Stay Free - Russel Brand - Trump takes on BBC while Britain burns - SF649

Nov. 12, 2025 - Stay Free - Russel Brand

01:02:02

Trump takes on BBC while Britain burns - SF649

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Ladies and gentlemen, Russell Fran actor Russell Russell Francis trying to bring real journalism to the American people.
	Hello there you awakening wonders today we've got a fantastic show.
	We are taking a deep dive into two extremely important and significant subjects.
	One, my native UK has been immersed in crime and some high profile people are talking out about it.
	And two, the BBC have been caught editing content, editing content to manage the message of Donald Trump.
	When a media company can change the words of a president for their own convenience, you know how powers operate.
	You knew that already when Trump got kicked off of Twitter.
	And by the way, you can say this stuff without being an advocate for Trump or believing that Trump is the solution to all the world's problems.
	I don't believe Trump is the solution to all the world's problems.
	I believe Christ is the solution to all the world's problems and that you can have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ as I do.
	Nevertheless, a global imperialist state that wants to replace God is a big, big problem.
	Both of these stories illustrate that tendency.
	You are going to love it.
	If you're not a member of Rumble Premium yet, become a member of Rumble Premium now.
	Let's get into our first story.
	When it was revealed that the BBC had doctored a Trump speech to make it seem he incited the Capitol riot, it exposed more than bias.
	It exposed belief.
	The belief that deceiving the public is justified if it defeats the enemy.
	But when truth itself becomes negotiable, who's really endangering democracy?
	Trump or those claiming to defend it?
	Like the BBC.
	Hello there, you Awakening Wonders.
	Well there you have it.
	The BBC tell lies.
	The mainstream media tell lies.
	The mainstream media are invested in destroying independent media.
	You cannot trust them.
	You never could.
	Now it's interesting to talk about this now because Mam Dani, a socialist Muslim mayor, is in charge in New York City.
	And I'll be interested to see how right-wing media exaggerates, amplifies, detracts from, attacks Mamdani.
	It'll be just interesting because what matters really and where we want to get to is information.
	You can't trust the media, you can't trust the government.
	So now just try to assess information.
	And the idea that there's no objective information, that everything's subjective, that's bullshit.
	That's why you need God.
	You need to know that justice is real, truth is real, being a good person is real.
	Oh, it depends.
	It depends on the perspective.
	There's some perspective where it's okay to have a rape gang.
	There is no perspective where it's okay to have a rape gang.
	So let's have a look at those people we've charged with telling the truth.
	Remember, the word media just meant to be a channel via which information reaches you.
	It shouldn't get lacquered up, diluted, polluted, and intoxicated with ideology.
	And yet it seems to.
	It's been revealed that Trump edited a Trump speech in order to convey a certain story.
	Let's analyse that and then look at how it applies across the political spectrum and how, as always, what we need is direct control ourselves.
	We have the means of production.
	Why are we fucking around?
	They played the following clip.
	We're going to walk down to the Capitol and I'll be there with you.
	And we fight.
	We fight like hell.
	But Trump didn't in fact say this at all.
	The BBC spliced together two clips that took place 54 minutes apart.
	It's amazing that the Telegraph have chosen.
	Right, okay, we need to get the coolest person on the team here at the Telegraph to explain this to a modern, funky audience.
	Now what they've done is they've spliced together two clips using the old splicer.
	Yeah, what film you talk about?
	The Keystone cops.
	That's just an aside.
	The central and functional information is, of course, the BBC presented something to you as truth that was heavily narrativized.
	You'll all be familiar with this clip from The Simpsons, where someone's past was used to make them look like a rapist.
	Hey, why does this seem familiar to me?
	Precious Venus.
	Thank you!
	Then I noticed she was sitting on the gummy Venus, so I grabbed an offer.
	Oh, just thinking about that sweet, sweet candy.
	I just wish I had another one right now.
	Aw, crap.
	Somebody had to take the babysitter home.
	Then I noticed she was sitting on her sweet can.
	I grabbed her.
	Sweet can.
	Oh, just thinking about her can.
	I just wish I had grabbed her.
	Sweet.
	Sweet.
	Sweet can.
	Sweet can.
	Sweet, sweet can.
	Shagger of the year.
	Inkle ball bag.
	So, Mr. Simpson, you admit you grabbed her can.
	What do you have to say in your defense?
	Mr. Simpson, your silence will only incriminate you further.
	No, Mr. Simpson, don't take your anger out on me.
	Get back, get back.
	Mr. Simpson, no!
	Capitization may not have happened.
	We all know that's how the media functions, so what does it reveal about the media's intention?
	Now we know they have an intention.
	What is it?
	So let's go through it again.
	We're gonna walk down to the Capitol, and I'll be there with you.
	Now, see there, between Capitol and and, that's a cut.
	Oh my god, you know what's terrifying about watching this is that this is made for an audience of I suppose boomers and Generation X's and people my age.
	And look at the level of hand-holding they need to understand this stuff.
	I suppose I've worked in media all of my life and been involved in content creation for a long while.
	I'm like, yeah, if there's a cutaway, that means that there's an edit.
	And that means that they're using something else.
	Right, Massey?
	Oh no!
	Wait, what?
	No, it's bloody obvious.
	Mike grabbed.
	Sweet can.
	These things are obvious to people that understand media.
	And what's equally obvious to me, given that now we know, my God, that this is the margin, this is the chasm that we're crossing, the BBC did that for a reason.
	And the reason the BBC did that is whether you like Trump or not, and whether you agree with him ideologically on what you think he thinks about race or immigration or any of the subjects that can be used to stimulate you back into your numb, dumb ignorance, Donald Trump, whatever he is and isn't, isn't...
	is a problem to the kind of institutional and establishment interests that plainly have total control over the BBC.
	Here's what Trump actually said.
	We're going to walk down to the Capitol and we're going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women.
	It's different.
	It's completely different.
	Now, here's a prediction.
	What will happen now is they'll say, oh, one person made that decision and we'll find the one person that made that decision and we'll get rid of the one person that made that decision.
	But that decision was a reflection of values that are deep within the BBC.
	All right, let me just ask you, who did the BBC want to win that election?
	Donald Trump?
	Yes or no?
	How do they want you to view Donald Trump, positively or negatively?
	So whenever they tell stories about anyone, think about what do they want you to think about that person and why would that be?
	It wasn't until nearly an hour later that he then said the second part of the BBC's version.
	We're going to walk down to the Capitol.
	And we fight.
	We fight like hell.
	Telegraph revealed that the BBC had doctored a Donald Trump speech for its Panorama program, editing it to make it appear though it had encouraged a Capitol riot.
	It confirmed what many people suspected.
	The so-called impartial establishment media are no longer chroniclers of truth, but active participants in a psychological war for narrative control.
	Look, man, it's hard for me to talk about something like this because I have been in a personal battle as a member of independent media with establishment media for a long time.
	Way before the very damaging allegations, which ultimately generated charges down the line, because none of the people involved in that documentary pursued anything criminal, there were a lot of headlines that were attacking me in a variety of other ways.
	So of course, I'm not impartial when it comes to the corruption of the media and the way that the media present information in order to bring down their opponents.
	And their chiefest opponents are independent media, because independent media inevitably leads to independent politics.
	If you start to follow independent media creators like me, forget me, who cares about me, or anyone, people that you barely even have heard of, then their audience share is divided.
	As well as hearing a lot of crazy stuff, you'll also get access to ideas that ultimately prevent you from being cuddled, curtailed and controlled by their interests.
	You'll start to recognize you don't need brokerage and mitigation in every area of your life.
	You don't need a layer of bureaucracy wrapped around you.
	Some people do want it and like it.
	Remember, during the pandemic period, some people did what they were told, some people didn't.
	Those people that do what they're told, why don't they live in a democracy that's a little bit more restrictive?
	Because you can, if you want, by the way, take as many vaccines as you like all day long, vaccine yourself to within an inch of your life.
	Then another group might not want to have vaccines.
	So what makes more sense?
	What makes more sense?
	Penalise the people that don't want to get vaccinated for not wanting to get vaccinated or simply acknowledge that you can have different types of people that want to take different types of medication or eat different types of food, that we can accommodate all of that.
	You don't need to assert and exert centralized control over every aspect of our lives.
	The scandal was not just a journalistic failure, it was a moral one.
	For years, legacy outlets have portrayed Trump not as a flawed political figure, but as a modern day Hitler, an existential evil against which any manipulation, any distortion becomes justified.
	In the process, they've done more than just reshape how politics is covered.
	They've helped reshape what politics is.
	Not a contest of ideas, but a holy war between the righteous and the damned.
	This kind of moral absolutism does not arise in a vacuum.
	It thrives in a system that depends on the creation and destruction of villains to sustain itself.
	The establishment always needs a monster, someone whose existence can justify its moral authority.
	Consider Dick Cheney, the former vice president, once reviled as the architect of America's bloodiest misadventures.
	For years, he was the liberal media's embodiment of evil, a corrupt war profiteer, the dark lord of the Bush administration.
	Yet in death, Cheney has been reimagined as a tragic hero, a principled conservative whose sole virtue, denouncing Trump, was enough to redeem a career once condemned.
	The same rehabilitation was extended to George W. Bush, a president whose wars killed hundreds of thousands, but who now appears on talk shows as a genial grandfather figure, embraced by the same networks that once painted him as a tyrant.
	The message is clear.
	You are only as monstrous as your usefulness to the narrative allows.
	If you can hold on to these two ideas, you won't go far wrong.
	One, technology now is so immersive that it can give us the kind of power of gods.
	And two, the state wants absolute control of that technology.
	You can see that they want to be God because they are using edicts and principles that only God might deploy.
	One, they want us to be like children, dependent on them for information and even in some cases, welfare.
	Two, in this instance, they are claiming the right of canonization, that they can wash away a lifetime of sin, that they can posthumously turn Dick Cheney, one of their worst monsters, into a totem of sanctification.
	At the heart of the transformation lies a media industry that no longer sees its role as holding power to account, but rather as defining which power deserves to be held.
	Impartiality has been replaced by moral theatre.
	The doctored panorama clip wasn't an isolated lapse.
	It was a symptom of a larger condition.
	From CNN's obsessive moralization of the basket of deplorables moment to MSNBC's relentless portrayal of half the country as domestic extremists to President Biden's battle for the soul of the nation speech with its red-lit staging and rhetoric of semi-fascism, the narrative has been weaponized.
	Political disagreement is no longer framed as difference.
	It's framed as danger.
	We must be honest with each other and with ourselves.
	Too much of what's happening in our country today is not normal.
	Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic.
	Now I want to be very clear.
	Very clear up front.
	Not every Republican, not even the majority of Republicans are MAGA Republicans.
	Not every Republican embraces their extreme ideology.
	I know, because I've been able to work with these mainstream Republicans.
	But there's no question that the Republican Party today is dominated, driven, and intimidated.
	We can't make this content without the support of our partners.
	Here's a message from one now.
	The wellness company, Peter McCulloch's brainchild.
	Now, I don't like the term brain child.
	It makes me think of a child who's sort of made out of brain material, all slimy and slobbery and covered in a network of neurological interconnections and syntactic sinew.
	Every day we are exposed to nanoplastics, the dirty bastards, infiltrating our food, water, testicles, clitori, and they're now being detected in the human body.
	A study in the New England Journal of Medicine found nanoplastics embedded in artery plaque and people with those particles at a high risk of heart attack and stroke over the next three years.
	The Wellness Company's medical board is dedicated to understanding root cause issues and created PlazDetox as a natural solution.
	PlasDetox is your daily defense that targets internal plastic buildup with a superior blend of ingredients.
	It includes cracked cell wall cholera.
	Right.
	Chlorella.
	Can you say that, Joe?
	Do you know that one?
	Do you know it?
	What's that?
	Chloera.
	Cracked cell wall chlolera.
	Never ever.
	Chlora.
	You ain't heard of that.
	Chlorella say chlorella.
	It removes toxins.
	It takes the toxins right out of there.
	Yeah, like green stuff.
	Chlorella.
	Chlorette, that's it.
	Calcium deglyerate to support phase two liver detox and the elimination of endocrine disruptors such as BPA, polystyrene, tomato extract to provide antioxidant protection and detox probiotic blend to reinforce the gut barrier and help clear nanoplastic byproducts.
	Use PlasDetox daily to reduce toxin burden and to support healthy liver detox, all in a clean daily formula for long-term use.
	Go to twc.health forward slash brand and use the code brand to get 10% off plus free shipping.
	Again, that's TWC.health forward slash brand and use the code brand to get 10% off.
	10% off with the code brand.
	TWC.health forward slash brand.
	See you over there.
	Get them filthy nanoplastics out of your nut bag, tit sack, mouth, and whole body.
	This is not new.
	History is leared with examples of how propaganda, fear, and selective truth-telling have been used to manufacture consent and crush dissent.
	The weapons of mass destruction saga remains a defining lesson in media complicity.
	Tony Blair's 2003 claim that Saddam Hussein could deploy WMDs within 45 minutes.
	George W. Bush's mission accomplished banner, the echo chamber that amplified the lies until they became justification for the war.
	Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States.
	Can you see me, please?
	Yeah!
	Thank you all very much, Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans.
	Major combat operations in Iraq have ended.
	in the battle of iraq the united states and our allies have prevailed and now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country
	In this battle, we have fought for the cause of liberty and for the peace of the world.
	Our nation and our coalition are proud of this accomplishment.
	Yet it is you, the members of the United States military, who achieved it.
	Your courage, your willingness to face danger for your country and for each other made this day possible.
	In the McCarthy era, communists filled the same role that fascists and MAGR extremists now occupy, a manufactured enemy so terrifying that reason and evidence could be suspended in the name of safety.
	Today we are engaged in a final all-out battle between communistic atheism and Christianity.
	The modern champions of communism have selected this as the time.
	And ladies and gentlemen, the chips are down.
	They are truly down.
	If there be any doubt, the time has been chosen.
	Let us go directly to the leader of communism today, Joseph Stalin.
	Here is what he said, not back in 1928, not before the war, not during the war, but two years after the last war was ended.
	As one of our outstanding historical figures once said, when a great democracy is destroyed, it will not be from enemies from without, but rather because of enemies from within.
	When Trump entered the political stage, he became the ultimate vessel for this tradition.
	His populism, often crude, always combative, made him an easy caricature, a perfect foil for a political class that needed a devil.
	But Trump's own instinct for division also poured fuel on the fire.
	His willingness to mock, insult, and polarize made it simple for his opponents to cast him as uniquely dangerous.
	Yet his supporters saw something else, not a savior, but a weapon against the elites who had long sneered at them.
	Last, the dynamic fed itself.
	Each side's fury justified the other, and the media, ever the opportunists, reaped the reward of outrage.
	But when the moral absolutism becomes the default lens, truth becomes irrelevant.
	The fine people on both sides controversy remains a textbook case.
	Trump's four comments where he explicitly condemned white supremacists were edited to make it appear that he sympathized with them.
	The clip went viral, the myth became permanent, and the division deepened.
	And that's when we heard the words of the President of the United States that stunned the world and shocked the conscience of this nation.
	He said there were, quote, some very fine people on both sides.
	Very fine people on both sides.
	Charlottesville lie.
	Very fine people on both sides.
	Except that isn't all he said.
	And they knew it then.
	And they know it now.
	Watch this.
	But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides.
	You had people in that group.
	Excuse me.
	Excuse me.
	I saw the same pictures as you did.
	You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.
	George Washington was a slave owner.
	Was George Washington a slave owner?
	So will George Washington now lose his status?
	Are we going to take down?
	Excuse me.
	Are we going to take down?
	Are we going to take down statues to George Washington?
	How about Thomas Jefferson?
	What do you think of Thomas Jefferson?
	You like him?
	I do.
	Okay, good.
	Are we going to take down the statue?
	Because he was a major slave owner.
	Now we're going to take down his statue.
	So you know what?
	It's fine.
	You're changing history.
	You're changing about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists because they should be condemned totally.
	But you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists, okay?
	And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly.
	Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people, but you also had troublemakers.
	And you see them come with the black outfits and with the helmets and with the baseball bats.
	You had a lot of bad people in the other group too.
	I'm sorry.
	I didn't understand what you were saying.
	You were saying the press has treated white nationalists unfairly?
	I just didn't understand what you were saying.
	There were people in that rally, and I looked the night before.
	If you look, they were people protesting very quietly the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee.
	I'm sure in that group there were some bad ones.
	The following day it looked like they had some rough, bad people.
	Neo-Nazis, white nationalists, whatever you want to call them.
	But you had a lot of people in that group that were there to innocently protest and very legally protest because I don't know if you know, they had a permit.
	The other group didn't have a permit.
	So I only tell you this.
	There are two sides to a story.
	I thought what took place was a horrible moment for our country.
	A horrible moment.
	But there are two sides of the country.
	Does anybody have a final?
	Does anybody have?
	You have an infrastructure.
	What makes you think?
	This might be today the first time the news networks played those full remarks in their context.
	Very fine people on both sides.
	The same playbook repeated itself after the Capitol riot.
	Selective editing, loaded commentary, and censorship in the name of safety.
	As the Twitter files later revealed, government agencies like the FBI and DHS were quietly coordinating with social media giants to suppress dissenting voices under the pretext of fighting domestic extremism.
	A new kind of orthodoxy was being born.
	Not state propaganda in the old Soviet sense, but something more subtle and pervasive.
	A fusion of government, tech, and media power, all aligned in service of one moral narrative.
	Meanwhile, the language of dehumanization became normalized.
	When Nancy Pelosi calls Trump a vile creature and the worst thing on the face of the earth, she's not merely insulting a rival.
	She's reinforcing a worldview in which political opposition is no longer legitimate.
	He's just a vile creature.
	The worst thing on the face of the earth.
	But anyway.
	You think he's the worst thing on the face of the earth?
	I do.
	Yeah.
	I do.
	Why is that?
	Because he's the President of the United States and he does not honor the Constitution of the United States.
	In fact, he's turned the Supreme Court into a rogue court.
	He's abolished the House of Representatives.
	This rhetorical escalation is not harmless.
	When every opponent is a monster, violence becomes plausible, necessary, and even inevitable.
	When every election is the end of democracy, compromise becomes treason.
	And when one side controls both the moral script and the media megaphone, what follows is not democracy but managed hysteria.
	The assassination of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk, whatever one's politics, must be viewed in this context.
	A culture that normalizes violent rhetoric can't be shocked when it metastasizes into actual violence.
	Words shape worlds.
	And America's political class, aided by a complicit press, has spent years shaping a world where annihilation feels like justice.
	So, how do we step back from the brink?
	Can a nation rediscover dialogue when its institutions profit from division, when its journalists have become activists, and its public broadcasters behave like political operatives?
	Can a society that once prided itself on the marketplace of ideas survive when truth itself is treated as a partisan property?
	Perhaps the most urgent question is this: if the media, the government, and the cultural elite are willing to distort, censor, and dehumanize in the name of morality, what happens when morality itself becomes the mask for control?
	The Doctor's BBC clip is not just a story about a speech, it's a story about the decay of trust, the weaponization of information, and the peril of turning politics into theology.
	When every opponent is Hitler, every election becomes Armageddon, and when outrage replaces truth as the currency of public life, there are no victors, only believers and heretics.
	If the goal was to save democracy, then perhaps the establishment should ask what kind of democracy can survive when its storytellers have become priests.
	If you want to read that article in full, you can do on Substack.
	This small clip shows you enough to never trust them again.
	You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables.
	Right?
	So racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, you name it.
	And unfortunately, there are people like that.
	And he has lifted them up.
	He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people.
	Now I have 11 million.
	He tweets and retweets.
	They're offensive, hateful, mean-spirited, rhetoric.
	Now, some of those, oops, they are irredeemable, but thankfully, they are not America.
	But the other basket, the other basket, and I know because I look at this crowd, I see friends from all over America here.
	I see friends from Florida and Georgia and South Carolina and Texas and as well as, you know, New York and California.
	But that other basket of people are people who feel the government has let them down.
	The economy has let them down.
	Nobody cares about them.
	Nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures.
	And they're just desperate for change.
	It doesn't really even matter where it comes from.
	They don't buy everything he says, but he seems to hold out some hope that their lives will be different.
	That they won't wake up and see their jobs disappear.
	Lose a kid to heroin.
	I feel like you're at a dead end.
	Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well.
	In a way, that clip's not a big deal.
	We all know that they lie.
	We all know they exaggerate.
	We certainly know that they edit.
	What's fascinating is that the technology now exists to hold the powerful to account.
	As the brilliant book Revolt of the Public excellently describes, the old elites no longer have control and the new elites haven't been fully incarnated.
	In this liminal space, there is an opportunity for power to change in ways that are radical and interesting.
	Remember, we can't rely on political ideas that emerged from the industrial age.
	Fascism, communism.
	We now have to move to political ideas that reflect our technology.
	And by God's holy grace, these technologies grant systems that are spiritually beneficial and authentic.
	Individual sovereignty, community democracy.
	It's now not possible for Hillary Clinton to just say basket of deplorables and not be held to account.
	You can't say that the North Stream pipeline was blown up by Putin and not be held to account.
	You can't say that Donald Trump incited a riot and not be held to account.
	You can't accuse people of things and not be held to account.
	Media is now in the hands of people.
	As Marshall McLuhan said, the medium is the message.
	And the message is this: media is decentralized.
	Power should be decentralized too.
	Power belongs to God and God only.
	Minimize the power of centralized government.
	Maximize democracy.
	These principles will change the world much more than changing the colouring of the flags and livery of whatever centralized organization you have in charge of your life.
	Whether it's Facebook or Columbia, whether it's the BBC or the Republican Party, you no longer require the degree of centralization that was once beneficial for municipal organization.
	Now what is possible is mass subsidiarity.
	Some people will call it anarcho-syndicalism.
	Some people will call it tribalism.
	But what people in positions of centralized power will always call it is dangerous because that modality ends their control.
	As much as Hillary Clinton may hate Donald Trump, there's no one she hates more than she hates you.
	As much as the BBC might hate Donald Trump, there's no one that they hate as much as they hate you, your freedom, your ability to change, and access information from outside of their narrow purview.
	But that's just why I think.
	Tell me what you think in the comments and the chat.
	We can't make this content without the support of our partners.
	Here's a message from one now.
	Do you want to support me?
	No, I don't.
	Yes, you do.
	Support me and support Rumble Premium.
	You won't only be supporting me, you'll get additional access to Mug Club, that's Crowder's gig, Tim Cast, that's Tim Paul's racket, and Glenn Greenwald's additional content.
	Join us on Rumble Premium.
	We make content every single week through Rumble because Rumble supports free speech.
	When I was under attack from the British government and the British media, Rumble stood firm.
	Yes, of course, there's crazy people on Rumble.
	There's crazy people everywhere.
	There's a crazy person living under this hat.
	That doesn't mean we shouldn't have the right to speak freely together.
	By supporting Rumble Premium, you're supporting me and content creators like me.
	You get additional content, and what I will say even more, drink down deep on the delicious irony in this one.
	You get an ad-free experience.
	If you want an ad-free experience of Rumble, get Rumble Premium.
	In the meantime, stay free.
	The rest of this show will not be on YouTube, The Globalist Swines.
	Click the link in the description and join us over on Rumble.
	Is Britain becoming a violent hellhole, or should it be a violent heck hole?
	Or are we exaggerating in order to exert control?
	Is Britain becoming more violent or has Britain always been violent?
	Are things falling apart or is medium is there's a lot of questions here actually?
	I mean, there's a lot of questions.
	There's a lot of questions.
	There's so many questions.
	There's so many questions.
	Let's get into it.
	Hello there, you awakening wonders.
	Thanks for joining us today.
	We're talking about crime in the UK.
	In the aftermath of the Huntingdon train stabbing, Britain once again finds itself gripped by fear and uncertainty.
	Headlines scream of chaos, social media teems with outrage and politicians urge vigilance, as if violence has become the new normal.
	But beneath the noise lies a deeper question, is Britain truly growing more dangerous, or are we being taught to live in fear?
	Let me know what you think in the comments think.
	Let me know what you think, because you're you know that's how that word works.
	Let me know what you think in the comments and the chat.
	Yeah, let me know what you think in the comments and chat.
	In the aftermath of the Huntingdon train stabbing, Britain finds itself once again in the grip of inner inquiry.
	Is violence escalating?
	Is Britain becoming more violent?
	Certainly, my sister-in-law, Kirsty Gallagher, got kicked in the back.
	She described it as like a football, and I wonder if that's just because anything you kick, by definition, is like a football and.
	But the truth is man, that's terrible.
	She's just walking down the street, a woman getting kicked right up the back.
	What's, going on in the Uk?
	Let's analyse it.
	Let's look at how media use it.
	Let's note too, how powerful interests exploit anything that happens ultimately to their ends.
	That's why you've got to stay switched on, you poor sods.
	Right, let's have a look at it.
	So the defense secretary says British public should be more vigilant, more vigilant.
	People are terrified.
	How can they be any more vigilant?
	Be aware, be awake, be conscious vigilant, vigilant infers, if I may say, do you know a word that comes from vigilant vigilante, and what that means is you'll become so watchful and you'll start to recognize the government and institutions you're dependent upon are incapable of doing their jobs, and you have to do it yourself and, in a way, you do have to do it yourself.
	That's the truth of the matter.
	You can't have an intercedary force, particularly not a government, that's ultimately there to control you and exploit you and to broker, as you know, relationships between other powerful interests, while making it look like it's helping you.
	The government of the Uk, in particular, is not there to help you.
	It's there to broker deals with more powerful interests, both corporate and commercial, and bureaucratic.
	You know that I mean by bureaucratic, larger bodies, whether it's the EU, the the Brexit didn't really really truly happen, did it.
	And commercially, you know what I mean, setting up deals, for example, like the Moderna one that Rishi Sunak did while in government.
	That I don't imagine Kiir Starma has reneged on or undone or negated, even in spite of us being aware now that the vaccines weren't what they promised to be, that Rishi Sunak had an unusual relationship with Modern he was part of the hedge fund that set it up.
	So what I mean to say is, why would you trust the government?
	If you would become super vigilant, you would start to notice that the real criminals are not just lunatics stabbing people on a train, even though that's obviously plainly a crime, but the people that facilitate and expedite endless crime through their corruption that benefit from us being terrified.
	But anyway, let's look at a quote.
	The British public is pretty tough and will carry on after train stabbings, but should be more vigilant.
	The defence secretary has said John Healy told SKY NEWS on sunday with Trevor Phillips.
	Well, for me, the British public are pretty tough, pretty resilient.
	We have to be with you lot in charge.
	If you're going to be governed by a mug like Starma, you better toughen up quick sharp double quick.
	Otherwise you're going to struggle to survive out there.
	Britain is changing quickly.
	The most likely outcome is some amalgam of Nigel Farage's reform and the Conservative Party will win whenever the next election is.
	But will that resolve the problem?
	Are we not experiencing deep systemic problems?
	Look at what's happening everywhere in fact.
	In New York, Mamdani, people lurching, lunging leftward.
	My God, I could talk about anything for 10 years.
	Let's use another asset.
	Liam Gallagher criticises Sadiq Khan over the rise in London knife crime.
	Now Sadiq Khan, another Muslim mayor, is regarded as compassionate.
	I've got a degree of respect for Sadiq Khan.
	Two reasons really.
	One is his dad was like a bus conductor.
	So whatever he's got, it ain't because he went to the right school.
	So let's respect that about Sadiq Khan.
	And frankly, it don't matter if someone's a Muslim or not.
	If they believe in God and they follow the precepts of Muslim, my prayer would be that that would make them peace-loving.
	I'm a Christian.
	I worship Jesus Christ.
	And I believe that London, England, the United States of America would be better aligned if they were governed and ruled in a total alignment with Christian principles.
	That's what I believe.
	But my beliefs can't be imposed on an entire planet.
	I find it hard enough to impose them on myself.
	I'm not surprised that Liam Gallagher, he's always been confident publicly, is willing to publicly criticise Sadiq Khan.
	Other celebrities from the 90s, is that what we know, Ricky Gervais and Liam Gallagher, they're not just from the 90s, they're mainly from the 90s, are criticising Sadiq Khan because, because in the case of Ricky Gervais, he's never going to stand for censorship.
	And Liam Gallagher, probably everyone's just sensing we've got a shared cultural obligation to have the conversations that are necessary as a country falls apart, right?
	I imagine it's that.
	Let's have a look.
	Let's have a look at the next asset.
	Ricky Gervais, welcome to London.
	Don't forget your Stab Fest.
	Brilliant marketing campaign for Ricky Gervais.
	Everyone's talking about it.
	It's generating a lot of interest and a lot of intrigue.
	But the truth that lies behind it, of course, is that London is being badly run.
	Do you know that I was thinking about running for mayor myself just about 25 seconds before there was an inundation of total immersive attacks across London?
	Obviously, I'm not going to be doing anything like that, not when I'm facing trial in June in London for the charges that you'll be very familiar with by now.
	But it's clear that the UK is falling apart fast and requires radical change quickly.
	My personal belief is that change does not come from within existing institutions and systems because if you think about it just for a second, just for a second, those institutions and systems are the very essence, the skeletal structure that requires rigidity.
	It's only by changing them that you'll get anything like the kind of change you're yearning for, craving, and that these various celebrities are expressing in ways that are ultimately probably filtered through self-interest.
	No different from me.
	No different from me in that instance.
	Now, Ed Miliband or Dave Miliband or one of them milly people said that Elon Musk should get out of British politics.
	I remember seeing him being all confident, get out of British politics.
	They all talk a bit like that, or is that just I don't have enough variety when it comes to comic voices?
	No, it's mys.
	Get out!
	Get out!
	Get out of British politics!
	Get your fingers out of my butt, Greg.
	Right, well, what I felt actually when I was watching Ed Miliband telling Elon Musk to get out of British politics is what do you mean really by British politics?
	Who does British politics belong to?
	The obvious answer would be the British people.
	Well, let's go down that rabbit hole.
	Here's Elon Musk on Joe Rogan talking about the impact of British governance on British small towns.
	These like lovely sort of small towns in England, Scotland, Ireland.
	They've been like sort of living their lives quietly.
	They're like hobbits, frankly.
	In fact, J.R. Tolkien.
	That's fucking offensive.
	We're not like hobbits.
	I'm not like a fucking hobbit.
	We ain't like hobbits.
	Then British towns.
	Especially something like Elon Musk saying they're like, Hobbits, mate, you try wandering around like... Tolkien was writing about the Midlands, I think is what he's about to say.
	But if you go wandering around any northern town or town in the Midlands around Tolkien, about which Tolkien was talking, and go, you're like Hobbits, you're like Hobbits, they will cyber-truck you right up.
	J.R. Tolkien based the hobbits on people he knew in small-town England.
	Because they were just like lovely people who like to, you know, smoke their pipe and have nice meals.
	It's an interesting characterization, but the British are also the people of the Second World War.
	The British are also the people of Dunkirk and the Normandy landings.
	The British are powerful people.
	That's not to say that we haven't been bureaucratized into crazy submission.
	And I know that Elon Musk is being supportive, not criticising Elon Musk.
	Who's got time for that?
	You know, Jesus.
	Anyway, my point is this: that the British people are potent, robust Ireland people invaded throughout their history, so ossified and accreted power is in them.
	Vikings, Romans, Celts, it's all just pounded into you like a kind of inuring.
	There's no question that we've been kind of oddly sidelined into this new tyrannical version of social democracy that appears to benefit from mass migration that's not being well managed.
	And perhaps the British people don't want migration.
	And if they don't want migration, have a referendum on it and then stop it.
	Because if you live in a democracy, that's what you're supposed to do.
	But I suppose I don't like the idea of describing us like hobbits.
	It's offended me.
	And have nice meals and everything's pleasant.
	The hobbits in the shire.
	So he was talking about, you know, places like Hertfordshire.
	Like the Shire is around in the greater London area, Oxfordshire type of thing.
	But the reason they've been able to enjoy the Shire is because hard men have protected them from the dangers of the world.
	But since they have almost no exposure to the dangers of the world, they don't realize that they're there.
	Until one day, you know, a thousand people show up in your village of 500 out of nowhere and start raping the kids.
	This has now happened God knows how many times in Britain.
	Yeah, I don't want to see a version where the orcs turn up and start raping Bilbo Baggins.
	That'll be a massive downer.
	Don't watch the DVD extras is what I would say.
	Britain is on the verge of introducing ID cards or certainly digital ID.
	Can I see your ID card?
	Yes, I'm a member of a Pakistani rape gang.
	Come on in.
	Can I see your ID card?
	I'm a Muslim mayor.
	Come on in.
	Hello.
	Can I see your ID card?
	I'm not vaccinated.
	Get the fuck out of here.
	Here's The Guardian, a purportedly left-wing but ultimately establishment newspaper talking about, you know, violent crime.
	London has turned into something, is into something crazy.
	Is the city in the grip of a crime wave?
	Perception of runaway crime, partly blamed for driving away the super rich, but in reality some high-profile offences such as watch theft are falling.
	Woohoo!
	Watches are not being stolen.
	Brilliant.
	The fact is there's an existential crisis.
	Britain is falling apart.
	There's total despair everywhere.
	No faith in our leadership.
	No ideology, no clear identity.
	But you can hang on to your kettle.
	No one's after your watch.
	You're all right here, son.
	Great news.
	Possibly also people don't wear watches anymore.
	That might be impacting that particular statistic.
	With violent crime dropping dramatically over the past two decades, crime in London is up.
	Recorded crime has increased by 31% in the past decade in the area that the Metropolitan Police covers with violent crime up by 40%.
	Now, is the increase in crime as a result of migration?
	Let me know in the comments and chat what you think.
	Here's Enoch Powell, a firebrand politician from the 1970s, 60s, 70s, and even 80s, who was, they say, the best prime minister England never had, who I once famously referenced when I called Nigel Farage a pound shop Enoch Powell.
	Look, if you fly into Gatwick, you'll see lots of green spaces.
	That is certainly true.
	However, if you have a country in which the population goes up as a direct result of immigration, what you find is not a shortage of green fields, if that's where you wanted to build houses.
	You find a shortage of primary school places.
	You find a shortage of GP surgeries.
	You know, we have fewer GPs per head than any other country in Europe today.
	You find congestion, whether it's on the roads or the London Underground or wherever you go.
	And what you find is that actually you're constantly playing catch-up and really the general quality of life for the massive population has gone down.
	So I think those comments today were wholly irresponsible.
	And what we've seen, I mean, it's quite interesting to think that, you know, in 1990, the population of this country was 55 million.
	It is now between 62 and 63 million.
	That is a massive, massive increase.
	And I think ordinary folk going about their lives are feeling it.
	And I think, you know, having a proper immigration policy, controlling the numbers, doing what nearly 200 countries in the world do, namely controlling the numbers that come and the type of people that come, is the answer.
	Russell Brown.
	I sometimes feel worried about you, Nigel Farage.
	The reason I feel worried is because I know a lot of people are frightened in our country.
	I know a lot of people are feeling afraid and frustrated.
	And there is a sense that there is a corrupt group in our country using our resources, taking away our jobs, taking away our housing, not paying taxes, exploiting us.
	And there is.
	There is an economic elite that this man's party is funded by, that this man comes from background working in the city.
	Let me tell you something.
	There was an economic crash and a lot of money was lost.
	His mates in the city farted.
	Nigel Farage is pointing at immigrants and the disabled and holding his nose.
	Immigrants are not causing the economic problems and suffering we're experiencing.
	As much as any of us, I enjoy seeing Nigel Farage in a boozer with a pint and a fag, laughing off his latest scandals about breastfeeding or whatever.
	I enjoy it.
	But this man is not a cartoon character.
	He ain't Delboy.
	He ain't Arthur Daly.
	He is a pound shop Enoch Powell and we've got to watch him.
	Here is the real deal premier brand politician that was Enoch Powell.
	I, of course, as a person that believes in a universal brotherhood, do not like to see division along racial or even cultural lines.
	But it's pretty clear that the UK right now is in crisis.
	And I believe that the underlying cause of that crisis is people feeling disempowered.
	And until there is individual empowerment, individual sovereignty, and community democracy, this will continue.
	And by the way, if that sounds sort of like Airy Fairy to you, what do you mean, the individual sovereignty and community democracy?
	It's not ephemeral and abstract.
	What I mean by that is communities could vote on whether or not they want to take any migrants in.
	Like saying Epping, it's unlikely that people are going to have migrant communities.
	But based on what I read about high-profile and affluent celebrities' views on migration, many of them want to have migrants in their community.
	Me, I believe that charity begins at home.
	That means not only is my first priority to take care of my family, but that I am personally responsible for helping other people.
	And if I can get myself into the state where I would say, I want a refugee family to come and live with me and I want to take responsibility for them, I believe I'd be doing God's work there.
	But I don't think anyone should be imposing that on me.
	Here's Enoch Powell's defining speech, the famous rivers of blood speech.
	In this country, in 15 or 20 years time, the black man will have the whip hand over the white man.
	I sort of just like the way people talk to them.
	The black man, the black chap, will have the whip hand over the white man.
	That's no good, is it?
	The white man is meant to have the whip hand over the black man.
	We also are 12 years a slave.
	We all enjoyed it.
	Well, imagine how awful it would be if somehow the English black actor, Chetinoir, I can never say that name.
	I'm the better Enoch Powell, got the whip and he was whipping, I don't know, Orlando Bloom, who won the white ones.
	No one wants that.
	None of us.
	Also, it's actually Muslim men, not black men, so they're sort of beige-ish, brown-ish Pakistani men.
	So I can already hear.
	And it's not a whip.
	It's a dick.
	And it's not a white man.
	It's usually a 12-year-old kid.
	And it's not their back.
	It's normally their vagina or anus.
	The chorus of execration.
	How dare I say such a horrible thing?
	How dare I stir up trouble and inflame feelings by repeating such a conversation?
	My answer is that I do not have the right not to do here.
	At least you can say that Enoch Powell isn't an idealist and he is true and faithful to his own principles.
	You don't get many politicians like that these days.
	My personal feeling is that the UK is now a multicultural society.
	My personal feeling is that Britain ought to become a Christian country, you would have to democratically and electorally instantiate a Christian government and better even than that, Christian principles at every level of government.
	Firstly, self-governance, then family governance, then community government, then the government of the entire nation.
	But not every town in Britain would probably vote that way.
	Some of them might vote Muslim and I'd live with that to get my community Christian.
	Some of them might want to be atheist and I'd live with that to get my community Christian.
	Some of them might want to be LGBTQ plus.
	They might want to have their community built around their sexual identity or who knows a thousand different ways to be a human being.
	I believe that God and Christ want us to be free.
	To do so.
	Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad.
	We must be mad.
	Literally mad as a nation to be permitted the annual inflow of some 50,000 dependents who are for the most part the material of the future growth of the immigrant descended population.
	It is like watching a nation busily engaged in heaping up its own funeral pile.
	There's no point listening to me moralizing.
	I'm not Tony Blair.
	Let's listen to Tony Blair moralizing.
	Let's note this significant moment in the ascent of Tony Blair when Tony Blair did what Tony Blair does best.
	Comes up with piffy little maxims and slogans without actually governing in accordance with them.
	Here is his famous tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime, which is a good slogan, but what is it like in practice?
	Same way people go, communism works in principle.
	Communism works in principle.
	But all government works in principle.
	The problem is no one in government has any principles.
	We need to tackle this problem in a concerted way.
	Tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime.
	Tough on cunt, tough on the causes of cunt.
	Here's David Cameron on the same subject.
	These are sickening scenes.
	Scenes of people looting, vandalising, thieving, robbing.
	Scenes of people attacking police officers and even attacking fire crews as they're trying to put out fires.
	This is criminality, pure and simple, and it has to be confronted and defeated.
	How do we have someone in government in that period, like only about eight years ago, that said, put out out that the way he said out there is such an indicator of elitism.
	You might as well be wearing a golden hat and have a golden penis.
	No one talks like that unless they've never been anything other than stinking filthy rich their entire lives.
	I suppose what the Tony Blair clip and the Enoch Powell clip and the David Cameron clip demonstrate is that people have always had concerns about crime and the way that crime is reported on is significant.
	With all media reporting, ask yourself the question, as Cicero said, qui bono.
	Who benefits?
	Who benefits?
	Every single news story that you read or encounter, learn to think continually while you're watching it.
	Who benefits?
	So if you're watching Bill Gates saying everyone should get vaccines, qui bono, Bill Gates benefits.
	If you watch Bill Gates saying, oh, agriculture, we should patent seeds now, qui bono, Bill Gates benefits.
	If you watch Bill Gates saying, oh, there's no such thing as climate change anymore because it doesn't suit me, qui bono, Bill Gates benefits.
	In fact, if you see Bill Gates, Bill Gates is just talking about Bill Gates and our to benefit Bill Gates all the time.
	It's actually very easy to use him as an example.
	When news broke of a stabbing aboard a train in Huntingdon, the government's first response, be vigilant, felt grimly familiar.
	Another tragedy, another warning.
	The attack joined a string of recent high-profile incidents, the Uxbridge triple stabbing in October, the Southport killings of three young girls in 2024, and a surge of viral footage showing fights, robberies and assaults across British towns.
	Public unease has deepened to the point where comedians and musicians now echo it.
	Ricky Gervasi's band, Welcome to London, Don't Forget Your Stab Vest poster, and Liam Gallagher's comment that London is open for knife crime capture a mood of cynicism and fear.
	Britain feels unsafe.
	Is it becoming more violent or simply more anxious?
	The question has been sharpened by comments from figures such as Elon Musk who told Joe Rogan that small British towns were being breached by waves of migrants, conjuring Tolkien-esque images of the Shire under siege.
	Nigel Varage too cited disputed data to claim that Afghan males are vastly more likely to be convicted of rape than those born in the UK.
	Well baby, don't ask me.
	I don't know what them Afghanis were doing 25 years ago, 26 years ago, when I was making top-class content.
	I guess that's just statistical.
	You could look at migrant populations in every country.
	You could say, well, what are white migrants in Egypt doing?
	You know, I don't think it's nice to make claims that certain ideologies are more inclined towards rape, the worst of the crimes.
	But I think what you can say is that if a culture skews towards denigration of the value of human life, then that's going to be a problem.
	And in a way, any culture that's spiritual, whether it's Christian or Muslim, ought so enshrine the sanctity of human sovereignty and dignity that violent and particularly sexually violent crimes ought be anathema.
	You ought never hear of them.
	Those claims feed a growing narrative that immigration and rising crime are intertwined.
	That violence in once peaceful communities is the inevitable consequence of unchecked borders.
	Yet data paints a more complex picture.
	While The Guardian reports that recorded violent crime in London has risen by 40% over the past decade across England and Wales, it has dramatically fallen over the past 20 years.
	The truth may depend less on the numbers than where one lives, what one reads and what one fears.
	The idea that sex crimes may occur outside of the domain of your birth is interesting.
	Consider the sex tourism industry.
	Consider how many people holiday in Pap Pong Bangkok in order to exploit sexual opportunity there.
	Wasn't Gary Glitter ultimately arrested in Thailand as a result of having sex with underage girls?
	I remember when I was a kid, I went to Thailand and I saw like older guys walking around hand in hand with what you could see were basically children.
	So be careful before making a claim like sexual ignominy belongs to one cultural or certainly racial group.
	But in the UK there is little doubt that there is a correlative between certain Pakistani populations, grooming and rape gangs.
	The information, the data exists.
	The problem that Britain has is it cannot have that conversation openly.
	So many people in power have a deep and duplicitous creed because they are hiding stuff, often personal stuff about their own sexuality.
	And even if they're not, they're usually compromised politically or financially.
	Whether it's something like Rushi Sunak with obviously corrupt financial connections or the deeper and more ubiquitous corruption that exists when you have people going through the Oxbridge system and the Etonian school system and ending up in government.
	It's a more diffuse type of corruption, but it's a compromise nevertheless.
	History offers clear warnings about how such anxieties can be amplified and exploited.
	In 1968, Enoch Powell's infamous Rivers of Blood speech turned public unease about immigration into national panic, fueling decades of division.
	Where of course people will look at that Enoch Powell speech and say that it was perspicacious.
	Tony Blair's 1990s mantra, tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime, similarly channeled public fear into a political weapon, projecting authority through moral urgency.
	And after the 2011 London riots, David Cameron declared criminality pure and simple, invoking broken Britain and pledging moral renewal.
	Fear has long been the language through which power asserts itself.
	The post-9-11 war on terror made this global, with governments deploying internal threats to justify surveillance, policing and the erosion of civil liberties.
	What began as a fight against terrorism often ended as a lesson in control.
	Today the conversation about violence and migration risks following that same path, there are indeed horrific crimes involving migrants and ignoring them would be dishonest, but treating individual atrocities as evidence of a national pan may transform legitimate concern into a moral panic, one that governments, tabloids and demagogues can easily weaponise.
	Sociologists of the 90s and 2000s documented similar cycles, hysteria over youth hoodie culture, the demonisation of video games and heavy metal after school shootings and the tabloid scapegoat-in that often obscured similar systemic failures.
	Later revelations from the Hillsborough disaster cover-up to the Jimmy Saville scandal showed how institutions sometimes gaslight the public, breeding the cynicism that endures to this day.
	When Jimmy Saville died, who we now know has necrophilia and paedophilia among his, let's call them hobbies, he was given the send-off of an emperor or a king.
	And he was actually friends with a king, King Charles, King of England, right now.
	Have a look at this.
	One of the country's best-known broadcasters, Sir Jimmy Saville, has died at the age of 84.
	With a career that spanned 40 years, he was famous for his show Jim Will Fix It and for being the first and last presenter of Top of the Pops.
	Sir Jimmy was also well known for his charity work, raising more than £40 million.
	Well, many tributes have been paid tonight, and Prince Charles said he was saddened by the news.
	Nick Hyam looks back at his life.
	Jimmy Saville loved the limelight and crowds loved him.
	But underneath the flamboyant showman, he was a profound enigma.
	He'd become a disc jockey, one of the very first, after a stint as a wrestler.
	He became famous for his catchphrases, dyed hair and eccentric clothes.
	How's your life as well at home?
	He was an outrageous self-publicist, but he also put his celebrity to use, raising money for charity.
	He ran marathons, raised £20 million for the Spinal Injuries Centre at Stoke Manderville, and at Leeds Infirmary, worked regularly as a porter.
	All my life, I was governed by a fun.
	Single fella, no expenses.
	Every day's Christmas Day.
	Every night's New Year's Eve.
	It's all fun.
	It was fun when I started, and it's fun today, and there's nothing wrong with the bit of fun.
	The danger then is twofold.
	On one side lies complacency, the refusal to acknowledge that crime, gang violence, and social dislocation are real and worsening in some areas.
	On the other lies hysteria, the rush that attribute every act of violence to outsiders, feeding an us versus them worldview.
	Both distort the truth and in between stands a public losing faith not only in the safety in their streets, but in the honesty of their institutions.
	Each new be vigilant warning from the government feels less like reassurance and more like abdication, as though citizens, not the state, are now responsible for their own protection.
	In the end, Britain's crisis may be less about crime itself and more about trust.
	Trust in statistics, trust in leaders, trust in the idea that fear is not being manufactured or manipulated for power.
	The moral panic may not just be in the headlines, it may be in the hearts of those who feel abandoned and unheard and unsafe.
	Whether Britain is truly more violent or simply more frightened, the atmosphere of dread has become real enough to shape the nation's psyche.
	And that perhaps is the most dangerous reality of all.
	Anything that travels through the lens of media, in particular social media, is subject to a degree of amplification and hysteria.
	But what cannot be ignored is that there's a democratic crisis in the UK that needs to be addressed.
	And democratic crises are an expression of several things.
	One is corruption.
	Two is a lack of clear principles by which we can govern.
	The same thing's happening in the United States.
	It's in a different part of the cycle.
	It's happening everywhere.
	And the reason is simple.
	Technology would now permit a different level of democracy, direct democracy, personal investment and involvement in the way that your community is run from every individual.
	And assuming that those individuals have a good relationship with God, and that's our job to ensure that they do, then these democracies or new institutions or new systems might prosper.
	The current institutions and systems are so corrupt, they will always lead to more violence, more corruption, and an inability to openly and transparently to discuss the root causes of those problems because the roots of those problems are not problems to the people in power.
	They are of enormous benefit.
	But that's just why I think.
	Let me know what you think in the comments and chat.
	Right.
	Well, that's the end of today's show.
	I hope you've enjoyed us.
	We will be back next time.
	Not with more of the same, but with more of the different.

▲