Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 12, 2025 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:35:07

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #1119

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of The Lotus Eaters, episode 1119, on the 12th of March, 2025. I am your host, Connor, joined by Carl and Harry.
	And today, on the show, we will be discussing the persecution of one Rupert Lowe.
	All of us would follow him into battle at a moment's notice.
	By the way, the Southport cover-up being proven true, and the Dr. Evil theory of history.
	Some very interesting topics for what will be my last show at LotusEaters.com.
	So, just wanted to say to everyone, before we do kick off, absolute...
	Pleasure serving alongside you, gents.
	Audience are always lovely.
	I'm sure the video comments are going to be...
	they're going to roast me sufficiently.
	And, in order for it being my last show, I'm going to do the last episode of Tomlinson Talks at 3, live to everyone who has a LotusEaters.com membership, and I'll be taking questions and comments and answering to the best of my ability.
	But, without further ado, Carl, please kick us off.
	So the question, I think, that is on everyone's lips at the moment is, why is Nigel Farage so afraid of Rupert Lowe?
	If he is claiming to support and do all of the things that Rupert Lowe has been hammering the media and the political environment on, why are they even in conflict?
	And I actually think I can explain this.
	So, let us begin by first shilling the Islander merch, which is finally here.
	So, Islander, of course, has been on sale and has been a massive success so far, but the merch was lacking a bit, but it's now here.
	It's up.
	So you can go over to lotuses.shop.lotuses.com, wherever you are in the world, go and pick up the latest Islander merch.
	I'm actually going to get mine after the podcast, and we will move on.
	Right, so, Nigel Farage has many people on his back at the moment because he seems to be trying to play two sides of an argument, and I don't think he can continue to do this forever.
	You get people like Jack Buckby, who have been long involved in British right-wing politics, going from one quite far side to a more moderate side.
	But the point he makes here is true.
	Farage has always been late to the game.
	On almost every issue that he has actually championed.
	The only one he's actually been ahead of the curve on is Brexit, obviously.
	But everything else that he's done, he's always been behind the times on.
	And this is something that people have noticed.
	And so I just did a bit of a deep dive.
	So the first public...
	The first real public attention I could find with Faraj talking about the grooming gangs was in 2014, after the release of the Alexis J report, when it was mainstream news, and I covered it at the time as well, and various other people did.
	And so he did that in December in 2014. And so this obviously got him some negative press coverage, but it was...
	The right thing to do, and it was good that someone was doing it, so that's good.
	And so the next one is in 2015, where he said there were no go zones for non-Muslims in France, which again, good thing to be making a point of.
	Well, how's the French Jewish population doing these days?
	Exactly.
	And in 2015, he said there were Muslim ghettos running Sharia law in England.
	We have the most Sharia courts of any European country.
	Yep.
	So that's...
	True.
	Again, it's all true.
	He accused Muslims in 2015 of having split loyalties between the UK and Islam.
	And in 2015, again, he criticised female gender mutilation and Sharia law and Sharia courts, which, again, not wrong.
	In 2017, he was on LBC talking about grooming gangs, when, again, these weren't necessarily popular things to talk about either, so give him his credit where it's due.
	But again...
	He's definitely not the first to have done this.
	He's always travelling behind the wave.
	Can I make a quick thing on that as well?
	Yeah, go ahead.
	At ARC, I spoke to Ben Habib and I said, have your outlooks on reform improved ever since Nigel Farage put out a video saying that Donald Trump is conducting mass deportations of illegal immigrants?
	Our countries are different, but the principle is the same.
	If you come here illegally, don't expect to stay.
	And Ben said, well...
	You would expect Nigel to do that now that Trump said it.
	And so what I think you're pointing out is a phenomena here of where the Overton window moves ahead of Farage, and when he sees it's safe, he'll run to catch up with it.
	Yes, and then he'll make a point of saying, I was always doing this.
	It's like, yeah, you were.
	You know, after the fact.
	Which, don't get me wrong, it's not that you need to have to be the crest of the wave or anything.
	It's okay to come in after the fact, but then don't act like you were the crest of the wave.
	But anyway, so, in 2018, he found that UKIP, his party, he wasn't the leader at the time, but he was during 2015 and 2014 when he was saying these things.
	In 2018, he leaves UKIP because of its preoccupation with Islam and grooming gangs.
	And he was like, well, we definitely want to work on an anti-Islamic party.
	It's like, okay, but what was all this then?
	What were you doing with all this?
	If, I mean, oh, you know what?
	Muslims are forming ghettos or no-go zones in France.
	Muslims got split loyalty in the UK. I'm not hot on female genital mutilation in Sharia courts.
	Grooming gangs are a problem.
	Why am I surrounded by Islamophobes?
	I don't know, Nigel.
	I think maybe you were signalling to them, actually, with all of this.
	And so, obviously, he left UKIP, threw UKIP completely under the bus and tried to sully their reputation, obviously.
	And this carries on until now, where Elon had his New Year's rampage about grooming gangs and Tommy Robinson and various other things.
	And, of course, Nigel Farage took the opportunity to throw Tommy Robinson under the bus because there's just literally no one he won't throw.
	But on January the 6th, he did call for a grooming gang inquiry.
	Okay, that's good.
	At least, finally, he's calling for something useful to happen.
	Now, this was nearly, well, three months ago now.
	What's happened?
	Nothing.
	So, the Reform Party position, because they voted for it, was for a national inquiry that had statutory legal powers to compel people to come and give evidence.
	And they then said, if this does not go ahead, We will pursue a private prosecution, like they did with the two men who attacked police officers at Manchester Airport, and then the Crown Prosecution Service eventually brought charges against them.
	So they do have within their power the ability to bring forward a private inquiry, and it might not be able to compel public officials who helped cover it up to give evidence, but you could easily televise it, livestream it, produce the findings in a report, and...
	Park your tanks on Starmer's front lawn as to why the government are unwilling to do this when lots of evidence hasn't been given their hearing before.
	And they haven't brought that forward and they haven't brought any announcements forward about it yet.
	Yes, and at the Reform Conference in January, he did say that he was putting Keir Starmer under immense pressure because previous inquiries he'd called a shotgun approach, whereas he'd wanted a rifle shot dealing with gangs, quote, predominantly of Pakistani origin, preying on young, in most cases, working-class white girls.
	Okay, yep, so that's exactly the right kind of language, the right kind of approach, in fact.
	So what's happened with it?
	Well, the answer is just nothing.
	He welcomed the fact that Andy Burnham from Greater Manchester had come out and also endorsed the same thing, and so you would think that he would pick up this momentum, get some work done, and actually make some noise and get some movement on this issue.
	And have it be bipartisan as well, because if the smartest political play would be to say, I am going to launch a private prosecution or private inquiry, I would like the cooperation from the leader of the opposition, Kimmy Baden-Ock, because even if I... Don't agree with the fact that she never raised it in her entire time as Parliament at the despatch box.
	I would like her help to show consensus on this.
	And with Andy Burnham's cooperation, considering, and it's not his fault, but lots of these grooming gangs were operating in Manchester's own backyard.
	And so he would say, this is cross-spectrum support, and that would put even more pressure on Starmer.
	Yes.
	Now, what this would also require is a spine of steel.
	You would have to have a backbone.
	To do all of this because the problem with Nigel is that he makes sure the wave is fully broken ahead of him before popping his head up to add his takes to it in order to make sure that he doesn't get the blowback.
	Because he personally doesn't like the blowback.
	And we know this from Catherine Blakelock, because she has worked with Nigel for something like 20 years.
	She knows him very, very well.
	And she's written an article for us that you can go and read on the website in your own time.
	but she says quote a while back Nigel was hounded by left-wing media for talking about Romanian men next door he realized he'd made a big mistake he did not want the type of criticism again and certainly did not want to be called a racist he also wanted continued access to mainstream media Farage has studiously avoided making comments about grubing gangs sharia law cousin marriage or terrorist attacks since then there's a fine line when honesty is sacrificed to expediency so I mean he has made some comments but nothing as strong until Elon Musk mainstreamed it in the
	And again, he's behind the crest of the wave.
	He has to follow as someone else has led.
	Well, also, lots of other people led to that discourse becoming global who do not have Farage's status, wealth, and level of insulation.
	So I'm thinking...
	Sam Bidwell, Charlie Peters, I contributed a bit.
	I mean, everyone on Twitter was tweeting about it before Musk suddenly picked it up.
	Exactly.
	The discourse was what Musk was reacting to, which is great, you know, it's superb.
	Farage wasn't a part of it.
	Farage came in after it, just like coming back to Clacton after, oh, they've got a poll out of 35%, oh, Nigel Farage will parachute himself in then.
	He's never at the crest of the wave.
	And this, just in case you're wondering, this is the quote, because they called him a racist for saying, do you really want loads of unwashed Romanian men next door to you?
	Well, we now know that in the stats that have just been released by the Centre for Migration Control, Romanian men are vastly overrepresented in the number of sex attacks they commit.
	So...
	Ten years on, completely vindicated.
	But the one time he was ahead of the wave on this, right, because they were going to open up to, what was it, Romania and Bulgaria?
	Schengen zone, yeah.
	Schengen zone, yeah.
	The one time Farage was actually ahead of the wave, he got slammed as a racist, and then that was it.
	Never again was he going to put himself first and lead on the issue.
	This is the confusing part.
	Reform's media strategy has been...
	At least, as I've been told, very Ming-Vars.
	They wanted to carry it softly over the line, at least past the local elections, when they can cement some wins.
	And they thought, in order to do that, they only had to focus on mainstream networks.
	For example, Zia Yusuf was invited for an interview on the New Culture Forum.
	He said it was too right-wing.
	Peter Whittle, gay man.
	Yeah, but Peter Whittle, very reasonable chap.
	Yes, but if you were trying to say external perceptions...
	How is he not respectable?
	But that's the point.
	He didn't say he's not respectable.
	He didn't say he wouldn't be an interesting interlocutor.
	He said, too right-wing.
	Ideological position.
	Ideological and governed by external perceptions, because the networks we would like to go on, like the BBC, Sky, ITV, Channel 4, even though they might have orchestrated a setup with a paid actor on Farage's Clacton campaign to rubbish the entire party.
	They would call us racists.
	So all of their media strategy is governed by avoiding being called racist by the people that are always going to be calling them racist.
	It's perplexing.
	They're literally paid to call you a racist.
	So anyway, moving on.
	So recently, Nigel Farage and Reform, in the wake of the Rupert Lode debacle, have been ramping up the anti-immigrant rhetoric, which is interesting, because it was only a couple of months ago on Bloomberg, he was like, I'm not anti-immigrant.
	It's like, okay, but this is definitely what's going to be considered to be anti-immigrant rhetoric, when you say one in four sexual offences are committed by immigrants.
	And then Reform will arrest and deport those who commit offences.
	Unlike everyone else, I've been saying this since 2013. I couldn't find anything from 2013, and I couldn't actually find that from 2013 either, but the most sort of spicy things we've already covered.
	But the point, again, being he's not on the crest of the wave.
	Rupert Lowe was at the crest of the wave.
	Causing the problem that Nigel Farage is now saying this in response to, and this is a repeated pattern.
	Nigel is not a leader, he is in fact a follower.
	He is always behind where he needs to be.
	So anyway, this, the debacle between Elon Musk, Nigel Farage and Rupert Lowe.
	Obviously came to a head, and I think this is where he obviously got the actual target on his back, where, of course, Elon Musk sussed out Nigel Farage very quickly.
	Oh, he's not at the crest of the wave.
	He's not the guy, like Trump, who's going to stand up and say, you know what, I don't care about any of your opinions.
	This is the right thing, and we're going to stand on this.
	Nigel Farage didn't do that.
	He backed down.
	He equivocated.
	He essentially showed that he didn't have a spine.
	Whereas Rupert Lowe said, no, this is it, and I make no apologies.
	And so Elon was very quick to say, ah, yes, this is the man, in fact.
	Well, the interesting thing is, He didn't explicitly say that Rupert Lewis should take over.
	He said, Yes, but everyone knows what that means.
	Implicitly.
	And there's no way that Nigel Farage looked at that and said, yeah, he's not saying that Rupert Lowe should take over.
	He's just said, I'm not the guy and reform needs a new leader.
	The reason I'm just drawing that distinction is because Rupert himself had never challenged Farage's leadership.
	Again, I'll say it.
	And he's praised it, in fact.
	There are a bunch of reform conferences where Rupert Lowe has got up and praised Farage's leadership.
	In private, he has been saying for a long time until this week, Nigel Farage deserves to be Prime Minister because of his tireless campaigning on Brexit.
	It's exactly my opinion on it.
	I would have happily supported Nigel Farage if he hadn't, frankly, been doing the things he was doing.
	You said it was the conclusion of his narrative arc.
	Exactly.
	And I agree, it should be.
	But ultimately, Farage has just not stepped into the role.
	He needs to be at the crest of the wave, leading, not following.
	And this, again, I think is why Elon Musk sussed him out so quickly.
	Because he wasn't prepared to stand on the point of principle.
	So, anyway, the war between Rupert Lowe and Nigel Farage is going really badly for Nigel Farage, as far as I can tell.
	Farage...
	I came out here and said that there was a parliamentary investigation into Rupert Lowe.
	Date wrong as well?
	He said it was on the 29th of February?
	He said he was reported on the 29th of February.
	There was no leap year this year.
	So there was no 29th of February.
	I mean, you know, easy mistake to make, I guess.
	I don't want to make too much of it, but, like, that didn't happen.
	And Adam here has written to the Parliamentary Investigations Office, and they're like, no, there is no case open against Rupert Lowe.
	You should follow Adam, by the way, because he does phenomenal work, especially on the grooming gang transcripts.
	He's been the one trying to procure them.
	So well done, sir.
	He's doing great work, and he's done good work here.
	So that's not true.
	So, interesting.
	And then Rupert Lowe tweeted this.
	You can see he says, there have been repeated attempts from senior reform figures that my language on the rape gangs was too strong, too robust, too tough.
	And then he explains and goes down and says, my view is clear.
	Anyone with any knowledge of these crimes and who fail to act is as guilty as the rapists themselves.
	We must deport foreign nationals who knew.
	If that means entire communities go, then that is what must happen.
	Now that is a strong statement, but how could you find yourself in disagreement with it?
	You look like you're happy with that, Harry.
	That's a great statement.
	That's a fantastic statement, very strong, entirely necessary, and it's also worrying that that opening statement that you made about the fact that him just having strong rhetoric at all on the grooming gangs causes issues within reform, that's a bit of an indictment of the character of those people in reform, because why would you be more outraged of him talking about it rather than the actual grooming gangs themselves?
	That's very...
	Establishment mainstream kind of position to take.
	Old style of politics, right?
	It's showing that Farage is actually kind of like yesterday's man because actually what the times now call for is someone like Rupert Lode say, you know what?
	This is the statement.
	If you find that too much, that's too bad.
	I'm not walking this back.
	And he says, I won't be silenced on that by anyone, because this is what I believe, because this is the right thing.
	And he is, of course, completely correct.
	If you were party to a rape gang by just staying silent on it because of familial loyalty or something like that, then you're culpable.
	You are culpable.
	You're part of a larger conspiracy to conceal it.
	Yeah, exactly.
	You're culpable, and therefore you are also guilty of allowing this to happen.
	If I knew about that, the first thing I'd do is go straight to the police.
	It doesn't matter who it is.
	Obviously, you don't...
	Within your community, you don't want the rapist living next door, but similarly, you don't want the person who knew about the raping and didn't say anything and didn't go to the police living next door either.
	Well, it's not just silence.
	This is...
	At the trials, as we've covered before, the daughters shout out, I love you, Dad.
	The families, when they've been interviewed by other Muslim women, will say, have you seen how those white girls dress?
	They're kafir.
	They deserved it.
	There was a BBC sort of mini-documentary where they were interviewing a bunch of Muslims, and there was this one Muslim girl in a dance hall just doing ballet or something.
	And she was like, yeah, we all knew, but we all just said nothing.
	It's like, okay.
	All right.
	You can't live alongside...
	You can't do it.
	That's not fair.
	If I may make one quick comment, the reason that Nigel Farage is looking like yesterday's man now is the same reason that Rupert Lowe has gained such an organic following over time.
	It's because he understands how Twitter has completely changed the game.
	It has not just allowed him to circumvent a coordinated media and party press release reputation destruction job with a few tweets in a few days, but it's also allowed him to circumvent the gatekeeping, Which tightly controls the Overton window.
	Because Farage is operating according to what the dinner party circuit, what the donors, what the media and what fellow politicians will deem as being racist.
	Whereas Rupert Lowe has looked at X, gone, hold on a minute, this was an effective register of public mood because the overwhelming sentiment on X was MAGA and then Trump won the popular vote.
	So this means this is where the public are.
	So I'm just going to speak directly to the public, unfiltered, and...
	Gaining a following because of it.
	And so he's not just swatted the reputation destruction effort, but he is actually...
	Like a true populist, giving the people permission to say what they already believe and also leading the people to said promised land.
	And that's the important thing.
	Rupert Lowe's following is organic because he is leading from the front.
	He is not waiting for someone else to clear the ground and make it sanitized so I can step on without getting too much slime from the media on me.
	No, he said, right, I don't care.
	I'm going to say my piece.
	This is what's going to happen.
	And people are rushing in to follow him.
	Again, the distinction in leadership styles could not be more stark.
	Farage is always behind the curve because he doesn't want to get in trouble.
	Rupert Lowe has just said, no, we're pushing through.
	And this was an interesting point that AA made on his stream yesterday about this, which was that MAGA was very eager to take advantage of the momentum that was being built online and very, very eager to liaise with and interact with the online communities who appreciated MAGA and women's support of him.
	Farage doesn't want...
	Anything to do with these people.
	Rupert's happy to interact with us.
	Rupert's happy to speak to people.
	Farage sees it all as beneath him because it's beneath the Westminster dinner table class.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Anyway, so like I said, at the beginning of this, Rupert said there was a belief from senior reform figures that my language was too robust and they were trying to silence him.
	Well, that's an allegation.
	So...
	Normally, when something like this would be alleged, the person would come out and deny it.
	And so then it's a he said, she said, no, you've got to side with the person who says that didn't happen because you need affirmative proof.
	Well, that would be the case unless they just come out and say, yeah, I did do that.
	I just, yeah, I silenced Rupert Lowe on that.
	So Nigel Farage admits that he did silence Rupert Lowe and says, right, no matter what happens now, he'll never be allowed back into reform.
	So, okay, brilliant.
	You've lost your brightest star.
	A one good MP. Gone.
	Who next, Nigel?
	The guy who was doing something like 56% of all the work.
	The guy who was actually actively fundraising to help his constituents.
	So yeah, he said obviously there'd be no way back for him.
	And Nigel Farage says in his speech in Essex that he talks about, what I stopped him from using was the word repatriation.
	I told him not to use the word repatriation as well as mass deportations.
	So he did silence him on that.
	You were just saying, he says, you silence me on this, and you say, I silence you on that.
	His exact words were, I thought it was a very grave, dark, and dangerous use of language.
	Right, so what Farage is saying there...
	School mom, tone policing.
	Categorically, one, it's very feminine to be governed by external perceptions.
	Rupert Lowe doesn't do that.
	Secondly, Farage is explicitly saying the two-tier justice system that he was rallying against in the aftermath of Southport will remain in place for illegal immigrants.
	Because now...
	If you are refusing to deport every single illegal immigrant in this country, that means you are comfortable with a level of law-breaking.
	And so Reform's party platform, much to our dismay, is we will allow illegal immigrants to stay in the country because we don't want to be called racist.
	What is the point?
	Because, oh, it's very grave, dark language.
	It's like, don't you think the rapes are worse?
	Yeah.
	Like, sorry, I hate to get all Norm Macdonald on you on this, but I think the grooming gangs were worse, actually, than the language Rupert Lowe has used.
	And Rupert Lowe, he was told not to say it at the Reform Conference, and he said it anyway.
	You've got to love it.
	You've got to love that kind of attitude.
	Again, that is what leading from the front is.
	These people are going to object to this, but it's the right thing to do, and so I'm going to do it.
	Anyway, so Matt Goodwin came out in defense with Nigel Farage on this.
	I hate this now because, unfortunately, you're going to have to pick a side.
	You're either with the person leading from the front and telling the truth, or you're with the person who leads from the rear and is telling lies, frankly.
	Not just lies.
	As Ben Habib pointed out, it's not just that Farage says Lo can't come back.
	It's why would Lo want to come back when Farage has supported bringing what seemed like trumped-up charges against him, which, if they were successful, Rupert Lo would go to prison.
	Yep.
	Like, so...
	If you support Farage at this stage...
	Being ruined forever.
	Yeah, if you support Farage at this stage, it's not just mean girl reputation destruction.
	It's the potential of sending him to prison for saying something that he's saying he didn't even say.
	So, look, I really like Matt.
	I've had him on my show twice.
	Yeah, I've had Matt on the show.
	I like Matt.
	Matt was one of the two people in Reform that's basically keeping my faith in there alongside Rupert.
	Yep.
	I think he's not only picked the wrong side here, but if...
	Faraj and Zia Yusuf are not below these tactics.
	Matt, do you not think they won't come for you next?
	Because you are the most eligible successor to Faraj currently in the party.
	And if there's one thing they can't abide, especially Zia Yusuf, it's people getting in his way.
	I mean, everyone around Faraj must understand they're a marked man.
	He's got such a long history, we covered it in the podcast earlier in the week, of his long history of throwing people under the bus and destroying them to the best of his ability, which is what he's just tried with Rupert Lowe.
	You're not safe with him, Matt.
	He will do this to you.
	Anyway, Matt had this contradictory, well, an argument with Rupert Lowe, because Rupert Lowe pointed out, well, no, they did censor him on the term mass deportations.
	And so Matt said, well, in reality, it's an unworkable, unpopular, and impossible policy.
	I don't think that's true.
	Matt, and I know because, like Connor, I read your sub stack.
	Connor, you replied to this.
	Do you want to just explain your reply very quickly?
	Yeah, so Matt was alleging that Rupert Lowe had called for the deporting of British nationals, which is not true.
	He's never said that ever.
	And in fact...
	I think that might be in reference to his statement that we need to deport the communities that hid the crime.
	He said foreign nationals.
	Yeah.
	Explicitly, he said foreign nationals and dual nationals.
	And according to the law, and there's two pieces of law here, the 2007 Nationality and Borders Act, plus under the Blair government, means that if you commit an offence that gives you a 12-month prison sentence, under Section 32, you are automatically eligible for deportation, unless under Section 33, human rights law intervenes.
	But it's in the Reform Manifesto to leave the ECHR and abolish the Human Rights Act.
	So that would make these deportations automatic.
	So what is 13,000 foreign criminals deported if not a mass deportation?
	And then the other thing on that, the Shemima Begum principle, which I know that Nigel Farage doesn't agree with because he spoke about bringing her back, despite her rotting in a Syrian desert somewhere, deservedly.
	It means that if you have dual nationality, we can take away your British nationality so that you aren't stateless and you can belong to another country if you've committed a crime against the country.
	These are all popular positions, and I know this because we read Matt's substack, and in Why the Woke Left Lost, a recent substack that Matt pointed me to when I wanted to make the case in another article for why this is an unpopular position, the position that immigration should increase...
	All of the other suite of woke progressive opinions are only 8-10% of the country.
	Whereas the Telegraph found recently that Donald Trump's mass deportation policy, if you go back to that previous graph there, has, I think it's 58% public support.
	So if we just copied Donald Trump's mass deportations policy, which he called mass deportations and won over Hispanic men with, reform would win more than 20% of the electorate that they actually need to get a majority.
	And it's kind of crazy that we're even debating this, because obviously...
	Stripping the British nationality from a dual national and sending them home is the right thing to do if they commit a crime in this country.
	Obviously, the public are going to be behind this.
	And so saying, well, this is an unpopular and unworkable policy, it's like, well, no, it doesn't seem unworkable at all.
	And it seems to me that it'll be very popular.
	And it wouldn't take very much of a media push to get people to understand this is actually a good thing.
	It's not just unworkable at all.
	One, I remember the Ryanair boss.
	Proposing that you could use as flights.
	But two, as I pointed out there, in the recent quarterly migration statistics, in 2024, we processed, British Airports processed, 132.3 million arrivals.
	Now, let's say the conservative estimate of illegal migrants in 2017 by Pew Research, 1.2 million, is accurate.
	It's more than that, right?
	That's a couple of weeks.
	If you mobilized it, a couple of weeks.
	Privatise it.
	Anyway, moving on.
	So Rupert Lowe came out and said, well look, I make a promise to you all today.
	I will hold this inquiry into the Pakistani rape gangs.
	I will source the funding.
	I will make it happen.
	Plans now already underway.
	Reform and Farage failed to do so.
	I will not.
	When I make a promise, I will keep it.
	Did we think that anyone else in reform was going to do this in Rupert's absence?
	No, obviously not.
	And so Farage finally, after all of this, decided to respond to Rupert Lowe.
	As you can see from the ratio, in fact, the ratio is worse than this.
	It's 3.7 to...
	No, it's 4.5.
	It's worse.
	It's 4.5 to 2.2.
	I mean, I did reply to Farage and I got more likes.
	Everyone did.
	Everyone did.
	Rupert's 17. Wow.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Rupert's 17 to his too.
	So Nigel Farage said, I have fought against the rape gangs for over a decade.
	Well, I don't think I would say that, Nigel.
	You have mentioned it in passing a few times, and then you left UKIP because Jared Batten took you seriously and wanted to do something about the rape gangs.
	And so you're like, what?
	Tommy Robinson?
	Islam?
	Rape gangs?
	I'm out of here.
	You're weirdos.
	Why have you become a party of weirdos obsessed with Islam and rape gangs?
	You've got this YouTuber in here now.
	Yeah, exactly.
	I wasn't the thing that came up.
	It was about the obsession with the rape gangs in Islam.
	It's like, okay, but have you campaigned against them or not?
	Why did you leave UKIP then?
	If you've been fighting the rape gangs, what would be the reason?
	There's also a difference between condemning it and proposing a policy to do something about it.
	Yeah, which he didn't do, obviously.
	And then he carries on and says, For Rupert Lode to say that I tried to prevent him from talking about this is monstrous.
	Well, you admitted that you did.
	You were like, no, you can't talk about it in this way.
	You have to talk about it in my way or else.
	He told Lee Anderson that he would slit the throat of the Reform Party.
	That seems to be a lie.
	And this is a lie that's morphed as well.
	Because it began with, he said he'd slit Zia Yusuf's throat, which wasn't true.
	And now he would slit the throat of the Reform Party, which also wasn't true.
	He said the Reform Party would slit its own throat if it didn't do whatever it was.
	And so he says, Lowe is out to cause damage and should be ignored by our supporters.
	So, maximum damage control.
	That's what this is.
	And that was bloody foolish, because of course, this gave the opportunity for Rupert Lowe to respond.
	Because this is what happens when you engage in the dialectic.
	And now the dialectic is moving, and it's moving in our direction.
	Easily.
	So much for Twitter not being real life.
	So much for Twitter not being real life.
	So, desperate.
	Rupert says, I said that reform leadership was slitting its own throat by launching this horrific smear campaign against me with zero credible evidence.
	And so far, has anyone seen any evidence?
	No.
	What we've seen is Rupert Lowe's own staff going, no, we love Rupert, you're talking nonsense.
	He says, I raised questions of reform policy, communication and structure.
	The day after you kicked me out, that's your real motive.
	Seems to be the case, Nigel.
	Seems to be the case.
	Because Rupert, again, was leading from the front.
	And you were not happy with this because you want to lead from the back.
	And so Farage went on Australian Sky News today, this morning, and...
	very, very interesting.
	But I have to ask about what's been around this week, that one of your MPs seems to have had a bit of a crack as suggesting that all of it is you being the messiah of the party.
	Well, I'll give you the tip.
	The only reason there's any reform MPs is because of this bloke on the screen right now.
	Let's be honest about that, OK?
	So tell me about Rupert Lowe and why he's wrong and has he apologised?
	And is all of this just the people who hate trying to find a way to break you up?
	Well, look, you know, he has done some good work as an MP, lots of written questions...
	Big Twitter ex-following.
	But I've been here before.
	I've been here before.
	You know, you build something up and somebody else thinks they can do a better job than you.
	So I think it's no secret he'd like to be leader.
	He thinks he's going to be the next Prime Minister.
	He even said to a group of us the other week, I will destroy anyone that gets in my way.
	Well, I'm sorry, but I'm in the way.
	To have said what he said just two weeks before nominations go in for the English County Council local elections to attempt to spread demoralisation amongst our thousands of volunteers who are out there getting ready really is a very, very bad thing to do.
	The dialectic has moved.
	It's, these were legitimate complaints by Rupert Lowe's staff when he was threatening Zio's life.
	Well, yeah, the staff dropped their veil of anonymity and said it's bogus and also...
	It took three to four months for Yusuf to report said threats, so they're not credible.
	But it's justified us calling the police on him because he challenged my leadership and he spread demoralization.
	He did give the game away.
	He gave it completely away.
	He wants to be leader.
	I thought it was about actual complaints from within his office.
	I thought it was about crimes.
	I thought it was bullying people.
	No, he wants to be the leader.
	But Rupert Lowe has never said this.
	He's never said, I want to be the leader.
	What he has done is shown leadership.
	That's what he's done.
	He's led from the front.
	He's gone and gone, no, I'm going to do this.
	I'm going to do that.
	And Farage perceives that as someone trying to steal the leadership from him.
	To be fair...
	Because he's refusing to get into it.
	To be fair to Farage's perspective, Farage is just standing there thinking, oh god, this guy's actually useful.
	Oh god, he does things.
	Oh god, I don't really do anything, actually, now that I think about it.
	Oh god, he might take my job if I keep being useless.
	Err, err, smear him.
	That is exactly what has happened, because every stage of Farage's career, he's been behind the curve, so someone else, if they get ahead of him, Stephen Wolf, Douglas Carswell, whoever it is, no, you're the problem.
	I've got to continue riding behind the wave rather than being at the crest of it.
	Ben Habib's so vindicated.
	Oh, absolutely.
	And then, is it about allegations?
	No, it's about, I'm afraid that he's going to be a better leader than I am.
	And honestly, at this point, anyone would be a better leader than you, Nigel.
	I do love the implication is that Farage just goes, oh my god, someone's more popular.
	Call the police!
	Anyway, this has been going on for quite a while, but just to summarize what has also happened, apparently Elon Musk is considering backing Rupert Lowe to form a rival party to Nigel Farage.
	Do it.
	Don't join the Tories, Rupert.
	The Tories, you'll get sucked in to the arcane machinery of the Tory party and they'll swallow you up and chew you out.
	You know what I mean, right?
	Don't do it.
	Form your own party.
	Do it right.
	Set the foundations down.
	Do something good and something amazing could come of it.
	We've got four years.
	That's a lot of time, man.
	And we will follow you into battle.
	Right, let's go through the comments quickly.
	I can't actually see them.
	I can, yeah.
	Crashprone.
	Good luck to your future endeavours, Connor.
	You may be succeeded, but you can't be replaced.
	I appreciate it.
	Big Camus fans over here.
	For $10, J.M. Denton.
	Islander arrived in Dallas in four business days.
	Despite the treacherous whims of our postmen, great style, no trace of modernity, could hang the pictures on my wall.
	Rory is an elegant artist.
	Genuinely, it's not just because we're trying to sell hard products to keep the lights on.
	You should buy it.
	It's a work of art.
	You've got to say this next one in a Jerry Seinfeld impression.
	I'm not very good at it.
	Please do it.
	Neither am I, actually.
	Well, you've set up the precedence.
	You have to do it.
	Nigel Farage?
	More like Nigel Farad.
	I like Dan's Farage the Mirage.
	Yeah.
	That's good, because that is genuinely a great summary of what Farage's been.
	He's just been this more, oh, eventually we'll get to Farage and he'll do something useful.
	No, he will never do anything useful.
	He's the problem.
	Yes.
	I can't read that name out, but just got my copy of Islander in the US, and Connor, I've enjoyed your work at Lotus Ears.
	Thank you, sir.
	Maybe name yourself something PG next time.
	SoberSaint for $5.
	Sorry to see you go, Connor.
	Good luck in your future endeavours.
	Yeah, I'll still be lurking around in other places, and we'll be...
	Trading notes back and forth, I'm sure.
	Revolution continues.
	Crash prone for $5.
	Any public inquiry into the grooming gangs would be a waste of time.
	Any such inquiry would not be legally binding, i.e.
	you cannot compel people to speak.
	You could with a national statutory inquiry, and bringing forward a private inquiry could increase the tension to then mandate a public inquiry.
	So it's useful to do in lieu of a straightaway national inquiry.
	And it's also just the right moral thing to do.
	Before we go on to the next one, Samson, could you go and turn the AC on, please?
	It's somehow switched itself off.
	It's getting quite hot in here now.
	So, just a quick thing there.
	No worries.
	$5.
	Dragon Lady Chris, I'm breaking out the liqueur I got for Christmas and will be raising a toast during the last Thompson Talks.
	Fare thee well, Connor.
	Thank you very much.
	Do send in your questions live.
	I will be answering them at the end of the show.
	Now...
	You alright, Samson?
	He's fine, he's fine.
	Wonderful.
	Well, just carry on, don't worry.
	Yeah, I was going to wait for Harry to stop his rendition at the Seinfeld.
	I've got it, it's stuck in my head.
	Okay, wonderful, keep it there.
	Brilliant.
	Right, since it's my last segment on LotusEaters.com, I thought I would keep up the tradition of being the bearer of bad news and say that all of the conspiracy theorists were vindicated.
	Turns out the entire South Court trial was cover-up.
	And it's been admitted by government officials now.
	So, here's Starmer.
	Yes, again.
	instantiating a two-tier standard of justice and completely betraying all of the bereaved families of those girls.
	And it just keeps getting worse.
	Before we continue, I would like to remind you that we do have Islander 3 on sale here because things are very demoralizing these days.
	And so we thought we'd dedicate a hard asset product to raising a critical consciousness of how we can restore our culture, our faith, our families, our aesthetics, and...
	People that have worked here have poured their heart and soul into it.
	It's beautiful, it's £14.99, and the distributor issues have been fixed, and people in the US have already got their copies, so if you order it, it should be shipped to you in due course.
	Now, moving on with the news.
	So, what we've got here, there was a trial the other day of a chap, very strange-looking, his name is Jordan Wilkes, and he was inspired by Axel Rudakabana to stab a nine-year-old girl in the neck while she was playing in the stairwell His apartment block.
	Yeah.
	Now, you're reacting like this, because it's appalling.
	Yes.
	That's because I've got two daughters.
	Yeah.
	This was August 2024, during the riots.
	Didn't even hear about it.
	No.
	So, other than the BBC doing some light reporting on the fact that he had done this, why were we not told about his inspirations?
	Because it's not like Axel Rudakabana, where he was 17 when he committed the crimes.
	Wilkes is 29. I'll get into why they've kept a lid on this, because it seems to be the sort of trend that I've been covering on my show and the podcast for a while, where the government sees its duty to manage the febrile social conditions of imported diversity by unilaterally disarming the native population any time that the diversity goes out and does something very predictable.
	His first victim was playing with a friend on the stairwell outside his flat in Christchurch in Dorset.
	Fuelled by thoughts of fulfilling a sick fantasy, and this is according to the Mirror reporting, he opened his door and stabbed the girl in the neck, shoulder, and knee with a penknife without saying anything.
	She and her friend managed to flee to the safety of another flat, but the wounds to the girl's shoulder and knee were so deep the bone could be seen.
	She's since been able to make a full recovery, mercifully.
	Wilkes was arrested by armed police who raided his flat a short time after the attack.
	They recovered a clump of the girl's hair that he cut as a trophy, or had actually ripped from her scalp in...
	in his attempt to try and hold her in place to keep stabbing her.
	Bournemouth Crown Court heard he had watched YouTube videos and podcasts on crimes involving the killing of children before stabbing the girl as she played outside his home in August.
	These included the killing of three girls at a dance class in Southport last year by second-generation Rwandan Axel Ridicabana, the murder of James Bulger, and several American high school massacres.
	Hours before the attack, he watched a video on someone called Aidan Fucci, who murdered a 13-year-old girl by stabbing her 114 times.
	Now, they're focusing on this reporting because it's the online...
	It's going to be the end of the true crime genre, isn't it?
	Yes, quite.
	He was found guilty and he's going to be sentenced in April, so keep your eyes out for that.
	But again, why did we not hear about this properly at the time?
	Why was it not broadcast while the riots were going on?
	Well, you know why.
	Yes.
	It's because it was a cover-up.
	And do you know who agrees with me?
	Jonathan Hall, KC, the head of the government's independent review of terror legislation.
	He himself has said that, quote, withholding information could have been far more prejudicial than just making the facts public.
	So he is saying Keir Starmer could have prejudiced the trial in Southport.
	By withholding information from the public.
	Which is precisely the reason he claimed that he withheld the information in the first place.
	Exactly.
	So legally speaking, he didn't have to do that, even though they keep appealing to the law.
	Hall wrote, quote, the failure by the authorities to spell out basic and sober facts about the attacker led to a contagious disinformation about a murderous Muslim asylum seeker.
	Well, he was the son of asylum seekers and question marks over his affinity for Islam.
	He certainly was obsessed with Muslim terror attacks, as we know, as Prevent Noon didn't step in.
	And a copy of an Al-Qaeda training manual, too.
	Yeah, and he was obsessed with the London Bridge attacks and the Manchester Arena bombing.
	I'm actually happy to say that he's not, as far as we can tell, a Muslim.
	I mean, he didn't, you know, go to the mosques.
	He didn't, you know, give zakat or whatever.
	There is the allegation that he was attending mosque while in Belmarsh prison.
	Right, okay.
	We don't know.
	But the fact that there's such an open question over it, I'm happy to say, okay, we'll put that to the side, right?
	Because...
	It doesn't necessarily have to be any part of the motivation or anything like that.
	It clearly has inspired him insofar as jihadist attacks have provided a template for it.
	So the idea that this was just all dangerous disinformation, one, not true, two, spread in lieu of actual information being put out by Keir Starmer who...
	He was in Southport for all of three seconds before he scarpered because he was heckled by the locals.
	And Hall said, I would go further.
	It led to dangerous fictions that could have been far more prejudicial to the prosecution of Rudacabana than some of the true facts which were suppressed in the name of contempt of court.
	Had there been a trial, jurors could have entered court with the impression that Rudacabana was a Muslim asylum seeker and, more toxically, that the authorities were determined to hush it up.
	Hall said it would have been far better for authorities to provide an accurate lead than ineffectual near silence.
	He wrote that the digital age meant that the current Contempt of Court Act passed in 1981. One, under Thatcher's government, needed examination.
	And he's not the only critic of Keir Starmer and his conduct during the Southport trials.
	The Times have conducted interviews with the families.
	Now, the families have complained because Keir Starmer's Attorney General, the same one who personally intervened to bring the case against Tommy Robinson and put him in prison, this Lord Hermer, the same one who oversaw the Chagos deal as well, just for our American viewers, he rejected calls for the Court of Appeal to review the length of Ruda Cabana's sentence because the parents feel it's not long enough because he could actually be let out of prison.
	Yeah.
	In his, what, early 70s?
	I mean, the fact that he's still alive is a crime against humanity, but anyway.
	Quite.
	So, the Times conducted a series of interviews with the Southport families, and I will spare some of the details, of course, because they detail here how they actually found their daughters.
	I can't even imagine.
	No, it's brutal.
	But I am going to read one detail, just so you can see what Keir Starmer and the Uniparty's policies put these families through, right?
	So, Alder Hay Hospital in Liverpool has a bereavement suite.
	That allows the families to spend time, and this is a baby King's family, before the funeral.
	We spent a week with her, and she was perfect.
	It was like she was asleep.
	She had her pyjamas on, there were nightlights, and it was like she was asleep.
	Even though it was hard for us at first, we now know, for us, it was the right thing to do.
	I held her hand, all the family came, we got her christened.
	We were supposed to get her christened age two, but we did it in the suite, and the whole family were there.
	Everyone could say their goodbyes the way they wanted to.
	On the last day, her mother and father did a final bedtime routine, read her Jack and the Beanstalk, and kissed her goodbye, and that's how we're going to remember her.
	None of the parents, as you can understand, have gone back to work yet.
	David and Jenny, Elsie's parents, have set up a charity which you can go and donate to.
	It's Elsie's Story.
	Starmer has announced a public inquiry, which the families support, but they, of course, are saying the prison sentence wasn't long enough and they've been basically shut out of the entire process and that Keir Starmer did not stay long enough to give his condolences.
	The Home Office have done a review on the failures of Prevent.
	Now, Prevent...
	For those who have been watching my show would know, has basically been ideologically captured by a 700-strong Muslim activist network in the Home Office, and have all but refused to monitor Islamic terrorism, but have instead been putting people like you, our viewers, on a far-right watchlist for reading Douglas Murray in 1984. Not exaggerating.
	Well, the review found this.
	The Prevent review of Axel Rudakabana contained spelling mistakes, which is why they had no follow-up.
	Because of a spelling mistake?
	Genuinely.
	Wait, how did that work?
	Like, the people that were running his case file were so incompetent that after the multiple referrals...
	Oh, they couldn't spell his name right or something like that.
	Right, oh my...
	God.
	Yes.
	The review concluded officers had prematurely dismissed the threat he posed on each of the three occasions he was flagged to prevent between December 2019 and April 2021. The police have missed chances to stop him because of spelling mistakes, prevent officers misspelled Rudy Cabana's name on his second and third referrals, which led to the premature closure of his case because officers weren't able to see his previous referrals on the system.
	We have ideologically bankrupt morons running everything, leading to the murder of children.
	Rudy Cabana's first name came to the attention of police in April 2019. Sorry, his name first came to the attention of police, where he would have been 12 after phoning the National Crime Agency to report bullying and saying he'd taken a knife into school.
	The account conflicts with the Lancashire Police's version of events, where they say their first interaction with Ruda Cabana came in October 2019, when he was 13, because he contacted Childline to make similar remarks, so he kept doing this.
	The National Crime Agency confirmed the Home Office inaccurately stated the agency had been in contact with Ruda Cabana directly, saying, the NCA became aware of information about Axel Ruda Cabana in October 2019, the information was shared with policing, and Ruda Cabana was visited by local officers.
	So, police, social workers, kept showing up to the home, he had been expelled from school for carrying a knife, for attacking...
	Students.
	He'd been referred to Prevent three times, and yet they dropped the ball, they kept misspelling his name, and ideological forces within the Home Office got a bit too uncomfortable with Rudakabana and other Islamic terrorists because it painted Islam in a bad light.
	And Prevent...
	We're also continuing the cover-up, because there are parallels with this to Abbie Harbie Ali.
	For those who don't know, that was the son of Somalian diplomats who murdered Sir David Amos MP in his constituency in Southend-on-Sea in late 2021. And his daughter, Katie Amos, has been fighting an absolute crusade at the expense of her entire private life to try and get, as well, a national inquiry into this.
	Because she's saying, hang on a minute, it's all well and good to say prevent drop the ball here, because Abbie Harbie Ali...
	Met with prevent officers once in a McDonald's in Croydon, and then they were like, nothing more to see here, like six months later.
	Where is the accountability?
	Why aren't people losing their jobs?
	I used to work in mobile phone complaints in a call centre, right, and we held ourselves to higher standards than this guff.
	These are the people that are running our government, using our money, allowing just the terrorists to roam free.
	Not one single person has been fired from this, have they?
	No.
	God damn it, man.
	I know.
	I know.
	It's like the rape gangs all over again.
	The people that administered local labour councils are now seniors in the Home Office.
	They're advisors to Yvette Cooper.
	The place that I was working at, we took contracts from different companies, and I won't name any of the companies, but one of the departments was doing such a bad job handling the complaints that the company pulled out of the contract.
	So, again, higher standards than what our government expects.
	There's actually some sort of consequence.
	There's a consequence to it.
	Yeah, so the first meeting took place for Abbie Habiali on the 6th of November 2014, and it was dropped with little to no follow-up, if you read the full Prevent review, which is available on the government website, on the 5th of June 2015, six years before he stabbed David Amos.
	To death.
	Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has denied Katie Amos' request to have a national inquiry, and it's because, one, it will turn over too many stones at the Home Office, showing just how deep the rot has gone with Muslim activists there.
	That's why we want the inquiry.
	Yes, but they don't want the inquiry, because what would that put off?
	The Muslim vote.
	The thing is, it'd also make Labour basically culpable for all of this.
	Yeah.
	And the Conservatives.
	At this point, I'd be happy if they would be willing to split the Muslim vote, get them to go all to their own ethnic and sectarian religious parties.
	They would do anyway.
	It's going to happen.
	They're going to do it, so why not do it sooner rather than later?
	If only because to the...
	Idiot Lib Dem voter who still doesn't see the problem.
	Seeing that there are just active parties who are campaigning purely against your interests in favour of their own might be a little bit of a wake-up call and maybe parties like Labour and even Reform will stop having to feel the need to bow down to these people.
	The existence of George Galloway should have been enough of that example, but no, okay, we're going to have to have the Muslim Party.
	Well, there are now...
	Sectarian pro-Gaza MPs, thanks to Rupelo's exile, on parity with Reform MPs.
	There's four of each.
	So, as much as Reform want to be a beachhead in Parliament, you are...
	You count Jeremy Corbyn amongst those?
	You can do, but he's not actually, like, practicing.
	If you do, they outnumber him.
	We know.
	He's not actually a practicing.
	He's part of the Independent Alliance.
	I know.
	Technically, they outnumber him.
	You're right.
	I know, yeah.
	So, Yvette Cooper...
	Denied this.
	Katie called the investigation to prevent failures has already been taken place.
	Another useless paper review conducted by a person of their choice.
	She's taking legal action against Essex police in the Home Office and she has already, as well, suggested she might have to do it against the Conservative Party because all of David's so-called friends and colleagues got up after his murder and acted as if a tweet had killed him.
	As Marc Francois said, we need David's law to crack down on online speech.
	and ever since when she's interacted with the Home Office or the Conservative Party, she has said that she was told, if you don't like what we've done, sue us.
	Contemptable treatment of this woman.
	I'm going to play a short clip of her just at the press conference, just so you can see, again, exactly what the government has put these families through.
	There are no words to describe the unbelievable pain of losing a father in such a brutal and a senseless way.
	From the moment that I woke up on October the 15th, 2021...
	My whole world was shattered beyond repair.
	My father, Sir David Amos, was not just a public servant.
	He was my protector, my guide, my greatest champion, and above all, my friend.
	Take your time.
	Right, I'm just going to stop there because, yet again.
	This is what they're putting these people through just to protect their own little ethnic and religious fiefdoms, right?
	Also, just to remind you all, when David's colleagues were recently asked about this, this was Mike Freer, I think it was late last year, he was asked on Julia Hartley Brewer's show after his constituency office had been firebombed by pro-Gaza protesters, he said, well, we actually don't know the motivation of David Amos' killer.
	Oh, don't we?
	Yeah, no, he said he did it because David Amos had voted to intervene in Syria and Libya.
	Yeah.
	I was going to say, I thought we actually did know exactly.
	Yeah, we do, yeah.
	No, what they don't want to do is say it out loud.
	So, all the political class, again, abject traitors.
	Now, the government could just stop importing jihadists.
	They could stop importing Islamist sectarians.
	They could stop all of this tomorrow.
	Instead, Keir Starmer's changing the law, and it's not going to class Ruda Cabana as a terrorist.
	I don't mean to laugh, but, like, this is...
	Oh, my God, it's...
	Yeah.
	It's just like a bad joke.
	Instead, what they're doing is they're purposefully freeing up extra prison cells in case there's another riot.
	Oh, well, there we go.
	I mean...
	Because they realise that they are gerrymandering the demographics, which then exerts democratic pressure in favour of those sectarian Islamist MPs, but also that there's going to be sort of...
	Ethno-religious vigilante gangs fighting in the streets any time one of the diversity does what is predictable and stabs a bunch of children, again, in a copycat attack.
	And you would just think, okay, we'll just change course so this doesn't happen, but they're like, no, the course is locked in, we're definitely having this, so we're going to need more prisons.
	Yes, and we know that this is the strategy.
	This is not a conspiracy theory, and one, conspiracy theories keep being prudent and true, but we know this is the case because...
	I don't know if you've seen this.
	David Betts is an academic at King's College London.
	He's an expert in urban warfare and how civil wars break out, particularly between urban and rural areas along political, theological and ethnic lines.
	And he spoke to Louise Perry, my episode's actually out today, following on from this, talking about how the Home Office are using gaslighting tactics to prevent this from happening.
	So it's a sequel episode.
	He has said that Britain is basically on track, on rails for a civil war and nothing's going to avert it because the government is not listening.
	And so they know this, and so what's their strategy?
	Well, he also spoke to Peter Whittle of the New Culture Forum, and I decided to do a little write-up of this on the Substack because of all the work that I've written for Lotus Eaters on Thomson Talks.
	kind of feeds into this but basically Raikou Keir Starmer the Labour government Prevent all of this exists to unilaterally disarm the native British population as the narrative of what David Betts calls downgrading takes effect as in you are conscious of the fact that we are discriminated against in law in culture in immigration policy that we have voted against in every election and referendum since 1974 and so what the government is doing is basically telling you at all times don't look back in anger while we're still going to do this
	So, sorry to put a depressing end to my time presenting at the Lotus Ears, but this is what I want the...
	It's fitting.
	This is what I want everyone to keep in mind, is that basically the government is waging a form of psychological warfare on us, they know what they're doing, it is very much a cover-up, and do not be gaslit out of wanting to defend what you love.
	Right, a couple more rumble rants.
	Sorry, James.
	I still can't see him, sorry.
	Okay.
	I'll go through.
	The engaged few watching Carl's face kind of reads about that.
	I really want to hand Carl a sharp axe.
	To do woodcutting with, I assume.
	Johans Schugenboom says, Harry, I'm sorry to hear Stelios was bullying you.
	Currently we've got an HR inquiry about it.
	There's going to be consequences.
	I had to pull him off of the coat-hanging peg as we came in because he was wedgied just hanging like it.
	It's true.
	It's impressive how such a small man, like this big maybe, can cause so much damage.
	Markabic says, The situation is.
	Without you, Lotus Eaters, Connor, and very few others, this would not see the light of day, and yet it is still a symptom of the general population.
	Thank you for everything.
	Well, we try our best to keep everyone informed here, and we live by our consciences, if nothing else.
	Harry?
	Yes.
	Alright, now for something completely different, something that I hope is going to be a little bit less depressing in the here and now, but possibly controversial, so I'm going to try and avoid stepping on any third rails.
	Oh lord.
	I will.
	I will avoid it.
	Do not worry, gentlemen.
	I'm going to be very reasonable with all this.
	And I'm going to be talking about the Dr. Evil theory of history, its proponents, and the historians who are the proponents in their attempts to gatekeep new historians who are trying to put forward a more contextualized and less black-and-white nuanced version of history.
	Because Daryl Cooper...
	Otherwise known as MarthaMade, is going to be making an appearance on the Joe Rogan podcast very, very soon, which I'm very interested to watch.
	I'm sensing that Twitter, after it, will be full of clips of him saying things that are intentionally provocative that might sound a bit mad to some people because he's obviously doing it on purpose to get some...
	Yeah, so get some notoriety.
	But I think what we're seeing at the moment, outside of the controversy that will be generated by this, because of course there was the controversy when he did a Tucker Carlson interview at the end of last year, which I'm going to refer back to, is that...
	We are facing a paradigm shift at the moment in the way that people are examining the Second World War.
	Whereas previously, and you expect this with every great conflict that erupts, each side has a great incentive to portray the other side as the utter barbarians, no nuance, the most evil people who've ever existed.
	They're Dr. Evil.
	They're crazy and evil just for the sake of it.
	We see it even today with the way that in 2022 Putin was portrayed following the initiation.
	But as time passes, people tend to become more detached from that initial hysteria, from the initial portrayal of that, and they look at things in a more objective and greater context, and they're able to put the pieces in place.
	Some refer to this as revisionism, some use it like a dirty word, but if you go back to the early 20th century, even 10-15 years after the end of the First World War, you had people People turning around and saying, listen, the Germans were not the most evil people to ever exist.
	Here's the greater context that started the chain of events that did that.
	The Second World War's had a bit of a longer-lasting legacy than the First World War in that, but we're starting to see people like Daryl Cooper, who are not, as the smears are saying, coming out and acting as apologists for Nazi or Soviet crimes or any crimes that were committed under the Second World War, but who are trying to put it into a broader context and elucidate it for people who've only had the black and white version of the story thus far.
	I will say it is pretty black and white to say that Winston Churchill was the greatest villain of the second world.
	Oh yeah, I disagree with him on that.
	And that was very clearly him just trying to be naughty and a bit of an edgelord so that he could get some controversy going.
	But again, I mean, even in the initial Tucker Carlson interview, he stated outright that he was trying to be provocative.
	And he's done a lot of trolling on Twitter as well.
	Again, because...
	No publicity.
	Any publicity is good publicity, right?
	May I have this mouse?
	Oh yes, sorry.
	But what isn't controversial is Islander Magazine, which is a wonderful magazine full of lots of very uncontroversial figures like Carl Benjamin, Dr. Nima Parvini, Morgoth's Review, and many more.
	Connor Tomlinson, you've never had a controversy, have you, Connor?
	Ask Hope Not Hate?
	No, I don't think so.
	I don't think so.
	I think we're all very, very clean.
	Weirdly, it's their greatest hits, though, isn't it?
	Yes.
	We looked at Hope Not Hate's state of hate and thought, right, we need that guy.
	Yeah, there you go.
	And I got my first mention, so get in there, boyos.
	It's like a right-wing phone book.
	Yeah, it is.
	But you can buy that on the website for $14.99.
	It is a limited run, so you can get them while they're still going.
	They won't be available forever.
	We also have the Islander 3 merch line that's now available, like this wonderful winter sports t-shirt.
	Again.
	The designs on these are absolutely wonderful, so pick them up while you still can.
	And for our Redditors in the audience, they now go up to a size that will fit.
	I don't know how you got onto this video, perhaps you misclicked somewhere, but, you know, if you're interested...
	Grab a t-shirt anyway.
	Yeah, grab a t-shirt!
	I mean, you don't need to say that it was from an evil right-wing podcast, it just looks cool, right?
	So, Joe Rogan himself has actually courted a bit of controversy even prior to Martha Mage showing up on his, well, making his appearance very, very soon, which was that he had this gentleman appear on his podcast.
	Now, I've actually referred to this guy, Ian Carroll, before when the whole Diddy controversy was going around, because he was sharing a lot of videos that were actually quite interesting in terms of, like, the behind-the-scenes connections that Diddy had, and trying to trace everything.
	I have not watched this episode.
	I do not know what he said on it, so I cannot support or back up any of the claims.
	He's very anti-Israel?
	I know that.
	I know that for a fact.
	He did get a condemnation from the ADL, though.
	So, we're not particularly surprised about that, and we can be sure that there will probably be another condemnation from the ADL following this.
	So, again, Marta made, he's made a recent appearance on Aura McIntyre, who I consider a friend, he's a friend of the show, and he's announced in this that he's a quick update, got a wedding to attend this weekend, and from there I'm going to Austin to do the Joe Rogan experience.
	Far as I know...
	This is the first appearance that he will make, and I'm sure it'll be a very, very interesting conversation.
	And this is presumably in support of the fact that he is doing this new series, because if you've not watched Martha Made, he's a very, very interesting history podcaster.
	He's got his substat where he also writes articles as well.
	Sometimes he'll turn those into podcasts.
	He's done a very, very, very long and in-depth series.
	The first one he did...
	On the Israel-Palestine conflict, tracing it back to the 19th century, the onset of Zionism, and trying very very hard to look at it straight down the middle and empathize.
	With both sides.
	It's one of his greatest strengths, to be honest.
	And it's very, very interesting.
	I've listened to the first two episodes of it thus far.
	It's very, very comprehensive.
	He's done a series on things like the Jim Jones massacre.
	He's done a series that I also listened to on the Epstein allegations.
	Lots of good stuff.
	But this latest one is he's diving into the Second World War.
	And he's trying to look at it again from a down-the-middle...
	I see why he's become a cropper here.
	Yeah, trying to present the Germans not as cartoon Hollywood villains, whether or not you agree with the actions that they took, but trying to examine them as real people who existed in a real time and place with greater context.
	and you can also take a look at the way that their war aims were interacting with other people's war aims because I've been doing a lot of research recently into the second world war myself and we'll be referring to a little bit of that if we have time as we go on but the thing that I've come to the conclusion of was that
	world war ii was basically the Americans seeing Europe destroying itself for the second time in a row within 20 years and deciding fantastic we'll carve you up with the Russians.
	Right, it was a reverse of the Monroe Doctrine.
	Just before you get taken out of context by ill-motivated actors, yes, of course, we disagree with what the Germans did in World War II. I hate the fact that you always have to, but I appreciate what you're trying to do there.
	I know I'll be called a hall monitor, but...
	No, no, no, I think that's fair.
	For anyone who's wondering, we side with the British.
	Yes.
	Because we're the British.
	Also because we lost, as I will explain as this goes further.
	We side with ourselves?
	We were on the side of the people who won.
	But we ourselves lost.
	There's a reason that we're not a great power in the world anymore.
	There's a reason that our greatest bragging rights on the world stage is that we were number two soft power and we have no empire anymore and all of the members of the Commonwealth are flooding into our country in record numbers and lots of other strangers from foreign lands as well.
	So, of course, this immediately gets taken and people take to Twitter because he put out a trailer for it where he just was like, Let's make this look cool.
	So I've never watched or listened to any of this stuff.
	It's nothing that you wouldn't see on the History Channel.
	Yeah, but he's saying he's an open Holocaust denier.
	Is he a Holocaust denier?
	No.
	Right.
	As you can imagine, for a man who did a 30-hour series...
	On the 19th century to 1947, Israel and Palestine.
	He covered a lot of stuff in the Second World War in that series, including the pogroms and the Holocaust itself.
	He had an enormous half an hour segment in one on the...
	I think he did it on the Ukrainian massacre of...
	I think it was...
	30,000 to 50,000 Jews in Babi Yar where they were just lined up against a massive pit and shot.
	So what that is, and we're all familiar with this, is them taking a very small clip from his interview with Tucker and taking it completely out of context.
	Now what he said...
	In the clip is that the Germans initiated a new front of the war, the second front, with the Russians, expecting it to be a short war, not expecting to have to deal with winter conditions, took on far more prisoners of war than they expected that they would have to, and had no infrastructure and no food to give them, which led to ridiculous levels of deaths in the prisoner of war camps.
	This is all true, and can in fact be verified by books like this.
	Stalin's War by Sean McMeekin, an expert on the Russian side of the early 20th century.
	The Holocaust denier, perhaps.
	Published by Penguin.
	As most Holocaust denial is.
	Came out in 2023, I believe.
	And people are saying, well, he was just diminishing the Holocaust.
	He didn't mention anything to do with the extermination camps, which were all in Poland.
	There was actually dozens of prisoner of war camps dotted all across the Eastern Front, which I don't think people know, but the...
	The Baltics on the north, all the way to the bottom of the Balkans, is actually a massive, massive front to do a lot of fighting on.
	So, again, there were plenty of prisoner of war camps.
	This is true.
	In this, Sean McMeekin discusses how I think the camp death rate for the prisoner of war camps, without talking about the extermination camps like Soberborg, Treblinka, Auschwitz, Maginek, was 57.5%.
	Now, when discussing this, Daryl Cooper said, obviously that's a crime.
	That's a crime.
	They did not prepare properly for it, but they should have known that if you're going against Russia, you're going to have to deal with these kinds of contingencies, and it's still something that they are guilty of.
	Millions of people died in these camps.
	It's one of those things, I remember years ago, I'm not a...
	Second World War Scholar, but I remember watching a documentary or something where they were saying that in Ukraine, lone German officers would go to Ukrainian villages and stuff and just have prisoners of war at a big trail just willingly walking behind them.
	Because of course they were thinking, oh great, the Germans had to liberate us from the Soviets.
	So they would end up with tens of thousands of people that, like you said, they're not prepared for.
	And it's like, yeah, okay, it's irresponsible and it's bad.
	And again, Daryl Cooper is not...
	Supporting the actions of the Germans in saying that, nor is he denying the Holocaust.
	It's just a smear.
	It's just a completely out-of-context smear.
	One of the other interesting things about this is, though, because of how much the Soviet subjects hated the Soviet government, despite all of that, 1.5 million Soviet subjects, including 800,000 ethnic Russians, still defected.
	Which is very, very interesting.
	But one of the other things that came out was that recently, the other day, Neil Ferguson, who was part of the original controversy, decided to jump in on this and call him a nasty little Nazi apologist who's won an audience of millions.
	That is apparently what happens when podcasts drive out books and anti-history drives out history.
	And this seems to be something that he's trying to coin, this idea of...
	Anti-history.
	What is the definition of anti-history versus history?
	Well, I'll show you in a few minutes when we get to the article that he wrote.
	Constantine also came out in an argument with Dave Smith, which was...
	Quite funny, I really like Dave Smith.
	Constantine's not my biggest fan, but he also took a very dishonest tack with this, where he said that in the interview with Tucker, he said Churchill was the chief villain of World War II, not Hitler.
	Again, I disagree with that statement.
	He did say that, but then he goes on, and then also said that being genuinely right-wing has been made illegal in Europe when the only political parties banned in Europe are Nazis.
	Interesting.
	Now, Konstantin, you know you're being disingenuous when you say that because Nazi is a term that has been applied to...
	Basically everybody who is remotely right-wing at this point, and in Germany right now, back in 2021, the government decided that they could spy on the AFD, and recently tried to hold a vote to ban them for being too right-wing.
	There were 116 lawmakers from other parties that tried to create what they call a firewall around the AFD, and according to the anti-Nazi clauses of the Constitution, tried to ban them.
	Now, if you're looking for a candidate for the reincarnation of Adolf Hitler...
	A lesbian who believes in free markets whose girlfriend is a Sri Mankin immigrant is probably not the best one to pick.
	The AFD is just a patriotic liberal party.
	They are a populist party, which in Europe is sometimes used as a synonym for Nazi, as anything remotely populist and right-wing is.
	So I think that's a very, very dishonest framing of the argument right there, and Konstantin should know better.
	I just think, you know, him trolling with the picture of Hitler in Paris saying he'd be better than the drag queens and stuff like this, yeah, that's not...
	Yeah, that's not good.
	And that's just the troll, again.
	The troll muddies the waters.
	If he wants to stay clear, it's not a good idea.
	But there is a big difference between the output that he puts on Twitter versus the stuff that he puts on his podcast.
	He's responsible for both.
	Yeah, exactly.
	I don't think there's a holocaust now, but he's definitely not helping his case here.
	No, of course not.
	And he does some trolling on his Instagram as well, which people like to get hold of.
	But this next part is where he says, Again, straight away...
	One of the big arguments for people we're taking out of context is from this recent book published by Penguin.
	Many of his other arguments can be found in other books like this one, The New Dealers War, published by Basic Books, who amongst others publish Thomas Sowell, and other centre-right thinkers and historians.
	And this guy, Thomas Fleming, has appeared on CNN and PBS. He's a very, very safe historian.
	And the interesting thing about using the Irving accusation is that...
	Daryl did post a load of the books that he'd been reading to research this, and yet Irving was included in that.
	But do you know who does also cite David Irving in their books on history?
	So you've got Max Hastings.
	It's not Neil Ferguson, is it?
	I wanted to try and look through a few of his bibliographies, but I didn't have any of his books on World War II. Maybe, though.
	So Max Hastings.
	Ian Kershaw cites him a lot in his Hitler biography, which is a massive two-volume set, and also Andrew Roberts.
	Why do they cite them?
	Well, they're included in the bibliography, and I would assume that they're citing him because of the fact that he did a lot of the primary archival research.
	I don't know if you know.
	Are they challenging him in his assertions?
	Or are they just citing him and saying, Andrew Roberts is a just normal biography of Churchill.
	I don't believe he's actually responding to other historians' arguments within the actual biography.
	Right, so we don't...
	I mean, Max Hastings, for instance, he cites him in Bomber Command, which is talking about the Bomber Command during the Second World War, and just cites a lot of Destruction of Dresden, which was his initial book, where it came out.
	The issue that they have is that if Irving is the primary researcher for a particular topic, well, you've got nowhere else to go to if he's the guy who went through all the archives, read them all, documented it.
	I mean, Destruction of Dresden was written in collaboration with Bomber Harris.
	In the 1960s.
	So he did a lot of this.
	But what I dislike is the gatekeeping aspect of this.
	Obviously, Irving said some out there stuff, which people vehemently disagree with.
	The Deborah Lipstadt Irving trial went terribly for him and his name has been in the mud ever since then.
	But, apparently, there's a gatekeeping aspect to who's allowed to cite his work or not.
	And Daryl...
	And we've not really got to the part of his series yet where he addresses any arguments that Irving may or may not have been making, is being smeared through association.
	He's been tarred through association, whereas again, the arguments that he actually made on Tucker Carlson can be verified and found in books like this, books like this, and plenty of other mainstream books, including Andrew Roberts' book himself.
	So I just found that a little bit...
	Disingenuous.
	It does depend on the context as to whether...
	Because I haven't read Robert's book on Churchill.
	It depends on the context as to whether or not he's stating him as saying, here's where I lift this fact about Churchill from, versus this is what David Irving says, and is that incorrect?
	We don't actually know why he cited him.
	That's my only...
	that people will trip you up on, basically.
	That's fair, but having read a bit of Andrew Robert's biography, it's not a biography in which he seems to be trying to...
	Address other people's arguments.
	It's just, here is Churchill's life.
	And Irving did his biographies on the war part of Churchill's life during the Second World War.
	So, for many people, because he did a lot of primary research, they are useful resources still, whether or not you want to come to the same conclusions as him.
	Again, the Tucker Carlson interview was the thing that made all of this blow up all the way back in September.
	September?
	I believe it was.
	And one of the first things that happened was, out of nowhere, you get all the worst people in the world spring into action to get a load of people like Neil Ferguson, like Andrew Roberts, to immediately begin telling them how naughty he's being in what I can only describe as Soviet-style denunciations.
	Like you had...
	Andrew Roberts appearing on Fraser Nelson.
	Our best friend, Fraser Nelson.
	You had him appearing on Piers Morgan as well.
	Andrew Roberts himself wrote this article here, saying that no, Churchill was not the villain.
	Again, I actually agree with this.
	I actually agree with this.
	I do not agree with his statement that Churchill was the villain.
	Again, reading these two books here, when you get to issues like the Tehran Conference...
	I can't help but feel bad for Churchill, because he was completely sidelined by Roosevelt and Stalin, who immediately began plotting together on how they were going to dismantle the British Empire and carve up Europe for themselves in spheres of influence once the war was over.
	So I can't see Churchill as the bad guy in that, especially because, honestly, when it came to things like covering up the Kachin massacre...
	Which was an atrocity committed by the Soviets once they'd partitioned Eastern Poland alongside the Polish officers.
	Yeah, the 10,000 Polish officers who had been shot.
	So the Germans notified the Red Cross that they'd found these corpses.
	Then the Polish government in exile in London said that they wanted an inquiry to find out who did it.
	Everybody knew that it was the Soviets.
	The Soviets said, no, no, it was the Germans.
	Who cares that all of these corpses are way too old for it to have been the Germans to do this?
	Churchill was the one guy who was actually saying, no, we need to put this inquiry in and we need to find out what's going on.
	Because he understandably was a bit uncomfortable about potentially being aligned with people who just brutally massacre for no reason.
	It was the Americans who shut it down.
	The Americans in collaboration with the Soviets.
	For all his faults, there are a number of times where Churchill was acting as the most moral person in the conflict.
	So when this all kicked off, I wrote a piece for Courage that basically said, yes, Britain lost World War II in as far as it's entangled in international legal agreements that impair our ability to deport foreign rapists.
	But Churchill would not have wanted that, and that's why he designed it that way.
	And I found it interesting that the likes of...
	Oral McIntyre, mutual friend, but also Constantine Kissin agreed with that.
	And I think that's why Daryl Cooper has elicited such a bad reaction.
	It's not just the moral taboo around World War II. It is the stating that Churchill is the key villain, and Churchill's actions have led to Britain being what it is now, when if you transported him through time, the same people that call us Nazis would also call him a Nazi.
	I just don't think Churchill was in control of what was happening.
	That's the thing.
	Oh no, I've got plenty of references for that.
	Sadly, and again...
	So he can't be the primary villain because he's not the primary agent of anything that's happening.
	Well, just in raw bodies as well.
	It's Stalin.
	Well, yeah, but obviously, but like, it just feels that things were happening around that he was trying to hold back the tide of history, essentially, and he couldn't do it, obviously.
	I'll just go through some examples of that, and then we can move on.
	So the Tehran Conference, so they get there.
	The first thing that happens is Stalin...
	Gives this cover story that, oh, we're about to be assassinated, so you're all going to have to stay at my compound instead.
	Doesn't extend that to Churchill, who apparently, if there was an assassination plot, he doesn't care if he gets shot.
	The Iranian government said there's nothing like that.
	He just wanted to get Roosevelt in the same compound as him so he could bug his rooms and listen into everything that they were saying.
	Goes to have a meeting with Roosevelt without Churchill being involved, and immediately starts to plot how they...
	Well, no, actually, no, it's not Stalin that does this.
	Roosevelt offers to him the opportunity, and I've got it here, let me see, I posted this the other day, just saying that, you know, why don't we carve up India together?
	I know Britain owns India right now.
	They're in charge of India.
	Take it, please.
	He says, explaining that he thought that it was better to not discuss the question of India with Mr. Churchill, Roosevelt proposed that the United States and USSR work together to reform British India from the bottom, somewhat on the Soviet line.
	Incredible how the American president can be so pro-Soviet.
	Well, yes, it is incredible, until you realize that people like Harry Hopkins, who was one of his...
	Basically, his right-hand man, who spent a lot of time in Russia, was actively trying to purge the Roosevelt administration of anti-Soviet elements that was determined entirely by him, whether you were anti-Soviet or not.
	So that's from Stalin's war.
	In the New Dealers' war, it actually goes a bit further than that, because he mentions that, and then he also says that they were basically planning on carving up French Indochina as well, and wanted to make sure that France was not an independent country.
	Afterwards.
	Again, it seems to me that in the conflict, America saw an opportunity with Europe tearing itself apart and said, we can become the global superpower with Europe and particularly the British Empire out of the way.
	That's why with Lend-Lease we got, what, 50 run-down war destroyers from the First World War.
	That we had to pay back.
	That we had to pay back.
	and Russia, happily, managed to get a lend-lease, but all brand new stuff.
	We sent them stuff in Britain and got it for free.
	Well, they got...
	Sorry, actually, no.
	They got a $1 billion credit line and then they used up that $1 billion credit line and then Roosevelt said, here's another billion dollars for free.
	Don't worry about it.
	Pay us back whenever you want.
	So clearly, the place that Churchill occupies in Daryl Cooper's mind is fulfilled by Roosevelt.
	Certainly from the British perspective.
	Yeah, so he's just got the wrong man.
	Yeah.
	I mean, I believe...
	You can feel just how outmaneuvered Churchill is in all of this, right?
	Like, he obviously, if it was up to Churchill, none of these decisions were being made.
	But obviously, Churchill is not responsible for any of these.
	He's been completely sidelined and gone around.
	Yeah, so, I mean, Roosevelt in particular seems to have been...
	Ridiculously friendly to the Soviet administration.
	Thomas Fleming says here, in FDR's political cosmology, Russia was exempted from the negative judgments of the old world.
	Which the New World was morally superior to, yeah.
	Like the United States, she wasn't part of Europe.
	Ever since his recognition of the Soviet Union in 1933, he'd envisioned a Russian-American entente as the answer to the fratricidal tendencies of Europe's great powers.
	Furthermore, Cordell Hull, who was the Secretary of State underneath Roosevelt, gave a speech to the Congress in 1943, right before Tehran.
	Characterizing the communists as being, like your country cousins, come to town.
	They're a little slow, but well worthwhile.
	He saw no barriers whatsoever to future Soviet-American cooperation.
	They killed millions of people.
	They'd already killed millions of people.
	Yeah, ten years prior to that, and they knew.
	The Kachin massacre had already happened, and they knew.
	And to give another example of Churchill actually...
	Being the most moral person in the room.
	So on the second to last night of the conference, Stalin was hosting a dinner and started joking about, well, joking, about how following the end of the war they would just indiscriminately shoot 50,000 or 100,000 members of the German army, of their officer class.
	Churchill...
	It says, exploded and cried that the British people had always been opposed to, and always would be opposed, to mass vengeance.
	Stalin insisted that at least 50,000 needed to be shot.
	Churchill then said, I would rather be taken out into the garden here and now and be shot myself than sully my own and my country's honour by such infamy.
	Prime Minister was obviously aware that he was dealing with the man who had massacred 10,000 Polish officers in the Kachin Forest.
	Roosevelt's reaction alarmed Churchill even more.
	The President suggested a compromise.
	Shoot 49,000 instead.
	I mean, FDR really was just a commie, wasn't he?
	Yeah.
	I'm with Curtis Yarvin on this.
	It's a great argument that's made in, again, Stalin's war, because he goes through some of the earlier parts of FDR's administration with the New Deal, where he points out, well, he has the New Deal...
	Opens up all of these new government departments that immediately get filled with communist infiltrators and spies.
	Anyway.
	But anyway, again, you can disagree with Daryl Cooper.
	I think that the historical gatekeeping on certain subjects is unnecessary.
	I think it's a sign that these people are afraid that their conception of history is being challenged.
	And I think, I can hope that given some of the examples that I've given today, that you can see that it was not as black and white given the internal dynamics, even within the I mean, the soldier on the ground probably did, but the higher-ups in the American administration, in the Soviet administration, did not truly believe that they were fighting a war for good, they were fighting a war for power.
	You definitely made Churchill look a lot more sympathetic.
	I was reading through some of the stuff and going like, oh god, I feel bad for him.
	I can totally understand why Churchill reacts this way.
	I feel really bad for him, but I'm very interested to see what's going to happen with this Martha Maid interview with Joe Rogan.
	I imagine over the course of...
	Three to four to five hours.
	They're probably going to get into the subject of that, and perhaps he'll be able to better acquit himself over a longer format where they're going to hone down on it.
	Either way, I think his series is excellent, and I listened to the first episode, the prologue, this morning.
	Difficult stuff.
	Difficult stuff, but not a sympathizer, not apologizing for anything that the Nazis did crime-wise.
	Okay, on to the video comments, then.
	Good morning, Lotus Eaters.
	Welcome to Eastern Washington.
	Turn up, please.
	Good morning, Lotus Eaters.
	Welcome to Eastern Washington.
	Over here, the weather's either sunny or windy, and the people tend to be more based.
	While over here runs a business, I decide to go for a quick hike up the Lower Clemens Loop right outside of town.
	I didn't have enough time to do the upper loop, unfortunately.
	The hike up was easy enough, the hike down not so much.
	There were tons of animals in the area, though a bit too far away for decent pictures.
	Great views of Mount Rainier and Mount Adams as well.
	Hope you guys are having a great week so far.
	Looks wonderful, I'm very envious.
	Yeah, my week's going great, thank you.
	What's the next one?
	Physionomy and ego.
	The similarities between Farage and this woman are uncanny.
	I need you to understand.
	To me you're simply a peasant.
	I don't want to hold your hand.
	For I'm a grown-ass woman.
	Because of your tiny little brain.
	I know it's hard to comprehend.
	I have to woman's plan for you to understand.
	But that's fine and I'll do it again.
	Why did you subject me to that?
	I've got cancer now.
	Yeah, I've never heard of this person, thank god.
	Next, please.
	So this is the new Severus Snape, huh?
	Yep.
	I guess Lily chose James so her son would have a father.
	Dumbledore said you're clearly the one that most qualified for the job, but I'm going with this guy.
	So this is Neville's greatest fear.
	As a white, attractive woman, I understand.
	He killed a lot of people when he was young, but that is just what his kind of people does.
	And killing the old white man that wouldn't give him the job he was clearly qualified for is just justified.
	And finally, gotta show my progress with the drawings.
	I think this is really good.
	Yeah, that's great, actually.
	Again, complete inability to suspend disbelief looking at that.
	That's not Snape.
	It's not.
	Yeah, but it's not Snape on purpose.
	Yeah, of course.
	It's not Snape because you liked Harry Potter, and so F you.
	I mean, I was even indifferent to it, but it's just...
	Someone pointed out, I don't even like Adam Driver.
	They've got...
	Oh, dear Lord.
	We've got Adam Driver walking around as basically Alan Rickman's clone, and you didn't choose him.
	It's a good point, actually.
	I'd not considered the similarity between the two of them.
	Yeah.
	Oh, my lockdown hair.
	Why did you do that?
	I've heard it said that people are coming to our lives for losers.
	In my marketing brain, I used to be a suffering guy and I was like, Ken?
	Ken is all right.
	The, uh, Roasty, the Roasty Redemption Mafia.
	Um, even at a pub now, isn't it off the bar and all that?
	No, they have a lot of QR codes that they've got on their table.
	Good news, guys.
	AIDS is up.
	Woo!
	Yeah, there you go.
	Yes, it is.
	No, no, no, no, no.
	This is my second show this morning.
	So the other one you watched the last time.
	So you weren't looking at the civilisation, even on the civilised streets.
	But I think that that's more just mud.
	I know I'm with who I am today because I knew you.
	Aw, that's nice, isn't it?
	Appreciate it.
	Well, you have done a lot of good work for us, man.
	We are going to miss you.
	Cheers.
	Well, I wouldn't...
	It's not that we're not going to see you again or anything like that, but, you know...
	Yeah, I'm dying.
	Thanks.
	I was going to say, you know, we will see him in the future.
	It's fine.
	I've been seeing a lot of remarks about...
	You're faraging me.
	Sorry.
	Oh, no.
	Sorry, Karen.
	I've been seeing a lot of remarks about guillotining Elon Musk, and the guillotine has been a leftist symbol for a while.
	I say we need to reassert a symbol of our own, and why not the humble flame?
	It's been used not only to represent liberalism and enlightenment, but like the guillotine, it's also a means to offer enemies.
	We've used it to burn witches, we've used it to burn communists, communists have used it to burn communists, and so on.
	Greek fire developed in the homeland of democracy, and its successor, Napalm, was used to defend Greek liberty from communist aggressors.
	So the next time you see the left making aggressive references to their choppy-chop symbol, let them know that if they hate Elon Musk and electrical vehicles so much, they're welcome to convert to biofuel.
	I only see one big problem with this, is that people will refer back to the tiki torches.
	Oh yeah, yeah.
	And also the...
	And also the fascis as well, kind of similar.
	And the Statue of Liberty to say, would you like infinity immigrants?
	Here's this part.
	Although I like the sentiment, though.
	Pelling argument, nonetheless.
	On with the next one.
	Rayon, otherwise known as viscose, is a man-made fabric with highly desirable properties.
	It wicks sweat, dries quickly, and does not hold a static charge.
	It's made by breaking down cellulose with extremely harsh chemicals and re-polymerizing it.
	Clothing or bedding marked as bamboo is rayon.
	Be careful when business evangelists talk about promoting nature-based solutions and naturally derived ingredients.
	My name is Nicole Schwab.
	I'm the co-director of the platform to accelerate nature-based solutions at the World Economic Forum.
	What they actually mean is man-made, but using plants instead of oil.
	Agricultural land is being bought for resources, not food.
	Like cotton.
	I suppose wool's animal rather than plant, but like...
	So wool's really uncomfortable.
	Yeah, I like wool.
	Cotton's way nicer.
	I have to have cotton and everything.
	Yeah, fair, but...
	Anyway, on the next one.
	Oh, dear Lord.
	Go on then.
	Ode to Connor.
	May the trail you find yourself upon stand the test of time.
	May your path be more than duty, and you gather plenty dimes.
	I hope your new adventures will be a good ride.
	And you enjoy the journey, both you and your bride.
	Wishing you all the best.
	Anne.
	Oh, thanks.
	We set the wedding date the other day, so expect invoids, boys.
	Cheers, man.
	Anyway, on the next one.
	Dan's Civil War video was great.
	Things are said behind the paywall that wouldn't otherwise be said.
	It's always illuminating.
	I've mentioned before that I understand the precarious situation you're in and the targets on your backs, as Dan did touch on.
	For today's hosts, do any of you think it can be reversed, or is the inertia of the system going to lead to civil war?
	Everything can be reversed.
	Everything can change.
	Can be reversed if the willingness to do so is there.
	I actually think that the Farage development we've spoken about is positive in that regard.
	I think it's spectacular.
	Because it means that the intractable blockage, the sort of cult of personality that was unwilling to do anything, has been...
	True, sorry, I don't want to be a dick, but...
	No, I totally agree.
	Things are existential now, and we can't wait for it.
	So it's been removed, and now people who are competent, like Ben Habib, like Rupert Lowe, etc., the absolute wealth of talent they left on the table can get to work on preventing imminent...
	Farage's vanity just has to be...
	Sorry, too bad.
	Get out.
	I don't know about you guys, but seeing Dan in a beanie like that gives me the urge to cross the road.
	He looks like a drunk hobo.
	Especially with the shirt and blazer.
	He's just lost his final investment at bet, Fred.
	I thought he looks a little bit like Barry from Four Lions.
	He's a bit like a convert in a bunker.
	Radicalizer moderates.
	Anyway, next one.
	Connor, if you haven't said what's next for you, I'd love to stay in tune with anything you do.
	Your contribution to your country has been great, and I hope it may continue.
	Should we ever cross paths?
	It would be a pleasure.
	A thousand things I wish I could say, but a profound and earnest thank you for everything should encompass it all.
	Thank you.
	I pray for goodness to follow you.
	It's well deserved.
	Oh, thanks, man.
	I mean, I'll be out in the US, not infrequently.
	Also, probably, if anyone's going to NatCon DC in September, I'll see you there.
	Updates coming soon on what I'm doing, but basically I got given too many opportunities that I could turn down that were useful to the cause, and so I will be pushing in the same direction just from different positions to these wonderful lads here.
	I went down to the river on the weekend.
	It was a beautiful day to see Foraker, Hunter, and McKinley.
	Ah.
	Lovely.
	Very good.
	Glad Trump renamed that mountain.
	Thank the lord.
	Nobody can fill the void left behind by your knowledge, personality, wisdom, and giant ears.
	I heard that one.
	Nothing to say other than thanks very much.
	They had to get one in there, didn't they?
	Yeah, of course.
	It's fine.
	That all?
	Excellent.
	We'll do a couple of written ones before we wrap up, I suppose.
	We have two more Rumble Rants.
	We do have two Rumble Rants.
	$20 as well, thank you.
	Thank you, GLE777. Thank you for your service at the Lotus Eaters.
	Connor, have a few pints on me before Starmer inevitably bans alcohol.
	I actually gave up last Lent and have stuck with it ever since.
	Oh, well done.
	Hence why I've been a lot more prudent on lads hours.
	Why would you do that?
	Because, honestly, it's expensive.
	It made me feel crap the next day.
	And if you're in Westminster, there's no such thing as a free drink.
	Yeah, that's true.
	Everyone knows that Parliament tries to get compromise on people.
	Doesn't want to wake up in Gove's apartment again.
	The third time now!
	Damn it!
	Now I've got a limp home from Pimplica.
	McLeod for $5.
	This is addressed to you, Harry, I believe.
	FDR being pro-Soviet is nothing new.
	He was unapologetically socialist.
	80% of socialist programs started in the US were by him.
	He even confiscated gold from American citizens.
	That's a good point.
	I should have brought that up.
	The just stealing...
	Gold from people, making it illegal.
	Very Dr. Evil.
	It is actually Dr. Evil.
	Maybe there is something to this theory actually.
	So, do you want to do the written comments?
	Well, yeah, I'll do a couple of them.
	I'll skip over the ones that are saying goodbye to you.
	Bleach Demon says...
	It's alright, it's fine.
	We haven't got time.
	Bleach Demon says Farage is looking more and more like a typical feckless, vaguely right-leaning politician.
	Yeah, he's looking like a Tory, isn't he?
	He can eloquently parrot messages of more resolute men than himself, but will not advance anything without popular opinion leading him.
	That's precisely what is happening Martin says Tell him how you really feel I know.
	But the thing is, it's kind of true.
	That's the problem.
	It's not now an uncommon narrative within Reform's own voter base.
	Yeah.
	Well, we covered the thing the other day.
	Only a third of Reform members are actually deeply committed to Farage.
	Jimbo says, It's amazing that Farage thinks he can control the narrative on this one.
	Unless something truly shocking comes out, this is despicable behavior.
	Oakeshaw in particular has behaved appallingly over this.
	Yeah.
	And Russian says, With every tweet Farage loses yet more credibility.
	Quite.
	Quite.
	Right, is that it for us?
	Okay.
	Thanks very much, gents.
	Yeah, I know.
	Last ever sign-off.
	I'll be back in about 20-odd minutes for the final episode of Thomson Talks, where I'll be taking your questions and ranting, as I typically do.
	But before I go, thanks, guys.
	It's been a pleasure.
	I mean, co-host of Comics Corner, we've had plenty of good memories.
	Oh, yeah.
	From the first time you collared me after I came in for the guest episode and made a tea, and you just turned around and went, right, when do you start?
	Yeah.
	It's been a hell of a ride.
	I'm sure you'll be back.
	Yeah.
	You'll always be able to come visit.
	Understood.
	We'll only be down the road.
	Anyway.
	We still didn't get Watchmen done together.
	Be a looming promise.
	Come on.
	I did hate it.
	And on that controversial take, I'll leave you guys.
	Love you and leave you.
	We will be back tomorrow at one o'clock.
	Take care.
	God bless.

▲