Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

🎁 𝗔𝗻 𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗹𝘆 𝗖𝗵𝗿𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗺𝗮𝘀 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗶𝘁'𝘀 𝗮 𝗕𝗜𝗚 𝗼𝗻𝗲! 🎁 A man who doesn't really need an introduction... Welcome to #BathRugby, Scottish Rugby & British & Irish Lions fly-half Finn Russell! 💙

Bath Rugby

125,258 subscribers

261,231 views • 3 years ago •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

10 Comments

Ollie Evans3 years ago

@Scotlandteam @lionsofficial @finn_russell

Bobby ⚒🛀🇬🇧🇳🇿3 years ago

@Scotlandteam @lionsofficial @finn_russell Wow quality signing ✍️ looking forward to seeing him in the 🔵⚫️⚪️

David Hutchison3 years ago

@Scotlandteam @lionsofficial @finn_russell

Ollie Smith's Step®3 years ago

@lionsofficial @finn_russell

Kirsty3 years ago

@Scotlandteam @lionsofficial @finn_russell

Huw Vicary3 years ago

@Scotlandteam @lionsofficial @finn_russell This is far better than any Christmas present that has ever been gifted it ever will be.

Paul Goddard3 years ago

@premrugby @Scotlandteam @lionsofficial @finn_russell Well with all the money bath are spending , the only club I see bath joining is wasps and worcesters club

john Ayrshire drysdale3 years ago

@Scotlandteam @lionsofficial @finn_russell Will follow Bath rugby now since finn is on his way

HH3 years ago

@Scotlandteam @lionsofficial @finn_russell 🤔 I can’t see Russel as a Van Gran 10. Carberry played his worst rugby under him and is back looking himself since he’s gone.

Ceri Hall3 years ago

@Scotlandteam @lionsofficial @finn_russell Best Christmas present ever! Welcome Finn! Looking forward to seeing you mixing it up at Bath 💙🖤🤍

Related Videos

𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝘆 ✍️ Scottish and British & Irish Lion Finn Russell has signed a new contract that will keep the fly-half at The Rec until June 2028!

𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝘆 ✍️ Scottish and British & Irish Lion Finn Russell has signed a new contract that will keep the fly-half at The Rec until June 2028!

Bath Rugby

70,663 views • 1 year ago

💄𝗛𝗲 𝗮𝘀𝗸𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝘀𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗮𝗻𝘀𝘄𝗲𝗿 𝘀𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗱 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲 𝗮 𝗺𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗵𝗹𝘆 𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗼𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝗻 𝗮 𝗹𝗼𝘃𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆. A man asked a woman: "Are you ready for a serious relationship?" Her answer wasn't about love. It wasn't about loyalty. It wasn't about trust. It wasn't about communication. Instead, she listed what he would need to pay: • Mortgage • Car note & insurance • Phone bill • Utilities & internet • Hair, nails & lashes • Vacations • Gas every Sunday • And be a father to children who aren't biologically his. Everyone is entitled to their standards. But if the first conversation is only about what someone must provide financially, don't be surprised when people wonder where the partnership begins. A serious relationship isn't just about paying bills. It's about character. It's about loyalty. It's about respect. It's about shared purpose. It's about two people bringing value and building a life together. Provision matters. So does peace. So does accountability. So does what each person brings to the table. The strongest relationships aren't built on a list of demands. They're built by two people committed to becoming an asset to each other's lives. What does "serious relationship" actually mean to you? Let's hear your definition. C & Q ✍️🏾 𝑳𝒊𝒇𝒆 𝒅𝒊𝒅𝒏’𝒕 𝒃𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒌 𝒖𝒔 - 𝒊𝒕 𝒕𝒂𝒖𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝒖𝒔. 𝑮𝒖𝒂𝒓𝒅 𝒚𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒑𝒆𝒂𝒄𝒆 𝒅𝒂𝒊𝒍𝒚.

💄𝗛𝗲 𝗮𝘀𝗸𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝘀𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗮𝗻𝘀𝘄𝗲𝗿 𝘀𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗱 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲 𝗮 𝗺𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗵𝗹𝘆 𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗼𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝗻 𝗮 𝗹𝗼𝘃𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆. A man asked a woman: "Are you ready for a serious relationship?" Her answer wasn't about love. It wasn't about loyalty. It wasn't about trust. It wasn't about communication. Instead, she listed what he would need to pay: • Mortgage • Car note & insurance • Phone bill • Utilities & internet • Hair, nails & lashes • Vacations • Gas every Sunday • And be a father to children who aren't biologically his. Everyone is entitled to their standards. But if the first conversation is only about what someone must provide financially, don't be surprised when people wonder where the partnership begins. A serious relationship isn't just about paying bills. It's about character. It's about loyalty. It's about respect. It's about shared purpose. It's about two people bringing value and building a life together. Provision matters. So does peace. So does accountability. So does what each person brings to the table. The strongest relationships aren't built on a list of demands. They're built by two people committed to becoming an asset to each other's lives. What does "serious relationship" actually mean to you? Let's hear your definition. C & Q ✍️🏾 𝑳𝒊𝒇𝒆 𝒅𝒊𝒅𝒏’𝒕 𝒃𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒌 𝒖𝒔 - 𝒊𝒕 𝒕𝒂𝒖𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝒖𝒔. 𝑮𝒖𝒂𝒓𝒅 𝒚𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒑𝒆𝒂𝒄𝒆 𝒅𝒂𝒊𝒍𝒚.

Chief & Queen

11,245 views • 16 days ago

🚨THE ONLY PANDEMIC IN THIS WORLD IS PEDOPHILIA🚨 Just wanted to clarify something for the dribbly gimps on the left who feel they have some sort of Gotcha moment when an Irish man is caught abusing children & they feel the need to tag me & others in it for not commenting on the situation🇮🇪 Unfortunately the home grown IRISH predators who target children & who we've had problems with for time & memorial on this island ARE OUR RESPONSIBILITY & that of this rotten & highly Treasonous State🇮🇪 So when you dickheads go to working class communities,Remove your silver spoons from your gammy mouths & start screaming "REFUGEES ARE WELCOME HERE" those foreign criminals that have no background checks whatsoever & who go on to Assault,Attack,Rob,Rape & murder innocent Irish people including women & children that could have easily been prevented by closed borders & employing people who do their Jobs properly THEY ARE NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY but make no mistake ALL the heinous crimes that they perpetrate(d) ON ALL YOUR HEADS BE IT including the Government,NGOs,the Police & every scumbag who has profited from this nightmare🇮🇪 We are surrounded by the most evil bastards imaginable on our own soil. They are embedded everywhere in society from the Judges chambers, Political parties to the school room & everywhere in between & beyond. But here's a wonderful idea let's bring in hundreds of thousands of unchecked animals from third world shit holes whose sick ideologies permit them to rape children. Sure what could go wrong?🇮🇪 I couldn't give any less of a fuck what Race,Nationality,Colour or Creed they are or whether they're a man or a woman for that matter. If they destroy a child's life & innocence in the most vile way known to man. Firstly they should be handed over to the victims family so that they can exact their own brand of righteous justice. Then they should be dragged by their hair through the streets,Strung up & then hanged & burned in public🇮🇪 This might actually work as a deterrent because strangely enough all the suspended sentences (Judge Nolan) or sending these deranged bastards to Arbour Hill with the rest of the nonces to be fed & watered for A few years at the expense of the tax payer just doesn't seem to be cutting it🇮🇪 THE ONLY GOOD PEDOPHILE IS A DEAD ONE. NO QUESTIONS, NO TALK, JUST DO THE WORLD A FAVOUR & GET RID BECAUSE THERE IS NO CURE FOR THAT TYPE OF EVIL & SICKNESS🇮🇪 I hope that clears everything up for the wankers who NEVER open their mouths about child rape unless it's an Irish person in the papers or on the news. This is not some point scoring competition. These are innocent babies,Precious little souls whose lives are permanently destroyed not just numbers or statistics & if you truly cared instead of slating someone whose working class accent seems to offend you more than the actual unspeakable crimes perpetrated against vulnerable children. Start putting your time to good use & CALL OUT THE MONSTERS THAT ARE RESPONSIBLE & DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY & JUSTICE🇮🇪 I won't hold my breath though seeing as how your lot have championed every satanic perversion foisted & forced upon Irish children at the callous & cruel hands of the criminals in suits & their Globalist whoremasters in Europe. Whether it be the introduction to porn for minors in the guise of 'Sex Education' or convincing & manipulating little boys & girls that they were somehow born in the wrong bodies & to mutilate & sterilise themselves. A special place in Hell awaits you all🇮🇪 When these times are studied in years to come the future generations will realise that the only ones who stood up for them & their God given Birthright were the non existent big bad 'FAR RIGHT' AKA CONCERNED PARENTS. True Irish MEN & WOMEN who saw the danger & who willingly stood Infront it no matter what🇮🇪 PROTECT CHILDHOOD INNOCENCE AT ALL COSTS. STAMP THIS EVIL OUT FOR GOOD🇮🇪 God bless🙌éiReGoBragh🇮🇪 MaryFlynnONeill LIZ CROKIN Lara Logan General Mike Flynn James English

Fergus (Ferg) Power

15,911 views • 6 months ago

A Harvard professor asked 1 question 4 different ways - and got 4 contradicting answers His name is Michael Sandel. He teaches Justice. He opens the entire course with a hypothetical that takes 30 seconds to state and takes the rest of the hour to unravel. His entire framework fits on a napkin. You're driving a trolley. The brakes fail. 5 workers are on the track ahead. A side track has 1 worker. You can steer. Ask a room of students what they'd do, and the vast majority say the same thing: turn. Better 1 dies than 5. Here is where it falls apart. Change nothing about the math. Change only the mechanism. Now you're standing on a bridge, watching the same runaway trolley bear down on the same 5 workers. Next to you stands a heavy man. Push him off the bridge, his body stops the trolley, 5 live and 1 dies - the exact same trade as before. Almost nobody pushes him. Same numbers. Same outcome. Completely different answer. Sandel doesn't tell the room they're wrong. He asks them to explain the difference, and the room can't agree on one. 1 student argues the fat man never chose to be involved, unlike the worker already standing on the side track - except the worker never chose it either. Another argues that steering a wheel is a "split-second" reaction while pushing a man is deliberate murder - except both require an active, conscious decision to kill 1 person you weren't otherwise going to kill. Every explanation the room offers gets challenged by another student within seconds. Then Sandel tightens the trap further. You're an ER doctor. 5 patients need moderate care, 1 needs intensive care, you can't save all 6. Nearly everyone chooses the 5 - consistent with the trolley. Then: you're a transplant surgeon. 5 patients need 5 different organs. A healthy stranger naps in the next room. You could harvest his organs and save all 5. Almost nobody says yes. Same math, every single time. 1 life against 5. The answer keeps flipping, and the room keeps struggling to explain why. Sandel closes the lecture with a real case from 1884 - the shipwreck of the Mignonette. 4 sailors adrift with no food or water. After 19 days, the captain killed the weakest of them, a 17-year-old crew member, so the other 3 could survive by eating his body. All 3 survivors were rescued. 2 of them stood trial for murder back in England. The room splits immediately. Does it matter that the boy had no family waiting, while the others had wives and children? Is killing 1 to save 3 different in a lifeboat than on a bridge? Is murder wrong regardless of the outcome it produces, or only wrong when the math doesn't justify it? Here is what the lecture is really about. Sandel isn't teaching students the right answer to any of these cases. He's showing them that their own moral intuitions contradict each other within the same hour, under questioning they can't escape - and that noticing the contradiction is the actual beginning of moral philosophy. He teaches this to students who will spend careers making decisions that quietly involve this exact tradeoff - policy, medicine, law, business. Half of them will never examine the framework they're using. The other half will remember the moment their own logic broke in front of a room of strangers. The lecture is free. Harvard has taught it publicly for decades. The barrier was never access. The barrier is sitting with the contradiction long enough to admit you don't actually have a consistent principle - you have a set of feelings that change depending on how the question is asked. The napkin costs nothing. Realizing your moral intuitions contradict each other is the entire edge.

A Harvard professor asked 1 question 4 different ways - and got 4 contradicting answers His name is Michael Sandel. He teaches Justice. He opens the entire course with a hypothetical that takes 30 seconds to state and takes the rest of the hour to unravel. His entire framework fits on a napkin. You're driving a trolley. The brakes fail. 5 workers are on the track ahead. A side track has 1 worker. You can steer. Ask a room of students what they'd do, and the vast majority say the same thing: turn. Better 1 dies than 5. Here is where it falls apart. Change nothing about the math. Change only the mechanism. Now you're standing on a bridge, watching the same runaway trolley bear down on the same 5 workers. Next to you stands a heavy man. Push him off the bridge, his body stops the trolley, 5 live and 1 dies - the exact same trade as before. Almost nobody pushes him. Same numbers. Same outcome. Completely different answer. Sandel doesn't tell the room they're wrong. He asks them to explain the difference, and the room can't agree on one. 1 student argues the fat man never chose to be involved, unlike the worker already standing on the side track - except the worker never chose it either. Another argues that steering a wheel is a "split-second" reaction while pushing a man is deliberate murder - except both require an active, conscious decision to kill 1 person you weren't otherwise going to kill. Every explanation the room offers gets challenged by another student within seconds. Then Sandel tightens the trap further. You're an ER doctor. 5 patients need moderate care, 1 needs intensive care, you can't save all 6. Nearly everyone chooses the 5 - consistent with the trolley. Then: you're a transplant surgeon. 5 patients need 5 different organs. A healthy stranger naps in the next room. You could harvest his organs and save all 5. Almost nobody says yes. Same math, every single time. 1 life against 5. The answer keeps flipping, and the room keeps struggling to explain why. Sandel closes the lecture with a real case from 1884 - the shipwreck of the Mignonette. 4 sailors adrift with no food or water. After 19 days, the captain killed the weakest of them, a 17-year-old crew member, so the other 3 could survive by eating his body. All 3 survivors were rescued. 2 of them stood trial for murder back in England. The room splits immediately. Does it matter that the boy had no family waiting, while the others had wives and children? Is killing 1 to save 3 different in a lifeboat than on a bridge? Is murder wrong regardless of the outcome it produces, or only wrong when the math doesn't justify it? Here is what the lecture is really about. Sandel isn't teaching students the right answer to any of these cases. He's showing them that their own moral intuitions contradict each other within the same hour, under questioning they can't escape - and that noticing the contradiction is the actual beginning of moral philosophy. He teaches this to students who will spend careers making decisions that quietly involve this exact tradeoff - policy, medicine, law, business. Half of them will never examine the framework they're using. The other half will remember the moment their own logic broke in front of a room of strangers. The lecture is free. Harvard has taught it publicly for decades. The barrier was never access. The barrier is sitting with the contradiction long enough to admit you don't actually have a consistent principle - you have a set of feelings that change depending on how the question is asked. The napkin costs nothing. Realizing your moral intuitions contradict each other is the entire edge.

vladuah

28,738 views • 6 days ago

//The Wire//2300Z November 3, 2025// //ROUTINE// //BLUF: TWO-DAY KNIFE ATTACK SPREE CULMINATES IN MASS STABBING ON TRAIN IN UNITED KINGDOM, PASSENGERS AND CREW DO THEIR BEST TO HALT THE ATTACK. FEDERAL JUDGE ORDERS SNAP FUNDING TO MATERIALIZE. GOLDEN HINDU IDOL 15 STORIES TALL TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN RURAL NORTH CAROLINA.// -----BEGIN TEARLINE----- -International Events- United Kingdom: On Saturday, a mass stabbing was carried out on a train bound for London from Doncaster. 10x people remain in critical condition as a result of the attack. The assailant has been identified as Anthony Williams. A separate individual who may have also been involved in some way was arrested at the scene. This individual has not been identified, but authorities have stated he is of Caribbean descent. Police also tased one man on the platform after the train arrived at the station, however this was a case of mistaken identity and the tased man was released without charge. -HomeFront- North Carolina: Local concern has emerged following plans to build a massive Hindu "temple" in the small town of Moncure, just west of Holly Springs. This extremely large and sprawling complex is planned to have a golden idol that will be roughly 155 feet tall...one foot taller than the Statue of Liberty. This project was announced earlier this year, but has gained notoriety as the construction plans move forward. Analyst Comment: Small towns in historically Christian rural areas are often targeted for the construction of golden idols due to the ease of bribing/influencing local officials to obtain permission to build commercial facilities. In this case, Moncure is an extremely small town that doesn't really engage in any zoning (they leave it to the county to decide), so it's easy to pencil-whip the re-zoning of private residential property to allow for the construction of a pagan idol that will dominate the terrain for dozens of miles. This idol is not even built yet, the area slated for it's construction is still just undeveloped land. However, (to the surprise of literally no one) it's already featured heavily in the Google search results for Moncure, NC as the top tourist destination for the town. Hindus have already spammed the reviews for the structure that doesn't exist yet, giving it top marks and praising the facility as great to visit...with the owners of the place celebrating the fake reviews of a non-existent facility, while simultaneously admitting that the facility doesn't exist yet. Washington D.C. - U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell Jr. has ordered the White House to ensure that emergency funds are used for the SNAP program, stating that "the USDA must distribute the contingency money timely, or as soon as possible, for the November 1 payments to be made". Analyst Comment: That brief description was more or less the entire order, which was oral in nature. However, a lot of other things have to click into place to make this order come to fruition, especially due to the complexities of the Judiciary ordering the Executive to do something that is technically the job of the Legislative. Despite the very obvious problem with this arrangement, the issue is now tied up in court, effectively stalling the distribution of at least some electronic deposits. However, some EBT recipients have reported getting their funds as they have before, so it's not clear as to what funds are being disbursed, or to whom. -----END TEARLINE----- Analyst Comments: The train stabbing attack in the United Kingdom is one of the most significant attacks in recent British history. A Major Incident was declared and a PLATO response was initiated (which is the colloquialism for an active terror attack in progress). The details of the attack itself are not entirely clear, but at the moment the eyewitness statements indicate this one was ugly. A train car packed with people who cannot escape makes for an exceptionally vulnerable target for malign actors. Witnesses state that the attack took a long time to complete, and that the stabbings were carried out over a period of 15-20 minutes. This was made worse by the fact that this mass attack was 100% preventable. The attack onboard the train was actually the *fourth* stabbing attack conducted by Williams within a 24 hour period. Authorities have not confirmed anything; all of this investigative legwork is being conducted by private citizens as the British government has been silent on the matter. However eyewitness statements indicate that Williams was likely the same man who stabbed a 14-year-old in Peterborough the day before (October 31). That same day, Williams was observed brandishing a knife in a barber shop in Cambridgeshire. Williams is also suspected in stabbing a different man in East London on November 1st. In all prior cases, either the police did not investigate at all, or did not circulate his photo or issue a BOLO notice. This was quite literally a case of a madman with a knife stabbing anyone he liked over a period of two days, before the final culminating attack took place onboard the train. Concerning motive, this meets all definitions for being classified as a terror attack. However, British authorities have very adamantly stated that it isn't a terrorist attack. Trust is nearly nonexistent with British authorities at this point, but the story told by the Transit Police is that this was a private dispute between two criminals, which devolved into one of them attempting to stab the other. Due to the tight quarters of a packed train car, this resulted in everyone in the car becoming unwillingly involved. At the moment, this version of the story appears to be false for many reasons, first and foremost is the detail that Williams had already conducted three stabbing attacks prior to the one on the train. What started the incident inside the train car remains uncertain. However, once violence had been undertaken the assailant tried to kill everyone on the train, and a general state of bedlam erupted as passengers fled up and down the train to escape the attack. This is confirmed beyond all doubt, by the CCTV footage that was leaked, showing Williams pursuing passengers down the platform after arriving at Huntingdon Station. This is about as smoking-gun as it can get, and confirms that the attacker did indeed attempt to target citizens deliberately, as opposed to people just getting in the way of a private murder attempt. As a reminder, there are at least two security cameras at each end of every car on the London North Eastern Railway trains. So footage of the attack (and importantly, everything that led up to it) does exist. Since this footage probably won't be released, the most important witnesses to consider when trying to figure out what happened, are those who at present cannot speak...the individuals still undergoing intensive medical treatment are the people who were closest to the attack and their testimony carries much weight. At the moment, there have been no fatalities, but prayers are strongly encouraged for the survivors to ensure their rapid recovery. More broadly, this attack highlights the extreme need for citizens who are not just prepared physically, but also mentally. Train driver Andrew Johnson became aware of the attack, and instead of stopping the train on the tracks (where police and medical would take some time to arrive), Johnson diverted the train to a different track which would take the train into the next-closest station (which happened to be Huntingdon) where police would be waiting, radioing ahead to ensure that the attack on his train could be stopped as soon as possible. One railway crew member onboard the train (who has not yet been named due to being wounded) also displayed great courage by blocking the passage of the attacker, delaying his rampage down the train for a time, sustaining severe wounds in the process. Several passengers also carried out the time-honored tradition of using violence-of-action to take the fight to the attacker (all of whom were wounded during the attack). Stephen Creen was wounded while attempting to stop the attacker, along with several others who attempted to do the same even though everyone except for the attacker was unarmed. In short, details may be hard to discern, but currently it looks like most people did the right thing; those who could fight, did so. Those who couldn't, fled and attempted to warn other passengers down the train, as well as caring for the wounded. This attack proves once again that almost everything can be done correctly, and the fight still be a hard one. Attacks will continue, this is unfortunately a certainty. If not from deliberately planned terror attacks, then from random outbursts of violence. But, the first steps in the British re-conquering their kingdom will be to foster a culture of using extreme violence, to stop extreme violence. Not out of malice or hatred, but out of the desire to stop the harm to innocent people. For far too long the British government has portrayed sheer survival instinct as hatred, which is pure gaslighting that couldn't be further from the truth. Attacks like this, while horrific, do a lot to show the British people that stopping a mass murdering lunatic requires violence, and exercising this violence to protect the innocent is a good thing. As such, considering this rampage will be in the news cycle for a while, it will be absolutely crucial to applaud the actions of those who did what they could to stop the attack. Focusing on the horror of the day is easy but fruitless; it is a far, far better thing to focus on the good that was done, and try to improve the lessons-learned for the challenging times ahead. They might not have been as successful as one would hope, but some gave it a try anyway and did the best they could. Which is the most anyone can hope for, and what we all should strive to achieve. Analyst: S2A1 Research: //END REPORT//

//The Wire//2300Z November 3, 2025// //ROUTINE// //BLUF: TWO-DAY KNIFE ATTACK SPREE CULMINATES IN MASS STABBING ON TRAIN IN UNITED KINGDOM, PASSENGERS AND CREW DO THEIR BEST TO HALT THE ATTACK. FEDERAL JUDGE ORDERS SNAP FUNDING TO MATERIALIZE. GOLDEN HINDU IDOL 15 STORIES TALL TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN RURAL NORTH CAROLINA.// -----BEGIN TEARLINE----- -International Events- United Kingdom: On Saturday, a mass stabbing was carried out on a train bound for London from Doncaster. 10x people remain in critical condition as a result of the attack. The assailant has been identified as Anthony Williams. A separate individual who may have also been involved in some way was arrested at the scene. This individual has not been identified, but authorities have stated he is of Caribbean descent. Police also tased one man on the platform after the train arrived at the station, however this was a case of mistaken identity and the tased man was released without charge. -HomeFront- North Carolina: Local concern has emerged following plans to build a massive Hindu "temple" in the small town of Moncure, just west of Holly Springs. This extremely large and sprawling complex is planned to have a golden idol that will be roughly 155 feet tall...one foot taller than the Statue of Liberty. This project was announced earlier this year, but has gained notoriety as the construction plans move forward. Analyst Comment: Small towns in historically Christian rural areas are often targeted for the construction of golden idols due to the ease of bribing/influencing local officials to obtain permission to build commercial facilities. In this case, Moncure is an extremely small town that doesn't really engage in any zoning (they leave it to the county to decide), so it's easy to pencil-whip the re-zoning of private residential property to allow for the construction of a pagan idol that will dominate the terrain for dozens of miles. This idol is not even built yet, the area slated for it's construction is still just undeveloped land. However, (to the surprise of literally no one) it's already featured heavily in the Google search results for Moncure, NC as the top tourist destination for the town. Hindus have already spammed the reviews for the structure that doesn't exist yet, giving it top marks and praising the facility as great to visit...with the owners of the place celebrating the fake reviews of a non-existent facility, while simultaneously admitting that the facility doesn't exist yet. Washington D.C. - U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell Jr. has ordered the White House to ensure that emergency funds are used for the SNAP program, stating that "the USDA must distribute the contingency money timely, or as soon as possible, for the November 1 payments to be made". Analyst Comment: That brief description was more or less the entire order, which was oral in nature. However, a lot of other things have to click into place to make this order come to fruition, especially due to the complexities of the Judiciary ordering the Executive to do something that is technically the job of the Legislative. Despite the very obvious problem with this arrangement, the issue is now tied up in court, effectively stalling the distribution of at least some electronic deposits. However, some EBT recipients have reported getting their funds as they have before, so it's not clear as to what funds are being disbursed, or to whom. -----END TEARLINE----- Analyst Comments: The train stabbing attack in the United Kingdom is one of the most significant attacks in recent British history. A Major Incident was declared and a PLATO response was initiated (which is the colloquialism for an active terror attack in progress). The details of the attack itself are not entirely clear, but at the moment the eyewitness statements indicate this one was ugly. A train car packed with people who cannot escape makes for an exceptionally vulnerable target for malign actors. Witnesses state that the attack took a long time to complete, and that the stabbings were carried out over a period of 15-20 minutes. This was made worse by the fact that this mass attack was 100% preventable. The attack onboard the train was actually the fourth stabbing attack conducted by Williams within a 24 hour period. Authorities have not confirmed anything; all of this investigative legwork is being conducted by private citizens as the British government has been silent on the matter. However eyewitness statements indicate that Williams was likely the same man who stabbed a 14-year-old in Peterborough the day before (October 31). That same day, Williams was observed brandishing a knife in a barber shop in Cambridgeshire. Williams is also suspected in stabbing a different man in East London on November 1st. In all prior cases, either the police did not investigate at all, or did not circulate his photo or issue a BOLO notice. This was quite literally a case of a madman with a knife stabbing anyone he liked over a period of two days, before the final culminating attack took place onboard the train. Concerning motive, this meets all definitions for being classified as a terror attack. However, British authorities have very adamantly stated that it isn't a terrorist attack. Trust is nearly nonexistent with British authorities at this point, but the story told by the Transit Police is that this was a private dispute between two criminals, which devolved into one of them attempting to stab the other. Due to the tight quarters of a packed train car, this resulted in everyone in the car becoming unwillingly involved. At the moment, this version of the story appears to be false for many reasons, first and foremost is the detail that Williams had already conducted three stabbing attacks prior to the one on the train. What started the incident inside the train car remains uncertain. However, once violence had been undertaken the assailant tried to kill everyone on the train, and a general state of bedlam erupted as passengers fled up and down the train to escape the attack. This is confirmed beyond all doubt, by the CCTV footage that was leaked, showing Williams pursuing passengers down the platform after arriving at Huntingdon Station. This is about as smoking-gun as it can get, and confirms that the attacker did indeed attempt to target citizens deliberately, as opposed to people just getting in the way of a private murder attempt. As a reminder, there are at least two security cameras at each end of every car on the London North Eastern Railway trains. So footage of the attack (and importantly, everything that led up to it) does exist. Since this footage probably won't be released, the most important witnesses to consider when trying to figure out what happened, are those who at present cannot speak...the individuals still undergoing intensive medical treatment are the people who were closest to the attack and their testimony carries much weight. At the moment, there have been no fatalities, but prayers are strongly encouraged for the survivors to ensure their rapid recovery. More broadly, this attack highlights the extreme need for citizens who are not just prepared physically, but also mentally. Train driver Andrew Johnson became aware of the attack, and instead of stopping the train on the tracks (where police and medical would take some time to arrive), Johnson diverted the train to a different track which would take the train into the next-closest station (which happened to be Huntingdon) where police would be waiting, radioing ahead to ensure that the attack on his train could be stopped as soon as possible. One railway crew member onboard the train (who has not yet been named due to being wounded) also displayed great courage by blocking the passage of the attacker, delaying his rampage down the train for a time, sustaining severe wounds in the process. Several passengers also carried out the time-honored tradition of using violence-of-action to take the fight to the attacker (all of whom were wounded during the attack). Stephen Creen was wounded while attempting to stop the attacker, along with several others who attempted to do the same even though everyone except for the attacker was unarmed. In short, details may be hard to discern, but currently it looks like most people did the right thing; those who could fight, did so. Those who couldn't, fled and attempted to warn other passengers down the train, as well as caring for the wounded. This attack proves once again that almost everything can be done correctly, and the fight still be a hard one. Attacks will continue, this is unfortunately a certainty. If not from deliberately planned terror attacks, then from random outbursts of violence. But, the first steps in the British re-conquering their kingdom will be to foster a culture of using extreme violence, to stop extreme violence. Not out of malice or hatred, but out of the desire to stop the harm to innocent people. For far too long the British government has portrayed sheer survival instinct as hatred, which is pure gaslighting that couldn't be further from the truth. Attacks like this, while horrific, do a lot to show the British people that stopping a mass murdering lunatic requires violence, and exercising this violence to protect the innocent is a good thing. As such, considering this rampage will be in the news cycle for a while, it will be absolutely crucial to applaud the actions of those who did what they could to stop the attack. Focusing on the horror of the day is easy but fruitless; it is a far, far better thing to focus on the good that was done, and try to improve the lessons-learned for the challenging times ahead. They might not have been as successful as one would hope, but some gave it a try anyway and did the best they could. Which is the most anyone can hope for, and what we all should strive to achieve. Analyst: S2A1 Research: //END REPORT//

S2 Underground

16,592 views • 9 months ago

A film that should give you the chills. George Bernard Shaw was an Irish playwright, critic, polemicist, and lifelong socialist activist whose ideas, especially on eugenics, remain among the most disturbing aspects of early 20th-century progressive thought. He became a leading music and theatre critic and one of the most prolific playwrights of his age (over 60 plays, including Pygmalion, later adapted into My Fair Lady). In 1925 he won the Nobel Prize in Literature. Yet it was politics, not literature, that consumed much of his energy. In 1884 Shaw joined the newly founded Fabian Society, a middle-class socialist group that rejected Marxist revolution in favour of permeation, the slow, deliberate infiltration of socialist ideas into existing institutions through education, local government, and legislation. Shaw quickly became its star pamphleteer: he wrote the society’s first manifesto, recruited Sidney and Beatrice Webb, and edited the landmark Fabian Essays in Socialism (1889), which sold tens of thousands of copies and helped lay the intellectual groundwork for the British Labour Party and the welfare state. The Fabians’ brand of socialism was explicitly technocratic. They saw the state as an instrument for rational planning and improvement of the population itself. Many leading Fabians, including the Webbs, H.G. Wells, and Shaw, were enthusiastic supporters of eugenics, the pseudoscience of breeding better humans and eliminating the unfit. They viewed uncontrolled reproduction by the poor or inefficient as a threat to the socialist future they envisioned. Shaw’s most infamous public statement came in a 1931 Paramount Sound Newsreel interview. With a smirk and his distinctive Irish lilt, he proposed that every citizen should periodically appear before a properly appointed board (like an income-tax commissioners) and justify their existence: “You must all know half a dozen people at least who are no use in this world, who are more trouble than they are worth…If you can’t justify your existence; if you’re not pulling your weight in the social boat; if you’re not producing as much as you consume or perhaps a little more, then clearly we cannot use the big organisation of our society for the purpose of keeping you alive” This was not a one-off provocation. As early as 1898 Shaw had written that the majority of Europeans have no business to be alive. In a 1910 lecture to the Eugenics Education Society he openly discussed the need for a lethal chamber and the extensive use of euthanasia because a great many people would have to be put out of existence simply because it wastes other people’s time to look after them. He also called for a humane gas that could kill painlessly, both for warfare and, he chillingly suggested, domestic use. These ideas were not eccentric outliers; they flowed directly from the Fabian vision of a scientifically managed socialist society. Shaw himself declared in the appendix to Man and Superman (1903): The only fundamental and possible Socialism is the socialization of the selective breeding of Man. Eugenics supplied the scientific tool for perfecting the human material that socialism would then organise. The Fabians saw poverty, crime, and inefficiency as biological problems to be solved by the state, through sterilisation, segregation, or, in Shaw’s rhetoric, elimination. Shaw’s socialism is part of a broader early 20th-century current among intellectuals who believed the state should engineer both the economy and the gene pool. The same Fabian circles that helped create the modern welfare state also flirted with the darkest applications of social efficiency. Shaw never retreated from these views, even after the horrors of the 20th century made them indefensible to most people. Shaw’s gradualism with eugenic social engineering reveals the ultimate destination of all socialist ideals: to grant government the absolute power of God, judge, and jury over human life itself.

Brian Roemmele

56,328 views • 3 months ago

IS IT ADVISABLE TO MARRY A WOMAN WHO IS MORE CAREER-DRIVEN THAN YOU? Hello, friends. Welcome to another episode of Mr & Mrs Better Half. It is designed to strengthen marriages and relationships that will lead to marriage, with wisdom from God's Word. Sometimes ago, I asked some friends, ‘what do you think causes major friction in a marriage?’ One of the answers was money. On further probing, we got into one of the big money issues: “Finances are often problematic when the wife earns more.” A follow-up question: Since few earn millions on their 1st job, how did these women build their finances to surpass their husbands’? Again, we hit another interesting note- ‘some women are too ambitious! If they would just ‘chill’ things would be okay.’ This statement threw up so many questions. Should a wife deliberately go for a low-paying job to avoid earning more than her husband? Should she also perform poorly to ensure she doesn’t get promoted? If she’s offered a raise, should she refuse? Of course, these things sound silly but these are actual options some couples have considered in their homes to preserve the peace. Sometimes, the man actually starts out earning more but calamity strikes and his business/career goes downhill. So the once ‘balanced’ household turns upside down because the woman now pulls most of the financial weight. The big question you should ask is this. ‘Why should money (something so many seem to be chasing) which should make life easier become the very thing that can cause unhappiness? There are 4 things I would like you to consider today- Changing times, Culture, Acceptance and Attitude. A) Changing Times: Men, the days when women in the workplace were oddities have since gone. With advancements in technology, many of the more physical jobs have been taken over by machines. This means that there’s no reason women should be sidelined on the grounds of being physically weaker than men. This coupled with the realization of a woman’s right to express her intelligence means the world has made much progress where women in the workplace are concerned. Today there is hardly any industry where you will not find women doing remarkable things. As a result, it is not uncommon for husbands & wives to earn similar salaries or have the wives even bringing more. The truth is that most men like the added household income- who wouldn’t? The only thing is that they just want to earn more than their wives. This clearly becomes an issue of self-esteem and ego. Please understand that you can’t derive your sense of self from money. Many men think being a man is all about bringing in money. It takes a lot more than that to be a real man. Different things make a man. They include the ability to provide, lead, protect, nurture and love. Men you have to bring more to the table than just money to be an exemplary head of your household. So stop being hung up on money alone. (B) Let’s go to Culture. In the past women were touted as the homemakers while men barely lifted a finger in their homes. What men didn’t understand is that being a homemaker is a very marketable skill! A good homemaker is likely to be very skilled in people and money management, multi-tasking, negotiation skills, etc. You’d think that keeping a woman in the house would incapacitate her in the business terrain but you’d be wrong! Women develop the soft skills required for top-tier management quite early in life! Coupled with formal education, a woman who truly wants to succeed in business is a force to reckon with. Perhaps we should take a look at how we raise our sons these days. We might just be doing them a disservice! (C) Let’s discuss Acceptance. As a man, I understand one’s ego can take a pounding if your wife earns more. Single men dating ladies that earn more often vow to themselves that they'll turn the financial tables around before they get married or shortly after. Like it or not, this doesn’t always happen. Sometimes a woman’s gift will shoot her to the peak of her profession. What will you do? Will you kill yourself trying to earn more? Will you resent her success or do the mature and supportive thing and accept it? I have come to know a certain truth. As much as it might be your preference, who earns more in your relationship is not your call. I will repeat this. It is not your call to determine who earns more in this life. Everyone has a race to run. God has blessed everyone with a unique gift. You cannot determine the extent of another person’s potential. If you can't cope with a successful lady you actually have a problem with self-esteem which is not her problem; it’s yours. Single guys, when you court a lady, look beyond her hips, lips and fingertips and determine her inner ‘horsepower’. Can you envision whom she is likely to be if all things work out for her good? Will you be intimidated by her success? There are ladies who are incredibly brilliant, driven and ambitious. You can tell they are loaded from the onset. Such people tend to have a light shine on them and often end up in the public eye doing great things. You shouldn’t marry someone like that and try to cap her … you will kill her spirit, kill the marriage or kill yourself. Remember that your wife also wants to die empty. Your responsibility as a husband is to give her wings to fly. Be a real man, a secure man. Manage your ego and support her. Now if this is difficult for you to stomach, please don’t marry her. In your house, everyone should be a cheerleader urging each one to victory. If you know you've the tendency to be jealous of people’s progress or be competitive, marry wisely. More importantly, deal with this weakness. It’s a bad one & reeks of emotional immaturity. (D) Finally- Attitude. Sometimes the husbands try to be supportive but the attitudes of the wives make it very hard. I have already addressed the men on attitude and the need to build their self-confidence and be supportive of their wives, but now I’ll speak to the wives. To the women: Do you lord the fact that you earn more over your husband? Do you seize the reins and make the big decisions? If you keep cutting down your husband because you earn more money, you pull down your home with your hands. Please don’t get it twisted. The man remains the head of the home. Don’t let money or your position at work get to your head. Pride is unattractive in anyone and that includes you. Cultivate a gentle, quiet and humble spirit. It’s important to note that money or wealth will always amplify who you really are. If you are compassionate and respectful you will continue to be so regardless of the money you make. If you are crass, rude and disloyal, money will make that more apparent and cause problems in the home. Remember that marriage is a partnership. Your success is really “our success”. His support helped you become successful. Even if he has not been supportive still carry your blessing with decorum and don’t disrespect him. Remember the blessing comes from God. A woman that sees God’s perspective when it comes to the marriage institution will not misbehave when blessed. God has chosen to bless your family through you. Be humbled by the blessing and obedient to God’s order. To both man and wife: keep praying for each other’s success. Both of you should do your best, no one taking advantage of the other. Keep aspiring to get better and more productive. Keep pushing the limits and be the best you can be. God will cause joy to fill your home. I hope this has been helpful to you. I will be back next week with another topic. Until then, thanks for following and retweeting. May your marriages and relationships be sweet! #MrMrsBetterHalf

IS IT ADVISABLE TO MARRY A WOMAN WHO IS MORE CAREER-DRIVEN THAN YOU? Hello, friends. Welcome to another episode of Mr & Mrs Better Half. It is designed to strengthen marriages and relationships that will lead to marriage, with wisdom from God's Word. Sometimes ago, I asked some friends, ‘what do you think causes major friction in a marriage?’ One of the answers was money. On further probing, we got into one of the big money issues: “Finances are often problematic when the wife earns more.” A follow-up question: Since few earn millions on their 1st job, how did these women build their finances to surpass their husbands’? Again, we hit another interesting note- ‘some women are too ambitious! If they would just ‘chill’ things would be okay.’ This statement threw up so many questions. Should a wife deliberately go for a low-paying job to avoid earning more than her husband? Should she also perform poorly to ensure she doesn’t get promoted? If she’s offered a raise, should she refuse? Of course, these things sound silly but these are actual options some couples have considered in their homes to preserve the peace. Sometimes, the man actually starts out earning more but calamity strikes and his business/career goes downhill. So the once ‘balanced’ household turns upside down because the woman now pulls most of the financial weight. The big question you should ask is this. ‘Why should money (something so many seem to be chasing) which should make life easier become the very thing that can cause unhappiness? There are 4 things I would like you to consider today- Changing times, Culture, Acceptance and Attitude. A) Changing Times: Men, the days when women in the workplace were oddities have since gone. With advancements in technology, many of the more physical jobs have been taken over by machines. This means that there’s no reason women should be sidelined on the grounds of being physically weaker than men. This coupled with the realization of a woman’s right to express her intelligence means the world has made much progress where women in the workplace are concerned. Today there is hardly any industry where you will not find women doing remarkable things. As a result, it is not uncommon for husbands & wives to earn similar salaries or have the wives even bringing more. The truth is that most men like the added household income- who wouldn’t? The only thing is that they just want to earn more than their wives. This clearly becomes an issue of self-esteem and ego. Please understand that you can’t derive your sense of self from money. Many men think being a man is all about bringing in money. It takes a lot more than that to be a real man. Different things make a man. They include the ability to provide, lead, protect, nurture and love. Men you have to bring more to the table than just money to be an exemplary head of your household. So stop being hung up on money alone. (B) Let’s go to Culture. In the past women were touted as the homemakers while men barely lifted a finger in their homes. What men didn’t understand is that being a homemaker is a very marketable skill! A good homemaker is likely to be very skilled in people and money management, multi-tasking, negotiation skills, etc. You’d think that keeping a woman in the house would incapacitate her in the business terrain but you’d be wrong! Women develop the soft skills required for top-tier management quite early in life! Coupled with formal education, a woman who truly wants to succeed in business is a force to reckon with. Perhaps we should take a look at how we raise our sons these days. We might just be doing them a disservice! (C) Let’s discuss Acceptance. As a man, I understand one’s ego can take a pounding if your wife earns more. Single men dating ladies that earn more often vow to themselves that they'll turn the financial tables around before they get married or shortly after. Like it or not, this doesn’t always happen. Sometimes a woman’s gift will shoot her to the peak of her profession. What will you do? Will you kill yourself trying to earn more? Will you resent her success or do the mature and supportive thing and accept it? I have come to know a certain truth. As much as it might be your preference, who earns more in your relationship is not your call. I will repeat this. It is not your call to determine who earns more in this life. Everyone has a race to run. God has blessed everyone with a unique gift. You cannot determine the extent of another person’s potential. If you can't cope with a successful lady you actually have a problem with self-esteem which is not her problem; it’s yours. Single guys, when you court a lady, look beyond her hips, lips and fingertips and determine her inner ‘horsepower’. Can you envision whom she is likely to be if all things work out for her good? Will you be intimidated by her success? There are ladies who are incredibly brilliant, driven and ambitious. You can tell they are loaded from the onset. Such people tend to have a light shine on them and often end up in the public eye doing great things. You shouldn’t marry someone like that and try to cap her … you will kill her spirit, kill the marriage or kill yourself. Remember that your wife also wants to die empty. Your responsibility as a husband is to give her wings to fly. Be a real man, a secure man. Manage your ego and support her. Now if this is difficult for you to stomach, please don’t marry her. In your house, everyone should be a cheerleader urging each one to victory. If you know you've the tendency to be jealous of people’s progress or be competitive, marry wisely. More importantly, deal with this weakness. It’s a bad one & reeks of emotional immaturity. (D) Finally- Attitude. Sometimes the husbands try to be supportive but the attitudes of the wives make it very hard. I have already addressed the men on attitude and the need to build their self-confidence and be supportive of their wives, but now I’ll speak to the wives. To the women: Do you lord the fact that you earn more over your husband? Do you seize the reins and make the big decisions? If you keep cutting down your husband because you earn more money, you pull down your home with your hands. Please don’t get it twisted. The man remains the head of the home. Don’t let money or your position at work get to your head. Pride is unattractive in anyone and that includes you. Cultivate a gentle, quiet and humble spirit. It’s important to note that money or wealth will always amplify who you really are. If you are compassionate and respectful you will continue to be so regardless of the money you make. If you are crass, rude and disloyal, money will make that more apparent and cause problems in the home. Remember that marriage is a partnership. Your success is really “our success”. His support helped you become successful. Even if he has not been supportive still carry your blessing with decorum and don’t disrespect him. Remember the blessing comes from God. A woman that sees God’s perspective when it comes to the marriage institution will not misbehave when blessed. God has chosen to bless your family through you. Be humbled by the blessing and obedient to God’s order. To both man and wife: keep praying for each other’s success. Both of you should do your best, no one taking advantage of the other. Keep aspiring to get better and more productive. Keep pushing the limits and be the best you can be. God will cause joy to fill your home. I hope this has been helpful to you. I will be back next week with another topic. Until then, thanks for following and retweeting. May your marriages and relationships be sweet! #MrMrsBetterHalf

Godman Akinlabi

141,480 views • 3 years ago

THE OCCULT ROOTS, ELITE, INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES and INSTITUTIONS PLAN to ALTER MAN & CONTROL SOCIETY. It was all engineered. From symbolism, to intelligence agencies Mk Ultra programs, to transhumanism, and transgenderism, and where the elite get their pedophi*e beliefs from. This is going to explain the foundation and plan for society and layout a huge piece of the puzzle to help you understand where it all came from and how it started. Many of these occult rooted wealthy socialists knew exactly how they were going to literally bring in their New World Order before most of the methods or techniques even existed, and the crazy part is that it's happening today, exactly like they said it was. The last part of their plan, before it is complete was the sexual revolution, and what do we see happening all around us today with transgenderism, transhumanism, and pedophil*a with children? The plan was to revolutionize Western civilization through counterculture, and a sexual revolution to make the West more amenable to a future of socialist technocracy. They knew if they wanted to win they had to play the long game. These people were thinking generations ahead. This is called the Fabian Society model-the slow burn of implemented ideas to transform society. Their symbol is a literal wolf in sheep's clothing/skin. The Fabian Socialist Technocrats talked about this in the 1920s & 1930s. Like Bertrand Russel, a British philosopher who was one of the very first people who openly lived in a pan/poly relationship before anyone else, who basically helped plan the sexual revolution as well as many others. Herbert George Wells (H.G. Wells), the father of science fiction also wrote a bunch of mainline geopolitical books like "The Open Conspiracy," and "The New World Order." In these books he describes how they would revolutionize Western civilization through counterculture and sexual revolution to a socialist technocracy. These books were literally telling you their plans. The concept of technocracy has roots in ancient ideas like Plato's philosopher kings, and it gained traction during the Industrial Revolution and the Great Depression. Technocracy emphasizes the use of technical expertise in decision making often prioritizing scientific evidence and data over political considerations or public opinion. Sounds good in some aspects but it doesn't work overall. So, as counterculture, this sexual revolution, and darker occult practices, like Satanism and Paganism, etc., started to rise up, elites and governments started to catch on to these beliefs and practices and big money went into funding the creation of some institutions, non-profits and other programs along with projects in intelligence agencies in the U.S. and others. This overall takeover of the West and society was both calculated and non-intentional in a way. But from big names involved, The Esalen Institute was born. A non-profit in Big Sur, California that focuses on humanistic alternative education. The Institute played a key role in the Human Potential Movement beginning in the 1960s. The Esalen Institute was founded by Michael Murphy and Dick Price in 1962. It is basically the "think tank" of counterculture and the sexual revolution, promoted by very wealthy and influential people. Their intention was to support alternative methods for exploring human conscientiousness, promoting that everything is divine. One major thing you must understand that the roots of many of the people in Esalen were all into Satanic occult type belief systems and paganistic practices, like from the teachings of Anton LaVey and Aliester Crowley, who both were heavily involved in Satanism and also into pedophil*a and transhumanistic beliefs. Crowley was also a part of British Intelligence/MI5, and heavy into altering the mind with drugs and substances to make contact and change conscientiousness and to be like their own god. Other notable figures of Esalen was Timothy Leary, a psychologist who is also known for his advocacy of psychedelic experiences, a prominent figure of the counterculture movement and heavily into Aliester Crowley's sex revolution beliefs. All these sexual beliefs are associated transhumanism, transgenderism, and pedophil*a. Which is no coincidence why you see the heavy push for this on our society and on our children today. Another very prominent name and usual suspect is David Rockefeller who heavily promoted and funded the Esalen Institution and any others like it and donated millions of dollars to them every single year from the 1970s to around 2004. Rockefeller wasn't the only one and this is just one piece of this overall plan to destroy the West and society itself to bring in this new world. Let's move on. Now we will connect how Mk-Ultra was literally beyond the WW2 German connection and operation paperclip and set up from an arm of these foundations and writings of some of these people who laid the ground work and sparked these ideas into a reality, to be used on Western society and to literally alter man's mind and his actual physical appearance. Bring in the green agenda and convince man that man is the problem. A White Paper was written in the 1970s called, "Changing the Images of Man," put out by the Tavistock Institution. In this key paper they talked about reengineering all of Western civilization's thoughts. Not just about the environment, but also about man himself. The Tavistock Institution of human relations is a British non-profit reaserch and consulting organization, specialising in the study of group behavior. They also have sister companies in China and Germany, and it was established in 1947. They explained about how they needed to convince man that man is the problem. This is exactly where all of your counterculture, sexual revolution, depopulation, antinatalist, transgenderism, transhumanism, pedophil*a, etc., beliefs stem from. You are the problem but you can change yourself. Feb 4, 1932, A Brave New World, and then, A Brave New World Revisited was written. Huxley wrote that this is not fiction, this is a plan of things to come. The 2nd chapter is literally all about child sexual abuse material. This is where all this stuff came about and into our society. Huxley heavily believed in Aliester Crowley's belief systems and partied with Crowley, even attending orgies together. Huxley took Crowley's book, "The Drug Diaries to a government study level in a sense. Which was originally what Crowley was working with to contact entities and perform ritualistic ceremonies and involved with sexual activities with children. Tavistock was basically the British Mk Ultra from the studies originally from Aliester who was also a British intelligence agent with MI5. These drug studies and mind control studies at Tavistock led to the idea that you can engineer and change a human being, not just in his mind, but an entire change of physiology and biology of a person. Hence Transgenderism and Transhumanism, etc. Like how they're literally giving kids drugs and surgeries to "change" their genders today. In 1969 Dr. Holger Hyden who worked on mind control through drugs and medication, etc., was invited to a mind control conference in San Francisco that the Rockefellers sponsored by the CIA's, "Voice of America. Dr. Hyden's papers were about drugs and chemicals actually changing gender in men and women in the future. And look where we are now. The CIA made alliances with the French post modernists and deconstructionists who were a part of Congress for Cultural Freedom. The CIA also had and still does have members who studied and agreed with these same belief systems and started to study mind control after Huxley's brave new world which sparked their interest because of Crowley's actual experimentation actually using drugs to alter conscientiousness and for control or engineering one's mind and the results and studies from the Tavistock and their research. Which all stems back to his Satanic and sexual beliefs. Now we examine the CIA Mk Ultra with Hollywood and it's Mk Ultra program to induce, steer, and mold behavior throughout the population through, sex, drugs, and rock and roll. This was all apart of the mind control program on a grand scale relating to propaganda and drugs. Most A-list celebrities back then were also working or were active intelligence agents who also had DoD badges including Marylyn Monroe, to access the famous Air force location named Laurel Canyon where many operations stemmed from when it came to manipulating the public with music, t.v. and with any other type of influence. Many were recruited to do spy work for intelligence agencies. This was basically them working out their big plan, their agenda, which still happens today with the huge push with the occult and Satanic worship, sexual deviancy, transgenderism, transhumanism, you name it. They even have after school Satan groups in schools for kids starting as young as in kindergarten. This is also why you see the gigantic push for pedophil*a and trying to be able to give children consent and be sexualized, while horrific laws are being passed to reduce penalties for child predators. This is the type of "Brave New World" they want. The last step before bringing in their New World is the sexual revolution aspect which includes transgenderism, pedophil*a, transhumanism, Satanism, the green agenda, and depopulation. But the sexual revolution is the most important and last step. The fall of Rome also occurred when this type of sexual activity occurred as well. Something to really take into consideration and compare it to where we are now. Every single one of these ideologies and beliefs all stem from these wealthy elite individuals, institutions and belief systems that they all planned decades ago and it's literally happening right in front of us. There is so much more to this but this gives you an introduction or a starting point to connect the dots of where it all came from during the past century, which directly is impacting our lives and society. They are now experiencing heavy pushback. We're onto them and their ultimate plan. They gave us the roadmap. It's up to you to understand it and up to all of us to stop it.

THE OCCULT ROOTS, ELITE, INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES and INSTITUTIONS PLAN to ALTER MAN & CONTROL SOCIETY. It was all engineered. From symbolism, to intelligence agencies Mk Ultra programs, to transhumanism, and transgenderism, and where the elite get their pedophie beliefs from. This is going to explain the foundation and plan for society and layout a huge piece of the puzzle to help you understand where it all came from and how it started. Many of these occult rooted wealthy socialists knew exactly how they were going to literally bring in their New World Order before most of the methods or techniques even existed, and the crazy part is that it's happening today, exactly like they said it was. The last part of their plan, before it is complete was the sexual revolution, and what do we see happening all around us today with transgenderism, transhumanism, and pedophila with children? The plan was to revolutionize Western civilization through counterculture, and a sexual revolution to make the West more amenable to a future of socialist technocracy. They knew if they wanted to win they had to play the long game. These people were thinking generations ahead. This is called the Fabian Society model-the slow burn of implemented ideas to transform society. Their symbol is a literal wolf in sheep's clothing/skin. The Fabian Socialist Technocrats talked about this in the 1920s & 1930s. Like Bertrand Russel, a British philosopher who was one of the very first people who openly lived in a pan/poly relationship before anyone else, who basically helped plan the sexual revolution as well as many others. Herbert George Wells (H.G. Wells), the father of science fiction also wrote a bunch of mainline geopolitical books like "The Open Conspiracy," and "The New World Order." In these books he describes how they would revolutionize Western civilization through counterculture and sexual revolution to a socialist technocracy. These books were literally telling you their plans. The concept of technocracy has roots in ancient ideas like Plato's philosopher kings, and it gained traction during the Industrial Revolution and the Great Depression. Technocracy emphasizes the use of technical expertise in decision making often prioritizing scientific evidence and data over political considerations or public opinion. Sounds good in some aspects but it doesn't work overall. So, as counterculture, this sexual revolution, and darker occult practices, like Satanism and Paganism, etc., started to rise up, elites and governments started to catch on to these beliefs and practices and big money went into funding the creation of some institutions, non-profits and other programs along with projects in intelligence agencies in the U.S. and others. This overall takeover of the West and society was both calculated and non-intentional in a way. But from big names involved, The Esalen Institute was born. A non-profit in Big Sur, California that focuses on humanistic alternative education. The Institute played a key role in the Human Potential Movement beginning in the 1960s. The Esalen Institute was founded by Michael Murphy and Dick Price in 1962. It is basically the "think tank" of counterculture and the sexual revolution, promoted by very wealthy and influential people. Their intention was to support alternative methods for exploring human conscientiousness, promoting that everything is divine. One major thing you must understand that the roots of many of the people in Esalen were all into Satanic occult type belief systems and paganistic practices, like from the teachings of Anton LaVey and Aliester Crowley, who both were heavily involved in Satanism and also into pedophila and transhumanistic beliefs. Crowley was also a part of British Intelligence/MI5, and heavy into altering the mind with drugs and substances to make contact and change conscientiousness and to be like their own god. Other notable figures of Esalen was Timothy Leary, a psychologist who is also known for his advocacy of psychedelic experiences, a prominent figure of the counterculture movement and heavily into Aliester Crowley's sex revolution beliefs. All these sexual beliefs are associated transhumanism, transgenderism, and pedophila. Which is no coincidence why you see the heavy push for this on our society and on our children today. Another very prominent name and usual suspect is David Rockefeller who heavily promoted and funded the Esalen Institution and any others like it and donated millions of dollars to them every single year from the 1970s to around 2004. Rockefeller wasn't the only one and this is just one piece of this overall plan to destroy the West and society itself to bring in this new world. Let's move on. Now we will connect how Mk-Ultra was literally beyond the WW2 German connection and operation paperclip and set up from an arm of these foundations and writings of some of these people who laid the ground work and sparked these ideas into a reality, to be used on Western society and to literally alter man's mind and his actual physical appearance. Bring in the green agenda and convince man that man is the problem. A White Paper was written in the 1970s called, "Changing the Images of Man," put out by the Tavistock Institution. In this key paper they talked about reengineering all of Western civilization's thoughts. Not just about the environment, but also about man himself. The Tavistock Institution of human relations is a British non-profit reaserch and consulting organization, specialising in the study of group behavior. They also have sister companies in China and Germany, and it was established in 1947. They explained about how they needed to convince man that man is the problem. This is exactly where all of your counterculture, sexual revolution, depopulation, antinatalist, transgenderism, transhumanism, pedophila, etc., beliefs stem from. You are the problem but you can change yourself. Feb 4, 1932, A Brave New World, and then, A Brave New World Revisited was written. Huxley wrote that this is not fiction, this is a plan of things to come. The 2nd chapter is literally all about child sexual abuse material. This is where all this stuff came about and into our society. Huxley heavily believed in Aliester Crowley's belief systems and partied with Crowley, even attending orgies together. Huxley took Crowley's book, "The Drug Diaries to a government study level in a sense. Which was originally what Crowley was working with to contact entities and perform ritualistic ceremonies and involved with sexual activities with children. Tavistock was basically the British Mk Ultra from the studies originally from Aliester who was also a British intelligence agent with MI5. These drug studies and mind control studies at Tavistock led to the idea that you can engineer and change a human being, not just in his mind, but an entire change of physiology and biology of a person. Hence Transgenderism and Transhumanism, etc. Like how they're literally giving kids drugs and surgeries to "change" their genders today. In 1969 Dr. Holger Hyden who worked on mind control through drugs and medication, etc., was invited to a mind control conference in San Francisco that the Rockefellers sponsored by the CIA's, "Voice of America. Dr. Hyden's papers were about drugs and chemicals actually changing gender in men and women in the future. And look where we are now. The CIA made alliances with the French post modernists and deconstructionists who were a part of Congress for Cultural Freedom. The CIA also had and still does have members who studied and agreed with these same belief systems and started to study mind control after Huxley's brave new world which sparked their interest because of Crowley's actual experimentation actually using drugs to alter conscientiousness and for control or engineering one's mind and the results and studies from the Tavistock and their research. Which all stems back to his Satanic and sexual beliefs. Now we examine the CIA Mk Ultra with Hollywood and it's Mk Ultra program to induce, steer, and mold behavior throughout the population through, sex, drugs, and rock and roll. This was all apart of the mind control program on a grand scale relating to propaganda and drugs. Most A-list celebrities back then were also working or were active intelligence agents who also had DoD badges including Marylyn Monroe, to access the famous Air force location named Laurel Canyon where many operations stemmed from when it came to manipulating the public with music, t.v. and with any other type of influence. Many were recruited to do spy work for intelligence agencies. This was basically them working out their big plan, their agenda, which still happens today with the huge push with the occult and Satanic worship, sexual deviancy, transgenderism, transhumanism, you name it. They even have after school Satan groups in schools for kids starting as young as in kindergarten. This is also why you see the gigantic push for pedophila and trying to be able to give children consent and be sexualized, while horrific laws are being passed to reduce penalties for child predators. This is the type of "Brave New World" they want. The last step before bringing in their New World is the sexual revolution aspect which includes transgenderism, pedophil*a, transhumanism, Satanism, the green agenda, and depopulation. But the sexual revolution is the most important and last step. The fall of Rome also occurred when this type of sexual activity occurred as well. Something to really take into consideration and compare it to where we are now. Every single one of these ideologies and beliefs all stem from these wealthy elite individuals, institutions and belief systems that they all planned decades ago and it's literally happening right in front of us. There is so much more to this but this gives you an introduction or a starting point to connect the dots of where it all came from during the past century, which directly is impacting our lives and society. They are now experiencing heavy pushback. We're onto them and their ultimate plan. They gave us the roadmap. It's up to you to understand it and up to all of us to stop it.

The SCIF

85,521 views • 1 year ago

The TAVISTOCK, ESALEN, and STANFORD RESEARCH institute, the OCCULT, and the CIA's plan to BRAINWASH and destroy AMERICA. "We must convince man that "man" is the problem." This is their plan to bring about their "Brave New World." But it's not what you think it is. This is the sinister plan that you see unfolding right now in today's world. This is WHO is behind it, HOW, WHEN, and WHERE they planned it, and WHY. From the climate agenda, transgenderism, transhumanism, the Satanic agenda, the pedophi*e agenda and attack on our children, to cancel culture, the sexual revolution, communism, and every other backwards, upside down, and evil idea being brought about into our society. This is very important to understand, pay attention. It was all engineered. From symbolism, to intelligence agencies Mk Ultra programs, to transhumanism, and transgenderism, and where the elite get their pedophi*e beliefs from. This is going to explain the foundation and plan for society and layout a huge piece of the puzzle to help you understand where it all came from and how it started. Many of these occult rooted wealthy socialists knew exactly how they were going to literally bring in their New World Order before most of the methods or techniques even existed, and the crazy part is that it's happening today, exactly like they said it was. The last part of their plan, before it is complete was the sexual revolution, and what do we see happening all around us today with transgenderism, transhumanism, and pedophil*a with children? The plan was to revolutionize Western civilization through counterculture, and a sexual revolution to make the West more amenable to a future of socialist technocracy. They knew if they wanted to win they had to play the long game. These people were thinking generations ahead. This is called the Fabian Society model-the slow burn of implemented ideas to transform society. Their symbol is a literal wolf in sheep's clothing/skin. The Fabian Socialist Technocrats talked about this in the 1920s & 1930s. Like Bertrand Russel, a British philosopher who was one of the very first people who openly lived in a pan/poly relationship before anyone else, who basically helped plan the sexual revolution as well as many others. Herbert George Wells (H.G. Wells), the father of science fiction also wrote a bunch of mainline geopolitical books like "The Open Conspiracy," and "The New World Order." In these books he describes how they would revolutionize Western civilization through counterculture and sexual revolution to a socialist technocracy. These books were literally telling you their plans. The concept of technocracy has roots in ancient ideas like Plato's philosopher kings, and it gained traction during the Industrial Revolution and the Great Depression. Technocracy emphasizes the use of technical expertise in decision making often prioritizing scientific evidence and data over political considerations or public opinion. Sounds good in some aspects but it doesn't work overall. So, as counterculture, this sexual revolution, and darker occult practices, like Satanism and Paganism, etc., started to rise up, elites and governments started to catch on to these beliefs and practices and big money went into funding the creation of some institutions, non-profits and other programs along with projects in intelligence agencies in the U.S. and others. This overall takeover of the West and society was both calculated and non-intentional in a way. But from big names involved, The Esalen Institute was born. A non-profit in Big Sur, California that focuses on humanistic alternative education. The Institute played a key role in the Human Potential Movement beginning in the 1960s. The Esalen Institute was founded by Michael Murphy and Dick Price in 1962. It is basically the "think tank" of counterculture and the sexual revolution, promoted by very wealthy and influential people. Their intention was to support alternative methods for exploring human conscientiousness, promoting that everything is divine. One major thing you must understand that the roots of many of the people in Esalen were all into Satanic occult type belief systems and paganistic practices, like from the teachings of Anton LaVey and Aliester Crowley, who both were heavily involved in Satanism and also into pedophil*a and transhumanistic beliefs. Crowley was also a part of British Intelligence/MI5, and heavy into altering the mind with drugs and substances to make contact and change conscientiousness and to be like their own god. Other notable figures of Esalen was Timothy Leary, a psychologist who is also known for his advocacy of psychedelic experiences, a prominent figure of the counterculture movement and heavily into Aliester Crowley's sex revolution beliefs. All these sexual beliefs are associated transhumanism, transgenderism, and pedophil*a. Which is no coincidence why you see the heavy push for this on our society and on our children today. Another very prominent name and usual suspect is David Rockefeller who heavily promoted and funded the Esalen Institution and any others like it and donated millions of dollars to them every single year from the 1970s to around 2004. Rockefeller wasn't the only one and this is just one piece of this overall plan to destroy the West and society itself to bring in this new world. Let's move on. Now we will connect how Mk-Ultra was literally beyond the WW2 German connection and operation paperclip and set up from an arm of these foundations and writings of some of these people who laid the ground work and sparked these ideas into a reality, to be used on Western society and to literally alter man's mind and his actual physical appearance. Bring in the green agenda and convince man that man is the problem. A White Paper was written in the 1970s called, "Changing the Images of Man," put out by the Tavistock Institution. In this key paper they talked about reengineering all of Western civilization's thoughts. Not just about the environment, but also about man himself. The Tavistock Institution of human relations is a British non-profit research and consulting organization, specializing in the study of group behavior. They also have sister companies in China and Germany, and it was established in 1947. They explained about how they needed to convince man that man is the problem. This is exactly where all of your counterculture, sexual revolution, depopulation, antinatalist, transgenderism, transhumanism, pedophil*a, etc., beliefs stem from. You are the problem but you can change yourself. Feb 4, 1932, A Brave New World, and then, A Brave New World Revisited was written. Huxley wrote that this is not fiction, this is a plan of things to come. The 2nd chapter is literally all about child sexual abuse material. This is where all this stuff came about and into our society. Huxley heavily believed in Aliester Crowley's belief systems and partied with Crowley, even attending orgies together. Huxley took Crowley's book, "The Drug Diaries to a government study level in a sense. Which was originally what Crowley was working with to contact entities and perform ritualistic ceremonies and involved with sexual activities with children. Tavistock was basically the British Mk Ultra from the studies originally from Aliester who was also a British intelligence agent with MI5. These drug studies and mind control studies at Tavistock led to the idea that you can engineer and change a human being, not just in his mind, but an entire change of physiology and biology of a person. Hence Transgenderism and Transhumanism, etc. Like how they're literally giving kids drugs and surgeries to "change" their genders today. In 1969 Dr. Holger Hyden who worked on mind control through drugs and medication, etc., was invited to a mind control conference in San Francisco that the Rockefellers sponsored by the CIA's, "Voice of America. Dr. Hyden's papers were about drugs and chemicals actually changing gender in men and women in the future. And look where we are now. The CIA made alliances with the French post modernists and deconstructionists who were a part of Congress for Cultural Freedom. The CIA also had and still does have members who studied and agreed with these same belief systems and started to study mind control after Huxley's brave new world which sparked their interest because of Crowley's actual experimentation actually using drugs to alter conscientiousness and for control or engineering one's mind and the results and studies from the Tavistock and their research. Which all stems back to his Satanic and sexual beliefs. Now we examine the CIA Mk Ultra with Hollywood and it's Mk Ultra program to induce, steer, and mold behavior throughout the population through, sex, drugs, and rock and roll. This was all apart of the mind control program on a grand scale relating to propaganda and drugs. Most A-list celebrities back then were also working or were active intelligence agents who also had DoD badges including Marylyn Monroe, to access the famous Air force location named Laurel Canyon where many operations stemmed from when it came to manipulating the public with music, t.v. and with any other type of influence. Many were recruited to do spy work for intelligence agencies. This was basically them working out their big plan, their agenda, which still happens today with the huge push with the occult and Satanic worship, sexual deviancy, transgenderism, transhumanism, you name it. They even have after school Satan groups in schools for kids starting as young as in kindergarten. This is also why you see the gigantic push for pedophil*a and trying to be able to give children consent and be sexualized, while horrific laws are being passed to reduce penalties for child predators. This is the type of "Brave New World" they want. The last step before bringing in their New World is the sexual revolution aspect which includes transgenderism, pedophil*a, transhumanism, Satanism, the green agenda, and depopulation. But the sexual revolution is the most important and last step. The fall of Rome also occurred when this type of sexual activity occurred as well. Something to really take into consideration and compare it to where we are now. Every single one of these ideologies and beliefs all stem from these wealthy elite individuals, institutions and belief systems that they all planned decades ago and it's literally happening right in front of us. There is so much more to this but this gives you an introduction or a starting point to connect the dots of where it all came from during the past century, which directly is impacting our lives and society. They are now experiencing heavy pushback. We're onto them and their ultimate plan. They gave us the roadmap. It's up to you to understand it and up to all of us to stop it.

The TAVISTOCK, ESALEN, and STANFORD RESEARCH institute, the OCCULT, and the CIA's plan to BRAINWASH and destroy AMERICA. "We must convince man that "man" is the problem." This is their plan to bring about their "Brave New World." But it's not what you think it is. This is the sinister plan that you see unfolding right now in today's world. This is WHO is behind it, HOW, WHEN, and WHERE they planned it, and WHY. From the climate agenda, transgenderism, transhumanism, the Satanic agenda, the pedophie agenda and attack on our children, to cancel culture, the sexual revolution, communism, and every other backwards, upside down, and evil idea being brought about into our society. This is very important to understand, pay attention. It was all engineered. From symbolism, to intelligence agencies Mk Ultra programs, to transhumanism, and transgenderism, and where the elite get their pedophie beliefs from. This is going to explain the foundation and plan for society and layout a huge piece of the puzzle to help you understand where it all came from and how it started. Many of these occult rooted wealthy socialists knew exactly how they were going to literally bring in their New World Order before most of the methods or techniques even existed, and the crazy part is that it's happening today, exactly like they said it was. The last part of their plan, before it is complete was the sexual revolution, and what do we see happening all around us today with transgenderism, transhumanism, and pedophila with children? The plan was to revolutionize Western civilization through counterculture, and a sexual revolution to make the West more amenable to a future of socialist technocracy. They knew if they wanted to win they had to play the long game. These people were thinking generations ahead. This is called the Fabian Society model-the slow burn of implemented ideas to transform society. Their symbol is a literal wolf in sheep's clothing/skin. The Fabian Socialist Technocrats talked about this in the 1920s & 1930s. Like Bertrand Russel, a British philosopher who was one of the very first people who openly lived in a pan/poly relationship before anyone else, who basically helped plan the sexual revolution as well as many others. Herbert George Wells (H.G. Wells), the father of science fiction also wrote a bunch of mainline geopolitical books like "The Open Conspiracy," and "The New World Order." In these books he describes how they would revolutionize Western civilization through counterculture and sexual revolution to a socialist technocracy. These books were literally telling you their plans. The concept of technocracy has roots in ancient ideas like Plato's philosopher kings, and it gained traction during the Industrial Revolution and the Great Depression. Technocracy emphasizes the use of technical expertise in decision making often prioritizing scientific evidence and data over political considerations or public opinion. Sounds good in some aspects but it doesn't work overall. So, as counterculture, this sexual revolution, and darker occult practices, like Satanism and Paganism, etc., started to rise up, elites and governments started to catch on to these beliefs and practices and big money went into funding the creation of some institutions, non-profits and other programs along with projects in intelligence agencies in the U.S. and others. This overall takeover of the West and society was both calculated and non-intentional in a way. But from big names involved, The Esalen Institute was born. A non-profit in Big Sur, California that focuses on humanistic alternative education. The Institute played a key role in the Human Potential Movement beginning in the 1960s. The Esalen Institute was founded by Michael Murphy and Dick Price in 1962. It is basically the "think tank" of counterculture and the sexual revolution, promoted by very wealthy and influential people. Their intention was to support alternative methods for exploring human conscientiousness, promoting that everything is divine. One major thing you must understand that the roots of many of the people in Esalen were all into Satanic occult type belief systems and paganistic practices, like from the teachings of Anton LaVey and Aliester Crowley, who both were heavily involved in Satanism and also into pedophila and transhumanistic beliefs. Crowley was also a part of British Intelligence/MI5, and heavy into altering the mind with drugs and substances to make contact and change conscientiousness and to be like their own god. Other notable figures of Esalen was Timothy Leary, a psychologist who is also known for his advocacy of psychedelic experiences, a prominent figure of the counterculture movement and heavily into Aliester Crowley's sex revolution beliefs. All these sexual beliefs are associated transhumanism, transgenderism, and pedophila. Which is no coincidence why you see the heavy push for this on our society and on our children today. Another very prominent name and usual suspect is David Rockefeller who heavily promoted and funded the Esalen Institution and any others like it and donated millions of dollars to them every single year from the 1970s to around 2004. Rockefeller wasn't the only one and this is just one piece of this overall plan to destroy the West and society itself to bring in this new world. Let's move on. Now we will connect how Mk-Ultra was literally beyond the WW2 German connection and operation paperclip and set up from an arm of these foundations and writings of some of these people who laid the ground work and sparked these ideas into a reality, to be used on Western society and to literally alter man's mind and his actual physical appearance. Bring in the green agenda and convince man that man is the problem. A White Paper was written in the 1970s called, "Changing the Images of Man," put out by the Tavistock Institution. In this key paper they talked about reengineering all of Western civilization's thoughts. Not just about the environment, but also about man himself. The Tavistock Institution of human relations is a British non-profit research and consulting organization, specializing in the study of group behavior. They also have sister companies in China and Germany, and it was established in 1947. They explained about how they needed to convince man that man is the problem. This is exactly where all of your counterculture, sexual revolution, depopulation, antinatalist, transgenderism, transhumanism, pedophila, etc., beliefs stem from. You are the problem but you can change yourself. Feb 4, 1932, A Brave New World, and then, A Brave New World Revisited was written. Huxley wrote that this is not fiction, this is a plan of things to come. The 2nd chapter is literally all about child sexual abuse material. This is where all this stuff came about and into our society. Huxley heavily believed in Aliester Crowley's belief systems and partied with Crowley, even attending orgies together. Huxley took Crowley's book, "The Drug Diaries to a government study level in a sense. Which was originally what Crowley was working with to contact entities and perform ritualistic ceremonies and involved with sexual activities with children. Tavistock was basically the British Mk Ultra from the studies originally from Aliester who was also a British intelligence agent with MI5. These drug studies and mind control studies at Tavistock led to the idea that you can engineer and change a human being, not just in his mind, but an entire change of physiology and biology of a person. Hence Transgenderism and Transhumanism, etc. Like how they're literally giving kids drugs and surgeries to "change" their genders today. In 1969 Dr. Holger Hyden who worked on mind control through drugs and medication, etc., was invited to a mind control conference in San Francisco that the Rockefellers sponsored by the CIA's, "Voice of America. Dr. Hyden's papers were about drugs and chemicals actually changing gender in men and women in the future. And look where we are now. The CIA made alliances with the French post modernists and deconstructionists who were a part of Congress for Cultural Freedom. The CIA also had and still does have members who studied and agreed with these same belief systems and started to study mind control after Huxley's brave new world which sparked their interest because of Crowley's actual experimentation actually using drugs to alter conscientiousness and for control or engineering one's mind and the results and studies from the Tavistock and their research. Which all stems back to his Satanic and sexual beliefs. Now we examine the CIA Mk Ultra with Hollywood and it's Mk Ultra program to induce, steer, and mold behavior throughout the population through, sex, drugs, and rock and roll. This was all apart of the mind control program on a grand scale relating to propaganda and drugs. Most A-list celebrities back then were also working or were active intelligence agents who also had DoD badges including Marylyn Monroe, to access the famous Air force location named Laurel Canyon where many operations stemmed from when it came to manipulating the public with music, t.v. and with any other type of influence. Many were recruited to do spy work for intelligence agencies. This was basically them working out their big plan, their agenda, which still happens today with the huge push with the occult and Satanic worship, sexual deviancy, transgenderism, transhumanism, you name it. They even have after school Satan groups in schools for kids starting as young as in kindergarten. This is also why you see the gigantic push for pedophila and trying to be able to give children consent and be sexualized, while horrific laws are being passed to reduce penalties for child predators. This is the type of "Brave New World" they want. The last step before bringing in their New World is the sexual revolution aspect which includes transgenderism, pedophila, transhumanism, Satanism, the green agenda, and depopulation. But the sexual revolution is the most important and last step. The fall of Rome also occurred when this type of sexual activity occurred as well. Something to really take into consideration and compare it to where we are now. Every single one of these ideologies and beliefs all stem from these wealthy elite individuals, institutions and belief systems that they all planned decades ago and it's literally happening right in front of us. There is so much more to this but this gives you an introduction or a starting point to connect the dots of where it all came from during the past century, which directly is impacting our lives and society. They are now experiencing heavy pushback. We're onto them and their ultimate plan. They gave us the roadmap. It's up to you to understand it and up to all of us to stop it.

The SCIF

16,700 views • 10 months ago

Dr Jim Chalmers PhD is a smartarse. He let fly on Sussan Ley today, and for the first time since Albanese became leader of the Labor Party, they are worried. They are not afraid of Ley. They are trying to shame her into stepping back into the Net Zero love in. The place where all the establishment elite hang out, eat fine food and slap each other on the back with their gym towels. Ley will be susceptible to this, because deep down she has a strong conviction, an unwavering belief in serving the establishment power and finding the path of least resistance. (The coalition needs a new leader and a new front bench.) But the absolute tantrum being thrown around the Australian institutions right now, can be heard from New Zealand. It shows the coalition are indeed over the target, and that with Australia first policies built on good principles, they can win. All the Labor and Green sympathisers in the media, the pollsters, the academics, the commentariat and the politicians themselves are desperately trying to convince the coalition that they will not win ever again if they change course on Net Zero, climate action and a raft of other things. I am not sure if they are just not that bright, or if they just think we are stupid, but I can’t understand why all these people are so worried about the fortunes of their political opposition. An opposition they really can’t stand. I think it is more likely they are scared that without the coalition pretending along with them on the made-up issues like the desperate need for Net Zero, they will have to tackle some of our real-world problems. Oh… and the big, gigantic taxpayer funded money-go-round will stop. Which means they will have to get real jobs… “yuck”. When Jim Chalmers, called anyone who doesn’t think Net Zero is a good idea “cookers” and “crackpots”, it seemed to me he thinks that the massive opposition to what is now obviously failed policy, is just a fringe group. It isn’t. Anyone with half a brain cell can see the cost of electricity has gone up faster than the transition itself. We have watched the aftermath of the closing of one coal-fired power station after another, being replaced with finicky, intermittent and ill fit ‘renewable’ solutions. It is in every power bill and plastered on the exit door of every major manufacturing-based business closure. It is in the cost of everything we have and do. But the game is over. The world is moving on from Net Zero. We are not even that worried about the clearly overstated climate problem so much anymore. Because they cried wolf, time after time, they bashed us over the head from their private jets champagne in hand, as they called us names. We disgust them. It is clear the Labor/Green arguments on climate have been overstated. The solutions ill thought through and undercooked. The only real winners have been the billionaires, lobbyists and ex-politicians who seem to have extracted more welfare from the Australian public than the NDIS and Centrelink combined, as they are paid to provide infrastructure that does not work. Only to shelve it and ask for another hand-out for the next one. Which they get. The problem is that intermittent energy generation like solar and wind is unstable - by design - and battery technology is far from where it would need to be to stabilise it. Electricity provision is a delicate balance of supply and demand, and random, unpredictable power generation is counterproductive. Too much electricity is as bad as not enough. Simple, predictable and reliable energy sources will always be cheaper. Energy sources that are not reliant on the unpredictable weather, or transient cloud free daylight. the "transition" was always a terrible plan and doomed to fail. That's before you even get to the disastrous execution. The elites really do take us for fools; it's not like any of this was an unknown to them at any point. Meanwhile average household incomes are being beaten into insignificance by inflation, driven by an energy system that has become more complex, and unstable than a Swiss watch balanced on the mast of a yacht, sailing the Sydney to Hobart. Chalmers has never had a real job, but he calls us names. Us... we the people who pay his salary. After the mess he and his mates have caused, he has no right to call us names. In truth, he owes us all an apology. I am certain we would be better off without his help, and I for one begrudge him every dollar he has ever made off the back of the taxpayer. He is a disrespectful, incompetent, and ungrateful waste of a seat. A smartarse of a man not fit to be treasurer. We must do better. I just want Australia back.

Dr Jim Chalmers PhD is a smartarse. He let fly on Sussan Ley today, and for the first time since Albanese became leader of the Labor Party, they are worried. They are not afraid of Ley. They are trying to shame her into stepping back into the Net Zero love in. The place where all the establishment elite hang out, eat fine food and slap each other on the back with their gym towels. Ley will be susceptible to this, because deep down she has a strong conviction, an unwavering belief in serving the establishment power and finding the path of least resistance. (The coalition needs a new leader and a new front bench.) But the absolute tantrum being thrown around the Australian institutions right now, can be heard from New Zealand. It shows the coalition are indeed over the target, and that with Australia first policies built on good principles, they can win. All the Labor and Green sympathisers in the media, the pollsters, the academics, the commentariat and the politicians themselves are desperately trying to convince the coalition that they will not win ever again if they change course on Net Zero, climate action and a raft of other things. I am not sure if they are just not that bright, or if they just think we are stupid, but I can’t understand why all these people are so worried about the fortunes of their political opposition. An opposition they really can’t stand. I think it is more likely they are scared that without the coalition pretending along with them on the made-up issues like the desperate need for Net Zero, they will have to tackle some of our real-world problems. Oh… and the big, gigantic taxpayer funded money-go-round will stop. Which means they will have to get real jobs… “yuck”. When Jim Chalmers, called anyone who doesn’t think Net Zero is a good idea “cookers” and “crackpots”, it seemed to me he thinks that the massive opposition to what is now obviously failed policy, is just a fringe group. It isn’t. Anyone with half a brain cell can see the cost of electricity has gone up faster than the transition itself. We have watched the aftermath of the closing of one coal-fired power station after another, being replaced with finicky, intermittent and ill fit ‘renewable’ solutions. It is in every power bill and plastered on the exit door of every major manufacturing-based business closure. It is in the cost of everything we have and do. But the game is over. The world is moving on from Net Zero. We are not even that worried about the clearly overstated climate problem so much anymore. Because they cried wolf, time after time, they bashed us over the head from their private jets champagne in hand, as they called us names. We disgust them. It is clear the Labor/Green arguments on climate have been overstated. The solutions ill thought through and undercooked. The only real winners have been the billionaires, lobbyists and ex-politicians who seem to have extracted more welfare from the Australian public than the NDIS and Centrelink combined, as they are paid to provide infrastructure that does not work. Only to shelve it and ask for another hand-out for the next one. Which they get. The problem is that intermittent energy generation like solar and wind is unstable - by design - and battery technology is far from where it would need to be to stabilise it. Electricity provision is a delicate balance of supply and demand, and random, unpredictable power generation is counterproductive. Too much electricity is as bad as not enough. Simple, predictable and reliable energy sources will always be cheaper. Energy sources that are not reliant on the unpredictable weather, or transient cloud free daylight. the "transition" was always a terrible plan and doomed to fail. That's before you even get to the disastrous execution. The elites really do take us for fools; it's not like any of this was an unknown to them at any point. Meanwhile average household incomes are being beaten into insignificance by inflation, driven by an energy system that has become more complex, and unstable than a Swiss watch balanced on the mast of a yacht, sailing the Sydney to Hobart. Chalmers has never had a real job, but he calls us names. Us... we the people who pay his salary. After the mess he and his mates have caused, he has no right to call us names. In truth, he owes us all an apology. I am certain we would be better off without his help, and I for one begrudge him every dollar he has ever made off the back of the taxpayer. He is a disrespectful, incompetent, and ungrateful waste of a seat. A smartarse of a man not fit to be treasurer. We must do better. I just want Australia back.

Matthew Camenzuli

35,976 views • 9 months ago

I Spent $100k On Developers Before Learning This: Build Your AI Bot Today the blueprint to building your first ai trading bot without a degree or a single clue where to start is hidden in plain sight. most people think you need a stanford degree or some crazy math background to build these systems but i spent ten years in tech scared to code for that exact reason. i thought it was only for the geniuses and the nerds while i was just a guy who played video games and wanted his time back the reality is that code is the great equalizer because it doesn't care who you are or where you came from. i lost hundreds of thousands of dollars hiring developers who did shoddy work and i lost even more through liquidations and over trading because i was too emotional to follow my own rules. i knew i had to automate everything if i wanted to survive this game so i decided to learn live on youtube and iterate my way to success everyone is looking for the holy grail indicator that prints money while they sleep but they are looking in the wrong place. the real secret isn't a magical line on a chart but a process i call the rbi system which stands for research backtest and implement. most traders fail because they try to build a bot before they even know if their strategy worked in the past which is basically just gambling with extra steps you have to start with deep research into a strategy like supply and demand zones where you buy where the banks buy and sell where they sell. once you have a solid idea you must backtest it against years of data to see if it actually has an edge. if it doesn't work in the past it definitely won't work in the future but if it shows promise then you move to the implementation phase with small size there is a hidden cost to automation that can wipe out your profits before you even place a trade if you aren't careful. i found myself overusing api credits and running up a massive bill just to fetch wallet balances and token lists. if your bot is calling the exchange every five seconds just to see how much money you have you are essentially burning cash for no reason you can use ai tools like cursor to help you write the python code even if you are a total beginner. i still use ai to explain complex functions and identify where my code is being inefficient or chewing through credits. i had to refactor my entire dashboard and timer logic to only check balances every thirty minutes instead of every few seconds to save those precious credits the man who made thirty one billion dollars in the markets had one rule he never broke throughout his entire career. jim simons was the greatest algorithmic trader to ever live and he proved that systems will always beat human intuition over a long enough timeline. his secret wasn't some complex formula that no one else could understand but a commitment to a specific way of thinking simons always said you just have to make your systems better and better because that is what everyone else is trying to do. the game never really ends because the markets are always evolving and your edge will eventually decay if you don't iterate. this is why i build in public and show every step of the process because the iteration is where the actual money is made the reason you get liquidated isn't the market or the whales or some conspiracy against your small account. the real reason is the conversation you have with yourself at two in the morning when you are down on a trade and decide to move your stop loss. humans are built for survival not for trading and our emotions like fomo and fear will always sabotage our results when you automate your trading you are essentially signing a non negotiable contract with yourself that the bot will execute without question. if the plan says to sell fifty percent in an uptrend and ninety five percent in a downtrend the bot does it every single time. it doesn't feel the panic when a red candle drops or the greed when a green one spikes it just follows the code i used to spend all day staring at screens chasing bars up and down thinking that more screen time equaled more profit. i got into trading to get my time back but i ended up becoming a slave to the charts until i finally learned to code. now i have fully automated systems trading for me instead of getting liquidated because i removed the weakest link in the system which was me you don't need to spend ten years learning how to code before you can start building your own trading bots. if you spend three to six months getting the gist of python and using ai to bridge the gap you can start building immediately. start with a simple supply and demand bot that looks for major coin trends and only enters when the odds are heavily in your favor by checking the trend of bitcoin ethereum and solana simultaneously you can ensure you aren't fighting the overall market direction. i look for at least two out of those three to be trending before my bot is even allowed to look for an entry. this simple filter alone can save you from thousands of dollars in paper cuts during choppy sideways markets if you can't fly then run and if you can't run then walk but by all means you must keep moving toward automation. the process of taking an idea out of your brain and putting it into a system is the most secretive and valuable skill in the world. don't follow the pack and try to solve the same problems as everyone else but find your own edge and code it into existence the deal you make with yourself at the start of your journey is what determines if you will actually make it or not. i made a contract with myself to learn live and show everything because i believe that transparency is the only way to truly learn this craft. stick to your plan and iterate every single day because the systems you build today are the equalizers that will change your life tomorrow

I Spent $100k On Developers Before Learning This: Build Your AI Bot Today the blueprint to building your first ai trading bot without a degree or a single clue where to start is hidden in plain sight. most people think you need a stanford degree or some crazy math background to build these systems but i spent ten years in tech scared to code for that exact reason. i thought it was only for the geniuses and the nerds while i was just a guy who played video games and wanted his time back the reality is that code is the great equalizer because it doesn't care who you are or where you came from. i lost hundreds of thousands of dollars hiring developers who did shoddy work and i lost even more through liquidations and over trading because i was too emotional to follow my own rules. i knew i had to automate everything if i wanted to survive this game so i decided to learn live on youtube and iterate my way to success everyone is looking for the holy grail indicator that prints money while they sleep but they are looking in the wrong place. the real secret isn't a magical line on a chart but a process i call the rbi system which stands for research backtest and implement. most traders fail because they try to build a bot before they even know if their strategy worked in the past which is basically just gambling with extra steps you have to start with deep research into a strategy like supply and demand zones where you buy where the banks buy and sell where they sell. once you have a solid idea you must backtest it against years of data to see if it actually has an edge. if it doesn't work in the past it definitely won't work in the future but if it shows promise then you move to the implementation phase with small size there is a hidden cost to automation that can wipe out your profits before you even place a trade if you aren't careful. i found myself overusing api credits and running up a massive bill just to fetch wallet balances and token lists. if your bot is calling the exchange every five seconds just to see how much money you have you are essentially burning cash for no reason you can use ai tools like cursor to help you write the python code even if you are a total beginner. i still use ai to explain complex functions and identify where my code is being inefficient or chewing through credits. i had to refactor my entire dashboard and timer logic to only check balances every thirty minutes instead of every few seconds to save those precious credits the man who made thirty one billion dollars in the markets had one rule he never broke throughout his entire career. jim simons was the greatest algorithmic trader to ever live and he proved that systems will always beat human intuition over a long enough timeline. his secret wasn't some complex formula that no one else could understand but a commitment to a specific way of thinking simons always said you just have to make your systems better and better because that is what everyone else is trying to do. the game never really ends because the markets are always evolving and your edge will eventually decay if you don't iterate. this is why i build in public and show every step of the process because the iteration is where the actual money is made the reason you get liquidated isn't the market or the whales or some conspiracy against your small account. the real reason is the conversation you have with yourself at two in the morning when you are down on a trade and decide to move your stop loss. humans are built for survival not for trading and our emotions like fomo and fear will always sabotage our results when you automate your trading you are essentially signing a non negotiable contract with yourself that the bot will execute without question. if the plan says to sell fifty percent in an uptrend and ninety five percent in a downtrend the bot does it every single time. it doesn't feel the panic when a red candle drops or the greed when a green one spikes it just follows the code i used to spend all day staring at screens chasing bars up and down thinking that more screen time equaled more profit. i got into trading to get my time back but i ended up becoming a slave to the charts until i finally learned to code. now i have fully automated systems trading for me instead of getting liquidated because i removed the weakest link in the system which was me you don't need to spend ten years learning how to code before you can start building your own trading bots. if you spend three to six months getting the gist of python and using ai to bridge the gap you can start building immediately. start with a simple supply and demand bot that looks for major coin trends and only enters when the odds are heavily in your favor by checking the trend of bitcoin ethereum and solana simultaneously you can ensure you aren't fighting the overall market direction. i look for at least two out of those three to be trending before my bot is even allowed to look for an entry. this simple filter alone can save you from thousands of dollars in paper cuts during choppy sideways markets if you can't fly then run and if you can't run then walk but by all means you must keep moving toward automation. the process of taking an idea out of your brain and putting it into a system is the most secretive and valuable skill in the world. don't follow the pack and try to solve the same problems as everyone else but find your own edge and code it into existence the deal you make with yourself at the start of your journey is what determines if you will actually make it or not. i made a contract with myself to learn live and show everything because i believe that transparency is the only way to truly learn this craft. stick to your plan and iterate every single day because the systems you build today are the equalizers that will change your life tomorrow

Moon Dev

11,726 views • 6 months ago

Farage and the suckers I used to regularly socialise with a group, one of whose number was a financial lawyer. He used to tell us about something that was surprisingly common in his line of work. He would be called in to give advice because someone wanted to spend their life savings on a scheme that was an obvious scam. He said that 99% of the time they could not be talked out of it. Nothing and nobody could persuade them not to do it, because they were convinced that a fortune was there to be made, and they were desperate to pour as much money as they could into the scheme. They would get really angry with anyone (like a spouse, or other family, or friends) who tried to stop them. Why are you stopping me from making a fortune, they would say. “You're ruining my chance of living the life of my dreams,” was their view. This was meant to happen. This was the life they deserved, which had been so cruelly denied to them for so long. Finally reality was going to turn around and favour them for a change. It was the “Shut up and take my money” meme in real life. It wasn’t that they didn't understand about scams. Yes, scams happen, they knew that, but they don’t happen to me. (That, at least, was my friend’s summation of their thinking based on talking to them.) They could barely take seriously the idea that they were a gullible fool who was being tricked. When obvious problems and flaws with the scheme were pointed out, they would come up with far-fetched and implausible explanations to wave the problems away. Any explanation would do, as long as it meant they didn’t have to wake up from the dream. In almost every case the person concerned decided to put their money into the scheme. Hardly anyone decided not to. In every single case they lost all the money. In every one of these cases the mark was completely shocked and stunned when it happened. They never saw it coming, despite so many people around them telling them it was a con. I bring this up because the situation with Nigel Farage is similar. People are desperate to believe that he is going to save the country. I don't blame them for being desperate. The situation *is* desperate. But that means that many people will cling onto anything which is presented to them as the solution. Farage, they are told by the media, is the big, bad anti-immigration, anti-green, anti-PC man. Great, they think. If the media doesn't like him, then he’s the man for me. I'm also against those things. So they buy into him, big time, without a proper examination. Look, they say, he was Mr Anti-EU for decades. He’s Mr Brexit. He released that poster during the Brexit campaign depicting a long line of foreigners trying to get into Britain. The hated MSM attacks him for being anti-immigration, etc. So how can you lose if you trust him? Life will become good again if we all just support Nigel. Sink your emotional life-savings into him, and watch the results pour in once he gets power. So when you tell them to read Farage’s fine-print, like the Reform manifesto (digging into what slogans like “Net Zero immigration” actually mean), or particular things he has publicly said over the years, and what many people who have worked with him say about him, they act exactly like those people who are advised not to invest their life savings into a get-rich-quick scheme. They get angry and offended. Why are you trying to take away my dream of a better life for me, and a better Britain for all of us? Why are you undermining the only man who stands any chance of transforming the country for us, and preventing my life from getting worse and worse? You’re just trying to ruin everything. You’re just a negative Nelly, who is too afraid to take a risk. Maybe you even support Labour, really. And so on. When asked to explain why it is that Farage’s actual positions, and his track record, indicate that he is not remotely the hard-liner they think he is, they act like the wannabe investors who will come up with any excuse, no matter how implausible, to preserve the dream. I know, I've seen many of them in my comments doing this. “He has to pretend to be more mainstream and mild than he really is in order that he doesn’t get bad MSM headlines” is the gist of it. “The BBC would tear him apart and his support would vanish overnight if he said anything stronger at this stage,” they say. In other words, “he has to get his party into a stronger position before he can say anything that might seem radical.” Apparently being neck-and-neck with Labour and the Conservatives in the polls, having MPs in Parliament, facing rival parties that are collapsing in unprecedented fashion for their adherence to the established ways, having the media hang on your every word, and facing a country crying out for a change in your supposed direction, isn’t a strong enough position for you to lay out your real agenda. You’ve still got to be timid and pretend to differ only slightly from the Conservative Party, lest the British people say, “Reducing mass immigration back to the levels they were in 2000 frightens me, who will cook our kebabs? I’m going to go back to the Tories/Labour/LibDems.” So it’s quite reasonable, apparently, for Farage to delay saying what he really thinks until 2034. Or 2039. Until then, we’ll just twiddle our thumbs and trust him with our support. It never occurs to them as a serious possibility that maybe Farage isn’t “hiding his real power levels,” but just isn’t very radical. In fact, his whole history indicates that not only does he have no interest in supporting robust anti-immigrationism, he is actively opposed to it. He left UKIP because he thought UKIP people were too concerned with Islamic immigration. When he was in charge of UKIP it worked with the intelligence services to weed out anyone who didn’t want Britain being filled up with foreigners. All his public statements going back thirty years indicate that he is a liberal, supply-side Thatcherite, who repudiates nationalism, unless it’s anodyne, flag-waving, Union-Jack-biscuit-tin civic nationalism, where anyone who can vaguely adopt some British cliches (cricket, tea, old Jags, etc.) gets a passport. If he’s playing a game to fool the media, it’s a game that goes back a long, long way. Where is the actual evidence, then, that shows that he is in any way a nativist? What reason is there to believe that he is really is a blood-and-soil nationalist who will suddenly reveal, once in power, his determination to remigrate millions of foreigners, when he’s spent his whole life urging against this? There is no reason to believe this at all, other than people’s desperation to search for a Messiah figure, and the fact that the media (and various hysterical left-wingers) give people the impression that this is Farage’s plan. But they have no evidence for this either, and anyway, why would the media give airtime to someone who genuinely thought this? Wouldn't that devious and tricksy ol’ MSM be more likely to give airtime to someone who was actually rather liberal when it comes down to it, but who can be made to seem like an attractive, anti-establishment rebel, while simultaneously sidelining the real rebels? It's like when the people who want to give away their life savings are shown the long history of bankruptcies that their Svengali has left behind, and they excuse it by saying something like, “Oh, that’s because he never had enough financial support from people. But thanks to me, I can finally give him the money he needs to succeed.” Or whatever excuse they kid themselves with. When asked, “But what evidence is there that he can make you money?”, they reply, “He’s told me his plan, and swears it will work, and it sounds good to me. Look, the rate of return is amazing, I can't pass that chance up, don’t look a gift horse in the mouth,” and so on. Farage also has a glib, charismatic manner, and is very good at talking in general-enough language that people can read into it what they like. “People on the streets have been talking to me, and they've had enough,” he kept saying during the summer 2024 election campaign, but he was rather vague about what exactly they were fed up with, and even vaguer about what he proposed to do about it, which allowed the sucker, er, supporter to decide that Farage was talking about just the very things the supporter thinks are important, and had in mind the same solutions. The media will admit, though, when it thinks the average Joe isn’t listening, that Farage isn’t anywhere near as bad as they normally make him out to be. This is what’s going on in this video clip of Michael Crick, which was from Times Radio, which the average Joe doesn’t listen to. The point of Crick admitting this is to calm down any naive liberals or leftists who are starting to froth at the mouth at the prospect of Farage getting anywhere. (“Look, we don't like him, but we can live with him, he's tamer than you think, better him than some genuine nationalist party.”) I haven't even talked about the idiocy of thinking that Reform’s support would plummet overnight instead of rising (or at least staying roughly the same) if they started talking tougher. (The Telegraph’s pet hamster Tim Stanley hysterically claimed recently that if Reform decided to do this they would lose 10,000 votes for every “far-Right” voter they courted.) I haven’t said anything about how an anti-establishment party must of necessity drive changes in stateable public opinion, rather than accept the status quo. Nor have I talked about the foolishness of trusting a party that you think is cowardly and constantly lying. Or the problem of how rational it is to believe that a timid party, that said for years that it definitely won't do X, Y and Z, will be capable of doing X, Y and Z when it gets power, especially seeing as it will face the real wrath of the establishment at that point. These are all legitimate topics for discussion, but in this article I have been mainly concerned with the parallels with the self-deluding life-savings investor. The conman doesn’t need that many suckers to be a success. He just needs a few. Similarly, Farage doesn’t need that many people to fall for his shtick. With the other big parties’ support in free fall, he can set Reform up as the rebel outsider party for years on the back of a minority of votes, without ever having to make any hard choices, or commit to any positions which will genuinely set the establishment against him. He also has an advantage over the traditional conman, who operates on the margins and in the shadows, of having the media there to endorse him as the “official” rebel. Their every warning makes him seem more attractive to the dissatisfied: “Don’t vote for that Farage, don’t you know he’s anti-immigration and anti-Net Zero? He’s a maverick who doesn’t do what he’s told.” No wonder Reform’s membership numbers are going through the roof. When one person loses their head to a charismatic phony it’s a private tragedy. When enough voters lose their heads to a political phony, who’s taking away the oxygen that a real opposition needs, it’s a public tragedy. So I say, keep your political life savings in a box under your bed for now. And if you must spend some or all of it on Farage, be demanding. Keep all your receipts, note what he says and doesn’t say, and demand that he clearly articulates the feelings of the people he claims to represent. Don’t let him fob you off with vague and airy platitudes. He’s not Barack Obama. He’s your rebel, so make him speak for you, and if he won’t, find someone else who will.

Farage and the suckers I used to regularly socialise with a group, one of whose number was a financial lawyer. He used to tell us about something that was surprisingly common in his line of work. He would be called in to give advice because someone wanted to spend their life savings on a scheme that was an obvious scam. He said that 99% of the time they could not be talked out of it. Nothing and nobody could persuade them not to do it, because they were convinced that a fortune was there to be made, and they were desperate to pour as much money as they could into the scheme. They would get really angry with anyone (like a spouse, or other family, or friends) who tried to stop them. Why are you stopping me from making a fortune, they would say. “You're ruining my chance of living the life of my dreams,” was their view. This was meant to happen. This was the life they deserved, which had been so cruelly denied to them for so long. Finally reality was going to turn around and favour them for a change. It was the “Shut up and take my money” meme in real life. It wasn’t that they didn't understand about scams. Yes, scams happen, they knew that, but they don’t happen to me. (That, at least, was my friend’s summation of their thinking based on talking to them.) They could barely take seriously the idea that they were a gullible fool who was being tricked. When obvious problems and flaws with the scheme were pointed out, they would come up with far-fetched and implausible explanations to wave the problems away. Any explanation would do, as long as it meant they didn’t have to wake up from the dream. In almost every case the person concerned decided to put their money into the scheme. Hardly anyone decided not to. In every single case they lost all the money. In every one of these cases the mark was completely shocked and stunned when it happened. They never saw it coming, despite so many people around them telling them it was a con. I bring this up because the situation with Nigel Farage is similar. People are desperate to believe that he is going to save the country. I don't blame them for being desperate. The situation is desperate. But that means that many people will cling onto anything which is presented to them as the solution. Farage, they are told by the media, is the big, bad anti-immigration, anti-green, anti-PC man. Great, they think. If the media doesn't like him, then he’s the man for me. I'm also against those things. So they buy into him, big time, without a proper examination. Look, they say, he was Mr Anti-EU for decades. He’s Mr Brexit. He released that poster during the Brexit campaign depicting a long line of foreigners trying to get into Britain. The hated MSM attacks him for being anti-immigration, etc. So how can you lose if you trust him? Life will become good again if we all just support Nigel. Sink your emotional life-savings into him, and watch the results pour in once he gets power. So when you tell them to read Farage’s fine-print, like the Reform manifesto (digging into what slogans like “Net Zero immigration” actually mean), or particular things he has publicly said over the years, and what many people who have worked with him say about him, they act exactly like those people who are advised not to invest their life savings into a get-rich-quick scheme. They get angry and offended. Why are you trying to take away my dream of a better life for me, and a better Britain for all of us? Why are you undermining the only man who stands any chance of transforming the country for us, and preventing my life from getting worse and worse? You’re just trying to ruin everything. You’re just a negative Nelly, who is too afraid to take a risk. Maybe you even support Labour, really. And so on. When asked to explain why it is that Farage’s actual positions, and his track record, indicate that he is not remotely the hard-liner they think he is, they act like the wannabe investors who will come up with any excuse, no matter how implausible, to preserve the dream. I know, I've seen many of them in my comments doing this. “He has to pretend to be more mainstream and mild than he really is in order that he doesn’t get bad MSM headlines” is the gist of it. “The BBC would tear him apart and his support would vanish overnight if he said anything stronger at this stage,” they say. In other words, “he has to get his party into a stronger position before he can say anything that might seem radical.” Apparently being neck-and-neck with Labour and the Conservatives in the polls, having MPs in Parliament, facing rival parties that are collapsing in unprecedented fashion for their adherence to the established ways, having the media hang on your every word, and facing a country crying out for a change in your supposed direction, isn’t a strong enough position for you to lay out your real agenda. You’ve still got to be timid and pretend to differ only slightly from the Conservative Party, lest the British people say, “Reducing mass immigration back to the levels they were in 2000 frightens me, who will cook our kebabs? I’m going to go back to the Tories/Labour/LibDems.” So it’s quite reasonable, apparently, for Farage to delay saying what he really thinks until 2034. Or 2039. Until then, we’ll just twiddle our thumbs and trust him with our support. It never occurs to them as a serious possibility that maybe Farage isn’t “hiding his real power levels,” but just isn’t very radical. In fact, his whole history indicates that not only does he have no interest in supporting robust anti-immigrationism, he is actively opposed to it. He left UKIP because he thought UKIP people were too concerned with Islamic immigration. When he was in charge of UKIP it worked with the intelligence services to weed out anyone who didn’t want Britain being filled up with foreigners. All his public statements going back thirty years indicate that he is a liberal, supply-side Thatcherite, who repudiates nationalism, unless it’s anodyne, flag-waving, Union-Jack-biscuit-tin civic nationalism, where anyone who can vaguely adopt some British cliches (cricket, tea, old Jags, etc.) gets a passport. If he’s playing a game to fool the media, it’s a game that goes back a long, long way. Where is the actual evidence, then, that shows that he is in any way a nativist? What reason is there to believe that he is really is a blood-and-soil nationalist who will suddenly reveal, once in power, his determination to remigrate millions of foreigners, when he’s spent his whole life urging against this? There is no reason to believe this at all, other than people’s desperation to search for a Messiah figure, and the fact that the media (and various hysterical left-wingers) give people the impression that this is Farage’s plan. But they have no evidence for this either, and anyway, why would the media give airtime to someone who genuinely thought this? Wouldn't that devious and tricksy ol’ MSM be more likely to give airtime to someone who was actually rather liberal when it comes down to it, but who can be made to seem like an attractive, anti-establishment rebel, while simultaneously sidelining the real rebels? It's like when the people who want to give away their life savings are shown the long history of bankruptcies that their Svengali has left behind, and they excuse it by saying something like, “Oh, that’s because he never had enough financial support from people. But thanks to me, I can finally give him the money he needs to succeed.” Or whatever excuse they kid themselves with. When asked, “But what evidence is there that he can make you money?”, they reply, “He’s told me his plan, and swears it will work, and it sounds good to me. Look, the rate of return is amazing, I can't pass that chance up, don’t look a gift horse in the mouth,” and so on. Farage also has a glib, charismatic manner, and is very good at talking in general-enough language that people can read into it what they like. “People on the streets have been talking to me, and they've had enough,” he kept saying during the summer 2024 election campaign, but he was rather vague about what exactly they were fed up with, and even vaguer about what he proposed to do about it, which allowed the sucker, er, supporter to decide that Farage was talking about just the very things the supporter thinks are important, and had in mind the same solutions. The media will admit, though, when it thinks the average Joe isn’t listening, that Farage isn’t anywhere near as bad as they normally make him out to be. This is what’s going on in this video clip of Michael Crick, which was from Times Radio, which the average Joe doesn’t listen to. The point of Crick admitting this is to calm down any naive liberals or leftists who are starting to froth at the mouth at the prospect of Farage getting anywhere. (“Look, we don't like him, but we can live with him, he's tamer than you think, better him than some genuine nationalist party.”) I haven't even talked about the idiocy of thinking that Reform’s support would plummet overnight instead of rising (or at least staying roughly the same) if they started talking tougher. (The Telegraph’s pet hamster Tim Stanley hysterically claimed recently that if Reform decided to do this they would lose 10,000 votes for every “far-Right” voter they courted.) I haven’t said anything about how an anti-establishment party must of necessity drive changes in stateable public opinion, rather than accept the status quo. Nor have I talked about the foolishness of trusting a party that you think is cowardly and constantly lying. Or the problem of how rational it is to believe that a timid party, that said for years that it definitely won't do X, Y and Z, will be capable of doing X, Y and Z when it gets power, especially seeing as it will face the real wrath of the establishment at that point. These are all legitimate topics for discussion, but in this article I have been mainly concerned with the parallels with the self-deluding life-savings investor. The conman doesn’t need that many suckers to be a success. He just needs a few. Similarly, Farage doesn’t need that many people to fall for his shtick. With the other big parties’ support in free fall, he can set Reform up as the rebel outsider party for years on the back of a minority of votes, without ever having to make any hard choices, or commit to any positions which will genuinely set the establishment against him. He also has an advantage over the traditional conman, who operates on the margins and in the shadows, of having the media there to endorse him as the “official” rebel. Their every warning makes him seem more attractive to the dissatisfied: “Don’t vote for that Farage, don’t you know he’s anti-immigration and anti-Net Zero? He’s a maverick who doesn’t do what he’s told.” No wonder Reform’s membership numbers are going through the roof. When one person loses their head to a charismatic phony it’s a private tragedy. When enough voters lose their heads to a political phony, who’s taking away the oxygen that a real opposition needs, it’s a public tragedy. So I say, keep your political life savings in a box under your bed for now. And if you must spend some or all of it on Farage, be demanding. Keep all your receipts, note what he says and doesn’t say, and demand that he clearly articulates the feelings of the people he claims to represent. Don’t let him fob you off with vague and airy platitudes. He’s not Barack Obama. He’s your rebel, so make him speak for you, and if he won’t, find someone else who will.

Hector Drummond

34,408 views • 1 year ago

THE TRUTH ABOUT TRUMP & EPSTEIN. The truth must be stated and not overlooked. Yes, Trump is in the Epstein files but not as many would think. So technically, Elon is not lying. Trump just is not implicated in the Epstein files in a nefarious sick way like many others are such as have half of Hollywood and people like Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew, and other wealthy elite individuals are. Everyone always shows the same video and same couple pictures and say's, see? He's guilty. But this couldn't be farther from the truth. Yes Trump is had another wealthy person at his events and knew Epstein before he was ever arrested in 2005-2006 for sexual crimes against a minor, Trump broke off his relationship and banned him from ever stepping foot in Mar-a-Lago ever again for hitting on another members young daughter. When it comes to being on the flight logs, yes, Trump is on it as well from the little time they spent together before anything was ever known or public or before he was ever even arrested. Epstein's own pilot admitted that Trump did fly from West Palm Beach to Newark New Jersey, on January 5, 1997, and it wasn't even on the Lolita Express that was the Epstein Island's main shuttle jet. It was on a completely other aircraft. Finally another huge revelation is the prosecutor in the Epstein case who admitted that out of every single person, politician, and celebrity he asked for help to prosecute Epstein, Trump was the ONLY ONE who helped him prosecute Epstein to make sure he made it behind bars and cooperated and gave him as much time as he needed. All the victims of Epstein and others also all supported Trump throughout the case and his presidency and many have stated that Trump has never done anything to them and that they have never seen him on the Island. Do you really believe if Trump was guilty in anyway, all his dirty laundry wouldn't have been aired out in 2016, or the 2 previous elections with Biden and Kamala? Give me a break. They'd be watering at the mouth the first chance they'd get to drop the news. There's nothing there folks. Stop buying everything at the surface level. This operation has never ended. Sometimes you need to force or push your opposition to make a move or expose themselves. Remember, there are layers, optics, and timing to everything you see happening. Don't buy everything at the surface level. Think deeper. Lastly, I am strictly for the people, the children, the country, and the truth. It doesn't matter who you are, what side your own, or your beliefs. As long as your for the same things, your good in my book. And if Donald Trump was involved in a nefarious way, then he can go down too. But one thing I will tell you is that many would have never supported him if he was ever guilty in the first place. The man can not be bought and is not compromised. He genuinely cares about people and his country. Think bigger people. The show must go on. There are no coincidences.

THE TRUTH ABOUT TRUMP & EPSTEIN. The truth must be stated and not overlooked. Yes, Trump is in the Epstein files but not as many would think. So technically, Elon is not lying. Trump just is not implicated in the Epstein files in a nefarious sick way like many others are such as have half of Hollywood and people like Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew, and other wealthy elite individuals are. Everyone always shows the same video and same couple pictures and say's, see? He's guilty. But this couldn't be farther from the truth. Yes Trump is had another wealthy person at his events and knew Epstein before he was ever arrested in 2005-2006 for sexual crimes against a minor, Trump broke off his relationship and banned him from ever stepping foot in Mar-a-Lago ever again for hitting on another members young daughter. When it comes to being on the flight logs, yes, Trump is on it as well from the little time they spent together before anything was ever known or public or before he was ever even arrested. Epstein's own pilot admitted that Trump did fly from West Palm Beach to Newark New Jersey, on January 5, 1997, and it wasn't even on the Lolita Express that was the Epstein Island's main shuttle jet. It was on a completely other aircraft. Finally another huge revelation is the prosecutor in the Epstein case who admitted that out of every single person, politician, and celebrity he asked for help to prosecute Epstein, Trump was the ONLY ONE who helped him prosecute Epstein to make sure he made it behind bars and cooperated and gave him as much time as he needed. All the victims of Epstein and others also all supported Trump throughout the case and his presidency and many have stated that Trump has never done anything to them and that they have never seen him on the Island. Do you really believe if Trump was guilty in anyway, all his dirty laundry wouldn't have been aired out in 2016, or the 2 previous elections with Biden and Kamala? Give me a break. They'd be watering at the mouth the first chance they'd get to drop the news. There's nothing there folks. Stop buying everything at the surface level. This operation has never ended. Sometimes you need to force or push your opposition to make a move or expose themselves. Remember, there are layers, optics, and timing to everything you see happening. Don't buy everything at the surface level. Think deeper. Lastly, I am strictly for the people, the children, the country, and the truth. It doesn't matter who you are, what side your own, or your beliefs. As long as your for the same things, your good in my book. And if Donald Trump was involved in a nefarious way, then he can go down too. But one thing I will tell you is that many would have never supported him if he was ever guilty in the first place. The man can not be bought and is not compromised. He genuinely cares about people and his country. Think bigger people. The show must go on. There are no coincidences.

The SCIF

792,522 views • 1 year ago

Carol Vorderman in conversation with James O'Brein over Reform UK's Makerfield by-election candidate Robert Kenyon's insulting remarks JOB, "Carol Vorderman has asked Robert Kenyon, a Reform UK's candidate in the imminent Makerfield by election, for an apology, for posts on a now deleted X account in which he, Well, you'll find out, if you don't know already, she said, I want an apology from Rob Kenyon to me and to all the other people he's abused online." JOB, "I sat down with Carol yesterday afternoon to talk about this and, one or two other things. It occurred to me, just sitting down now, Carol, that this is not something you, you sought because you haven't been in any sense reticent in recent years with your political opinions and even with activism, but you've been dragged into this deeply unpleasant situation entirely innocently." JOB, "So unpleasant, in fact, that I'm not sure I can repeat, I'm not sure I'm comfortable saying in front of you the words that Robert Kenyon chose to endorse and defend on, social media." CV, "Well, I am, because it's important that people know. And this is just one comment. He has made multiple comments which are online abuse about me and lots of other people. So the one specifically about me that he endorsed was I want to smell and lick Carol Vorderman's eight letter word beginning with A." CV, "And reform have said, oh, it's just locker room banter. I don't know why they're using the term locker room, by the way, because I thought we said changing rooms in this country. But that's an entirely different, different, question. But the thing is, James, I'm not upset by it, I am angered by it." CV, "And the reason that I'm angered by it is because every woman listening, any woman who is on social media will have similar said to her, either abusive, all the other things that he said. You know, there was some forum that he was on, rugby, league forum, and they were posting pictures of the girls, the women who play." CV, "And then he was saying, oh, English women, they don't care. All they want to do with their fat bellies, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Then there was some, European women. Then he was saying, you know, oh, you wouldn't get me off them with a bazooka." CV, "You know, all this stuff, stuff about abortion. I mean, it's just disgusting stuff. And it's not just one comment, it's a tirade of online abuse. And every woman listening who has had that will know how it makes them feel." CV, "And so I am angry that a political party can take this person on one without obviously vetting him properly. But also that they just defend it and they're fine with that." JOB, "He was not a politician at the time. He was an ordinary man from an ordinary place, said Danny Craig group." CV, "Really? That's what. Yeah, that's what posh boys, who lead the Reform Party think, of ordinary men. Well, ordinary men generally are lovely, you know, they really are." JOB, "We do our best." CV, "Well, you are. And they respect women. All of that is true. But you have this growing minority who are extremely abusive. And I'm 65, James. And so I've been, you know, and women my age, we've been through the hard years." CV, "So in the 70s, you know, I was a bright kid from a comp in North Wales. Free school meals kid. And it took, you know, a lot to get to a Cambridge college because there were only, three girls colleges." CV, "And I think four or five had gone what they called mixed. So these are boys colleges taking on women's colleges. And it was like, why wouldn't you? You know, I was from a boys and girls comp, but we had to go through that." CV, "You had to be the first woman to do this. First woman from a state school. Northwest goes Cambridge first. You know, I was, I think, when I did engineering, There were about 300 students in our year, four or five of them were girls. I worked underground, me and 2,000 men, all this." CV, "So we have done the hard years over decades, all that. I wanted to be a fighter pilot. You can't, because you're a girl and you don't have the appendage that's required. You know, all of this nonsense that we had to put up with. So, for me, that this Reform Party is saying on day one, they would repeal the Equality act." CV, "And we all know what that means. So, you know, the protections against harassment of women in the workplace, the, equal pay, maternity leave, maternity pay, all of those. We're going to scrap all those. So it is indicative of the way in which this might go, as we've seen in America." JOB, "I think talking of ordinary men, the person who pushed back against him on social media was. It was a rather better model of masculinity." CV, "Yes, absolutely. So he's the author, Chris Ryan, who is a former SAS hero, a very successful author. Chris is his pen name. And, he absolutely defended me because he is a real man." CV, "He's not a pretend. He's a real guy and a guy who respects women." JOB, "I suppose, in some sense, the writing was on the wall with the leadership of reform who have not responded by the way, to, our, requests a, response to these allegations of misogyny, including the comments directed at you." JOB, "But when James McMurdoch Ended up in Parliament just after the last election, and, it quickly emerged that he'd been jailed for attacking a former girlfriend." CV, "Yes. And here is another example, a very serious example of, to me, reforms, excuses for things. So I think it was a Times newspaper fact he only got in with a majority of 98." CV, "So imagine if this information had been available beforehand about him. So, shortly after he was elected in 2024 as a Reform MP, I think it was a Times newspaper, found that he had been convicted and served time for, assaulting his girlfriend." CV, "He then said in his defense, oh, it was a push. Then the official court documents show that she was on the floor. He was kicking her multiple times while she was on the floor and had to be, dragged away by two security guards." CV, "Very different stories. Richard Tice then defends it, saying, oh, well, he's served his time. That was a long time ago. It doesn't matter. I am sorry. It matters. It matters to women. We know how much harassment online has increased and offline." CV, "So this is a time for all women to stand up and say, enough now, we are not going backwards." JOB, "I suppose one example is. It could be chalked up as accidental or carelessness. But two examples and emerging patterns speak of something altogether more sinister." CV, "Yes, well, Lee Anderson, bless him, when he was a Tory. That was after he was a Labour." JOB, "Yes." CV, "And now he's a Reform." JOB, "Correct. Well, at the time of this conversation, we'll have to check before we play it" CV, "out on the program tomorrow. Yeah, so he was, in the Conservative Party at the time and he was slinging insults to me all the time on Twitter in, the days when we used to be on Twitter. And, you know, obviously now he's reformed, he thinks it's perfectly acceptable." CV, "So there is a pattern there with this party. And, that is my concern that they will, if they get into, and they've stated it out in the open, we will repeal the Equality Act." JOB, "It's surprising to me when people like Danny Kruger talk about ordinary people. An ordinary man for an ordinary man." CV, "When he went to Eton." JOB, "Yeah. And, well, also his mother is on telly as well, so, you know, he or she at, at least will be aware of the misogyny that police. Yeah, yeah. You think that that might have given him a slightly more sensitive insight into what it's like for women like you. And, and you are tough. I mean, I don't mean that in a patronizing way." CV, "I take it as a compliment." JOB, "Good, I'm glad you do because you are perfectly capable of looking after yourself. A lot of women, both online and offline, are not, of course, and those are the kind of women that, misogynistic men prey on." CV, "But the thing is, I, I have a tough skin now because of all of the abuse over decades. And it. You know, I can remember when I wore a short skirt to the BAFTAs. I was age 39. Well, it was like I'd killed my grandmother the next day." CV, "It was the quest. Even the BBC made a whole Kilroy show about it. Flew this dress in copy dress from Paris. And, the question was, should a woman age 39 wear a dress above the knee? Jeez, I mean, that's my lifetime. This isn't Victorian days or my mother or post war." CV, "This is me in my lifetime. So, you know, as I go back to the beginning, women my age who love the fact that our daughters or nieces, or grandchildren have, can play football, you know, very happily can be applauded for what they do in sport." CV, "Can be. Oh, another thing that I'll, Kenyon said was that women can't referee, drive, take directions. And he had a go at various female sports presenters on the telly. You know, it's constant, it's consistent." JOB, "So they're not, they're not up to the job. They're only there to tick a box. And then declaring and From a political point of view, this is interesting actually stating I'm sexist. Sorry, but I am." CV, "Yeah." JOB, "And then the defense from reform UK becomes. These comments were made before he entered politics. He's perfectly entitled to his own personal opinions." CV, "That was three weeks ago." JOB, "Yeah, yeah. It's extraordinary that he can state that because Murdoch didn't get dropped by the party for the conviction for battering his ex, he got dropped after it emerged that he'd taken Covid loans out under the COVID support scheme. I think that's still ongoing." JOB, "But to state I am sexist, sorry, but I am in 2024 would have probably been a career ending revelation. Do you think? We're going a bit backwards, But I think we" CV, "have the potential to go backwards and we now, you know, generally you go, life's good. You know, doing this, that and the other. When I began my career as an engineer, funnily enough, not many women then were talking about having a career because not Many women have been to university and all of that." CV, "Now, thankfully, decades later, women are having careers. But also, housing was a lot cheaper then. So now we need to. You need, two incomes to fund a mortgage generally in this country." CV, "So the whole business of, oh, well, we're going to scrap the law that says about equal pay. That's going to affect people directly. And this is what I want people to understand, really. This is. This is not just about a woman getting on a high horse about something." CV, "This is very, very, very. Couldn't be more serious." JOB, "And, yeah, it is, of course, people like Nigel Farage and Sarah Potchin who claim that they're the party dedicated to protecting women and children. I mean, it's beyond irony. It emerged yesterday that one in five of the people arrested over the riots in 2024, which many people feel were fermented by Nigel Farage's social media activ." JOB, "Five of the people arrested over those riots have since been reported to the police for domestic abuse. So to simultaneously encourage and excuse the misogyny that's been directed at you and at other women while claiming. And, of course, to put a violent offender into Parliament and say that that's not an excluding offense while simultaneously claiming that they act for women and children is, It's beyond parody, isn't it?" CV, "And those same people who were arrested, there were almost 900 of them, weren't there? About the riots across the country at the time, 41% had already, been reported to the police for domestic abuse." JOB, "So who are the women and children they're dedicated to protecting?" CV, "Well, quite." JOB, "And who are they protecting them from?" CV, "None." JOB, "It's good to see you. I knew that you would be, perturbed by this, but." CV, "I am." JOB, "But enraged?" CV, "Yes, I am." JOB, "And are you expecting an apology? I know you've demanded." CV, "Well, I can't." JOB, "You did not demand anything." CV, "I can't demand anything. I have asked for an apology. Not for me." JOB, "No." CV, "But for all of us. And for his comments so far. I just think we're on day three. Nothing." JOB, "Not even a whisper nothing or a nothing." CV, "He's still running away. Hiding away from cameras, maybe." JOB, "Don't hold your breath, Carol. Thank you." CV, "Thanks, James." JOB, "Still waiting. I hope she didn't hold her breath. We got a statement from Reform Councillor Kenyon, made these comments before entering politics. We are confident that he is an excellent candidate who will be a superb local MP for Makerfield. And a full list of all the candidates running there can be found at lbc co uk"

Carol Vorderman in conversation with James O'Brein over Reform UK's Makerfield by-election candidate Robert Kenyon's insulting remarks JOB, "Carol Vorderman has asked Robert Kenyon, a Reform UK's candidate in the imminent Makerfield by election, for an apology, for posts on a now deleted X account in which he, Well, you'll find out, if you don't know already, she said, I want an apology from Rob Kenyon to me and to all the other people he's abused online." JOB, "I sat down with Carol yesterday afternoon to talk about this and, one or two other things. It occurred to me, just sitting down now, Carol, that this is not something you, you sought because you haven't been in any sense reticent in recent years with your political opinions and even with activism, but you've been dragged into this deeply unpleasant situation entirely innocently." JOB, "So unpleasant, in fact, that I'm not sure I can repeat, I'm not sure I'm comfortable saying in front of you the words that Robert Kenyon chose to endorse and defend on, social media." CV, "Well, I am, because it's important that people know. And this is just one comment. He has made multiple comments which are online abuse about me and lots of other people. So the one specifically about me that he endorsed was I want to smell and lick Carol Vorderman's eight letter word beginning with A." CV, "And reform have said, oh, it's just locker room banter. I don't know why they're using the term locker room, by the way, because I thought we said changing rooms in this country. But that's an entirely different, different, question. But the thing is, James, I'm not upset by it, I am angered by it." CV, "And the reason that I'm angered by it is because every woman listening, any woman who is on social media will have similar said to her, either abusive, all the other things that he said. You know, there was some forum that he was on, rugby, league forum, and they were posting pictures of the girls, the women who play." CV, "And then he was saying, oh, English women, they don't care. All they want to do with their fat bellies, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Then there was some, European women. Then he was saying, you know, oh, you wouldn't get me off them with a bazooka." CV, "You know, all this stuff, stuff about abortion. I mean, it's just disgusting stuff. And it's not just one comment, it's a tirade of online abuse. And every woman listening who has had that will know how it makes them feel." CV, "And so I am angry that a political party can take this person on one without obviously vetting him properly. But also that they just defend it and they're fine with that." JOB, "He was not a politician at the time. He was an ordinary man from an ordinary place, said Danny Craig group." CV, "Really? That's what. Yeah, that's what posh boys, who lead the Reform Party think, of ordinary men. Well, ordinary men generally are lovely, you know, they really are." JOB, "We do our best." CV, "Well, you are. And they respect women. All of that is true. But you have this growing minority who are extremely abusive. And I'm 65, James. And so I've been, you know, and women my age, we've been through the hard years." CV, "So in the 70s, you know, I was a bright kid from a comp in North Wales. Free school meals kid. And it took, you know, a lot to get to a Cambridge college because there were only, three girls colleges." CV, "And I think four or five had gone what they called mixed. So these are boys colleges taking on women's colleges. And it was like, why wouldn't you? You know, I was from a boys and girls comp, but we had to go through that." CV, "You had to be the first woman to do this. First woman from a state school. Northwest goes Cambridge first. You know, I was, I think, when I did engineering, There were about 300 students in our year, four or five of them were girls. I worked underground, me and 2,000 men, all this." CV, "So we have done the hard years over decades, all that. I wanted to be a fighter pilot. You can't, because you're a girl and you don't have the appendage that's required. You know, all of this nonsense that we had to put up with. So, for me, that this Reform Party is saying on day one, they would repeal the Equality act." CV, "And we all know what that means. So, you know, the protections against harassment of women in the workplace, the, equal pay, maternity leave, maternity pay, all of those. We're going to scrap all those. So it is indicative of the way in which this might go, as we've seen in America." JOB, "I think talking of ordinary men, the person who pushed back against him on social media was. It was a rather better model of masculinity." CV, "Yes, absolutely. So he's the author, Chris Ryan, who is a former SAS hero, a very successful author. Chris is his pen name. And, he absolutely defended me because he is a real man." CV, "He's not a pretend. He's a real guy and a guy who respects women." JOB, "I suppose, in some sense, the writing was on the wall with the leadership of reform who have not responded by the way, to, our, requests a, response to these allegations of misogyny, including the comments directed at you." JOB, "But when James McMurdoch Ended up in Parliament just after the last election, and, it quickly emerged that he'd been jailed for attacking a former girlfriend." CV, "Yes. And here is another example, a very serious example of, to me, reforms, excuses for things. So I think it was a Times newspaper fact he only got in with a majority of 98." CV, "So imagine if this information had been available beforehand about him. So, shortly after he was elected in 2024 as a Reform MP, I think it was a Times newspaper, found that he had been convicted and served time for, assaulting his girlfriend." CV, "He then said in his defense, oh, it was a push. Then the official court documents show that she was on the floor. He was kicking her multiple times while she was on the floor and had to be, dragged away by two security guards." CV, "Very different stories. Richard Tice then defends it, saying, oh, well, he's served his time. That was a long time ago. It doesn't matter. I am sorry. It matters. It matters to women. We know how much harassment online has increased and offline." CV, "So this is a time for all women to stand up and say, enough now, we are not going backwards." JOB, "I suppose one example is. It could be chalked up as accidental or carelessness. But two examples and emerging patterns speak of something altogether more sinister." CV, "Yes, well, Lee Anderson, bless him, when he was a Tory. That was after he was a Labour." JOB, "Yes." CV, "And now he's a Reform." JOB, "Correct. Well, at the time of this conversation, we'll have to check before we play it" CV, "out on the program tomorrow. Yeah, so he was, in the Conservative Party at the time and he was slinging insults to me all the time on Twitter in, the days when we used to be on Twitter. And, you know, obviously now he's reformed, he thinks it's perfectly acceptable." CV, "So there is a pattern there with this party. And, that is my concern that they will, if they get into, and they've stated it out in the open, we will repeal the Equality Act." JOB, "It's surprising to me when people like Danny Kruger talk about ordinary people. An ordinary man for an ordinary man." CV, "When he went to Eton." JOB, "Yeah. And, well, also his mother is on telly as well, so, you know, he or she at, at least will be aware of the misogyny that police. Yeah, yeah. You think that that might have given him a slightly more sensitive insight into what it's like for women like you. And, and you are tough. I mean, I don't mean that in a patronizing way." CV, "I take it as a compliment." JOB, "Good, I'm glad you do because you are perfectly capable of looking after yourself. A lot of women, both online and offline, are not, of course, and those are the kind of women that, misogynistic men prey on." CV, "But the thing is, I, I have a tough skin now because of all of the abuse over decades. And it. You know, I can remember when I wore a short skirt to the BAFTAs. I was age 39. Well, it was like I'd killed my grandmother the next day." CV, "It was the quest. Even the BBC made a whole Kilroy show about it. Flew this dress in copy dress from Paris. And, the question was, should a woman age 39 wear a dress above the knee? Jeez, I mean, that's my lifetime. This isn't Victorian days or my mother or post war." CV, "This is me in my lifetime. So, you know, as I go back to the beginning, women my age who love the fact that our daughters or nieces, or grandchildren have, can play football, you know, very happily can be applauded for what they do in sport." CV, "Can be. Oh, another thing that I'll, Kenyon said was that women can't referee, drive, take directions. And he had a go at various female sports presenters on the telly. You know, it's constant, it's consistent." JOB, "So they're not, they're not up to the job. They're only there to tick a box. And then declaring and From a political point of view, this is interesting actually stating I'm sexist. Sorry, but I am." CV, "Yeah." JOB, "And then the defense from reform UK becomes. These comments were made before he entered politics. He's perfectly entitled to his own personal opinions." CV, "That was three weeks ago." JOB, "Yeah, yeah. It's extraordinary that he can state that because Murdoch didn't get dropped by the party for the conviction for battering his ex, he got dropped after it emerged that he'd taken Covid loans out under the COVID support scheme. I think that's still ongoing." JOB, "But to state I am sexist, sorry, but I am in 2024 would have probably been a career ending revelation. Do you think? We're going a bit backwards, But I think we" CV, "have the potential to go backwards and we now, you know, generally you go, life's good. You know, doing this, that and the other. When I began my career as an engineer, funnily enough, not many women then were talking about having a career because not Many women have been to university and all of that." CV, "Now, thankfully, decades later, women are having careers. But also, housing was a lot cheaper then. So now we need to. You need, two incomes to fund a mortgage generally in this country." CV, "So the whole business of, oh, well, we're going to scrap the law that says about equal pay. That's going to affect people directly. And this is what I want people to understand, really. This is. This is not just about a woman getting on a high horse about something." CV, "This is very, very, very. Couldn't be more serious." JOB, "And, yeah, it is, of course, people like Nigel Farage and Sarah Potchin who claim that they're the party dedicated to protecting women and children. I mean, it's beyond irony. It emerged yesterday that one in five of the people arrested over the riots in 2024, which many people feel were fermented by Nigel Farage's social media activ." JOB, "Five of the people arrested over those riots have since been reported to the police for domestic abuse. So to simultaneously encourage and excuse the misogyny that's been directed at you and at other women while claiming. And, of course, to put a violent offender into Parliament and say that that's not an excluding offense while simultaneously claiming that they act for women and children is, It's beyond parody, isn't it?" CV, "And those same people who were arrested, there were almost 900 of them, weren't there? About the riots across the country at the time, 41% had already, been reported to the police for domestic abuse." JOB, "So who are the women and children they're dedicated to protecting?" CV, "Well, quite." JOB, "And who are they protecting them from?" CV, "None." JOB, "It's good to see you. I knew that you would be, perturbed by this, but." CV, "I am." JOB, "But enraged?" CV, "Yes, I am." JOB, "And are you expecting an apology? I know you've demanded." CV, "Well, I can't." JOB, "You did not demand anything." CV, "I can't demand anything. I have asked for an apology. Not for me." JOB, "No." CV, "But for all of us. And for his comments so far. I just think we're on day three. Nothing." JOB, "Not even a whisper nothing or a nothing." CV, "He's still running away. Hiding away from cameras, maybe." JOB, "Don't hold your breath, Carol. Thank you." CV, "Thanks, James." JOB, "Still waiting. I hope she didn't hold her breath. We got a statement from Reform Councillor Kenyon, made these comments before entering politics. We are confident that he is an excellent candidate who will be a superb local MP for Makerfield. And a full list of all the candidates running there can be found at lbc co uk"

Farrukh

24,754 views • 2 months ago

FULL TRANSCRIPT OF ELON'S CYBERCAB AND ROBOVAN PRESENTATION 00:00 Welcome 01:16 Cybercab & Future of transportation 04:33 Cost 05:53 Timeline 07:13 Self-driving technology 10:05 Inductive charging 10:24 The cities of the future 11:04 Robovan 12:13 Optimus Welcome Welcome to the We, Robot party. We have quite a show for you tonight. I think you're going to like it. As you can see, I just arrived in the Robotaxi, the Cybercab. And there's 20 more where that came from. So they've been traveling, there's no people in them. As you can see, the car is just going by with no people. We have 50 fully autonomous cars here tonight. So you'll see model Y's and the Cybercabs, all driverless. You'll be able to take a ride in the Cybercab. There's no steering wheel or pedals. So I hope this goes well, we'll find out. You see a lot of sci-fi movies where the future is dark and dismal, where it's not a future you want to be in. So, you know, I love Blade Runner, but I don't know if we want that future. We want that duster he's wearing, but not the bleak apocalypse. We want to have a fun, exciting future that, if you could look in a crystal ball and see the future, you'd be like, yes, I wish I could be there now. That's what we want. Cybercab & Future of transportation So, when we think about transport today, there's a lot of pain that we take for granted, that we think is normal. Like having to drive around LA in 3 hours of traffic. Yeah, people that live in LA, I mean, you know, try to get from Pasadena to El Segundo during rush hour. You can fly to another city faster than you can get to LA. And you have to drive the whole way, unless you're in a Tesla. Of course, our Tesla already does quite well at this supervised self-driving. So, supervised full self-driving is actually working quite well. I'm sure there's people in the crowd who are using that. So, we'll move from supervised full self-driving to unsupervised full self-driving where the car, you could fall asleep and wake up at your destination. But there's also a challenge for a lot of people that cars cost too much. I mean, when you factor in everything that goes into a car and the car insurance and the car payments, storage of the car, it's very expensive. You say, like, how many hours a week are cars used? Your average passenger car is only used about 10 hours a week out of 168 hours. So, the vast majority of the time cars are just doing nothing. But if they're autonomous, they could be used, I don't know, five times more, maybe ten times more. So you could actually, for the same car, would have five times as much value, maybe ten times as much value. There's 168 hours in the week, and like I said, only ten of them are used for driving. And then, a bunch of those hours are looking for a parking spot, which can be pretty annoying at times. So, with autonomy, you get your time back. This is a very big deal. So it's not just, it'll save lives, like a lot of lives and prevent injuries. I think we'll see autonomous cars become ten times safer than a human. I mean, if you think of times past where there used to be an elevator operator in every elevator but once in a while, they get tired and accidentally shear somebody in half. Now, we have automated elevators. You just get an elevator and you press a button and you don't even think about it and it just takes you to the floor. And if you did see an elevator operator with a big relay switch, you'd be like, that's weird. That's how cars will be. And it's not just the lives saved in injuries, but if you think about the cumulative time that people spend in a car and the time that they will get back that they can now spend, well, I guess, on their phones or watching a movie or doing work or whatever you want to do you can think of the car in autonomous world as being like just little lounge. You're just sitting in a comfortable little lounge and you can do whatever you want while you're in this comfortable little lounge. And when you get out, you will be at your destination. So, yeah, it's gonna be awesome. Cost So, in fact, I think the cost of autonomous transport will be so low that you can think of it like individualized mass transit. The average cost of a bus per mile for a city, not the ticket price, because that is subsidized, but the average price is about a dollar a mile, whereas the cost of Cybercab we think probably over time, the operating cost is probably going to be around twenty cents a mile. Including taxes and everything else, it probably ends up being 30 or 40 cents a mile. And you will be able to buy one. And we expect the cost to be below $30,000. And I think there'll be an interesting business model where, let's say somebody is an Uber or Lyft driver today where they can actually sort of manage a fleet of cars and like, sort of manage, I don't know, 10, 20 cars and just take care of them. Like a shepherd tends their flock. You have a little flock of cars and you're the shepherd and you take care of your flock of cars. I think that would be pretty cool. I think it's going to be a glorious future. It's going to be really something special. Timeline We do expect actually to start fully autonomous unsupervised FSD in Texas and California next year. And that's obviously, that's with the Model 3 and Model Y. And then we expect to be in production with the Cybercab, which is really highly optimized for autonomous transport in probably, I tend to be a little optimistic with time frames, but in 2026. So, yeah, before 2027, let me put it that way. And we'll make this vehicle in very high volume. But well, before that, you will experience a robotic taxi via the Model 3 and Model Y program and model S and X, too. But the Model 3 and Y will achieve unsupervised full self-driving with permission, in wherever regulators essentially approve it. In the US, and then to follow outside the US. And Cybertruck, too. All our cars are basically, all cars that we make. Let's not get nuanced here. Self-driving technology One of the reasons why the computer can be so much better than a person is that we have millions of cars that are training on driving. It's like living millions of lives simultaneously and seeing very unusual situations that a person in their entire lifetime would not see. With that amount of training data, it's obviously going to be much better than what a human could be because you can't live a million lives. And it's also, it can see in all directions simultaneously and it doesn't get tired or text or any of those things. So, it will naturally be, like I said 10, 20, 30 times safer than a human, just for all those reasons. And I want to emphasize that the solution that we have is, AI and vision. So, there's no expensive equipment needed. The Model 3 and Model Y and S and X that we make today will be capable of full autonomy, unsupervised. And that means that our cost of producing the vehicle is low. Now, we are going to actually over-spec the computer for the Cybercab. So, our AI 5 computer will be somewhat over-spec'd because I think there's actually also an opportunity, sort of like an Amazon Web Services, where if the car is driving for 50 hours a week, there's still over 100 hours left and there's a potential there to have a massive amount of distributed inference compute, where if you've got like a fleet of 100 million vehicles and a kilowatt of efficient inference compute, you have 100 gigawatts of compute, which is really quite substantial. And if it's there, you might as well use it so that I think will make sense. So, our autonomous future is here. As I said, we've got 50 Teslas driving autonomously. We're trying to give you a sense of what cities will be like in the future. And when you get in, you'll see like, it's really quite a wild experience to just be in a car with no steering wheel, no pedals, no controls, and it feels great. So we have enough vehicles here, so everyone should be able to try it out and experience the set that we've built here. It's a very big set. So it's like really we've used I don't know, 20, 30 acres or something like that. It's really big. So, it goes on, the ride's long. And we set it up to feel like a ride, like a park ride. So, it'll be cool and you'll get to experience it tonight. Inductive charging Something we're also doing is and it's really high time we did this is inductive charging. So, the robotaxi has no plug. It just goes over the inductive charger and charges. So, yeah, it's kind of how it should be. The cities of the future One of the things that is really interesting is how will this affect the cities that we live in. And when you drive around a city, or when the car drives you around the city, you'll see there's a lot of parking lots. There's parking lots everywhere, parking garages. What would happen if you have an autonomous world is that you can now turn parking lots into parks. And so, from we're taking the inglot out of parking lot. You're welcome. So, there's a lot of opportunity to create green space in the cities that we live in. So, like, that would be quite fantastic. Robovan Oh, and also, what happens if you need a vehicle that is bigger than a Model Y? The Robovan. We're going to make this and it's going to look like that. Now, can you imagine going down the streets and you see this coming towards you? That'd be sick. So this can carry up to 20 people, and it can also transport goods. You can configure it for goods transport within a city. Or transport of up to 20 people at a time. The Robovan is what's gonna solve for high density. If you want to take a sports team somewhere or you're looking to really get the cost of travel down to, I don't know, 5, 10 cents a mile, then you can use the Robovan. One of the things we want to do, and we've seen this with the Cybertruck, is we want to change the look of the roads. The future should look like the future. Optimus Speaking of robots. Everything we've developed for our cars, the batteries, power electronics, the advanced motors, gearboxes, the software, the AI inference computer, it all actually applies to a humanoid robot. The same techniques. It's just a robot with arms and legs instead of a robot with wheels. We've made a lot of progress with Optimus. And as you can see, we started up with someone in a robot suit. And then, we've progressed dramatically, year after year. So, if you extrapolate this, you're really going to have something spectacular, something that anyone could own. So, you can have your own personal R2-D2-C3PO. And I think at scale, this would cost something like, I don't know, $20,000, $30,000, probably less than a car is my prediction, long-term. It'll take us a minute to get to the long term. But fundamentally, at scale, the Optimus robot, you should be able to buy an Optimus robot for, I think, probably $20,000 to $30,000, long-term. And what can it do? It'll basically do anything you want. It can be a teacher or babysit your kids, it can walk your dog, mow your lawn, get the groceries, just be your friend, serve drinks whatever you can think of, it will do. And, yeah, it's going to be awesome. I think this will be the biggest product ever of any kind, because I think everyone of the 8 billion people of Earth, I think everyone's going to want their Optimus buddy. And there's going to be maybe two. And then, they'll be producing products and services. I predict, actually, provided we address risks of digital superintelligence, 80% probability of good outcome, look on the bright side, the cup is 80% full, the cost of products and services will decline dramatically. And basically, anyone will be able to have any products and services they want. It will be an age of abundance the likes of which people have not, almost no one has envisioned. It will be something special. So now, one of the things we wanted to show tonight was that Optimus is not a canned video. It's not walled off. The Optimus robots will walk among you. Please, please be nice to the Optimus robots. You'll be able to walk right up to them and they'll serve drinks at the bar. I mean, it's a wild experience just to have humanoid robots and they're there, you're just in front of you. So yeah, with that, let's party!

FULL TRANSCRIPT OF ELON'S CYBERCAB AND ROBOVAN PRESENTATION 00:00 Welcome 01:16 Cybercab & Future of transportation 04:33 Cost 05:53 Timeline 07:13 Self-driving technology 10:05 Inductive charging 10:24 The cities of the future 11:04 Robovan 12:13 Optimus Welcome Welcome to the We, Robot party. We have quite a show for you tonight. I think you're going to like it. As you can see, I just arrived in the Robotaxi, the Cybercab. And there's 20 more where that came from. So they've been traveling, there's no people in them. As you can see, the car is just going by with no people. We have 50 fully autonomous cars here tonight. So you'll see model Y's and the Cybercabs, all driverless. You'll be able to take a ride in the Cybercab. There's no steering wheel or pedals. So I hope this goes well, we'll find out. You see a lot of sci-fi movies where the future is dark and dismal, where it's not a future you want to be in. So, you know, I love Blade Runner, but I don't know if we want that future. We want that duster he's wearing, but not the bleak apocalypse. We want to have a fun, exciting future that, if you could look in a crystal ball and see the future, you'd be like, yes, I wish I could be there now. That's what we want. Cybercab & Future of transportation So, when we think about transport today, there's a lot of pain that we take for granted, that we think is normal. Like having to drive around LA in 3 hours of traffic. Yeah, people that live in LA, I mean, you know, try to get from Pasadena to El Segundo during rush hour. You can fly to another city faster than you can get to LA. And you have to drive the whole way, unless you're in a Tesla. Of course, our Tesla already does quite well at this supervised self-driving. So, supervised full self-driving is actually working quite well. I'm sure there's people in the crowd who are using that. So, we'll move from supervised full self-driving to unsupervised full self-driving where the car, you could fall asleep and wake up at your destination. But there's also a challenge for a lot of people that cars cost too much. I mean, when you factor in everything that goes into a car and the car insurance and the car payments, storage of the car, it's very expensive. You say, like, how many hours a week are cars used? Your average passenger car is only used about 10 hours a week out of 168 hours. So, the vast majority of the time cars are just doing nothing. But if they're autonomous, they could be used, I don't know, five times more, maybe ten times more. So you could actually, for the same car, would have five times as much value, maybe ten times as much value. There's 168 hours in the week, and like I said, only ten of them are used for driving. And then, a bunch of those hours are looking for a parking spot, which can be pretty annoying at times. So, with autonomy, you get your time back. This is a very big deal. So it's not just, it'll save lives, like a lot of lives and prevent injuries. I think we'll see autonomous cars become ten times safer than a human. I mean, if you think of times past where there used to be an elevator operator in every elevator but once in a while, they get tired and accidentally shear somebody in half. Now, we have automated elevators. You just get an elevator and you press a button and you don't even think about it and it just takes you to the floor. And if you did see an elevator operator with a big relay switch, you'd be like, that's weird. That's how cars will be. And it's not just the lives saved in injuries, but if you think about the cumulative time that people spend in a car and the time that they will get back that they can now spend, well, I guess, on their phones or watching a movie or doing work or whatever you want to do you can think of the car in autonomous world as being like just little lounge. You're just sitting in a comfortable little lounge and you can do whatever you want while you're in this comfortable little lounge. And when you get out, you will be at your destination. So, yeah, it's gonna be awesome. Cost So, in fact, I think the cost of autonomous transport will be so low that you can think of it like individualized mass transit. The average cost of a bus per mile for a city, not the ticket price, because that is subsidized, but the average price is about a dollar a mile, whereas the cost of Cybercab we think probably over time, the operating cost is probably going to be around twenty cents a mile. Including taxes and everything else, it probably ends up being 30 or 40 cents a mile. And you will be able to buy one. And we expect the cost to be below $30,000. And I think there'll be an interesting business model where, let's say somebody is an Uber or Lyft driver today where they can actually sort of manage a fleet of cars and like, sort of manage, I don't know, 10, 20 cars and just take care of them. Like a shepherd tends their flock. You have a little flock of cars and you're the shepherd and you take care of your flock of cars. I think that would be pretty cool. I think it's going to be a glorious future. It's going to be really something special. Timeline We do expect actually to start fully autonomous unsupervised FSD in Texas and California next year. And that's obviously, that's with the Model 3 and Model Y. And then we expect to be in production with the Cybercab, which is really highly optimized for autonomous transport in probably, I tend to be a little optimistic with time frames, but in 2026. So, yeah, before 2027, let me put it that way. And we'll make this vehicle in very high volume. But well, before that, you will experience a robotic taxi via the Model 3 and Model Y program and model S and X, too. But the Model 3 and Y will achieve unsupervised full self-driving with permission, in wherever regulators essentially approve it. In the US, and then to follow outside the US. And Cybertruck, too. All our cars are basically, all cars that we make. Let's not get nuanced here. Self-driving technology One of the reasons why the computer can be so much better than a person is that we have millions of cars that are training on driving. It's like living millions of lives simultaneously and seeing very unusual situations that a person in their entire lifetime would not see. With that amount of training data, it's obviously going to be much better than what a human could be because you can't live a million lives. And it's also, it can see in all directions simultaneously and it doesn't get tired or text or any of those things. So, it will naturally be, like I said 10, 20, 30 times safer than a human, just for all those reasons. And I want to emphasize that the solution that we have is, AI and vision. So, there's no expensive equipment needed. The Model 3 and Model Y and S and X that we make today will be capable of full autonomy, unsupervised. And that means that our cost of producing the vehicle is low. Now, we are going to actually over-spec the computer for the Cybercab. So, our AI 5 computer will be somewhat over-spec'd because I think there's actually also an opportunity, sort of like an Amazon Web Services, where if the car is driving for 50 hours a week, there's still over 100 hours left and there's a potential there to have a massive amount of distributed inference compute, where if you've got like a fleet of 100 million vehicles and a kilowatt of efficient inference compute, you have 100 gigawatts of compute, which is really quite substantial. And if it's there, you might as well use it so that I think will make sense. So, our autonomous future is here. As I said, we've got 50 Teslas driving autonomously. We're trying to give you a sense of what cities will be like in the future. And when you get in, you'll see like, it's really quite a wild experience to just be in a car with no steering wheel, no pedals, no controls, and it feels great. So we have enough vehicles here, so everyone should be able to try it out and experience the set that we've built here. It's a very big set. So it's like really we've used I don't know, 20, 30 acres or something like that. It's really big. So, it goes on, the ride's long. And we set it up to feel like a ride, like a park ride. So, it'll be cool and you'll get to experience it tonight. Inductive charging Something we're also doing is and it's really high time we did this is inductive charging. So, the robotaxi has no plug. It just goes over the inductive charger and charges. So, yeah, it's kind of how it should be. The cities of the future One of the things that is really interesting is how will this affect the cities that we live in. And when you drive around a city, or when the car drives you around the city, you'll see there's a lot of parking lots. There's parking lots everywhere, parking garages. What would happen if you have an autonomous world is that you can now turn parking lots into parks. And so, from we're taking the inglot out of parking lot. You're welcome. So, there's a lot of opportunity to create green space in the cities that we live in. So, like, that would be quite fantastic. Robovan Oh, and also, what happens if you need a vehicle that is bigger than a Model Y? The Robovan. We're going to make this and it's going to look like that. Now, can you imagine going down the streets and you see this coming towards you? That'd be sick. So this can carry up to 20 people, and it can also transport goods. You can configure it for goods transport within a city. Or transport of up to 20 people at a time. The Robovan is what's gonna solve for high density. If you want to take a sports team somewhere or you're looking to really get the cost of travel down to, I don't know, 5, 10 cents a mile, then you can use the Robovan. One of the things we want to do, and we've seen this with the Cybertruck, is we want to change the look of the roads. The future should look like the future. Optimus Speaking of robots. Everything we've developed for our cars, the batteries, power electronics, the advanced motors, gearboxes, the software, the AI inference computer, it all actually applies to a humanoid robot. The same techniques. It's just a robot with arms and legs instead of a robot with wheels. We've made a lot of progress with Optimus. And as you can see, we started up with someone in a robot suit. And then, we've progressed dramatically, year after year. So, if you extrapolate this, you're really going to have something spectacular, something that anyone could own. So, you can have your own personal R2-D2-C3PO. And I think at scale, this would cost something like, I don't know, $20,000, $30,000, probably less than a car is my prediction, long-term. It'll take us a minute to get to the long term. But fundamentally, at scale, the Optimus robot, you should be able to buy an Optimus robot for, I think, probably $20,000 to $30,000, long-term. And what can it do? It'll basically do anything you want. It can be a teacher or babysit your kids, it can walk your dog, mow your lawn, get the groceries, just be your friend, serve drinks whatever you can think of, it will do. And, yeah, it's going to be awesome. I think this will be the biggest product ever of any kind, because I think everyone of the 8 billion people of Earth, I think everyone's going to want their Optimus buddy. And there's going to be maybe two. And then, they'll be producing products and services. I predict, actually, provided we address risks of digital superintelligence, 80% probability of good outcome, look on the bright side, the cup is 80% full, the cost of products and services will decline dramatically. And basically, anyone will be able to have any products and services they want. It will be an age of abundance the likes of which people have not, almost no one has envisioned. It will be something special. So now, one of the things we wanted to show tonight was that Optimus is not a canned video. It's not walled off. The Optimus robots will walk among you. Please, please be nice to the Optimus robots. You'll be able to walk right up to them and they'll serve drinks at the bar. I mean, it's a wild experience just to have humanoid robots and they're there, you're just in front of you. So yeah, with that, let's party!

Mario Nawfal

241,051 views • 1 year ago

"We loved our daughter and we wanted to help her." ~Tim Gallaudet This is way too long but I hope you enjoy it. As far as Steven Greenstreet 🐷's posts about the Gallaudets, hauntings and psychics? First off, Tim Gallaudet's wife, "was also a Naval Academy graduate and a master’s recipient from Scripps, having earned her degree in 2001." Source: We know the resume of retired Rear Admiral and oceanographer, Tim Gallaudet, but what about his wife, Caren? She's a big part of this story, so any journalist covering it would want you to know a little something about her. But not Greenstreet, who is, as I said, not a journalist. He leaves out any detail that doesn't fit his debunker, mocking narrative. And he just blocked me. Good. Trash. More... “(My wife Caren) is an inspiration to me, first because she was a Navy diver, and you don’t need to say more. And second, she was a Navy diver as a female during a time when it was not easy. In the late 1980s/early 1990s there was a lot of sexual harassment in the Navy.” ~RDML Tim Gallaudet ~ This episode of "The Dead Files," S6E8 ("You Will Be Mine") aired May 20th, 2016. Caren: "People think I'm crazy but it's hard to do battle with an enemy you don't understand. There are things moving around the house. We're hearing voices. We've all had nightmares. We've seen full apparitions. Now things are getting physical." (I would liked to have heard more about full apparitions and exactly who saw them. Having multiple witnesses to alleged phenomena is important. And yes, people will think you're crazy but screw 'em. People have been experiencing this type of phenomena all over the world. At the time this was shot (2015 or 2016), their oldest of three daughters, Laurel, was 14, Aspen was 8, and the youngest, Cedar, was 6.) Caren: "My husband works for the Department of Defense and he travels a lot, so he's rarely here." (They bought the property in 2007 but the odd activity in the house didn't start until Cedar turned 3.) Caren: "Cedar has drawn pictures. This is the man with the brown arms. He lives in her room in her closet. This one she saw in my bathroom, it was a man covered with blood. And I have a book with over 40 drawings. She has become anxious and depressed." (Why didn't the family bring her to a psychiatrist or psychologist first before immediately seeking out a medium? What? They did? Why didn't hack Greenstreet tell us that? Because his goal is to make anybody connected to UFO disclosure look bad.) Caren: "We've seen psychiatrists, psychologists. They all say she's a normal little girl. But she says things that 5 and 6 year old children should not be saying. I love her with all my heart but, at times, I don't know who she is." How is Caren handling it? Caren: "Not very well. When I'm alone, I do a lot of crying. I feel isolated, I feel exhausted." (The kids fight and the older sisters blame Cedar for what's going on. That fighting may be related to the phenomena. Watch the video clip I included below for context. ~ Caren: "We're wiling to do whatever it takes. We're ready." (My take: It's obvious they were desperate for help in a situation where nobody else was offering up anything to fix the problem. So they turned to an alleged medium, Amy Allan, and former NYPD homicide investigator, Steve DiSchiavi, who were part of a TV show, "The Dead Files." I am NOT a fan of those types of shows and I would tell people to avoid them if they had a problem like what the Gallaudet's described. But I wasn't in their shoes so who knows what I might have done to get help for the people I love? Luckily, I've never had to deal with a situation like that.) Caren: "I was in the kitchen, and I opened the cupboard. And before doing anything, all the dishes and the bowls fell on top of me." (Sounds like poltergeist activity. And when I say poltergeist, I don't necessarily mean a ghost, spirit, etc. If you read Dr. Barry Taff's book, "Aliens Above, Ghosts Below," he talks about something called Recurrent Spontaneous Psychokinesis, or RSPK. The term was coined by parapsychologist, the late Dr. William Roll. The theory is that the paranormal activity taking place is originating from one of the people in the house. Usually, a young, adolescent boy or girl. "After receiving a report of poltergeist-like activities, two investigators from the Rhine visited a site and observed disturbances that were classified as Recurrent Spontaneous Psychokinesis or RSPK. RSPK is the modern interpretation of what was previously called poltergeist activity. It occurs when an individual – in this case an adolescent boy – is present in every case where a poltergeist-like effect is observed. The activity is interpreted as the result of unconscious psychokinesis activities coming from the individual who is called the PK-Agent." Source: ~ Here's a transcription of the video clip I included below: Parapsychologist Dr. Barry Taff: "The original belief, regarding poltergeist, was that they were, basically, mischievous, prank-playing ghosts. That's what the German word means. The modern theorist in parapsychology consider a quite different type of belief system is operating here, or phenomena is operating. They believe that there are young children present, pubescent, adolescent children, and the research tends to support this belief. These young children are present with a lot of emotional animosities, belligerence, a lot of very intense interactions. And this emotional interaction will produce an emission of unconscious energy from these children, which will affect matter, objects around them. Make them move, affect electrical appliances, make them turn on and off. Make things speed up and slow down, affect televisions, affect radios. Dishes may explode, furniture may move across the room, cameras may go off by themselves, light bulbs may explode suddenly." ~ "A person-focused poltergeist tends to (but not always) involve a female adolescent who is suffering from emotional turmoil when the activity begins. That said however, not all so called 'focal agents' are teenagers. Indeed, William G. Roll, a pioneer in poltergeist research, found the age of people reporting experiences of poltergeist activity ranged from eight to 78 years." Source: ~~~ (That may explain what went on in the Gallaudet home but it's still not accepted by mainstream science as a valid theory. Unfortunately, Allan (the alleged medium) didn't offer up any alternative explanations for the paranormal activity in the home and focused solely on the alleged spirts of dead people as the answer. She thought Cedar was a physical medium who could cause that type of activity to occur, but again, 100% related it to the spirits of dead people, without offering any other explanation. IMO, it's possible one of the girls (or Caren) is a PK-Agent and this had nothing to do with spirits. Then again, maybe it IS connected to non-physical entities? Spirits of the dead? Keel's ultraterrestrials, who he believed impersonated the dead? A mix? Something different? Impossible to prove, either way. So, I don't know. But I DO believe SOMETHING anomalous was going on. If you want an example of how an alleged haunting, ghost or poltergeist case should be investigated, watch this. The clip I attached at the end is from this video. If these folks were still doing investigations, I'd refer anybody who was dealing with this type of situation to them.) "We don't consider our pictures proof of anything, we consider them part of the struggle to gather evidence to try to understand this phenomena." ~Kerry Gaynor Watch it... 👆🏼👆🏼👆🏼 ~ Caren: Also, "my daughter, Laurel, and I were right here having a conversation. And all of a sudden she screamed. She said, 'Someone just touched me on my back.' And there was no one else in the room." The bedroom... Caren: "I was woken by a noise. Immediately, I looked to the door and saw a giant, black shadow coming at me from the door. It came over the bed and came straight over top of me. I was scared to death. I've never been that scared in my life." (This is very similar to what happened to people who visited Skinwalker Ranch (and other locations) and reported taking "something" home with them. Also known as the hitchhiker effect. ) Caren: "I was asleep and I felt a hand grab my hair and yank me up. It was a very aggressive pull. I screamed, and I did not go back to sleep after that. There was no one around. Tim wasn't here. It was not a nightmare. I don't sleep most nights, but I'm glad that I had the experience because I understand what Cedar's going through. If I saw that every night, I think I'd act like her, too." Caren's mother, Jan: "Something's going on with Cedar. She's changed dramatically in the last year, year and a half. To do this to my grandchildren makes me angry. My husband and I were babysitting here and we heard Cedar cry out, yelling and screaming, 'Stop it, stop it. Leave me alone!' So I rubbed her back and she went back into her sleep. And then I heard a low voice (that sounded male) say, 'It's gonna be alright. It's alright.'" (From the investigation, Jan wants, "peace among the girls. They don't tend to get along. It's more than just sibling rivalry. It's something else." She thinks the girls are in physical danger. As Taff noted, intense interactions among people in the house could be the cause of all of this. Why did it take a few years for the activity in the house to start? Did anything change in the family dynamic? Cedar is interviewed and she tells the investigator what she's experienced, which includes a scary dream with blood on the floor and dead people. She says she sees the man with brown arms and brown skin who yells at her, "Get out of here, this is not your room. This is my room." Later on, the medium says that this man was there to protect Cedar. Based on what he allegedly said, that makes zero sense. I'm not a fan of this medium (Allan), to put it mildly. Aspen, eight years old, says she sees a shadow man in her room who sits near her dresser. She also saw a little girl who was wet. "I felt a thumb press on my neck really hard." During the nighttime walkthrough of the house, the medium says that one of the spirits looks wet. Is this confirmation or was the medium fed information about what the children experienced? Impossible to know as it's an edited TV show.) Caren says Cedar has seen over a hundred spirits. "It's every night." Medium Allan says this one spirit is tormenting the kids because she's jealous of them and wants Caren to be her mother.) Amy Allan: "The only way (this spirit) could be with you is if you were to kill yourself, then you guys would spend entirety together, and you would forever be her mother, alone." (I'm sorry but without any evidence to back that up, it's an irresponsible thing to say and, IMO, a bunch of sensational bs.) You can watch the entire episode if you log in with your cable subscription. Or watch it at Greensteet's post... ~ Tim Gallaudet was on with “Jay Anderson” a few years ago and spoke about the phenomenon and what his family has experienced. Tim Gallaudet (TG): "You see a sort of grouping of UAP and paranormal and how does it intersect. And the answer is: I don't know." TG: "We were all grown up in traditional, kind of, religion. But at some point in our lives, my youngest daughter had real serious behavior issues. And to sum it all up, she is like many of these mediums that you see. She could see spirits, she saw them all the time. A lot of listeners might just think this is just a joke or made up." (I definitely don't think it's a joke, but if she still has these abilities when she gets older, try to take her to get tested at Windbridge Research. Some people (who call themselves mediums) claim they can acquire information via something other than their five senses and have shown the ability to do so under controlled conditions. Are they speaking to the dead or is it something else? I don't know. And FYI, a medium claims they can speak to the dead and also provides alleged psychic readings to people about their lives and sometimes the future. Nine times out of ten, a psychic does not claim to speak with the dead.) TG: "There are people that have this ability to tap into whatever we wanna call it. The Other Side, where people go when they die, whatever that is. The energy that people leave behind. There's a lot of ways to explain it. It was real and...real to us." (They're allegedly able to see the spirits of the dead and can acquire information they have no way of knowing via their five senses. To me, the part about them acquiring information they have no way of knowing through means other than their five senses has been proven. Maybe there's some storehouse of information that they're accessing, like an Akashic Records type of thing? Or, maybe they're really communicating with the dead or some other entities? Again, I don't know where the information is coming from. As TG said, there are lots of ways to explain it.) TG: "She had real experiences, it was affecting her. And through a lot of therapy, we were able to basically have her - now she's thirteen - she became adjusted and has kind of dealt with that. She's sort of suppressed it, actually, which is okay. I mean, she's only thirteen. We can take a pause and help her develop as a person and human before coming to groups with that incredible ability." (TG and his wife did everything they could to help their daughter. When traditional methods failed, they sought help in other ways. Why anybody would have a problem with that is beyond me.) TG: "My wife and I, through this experience, to just be able to help her, we came to meet several mediums who are incredibly gifted." One of them was the Long Island medium, Theresa Caputo. (I like to see Caputo tested in a lab. If you'd like to see what that looks like, watch this HBO documentary on Life After Death and mediums. You'll have to search for the other parts. Part 1 of Life Afterlife ) ~ TG said he and his wife had a camera in Cedar's room when this activity was taking place and, "there was orbs flying all around this video. It was so active." (I'd like to see this video and see if those were orbs or particles of dust.) TG: "We loved our daughter and we wanted to help her. And so, through just meeting people, doing a lot of reading about people, these experiences, it became real to us and it opened our minds. I don't have all the answers but I know what we experienced, I know what she saw. We contacted [the show] because we thought she could help her and she ultimately did help my daughter." (That's really all that matters! TG says he has some family history with this type of thing but doesn't have any details as people were less willing to talk about it back then.) TG "She was not the Devil, she was seeing real things (laughs), and that's it. We were not gonna brand her or blame her. And I ultimately know, it was that love that we shared - my wife and I - for her, that opened our minds and create the right outcome. For being well-adjusted, having that in our history, and not being afraid of it or ashamed of it. And being aware and open now to a lot of other things that happen in life and maybe seeing their meaning." (Well said. After learning about this, my respect for Tim and his family has only increased.) ~ Last and definitely least...Greenstreet's comments. SG: "In an interview with TheProjectUnity, former Navy Admiral Tim Gallaudet claims his young daughter is a 'medium' who sees spirits and can communicate with them." (He said that but also added this...) TG: "There are people that have this ability to tap into whatever we wanna call it. The Other Side, where people go when they die, whatever that is. The energy that people leave behind. There's a lot of ways to explain it." SG: "Gallaudet's wife claims their house is haunted by violent poltergeists." (His wife explained what the family was experiencing. I don't recall anyone involved mentioning poltergeists or that the house was haunted. This are buzzwords SG uses to disparage people. Just like his "monsters" garbage. ) SG: "Their youngest daughter, 6, thinks ghost monsters are hiding in her room and both the TV show stars and her parents validate her fantasies as real." (His wife and daughters were having experiences they couldn't explain. They took the youngest to a psychiatrist and psychologist and they couldn't help. So they sought out the show. You left out the part about them seeking professional help first. Why? Because you're a piece of trash who will do anything to disparage anybody involved in this. I think YOU should seek help.) SG: "Gallaudet says he's taken his young daughter to multiple psychics to try to 'help her.'" (Nope. Mediums. For a so-called journalist, you should know the difference. And again, this was AFTER they sought out traditional help.) SG: "It should be noted that Gallaudet is "close friends" with Jay Stratton, another retired Navy official who claims his house was/is also haunted by violent poltergeists who attacked his children." (Talk to Stratton and you'll see he doesn't define what happened to his family. Oh, that's right, he won't talk to you because you're an azzhole. And it makes sense that those two would bond since their families experienced similar things. I hope Tim shares more details about what's currently going on with his family and what he experienced himself.)

Joe Murgia

88,583 views • 2 years ago

Zack Polanski on BBC Radio 4's Today prog calmly knocking back everything Nick Robinson throws at him across 17 minutes NR (00:00.2), "Delighted to say that Zach Polanski is here in the Today programme studio, for the latest, indeed, for the last of our party leader interviews. Morning to you and thanks for coming in." ZP (00:09.2), "Thanks for having me." NR (00:09.8), "Nick, I want to talk to you about what your party would do if it does indeed gain some power after the votes on Thursday. But I want to begin by putting to you one of the latest storeys about you. A Times investigation says that you've made a series of false or disputed claims about jobs you've had in the past with." NR (00:31.8), "Why, for example, did you say you were a spokesperson for the British Red Cross when they are absolutely clear that, though a supporter of theirs, you were never a spokesperson for them?" ZP (00:42.3), "So I hosted, various fundraisers for the British Red Cross and indeed I would go on stage and speak for them about the amazing work they do tackling humanitarian crises, on the climate crisis and indeed for refugees all around the world. I use the wrong word and I accept that." ZP (00:57.5), "But I would essentially take words on stage with me and speak. It's important, though, and I accept this, that, you know, I don't support any political party and I've made sure that's been taken down." NR (01:06.5), "You say this sort of storey is a fuss about nothing, that you get your facts wrong because it comes up with other examples." ZP (01:11.7), "Well, I think it's totally fine to ask me questions about my past. I would also say in the same breath, though the Times published a pretty anti Semitic cartoon of me last week. I asked them to apologise. And it feels some of these storeys feel like scraping the barrel to kind of go back 10, 15 years. I've had so many friends, I'm literally talking maybe 20 or 30 in the last few weeks who have phoned me and said, a Times journalist has been phoning and they've been desperately trying, trying to find things about your past." ZP (01:36.5), "They asked me lots of questions and seemed disappointed that I didn't have some juicy, dirty gossip." NR (01:41.6), "Yeah, well, there was. Whether you call it juicy or dirty, and it wasn't gossip, it was a fact. The fact that you claimed that as a hypnotherapist, you could enlarge women's breasts using the power of thought. People are entitled to say, what's this guy really about?" ZP (01:57.2), "People are totally entitled to say that. And that's an important part of politics, that people ask you questions. What I would say is that, you know, this was 13 years ago. It was a Sun journalist's idea. I've apologised for that. Because even though it was a son journalist idea, I was an adult and I should have said no, you went along with it." NR (02:12.6), "Yeah." ZP (02:12.9), "It's important to say I wasn't a politician. And I've apologised for it repeatedly." NR (02:16.7), "And the BBC showed that some days later, in fact, you repeated the claim that you could do it. But let us not get bogged down in the past. It is striking, though, that on X last night, when, let's be honest, people who are critics of you are having a go. The Daily Mail calls it the Green Menace on its front page." NR (02:34.1), "How did you react? You said you were under relentless attacks because they, your critics don't want a wealth tax, don't want public ownership. They're trying everything in their power to stop us, you said. It's a curious thing to say, isn't it? Ahead of local elections, Green councillors will not have the power to implement any of those policies, will they?" ZP (02:54.8), "Well, I think the relentless attacks on the Green Party in this election, for a local election have partly been about the local election, but really they're about the bigger picture right now. The bigger picture is when I ran to be leader of the Green party, we had 50,000 members, we've now got 225,000 members. So we are rising." ZP (03:11.1), "And I think lots of people are worried about the prospect. And when I say people, people who own, right wing media, multimillionaires and billionaires who are worried about the prospect that they might have to pay a little bit more tax. And so I think it's important that I focus on the vision and the hope and our actual plan." ZP (03:27.4), "I also think it's a complete reality, though we've seen it in the past before with left wing leaders, that there's no secret, there's no love lost between me and the right wing media. And almost every single day they print things that just aren't true." NR (03:38.8), "But just address the point I raised. Wealth tax councils won't get to do that. Public ownership councils don't get to do that. Well, not entirely. We'll come to that in a second. You are running on a national platform of change that the people who are elected on Thursday, whether in the Welsh Parliament, you don't run candidates in the Scottish one, or in English, local councils simply cannot do." ZP (04:03.2), "Well, I think it's about what are your values as a party? And whilst other party leaders and other parties take donations from oil and gas companies or arms trade companies, private healthcare or gambling, Green Party councillors only have two vested interests and Those vested interests. We want to protect the communities we seek to serve and we want to protect the environment." NR (04:21.6), "Well, let's come to that, then, because most interesting, perhaps, is to look at what Greens say who are running for office. You are not. You are a member of the London assembly, you're not a Member of Parliament, you're not running in these elections. Now, you live in Hackney. Hackney happens in northeast London to be a top Green target for taking control from the Labour Party." NR (04:41.9), "So let's look at protecting communities. For example, on crime, the manifesto calls the Metropolitan Police institutionally racist, homophobic, sexist and misogynists. It goes on to say, greens cannot accept this system. It calls for safe spaces for, heroin users to shoot up, to end cautions for street prostitution and to end what the manifesto calls discriminatory policing of delivery riders." NR (05:08.8), "This is an agenda for an endless fight with the police, isn't it?" ZP (05:12.0), "I don't think so. Baroness Casey, in the last couple of years, did a review into Metropolitan Police and it was actually the findings that found it institutionally racist and misogynistic. Something that Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, to his credit, accepts. It is noticeable that Mark Rowley, the Commissioner of the Police, doesn't accept that, yet they continue, to work together in that way." ZP (05:31.1), "On the issue of drug harm, we have the highest drug deaths, of any country in Europe. And every single year for the past 13 years, drug deaths have increased. So I think the question anyone has, and we have in Hackney, is that the war on drugs has clearly failed. It's failed in cities right across this country, and more and more people are, often taking dangerous drugs." ZP (05:50.3), "So do we want people to buy them on the black market or on street corners? Or do we want people to go to a pharmacy or a medical health professional where, if they have an addiction to dangerous drugs, we can work with them to take a public health approach based in harm reduction." NR (06:02.7), "Public health approaches to. Is to legalise hard drugs and to legalise prostitution, you say to legalise and regulate and the regulators. It's still legalised, isn't it?" ZP (06:11.5), "No, the point is you can't just go into a shop and buy drugs, which is how it's presented in the press. Again, because I can keep talking about what councillors can do, rather than what" NR (06:18.3), "you would do if you were Prime Minister, because that's for another interview. Are you saying councillors should cut the police budget? Because that's what it seems to imply when you say, we cannot accept this system, let the council spend Money on crime reduction. Don't give that money to the police." ZP (06:33.7), "It's about reprioritizing. So it's." NR (06:35.5), "Does that mean cut in English?" ZP (06:36.7), "No. So let's look at example. We're straight back onto drugs. A lot of police time is spent on stop and search for cannabis use, for instance. It doesn't escape people's notice that that is often, in the politics of racism, if you're a young black person, I think it's something like you're 18 times more likely to be stopped and searched than your white peer, despite the fact there's no evidence that they're more likely to be dealing or using drugs." ZP (07:00.8), "And so I think it's important that we make sure the police time is spent properly, which I think is about community prevention, about cohesiveness and bringing communities together, particularly in, like, whether it means redirecting the budget." NR (07:11.4), "Does it mean the police budget?" ZP (07:12.9), "Well, it means redirecting within the police budget, so making sure that the time police are spent is spent on community safety." NR (07:18.2), "Well, it's interesting that we talked about police because, as you know, you've come under serious criticism for retweeting criticism of the action of the police officers who stopped the alleged attacker of Jews in Golda's Green. Now, you apologised for retweeting that." NR (07:34.1), "You said you should have a meeting with the head of the Met. You sent him a letter. I want to ask you a different question. You've not apologised for the content of that. Why did you empathise with the attacker, and not with police officers who feared for their own lives and were trying to protect other people's lives?" ZP (07:53.3), "I think there's two things in that that I, really clearly want to say. The first is my very first response to the attack was to be horrif, as everyone was, I'm sure. And the first thing I posted was solidarity to the victim, to the family and indeed, to people who are suffering right now, including as a Jewish man, where Jewish safety is not abstract." NR (08:12.0), "But then you posted that officers were repeatedly and violently kicking a mentally ill man in the head when he was incapacitated by a Taser, caused extreme offence to those officers, to the head of the Met and to many people. I ask you again, why did you empathise, Empathise with the attacker, not with the police officer." ZP (08:28.9), "As I said, there's two things I wanted to say, so that was the first. The second, what I want to say is two things can be true at the same Time officers are incredibly brave when they run towards scenes of crimes that most people, including myself, would want to run away from. At the same time, I think it is accurate, and that I was also traumatised, by seeing, someone handcuffed and completely, repeatedly kicked in the head." ZP (08:51.7), "Now, sure, if you'll forgive me, it is an answer," NR (08:54.4), "but it's not an answer to the question. You posted something with the power that you have, with the number of people who follows us, and not empathising in that post with the Jewish community or critically with the police officers, you empathise with the attacker. Look what they're doing to the alleged attacker." ZP (09:11.1), "I don't think it was your choice. As I say, the first thing I did was show solidarity to the victims and I thank the officers. Second, though, I think the sign of a compassionate society is how we treat people, even people who have done horrific things, because actually, the way we do justice in this country is in court." NR (09:26.0), "You said a key value of the Greens was protecting communities. What are your proposals for protecting the Jewish community?" ZP (09:33.5), "The Jewish community is not safe right now. And as I said, as a Jewish man, this isn't abstract for me. In fact, in the last six weeks alone, two people have been arrested. So how would you protect anti Semitic attacks towards me? I think there's lots that needs to happen in this country. The first is community cohesion and community building. Some of the work that I'm proudest of in London, that I see Londoners do, is where I see the Jewish community working alongside the Muslim community." NR (09:55.1), "What would you do? What would Zach Polanski do in order to reduce attacks on the Jewish community?" ZP (09:59.9), "So, first of all, to invest in that work, that community, faith work, to make sure communities stand together. Second, to make sure that the Jewish community, give them the investment that they need. In fact, what the Prime Minister has been doing to make sure that happens. I do think a police response is the last response when everything before it has failed." NR (10:17.6), "I still think you're not really answering the question about what you would do. Let me ask you this." ZP (10:21.0), "I think I do." NR (10:21.6), "Would you deal with, for example, a candidate who says Jewish people fear hate because they know they should be hated. Another one who suggested that the attacks on the ambulances was a false flag and carried out, presumably by Israel. Another of your candidates who blamed Israel for the Bondi beach terrorist attack." NR (10:41.0), "A fourth candidate who said Donald Trump was, quote, owned by Jews. And most horrifying of all, although this individual has now been arrested, one of your candidates who Reposted something saying ramming a synagogue isn't anti Semitism, it's revenge." NR (10:56.8), "What are you, Zach Polanski doing to end these disgusting messages?" ZP (11:03.5), "Those messages are all unacceptable and it's important to condemn that. The Green Party are an anti racist party and it's important that we stick to our values." NR (11:11.0), "We can't just say the words were an anti racist bar to. And I've just read you out five of the most revolting comments at a time when, according to an independent advisor, we face a national emergency of anti Semitism. I'm asking you, you're not responsible for everything they say. Of course you're not." NR (11:26.3), "You can't be." ZP (11:27.3), "I am responsible, actually." NR (11:28.2), "What are you going to do about it?" ZP (11:29.0), "I am the leader of a party. I was about to finish my sentence." NR (11:31.5), "Forgive me. Go on." ZP (11:32.4), "We're an anti racist party. And so what I've already committed to doing is making sure that we have a standardised vetting process in future. And also make sure that we have compulsory training of all our candidates to make it clear that anti Semitism is completely unwelcome in the Green Party as it is in society. It is also important to say one case of anti Semitism is one too many." ZP (11:50.5), "This is a handful of cases and actually we have over 4,500 candidates, the vast, vast majority of which are doing amazing work in their communities right now, going out there to tackle the cost of living crisis, to make sure that we're funding public services and making sure that it's about people power and community, grassroots power." NR (12:05.1), "You can dismiss one or two as, just, unrepresentative. I've just read five. I could have read 20 cases of revolting anti Semitism posted by your candidates. Now you're a new leader, how are you going to avoid becoming the new Jeremy Corbyn of British politics?" ZP (12:21.5), "Well, I think me and Jeremy are very different people and there's much, you know, the question was almost inviting me to condemn Jeremy Corbyn. I think there was lots that Jeremy Corbyn was putting forward to this country that I think was really positive. We've talked about wealth taxes, about public ownership. I also think it's important, speaking, for myself right now, that we make sure that we have this vetting process, that it's really clear that anti Semitism, Islamophobia, any form of hatred or hate, crime is not welcome." NR (12:47.3), "Do you believe that Palestine is, to coin a phrase, on the ballot this Thursday?" ZP (12:52.3), "I think lots of things are on the ballot this Thursday." NR (12:54.6), "But is Palestine on the ballot? This." ZP (12:56.2), "I think it's one of the elements, as is the climate crisis. As is." NR (12:58.7), "What does it mean Palestine is on the ballot? Because. The reason I ask you is because your candidate for mayor of Lewisham says Palestine is on the ballot this Thursday. Haringey Green Party campaign launch video. You might think it'd be about bins, you might think it'd be about schools, hospitals, it might be about cleaning up the roads." NR (13:17.2), "It is a series of councillors saying, as a council, I will take all appropriate steps to, uphold the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. Do you think council elections really should be about Palestine?" ZP (13:29.8), "I think they can be about all of those things. And I think what people have seen in this country is a genocide for two and a half years that our government is still arming, are still sharing intelligence with. And I think lots of people feel very strongly both about their local services, as they should do, and feel equally strongly about the fact that there's a reprehensible genocide happening." ZP (13:48.5), "And they vote, but the way they vote in local elections" NR (13:52.6), "should be determined by their views of Israel and Palestine." ZP (13:56.0), "I wouldn't tell anyone how their vote should be determined, but I think it's an element for lots of people in how they vote." NR (14:00.1), "And do you think that will contribute to community cohesion? Do you?" ZP (14:02.7), "I think yes, because I think, we shouldn't pit Jewish safety against a genocide in Gaza. That's conflating anti Semitism and criticism of the Israeli government. That's something Benjamin Netanyahu does regularly. And as a Jewish person, that makes me feel less safe." NR (14:16.4), "Sure. But there are lots of Jewish people who would say to you they feel unsafe if they feel that their counsellors are motivated first and foremost by Palestine. And if somebody gives that speech, for example, about Palestine being on the ballot, they are likely to think that." NR (14:34.6), "We looked for, example at Barnett Greens, where one in seven residents identify as Jewish. And it includes in its manifesto the fact that, you're standing up for Palestine. Do you think that's going to help?" ZP (14:49.0), "Well, I walk regularly on Palestinian marches with hundreds and hundreds, in fact, thousands of people, many of whom are Jewish. And there have been rabbis who have spoken out on this too. I accept, though, there are Jewish people whose views are equally as valid who, don't agree with those views." ZP (15:04.0), "And I think the job of all of us who are in public life right now is to de. Escalate tensions. And look, how do we bring people together? And I accept that's a huge challenge. And I think one of the ways we could do that is by ending our complicity in the genocide." NR (15:15.4), "Let's turn finally to another issue. We'll talk at greater length when, we're talking about the possibility of you being Prime Minister, which you have said that you would like to do. One thing that is very high on the agenda now is the soaring cost of government borrowing. What would the Greens do to cut it?" ZP (15:30.6), "Well, I think we need to make sure that we're investing. So I think there's two ways of doing that. The first is, wealth taxes, which I know we've rehearsed before, but I'll just say that's for first place." NR (15:38.4), "How does that cut government borrowing?" ZP (15:40.2), "Because ultimately it means you need to borrow less if you're." NR (15:43.0), "If you're ultimately about cutting the cost of government borrowing." ZP (15:45.5), "Yes." NR (15:45.8), "Which is soaring. It's higher than it's been any time this century because people are nervous about high spending, high taxing governments that are politically unstable." ZP (15:54.7), "I think someone who speaks brilliantly on this, who I've spoken to, is the economist Mariana Matsicatu, and she talks about the fact that a government should have a mission that should be a very clear plan of how you tackle the climate crisis, how you reduce inequality. Now, if you have a clear plan and you're borrowing for that, you're taking the market with you because they can clearly see what the return on investment is and how you're bringing money back into the." ZP (16:15.2), "That's how you reduce borrowing levels. If we don't have a plan and continue to borrow, then it feels very, very scattered, and that's why things are getting worse. We need to make sure that there's a consistent plan in place that's set out carefully that can make sure we're putting money back into our communities and investing in those communities." NR (16:29.3), "Do you think you're ready to be Prime Minister?" ZP (16:31.1), "I'm not ready right now, no. I've been leader for eight months, and there's lots of skills and lots of knowledge to get, and I think that's fine. I think I'm a human being. I'm not perfect." NR (16:38.5), "But give it two years, you will be." ZP (16:40.0), "Well, we'll see in two years time, won't we? But I'll certainly be putting in the work." NR (16:43.2), "Zach Polanski, leader of the Green Party in England and Wales, thanks very much for coming into the." ZP (16:46.3), "Thank you, Nick."

Zack Polanski on BBC Radio 4's Today prog calmly knocking back everything Nick Robinson throws at him across 17 minutes NR (00:00.2), "Delighted to say that Zach Polanski is here in the Today programme studio, for the latest, indeed, for the last of our party leader interviews. Morning to you and thanks for coming in." ZP (00:09.2), "Thanks for having me." NR (00:09.8), "Nick, I want to talk to you about what your party would do if it does indeed gain some power after the votes on Thursday. But I want to begin by putting to you one of the latest storeys about you. A Times investigation says that you've made a series of false or disputed claims about jobs you've had in the past with." NR (00:31.8), "Why, for example, did you say you were a spokesperson for the British Red Cross when they are absolutely clear that, though a supporter of theirs, you were never a spokesperson for them?" ZP (00:42.3), "So I hosted, various fundraisers for the British Red Cross and indeed I would go on stage and speak for them about the amazing work they do tackling humanitarian crises, on the climate crisis and indeed for refugees all around the world. I use the wrong word and I accept that." ZP (00:57.5), "But I would essentially take words on stage with me and speak. It's important, though, and I accept this, that, you know, I don't support any political party and I've made sure that's been taken down." NR (01:06.5), "You say this sort of storey is a fuss about nothing, that you get your facts wrong because it comes up with other examples." ZP (01:11.7), "Well, I think it's totally fine to ask me questions about my past. I would also say in the same breath, though the Times published a pretty anti Semitic cartoon of me last week. I asked them to apologise. And it feels some of these storeys feel like scraping the barrel to kind of go back 10, 15 years. I've had so many friends, I'm literally talking maybe 20 or 30 in the last few weeks who have phoned me and said, a Times journalist has been phoning and they've been desperately trying, trying to find things about your past." ZP (01:36.5), "They asked me lots of questions and seemed disappointed that I didn't have some juicy, dirty gossip." NR (01:41.6), "Yeah, well, there was. Whether you call it juicy or dirty, and it wasn't gossip, it was a fact. The fact that you claimed that as a hypnotherapist, you could enlarge women's breasts using the power of thought. People are entitled to say, what's this guy really about?" ZP (01:57.2), "People are totally entitled to say that. And that's an important part of politics, that people ask you questions. What I would say is that, you know, this was 13 years ago. It was a Sun journalist's idea. I've apologised for that. Because even though it was a son journalist idea, I was an adult and I should have said no, you went along with it." NR (02:12.6), "Yeah." ZP (02:12.9), "It's important to say I wasn't a politician. And I've apologised for it repeatedly." NR (02:16.7), "And the BBC showed that some days later, in fact, you repeated the claim that you could do it. But let us not get bogged down in the past. It is striking, though, that on X last night, when, let's be honest, people who are critics of you are having a go. The Daily Mail calls it the Green Menace on its front page." NR (02:34.1), "How did you react? You said you were under relentless attacks because they, your critics don't want a wealth tax, don't want public ownership. They're trying everything in their power to stop us, you said. It's a curious thing to say, isn't it? Ahead of local elections, Green councillors will not have the power to implement any of those policies, will they?" ZP (02:54.8), "Well, I think the relentless attacks on the Green Party in this election, for a local election have partly been about the local election, but really they're about the bigger picture right now. The bigger picture is when I ran to be leader of the Green party, we had 50,000 members, we've now got 225,000 members. So we are rising." ZP (03:11.1), "And I think lots of people are worried about the prospect. And when I say people, people who own, right wing media, multimillionaires and billionaires who are worried about the prospect that they might have to pay a little bit more tax. And so I think it's important that I focus on the vision and the hope and our actual plan." ZP (03:27.4), "I also think it's a complete reality, though we've seen it in the past before with left wing leaders, that there's no secret, there's no love lost between me and the right wing media. And almost every single day they print things that just aren't true." NR (03:38.8), "But just address the point I raised. Wealth tax councils won't get to do that. Public ownership councils don't get to do that. Well, not entirely. We'll come to that in a second. You are running on a national platform of change that the people who are elected on Thursday, whether in the Welsh Parliament, you don't run candidates in the Scottish one, or in English, local councils simply cannot do." ZP (04:03.2), "Well, I think it's about what are your values as a party? And whilst other party leaders and other parties take donations from oil and gas companies or arms trade companies, private healthcare or gambling, Green Party councillors only have two vested interests and Those vested interests. We want to protect the communities we seek to serve and we want to protect the environment." NR (04:21.6), "Well, let's come to that, then, because most interesting, perhaps, is to look at what Greens say who are running for office. You are not. You are a member of the London assembly, you're not a Member of Parliament, you're not running in these elections. Now, you live in Hackney. Hackney happens in northeast London to be a top Green target for taking control from the Labour Party." NR (04:41.9), "So let's look at protecting communities. For example, on crime, the manifesto calls the Metropolitan Police institutionally racist, homophobic, sexist and misogynists. It goes on to say, greens cannot accept this system. It calls for safe spaces for, heroin users to shoot up, to end cautions for street prostitution and to end what the manifesto calls discriminatory policing of delivery riders." NR (05:08.8), "This is an agenda for an endless fight with the police, isn't it?" ZP (05:12.0), "I don't think so. Baroness Casey, in the last couple of years, did a review into Metropolitan Police and it was actually the findings that found it institutionally racist and misogynistic. Something that Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, to his credit, accepts. It is noticeable that Mark Rowley, the Commissioner of the Police, doesn't accept that, yet they continue, to work together in that way." ZP (05:31.1), "On the issue of drug harm, we have the highest drug deaths, of any country in Europe. And every single year for the past 13 years, drug deaths have increased. So I think the question anyone has, and we have in Hackney, is that the war on drugs has clearly failed. It's failed in cities right across this country, and more and more people are, often taking dangerous drugs." ZP (05:50.3), "So do we want people to buy them on the black market or on street corners? Or do we want people to go to a pharmacy or a medical health professional where, if they have an addiction to dangerous drugs, we can work with them to take a public health approach based in harm reduction." NR (06:02.7), "Public health approaches to. Is to legalise hard drugs and to legalise prostitution, you say to legalise and regulate and the regulators. It's still legalised, isn't it?" ZP (06:11.5), "No, the point is you can't just go into a shop and buy drugs, which is how it's presented in the press. Again, because I can keep talking about what councillors can do, rather than what" NR (06:18.3), "you would do if you were Prime Minister, because that's for another interview. Are you saying councillors should cut the police budget? Because that's what it seems to imply when you say, we cannot accept this system, let the council spend Money on crime reduction. Don't give that money to the police." ZP (06:33.7), "It's about reprioritizing. So it's." NR (06:35.5), "Does that mean cut in English?" ZP (06:36.7), "No. So let's look at example. We're straight back onto drugs. A lot of police time is spent on stop and search for cannabis use, for instance. It doesn't escape people's notice that that is often, in the politics of racism, if you're a young black person, I think it's something like you're 18 times more likely to be stopped and searched than your white peer, despite the fact there's no evidence that they're more likely to be dealing or using drugs." ZP (07:00.8), "And so I think it's important that we make sure the police time is spent properly, which I think is about community prevention, about cohesiveness and bringing communities together, particularly in, like, whether it means redirecting the budget." NR (07:11.4), "Does it mean the police budget?" ZP (07:12.9), "Well, it means redirecting within the police budget, so making sure that the time police are spent is spent on community safety." NR (07:18.2), "Well, it's interesting that we talked about police because, as you know, you've come under serious criticism for retweeting criticism of the action of the police officers who stopped the alleged attacker of Jews in Golda's Green. Now, you apologised for retweeting that." NR (07:34.1), "You said you should have a meeting with the head of the Met. You sent him a letter. I want to ask you a different question. You've not apologised for the content of that. Why did you empathise with the attacker, and not with police officers who feared for their own lives and were trying to protect other people's lives?" ZP (07:53.3), "I think there's two things in that that I, really clearly want to say. The first is my very first response to the attack was to be horrif, as everyone was, I'm sure. And the first thing I posted was solidarity to the victim, to the family and indeed, to people who are suffering right now, including as a Jewish man, where Jewish safety is not abstract." NR (08:12.0), "But then you posted that officers were repeatedly and violently kicking a mentally ill man in the head when he was incapacitated by a Taser, caused extreme offence to those officers, to the head of the Met and to many people. I ask you again, why did you empathise, Empathise with the attacker, not with the police officer." ZP (08:28.9), "As I said, there's two things I wanted to say, so that was the first. The second, what I want to say is two things can be true at the same Time officers are incredibly brave when they run towards scenes of crimes that most people, including myself, would want to run away from. At the same time, I think it is accurate, and that I was also traumatised, by seeing, someone handcuffed and completely, repeatedly kicked in the head." ZP (08:51.7), "Now, sure, if you'll forgive me, it is an answer," NR (08:54.4), "but it's not an answer to the question. You posted something with the power that you have, with the number of people who follows us, and not empathising in that post with the Jewish community or critically with the police officers, you empathise with the attacker. Look what they're doing to the alleged attacker." ZP (09:11.1), "I don't think it was your choice. As I say, the first thing I did was show solidarity to the victims and I thank the officers. Second, though, I think the sign of a compassionate society is how we treat people, even people who have done horrific things, because actually, the way we do justice in this country is in court." NR (09:26.0), "You said a key value of the Greens was protecting communities. What are your proposals for protecting the Jewish community?" ZP (09:33.5), "The Jewish community is not safe right now. And as I said, as a Jewish man, this isn't abstract for me. In fact, in the last six weeks alone, two people have been arrested. So how would you protect anti Semitic attacks towards me? I think there's lots that needs to happen in this country. The first is community cohesion and community building. Some of the work that I'm proudest of in London, that I see Londoners do, is where I see the Jewish community working alongside the Muslim community." NR (09:55.1), "What would you do? What would Zach Polanski do in order to reduce attacks on the Jewish community?" ZP (09:59.9), "So, first of all, to invest in that work, that community, faith work, to make sure communities stand together. Second, to make sure that the Jewish community, give them the investment that they need. In fact, what the Prime Minister has been doing to make sure that happens. I do think a police response is the last response when everything before it has failed." NR (10:17.6), "I still think you're not really answering the question about what you would do. Let me ask you this." ZP (10:21.0), "I think I do." NR (10:21.6), "Would you deal with, for example, a candidate who says Jewish people fear hate because they know they should be hated. Another one who suggested that the attacks on the ambulances was a false flag and carried out, presumably by Israel. Another of your candidates who blamed Israel for the Bondi beach terrorist attack." NR (10:41.0), "A fourth candidate who said Donald Trump was, quote, owned by Jews. And most horrifying of all, although this individual has now been arrested, one of your candidates who Reposted something saying ramming a synagogue isn't anti Semitism, it's revenge." NR (10:56.8), "What are you, Zach Polanski doing to end these disgusting messages?" ZP (11:03.5), "Those messages are all unacceptable and it's important to condemn that. The Green Party are an anti racist party and it's important that we stick to our values." NR (11:11.0), "We can't just say the words were an anti racist bar to. And I've just read you out five of the most revolting comments at a time when, according to an independent advisor, we face a national emergency of anti Semitism. I'm asking you, you're not responsible for everything they say. Of course you're not." NR (11:26.3), "You can't be." ZP (11:27.3), "I am responsible, actually." NR (11:28.2), "What are you going to do about it?" ZP (11:29.0), "I am the leader of a party. I was about to finish my sentence." NR (11:31.5), "Forgive me. Go on." ZP (11:32.4), "We're an anti racist party. And so what I've already committed to doing is making sure that we have a standardised vetting process in future. And also make sure that we have compulsory training of all our candidates to make it clear that anti Semitism is completely unwelcome in the Green Party as it is in society. It is also important to say one case of anti Semitism is one too many." ZP (11:50.5), "This is a handful of cases and actually we have over 4,500 candidates, the vast, vast majority of which are doing amazing work in their communities right now, going out there to tackle the cost of living crisis, to make sure that we're funding public services and making sure that it's about people power and community, grassroots power." NR (12:05.1), "You can dismiss one or two as, just, unrepresentative. I've just read five. I could have read 20 cases of revolting anti Semitism posted by your candidates. Now you're a new leader, how are you going to avoid becoming the new Jeremy Corbyn of British politics?" ZP (12:21.5), "Well, I think me and Jeremy are very different people and there's much, you know, the question was almost inviting me to condemn Jeremy Corbyn. I think there was lots that Jeremy Corbyn was putting forward to this country that I think was really positive. We've talked about wealth taxes, about public ownership. I also think it's important, speaking, for myself right now, that we make sure that we have this vetting process, that it's really clear that anti Semitism, Islamophobia, any form of hatred or hate, crime is not welcome." NR (12:47.3), "Do you believe that Palestine is, to coin a phrase, on the ballot this Thursday?" ZP (12:52.3), "I think lots of things are on the ballot this Thursday." NR (12:54.6), "But is Palestine on the ballot? This." ZP (12:56.2), "I think it's one of the elements, as is the climate crisis. As is." NR (12:58.7), "What does it mean Palestine is on the ballot? Because. The reason I ask you is because your candidate for mayor of Lewisham says Palestine is on the ballot this Thursday. Haringey Green Party campaign launch video. You might think it'd be about bins, you might think it'd be about schools, hospitals, it might be about cleaning up the roads." NR (13:17.2), "It is a series of councillors saying, as a council, I will take all appropriate steps to, uphold the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. Do you think council elections really should be about Palestine?" ZP (13:29.8), "I think they can be about all of those things. And I think what people have seen in this country is a genocide for two and a half years that our government is still arming, are still sharing intelligence with. And I think lots of people feel very strongly both about their local services, as they should do, and feel equally strongly about the fact that there's a reprehensible genocide happening." ZP (13:48.5), "And they vote, but the way they vote in local elections" NR (13:52.6), "should be determined by their views of Israel and Palestine." ZP (13:56.0), "I wouldn't tell anyone how their vote should be determined, but I think it's an element for lots of people in how they vote." NR (14:00.1), "And do you think that will contribute to community cohesion? Do you?" ZP (14:02.7), "I think yes, because I think, we shouldn't pit Jewish safety against a genocide in Gaza. That's conflating anti Semitism and criticism of the Israeli government. That's something Benjamin Netanyahu does regularly. And as a Jewish person, that makes me feel less safe." NR (14:16.4), "Sure. But there are lots of Jewish people who would say to you they feel unsafe if they feel that their counsellors are motivated first and foremost by Palestine. And if somebody gives that speech, for example, about Palestine being on the ballot, they are likely to think that." NR (14:34.6), "We looked for, example at Barnett Greens, where one in seven residents identify as Jewish. And it includes in its manifesto the fact that, you're standing up for Palestine. Do you think that's going to help?" ZP (14:49.0), "Well, I walk regularly on Palestinian marches with hundreds and hundreds, in fact, thousands of people, many of whom are Jewish. And there have been rabbis who have spoken out on this too. I accept, though, there are Jewish people whose views are equally as valid who, don't agree with those views." ZP (15:04.0), "And I think the job of all of us who are in public life right now is to de. Escalate tensions. And look, how do we bring people together? And I accept that's a huge challenge. And I think one of the ways we could do that is by ending our complicity in the genocide." NR (15:15.4), "Let's turn finally to another issue. We'll talk at greater length when, we're talking about the possibility of you being Prime Minister, which you have said that you would like to do. One thing that is very high on the agenda now is the soaring cost of government borrowing. What would the Greens do to cut it?" ZP (15:30.6), "Well, I think we need to make sure that we're investing. So I think there's two ways of doing that. The first is, wealth taxes, which I know we've rehearsed before, but I'll just say that's for first place." NR (15:38.4), "How does that cut government borrowing?" ZP (15:40.2), "Because ultimately it means you need to borrow less if you're." NR (15:43.0), "If you're ultimately about cutting the cost of government borrowing." ZP (15:45.5), "Yes." NR (15:45.8), "Which is soaring. It's higher than it's been any time this century because people are nervous about high spending, high taxing governments that are politically unstable." ZP (15:54.7), "I think someone who speaks brilliantly on this, who I've spoken to, is the economist Mariana Matsicatu, and she talks about the fact that a government should have a mission that should be a very clear plan of how you tackle the climate crisis, how you reduce inequality. Now, if you have a clear plan and you're borrowing for that, you're taking the market with you because they can clearly see what the return on investment is and how you're bringing money back into the." ZP (16:15.2), "That's how you reduce borrowing levels. If we don't have a plan and continue to borrow, then it feels very, very scattered, and that's why things are getting worse. We need to make sure that there's a consistent plan in place that's set out carefully that can make sure we're putting money back into our communities and investing in those communities." NR (16:29.3), "Do you think you're ready to be Prime Minister?" ZP (16:31.1), "I'm not ready right now, no. I've been leader for eight months, and there's lots of skills and lots of knowledge to get, and I think that's fine. I think I'm a human being. I'm not perfect." NR (16:38.5), "But give it two years, you will be." ZP (16:40.0), "Well, we'll see in two years time, won't we? But I'll certainly be putting in the work." NR (16:43.2), "Zach Polanski, leader of the Green Party in England and Wales, thanks very much for coming into the." ZP (16:46.3), "Thank you, Nick."

Farrukh

165,871 views • 3 months ago