically killing some people.
	So I'm sure Stormer's response will be to immediately announce a banning of any furniture that isn't nailed down.
	I'm just going to play that one more time while I make this point.
	Let's start again, and I'm going to make this point.
	The official narrative in this country is the greatest threat to the British people is Russia, and the greatest benefit to the British people is mass immigration.
	While that video is playing in the background.
	Well, said diversity is very strong enough to pick up that bit of furniture and lob it multiple flights.
	Let's just go to that.
	So crazy.
	That guy...
	Literally inches from death.
	Inches away from either being killed or mum goes to pick up the kids from school and say, yeah, daddy's in the hospital, you can't wake up.
	And if he does wake up, he's going to be in a wheelchair for the rest of his life.
	Because those kids, who are just as British as you are...
	Just absolute psychopaths.
	Just thought it'd be funny.
	And if that had hit a child, an elderly person, instant death.
	Yeah, yeah.
	The point that I made in the previous tweet that was captioned is that any time you hear about the phrase no-go zones in London, which Trump has used before, you get the disingenuous race communists like Ash Sarkar.
	Show me the barrier.
	It's not just that there are areas like Tower Hamlets and Whitechapel which are ill-advised for particularly female members of the native population to go at any time of day.
	No, it's the fact that these random acts of violence...
	Are so arbitrary, so reasonless, so unpredictable, except for the disproportionate demographic that's committing them, that public spaces, like shopping centres, become an ill-advised place to go, and just that level of background radiation of psychological anxiety means that if you want to enjoy yourself in your own capital city...
	You can't, and so you just avoid spending as much time there as possible.
	So outside of work, I just don't go to London.
	Why would you?
	Yeah, and so my own capital city, in my own homeland, has been rendered a no-go zone for me if I don't want my phone stolen, if I don't want to be subjected to a random act of violence, and if I don't want to walk around stressed all the time.
	The thing is, well, one thing that really bothers me is, look around, everything's fine.
	Yeah, everything's fine until this splats you.
	Well, exactly.
	I'm sure when you're walking with your kids, your head's on a swivel, you're looking out for danger.
	It's what men do.
	You're not going to be bloody looking up as well.
	I mean, you've got enough to be looking out for.
	This could have gone literally just a foot to the right, and there would have been blood all over the place.
	Yes.
	There would have been people screaming and shouting, everything is peaceful until it's not.
	And then it's terrifying.
	Now, I only saw this because Connor retweeted it.
	This won't make the news.
	Keir Starmer will not be talking about this.
	But no, apparently Russia is the biggest threat.
	BBC will instead run a round-the-clock news item in primetime saying why Camden Council's diversity drive for building HS2 for people of that exact complexion, never mind their moral character, is an unalloyed good that you should be funding instead.
	So the state will propagandise you into thinking that unlimited numbers of people like that chap...
	Who have no regard for your life.
	Yeah, quite.
	Is a good thing, never mind what's happening there.
	Yeah.
	And this is just, you know, this is just a thing that happened yesterday we've got to get used to.
	So, I mean, to compare that, and this is what I'm really trying to do in this segment, is compare the joys and benefits of mass immigration versus the threat and peril of Russia.
	I thought it might be interesting just to look up all the times that Britain has invaded Russia and all the times that Russia has invaded Britain.
	So I've got the list.
	In fact, I had to cut it short.
	I had to do it within only the last 200 years.
	Let me guess.
	Is it the Crimean War?
	So Crimean War, 1853. Britain, alongside France and the Ottoman Empire, launched an invasion of Crimea, attacking positions such as Sevastopol.
	Anglo-Russian War, 1807. During the Napoleonic War, Britain captured Russian territories.
	Intervention in the Russian Civil War.
	This one is crazy.
	So in 1918, Britain, along with a whole bunch of other powers, basically invade Russia under the cover of their civil war.
	I mean, imagine if during our civil war, several Russian battalions turned up on the side of the Cavaliers.
	Naval raids in the Baltic, 1854. Right, okay.
	Carl's laughing because I'm envisioning it.
	Yeah, yeah, I know.
	A version of the future where Cromwell didn't win.
	Yes, there is that.
	But anyway, so there's four examples in the last 200 years, and there's more.
	There's many more examples, especially if you want to go up to Europe as a whole, the amount of times Europe as a whole has invaded Russia.
	Many, many occasions.
	I'm now going to list the times that Russia has invaded British territory.
	There we go.
	That's it.
	They have never invaded our territory.
	We have invaded their territory multiple times.
	Which sort of brings me to...
	I did a response to Peter McCormack.
	So he's basically asking the question.
	And I'm not digging on Peter here.
	He's a friend.
	I like him.
	But I just wanted to sort of get into the thinking behind this.
	But he's basically asking, why is it that the war in Gaza would end if Hamas released the hostages, but not similarly the war in Ukraine would end if Russia just stopped its illegal invasion?
	Now, again, I'm not beating up on Peter because he's a friend, but I'm...
	I just wanted to address the particular point because this is the core of it.
	It's because those moral considerations are in practice entirely irrelevant.
	It's not about who's correct.
	It's not about who can make the most principled argument on Twitter.
	It is simply that Israel and Russia can exercise raw power in Gaza and Ukraine and failure to make peace at the earliest opportunity is therefore immoral and wrong and stupid.
	There's no upside to it.
	Both those arguments are positioning Gaza and Ukraine in the position of asking for mercy.
	So, that's a tacit admission.
	Or asking for a foreign patron to step in and save them.
	There isn't one.
	Well, that's the next point I make.
	The moral argument is only useful if you can convince a greater power to intervene.
	And it was obvious from the start that the US-EU will not overtly engage Russia.
	And that's why it does simply come down to the distinction between hard power and soft power.
	Here's a very easy example.
	That's a sign at the end of my street.
	It's a neighbourhood watch area.
	Incidentally, now I... Do you remember when there was one up a lot over the place 20 years ago?
	I look at them slightly differently now.
	I'm looking at that and wondering if what's going on there is this lady is saying to the police officer, this diverse man has captured my daughter, can I have her back?
	And the police officer is saying that you're going to be arrested for racism.
	Look at the moral unity that's displayed in the picture.
	Yes.
	You know, the police, you know, your friend, they're on your side, as are your neighbours.
	So, you know, watch out for some chav youths who might, you know, steal something from your car.
	No, no, not nearly that crazy, right?
	They might be smoking some drugs and they might steal something from your car or something, right?
	That was the level of criminality.
	But this is the ultimate expression of, you know, soft power rhetoric.
	Utterly, utterly ineffectual.
	There's an effectual home defence.
	No, I disagree.
	It's effectual in a different kind of society.
	Oh yeah, in a society that no longer exists.
	Can I contrast the previous sign with the signs that you see on the London Underground?
	So the previous sign had its text written in something akin to, it looks like a children's TV show, it looks like Rainbow from the 70s, right?
	This is being presented as cuddly, comfy, you know, We can police ourselves.
	Whereas, because London is such a diverse city, and even though the signs are in English, they're not that effective, now you get announcements to stand on this side of the escalator, do not stare at people, do not speak, all the very forceful fonts, very plain, very...
	Do you ever play Half-Life 2?
	Yes.
	Very much like that.
	Yeah.
	Think of Bream's Regime.
	You know, where you've got the guards in their masks and it's like, move over there, sit down.
	You know, do this.
	It's a command society.
	It's like being in Arkham City.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	But this is referencing a world that no longer exists.
	This is empty platitude at this point.
	This is what matters.
	This is the point.
	This is hard power.
	So Russia controls 100% of Crimea, 100% of Lugansk, 94.3% of Kherson, 72% of Zaporosha, I'm probably saying that wrong, and 61% of Donetsk.
	So the only question here is, don't tell me about your principles.
	Don't tell me about the moral arguments.
	Do you have the raw power?
	Do you have the hard power to evict Russia from those areas?
	Well, you can only enforce principles where you have hard power control.
	Yes.
	Well, principles are a post-justification for what your raw power does.
	In some cases, but it's also a projection of what you're going to do in the future.
	But either way, if you don't have the might to enforce your dictates on what's happening, you can hold any principle you want, but if it doesn't translate into reality, who cares?
	So this is the point that, you know, somebody like Kemi Baynort doesn't understand.
	She says at times like these it's important we stand together to defend the fundamental principles.
	But without raw power, that's meaningless.
	So this is basically schoolyard politics.
	Yes.
	Student politics.
	No, specifically primary schoolyard politics, because the aggressor shouldn't win.
	Okay.
	So what you're asking for, again, is a higher power or an authority, a teacher, to step in and reprimand the bully.
	Because if you just allow the kids to play it out long enough, the bully will win all the interactions if the smaller and weaker kid does not have someone to step in on their side.
	So what she's saying here is either the UK should step in, which we don't have the military might to do so, or that we should escalate to some sort of higher authority, which in their mind is what?
	United States.
	Excellent.
	It's always teacher, come save me.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	But at least she's opposition.
	This is Keir Starmer.
	Ostensibly opposition.
	Yes, who is the Prime Minister.
	So does he understand the difference between raw power and waffling about principles?
	Let's play this, Samson.
	The answer's going to be no, by the way.
	Speaker, it was a productive summit.
	Together we agreed a clear strategy.
	Okay, clear strategy, good.
	That the United Kingdom, France and our allies...
	We'll work closely with Ukraine on a plan to stop the fighting, which we will then discuss directly with the United States.
	It's a plan that has four clear principles.
	Oh, there we go.
	Straight back to principles.
	Well, what's interesting about this as well, what are they actually fighting for?
	Because I've seen a lot of people say, okay...
	We've turned Britain into airstrip one.
	We're an economic zone for people from anywhere to come and go and take as they please.
	But they're fighting for Ukraine to basically have blood-and-soil nationalism and hard borders.
	I don't even think that's the case.
	Funny you should ask what they're fighting for.
	Julia Hartley-Brew has answered that question.
	I like Julia interpersonally, but she does have a very simplistic view of this conflict.
	For those of you who are listening, Julie Hartley Brew is saying, I watched Darkest Hour.
	So that's the Churchill movie.
	I haven't even watched it, but I can only imagine it's the most intense boomer bait you've ever seen.
	London is a lot more diverse than you might have thought it was.
	Oh, was it?
	Really?
	I suggest anyone cheering on Trump's demand for Zelensky to capitulate on Russia takes the time to watch this movie too.
	They might learn something about how you deal with Putin.
	We had an empire.
	Hang on, hang on.
	We had an empire, Julie.
	Hang on.
	Hang on.
	How you should deal with a threat from dictators like Putin?
	By allying with Stalin.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	Sorry, did I just enter a parallel universe where Churchill never made the pact with the Soviet Union?
	I have long felt that...
	Basically, all big policy decisions should be done by referendum.
	Things like, do you think there should be higher taxes?
	Do you think there should be mass immigration?
	Do you think we should go to war?
	And depending on what you put on your answer, depends on what happens.
	So if you say, yes, we should have higher taxes, you pay higher taxes.
	If you say yes to mass immigration, you get one in your house.
	And if you say yes to war, then you go and fight it.
	So you're going to draft all the boomers?
	Yes.
	And ironically, yes.
	The situation is just so different.
	Britain was like a quarter of the world's GDP. At that point?
	Yes.
	And even then we needed the Americans to win.
	Yeah, yeah.
	And even then we needed help.
	This is a chart tracking Ukrainians' own attitude towards the war.
	Now, as you can see, at the beginning of the war, it was very high.
	They thought that Ukraine should continue fighting the war.
	Now, forgive them for thinking that in early 2022, because the narrative was that, you know, they're going to get all the support.
	The West is 100% behind them.
	They probably thought there was going to be US troops turning up fairly soon.
	But you can just see the Ukrainian support for...
	Continuing the war is now about a third.
	Especially because the Russian sanctions themselves didn't work because you drove Russia into the arms of China which was completely inverting the Nixon doctrine which helped win the Cold War of driving Russia and China apart.
	But only a third want to continue this war and half want it to end.
	Even the Ukrainians...
	Are saying, no, this must end.
	We want this to end.
	There was a clear mandate for wanting this to end.
	Samson, could you play this?
	This is what it looks like in Ukraine.
	These are a bunch of men who have basically been captured, dragged off the street, because, you know...
	You can kill the sound, though.
	Well, that's what conscription is.
	So look at this.
	These people have basically just been captured, and they're being forced to the front line.
	Look at these guys.
	Their hands are in plastic cuffs.
	Like they're prisoners of war.
	So it's all very well for, you know, Julia Hartley-Brew and the rest of them to say, oh, isn't this exciting?
	There's a war.
	Send off these men.
	These men are being held at gunpoint in plasticuffs.
	I despise this position.
	It is sick and it is evil.
	But it also just shows the phrase war criminal.
	Again, Putin, bad, not a good person.
	War criminal is meaningless because, one, you have to sign up to the rules-based international order in order to be relegated by the standards of justice that render you a war criminal.
	But also, if that isn't a war crime, then the phrase war criminal means nothing.
	Yep.
	So those poor lads have to be sent into the meat grinder so that this guy can keep his coke supply coming and keep skimming off the top.
	Allegedly.
	Yeah, allegedly.
	Not that I think he'd say.
	Whilst at the same time, Europe does absolutely nothing to protect people like this.
	Yeah.
	In fact, actively enables these situations to happen by covering up the crimes, importing more perpetrators.
	It's so much deeper than that as well.
	It's the entire face of the state is against the British people at this point.
	I'll talk about it another time.
	We're running out of time.
	This is the worst manifestation of how that works.
	I had an unexpectedly popular tweet.
	It was just something I banged out.
	In response to Keir Starmer saying that he's going to put British troops in, I mean, the only way that...
	Don't bother playing it.
	The only way that it's going to work is if we massively ramp up conscription, because there's no chance that the British army, whatever it is, 60,000 fighting men and women, is going to take on the Russian army.
	200,000 boat migrants, crack them on.
	Yeah, you'll see how quickly the diversity returns to the nations of Oregon.
	Yeah, exactly.
	You could literally, if you wanted to have these people self-repatriate, You would literally say, right, anyone who came here in the last five years is being...
	Conscripted into the military.
	Two years' worth of service, then you get your citizenship.
	That's how the Romans did it.
	If they were going to absorb a population, it's okay.
	Fight for us first, and then maybe...
	It's only two years in the military, then you get your citizenship, and everything will be great, and literally the country will hollow out.
	But that was unexpectedly popular.
	I basically just told Keir Starmer to do one.
	I'm not fighting for him.
	You just put me in prison instead.
	I mean, I'm probably too old anyway, but, you know, solidarity with Conor over there.
	You know, what was that?
	Two million people have viewed that.
	Which will be a lot even for one of your tweets, let alone for one of my tweets.
	Spectacular.
	Yes.
	So that certainly resonates.
	Going with a boomer mindset on this, this is Michael McFool, who's perceiving this through the lens of Star Wars.
	The thing is, I don't even support the rebels in Star Wars.
	I mean, it's just this.
	Every liberal analogy is either about Star Wars, Harry Potter or Hitler, where Star Wars is about space Hitler and Harry Potter is about wizard Hitler.
	It's just Hitler all the way down.
	If it helps, I actually don't mind fictional metaphors being used in this way.
	We use them as well, you know, like Lord of the Rings and things like that.
	So it's fine.
	It's fine because this is the purpose of fiction, is to create a representation of reality that tells a story that instructs us in a moral way.
	So it's actually not wrong for them to do that.
	I would argue that the problem is that this story is completely made up.
	All stories are made up.
	And actually, if it was a realistic...
	Yeah, yeah, but no, if it was a realistic movie about a much larger military taking on a large...
	Yeah, the rebels would be crushed, yeah.
	The smaller military would get crushed.
	Well, not just that.
	Like, if this were a Star Wars parallel, it wouldn't be the rebels of the Empire, it would be the Empire v.
	the Hutt cartel.
	Yes.
	Literally them invading Tatooine and fighting bounty hunters.
	But the interesting thing is, there is actually an entire genre of movies about a much larger military crushing a smaller military, and it's basically every US war movie.
	Yes.
	But Julie Hartley Brewer and Michael McFord would never watch one of those and think, oh yeah, actually Ukraine probably needs to make peace because it's not going to win.
	Even though there's an entire genre of movie, they would never make that connection.
	This, I thought, is also worth throwing in there.
	So this is a sort of random anecdote from somebody I followed that basically points out, look, he was dating this Ukrainian girl, and one day she referred to herself as Russian.
	He was like, what's going on there?
	And she explained that she is Russian, even though she was born and lived her whole life in Ukraine.
	That's the thing.
	30% of Ukrainians are ethnically Russian.
	You speak only Russian.
	And the Luzenski government basically banned Russian.
	Russian books, Russian TV, Russian theatre, Russian magazines, Russian newspapers, just banned it.
	I mean, if we were all with Scotland, I'd probably do the same.
	Well, yes.
	I'm actually a lot more understanding about that with Zelensky.
	His country is being actively invaded by Russia.
	I can understand why he puts up a hard border against Russia.
	We don't enforce English in this country.
	If you go to Whitechapel, you see signs in Bangladeshi.
	Anyway, in the interest of time, let's hurry up.
	So very quickly, Europe is basically saying, look, they're going to spend an extra £800 billion on defence spending.
	Now, I ran the maths on this.
	Thank you, school mum, somehow in charge of our continent.
	I ran the maths on this because, look, people are saying, look, this was the whole debate we had recently in the US about the cost of deporting people.
	So, look, it's going to cost £14,000 per person.
	OK, so let's say Europe is going to spend £800 billion on defence spending.
	If you spent that on deportations instead, you'd get 57 million deportations out of Europe.
	So I just asked the question, in what future is Europe going to be safer?
	The one where they extend the Ukraine war by 18 months, or the one where they deport 57 million third worlders out of Europe?
	Well, the thing they fail to understand is that they're basically asking for mercenary forces to defend Europe.
	Whereas if they made Europe a place worth living and preserving, they would have untold numbers of volunteers.
	In World War I, a million men signed up to defend the British Empire from Britain alone.
	Like, that's huge.
	It's not going to happen again.
	No, that's never going to happen again because they loved their country and it was worth defending.
	It's not worth defending now.
	It was a time.
	Okay, let's bang through some quick comments.
	Zernax says, I think Zelensky is attempting to ransom Ukraine into NATO. We're not looking at what might come after.
	If someone said, if you want to know to fight next, look at who we're supporting now.
	Yeah, that's a fair point.
	NeoUnreally says, to be fair, Russia now has 20% of Ukraine's landmass.
	At their height, they had 27. They started with 7% in hand.
	Yeah, it's a myth that Russia is a threat to Europe.
	Well, this is another great point, because the Ukrainians, I think, they have half a million men or something at most in the field, and the Russians couldn't deal with it.
	It's like, yeah, the Russians are not going to steamroll across all of Europe.
	They can barely deal with, you know...
	The borderlands there, you know, so it's...
	Mr. Denton has given us a generous $20 saying, excluding boomers, was the anti-US, pro-Ukraine propaganda successful in making Europeans and Canadians ignore their migration problem?
	Well, we're always ignoring our migration problems.
	That wasn't difficult.
	Booker says, I don't understand British government is not capable of defending the coast of Kent from boats, but somehow capable of war with Russia.
	They are capable, they just do not.
	Well, that's the whole point, yeah.
	Binary Surfers says, far-right supremacists at work again in that shopping centre video.
	I keep saying it again, but get out of the cities, we're heading for South Africa.
	And Opuk says, if we can just scroll down a little bit.
	Has anyone asked an expert for his opinion?
	Maybe we should get Sasha Johnson on the phone.
	Oh, it's been a while since I did one on Sasha Johnson.
	Let's move on.
	So for those outside the UK, you might not be familiar with the case of Eleanor Williams.
	She was a now 22-year-old who became famous because she's currently in prison for promoting a grooming gang hoax.
	Now, this has been seized upon by the establishment media.
	I'm using Sky News here.
	As a reason to dismiss all of the women and girls who were murdered, raped, abused by imported Pakistani Muslim familial enclaves and networks of paedophiles that were actively covered up by police, social workers, politicians and said mainstream media.
	There's been some interesting twists in Eleanor Williams' story.
	That nobody could have quite predicted.
	Before we go on, though, it's not that the...
	Everything you said is exactly right, of course.
	But it goes further, because what they're trying to do is discredit the concept of the grooming gang entirely using this example, as if there haven't been literally hundreds now sent to jail for being part of these rape gangs.
	So I just wanted to, like, emphasize this is...
	Way worse than even, like, a very sober analysis makes it sound.
	It's really...
	I'm not familiar with this story at all, so basically this young woman, what, just made it up, did she, or something?
	So I'll get into it.
	So Eleanor Williams falsely accused five men, so there were four white guys, one Asian, I think he's of Pakistani heritage, of raping her as part of a fictional...
	Grooming gang.
	Fictional.
	Involving these five men, and this was in Bower Infines in Cumbria, so in the north of England.
	Posted photos of herself to Facebook where she had all sorts of horrific injuries that later was discovered were self-inflicted by a hammer that she bought in Tesco that only had her DNA on it that she ditched in a field.
	She called the police around when she was drugged up and damaged and they took an interview with her.
	There's body cam footage of it all.
	They then took her into custody for perverting the course of justice and accused her of, of course, self-inflicting these injuries and falsely accusing all these men.
	She was jailed for eight and a half years in March 2023. She's now out.
	As of February, because they included all the time that she was held in remand in her sentence.
	She served half her sentence, and she's now out on, I think, a five-year criminal court.
	It's actually really rare for people who make up false rape claims to go to jail.
	Well, this was against the precious diversity.
	Ah, okay.
	Yes, even though only one was the member of the demographic, but it was into the broader grooming gang story, and part of the reason this was such a high-profile case is because there was a protest in the town, Tommy Robinson showed up, and part of the story...
	Because it motivated nativist anger, that was the real crime.
	Exactly.
	Grooming gangs are diversity-coded as well, so...
	Right.
	Anyway.
	And, just for disclaimer...
	Making up all the false allegations against these five men.
	Absolutely reprehensible.
	We're glad that she was imprisoned and punished for doing this.
	But new details add an element of complication.
	Before I go on, I have been told to inform you that we, uh, because we are...
	Wholly self-funded over here at LotusEaters.com, and only the products we release in our subscription service help us keep the lights on.
	To tell you that we have our third issue of Islander out, I'm holding it here in my hands, includes an essay by yours truly, which you can get before I depart.
	So, hot off the presses, you should be getting it soon, as some people have already received.
	So...
	Anyway, back to the story.
	One of the people she falsely accused was a chap, and I believe there's an image of him in here, called Mohamed Ramzan.
	Now, Mohamed Ramzan is a local business owner.
	He had countless death threats, here he is, from members of the public who were concerned about this grooming gang existing.
	And he said they came from all over the world.
	There was also a chap called Jordan Trengrove, who was also...
	Credible that they got a picture of him with a Christmas tree in the background, isn't it?
	There you go.
	Can't really comment much on that.
	Jordan Trengrove was also falsely accused.
	He was one of the white guys, one of the English guys.
	And he said the word rapist was spray-painted on his house.
	He tried to kill himself two weeks after being falsely accused and arrested.
	He spent 73 days in prison sharing a cell with a convicted sex offender.
	So, horrific ordeal for him.
	A chap named Oliver Gardner, also falsely accused, was sectioned under the Mental Health Act.
	So she really, like...
	Ruined some of these innocent guys' lives.
	And the media decided to make multiple documentaries about this, because it pushed the narrative that the grooming gangs are just one great big hoax.
	If this one is fake, they're probably all fake, kind of.
	Yes, yes.
	What was most reprehensible, so this one's brand new, and we're going to come back to this one in a moment.
	This one was released in January.
	When the grooming gang story was sent global by Elon Musk off of the reporting from Charlie Peters, Max Tempers, Sam Bidwell, etc.
	And so they put this out consciously at a time where the stories, the transcripts of the actual abuse suffered by girls in places like Oxford, Rotherham, Rochdale, were being amplified to a global audience and there was a debate about a national inquiry in Parliament.
	They chose to put this one out.
	Very curious.
	So she's being used as the avatar of why...
	Any discussion about the grooming gangs is itself racist.
	This is also included in the Islamophobia definition.
	The government are currently concocting counsel around to censor these conversations and call you a racist.
	It's pushback.
	It's shut up and let the justice system do its thing quietly in the background.
	You need not concern yourself.
	The justice system being silencing the victims.
	According to the victims themselves, which is quite interesting, but we'll get onto that in a moment.
	The reason...
	This case has come to light again.
	It's because there have been new convictions of three brothers in Barrow and Leeds.
	So the same town that Eleanor Williams was in.
	Turns out there is actually a grooming gang there.
	And it's three brothers.
	These are the Meyer brothers.
	That's Shahar Amrin Meyer, who's 48. Shahar Alman Meyer, 47. And Shahar Joman Meyer, 38. And they're convicted of child sex offences between 1996 and 2010 on 62 counts.
	Channel 4 are going to have to make another documentary now.
	62 counts between the three of them.
	Oh.
	Yes.
	It was an organised child rape and trafficking ring.
	Amron Meyer sexually abused three children, faced 16 offences, two charges of intimidation, and one of kidnapping.
	Joman Meyer abused three children, faced 40 offences.
	The girls that were abused by Amron Meyer and Jermyn Meyer was young as six and seven.
	The middle brother, Alman, faced three sexual offence charges against one girl.
	Jermyn Meyer started a relationship with a 14 year old girl knowing she was under 16, groomed her by giving him gifts, alcohol, cigarettes.
	At the same time, Alman Meyer started a relationship with a 15 year old girl.
	During their relationship, the girl was raped by his older brother, Am- Amran.
	In 2009, the 15-year-old victim was threatened by Amran after speaking to the police.
	She was grabbed off the street by her hair and shoved into the back of a car by a man.
	And I apologise for all these details.
	It helps frame the kind of stuff that was going on in the town that was being ignored while they were focusing on Eleanor Williams' reprehensible false accusations.
	Amran Meyer told the girl that she didn't know what he was capable of and that he would do anything to protect his family.
	Now, this is a classic case.
	of what is called asabaya, which is the, I believe it's the Arabic word for the clannish mentality that is infecting particularly the Pakistani enclaves in this country that has it so that even the wives and daughters that have been subjected to abuse by these rape gang perpetrators will help cover it up and justify the abuse against these girls because they're white and they're kefir.
	So, this clannish mentality explains why three brothers...
	Would sexually abuse a bunch of children and never dob one another in.
	Whereas we've said before, if someone came up to us and presented us with the prospect of abusing an underage girl in a property they owned, we would either report him to the police immediately, or if the police...
	Instant violence in that case.
	Exactly, yes.
	In order to apprehend the suspect.
	I don't think I'd believe them.
	I'd be like, what are you talking about?
	You know, it'd be so far out of, like, what?
	I'm just on my way home.
	What are you talking about?
	I'm going to get dinner.
	In this community, they have paedophile honesty boxes.
	That's one practice that Charlie Peters disclosed, is that you'd go to a rental property, you'd write down how many times you'd use the girls being presented there, and then at the end of the month, the landlord would come round with a ticket system and you'd pay your dues.
	You weren't joking, they literally had a- Jesus Christ.
	Yes, yes, so that's how different the mindset is with these communities, right?
	So I'm just gonna hammer that home.
	So, Amran, specifically, Amran Meyer, made threats to a woman who was to be interviewed by the police in 2010 in relation to the brothers, due to the threats that interview never took place.
	All men pleaded not guilty to the charges they were faced with, but were convicted on the 28th of October 2024 at Preston Crown Court.
	Now, remember, these guys never plead guilty.
	Never.
	And it's because they think, one, the system is on their side, but two, they have no guilt.
	Why would they?
	These are white, non-believing girls, and they deserve it in their mentality.
	I remember it was the, it might have been the Rochdale ringleader, who launched into a rant about how Pakistanis are the supreme race, and if you're a non-believer, you will burn in hell forever, during his trial.
	There have been loads of this, where they all just yell, Allahu Akbar, and then when they're let off, their family's like, we love you, Dad, we'll see you soon.
	Not even when they're let off, that's when they're sentenced.
	Yeah, no, no, when they're sentenced, yeah, we love you.
	But then they just assimilate straight back into their own communities, as if they'd never entered prison for raping girls at all.
	And again, just to make the point, for any of us, our families would never talk to us again if we did this stuff.
	No.
	And quite rightly so.
	So the brothers have been jailed.
	So Jai was sentenced to life with a minimum turn of 20 years and 338 days.
	Ali got 10 years in prison and 4 years on licence, which is a remarkably...
	Similar sentence to Eleanor Williams, actually.
	It's only two years more, despite him actually raping children.
	And Sarge was sentenced to life with a term of 21 years and 232 days.
	And I bring this up not only because it happened in the same town, but because the victims of these men are now saying themselves that the myopic focus on the Williams story by the media caused them to not speak out about it and not be believed.
	And this is one of the women...
	She's spoken to Sky News and actually accused Sky News of being at fault for this to Sky News.
	So this is Elizabeth.
	She didn't give her last name for obvious reasons.
	Fears of reprisal, which she's already experienced.
	She was 19 at the time.
	Her boyfriend worked in a takeaway.
	And she said that young girls in school uniforms were at the flat above the takeaway.
	She said that so-called parties, where the girls were given alcohol and paired up with the men, often came from out of town.
	Quote, more men came down from Leeds, she said.
	I know they'd come down for one thing, and that was for sex with girls.
	I'd say roughly 20, 30 girls I'd seen coming and going, and they were all underage.
	Right, so there are hundreds of rapists, just at large, in this local area.
	That will never be brought to trial.
	Yeah, seems like it.
	Perhaps Operation Stovewood has, or the adjacent Home Office operations with the Joint Police Task Force, have it bubbling away under the surface.
	I'm sure they're right on it.
	Well, these three brothers were actually known to the police at the time that Eleanor Williams was being prosecuted.
	Oh, really?
	And they didn't announce it, so...
	They knew there was a gang at the time, while they were amplifying the fact that the grooming gangs were a hoax, and that's worthy of remembering.
	Elizabeth was pregnant at the time that this was happening, and she was told, I will set this house on fire with you and your partner in it, and make sure this kid will never come out of you.
	And this is Jai, one of the brothers that issued that threat to her for speaking out.
	Elizabeth then asked about the Williams case by Sky News, and she said...
	That it led to one of the victims in this trial considering pulling out as they felt they wouldn't be believed.
	She's frustrated the case has not received as much attention as that of Ellie Williams.
	Quote, Barrow got branded to be a lying town.
	It's not.
	Grooming was happening here and still probably is.
	Not every girl's a liar, you know, and it's not fair.
	Why don't you put this out as much as you shouted about Ellie Williams being a liar?
	Directly to Sky News.
	So the media who swarmed around the Ellie Williams case to put a cordon sanitaire around the grooming gang's narrative, because it's inconvenient to the idea that diversity is our strength, is at fault for silencing victims and creating a chilling effect on the ability for girls to come forward and actually prosecute the rapists that were operating in the town.
	She and another woman called Sarah, who also blew the whistle on this, are now calling for Ellie Williams' case to be examined.
	And Elizabeth said in the four days since the verdict in October, someone went and smashed her window.
	Clearly still people operating in this town.
	But why is she calling for Eleanor Williams' case to be examined?
	Well, Sky News got a hold of Eleanor Williams' diary.
	And she named these men in it.
	She named the real rapists in her diary.
	Oh.
	Yeah.
	What?
	Pretty shocking.
	Yeah.
	That's a bit of a twist we didn't expect.
	So yes, made false accusations against five men.
	Absolutely reprehensible.
	Glad she's got jail time.
	These accusations were wrong.
	However, they were a part of...
	And the police knew this, which is why they weren't named in her suit as people she had falsely accused.
	Yeah.
	So this has been made a deal about for four years, and it turns out she named actual child rapists in her diary.
	She was just lying about having been abused by them.
	It's like, no, they are child rapists, but not of you.
	Oh, well, then...
	Send her to jail.
	So, I mean, who knows what's going on in her mind, but maybe she was so intimidated by these brothers, but she wanted to put the allegations out there.
	I don't know.
	Very clumsy way of doing it, obviously.
	I don't know, but I don't want to speculate on that, because we just don't know, right?
	What are the odds, you know?
	Just choose three random people from this community.
	Oh, they just happened to me.
	Yeah, so I'll read some extracts from this of how she named them.
	The person that she named in particular was Shah Jomenmai, which is Sarge.
	He's convicted of 40 counts of child abuse, so prolific child rapists.
	The diary is dated between late 2019 and early 2020, so it's impossible for her to know that the police were looking at him.
	And this was a private diary as well.
	He's named...
	With a bunch of other men as well.
	There's a man that's euphemised as Zed here.
	So his name is not given out.
	So either the police are looking into him or have already looked into him protecting his identity.
	But here's a quote.
	Monday 21st of October 2019. Had Snapchats from Zed saying Sarge needs me in Blackburn tomorrow.
	Said I had to get the train to Preston because they didn't know for definite where Sarge wanted me.
	She also said Sarge is going to be pissed off with her.
	And references him being at parties where men take money after she goes off with certain people.
	So was she present at the parties or not?
	How did she know about them?
	That's a big question mark over her case now.
	Hasn't been answered.
	Okay.
	She also says, So was she involved in the drug trafficking trade?
	Was she one of the prostitutes that they were using?
	Yeah.
	And as you said, Dan, was she being physically intimidated?
	It seems like it.
	So again, reprehensible liar, but seems that she was being intimidated by actual paedophile gangsters that she named well before they were convicted.
	Sky News has digital evidence that the diary was written around at the time it was dated, and so wasn't public knowledge, and so couldn't have been fabricated.
	So this is genuine.
	And there's more.
	Both Sarge and Jai's names were brought up at her trial, among those she had alleged and abused her, but she was never charged with lying about them because the police were actively processing their investigation.
	So they actually knew all of this during the trial?
	Which is why they didn't bring charges against her for lying about them.
	Oh, that is bang out of order.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Yeah, quite.
	Yeah.
	Eleanor's mother, Allison, emailed police in October 2019, warning Sarge had brought a dangerous man to Barrow who was seen manhandling her daughter in a club and later pulling out a knife.
	So there's another person involved here that Eleanor's mother had reported to the police, and the police, again, seems to have taken no action.
	Apparently, Sky News say we can't name this man for legal reasons, but two years after the email was sent, he broke into a woman's home in another town and sexually assaulted her.
	He was later jailed.
	So again?
	So why can't we name him then?
	Yeah, don't know.
	He's already in jail for rape?
	Yep.
	Why can't we name him in this?
	And also, she accurately identified another potentially murderous rapist.
	I'm getting to the point where it's not just for Third World as we deport, it's the police as well.
	And the media.
	Well, the police are just incredibly corrupt here.
	Because they're still insisting they've done nothing wrong.
	Well, there are a bunch of things in, I think it was Rotherham, there are several police officers, several counsellors who were involved.
	Personally, with the grooming gangs.
	So, it's...
	Honestly, when you see the police acting in such a permissive way, it's entirely likely that the police are...
	The police in this country used to have such a stellar reputation.
	But we use the word police, and we're picturing Bobby on the beat.
	Remember, they're trying to recruit from these communities, right?
	So...
	One of them was killed in mysterious circumstances in Rotherham as well, when he was involved in the investigation.
	I didn't know about that, actually.
	Yep, killed.
	Yep.
	Yep.
	Struck by a car.
	Really?
	Just a car.
	Yep.
	Weird that.
	I've covered that on my show, and there's a clip on YouTube.
	It's interesting, this chap who's not being named, but is in prison, right?
	He was named 36 times in her diary, whereas Sarge, one of the brothers convicted of sex offence, is only named eight times.
	So, again, new of prolific, violent child rapists.
	And they're just allowed to carry on.
	Yeah.
	It's unbelievable.
	But the narrative that was promoted, and it's still partially true narrative, is that she is just falsely accusing men who were not part of the rape gangs.
	Men who did nothing wrong.
	Just all of these innocent men she's just accused.
	Wow.
	Yeah, it turns out there is not only a grooming gang operating in the town, but she knew some of the participants, had accused them at the time, and they weren't included in her case.
	And here comes the biggest twist, right?
	So not only are there now...
	Recordings of threatening Snapchat messages that she's been sent.
	Not only do we have her diary.
	What was Sarge doing for all of those years between 1996 and 2010?
	Well, Sky News has the answer.
	Others were found guilty of all 62 charges, including multiple rapes of children, intimidation and kidnap.
	Sarge and Jay were given life sentences.
	The judge described them as highly dangerous, with significant risk of re-offending.
	The brothers were not on trial for any drug offences.
	Their crimes spanned from 1996 to 2010. But what were they doing in the ten years before they were charged in 2020?
	Well, a lot of that time, Sarge was working for Mo Ramy.
	He seemed like a popular person in the town.
	Everybody knew him.
	Nobody said anything bad about him then.
	There was no rumours about him.
	In 2018, police spoke to Mo Ramey about Sarge over allegations unconnected to the recent case.
	But he insists they told him Sarge was not a threat to children and suggested he carry out a DBS check.
	And he defended Sarge on social media.
	Only recently, when the grim reality was revealed in court about Sarge's historical offences, did Mo have to come to terms with who he was.
	At that point, I felt disgusted.
	You put myself in danger.
	You put my children in danger.
	My 15-year-old son used to go on the ice cream van with him.
	You brought this trouble to my house.
	Has the Mia case dragged it up for you?
	I mean, are people saying, oh, well, there was a grooming gang?
	Clearly...
	I know the gang definition says three or more.
	The guy is still on his side.
	Yeah.
	But when you have three brothers, that's not a gang.
	Why not?
	So not a gang, according to Mo.
	Bear in mind, we must reiterate that Moe was falsely accused, but he was aware that Sarge could have potentially been a paedophile abuser, and Eleanor, part of this network, alleged Sarge in her diary was a paedophile abuser, and it turned out he was.
	So why did Moe not raise alarm bells about the fact that he might have had a paedophile in his employ?
	Again, shouldn't have been falsely accused?
	Terrible, terrible stuff.
	And getting no more specific than this, I just wouldn't mind a bit of a deeper dig there as well.
	Yeah, in case there were other people who were connected to Sarge.
	One of the things that this is all predicated on is the idea that there's a lot less communication and less personal and intimate knowledge of each other's lives than I think is likely.
	It's like, Mo doesn't know anything about this guy's personal life.
	He doesn't know anything about him.
	Police came, they asked him some questions, I didn't know anything, and, oh, right, okay.
	But didn't know enough to defend him on social media.
	Sure.
	Look, so, oh, look.
	Eleanor Williams, absolutely categorically wrong to lie about the men that she did falsely accuse, shouldn't have faked her injuries, shouldn't have pulled that stunt, deserved her prison time.
	But there was more here than originally met the eye, and so the lesson to be learned...
	Is that if the media had not ran with her story as a single example with which we could use to dismiss the grooming gangs as a narrative of anti-Muslim racism, then more girls would have come forward, more perpetrators would have been prevented, and probably these men wouldn't have to have been lied about, and outstanding questions would not have been had about her case.
	But all I can say is there was more to this hoax than first appeared, and I wonder if we'll end up hearing more.
	Nero Mule says, there's just been an injurious brawl in Serbia's parliament.
	Opposition MPs toss smoke and stun grenades into the chamber and throw the banner reading, Serbia rises up to bring down the regime.
	I know nothing about that region of politics, but I want to see the clip at least.
	That sounds fun.
	Anyway, let's go to the video comments.
	In the meantime, Theodore says, wish you a happy and feastful Shrove Tuesday.
	Lent begins, may you have many pancakes with lemon and sugar.
	I haven't decided what I'm giving up yet, other than listening to my Mrs. Nonsense.
	I'm glad I'm not religious.
	We'll get you.
	Let's go for it.
	Since my mech game is based on my IRL mech building experience, Breaker, squad unit 2, standing by.
	10-4.
	All the game upgrades will involve parts and technologies that already exist.
	Like car batteries, generators, and armor made out of steel sheeting, fiberglass, and ceramic tiles.
	Naturally, I'm thinking the setting will be post-apocalyptic, where the progressives will have blotted out the sun in order to fight climate change.
	I like the idea of a post-apocalyptic mech thing.
	You can have the mechs being quite janky.
	It looks like an 8-bit Titanfall.
	Yeah, it looks quite cool.
	It looks wholesome.
	Good luck with the game.
	Yeah, because one of the things about mech games is it's already set in the future, so there's super high-tech, especially the Japanese ones.
	But actually, kind of like post-apocalyptic, like, you know, pirate stamped together, you know, clawed together.
	Mad Max Mechs.
	Yeah, Mad Max Mechs.
	Yeah, that's actually a good selling line.
	Let's go to the next one.
	The debacle of the gay Taylorique reinforced to me something I recently realised.
	Throwing the doors open to migrants was a cathartic act of revolution, and now the owners must live with the consequences, a difficult task in our feminised age.
	Recently I realised that women's attitudes and behaviour are predicated on one simple rule, that anything they say or do can be taken back.
	Gentlemen are unusually accommodating to women and girls who can perform quite selfish acts, and then say, I didn't mean it.
	I'm sorry.
	When women are in power, there's no one to whom they can plead.
	They are on the hook for their own actions.
	At this point, they become vindictive and will turn on everyone else.
	Maybe we should just take all the proclamations of war or indefinite compassion extended to migrants by female politicians as, you're just venting, dear.
	Yeah, no, I empathise with you too.
	I empathise with you too.
	And do absolutely no action.
	We just got a super chat from J.M. Denton for $50.
	Thanks, man.
	Who says, USAID here for a documentary on the real grooming gangs.
	Dear Lord, this is infuriating.
	You know what?
	It may well be something we can accommodate.
	So watch this space.
	In the meantime, watch Charlie Peter's one as well.
	Very good.
	I have a genuine question.
	What is the definition of democracy?
	I feel like we're being fooled into thinking democracy is synonymous with voting.
	However, every time I hear democracy is under threat, the proposed solutions are stop people from voting for who they want, annulling elections, banning political parties, or banning free speech.
	Can we start asking the rules-based order elite what democracy actually means to them?
	Will they stumble over this simple question?
	I have an answer to this, actually, and I answered it at length on one of the episodes of my show, but democracy does not mean one man, one vote.
	It is the means by which man's egalitarian nature is revealed to him, which means that every election results in a predictable outcome of victory for the progressives, and if it didn't, then racism, misinformation, etc.
	got in the way, and so you are justified in censoring opposition parties, media outlets, or critics of progressive policies which are presumed to be in everyone's equal.
	Good enough definitions, Andy.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Good morning, Lotus Eaters.
	I'm bummed that I missed out on the Zoom call on Friday.
	I'll have to make it to the call at the end of this month.
	On Saturday, I took advantage of the fantastic weather we were having to go for a snow hike up on the Mountain Loop Highway.
	I was the only one on the mountain, which was pretty sweet.
	A little word of advice.
	If the voice in your head tells you to bring something and you dismissively neglect to bring it, chances are you're going to need it.
	I have enough footage and pictures that I could make a part two from this trip if you'd like, and if it wouldn't clutter the video comments too much.
	Thanks, guys.
	I'd love it, mate.
	Looks beautiful.
	Yeah, lovely.
	Let's go for the next one.
	Boog Food Company, Insect, French, obviously, is thankfully facing collapse, but their functional ingredients will almost certainly live on.
	And their naming strategy is Marketing Genius, so stay vigilant.
	All of the products listed here are their mealworm offerings.
	In the food chain, right now, names can be switched out to appeal to different demographics and hide their contents in plain sight.
	To look into this further, head over to ingredientsnetwork.com.
	Search for any insect name.
	Cricket's a good place to start.
	Very good.
	I like also that our audience are now collaborating on their video.
	Boogwatch limit.
	Go to the next one.
	Following your announcement last week, Connor, I just wanted to send in a very brief video message, wishing you all the very best for the future, and to say thank you for everything that you've done with the Lotus Eaters since you've been with them.
	Take care, God bless, and I hope that all goes well for you with your future endeavours.
	Oh, thank you very much, mate.
	It's very wholesome.
	For those out of the loop who didn't watch my show, you should.
	Yeah, next week will be my last at LotusEaters.com next Wednesday.
	So we'll have a rip-roaring send-off on that daily podcast, I think.
	It'll be good fun.
	Let's go for the next one.
	And now some man and his very ridiculously young tech bros are taking away the careers of lifelong federal employees.
	Yeah!
	Yes!
	Yes!
	Into my veins!
	Yes!
	All of them!
	I love that video so much.
	I like to see federal employees getting fired.
	Let's go to the next one.
	I think it's Pancake Day.
	Yes, it's Pancake Day.
	It must be Pancake Day.
	Someone sent that to Drogpuff for UK aesthetics.
	Well, you know what?
	That, I think, is an old TV show from, like, 2003 or something.
	I remember watching it the first time round and haven't seen it since.
	But one thing that's worth doing is going back and watching these sort of TV shows from the early 2000s, and there's a profound sense of innocence around them.
	They don't know what's going on, and everything's just, oh yeah, everything's totally fine.
	We're living in the end of history.
	You can see already the paradigm that is being brought into existence.
	Subversion is the beginning.
	It's not just subversion.
	It's the fact that the setting for...
	The total disarmament of the British people on a sort of moral and cultural level is already there, and these people just aren't living the effects of it.
	So they're like, oh no, this is what being a good person is.
	And so they're swanning around, just like, ha ha ha, it's fine.
	Then you realise that what they're doing is completely humiliating our civilisation.
	They're just literally opening the door for the complete replacement of themselves as moral agents, and it's embarrassing to watch, frankly.
	Anyway, let's go to the next one.
	I didn't realise how many video comments were.
	I went to work on Saturday and forgot to bring the card reader with me.
	I know, what a dunce, which meant that I was physically incapable of accepting electronic payments for the entire day and had to take cash.
	As a result, I realised just how reliant people are on technology and how much control of our own property we've surrendered for convenience.
	At least 100 people couldn't withdraw cash from the ATM 10 metres away because they'd not brought their card believing they wouldn't need it, and so they couldn't make even the smallest purchase.
	Oh, also, I saw a study this morning suggesting that sex change surgeries doubles the rate of depression in people with gender dysphoria, which actually came out on my birthday, so that's fun.
	But you are right about the cash, then.
	And you're right about the sex change surgery.
	Oh, yeah.
	Yeah, that's true.
	Is there another one?
	No, that's the lot.
	Lord Narevas says, The terrifying thing about Ukraine is that Starmer government is now actively publicly considering sending British men to die on foreign step, and the boomers, by and large, are still clapping like seals for it.
	These are your children and grandchildren.
	Boomerism is incurable, unfortunately.
	It is, yeah.
	Omar says, The EU burephiles...
	I like that.
	Has to play Ukrainian potato because there is no NATO, there's just US military.
	If Trump takes his ball home, they'll have no real way to put up resistance against Russia without Pyrrhic losses.
	In the end, Trump tells Europe to fund their own defence, so either they stop war, he gets what he wants, or they pay for it and he gets what he wants.
	I mean, why would you fight for Europe?
	Why would you fight for these things if you're a young man?
	What would you be upholding?
	You'd have to be part of the Reddit Battalion to want to uphold this.
	You give me the opportunity to defend the borders or to take part in the deportations, and I'm there day one.
	Yeah, sure.
	If I'm going to uphold a patriotic order that doesn't say, oh, we can't recruit you for the military because you're a useless white man, then maybe I'll think twice.
	Mathurin says, Starmer's speech background music made it sound like he was from Super Earth.
	Yeah, that's quite interesting.
	He was from Helldivers.
	He didn't play it.
	It was very good to hold up.
	But yeah, like Starmer trying to play the Patriot is kind of embarrassing and I don't like it.
	Someone online says, in school, the smaller, weaker kid gets suspended if he fights back.
	Nothing happens if the bully beats him to a pulp.
	This is called zero tolerance.
	Yeah, it is a drawing of a false equivalency between the person who hits I had this all the time at school.
	We had this Maoist punishment called the hotspot, so they would stand you underneath the classroom windows, facing the schoolyard where everyone was playing, and you had to stand there silently for the entire hour lunch duration.
	If you spoke to someone who would inevitably come up to you and ask you why you were on it, you'd be placed on it the next day.
	Jesus.
	It's demented.
	It's actually like psychological torture for a primary school child.
	State schools are just awful.
	This is why I tell my son to just fight back and we'll worry about it afterwards.
	Colin said, I did see it suggested by a YouTuber that perhaps the EU is expecting the result of the meeting.
	If in this case, having the meeting in public may actually have gone a long way to undermine...
	I think they're just not really bright.
	Yeah, they're not really very bright.
	They're not coordinating very well.
	And they didn't expect Trump to essentially...
	I mean, Trump said in the meeting, look, do as we want or you get nothing.
	I don't think they expected him to follow through on it.
	Well, they're so used to words not meaning anything.
	Yeah, it's like, no, Trump is a New York businessman.
	He's going to do what he says.
	And there's lots of people who are grinding their teeth at your segment, which I don't blame them for because it was very annoying, but it's one of those things that we have to cover because otherwise, how would you know about it?
	Blood pressure will lower in my absence.
	Well, no, not really.
	We still cover these things, even in your absence.
	Yeah, fair point.
	Okay, well, anyway, we're out of time there, so thank you very much, folks, for joining us.

▲