When Is Enough Enough?

Thoughts around the degradation of once prestigious institutions for the cause of promoting diversity, including Cambridge University, the Church of England and the military.

Thank you for listening, God bless you all 

Transcript

Copy Transcript Copied

SPEAKER_02 0:23

Good evening, welcome back to the Flatcat Masless Podcast. This is episode number twenty two, which I'm calling when is enough enough. Now this one will cover a few issues in this one, few things that are bugging me as it relates to the degradation of prestigious institutions and the way that they are being bastardised and perverted and mistreated, all in the name of appeasing minorities, in the name of diversity and equity and inclusion, those you know, three glorious words that we're so used to. And I find it particularly disheartening because it it almost seems like a concerted effort to remove the prestige of these institutions, to remove the very things that made them so exceptional in the first place. So of course the first one I'm going to speak to is the Jason Aday situation. I imagine most of you will have heard of this bloke by now. He's a or was, sorry, a 41-year-old Cambridge professor, uh black fella, who was elevated above his station. He uh has been found to have plagiarised a lot of his work, he was basically largely unfit for the position in which he found himself, a very prestigious one, you know, what one of the most prestigious roles in his field anywhere in the world, really, because Cambridge, Cambridge University, along with being you know one of the top two universities in the UK, is widely regarded as one of the finest institutions of learning anywhere in the world. You know, Oxford and Cambridge, they are the British, Yale and Harvard, you know, they are top-tier universities. And there's always a kind of prestige associated with studying there, let alone teaching there. You know, I mean many of the finest scholars that these aisles have ever produced studied at Oxford or Cambridge. You know, and very few had the privilege of actually moving on to teach there, become professors there. It's really the height of academic, you know, teaching positions within Britain. And this fella, so in the name of diversity and equity and inclusion, he was elevated to his role and celebrated widely as the youngest black professor of Cambridge ever. And unfortunately, he killed himself on Friday. Now I'm not I'm not gorgeous enough to dance on the bloke's grave. I mean it's a crying tragedy that he felt the need to kill himself once his uh his lies and deceptions came under scrutiny. Yeah, and there was a lot of public coverage over the last few weeks regarding this. Um of course that's being spun now into this kind of unlawful, unreasonable witch hunt by if you guessed it, white supremacists and racists that only subjected the bloke to scrutiny because of the colour of his skin. This is of course a very 2D, you know, a very, very low level, low resolution take on the entire situation. Yeah, but when you look into the bloke's past and the things that he claimed, you know, I mean this bloke's life. We would make a hell of a movie. Yeah, diagnosed autistic very early on in life. He claims to have not been able to speak until he was like like 10 years old or something. Couldn't read or write until he was 18, you know, and he's uh has had multiple tumours removed, including a brain tumour, managed to get a PhD with a brain tumour, okay. He claims he ran hundreds of miles, 600 miles in six days, you know, 30 marathons in 35 days, including you know nine of them with a fractured leg. And on the face of it, it's just absurd. You know, the any level of scrutiny really should have identified, yeah, this boat's probably telling a few porkies. Yeah, we've all told tall tales, but this boat really took it to a different level. But it was celebrated hell helpers, you know, this this kind of icon of what you can achieve if you just believe in yourself and keep going, and oh, such an inspirational story, you know. And you don't have to look hard. You can find videos of fellow academics and uh faculty at Cambridge University falling over the bloke and singing his praises and you know all but falling at his feet and kissing the ground that he walks on. And large largely this was due to the colour of his skin. You know, he was absolutely elevated to such a prestigious position, despite not meeting the recruitment requirements for the role, because they wanted to show, hey, we're we're not racist, you know, we have black faculty, we we don't have any qualms about promoting a black guy to this role. You know, we're we're so good. I think this is what a lot of it boils down to is the quality of your character can be defined by how much we'll lift people of different minority backgrounds. Yeah, we we all know this has been going on for a long time. I'm not saying anything, you know, revolutionary here. We all know this to be the case, but I find it fascinating that such a wonderful university as Cambridge would see fit to sink its own reputation, you know, to attach itself so fervently to what is quite obviously a liar and not even a particularly convincing one. You know, and they they got in that boat and they sailed it until it sank. And now they want to look elsewhere to point the blame. You know, now I my my thoughts are with the R Day family, particularly his wife and his children. You know, they they've experienced a massive loss. I wouldn't wish that on anybody. That's horrible. There's also a level of blame that has to be levelled, not so much it his wife and children, who would only have known the version of their father or their husband that he put forward. But what about his what about his mum? Now she would have known he was lying about when he'd learnt how to speak and read and write, about his many, many athletic achievements. She'd have known about this. You know, and these these have been on the public record for years now. He's been very open about them, he stated them over and over and over again in different interviews, and she would have known, you lying sucked Yeah. She would have absolutely known, but kept quiet because it gave him the prestige. You know, and and what do they care that he's defrauding Cambridge with his lies? What do they care that he's being promoted above other more deserving candidates? Yeah, what what do they care? Because they get the prestige that comes with it, they get the accolades, they get the the money that comes with it as well, let's not forget. You know, and it's it's a crying tragedy. But I would say I was thinking about it earlier, and I think Jason Harday didn't die on Friday. And I'm not making a wise joke here. Yeah, I did see somebody say maybe he was murdered and he's just taking the credit for it. Now I'm I'm not saying that, although I did find that pretty funny. But I I think the actual death of Jason Harday occurred when his lies were uncovered. Yeah, the moment the scrutiny started is the moment that he died because everything about the bloke was false. It was all a deception, it was all a pack of narcissistic, self-aggrandizing lies. Yeah, when those lies were uncovered, when Jason Alday ceased to be. And following that, I suppose it was only a matter of time before he ended himself. This is because the lies he told, yeah, he knew full well that he was taking advantage of a system that thrives on this kind of equitable, you know, re redistribution of accolades. This system that rewards black people unnecessarily, promotes them above their station, promotes them to positions where they never should be. And he was more than happy to take the praise and adoration, the fame, you know, if you can call it that, that that came with being the youngest black professor, and he was more than happy to soak up the praise and attention for his so-called achievements. And when those were taken away, well he couldn't live without them. You know, so for the sake of what putting a black man in a higher position, Cambridge not only sunk their own reputation, but also destroyed this man's life. And I feel no joy in talking about the death of Jason Harday. You know, it's horrible that he felt that was his only way out, but this was a prison of his own making. And I find it despicable that people are trying to point the finger at the people that called out his lies. You know, I wanted this Dr. Schola woman, I can't remember her name, but she was saying that anybody effectively that questioned him asked him questions about the veracity of his many, many wild and spurious claims. They're murderers, they killed him. No, no. This situation was brought about by the lies of Jason Hardey, and Jason Harday's life ended at the hands of Jason Harday and Jason Harday along. Yeah, we shoulder no blame in this, but the admission within accusations that that he was hounded to his death by people merely asking questions, the the sort of admitted truth within that is that these people believe that if you question a black man on his obvious lies, if you don't believe him immediately and fully and forevermore, then if anything bad happens to him, you are at fault. And I do find it amazing the ease with which they you know they manage to assign blame to anybody but themselves. He's as much a victim of this woke system as the people that were passed over in his favour. And it really is a tragic situation, but again it's this insistence that we have to debase and degrade prestigious institutions to appease the you know the the secular religion of diversity and racial equity. It's this removal of the institution from its foundations. So Cambridge, they've shown that it's not so much about the education anymore, but propagating the whims of the regime, you know, it's become just another vessel for equity and wokeism. And I find that disgraceful, you know, because the reputation of Cambridge University took a long, long time to build up and it maintained it for a long, long time, and then very, very quickly it's managed to throw it away. Yeah, and contrary to what they might believe, they're not actually doing black scholars any favours. Because the more of these cases come to light where we see people being promoted above their station to a role that they haven't earned, yeah, being given accolades that they don't deserve, well, it's only gonna further future questions. Yeah, it's only gonna cause people's question in the future when they find their next token black person to promote as the best thing since sliced bread, people are gonna ask questions. So it nobody wins in this scenario. You know, nobody's taking a victory lap on this. Yeah, the only person that won for a time was Jason Hardey. Now I suppose maybe the uh his colleagues and the people that gave him the position, they can pat themselves on the back and feel like they're doing a good thing. But look where it's ended up. You know, this insistence on pushing DEI is deadly. And the people that are opposed to DEI, we knew this kind of thing would happen. You know, by by putting people in these positions and holding them up as some kind of token, you're inviting scrutiny. And for, you know, I hate to say, I hate to say it, but I hate to speak ill of the dead, but for compulsive lying narcissists like Jason Hardee, you sought to promote himself by exploiting this collective white guilt that we all have in this country. Scrutiny and subsequent exposure as a liar and a fraud are too much for his ego to take. Well, that was cheerful, wasn't it? So sticking on Cambridge for the time being, you see this thing, they're uh celebrating the installation of some third world squat style toilets in Cambridge. Now anybody that hasn't been to Cambridge, it really is, really is a beautiful little city. It's stunning. Yeah, the centre of Cambridge is gorgeous, beautiful place to be. And they want us to celebrate now that they're gonna be installing, yeah, squat style toilets, the kind you find in India, you know, holes in the grounds, put the shit in. This is what it's come to. And this is seen as progressive and a great leap forward because it's a style of toilet preferred by some minorities, uh, tourists who who come to Cambridge. And once again, it's this degradation of the prestigious and the beautiful to appease foreigners, minorities that will never appreciate it. Yeah, I mean I don't doubt that there's a lot of foreign tourists that go to Cambridge because it is such a beautiful spot and it's prestigious and its connection with the university and all these things, yeah, make it a great spot for tourism. But there's a hole in the ground for shit in, does that make it a great spot? Does that improve it in any measurable way? No. But they want us to celebrate it anyway, because once again, it's installing parts of a foreign country, a foreign culture, a foreign way of doing things into our prestigious and beautiful places. And I find it disgraceful, I really do. You've got to pay for the privilege to shit in the hole, of course, but um I really don't see what value this adds. You know, i i if they want to shit in a hole in the ground, there's many, many countries where you can go and do that. We don't need England, and particularly a beautiful place like Cambridge, we don't need this to become one of them. You know, it's only a couple of steps removed from designated shitting streets like they have in India. Yeah, if we go that far, why not just go the whole hog and have cowshit festivals like they do in India? Yeah, what's the difference at that point? You know, I I'm all for sharing cultures, sharing ideas and things like that. But some of them, it's like no, we we've progressed actually from holes in the ground. We we came away from that quite a long time ago, actually. We found a much better system for doing it. Yeah, and I think we should stick with that. I don't think we should be backtracking on ourselves in the in the name of uh you know appealing to Indians and third worlders who can't figure out how a toilet functions, and if you think I'm joking with that, I'm absolutely not. How many places, public places, have you been in? And in the toilets there'll be signs stuck on the walls showing you how not to use the toilet so you don't stand on the seat and squat, you know, you i it it really is baffling. Because when I first started seeing them, I thought, who are these signs for? What why have you got that sign there? You know what I thought it was another stupid little thing, like the you know, caution, contents hot signs that you get on your coffees whenever you buy 'em. I thought it was gonna be something daft like that, you know, uh, they gotta they gotta do this so that they're not liable if somebody decides to stand on the toilet seat, falls over and snaps an ankle. But no, no, it's for the uh third worlders that are here to enrich and our society, it's to tell them how to use it. We really are sliding backwards. So that's Cambridge. One of the most beautiful spots in the country and yeah, you can go there if you want to pay for a shit in the ground. Wonderful. Yeah, another another institution is now as you guys know I'm Catholic, so I don't really care all that much about the Church of England. You know what I care in so much as there's still my Christian brothers and sisters. I want the salvation of all Christians, all people. But the Church of England, the the upper management, let's say, once again, it's an example of a an institution, a great institution, instrumental in the development of our great nation and the civilisation that we enabled as a result of that. The Archbishop of Canterbury, you see her, she's gone on a tour of Africa where she's apologising profusely for slavery. As if that hasn't been done enough, as if we haven't apologised enough and helped out enough, you know, a as a form of reparation. As if we haven't sent enough aid and you know medical supplies and food and clothing and yeah. I mean where all those Africans get their 2009 Manchester United t-shirts if it wasn't for Western aid. But no, she has to go over there and make a a big show of it as as if she's actually somebody important, you know, which she's not, she's just LARPing as a minister. Yeah. But she's over there apologising again and again and again and again for slavery. And I I'm sick of it at this point. You heard me make this argument and other people make this argument. I was never a slaver, you were never a slaver, and these people she's apologizing to were never slaves. Now if we were to step back, cut all involvement with Africa, these people would be infinitely worse off than they are now. Yeah, we paid our dues, if ever there were any to pay. And you remember a while back I did a an episode on African ingratitude, and that still holds true. Never once, never once have I heard an African say thank you for ending slavery. Because the truth is, when we ended it, they didn't want to end it. Yeah, for them, it's it's as natural as breathing. I really do mean it, if we stepped back from Africa, caught all Western involvement, built a massive wall around Africa and left it to its own devices, within a generation slavery would be running rampant once again, because that's how they do things. Yeah, and African morality, despite heavy you know, Christianisation, African morality is of a different kind, to a point where many African countries see no issue with rape, and we see this reflected in the statistics. You know, they are so much more likely to rape and sexually abuse people, sexual assaults, everything, yeah, whether in Africa or when they come here to the West. Their morality is different. I'd say if we left them to their own devices within a generation, slavery would be thriving once again on the African continent. Yeah, and even when they come to the West, even in the 21st century, they're not opposed to slavery. Anybody remember that diplomat a while back? Yeah, she got uh she got arrested for having a slave in the UK. Yep, full on slavery in the 21st century, and she tried to claim diplomatic immunity. For it. So this is part and parcel of their way of life. You know, it's not some concept that was introduced to them by the white man. It wasn't some evil thrust upon them. It was the way they do things. And if we stopped but stopped having involvement with them, they would immediately return to slavery because it's what they do. So for her to go over there, yeah, this Archbishop of Canterbury, LARPing as a serious minister, for her to go over there and prostrate herself on behalf of the English people, on behalf of Western people, Christian people, for an institution that those people never wanted to get rid of and would happily return to given the opportunity. Shows once again that the Church of England has been removed from its foundations of propagating the Word of God and now serves to bring wokeness to the Church and fuel the fire of racial resentment that is the cultural currency of the hour. That's all it serves to do. The more these people, you know, propagate these slavery narratives and continue to apologize for it and float the idea that, you know, maybe we should pay reparations as if we haven't already done enough. The worse that fire is going to get, you know, the third world long ago learnt to cry racism and oppression in order to get what it wants from the civilised, decadent, weakened Western world. They know how to play the game. And we just keep allowing them to do it. And guilt trippers constantly, yeah, slaveries are the worst thing that's ever happened in the in the history of the world. And they're never going to say thank you to the people that stopped it. No, they're going to keep turning up with their hand out, asking us for more money, more resources, which they squander through corruption and ineptitude. And this needs to stop. And for the Archbishop of Canterbridge to go over there fueling that fire, it serves no purpose. There's never going to be any progress. Well, the African is taught to stand there with your hand out and your problems will go away. You know. That's the church. The military. Another once prestigious institution that's been reduced to crawling on its knees begging people to join. You know, I I see these army recruitment ads, and they're always they're always talking about what's in it for me. You know, I but I feel like this is a failure to understand the fundamental nature of the men who historically have joined up for the military. You know, they're not interested in diversity, they're not interested in wokeness, they're interested in serving and defending their country. Now after decades of you know the rejection of nationalism and patriotism, the demonization of anything approaching patriotism, is it any wonder they're having trouble getting people to sign up? Would you want to sign up for an institution that serves a country you have been told is evil and through your entire life you have been taught that your country is the devil, yeah, and and you want to sign up to fight for it? Bad person. Well then, when the time comes, why would you? A few years back they did these recruitment drafts to try and get more minorities into the armed forces, and they went off on this campaign of uh demonising the white only recruits that were applying because very few minorities were actually going for it. Yeah, I think the Air Force was one where they complained about only useless white recruits signing up. Suddenly, when you know the military situation worldwide globally started to look a little bit more precarious, well that attitude disappeared and they came back with a biggie bowl. I think maybe it had something to do with the fact that despite their attempts to recruit Muslims into the military and to diversify the armed forces, they found that more Muslims joined ISIS than signed up with the British Army. Yeah. So they were appealing to people who fundamentally do not feel themselves to be part of our country. And you know, fair enough. I agree. I wouldn't expect Muslims to join the armed forces because they know deep down this is not their country. That's why most of them more British Muslims signed up to join Islamic State than the British military. And they realised they might have fucked up by demonising the patriotic young white men who have always served. Yeah, so now they're embarked on this project of well, what's in it for you? And you know, there's a lot to be said for the skills you can learn in the army. You can learn, you know, there's one going around at the minute where a bloke's saying, What was in it for me? Well, I learned to wire this whole building. Hey, that's great. You know, learn skills that set you up for a decent career after the military. Great. But I've seen other ones. They get some uh some really, really black dude and say, Oh, what's in it for me? And he says, Oh, I learned how to talk to people. And it shows him going back to talk to his old school teacher and saying, Yeah, I've even got the confidence to talk to you, sir. So, yeah, marvellous. You what you went to the army and learned how to have a chat. You know, there's one with the bloke saying, you know, football was always everything for me, and and joining the military, or I get to play football with my mates. Uh is this a military recruitment ad? Playing football. Is that why you join the military? Now most most people they join the military because they love their country and they wanted to serve it. But once they've seen, you know, generations now of politicians going after them in the courts for decades after they've left the army for actions that they undertook at the behest of that government, why would they join up? You know, the the the sense of duty and and honour has been disparaged. Yeah, it's now no longer about what can you do for your country, but what's in it for you. You know, it's been removed once again from its initial foundation. The military was always about protecting, promoting the interests of your nation. Whereas now it's no no no, have a chat, become an electrician, play football. So you know where else you can do those things? On a building side, not the football part, but you can make friends with whom to play football. The the sense of wanting to defend the honour and the interests of your nation seems to have gone the way of the dodo. Yeah, and and it's thanks to attitudes promoted by the establishment, by the government, by society at large, where anything patriotic and nationalistic is to be scorned. Yeah, and then they wonder why they can't get these people to sign up. You know, now I I think a great one. Then they don't have to go overboard with the length of the advert, just show the boats full of fighting age Islamic men crossing the channel, yeah. Play a bit of dramatic music, some some war drums behind it, quick cut to uh ships and speedboats and soldiers deploying, you know, dramatic voice saying your country needs you, join the navy. Job done. And you'll have people signing up, but ah, of course. That would mean that uh they'd have to admit that we're being invaded slowly but surely, day by day. Yeah. Our old military bases, the disused ones that have no military staff on them anymore. Well, they're being used to house the people who are invading us. Yeah, how perverse is that? So you want to fix the recruitment, that's how you do it. You make an appeal to duty, you make an appeal to honour and the defence of the nation. That's how you do it. Not have a chat, play football, become a sparky. That's that's you're never gonna hit your targets with that. But of course, proper recruitment would be contingent on proper funding and equipment, wouldn't it? Yeah, so instead of sending billions upon billions upon billions abroad or spending it on welfare for migrants, or billions for you know, keeping illegal immigrants in hotels and giving them phones and haircuts and gym memberships and days out to you know national trust sites, give it to the military. Let them develop, modernise, expand, yeah, to meet the needs of the nation. Pretty simple, really. But on the topic of these illegal immigrants, did you see uh Edwina Curry, yeah, former Conservative Minister Edwina Curry talking about the brothels that that these illegal immigrants might need. She's saying it's it's tongue in cheek, but um yeah, she she gave an interview and she was saying, you know, there's this little village, it's got about uh 800 people, and they they're thinking of dropping 1200 boat people on their doorstep, pretty much all of them fighting age men. And she was saying that they might need to open a brothel in the village, this little historical village, yeah, I think it's in Oxfordshire. Open a brothel to service the needs of these people that have broken in here, and I'm thinking, what are you talking about? Yeah, first of all, it's not legal to operate brothels in this country, and I think that's a good thing. You know, I don't I don't think it should be. We we certainly don't want to be promoting the world's oldest profession, do we? But she's advocating for, seemingly, the laws to be bent to allow brothels to be provided for people that broke into our country illegally, who were then given money from the government against the wishes of the taxpayer, which they will then be able to spend in a brothel. Yeah. Now what tell me uh decency morality aside, what does this do? Well it provides a huge incentive for more and more people to come here if they believe all you gotta do is get on a boat in France, yep, leave France, which that's a blessing, whichever way you look at it, leave France, get to England, or even just get somewhere near it, and then they'll have to come and save you. And then they will put you up, they will feed you, clothe you, give you a gym membership, and they will give you money to go and spend in a brothel. And the idea behind this beating, it will protect the women of the village because if these men have their sexual needs satisfied, they won't have to go and rape women and children. So I I I am I just am I mad? Nobody's seeing the the sheer lunacy of that kind of proposal, tongue in cheek or not. Bend your laws to allow people that shouldn't be in your country to engage in unlawful activities at the taxpayers' expense. You've lost the plot, woman. Yeah, now I I've seen people pointing out Edwina Curry's Jewish ancestry. Yeah, now as far as I'm aware, she's not a practising Jew. She doesn't particularly like religion, she doesn't consider herself to be religious. Yeah, although she uh certainly is a member of the Jewish diaspora, she was a member of you know the conservative movement, Friends of Israel. And it just has to be acknowledged, you know, I am sick to death of members of the Jewish diaspora trying to shape the narrative on what we can and cannot do. Alright. And I'm not attributing it solely down to Judaism. Yeah, I mean I've already said enough to be labelled an anti-Semite, so no point couching my language, is there? You know, but uh so I I'm a Christian. So as a Christian, I reject the Jewish faith. And I I reject the Muslim faith. I believe in Christianity, in the divinity of Christ. So by definition, I suppose I'm an anti-Semite anyway, because seemingly, yeah, anti-Semitism is just not affirming every opinion held by any member of the Jewish diaspora. Same as being Islamophobic is failure to sufficiently appease Muslims. So, you know, they're gonna call me those things anyway. But it does seem a little bit strange to me that on all these contentious issues, you know, whenever there's an opinion put forward that will further the destruction of our culture, our society, there's always a member of the Jewish diaspora telling us how we can and cannot feel about it or what we should and shouldn't do. You know, there's there's people like Melanie Phillips, she's a uh British Jewish writer, and she will tell you how unique you know Jews are and uh how they have a unique link with their land, you know, meaning Israel. And she will tell you that they can be, you know, meaning Jews, and also Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, you name it, they can be just as British as you or me. Yeah, never mind the fact they're like, you know, Sikhs and Hindus, pretty much exclusively Indian. Yeah, so by definition they cannot be as British as you or I. But she looks at it from the civic point of view, you know, British identity is a civic identity, she says. But uh Jewish identity, no no no, that's unique, that's you know, they it's ethnic, cultural, and religious, and they have an ethnic, cultural, and religious link with Israel. Therefore, they're allowed a homeland that advocates for the uh betterment and protection of its own people, but we are not allowed the same. Yeah, she she expands on this. Yeah, you know, she mentions the Israeli identity being more of a civic identity, you know, you can be Arab Israeli or Jewish Israeli, whatever. So in in those terms, the British civic identity is a piece of paper that says you are British, and there's no in her worldview, there is no ethnic component. But let's just accept that at face value, yeah. So so in this instance we will equate uh the British civic identity with the Israeli civic identity. So within that there are uh the ethnic components, yeah. So the Jewish component, which is ethnic, there is an ethnic element to Judaism within the Israeli civic identity, I don't think based on her logic that it matters if Jewish people disappear entirely from Israel. That doesn't matter. Because she doesn't think it matters if my ethnicity disappears from within the British civic identity. One of us would be labelled a virulent, horrible, deplorable, beyond the pale anti-Semite and you know irretrievably racist person. The other one scot-free. Yeah, there's kind of assumption that things that Jewish people say cannot be wrong. You know, if they advocate for policies that would destroy one ethnicity, it doesn't matter because they are in their own view and in the view of many others, privileged and special, and it probably traces back to the Holocaust. Now, I'm no fan of the Holocaust, you know, shouldn't have to be said, but you know, uh I as I've obviously outed myself as an anti-Semite, I I suppose I should, you know, I should disavow the Holocaust. But um yeah, uh based on that, based on the horrible things that happened to Jewish people, you know, in the middle of the 20th century. Now I'm not allowed to advocate for the interests of my own home nation, my own ethnic people, you know, my ancestry. I'm not allowed to advocate on behalf of them because some bad things happened to her ancestors. Then you find this quite a lot. You find a lot of Jewish people that uh they will vote for leftist policies because leftist policies tend to be open borders, or at least you know, more pro-immigration these days. It's not always been the case, but we'll get into that on a different episode. So they look at it through the lens of, well, my ancestors were able to come to this country because, you know, of immigration. So I can't possibly take an anti-immigration stance, otherwise I'd be spitting in the face of my ancestors, while also expecting me to spit in the face of my ancestors. It's a really jumbled position. You know, we've spoken before about how these very same left wing pro-immigration policies are bringing in people that despise Jews, you know, to a level that I would never reach. And then they use the inevitable subsequent rise in anti-Semitism as a cuddle to further bash my people, my ethnic group. I can't make it make sense. But um so I'm no fan of political Judaism the same as I'm no fan of political Islam. Now, this doesn't mean I don't treat these people with respect, you know, I treat everybody with the inherent dignity that they are worthy of, you know, as creatures of God. I I'm not anti Jew. But I would say I'm anti Judaism. I'm not anti Muslim, but I am anti Islam. I'm not anti immigrant, but I am anti immigration. Yeah, maybe a trivial difference, but uh mean something to me. One of the only groups that I categorically despise are illegal immigrants. Yeah, that come here under the under the guise of being refugees and asylum seekers. Because we've seen that that's not what they are. They're coming to us from countries that have no war going on and they are using the most spurious excuses enabled by the lefties and the human rights lawyers. They they come here making claims, and their sole intention is to defraud and rob us. Yeah, and some of them, worse than that, as we spoke about last time, some of them are here to do violence against us, you know, to subjugate us under the boots of Islam. Yeah. Now, I have no issue with genuine refugees, you know, women and children fleeing the Ukraine war. We can make a space for you. When the war's over, you go back. But for people that come here illegally and claim to be asylum seekers, so no no no, if if you have a valid asylum claim, you can make it before you get here. But just by turning up here, you have disregarded our laws, and you are expecting hardworking people who are struggling to get by to foot the bill for your existence, and then you get people like Edwin Ocurry saying we should provide brothels for these people, yeah, it's disgusting. Yeah, you get people like Andrew Gold as well, you know, it's the same supremacy for Jews in Israel. But if you, as an Englishman or a Scotsman or a Welshman, you want to be ruled by a member of your own people, you're living in the past, mate. You can't have your own country. You can only have your country insofar as it is willing to serve the interests of the Jewish people, and I fundamentally disagree with that. Same as I do with you know, when the same argument comes from Muslims. I disagree with it. You know, I try and be consistent, which is why I'm against halal and kosher slaughter. So I guess that makes me Islamophobic and anti-Semitic. Well, we're tickling a lot of boxes today, and say halal, kosher slaughter, another example of laws that we have to make specific carve-outs for members of different religions. It's this degradation of laws also really pisses me off, actually, because you know it's our legal system that that formed the basis for many successful legal systems all around the world. Yeah, but once again, you'll see efforts to remove this institution from its you know a foundation of justice. So the justice system is no longer about justice, it now operates in service of the spreadsheet that we spoke about before. It operates in service of getting down the backlog of criminal cases, it's been removed. From its sense of history and heritage. Yeah, this nanny state that we live under enforces a molycodling effect whereby we have minimal responsibilities except to pay more taxes. And then because it's not our responsibility to preserve the foundation of justice that was the existential purpose of the justice system, it's therefore easier to remove our right to a trial by jury, for example. Something that David Lammy, the former Justice Secretary, was very hot on. Yeah, because that would make it easier to speed people through the judicial process, thereby cutting the backlog so they could turn around and say, Look, what a great job we've done. Yeah, and what what would a Caribbean man of what I believe is Ugandan descent, what would he care for the ancestral judicial heritage of the British people? Well what would he care? Nothing to do with him. Because it's not his country, it's not his heritage. Yeah, but if he can remove you from your heritage and he can you know sever your your connection with the responsibilities handed down to you, well he can also remove your rights. Yeah. And this is what we see over and over and over again. These fine institutions that we used to be able to be proud of. Well, they're removed from their original foundation and they are they are twisted into the service of the state, of this establishment, you know, that that sees everything as effectively a building block for its own, you know, proposed utopia. And I despise it. I really despise it. You know, I firmly believe that Western civilization was built upon the shoulders of the giants who came before us. Yeah. We've entered this decadent stage. And other people that are standing on the shoulders of the Western giant are seeking only to bring it to its knees by sheer weight of numbers. This is why we see constant debasement, degradation, and grovelling, all at the feet of diversity, all at the feet of minorities and and different you know ethnic groups and minority groups, special interest groups that care nothing for us, nothing for our heritage, nothing for our history, and nothing for our future. And I'm just gonna leave you with this, not not only because I've been trying to figure out a way to get Christopher Walker on the podcast for a while, love the bloke's voice, what can I say? Well, I think it's also pretty iconic speech, I would say. So give this a listen, let me know what you think, and I'll catch you on the next one. Goodbye.

SPEAKER_00 46:36

You watch those nature documentaries on the cable? Yeah, you see the one about lions? Yeah. Look at this lion.

SPEAKER_01 46:48

He's the king of the jungle. Huge man out there. He's laying down under a tree in the middle of Africa. He's so big, he's so hot. He doesn't want to move. Now, the little lion comes, they start messing with him. Biting his tail, biting his ears. He doesn't do anything. The lioness. She starts messing with him, coming on, making trouble. Still. Nothing. Now, the other animals, they notice this. They start to move in. The jackals. Barking at him, laughing at him. They nip his toes and eat the food that's in his domain. They do this. And they get closer and closer and bolder and bolder. Till one day that lion gets up and tears the ship. And everybody runs like the wind, eats everything in his path. Because every once in a while the lion has to show the jackals. Oh, yes.