Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Load Seaters, episode 1330 for the 12th of January 2026.
I'm your host, Luca, joined today by Stelios.
Hello everyone.
Firas.
Hello.
You're very used to this Monday group, aren't you, by Albert?
The great triumvirate of baseness.
Anyway, today we're going to be talking, ladies and gentlemen, all about the chaos in Iran.
We're then going to be discussing the chaos in Britain and how we may be looking at regime change if things continue in this way.
And then we're going to be discussing how all of your children are terrorists now.
And before you put the two together, no, we're not suggesting your children will be the ones implementing that regime change.
At least not yet.
Anyway.
A chaos in the gaming industry or something.
Yeah, yeah, deep chaos, deep state-sanctioned chaos.
Anyway, right.
So obviously, Islander magazine is now on sale.
Many great issues in it.
Great essays.
Interview with Rupert Lowe.
Great articles by Carl, Morgoth, AA, great writers.
It's on the website, £15, £14.99 even.
I'll knock you a penny off.
Because I'm feeling kind.
And you can go and buy the fifth issue.
All right, Stelios.
Right, so Iran is currently experiencing a significant wave of protests across the country.
That started from late December.
Reports claim that it was around December 28th.
It started as a protest in Tehran and it has spilled over the entire country.
And we have here a map that this is from January the 7th.
This is five days ago.
And they are showing you how the protests are spreading around Iran.
And that was again, I'm saying that was five days ago.
So it looks like things are escalating.
Although the regime is saying that right now it has a situation under control.
But we are going to talk a lot about what is happening here.
Before we do so, Luca has a message for you.
I swear I was here just a second ago.
Ladies and gentlemen, buy Islander magazine as it is in the segment.
$14.99 on the main website.
This particular issue is talking all about the themes of heroism and power.
So there are many wonderful articles in there by great returning writers such as Will Tanner, Carl Benjamin, Morgoth, great, great writers.
I've written a piece all about Aragon because what more fitting character could you think of from the Lord of the Rings to embody the virtues of heroism and power?
So it's on the website now.
Do go and get it.
As you can see, it's a very high-quality piece of work.
Rory has really excelled himself.
So I hope you enjoy the magazine.
Thank you.
Right.
this is not the first wave of protests in Iran.
This is actually we have had several protests in Iran before.
The last one that was really big was four years ago in 2022.
And it looks like right now we also have a very significant wave of protests.
Some people say that it is that they are even larger.
Right.
And here we have the timeline by CNN.
They're saying that the Iranian regime's grasp on power appears more tenuous than ever.
Scroll up a bit.
They're saying that the IRGC is condemning US support for protests.
Also, they are condemning Israel and we are going to talk about that quite a bit.
Here they say that the death toll in Iran climbs to at least 544 according to a US-based activist group.
And we have reports that say that it could be well into the low thousands, two to three thousands right now as we speak 12 of January.
And this is 1 p.m. UK time.
I'm sure that by the time this comes out on YouTube and we will have more developments.
But we are speaking with what is happening right now in mind.
Right, so let's move forward.
They're saying that the Times says that the death toll in Iran may already be in the thousands.
And there are fears that the growing number of protesters killed by the Iranian security forces will rise even more.
And one thing to say is that there is a rich background into these protests.
It's economic, geopolitical, and also political in this case.
It seems to have started in Tehran's Grand Bazaar, December 28.
And that was initially a protest by shopkeepers and merchants, frustrated by the rising inflation.
According to reports, there is 70% inflation in food products alone, food prices alone.
There is, generally speaking, very high inflation in Iran.
I think the general level of inflation is around 50%.
And there is also the push by the state to increase the military spending around 150%.
So there is a sort of dissatisfaction with that alone.
But it isn't just that alone.
It seems to have escalated even more.
There are people calling now for political change, for change in regime or change in government, change in the form of the state.
And there is also the geopolitical tension and the geopolitical discourse happening regarding this.
So Trump is saying that right now they are examining very strong options.
One thing to bear in mind is that Trump is someone for whom his word has to count and his word has to count on the global scale.
So at some point when there was a blackout, an internet shutdown of around 99% of access to the internet in Iran, everyone understood that this is in order to do a violent crackdown against the anti-regime Iranian protesters.
And Trump said that if the regime carries on killing people, he will have to respond.
Now, this is something that he will have to live up to because simply realpolitik.
Because if he doesn't, his word will count less.
And you're seeing that now with the way that he's handled Russia and Ukraine.
The fact that he's said so many times over and over, oh, I'm going to make peace, oh, I'm going to bring them to the table, it's diluting the strength of his word.
And so if he falls down that path with Iran as well.
But there's also the other thing to remember.
Trump is primarily a negotiator, the way I understand of him.
So he will not say things out loud outside in public that are going to harm his negotiating tactics.
So to answer negotiations.
Yeah, we should take everything he says with a pinch of salt.
So he says that they are examining very strong options.
He's getting hourly reports and he's going to see what he's going to do.
Here we have the Iranian supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khomeini, saying that essentially the America should leave the region.
And he says that Israel also is the problem in their region.
I'll just translate the chant, Allah Akbar, and Khamenei is the leader.
The crowd is shouting this.
And also they're going to chant death to America, death to England, and death to those who oppose the rule of the jurisprudent.
They say death to America, death to England.
And also they're going to say death to hypocrites and infidels and death to Israel.
And they're also saying that he's also going to describe Israel as the source of the absolute corruption, war, and discord in that region.
So that is his view.
When you say death to the hypocrites and the infidels, they are referring to the domestic opposition.
As he was saying when they were saying death to those who oppose Vilayat al-Faqih, their system of government.
So this is essentially authorizing a lot more violence against the protesters than we've already seen.
Right.
So here Lindsey Graham is playing the bad cup.
To be honest, Trump did play the bad cup to a degree.
Yeah, I don't think.
Lindsey Graham also goes again, the U.S. should bomb Iran tonight.
And he calls again for massive intervention of the kind that I don't think Trump will undertake.
Has Lindsey Graham ever not called for mass intervention?
No, maybe that is his shtick.
I think that this is where he comes from.
But honestly, I don't think people are trying to equate Trump's position with Lindsey Graham's position.
I don't think that the two are the same, the same way this apply to Venezuela.
Trump, I think, is much more of a Jacksonian advocate of precision strikes, minimum damage for maximum geopolitical gain, whereas the neocon school, or at least the school of Lindsey Graham and the one that was involved in the Iraq war and the design for it, was sort of minimum gains with maximum damage incurred.
Well, it's a complete comparison.
Well, I'm glad to see that Lindsey Graham's worldview has evolved so much since those few decades.
Right.
So here we have from open source Intel.
I want to say also that I want to thank my friends Warren and Jacob about comments and giving me context in this case.
Here we have this Ayatollah Mohsen Araki saying, if Grand Ayatollah Khamenei is targeted, the highest Shiite authorities will declare a global jihad against the U.S. and Israel.
I want to say one thing here.
It's just this seems to me very, in a way, careful diplomatic language because they're personalizing it.
Obviously, you will have the more hardcore people who are saying if the regime is targeted, we are going to respond.
But this seems to be a bit more personalized.
And it could be the case that they are trying to make a deal behind closed doors.
Say, right, maybe some people from the regime will leave, others will come in, and that's it.
And we are going to personalize it.
But that's something that should be taken with a pinch of salt.
So I've done a couple of podcasts with Kevork al-Masian and with Peter Kanonis going over what's happening in Iran and trying to sort of explain how it relates to Venezuela.
The Americans are using a different regime change template, which is to preserve the state, unlike what was done in Iraq and Libya, but to change the top leadership so that the behavior and the policies change without necessitating a full change in personnel.
So you replace Maduro, you keep his second in command, you keep his generals, his defense minister, etc.
But now they're going to sell oil to the Americans and do business with the Americans and compensate the companies that were expropriated, etc., etc.
And I think with Khamenei being 85, the American objective here is something similar.
And it's about giving the existing leadership of Iran a choice.
Either you die with Khamenei and all of your options in terms of retaliating to that are terrible, and we can discuss that, or you get rid of Khamenei and you make a separate deal with the Americans so that you don't have to sell all of your oil to the Chinese at a big discount, and you don't have to be start for investment.
Get Western investment.
And the benefit to the United States is that Iran remains functioning as a state as opposed to collapsing and creating chaos, and that it's cleaved off of China.
And then, if you can make also peace with Ukraine between Russia and Ukraine, you've sort of put some distance between the Chinese and their key allies, the Iranians and the Russians, so that China is the one that is sort of subject to a new containment strategy.
That seems to be the American idea.
And you have people like Lindsey Graham whose role is to be rabbit dogs, threatening and menacing and so on.
But the objective isn't about destroying Iran.
It's about changing the behavior of Iran.
And that might require getting rid of Khamenei.
Yeah, let's look and let's see whether the person that could substitute the current leader of Iran could be the exiled crown prince Riza Pahlavi.
He was interviewed on Fox News by Sean Hannity five days ago.
And he says that I've trained all my life to serve my nation.
I'm more than ever ready to step into Iran.
I will be there with my compatriots to lead the ultimate battle.
He has made a series of, I think, really good statements.
Right, here we have Rudy Giuliani, who now goes against him, against the exiled crown prince, says that the son of the brutal deposed Shah of Iran is a fraud.
He, unlike me and many others, has never risked his life to help the cause of Iranian freedom.
And he, Giuliani, I mean, is being accused for working and collaborating with the MEK, that is a sort of group-Islamist Islamo-Marxist group that had or its antecedents had participated in the Islamic Revolution, and they were among the leftists that got wiped out.
And now they exist as a sort of insane group, really, fully in control of their members in their everyday lives and in everything that they do.
I think they're in Albania now because they got kicked out of Iraq.
And like when you think about the Islamist alliance, that's exactly them.
And they're crazy.
They're going to ally with him again.
I don't know what they want.
Because last time they did so, I don't think that it was particularly good for the useful cat's paw to sort of attack Iran and to do some intelligence work, but they are lunatics fundamentally.
Right.
And here we have yet another call from the exiled crown prince who's who is addressing his Iranian compatriots.
And he's saying basically that he says that the freedom of Iran is near and says the blood spilled on the ground of Iran's immortal children guides us towards victory.
But not alone, global assistance will arrive soon as well.
And he calls the people to wait for his next messages.
And he expresses confidence that they are going to soon reclaim Iran from the Islamic Republic and hold celebrations of freedom and victory.
So the more important part is his calls to target state institutions, including the media and the security apparatus that's run by the state.
So he's basically advocating for a lot more violence and escalation because he knows that the existing regime will respond to this with lethal force.
So what is the criticism that he tries to get things to become worse in order to be honest?
If I were him, I would ask for people to stay protesting.
I mean, in his this is the sensible thing to do in his position.
Maybe peacefully without trying to sort of bring about attacks on on media and on the security services.
But that's not what he's doing.
So people in Iran are seen as burning regime flags.
They are shouting some of them are shouting long live the shah.
Others are burning a mosque here.
I think this is the Al-Rasul mosque in Tehran, but people should double check that.
At this point, everyone should double check everything that we're saying, because access to information here is a bit difficult.
Here they're saying that they are burning government buildings in Shiraz.
And also some of them are burning banks linked to the regime.
Right.
And we also have the question of whether a particular revolution is likely to succeed right now.
And there are all sorts of views here.
We have here a thread by Karim Sajidpour, which is, I found, particularly interesting.
And he says basically that there are five conditions needed for a revolution to work.
He says fiscal crisis, divided elites, a diverse opposition, a convincing narrative of resistance, and a favorable international environment.
And he says that right now all five are present.
It remains to be seen.
But it looks like the economy in Iran isn't good.
Also, the geopolitical landscape and the chessboard right now seems to be favorable towards something like a change in Iran.
So think about it.
How extensive that will be, I don't know, but it looks at the moment that things are moving forward in a way that they weren't in previous protests.
I have a question because obviously I'm not the most knowledgeable when it comes to Iranian politics.
But what you were saying, Feras, about obviously taking Iran away from China, what counter measures should we expect from China in order to prop up the regime whilst all of this is going on?
There has been talk about them helping Iran with a lot more air defense systems, but I haven't seen that proven that they've actually delivered those or that the Iranians are able to operate these because you need a lot of training on these kinds of new systems.
It's not like that simple.
They could be paying, they could pay more money into Iran to alleviate the energy crisis, but the Chinese are so commercially focused on getting oil as cheaply as possible and they tend not to throw out a lot of money unless it's used to extract natural resources, unless they know that they're getting paid back natural resources.
So that would go against their policy.
And when things are at this level, it's hard to see what you can do.
They could inject a few billion dollars to sort of try to bring the Riyal back down, because the main issue is the value of the currency and the inflation, exactly as you pointed out.
But they don't have a lot of good options.
The other reality is that the promise of the Islamic revolution was that they would end up becoming a major threat to Israel and eventually defeat Israel and therefore restore Muslim honor and dignity in their view.
This has completely failed.
With the loss of Syria and the defeat of Hezbollah, this has completely failed.
And now it's the Sunni Turks who are the much bigger challenge.
And so with the failure of the pan-Islamic ideology of the Islamic Revolution, now they need to turn nationalistic.
And you can't turn nationalistic under the banner of an Islamic revolution.
So something needs to give.
So when you I've heard by several people who have Iranian ancestries that they view themselves as a nation first and they're saying that Iran is different to Iraq.
It has a history that goes back centuries.
No, not centuries, millennia.
Millennia, yes.
And it's not that they just ended up there in the map because some people in the West just carved the border that way.
Right.
So they're saying that there are, it's multi-ethnic, but also national.
Yes.
And they're saying that it could be the case that there is a very fertile ground for a sort of national narrative there that is, as you said, anti-Islamist.
Because I suspect that the Islamist regime is saying religion first, then nation.
Yes.
Whereas there is the inverse from the, and this goes back to the days of Ahmadinejad at least.
So in the days of Ahmadinejad, there was conflict in 2008 within Iran over whether or not it should be more nationalistic or more Islamic.
So this is an old thing that they've had.
And there are members of the IRGC who just want to be nationalistic, but they are operating under the Islamic Revolution banner.
Yep.
Which places some constraints on what they are doing.
Right.
So let us now talk about discourse because it seems to me that this is where we have to say lots of things.
Because in the West, Western media were particularly silent when it comes to these protests for at least a week, if not nine, ten days.
Because right now, if you search the BBC, The Guardian, and other news outlets that belong to the legacy media category, you will see that most of the articles that they are releasing, they are being released in the last few days.
For many days, there was silence.
And the mainstream media wasn't the only part that was silent.
There were many other people who were silent, like lots of Democrat politicians, progressive politicians and leftists around the West, human rights groups, feminist groups.
Where were all the feminists?
And this is what, for instance, John K. Rowling is saying here.
If you claim to support human rights, yet can bring yourself to show solidarity with women fighting for the liberty in Iran.
You've revealed yourself.
You don't give a damn about people being oppressed and brutalized so long as it's being done by the enemies of your enemies.
And here we have Adnan Hussein, who says, who responds to John K. Rowling, forgive us for being reluctant to join a crowd that commits, cheers on, supports genocide as it now itches for regime change in the same region.
Something tells us it's not human rights or freedom that motivates their sudden moral awakening.
That said, though, I don't think that John K. Rowling ever...
J.K. Rowling.
Sorry.
Yes.
You're just trans J.K. Rowling.
That's freaking epic.
Yeah.
Congratulations.
I don't think anybody else could have done this.
No one would have had the code.
That's a reveal that I never saw coming.
John Kaye.
Right, okay.
Right, okay.
So this is by Adnan Hussein.
Also, Bushra Shaikh comes and says basically that this is all a Mossad CIA Western imperialism op.
This is her view on the matter.
And I think that there is a sort of element of discourse that is crazily anti-Jewish, that tries to say all of that is a Jewish SIOP.
And the Iranians would never want by themselves anything other than what they have now.
Personally, I don't find that place.
There is undoubtedly, obviously, Zionist agitation going on to bring down the regime in Iran.
But that only works if there is something to agitate against that can actually animate the people who are already there.
And so those problems exist by the Iranian regime.
Well, I mean, I mean, there's definitely an element of Jewish people wanting to back some people in Iran and want to have a favorable relationship with Iran.
Personally, I don't find that weird.
Yeah, exactly.
It's just how geopolitics works.
Here we have BBC News saying Iran leader says protesters are vandals trying to please Trump.
This sounds a bit like Rory Stewart in some respects when he was saying that Dominic Cummings in the UAE was a petulant child trying to appease Trump people on X when he said that top officials from the United Arab Emirates were saying that they don't want their children and citizens of their country to go to the UK to study because they think that they're going to risk radicalization.
It ended up that Rory Stewart was wrong.
Right.
So don't say that often.
Thank you.
Right.
So here we have several images of women smoking, burning images of the Iranian supreme leader.
They are pretty smoking, aren't they?
I don't know if some of them are AI or not, but I can definitely get the idea that there are women in Iran who do not like the current regime.
I'm not sure.
Because this has been proven before.
I don't know if particular pictures are there, but I mean, it's interesting.
Right.
Here we have Columbia University protesting against the mistreatment of Iranians who are protesting against the regime.
It looks packed.
Yeah, it's quite packed.
But it's quite empty.
And that raises questions.
Why aren't students revolting there?
Why aren't they protesting?
You're expecting reason from demons.
Why aren't they protesting?
Because, you know, you have all these departments in Western academia that are trying to do Eastern studies, Middle Eastern studies.
They're trying to show how woke and how awaken they are with respect to sort of injustices everywhere around the world.
But I don't see them there.
I don't know.
I don't know why.
I don't see Greta Thunberg talking about it.
I also don't see Mark Ruffalo, Pedro Pascal, Bella Hadid, Cynthia Nixon, Rosie O'Donnell, and Javier Berdem talking about it.
Just why?
Why aren't they talking about it?
I thought they cared about human rights, and I thought that they were in favor of a universalistic approach, because that's what they said.
It doesn't matter if people without such rhetoric are saying that right now, no, you should speak of Iranian anti-regime protesters being mistreated and being murdered in some cases by the government.
These people have raised the flag of universal human rights and they seem particularly silent here.
I have to object to what you're saying.
Okay.
On two premises.
First, there isn't really much comparison between 50,000, 60,000 killed in Gaza and shooting protesters at home when we don't have full information.
These are slightly two different things.
Second, there is no reason to want the opinions of any of those people on anything.
It should be silent on Mongolia.
They should be more often silent on pretty much every single issue in the world.
Third, we've seen that these people are far-left, suicidal, self-loathing lunatics.
So they're not going to behave with any consistency.
So you're sort of beating a dead horse there.
These people shouldn't have opinions about politics.
Yeah, welcome to the world of commentary.
Fair enough.
But I do want to respond to your first two points.
I mean, there are similarities and there are differences.
Even if we granted the number, as you said, of 50, 60K in Gaza spread across two years, or that's one thing.
We are talking also about 2 to 3K in 10 days.
So if that continues, it could be the case.
But also, remember that when someone has universalistic rhetoric, they need to show up everywhere irrespective of time and place.
So that's one thing.
And also, I never cared about what Javier Burdem said, but sadly, lots of people do care.
And I think that it's important to reiterate every time that they show how hypocritical they are and remind as many people as possible.
Because sadly, people tend to forget.
So here we had John, sorry, J.K. Rowling before.
That was a bluff.
Here we have Fuentes playing the rabid anti-Jewish card.
He says the chaos in Iran is totally astroturfed by Israel and the U.S. for regime change.
This was always the end game after over a decade of industrial sabotage, sanctions, political subversion, and espionage.
Why do you think Iran wanted nuclear weapons to prevent this exact scenario?
Well, honestly, I think that when it comes to commentary, I just lost any kind of trust to people like Carlson Fuentes.
I mean, I never trusted Fuentes and Candace Owens.
Because it seems to me that the card they're playing, the heavily isolationist card, the radical isolationist card, is just a divide and conquer.
It's just soft power propaganda against the West in order for them to say, well, look what happened when you cared about anyone in the world.
Bad things happened.
Look at what happened when you cared about Poland, when you cared about Europe, when you cared about Iraq, when you cared about Ukraine.
This is the kind of rhetoric.
And they have used it almost invariably, with one exception, against Trump, also even in Venezuela right now.
I thought Tucker and Fuentes were supportive of Venezuela.
Fuentes was definitely in support of that.
Fuentes.
One thing, Tucker was, I think, was initially against.
Then he appeared in the oil and backstage of the oil thing.
And Fuentes understood that that was going to be a disaster for him if he countersignal Trump on that bit.
And he changed and he drew the distinction between the isolationists and the third world isolationists and the America First.
And in some platforms, more than half of his audience downvoted it.
At least we can agree that Candace Owens is nuts.
So we can.
We can definitely agree on that.
Let's make peace on that.
That's sufficient ground for peace.
Anyway, and I want to say that the sort of support for the Iranian regime in the West has existed in the left before.
We should never forget this, but also the mainstream media.
We had people like Foucault being very cheerleader for Khomeini.
And also there was this New York Times article, Trust in Khomeini, where they were presenting him as a sort of great figure, vision and stuff.
But at the end of the day, all this is just rabid anti-Westernism, especially when it comes from a Western audience.
All this is just ecophobia.
So, I mean, I really hope for the best for Iranians, and let's see what's going to happen.
All right.
I'll just read this rumble round.
We've got one from Drunk Chengjung.
Says, Lindsay has realized that the less money that's spent on protracted occupation, the more money there is to bomb kids' value for money.
Nice guy, nice guy.
Why haven't you bought Islander yet?
Anyway, I know you still can, because there's a very good chance that Kier Starmer is going to ban X and might then ban all kinds of other people on the back of that.
So let's talk a little bit about Keir Starmer getting very angry, which I think is a bit of a first for him at X because the X AI has been used to produce images that I wouldn't approve of, frankly.
But there have been horrific things that have been done in Britain that don't get Kier Starmer emotional.
So let's see him get emotional for once, if only for novelty.
Disgraceful.
It's disgusting.
And it's not to be tolerated.
X has got to get a grip of this.
And Ofcom have full support to take action in relation to this.
This is wrong.
It's unlawful.
We're not going to tolerate it.
I've asked for all options to be on the table.
It's disgusting.
An ex need to get their act together and we will take action on this because it's simple.
So it's good to see that the guy actually is capable of some level of human emotion.
Yeah, I wish he could.
I was positive.
I wish he could be improving.
Amazing what they can do with robots these days.
Wish he could be that passionate about the rape gangs.
Yes, well, exactly.
Exactly.
And there's an ongoing campaign to get X banned.
You see here Jess Asato, someone I've never heard of, complaining about being portrayed in a bikini.
Obviously, Bovril is going to comment.
We know Bovril.
Yeah.
But it's worth remembering that this is a woman who voted against an investigation into the rape gangs.
And now she's complaining about AI images.
On my list of priorities, which comes first, genuine mass rape or bad AI?
I think it's a simple answer, but apparently it isn't for the Labour Party.
Brendan Cox is coming out swinging, saying that X has nothing to do with free speech, which is a bit funny.
The president was good banners from it.
The president of the United States.
There's actually a pretty good list here of who was banned, which I will get to in a moment.
A hell of a lot of people were banned.
And apparently, the British government is working with Canada on Australia to launch a coordinated ban on X over some indecent images that have been produced by Grok.
Now, the Canadians have since backtracked and said we have nothing to do with this.
The Australians seem to be doubling down and they have their own draconian laws intended to impose some kind of digital ID on everyone.
And Britain seems to be following suit with this stuff.
And Starmer is trying to find some kind of coalition of the willing, apparently.
He's calling it the Coalition of Decency.
What do you think?
Do decent people tend to have good relations with Ukrainian Ren Boys?
Depends if they're a decent Renboy.
Wonderful.
Wonderful.
So he's trying to build this coalition of the indecent and Ofcrom has obeyed, obviously, and now they are officially investigating X because Grok generated inappropriate images.
I have to stress, I am against these images, and I think Grok should have some safety.
Me too.
Yeah, we should say this.
But I think they're lying.
I don't think that's actually.
No, they've been waiting for an excuse to get rid of X for ages.
You know, I was saying the other day, they would just love nothing more than to put us all on the big blue sky reservation.
Exactly, exactly, exactly.
And they are clearly doing this with the objective of trying to just silence everybody in the country.
And this is happening at a pretty insane time because these guys are really thinking of some pretty wild stuff.
First, Britain wants to deploy troops to Ukraine alongside France.
They're saying they could muster maybe 7,500 troops or something like that.
Now, mind you.
Sorry, 7,000 troops.
Mind you, Trump says that this is what gets lost in a week.
So I simply don't understand the idea behind this really.
We used to have a global empire.
I think that we are at the point where lots of leaders in the EU are just trying to make statements in order to indicate resolve, just to say we are not going to tolerate this without necessarily falling.
I don't know how convincing they are being.
And just to add to the stupidity, Britain is also talking about plans to deploy troops to Greenland to protect it from the United States.
So the leadership of Britain seems to believe that it can fight a two-front war against Russia and the United States.
Which is something that we couldn't even do back in 1776 against the colonies.
It just sounds so terribly insane.
I mean, I did a video segment a few months back on whether Britain can fight.
Oh, just one month ago.
And the answer is no, not really.
But they are genuinely discussing this kind of thing and completely poisoning their relationship with the United States.
Because obviously the Americans are trying to get some kind of peace deal between Russia and Ukraine.
And Britain is saying, no, no, no, we're going to have a NATO presence there to make sure that the Russians say no to the peace proposal.
And obviously the Americans are serious about acquiring Greenland, let's say buying it.
And the Brits are saying no.
And this is happening at a time when the fighting capability of Britain is non-existent on the aircraft carrier front, on the nuclear submarine front, and on the general armed forces front.
So there is this level of delusion that is going into this.
And they don't seem to understand that the politics of signaling, which is exactly what they're doing, as you pointed out, Stelios, can have real-life consequences.
Yeah, but I have a question here, because, you know, I haven't formed an opinion on this.
I'm trying to think about it, because it seems to me that, on the one hand, Trump can get and has got from the EU several concessions, especially when it comes to the tariffs.
Everyone saw Ursula von der Leyen with Trump being completely, let's say, being legless, in a sense, just having nowhere to stand on.
She gave him everything he wanted.
On the other hand, I think that from a European perspective, I understand European leaders, whether I agree with them or not on particular issues or even the general direction.
I totally get why they don't want Europe to be, in a sense, the US's bitch.
But it is.
In some respects, yes, in some respects, no.
But the point is.
When something like the Nord Stream pipeline gets blown up and German industry is forced to collapse and the collapse of German industry brings down the European economy with it, and people are bragging because Britain has a high GDP growth rate compared to the G7, which is 1%.
This sends a message to Europeans.
The whole system is fundamentally broken.
Yeah, but that also sends you to the same thing.
And you don't fix the system by signaling your opposition to your allies, your enemies, and your people at the same time.
I think there are two things here, and I'm worried of derailing your segment.
Sure.
Two things in a thing: is that the Nord Stream pipeline affair shows to Europeans that they are in a way they are alone?
Yes.
So, yeah, they have to act as if they are alone in some sense.
And if they think that opposition in some respects and defense against Russia is in Europe's interests, and they do seem to be saying this, because if you focus on the rhetoric they use when it comes to the Poland and Belarus border, that's where they become far-right in their own standards.
Yes.
So I think that we could say that some of them, it's not necessarily that all of them are acting against Europe's interests in that very thing.
It doesn't mean that they have to be yes men to Trump.
It deserves a longer discussion on why it is.
And in many cases, I like Trump.
But it doesn't mean that European leaders have to become yesmen to Trump.
Fair enough.
Fair enough.
But I don't want to derail your segment, sorry.
But anyway, Kier Starmer is trying to ban X not only while going on lunatic foreign adventures, which he has absolutely no hope of winning, he's also at his lowest approval rating in history.
And in the history of France.
We're dealing with negative net 46.
So yes, there is probably, you know, we could get to net 100% negative, I'm sure.
If anyone can do it.
We trust you, Kier.
We trust you.
But the government is also losing control of the streets.
Yes.
Because not only were there the summer riots and the flag campaign and the promise of more of the same because of the uncontrolled immigration and the uncontrolled legal and illegal immigration, now the Sikh are going to fight the Pakistanis because of Pakistani rape crimes.
So the diversity bit seems to be falling apart.
And tragically, this is the only language that the state understands, which is sort of people showing up in force and protesting.
When they're white, they get arrested.
When they're Sikhs, I'm pretty sure community relations will improve.
And to counter this, he's not just thinking about banning X.
The government seems to have ordered Ofcom to look at breaking up the ability to encrypt messages so that people can't secretly communicate with each other without the government knowing about it.
That means that messages will be scanned before they are encrypted and sent.
So they're this terrified of the possibility of mass unrest.
I'm just really thinking about my meme group chats right now.
Yeah, yeah.
And you could sort of see why they're angry.
I mean, there is this app that basically helps you find people getting ratioed.
And every time the Labour Party opens their mouths, they get ratioed.
And it's genuinely funny because you could sort of go to their account and you can practically find not a single tweet where they haven't been ratioed.
And it's really the same for Kirstarmer himself.
Every time he says something, I mean, look at this.
He got 6,000 likes for something.
And Rupert Law got 48,000.
King.
Absolute king.
Well, also as well, you know, the thing is that X just allows for a conversation about the state of Britain and what they've done to it that is just so far beyond what they want to reckon with.
Exactly.
I want everybody to be on Blue Sky and Reddit.
But if they think in any way that by, you know, getting rid of X in the United Kingdom, that all of a sudden those feelings that gave rise to the conversation are going to go away.
Exactly.
You know, they're very naive.
Extremely naive.
I mean, look at this.
Every single thing he says, he either gets a community note or he gets a ratio, or usually both.
He told his cabinet ministers to ignore the polls.
Look, this is one of them where he didn't get ratioed.
You know, he's just sort of bloviating.
It's completely substance-free.
But the rest of it, you know.
I think the one time where he wasn't ratioed was when he did the Island of Strangers speech.
Yes.
Weirdly enough.
The one thing he backtracked on.
Weirdly enough.
Look at this.
His Christmas message.
16K versus 6K.
The guy is getting killed.
And I think this matters to him more than the safety of women and children because we've seen how he actually behaves in relation to the safety of women and children.
And we've seen how the Labour Party behaves.
They're also getting killed here.
Although this one, they didn't get killed.
This one is when Nadeem Zahawi was calling out Nigel Farage.
So, you know, that's a different story.
I'm sure there will be a daily video about that.
But pretty much everything else, they're just getting murdered.
And so they're trying to ban X.
And in one week, Kier Starmer turned out to be the most ratioed guy on X. Is it considered to just stop tweeting?
Just stop tweeting.
I feel bad for the poor interns and idiots who sort of have to sit around and tweet on his behalf.
I really feel bad about them.
And then they say that it's nothing to do with free speech and X is not about free speech.
Here is a clip collated by DC Draino on the number of accounts that were suspended.
Just look at this.
Alex Jones, Donald Trump, Milo, Laura Loomer.
I don't know who that guy is.
Marjorie Taylor Green.
Roger Stone, Steve Bannon, Steve Bannon, General Flynn, Mike Lindell, just everybody was banned.
And then they claim that this isn't about free speech.
Now, the thing is that the Americans have had it.
And it really looks like they've had it.
And they're using X to signal their support for a color revolution in Britain.
And I'm not exaggerating.
We have the Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy, Sarah Rogers.
And she calls out Starmer for blocking a ban on cousin marriages.
Because in the national security strategy, the Americans said that Europe was losing its civilization and losing its entire history and collapsing because of immigration, which obviously pissed off the Europeans no end.
Here, we're seeing her saying, look, if you're allowing cousin marriages, you're letting your civilization fall apart.
But it's remarkable in a way that, you know, JD Vance can go to Europe, give a speech, make a German cry.
And, you know, there's been all sorts of interventions from Washington on this front, on the question of European identity, on the questions of its very existential state of survival, but it's put itself in.
They don't care.
And despite this, there's been no pivoting.
There's not even been, really, as far as I can see, any shrewd or clever tactics on the part of these European elites to at least try and pretend that they're going along with the American strategy.
It's just one ham-fisted crackdown after the other.
Yes.
It's just one ham-fisted crackdown over the other.
And they don't seem to know what the hell that they're doing.
And here we see this Under Secretary, Ms. Rogers, going on about things like how women get killed in these honor marriages that happen between cousins, in these honor killings, in communities that marry a lot of their cousins.
And Ofcom, you know, is talking about banning more websites and maybe going after Wikipedia.
And then she calls them out again.
When they're threatening to ban X, they're talking about protecting women and girls.
But when they're talking about rape victims, they call them white trash.
They call them white trash.
How's that?
How's that for protecting women and girls?
White trash.
JD Vance gets hit on the act and points out that the Emiratis are actually banning their youth from studying in British universities because of the risk of radicalization, which doesn't get banned, which doesn't get policed.
Like, they don't go after these crazy mosques who are going on about who should be beheaded and who should be stoned and the proper way of stoning people and all of that stuff.
They don't go after them.
No emergency parliamentary session over this.
Exactly.
But that gets no action.
And again, they don't want to ban Blue Sky.
No.
And on Blue Sky, you see open calls for murder.
And the same in Australia.
Blue Sky was the one exception to the social media ban for under-16s.
Yes.
But it allows calls for murder for its political opponents.
So this isn't about free speech.
This isn't about protecting girls.
What is this about?
This is about control.
This is about a ridiculous paranoid regime.
I love the account that she's quote-tweeting.
Yeah, I mean, what a crossover.
Sorry, Carry.
Yes.
Yes.
Fair.
Fair.
Fair point.
Look at this.
They're banning platforms left and right all over Europe.
And that's the coalition of the willing that he's trying to build.
But it seems that these guys don't actually know what they're doing.
Firstly, Elon Musk has a role here.
He is Trump's hunting hound, essentially.
His role is to go and target these kinds of officials that are cracking down on free speech, that are cracking down on dissent, that are trying to keep Europe and the United Kingdom beholden to the extreme far left, of which Kirstarmer is the leader, of which Kirstarmer is the leader in this country.
And what they're trying to do is what Musk is trying to do is to trigger these people so that they overreact.
And then Trump comes crashing down on them with tariffs and with sanctions and so on.
And we've already seen the Americans impose sanctions on European officials for their role in policing speech.
And so what they're trying to do is instigate a major crisis between themselves and the United States.
But we know from the trade negotiations and from everything to do with defense that they can't win this crisis.
They're just betting on maybe Trump losing in 2026 so that he loses momentum or ultimately losing in 2028 and getting a Democrat in power.
But even if that happens, by the time that happens, they're not going to be in office in the United Kingdom because Farage will have come in.
So either way.
We don't yep.
They're on borrowed time, it seems.
Well, their bet when it comes to the elections here is that the combination of the Boris Wave voters, a lot of them from the Commonwealth who can vote and whose opinions are not reflected in the polling, and that's a big problem.
Yeah, yeah.
And the under 18s who can now vote, the 16 to 18-year-olds who are indoctrinated by the school system.
Well, it seems like they're going to go green, unless, of course, it's tactical voting.
And in tactical voting, they end up building some kind of coalition and keep on importing voters until they make it permanent.
So this is what they're betting on.
And they're betting that Trump doesn't escalate this further.
But it's also worth remembering that in various countries that have done this kind of insane policy, it's sort of dramatically backfired.
The protests that happened in Bangladesh were over-hiring policies by the state.
In Algeria, it was the president announcing that he's running again, which everybody thought would trigger nothing because he'd been governing for 12 years.
And even though he was in a vegetative state, it wouldn't change anything.
But that actually kicked things off.
In Nepal, it was basically a ban on social media.
In Lebanon, the 2019 unrest was because the stupid government thought that they could tax WhatsApp, which they didn't have the technical ability to do to begin with, but it triggered a massive wave of unrest that sort of toppled the government.
And so these guys don't seem to realize that this kind of policy can backfire and that there is an international geopolitical climate that is dead set against them in the same way that we talk about the geopolitical climate around Iran being dead set against them.
They don't understand that the public seems to have had enough.
And the summer protests over the migrant hotels were one key indicator there.
And they seem to think that they could just get away with anything.
So yeah, they want to ban X, but it could backfire quite spectacularly.
And Musk's role is to trigger this.
He's one of the country's top defense contractors.
The protests in Iran wouldn't exist without Starlink feeding information.
And the Ukrainian army couldn't fight if it didn't have Starlink for its communications.
So the idea that you can cross this man and get away with it because he's made himself so indispensable.
For the defense establishment.
Yeah.
At a time when the U.S. has really had enough, like you guys are playing with fire here and the public have had it with you.
And...
And they seem to have zero awareness of all of this.
Zero.
Anyway, I'll leave it there.
Well, zero awareness that they're willing to share with the public.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
I mean, just I think there's a list here of the countries that have banned X. Iran, China, Russia, Burma, Venezuela, North Korea, and Turkmenistan.
And the UK and Australia are looking to join that list.
It's funny as well, isn't it, as well?
Because whenever they talk about the ECHR, they're like, oh, do you want to be like Russia?
Do you want to be like Belarus?
Do you want to be like the people on this bad list?
Well, when it comes to this, obviously those sorts of things don't matter quite as much.
Yeah.
Anyway, let me have a look at the comments here.
That's a random name.
Based on what's happened with Maduro and the bans on certain Eurocrats, I welcome this belligerence from Starmer if it leads to regime change in Europe.
Yeah, I can see where you're coming from, buddy.
Not just a string.
Dubious AI services are banned.
X-region blocks AI services, et cetera, from the UK.
Fixed.
Not doing this proves incompetency.
I have no idea what's going on here.
Oh, PHUK, you can't trust a Greek on Iran.
You're being called out, Celios.
Sorry.
Because he's trying to remake Alexander's empire again.
Yeah, yeah.
Alexander Persians.
He did.
Exactly.
Yeah.
After he conquered them, which is exactly how you should like people.
All right.
If we could go over to my segment, Samson.
Thank you very much.
All right, then, ladies and gentlemen.
So, obviously, as you know, to lead on from what you were just saying, Firas, the current government knows that it is deeply, deeply unpopular, which is why every year there's an ever more encroaching surveillance state.
And it's why Prevent, the unit of the Home Office that specializes in counter-terrorism, seems to keep finding an ever more expansive list of potential candidates who could one day become terrorists.
Now, you start with really, really trivial things like this from back a few years ago, where I talked about there was a list that came out about some of the types of TV shows and books that Prevent thought were problematic and could be, you know, sort of low-key signals for white supremacists.
These such things included Yes Minister, you know, that show that your dad used to watch back in the 80s, and The Thick of It, a show that was literally made during the Blair era.
And so it's remarkable, really, thinking about the fact that all of these standard British television shows that have just sort of become cult classics were actually enabling terrorism all this time.
All this time.
Obviously, the Lord of the Rings was another one that they came after in C.S. Lewis as well.
And on that note, obviously, one of the reasons why they hate the Lord of the Rings so much is because it speaks to eternal virtues in the human character, such as heroism and the contemplation of power, the responsibilities come with it, and where abuses of it can lead us down a dark path.
And if you're interested in such themes as heroism and power, we now have Islander issue five, where we talk about these themes explicitly in great detail.
There are many, many wonderful articles in it by some fantastic writers such as Carl Benjamin, Will Tanner, academic agent, Morgoth.
I've written a piece all about Aragon.
So yeah, there's plenty of reading material in there that Prevent would not like.
So, do go and give it a read for $14.99.
It's very, very good.
Another thing to say, though, as well, is that beyond, like, you know, sort of them saying, oh, well, this TV program's a bit problematic, or this particular show or book is problematic, obviously, it goes much deeper than this.
Now, Connor did a fantastic job back in 2024 talking about how Prevent works with Raikou and the Home Office and all of these other government agencies, not just to control the flow of information that you have, but also how you react to the compounding problems that the state constantly sets against you.
In one of the worst examples of it, in terms of how Raikou and Prevent actually have the temerity to tell you how you may appropriately grieve after, you know, a terror attack, right?
That's the actual level of power that they've taken onto themselves.
Absolutely monstrous.
And what's more as well, I just wanted to say that I have some more work here all about Rudyard Kipling, who is also on the terror list.
So if you want to go and watch a great chronicles about one of Prevent's mortal enemies, even though he's been dead for quite a while, shows the power of his writing, ladies and gentlemen.
You can go and watch that.
So, where is all of this going?
Well, like I say, they control how you react to terror attacks.
They control how you react to the sort of information that you take in, which comes down to one of the things that you were saying, Ferris, about why they're trying to ban X with such fervor.
And now they finally, you know, the rag, squeezing out the rag of terrorists until they've finally arrived at your children.
Because Prevent, in combination with the whole city council and the East Riding of Yorkshire, have created a video game for your children between the ages of 11 and 18 to play at school under the guidance of their teacher.
And basically, by playing this video game, you can gain counseling and help if you think for a second, if you dare to contemplate for a second that actually maybe this multiculturalism thing isn't all it's cracked up to be.
My grandfather always talks about how safe it was in Britain only 50, 60 years ago.
Why is everything like this?
Why is it every time I go out my door, I just look upon the third world who I never asked to be here, and all of these sorts of things.
And so it's kind of again, like where they think they get the license to do this sort of thing, I will never know.
But let's talk about it a bit more, shall we?
So characters can face extremism referrals if they choose to engage with groups that spread quote harmful ideological messages or join protests against the erosion of British values.
Even searching online, sorry, even researching online immigration statistics is portrayed negatively.
Now, one of the things I just want to say about this as well is that the whole term of British values is very much within a pocket of actually the state's language, right?
That is the language of the Blair Wright establishment.
That is language that they are comfortable with when discussing identity.
So how it is that they should want to diminish the interest of a young man or woman who cares about the erosion of such British values, I will never know.
Why would they be penalized for that?
When Kemi Beninoff says that she doesn't feel Nigerian, that she is in fact Yoruba, and all of the other Nigerians are her ethnic enemies, should we be referring Kemi Benov to Prevent?
Because she's radicalized against the Igbo?
Maybe the Nigerian wing of Prevent.
Yeah, is there one?
Yes, it's probably, I'm sure the BBC probably has a brand.
There's probably a BBC Pidgin article about the Nigerian Prevent.
I suspect so.
I feel like I'm not even in the real world sometimes.
Yeah, well, that's what this segment is about, to really just make you guess at reality.
The game was developed with government backing, and so, yes, your taxpaying money did go into making this game, ladies and gentlemen.
Backing by councils in East Yorkshire over growing concerns about immigration and tensions about migrant accommodation in their communities.
It goes on to point out as well that you can basically play between two characters, a man and a woman.
But in both scenarios, depending on what you pick, the pronouns are always they in this video game.
That's just hard-baked into...
I have to stop you because even the beginning of it is insane.
Young players...
Hold on.
That is it.
A white teenage to avoid being reported for extreme right-wing ideologies.
The purpose of the game is to navigate the police state so that you're not reported for extreme right-wing ideology.
They don't think this might backfire?
But also what's more...
If you lose, you get referred.
But obviously what it is...
Yeah.
But what it is as well is because when you look at the age range that this game is targeted towards, obviously if you've got an 11-year-old kid who really, for all intents and purposes...
should not really have any political thoughts at the age of 11, I think you're entitled to a childhood.
And sure, you might talk about it around the family dinner table or anything, but I think that I'm a strong believer that children should be able to have that childhood.
What they're doing is basically setting up scare tactics.
Sorry, I apologize, but I have to interrupt you again.
I worked with a bunch of people in Egypt for a while, and I had to go there a lot and interview people all the time.
The worst thing about being there was the sense that everybody was psychologically broken in, that everybody was psychologically tamed and did not dare say anything for fear that it might upset me or upset any form of authority.
What these guys are doing is setting up a video game to create that psychological brokenness in 11 to 18 year olds.
This is evil.
I heard about this game and I assumed that it was evil, but I didn't imagine that it was that evil.
It's very, yeah, it's completely evil.
It goes on to make a point as well that the Pathways game was designed for use in schools, specifically.
It is designed for educational purposes.
Homeschooling, here we come.
Yeah, to combat, as you say, the extreme right-wing narratives.
And it goes on to just point out the fact that around the whole area and the East Riding of Yorkshire, it won't surprise you to hear, people there, just like everywhere else in England, as it happened, are getting quite sick to the back teeth with demographic replacement and the degradation of their culture and their way of life.
And so the establishment are looking at the radicalization of the younger generations.
And I have to say as well, there was always a part of me some years back that wondered which way the younger generations were going to go.
Because on the one hand, you know, I being born right at the end of 96, I've only ever known the Blair Wright project, right?
I've only ever really known diverse Britain.
And so there comes a point where you think, okay, but sure, I get it for the older people because they've seen the change.
They've actually seen this forced upon them.
But if you've never known the change, if all you've ever known is this, does that actually diminish that sense of rebellion in you and that sense of reactionary suspects?
That's why they made Anne Boleyn black, right?
That's why they insert these diverse characters in historic context.
So that you think it has always been this way.
And actually, there never was a revolution to begin with.
And so they're targeting your young children because ultimately, if they dare have any sort of concern about immigration or about crime or about cultural barriers or just any of the things that we constantly talk about on here, Prevent have got their eye on them, right?
They've got their eye on them, which is really, really dark.
And so I thought to round off this Monday's segment, we might play this game.
Oh, please.
So let's have a crack at it, shall we?
It shouldn't take too long.
I played it once this morning.
I won't tell you whether or not I made the extremism list.
I'll leave that to myself.
But let's talk through it, shall we?
So press start.
I'll just skip through all of the instructions.
We know how to play video games here, don't we?
It doesn't matter, you're a they, whichever one you pick, but we'll go for the guy and we'll make a start.
So, Charlie was enjoying an online game with friends.
Charlie had not started long attending a new school in East Riding, and they were so relieved.
He was so you're going to get this a lot.
He was so relieved to have made new friends at the school left recently.
Charlie has started browsing new games and websites that some of the new friends use.
Ooh.
Sometimes, though, the people on these websites see things that seem off, even Stellios, slightly concerning.
No, we wouldn't want to be slightly concerned.
Someone on this website has encouraged Charlie to download a video.
And you know what?
It's breakfast with Bo.
That's what I tried to get him to download Bo's breakfast show.
But Charlie is unsure.
Go on, Charlie.
It's instinct.
If you feel you shouldn't do it, you probably shouldn't do it.
Yeah.
Go on, Charlie.
Take the plunge.
So, how should Charlie react?
Should he tell a trusted adult?
Should he talk to a stranger online to find out more about the video?
Or should we just download it?
What do you think?
Go on.
I mean, I just, I don't.
This is interact.
This is a choose option D with none of the above.
All right.
Well, just don't click.
Don't click on it because there could be bad people out there.
Well, the criteria.
The scientist is fishy, and especially young children don't know exactly.
Well, the closest we can get.
Closest we can get to D is C, I'm afraid, Stellios.
Let's download the video.
Charlie, who wanted to...
You extremist you.
You got me.
Download the video, download it, shared it with different people online.
Oh, and you can see this meter here.
This is a terror meter.
This is basically how close you are to being radicalized versus how close you are to being, you know, like Starma's, yeah, Starma's perfect test subject.
So deep down, Charlie wasn't sure if this was the right thing to do.
Some of the ideas in the video were extreme and violent.
And it's important to remember downloading or streaming certain content can lead to a terror-offensive terror offense conviction.
This is the other reason why I wanted to play the game.
When you look at the actual language given to like 11-year-olds, 12-year-olds, this is the sort of thing that they're being scared with and confronted with.
You were going to say something, Ferris, I think.
Just incredible.
Let me be devil's advocate for a conversation's sake.
I think that the internet can be an extremely scary place, especially for children.
And perhaps one of the ways to make them find out, not in the FAFO sense, is to scare them.
That doesn't mean that the particular way and the particular message they're using is bad.
But you do want to convey a sense of urgency and a sense of danger to children on the internet.
Well, obviously, I agree with you.
You want to raise children to use the internet responsibly.
But of course, the point with this particular game is there's nowhere in there where it says something like, oh, Charlie downloaded a video and it convinced him to change himself into becoming a woman, you know, or anything like that.
You know, like, or, you know, Amelia decided to cut her tits off.
But that's the point.
That's the point.
It's what I'm trying to make is that you have to tell children that there are going to be people out there who will try to tell them to chop their parts off.
Yes.
So it's not that them being scared that is the issue as far as I'm concerned.
It's what they're telling them that is their constitution.
Yeah, to be scared about.
But the values that they're trying to shape.
And the point is as well.
wrong they're telling them to but it's worse than that because they're ultra libertarian here they're They're actively telling them not to be concerned about something that they are confronted with day in, day out, and will have to live with in perpetuity if this government gets its way, which, you know, God willing, it won't.
This is a particular highlight for me where it says, Charlie takes a seat in class and waits to get his grade.
To his disappointment, Charlie doesn't do as well as he was expecting.
He got 60 out of 100 for his work and you needed 75 to pass.
To make matters worse, somebody else got 80 out of 100.
And the teacher said that this person has received a job offer.
Even before that, this was for a hospitality class.
Instead of saying, become an engineer, become something useful in life.
It's about, you know, go become a waiter.
Charlie has applied to dozens of jobs, but he hasn't had any luck yet.
The children.
Wait, wait, wait.
Somebody else in the class tells Charlie that this is proof that immigrants are coming to the UK and taking our jobs.
Wow.
Wow.
Basically.
Supply and demand.
Smart girl.
How should Charlie react?
Well, I think we have to agree and comment and explore the idea further, personally.
Charlie approaches a classmate angrily.
He agrees with the ideas and begins shouting about them in class.
The teacher let Charlie know that the school has a zero tolerance on hate speech.
The teacher was concerned about Charlie's outburst and tried to get to the bottom of it.
And obviously, we've been put in isolation for our troubles.
Okay.
Chilling in the room now.
I mean, is this what making of a mass shooter or what is this about?
Well, he's now seeing more videos online.
And essentially what you get to is this is unbelievable.
Charlie watches a video and learns from the video that Muslim men are stealing the places of British war veterans in emergency accommodation.
Now, why on earth would Charlie think that?
What a crazy crackhead you are, Charlie.
It's not just that.
It's that the very language they're using is trying to bait you.
Because from their perspective, they would say that this doesn't constitute stealing.
And they'd say Charlie watches the video and learns from the video that Muslim men are taking places of British war veterans in emergency accommodation.
Whereas they are sort of trying to lure you into this.
Yeah.
Yeah, absolutely.
So they're trying to identify the threats at a very early age.
It's like let's throw you some traps so you fall into them and we refer to you as a extremist.
Well, in this video, they explain that the government is betraying white British people and we need to take back control of our country.
So obviously this shows as well.
Complete.
It's not that Labour and those in charge and the establishment don't understand our concerns or haven't heard us by now.
We've been shouting it long enough.
They understand perfectly what we think and why we think it.
They just don't want that, right?
They have a different future in mind and it is one built on your amiseration and the amiseration of your children.
How should Charlie react?
Well, we should engage with it directly, of course.
No need to be a coward about all of this.
Immediately begins typing comments.
I'll just keep going through it.
Some concerns about replacement as well.
The word replacement is used in one of them.
Basically, and it goes on to make a point as well.
We'll stop playing the game now and just Karen talking about it.
It wasn't that fun.
But all this to say as well, that this particular segment, you can see how the game is structured, that it takes you through different aspects of a child's life.
So you have how things go at school, how things go at the family dinner table, and it basically is the family dinner two women and the boy.
Where's the father?
Where's the final boss?
We need to see it.
No, where's the father?
I don't know.
Should we keep scrolling through and see if we can find a father?
Charlie's very concerned about English rights, which makes sense to me.
Again, we'll join this secret group, which is honestly probably just like a sharp posting Facebook page, if anything, because they're great.
Amelia, Amelia's our lash.
She's very based in this game, to be honest with you.
She cares very greatly about the things that we're concerned about.
No, there doesn't seem to be any father.
But one of the points that I was going to just say was it takes you through all these different aspects of a young person's life and basically says, look, if you are concerned about these sorts of things, this will create enormous tension in your life.
It is showing you that this, if you go down this path of caring about these things, of voicing concerns about these things, your life is going to be harder and you're going to meet with a lot more resistance.
And don't get me.
It's trying to break you.
They're right about that.
Yeah.
But it's only because it's structured, the system is structured in such a way.
It's only because they're evil.
Yes.
That they're trying to break you.
That's the long and short of it.
Yeah.
So Charlie's mum was not pleased and grew suspicious of all the new activity her child's.
My father is going to report him to Prevent, is she?
Yeah, and so essentially what happens when it comes to the sixth one is based on that terror meter, you get reported to prevent.
You end up having an intervention from Prevent.
And then there's this wonderful, very, very pretty visual, you know, just sort of showing how Prevent are the good guys and how you don't need to be worried about them.
they're here to get you back on the right path again so it is honestly i don't think the stasi were this banal or that evil no No.
I mean, it's levels of evil that I wouldn't even be able to think of creating.
I think they're going to recreate the worst that the Stasi did, including the torturer.
It's absolutely terrible.
So don't play this game, ladies and gentlemen.
Play Mountain Blade or Witcher Three instead.
They're far superior.
All right.
Hook has a car.
Oh, Opa Hook has a comment that we can't say, but he's calling us amateurs because Charlie should be wearing Hugo Boss.
Well, you know, they didn't really have the budget for so many detailed character designs.
Oh, punk.
I don't know what to tell you.
Okay, I'll just go through.
Oh, it's quite a lot of them.
Yeah, I've read these ones.
Okay.
Just from your segment, Coalition of Good one.
Anadinism.
Anadem.
And hedonism.
Thank you.
I'm embarrassing myself there.
Blocking fake photos of swimsuits, obviously from your segment, is an open door to blocking anything they want.
To do that, you might as well prohibit beaches and enforce modesty swimsuits.
I'm tired of puritanical pro-censorship.
Well, to be honest with you, as far as I'm concerned, I do think that, I mean, let's just acknowledge one thing as well, which is that despite the one-hat side of X condemning all of this that went on with X and the swimsuits and everything, there was the entire other side of women who were actively begging for it for their engagement and because whores.
But the point is that I'm on the drone strike OnlyFans camp.
I'm liberal in other words.
So let's move on from that.
Well, the other thing just to say is as well that this was an easy goal that Elon allowed to be opened up.
Having said that, Labour were dumb enough to take the bait, and as you were saying, they've bitten off far more than they can chew.
So it would be quite strange, wouldn't it, when the history of the 21st century is written and we find that the Starma government collapsed because they wanted women in swimwears and swimwear taken off of social media.
Website of OnlyFans, that's all the contradictions.
Ofunk says, let's all play a game.
Whoever gets the most referrals to prevent wins, there are bonus points if Starma sends his Stasi to knock down your front door while you're playing it.
Well, he'd be playing it at school, so it's back to school for all of us.
That's Random Name says, as a game developer, this woke shite is why I left the industry to go full indie.
My game would probably land me in jail in the UK.
It's about geopolitics in space.
Well, I'll tell you what, random name.
That sounds like a damn good game.
I hope to play it one day.
Yeah.
He also says, if this game was any good, it would end with Charlie.
Yes.
And also, Cranky Texan for $10, thank you, says, remember that Winston loses at the end of 1984.
Orwell was telling you that you can't beat the Fabians once they control what the truth is.
They're going for it.
True.
Alright.
Stillius.
Oh, so I want us to go to the comment, the video comments.
Yeah, let's go video content, that's some funny...
The concept of hyperreality has really helped me understand cognitive dissonance of people in our imperiled countries.
Though not to be confused with liars, it does explain people who are stuck in a storybook.
Most important, it finally gave me a reason why accelerationism will never work, because people will die for the hyper-reality.
I think that's a fair observation.
Next one.
I came across this headline and a thought occurred to me.
Europe has been trying to establish itself as a rival block to the USA since at least the 1990s.
They show a good amount of disrespect to the USA and most don't pay their NATO contributions.
How does the USA ensure appropriate defense of a strategically important territory that belongs to an ally?
Asking Denmark to invest more in defense be firmly rebuked, citing sovereignty over the territory.
But provoking them.
We're going to put boots on the ground in Greenland.
No, never be.
I might be wrong, but allies sending troops to defend their own territory seems like it's in the USA's interest, and maybe that's the plan all along.
I mean, they already have military bases in Denmark, don't they?
It's a long, complicated story with England.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
The short version is: Trump is right about this.
Well, if you can't get to work today because of a snow like I am, go out and clear it then.
Don't waste your time on concrete games and watching podcasts.
You can listen to the podcast while cleaning the snow.
Just wanted to say.
I want more snow before the winter ends.
So, do you know who the last white girl to get unalive by law enforcement in Minneapolis was before Renee Good?
No, you don't.
And I bet you don't know that the person who did it was the first Somali police officer in the entire United States and that they were convicted of murder.
And it was later overturned by the Minnesota Supreme Court.
And they only served a couple years.
Bet you didn't know that, did you?
What interesting information?
Maduro getting kidnapped, George Floyd 2.0 Lesbian Edition.
2026 is turning out to be quite a year, and we're not even two weeks in.
Well, this year, I'm working on overhauling the mech to make it safe for the public to pilot.
It's bittersweet to see some of these old parts go.
Some of them are nearly a decade old.
Thinking about how much things have changed since then, it makes one both anxious and excited for the future.
Who knows what wonderful things are in store this year?
And I plan to make some of them.
Nice.
And we'll keep watching as you do.
Have a good time.
I'm liking the start of this.
This looks promising.
Keep us updated.
What was it you wanted to say?
One of the honorary mentions.
Diogenes Knuts says, I, for one, think John K. Rowling is stunning and braves the transition in their quest to destroy trans ideology from the inside out.
And Stelius is a brave, intrepid journalist for being first to report on this development.
Is that what it was?
For some reason, I thought it was Joanne.
Or, you know, John.
I think it was something.
Yeah.
Isn't it Joanne?
Yeah.
What did I say?
Well, you were saying John.
Okay.
Slightly different Stellios.
Bridget Macron was so last year.
We're going to talk about John Rowling this year.
Michael Dreibelby says this is what makes the subscription to Lotus Cedars worthwhile.
The analysis of Stelios and Firas.
Here in the US, I get to hear the constant anti-Trump drumbeat, but with Firas and Stelios, I get a very clinical evaluation of what is actually going on with an actual view of how the world works in reality over the media Hollywood fantasies.
Very kind.
Thank you.
Very kind.
And Michael sends us really good messages very frequently.
Right.
Okay, so chaos in Iran comments.
Arizona Desert Rat says, I'm just not really keen on the US getting involved in another 20 years with no difference.
Fair enough.
Fair enough.
But one thing to say is just, first of all, I don't know what is going to happen, but I think one thing is that Trump doesn't want to have something of the sort.
He doesn't want to start a 20-year war that will lead to no place.
And one thing, though, that as a leader, there's a limit to how much anti-war he can sound in the global stage.
Because we know the, you know, if you want to prepare for peace.
You don't scare them, it doesn't work.
Yeah, if you want to have peace, prepare yourself for war.
And you need to actually communicate that you're not a Jimmy Carter.
Last time Jimmy Carter communicated that he was weak, there was the Iranian Revolution.
Right, so I think Trump is doing well in in doing that.
Right, so Dud Dudley douchebag.
Yeah, that yeah.
I can I cannot help but speculate that the lack of public support for the Iranian people is the lack of a coordinated color revolution and other interferences by NGOs.
Yep.
Different story, but okay.
Okay, you you want to not really.
I think with Starlink being operated there and one of the people that you were quoting, Neo Beg, she was saying that she was hearing from Mossad that Mossad was on the ground in Iran.
There is some support for it, but the media is just so anti-Trump that they are completely useless at this stage.
Okay, Baron von Warhock says the promise of liberating Persian Hottis will probably get far more young men in uniform than the threat of WMDs ever did.
Okay.
And Sean Gaffney says, on Iran, I feel for people and wish them well.
I really do not want the West to get involved.
I just want what is best for my people, my nation.
And yep.
And the Cambrian Kulak says, hi Firas, appreciate your initial thoughts on what this Iran business means for Turkey.
I can imagine there'd be mixed views.
Good that Turkey's enemy Iran is changing.
Albeit maybe not for the better from their perspective.
So if you have some answers to ends up in alliance with Israel to check Turkey, that would be pretty bad for the Turks.
And that might be where a nationalist Iran ends up going, especially if the Shah is involved in any way, because he's quite pro-Israel.
So we'll see.
And one last comment before we go to Faras is because this is good.
Sardonic Rath says John K. Rowling, not the hero we asked for, but the hero we deserve.
Ah, yes.
On Starmer wants to ban X, Jimbo says if they ban X, we are the biggest suckers in history.
Look at Starmer hitting a punching bag.
We were just talking about this morning and comparing this sort of emasculated Starmer to the emasculated Zach Polanski, him running like he has no coordination and Starmer punching a bag like he has the upper body strength of J.K. Rowling.
It's disgusting.
Although I think J.K. Rowling might be actually stronger than Starmer.
It would be hilarious to see.
Cumbrian Kulak, creepers got a creep.
The stuff on X has been grim.
That being said, the BBC has rightly earned a reputation for being full of nonsense.
Yes.
Yes.
Sophie Liv, they just dislike the slut detector.
Sophie, I'm not going to read the rest of that.
Thanks for that though.
Grant says, once in a blue moon, Canada does something sane.
No, they're just terrified of Trump putting more tariffs on them.
They didn't do something sane.
They just cowered in fear.
Hector Rex says, I had the indistinct, I had the distinct displeasure of seeing the Ofcom ladies in bikinis.
Oh, my eyes are burning.
Kevin Fox, the government excuse for getting Ofcom to clamp down on X is to protect women and children over the deep fakes and AI generated CSE images, and yet nothing about the groomers app of choice, Snapchat, which both the police and the NSPCC have shown are responsible for 50% of grooming activity.
Not to mention that there is all kinds of CP on Instagram and Facebook and a bunch of others.
And not to mention that there are real rapes happening, which they don't seem to care about.
So the digital stuff is awful.
But in the list of the priorities, the physical world comes before the digital world.
I maybe I'm just stupid or over.
Constantly importing people from various countries per capita.
More likely.
Yep, yes.
Yep.
Kirstarmer needs his Dark Lord and Master Tony Blair.
Yeah, maybe.
Please no.
Thank you.
No, please no.
From my segment, Maria Manzi says, got my new Islander delivered Saturday.
So when can I expect my free referral to Prevent?
Right now, Maria.
I'm sorry, we didn't attach it in the thing when we posted it.
It was a mishap.
I'll talk to the producers and make sure that this is corrected.
I apologize.
Justin B says, I really liked that Hope Not Hate list.
I already had several things from it, like The Lord of the Rings and Yes Minister.
So I went and bought most of the rest.
There were some good recommendations in there.
Exactly how you should treat them.
If you like cool things about Britain, you know, world-famous things that we've created, then you're a terrorist.
Thane Scotty of Swindon says, there's a YouTube video discussing this game, and apparently it's awful from a video game standpoint too.
And there's been no hard, with there being no hard win or lose conditions, it's as much a Chinese knockoff as it is a terrible propaganda.
Well, I'll tell you what, to be honest with you, maybe if Prevent had got a few people from their, you know, their bogus list to work on making the game, they'd have had a more high-quality product.
Because I imagine there's a lot of gamers on that list and people who know how to do game code.
George Hap says, Yes, Minister is speaking too much truth to not be flagged as extremist content.
It's a must-watch for every man who wants to be politically aware.
Yeah, it's one of the most genius British comedies that ever existed.
And what's more as well, yeah, and no wonder they don't like it because it shows that the civil servants and the civil service just exists as a permanent state that pursues aims and agendas that are totally different from, let alone the policy pledges and campaign promises of governments, that there's a permanent state there and that they work to undermine, you know, the sort of theater of democracy.
Anyway, we've run over, ladies and gentlemen, so I hope you've enjoyed the podcast today.
Thank you both for joining me.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Is Real Politik 3 for our?
Yes, there is an episode with Kevolk Almasian talking about Syria and what's been going on in Syria.
So please check it out.
Yeah, tune in for that.
Buy Islander, of course, and enjoy the rest of your day.