Hearts of Oak Podcast

Cambel McLaughlin - Jam for Freedom: Standing for Mental Health, Peace and Choice

Show Notes and Transcript
Founder, Cambel McLaughlin joins Hearts of Oak to discuss the upcoming, and second Jam for Freedom Festival and he shares his journey as a musician and English teacher. We examine the roots of the movement that was created in response to COVID tyranny and lockdowns and despite challenges and arrests, Cambel remains dedicated to spreading positivity through music and has received high praise and help from the legends Eric Clapton and Van Morrison.We explore the festival's organisation and artists, featuring the likes of our good friends Right Said Fred and the awesome Five Times August and the many workshops and talks highlighting community spirit and underlining music's role in promoting freedom and unity.
In the midst of lockdowns in June 2020, Cambel McLaughlin took his portable drum kit and speaker out to local parks to bring cheer and smiles to Londoners. This then developed into weekly outdoor free gigs named 'The Outside Jam' until the winter cold stopped them. In December of that year further COVID tyranny and draconian measures increased against musicians and the general population with another lockdown. Cambel then changed the name of his project to 'Jam for Freedom', his aim being to bring the world’s musicians together in a day of solidarity, called the ‘Jam for Freedom Day’. It was the first of many.After several months of tireless touring around the UK and Ireland with pro-freedom musicians, the project received international recognition from rock and roll great Eric Clapton. Van Morrison’s Rhythm and Blues Foundation also supported their cause, giving funds to upgrade their modest busking rig, but what propelled the project to international awareness was Eric Clapton featuring JFF in his music video for ‘This Has Gotta Stop’. Cambel instantly received emails from across the world from people wanting to join in, going from having two chapters in Ireland and the UK, to having 15 and growing.
Jam for Freedom Festival 2024August 8th- 11th | St Albans, Hertfordshire
See Right Said Fred, Joseph Arthur, Five Times August, Sons of Cream and enjoy 4 days and nights of 150+ liberating performances, workshops, panels, comedy and pantomime plus all-day children's entertainment and activities!
TICKETS   jamforfreedom.com/festival
Connect with Cambel and Jam for Freedom...WEBSITE            jamforfreedom.comX                         x.com/jamforfreedom
Interview recorded  22.5.24
Connect with Hearts of Oak...X/TWITTER        x.com/HeartsofOakUKWEBSITE            heartsofoak.org/PODCASTS        heartsofoak.podbean.com/SOCIAL MEDIA  heartsofoak.org/connect/SHOP                  heartsofoak.org/shop/
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com and follow him on X/Twitter twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin 
TRANSCRIPT
(Hearts of Oak)
Hello, Hearts of Oak.
I am delighted to have a brand new guest with us today of a musical flavour, which we'll get into that, and that's Cambel McLaughlin.
Cambel, thanks so much for your time today.
Thank you so much for having me, Peter.
Great to have you on, and I've seen, obviously, the second Jam for Freedom Festival is coming up, and obviously people can find it there, jamforfreedom.com, and @JamForFreedom is the Twitter or X handle and that is from the 8th to the 11th of August in St Albans.
We'll get into all of that, but I just wanted to make sure the viewers and listeners were aware that all the links are in the description.
But if you are around and want to have a great time at three, four days with a great lineup, musical lineup, then go check out the website, have a look and be part of, It looks like an amazing three, four days.
And it was Fred Fairbrass actually messaged me and said, hey, you need to have Cambel on.
I said, oh, yes, Cambel.
I've seen the event last year, Jam for Freedom.
So, it's great to have you on, Cambel.
But before we get into that, before we get into your arrest in 2021, which is a mark that quite a number of people now carry of standing up against the authoritarian regime.
Before that do you want to just give us a little bit of your background introduce yourself before we get on to Jam for Freedom.
Yeah, thank you I'm 29 years old I was 25 years old when I started, what then became the Jam for Freedom in 2020.
I traveled for a few years playing as a musician working as an English teacher in Australia Japan and on a cruise ship; lived in London.
You know, I've kind of been around, really proud of my country, really proud of, you know, what this country means and the freedoms we have and our heritage and just traveling abroad really cemented that as a young man, and so coming back and moving to London in 2018, I think I was about maybe 23, 24, at that time.
You know, as I said really, really, proud to be from here and just was like right I'm going to work really hard.
I'm going to start focusing on music as well on the side and so I started busking in London and I was doing really well.
I was, you know, making a really good bit of change and, you know, it's really rewarding, you know, when you're jumping on the streets busking; it's kind of like the harder you work the better you work, the more money you make, and the crowds were were getting big in Leicester Square in Trafalgar Square which is where I was performing around Christmas time and other times.
So, it's really fun, and I saved all my money, and then I put all my savings savings into starting like a weddings band.
We filmed everything, you know.
I auditioned everybody, we had a really good lineup, you know, loads of different singers and sax players and, you know, it was like a nine-piece band or something like that.
And then it was march 2020 and it was just, you know, I was just about to launch it all and then all of a sudden there's this this flu apparently and everything must stop and so that that kind of confused me because I thought this is just a flu right.
It's just going to be a couple months, okay, I'll just, you know, work from home or whatever for a bit.
Can I throw in, exactly where...exactly t he same issue, we started 20th of February 2020, exactly the same.
All these great plans that get burned and you have to start over, so I understand exactly your feeling at that time
Yeah, and I just still kept that hunger, you know, I was still like I'm not gonna let this stop me, and so, I started this project called the Outside Jam around June time and it was just basically me going around with all my busking gear in a park in in East London where I lived, and just bringing a party and people would come from from the area and just just party in the park and just, you know, families;it's family friendly.
We were just trying to just raise people's spirits we weren't really...
I just believed it was just going to be a few months of, you know, people just getting over this little flu and then you know obviously the governments were planning to do a lot more than on that.
But then it evolved and we kept doing that every week, and I got musicians from all over London would come in and perform and jam and, you know, people would share the microphones and no one was really getting sick, which was funny.
And then as the lockdowns intensified in December 2020, then I changed the name of it to Outside Jam to Jam for Freedom.
And then on the day of the so-called lockdowns on December 20th, which was when the whole of the UK was locked down.
I was like, no, we're going to, we're going to do jam for freedom.
And then I did the first one in a park, same concept, you know, busking musicians coming out, although less musicians wanted to join in at that point, it was just a handful, it was really just one other drummer.
So, then I had to learn how to kind of sing a bit.
So, it was just me.
I was, you know, I was normally the drummer.
I was forced into all these different roles that I had never done before.
And then I thought, you know what, let's, let's take this a step further.
Let's travel across our beautiful country and go wherever we want on the streets in the parks and let's Jam for Freedom there and let's get musicians from all over and let's try and make it international, let's try and make all the countries of the world go out on the streets and Jam for Freedom; let's do it all together on the same day, the same week, let's make a movement.
And I just kept pushing for that idea and eventually we did go on a UK tour.
We fundraised a little bit of money to get a motor home that a few of us could could sleep in and shower in, because at that point there was no...
You couldn't even go to a hotel, right, to even, you know, you couldn't book in hotels anywhere.
So, we did that and from December, then it's the tour kicked off in January, and then it's just been going on for like three years or three and a half years I suppose and then we have got international chapters now and people are Jamming for Freedom on in different countries and 15 international chapters.
And it's just kind of developed into this festival where we really want to celebrate musicians that are free-thinking individuals and creatives and positive change makers and thinkers and workshop hosts and comedians.
And that's what we have at our festival this year so it's a massive lineup.
Sounds a world away from busking. Do you ever miss the simplicity of just going out busking and just doing that yourself?
Yeah, it was funny.
I mean, when I was always busking, I did feel a bit like, because, you know, you're playing the popular songs, you're playing, you know, the Hollywood trendy stuff.
It always felt a bit like, I don't want to play this forever.
I want to write my own music.
I want to make, you know, make something different. And so...
I couldn't really go back to it now, because it doesn't feel right to me.
But I mean, yesterday, no, it wasn't yesterday, two days ago, we did a gig in support of Press Freedoms and Julian Assange.
So, we played outside the courtroom there and we kind of just freestyle.
So, we might play like another Brick on the Wall by Roger Waters and then we might just adjust the lyrics, you know, about certain things.
So yeah, I mean we kind of, we might, use old songs and then freestyle it, so we kind of have that element of what busking was and the simplicity, but we just kind of bring it and adjust it, I suppose.
mean it it sounds like a very natural thing for a musician to want to share their music but obviously uh 2021I've I followed it and you got arrested.
What was your crime?
Yeah, so that was part of the UK tour um and that was in February 2021, that was our first UK tour with the motor home, and I got arrested and accused.
I mean there was there was a few hundred people of us in a park having a good time and I think it was it was organized.
It wasn't organized by me, but it was organized, I don't know, maybe a few days before: everyone let's go to this park in East London and West London.
And so I turned up there with some amps and my drum kit and an Irish guitarist called Alan and some other musicians jumped on, and it was just me and a few other people that I had personally invited, but I got arrested and accused of organizing the whole thing, which I didn't, and then I went to court and I was like: "I didn't do it all I just, I just posted about it the night before, hey, let's jam for freedom here."
And then it got stamped on me.
So yeah, that was really sad because, well it was a bit eye opening because, you know, the reason, one of the reasons I started Jam for Freedom is because of my scepticism of, you know, governments and their, corruption and what they're doing to Europe and what they've done to the world and what what they're still doing.
It was kind of like: oh, yeah, I was right, you know, because the judge was interrupting me.
He wouldn't let me finish.
He was saying, oh did you write your speech?
Did you write your, I can't remember what it's called, your testimonial, you know, my defence or something.
Yeah, your statement your defence.
My statement, you know, did you write that?
Oh, because I was quoting as well, previous, like law suits or litigation which proved that it wasn't a crime which was all valid and he was interrupting me and telling me: oh that's not relevant.
And even even quoting like the English constitution and talking about the right to petition which is in the commonwealth countries.
You know, you have a right to protest and that supersedes, you know, all the other laws to a degree, right?
As long as you're not disturbing peace, which I wasn't, you know, we, I just, I didn't organize it.
At the end of the day, whatever they were accusing me of, it wasn't true, but they just slapped cut on me and I got fined.
They tried to fine me for 10 grand, but we got it reduced down to about 700 odd quid.
You know, I still got a criminal conviction for jamming in a park with like five other people for about half an hour.
You know, and but, you know, it just just happened that a few hundred people had already organized and planned to go there before even the the music was was on the schedule.
It's bonkers, that court appearance it's bonkers, because uh it's what we've seen certainly over the last four years, it's the establishment looking down.
And I mean, how dare you, or able to put something together in your defence?
You're just a pleb and you're speaking to someone in the system, in the criminal system, who is of a higher echelon in society.
I think we've seen that attitude across the board in the last four years.
Yeah, yeah.
Well, it's just kind of ingrained in...
You know, that kind of culture and, you know, the imperialist ideas.
You know, you have to, squash the rebellions, but I don't really, you know, I don't really care about what they think and how they view me and what their views are because, you know, I believe that what we do is, is far more powerful, far more beautiful, you know, and, and it's a celebration, and you know you can't you can't stop it.
You can't stop us celebrating and having a good time and connecting and spreading the truth.
Yeah.
It's just it's never going to stop me and you know they can be whatever they want to be.
It doesn't matter.
We're going to keep going.
Well, let me bring up, this is the, there we go.
That is the poster with a lot happening, and you've packed a heck of a lot in.
And you can just see that, obviously, August 8th to the 11th.
Let me repeat that, in St Albans.
And all the, if you go onto your Twitter page or the website, everything is there.
But I mean tell us about the event, tell us about what you want to happen, maybe your experiences from the first event, what you've learned.
Tell us about the the first one, what was that like and what were your takeaways from it
I mean our schedule this year is incredible.
You can jump on our website and we've got the whole schedules there, four pages of four different days, you know, there's over 150 different artists and performances and pantomime, comedians, panellists, workshops, every morning and much more, so jump on there and you can see that poster in detail.
Yeah, it was all, I mean I did festivals in my garden growing up.
I don't have a big garden, it's just like the council house garden, but my mum was really, really kind and let us all get together.
So, I've always done festivals since I was a teenager, and I just love that energy of just people getting together that maybe wouldn't have like hung out before.
But they're just kind of like, you know, meshing and they're kind of just getting on sharing a beer.
I just I like seeing unity and peace in the world.
I think we all do, really.
And so yeah, it's been on my mind to to put on a festival for years and then with Jam for Freedom happening it was part of my my plan; okay I'm going to put on festival as soon as I can to celebrate what we're doing.
And last year we did it for the first time.
It sold out, it was it was amazing.
It was very challenging, we worked for many months to kind of get everything sorted in time and, you know, fly in a guests and organize their travel and organize accommodation and organize, you know, there's so many things that are going on.
It could have been a lot better.
We did hire...
We hired a production team and they put a main stage together, which didn't work essentially.
And we were like, you know, you're going to come and fix this.
And they were like: yeah, and then they were like, oh, actually we're going to refund you.
And then I took them to court, because they didn't give me a refund.
I mean, they had really good testimonials and clients.
I don't know what the hell happened.
Took him to court twice and I won on both hearings and they were then, they were then hit with two county court judgments, but they didn't pay me any refund or any compensation and it was a lot of money that they owed me.
So, I had to kind of shoulder all of that responsibility and that difficulty.
But we had an amazing volunteer team an amazing team that we kind of put together like in the moment like right okay we're going to make a new stage in this in this marquee and we you know we basically adapted to the whole situation but obviously when stuff like that happens we had delays but uh this year we've got Right Said Fred's chosen production team who they've worked with on tours, and they've worked with massive artists like number one chart and topping artists.
And they're called Absolute Audio Hire.
So, they're managing the whole production this year of the main stage, which is where all the big stuff happens.
And then we've got an amazing production team that's going to help run the second stage.
So, that was really challenging, but, you know, what could I do?
You know, I hired a company, paid them a lot of money, and they scanned me and I took them to court.
Then they folded their company and went into administration.
So, you know, it's just all these things.
The site we used as well, they didn't, take care of the site.
We tried to take them to court, but they had already closed their company and they were scamming people.
And it was just, yeah, it was just a shame.
But our new site has, it's got, it's got tons of space, it's, it's got enough for 5000 people, but we're keeping it nice and intimate about 500 people.
And it's gorgeous.
It's got like a river running through it.
It's a stone's throw from London and like Luton and Heathrow Airport.
So, it's super accessible for guests from all over.
So, yeah, but it was an amazing time.
Overall, it was, you know, I've got so many emails like this was amazing.
Best festival ever.
I can't wait to come back.
You know, most people have come back from last year and we're just getting through our last tickets now.
But test that organizational side, because I've been an events coordinator back donkeys ago and organized fairly sizable events, but when you look at the number of individuals you have participated; it's one thing to organize a conference with maybe six or eight speakers during the day.
You've got a whole page full and and that's a world away from simply doing the music,now you've got all the organizational side you have to arrange, and I think that most people when they come to that they have no idea really of the work that goes on behind the scenes.
So, I'm sure whenever it was finished you were; it's happened, it's done, I can put my feet up now.
Yeah, I was proud of it, you know, you have that stress, but you have the the pride that you've done it I mean.
I guess from playing on, it kind of what, I'm a bit seasoned for the pressures and the stress from from playing on.
The streets and having police follow you and trying to arrest you, and you know, to stay calm and deal with that pressure.
I mean we had gigs when there was like 24, 27, riot police vans just encircling us, and you know, it becomes a bit of a military operation, because you have to kind of work out; right okay how long can we play for before we think they're going to come and come at us.
"Okay, let's keep let's do one more song, and you know, okay, you've got that drum, you've got that speaker, you know, you're ready to go if we need to beeline out of here, and we've we've done that stuff, so it becomes like, you know, it became kind of like second nature to deal with that pressure.
Also, these these musicians that we work with.
I mean, I know most of them, like I've played with them.
I toured with them, you know, I know them all like and I have an amazing volunteer team and, like amazing stuff that have worked with me and talk with me and toured with these artists.
So, there's loads of cross-pollination with all these musicians from across the world, Of course, England and the UK that we all kind of know each other.
And we all kind of  have got used to that pressure of of the Jam for Freedom gigs, and kind of everything goes on with it, but but yeah; as well as well with the speakers.
You know, I mean, we've done like almost 500 well over 500 shows across the world and that's led to all these different people that I've met and slept at their houses and on their sofas and their spare rooms and, and they're all part of the festival.
Like amazing staff who worked with me, tour with me,
So, it's a real massive community of people from America, Ireland, Europe, etc.
I we've got some Australians coming that are just happening to be in England this year that have done Jam for Freedom shows.
Yeah, it's intense, but at the end of the day it's a beautiful experience and it's a beautiful community, and yeah, I just hope that hope you guys can all come.
We've got really limited tickets now, so jump on, and get the last shoe.
Yeah, 100 percent, we're doing this just a day before it goes out, but certainly I'll repeat: everyone one go and and get tickets and make sure you're you're part of that.
Tells about the people you've met, I mean I've, to me, actually the last four years learning experience for me, media, you're obviously doing these massive events, and it's all about the people you meet, and they're phenomenal people who maybe wouldn't have crossed before, because you're doing one area and they're moving a different area, traditionally, you may not have crossed paths, but because of what we've faced the last four years, it's kind of standing shoulder to shoulder people who you may not agree with everything, but actually there's a lot you can work together on.
And that issue of freedom, free speech, freedom to assembly, all of that.
I mean, yeah, let us know some of those some people like I, you've obviously got the Fred’s there, and I remember thinking this is surreal on the phone chatting to Fred or Richard; on and on.
I think this is just the strangest experience.
But this is what I think the last four years have opened up.
Yeah, definitely.
I mean, I was busking on the streets in central London.
So, you know, I was getting a lot of people following me on social media and I think I had like Pixie Lott, who's an English singer.
She like been tweeting my video or something, but yeah, it wasn't any, you know, I'm just I'm a lad from a council house, and I don't have any famous family or anything, so I mean, having tea with Eric Clapton at his house, that was pretty, that was pretty wild, because I'm kind of nervous, you know mean; like I'm just like this is just; his wife and in meeting his family, and because he, put us...
So, Eric Clapton if people don't know, he used to we well we used to do loads of live streams, so our shows we'd live stream across the world in the lockdowns and people would tune in and, you know, give them a bit of hope and something to enjoy and sometimes they'd pop down, and you you know, be part of the live stream.
Eric was following our live streams and when he saw what happened to us in Hyde park one time when the police ambushed us and damaged some of our equipment and pushed people over and it was I think it was in march maybe it was April 2021, so he was watching that, he donated to help us repair some equipment and then we had a car that was donated; a little people carrier a little cheap cheapo vehicle.
There was a problem with that, it got written off, then I said: Eric can we borrow a van or something and yeah he lent us a tour bus basically um so I went and met him got the tour bus um you know he was just he's just a big fan of us and he was writing music whilst watching our live streams he wrote like the guitar solo to wherever all the rebels gone which he did with van Morrison.
Yeah, I mean that was that was pretty cool to have like Clapton be a fan of what we do and you know.
Hang out with him and go to a studio.
Completely unexpected, you know, because I'm a drummer, and his drummers, and the drummers that he played with are like people I based all my playing on.
So yeah, I mean there's others as well I mean just when we when we go when we go on tour and and i remember state when we went into Edinburgh and we do our gig and then we go halfway through: by the way we don't have any work to stay tonight could someone put us up, you know.
And it just always worked, and so I just never thought, I know, I don't need to plan, where I know I know someone's got a spare room or sofa, and this couple put us up and the woman; beautiful house, they, you know, so we got the proper like Scott's hospitality, it was just, we were so blessed.
You know, the wife was a an ex-head teacher still teaching and then the husband was like an oil rig engineer kind of supervisor type role, you know, he would I don't know, you know, they were smart, really, you know really smart people, and that was the thing is, we'd meet all kinds of people, you know, from all walks of life that, you know.
Perhaps I wouldn't have really kind of got on with or maybe had much common ground with, but all of a sudden we had this common ground because we were all in it together to spread that message out there on the streets and in the parks and have a good time when the police would come up to me and go: excuse, you know, in my ear, when I'm playing in Edinburgh, there's a video of it.
And the police policeman comes up and he goes: can you, I need you to ask people to social distance.
And I go, that's not my job, mate.
Freedom!
Just keep going.
You know, we're all in it together.
We're all just, just having a good time.
So yeah, it's been fascinating and you know, you do meet tons of people on the road and and you know the Assange show a couple days ago, you know, I saw people I hadn't seen in a couple of years.
It's a really nice community, so yeah, good on us all for for getting out there and meeting people when we were supposed to just stay in and as one of my friends, well I was not a friend anymore, he said: I should just sit inside and just eat some biscuits.
I'm like no, I'm going outside, I'm gonna go on a tour mate.
Yeah screw that idea.
I think we've seen a lot of information coming out about the totalitarian regime that we all live under and so you watch individuals giving giving speeches, I mean, I know you've got Tess Lawrie coming in.
I've watched her many times and had her on, but then it's kind of a departure into then looking at comedians and how comedy is used to engage and then looking at how music is used to engage and maybe, I'm kind of thinking more information, so this is about a speech or a presentation that's kind of my background in politics and all of that, but this is something very different.
Give us an insight of how music then, I guess, captures people in a in a completely different way than standing up and maybe doing a presentation which we think well, that's where you get a message across.
Yeah, yeah.
I think it can all be part of the same, you know, it's all part of the same like kind of sphere I suppose.
I mean, I guess when I've, you know, being really proud of my country and being a patriot and, you know, and spending time listening to videos and history and hours and hours of reading, you know, that kind of gives me that foundation of going, you know what, Jam for Freedom is a good idea and I'm going to do it, you know, back in 2020.
So, having that foundation of of that kind of knowledge, and you know, I'm always learning you know, you never know enough do you, but I think that the festival itself is it's kind of a celebration of what how, you know, that that is how Jam for Freedom started.
It started from knowing what; knowing good knowledge, wanting to know more, wanting to do the right thing, wanting to stay healthy, through watching speeches and reading panels and reading books and presentations and stuff.
And then the music is really that kind of icing on the cake, just, you know, so to speak, the cherry on top ,and so yeah we need the whole thing.
The really good thing about our festival program is it's curated in a way so that in the mornings you have the workshops; which is yoga, Falun gong, which you might know about is censored in in communist china.
So, we have all these kind of like...
We're trying to bring like indigenous ideas and and kind of really will help people relax and get healthy so you've got that in the morning um and then it goes into the panels, and then kind of in between the panels there's a break and then some of the music start so you can see all the panels you can do all the workshops and then you can still have like six seven eight eight, nine hours of live music and partying, you know, approximately, it might be a little bit, you know, around that timeframe. So you can have all of it, you know, and if you don't want to watch maybe one of the panels, well, there's an act on, there's an opera singer on, or there's, you know, you don't want to watch one of the live acts, you know, that's a different flavour. You can just watch some comedy.
You know, we've kind of curated it in a way so that you can fit in as much as possible, that you could basically see 90% of it.
And not miss not miss any of it.
Yeah so, that's my view on it and that's what we're bringing this year.
I want to finish off on on the issue of finance, because we live in a world where people are used to getting things for free whether it's media, news, interviews music, people now expect everything free and it's interesting in having that conversation with people to point out that actually everything has a cost.
And obviously putting on a festival like this, it doesn't come free unless someone owns a huge castle and wants to put it on on their ground to pay for it, that there are a lot of costs to put it on.
Just finish on that, because I think it's important that we, who believe, in actually freedom buy into it.
And that does mean buying into it with the money we have available, as well as our time and publicizing these events.
Yeah absolutely.
Yeah, know, where you put your money is where you put your vote in in effect, to the society that you want to build, and you know, in your children's future.
So yeah, support Hearts of Oak and support you know all the great causes that that that are close to your heart because it helps build a better world, and yeah, it is expensive to do what we do you know and to do what you do Peter, you know, with your studio and, you know um you know all the costs attached to it same with the festival it's a huge expense.
But you know we keep costs as low as possible and, you know, the food and drinks affordable, and whatever you know, the ticket the tickets support the musicians: pay for their pay for their travel, pay for their costs, pay for the, you know, comedians pay for the panellists, pay for the workshops, and in the morning and and everything, you know.
So you know you're you're in effect supporting people that support you that support a better world, um and we need to strengthen that and we need we need to be unafraid of creating an alternative economy that um can can rival the mainstream economy um and I've always championed that I've never been afraid to think that and you know even before I was doing jam for freedom
One Christmas, I think it was 20 the Christmas 2019, I challenged myself and I said: right, every gift I buy for my family members is going to be made in the UK and I don't know how much spent, 300, 400 pounds or something, you know, on all these gifts for my family, and I found it all.
The sheepskin shoes made in Devon, you know, the soaps made in in England, the socks made in Yorkshire etc etc.
So I've always been a champion of like. kind of, that you know that we can build our own economies that we can put our money where our mouth is.
With Jam for Freedom, this is a British institution I suppose, it's a British idea, it started here, support it, it's grown across the world, and you know, we're in talks to-do other festivals in in other countries, but yeah, support it, help us grow, and yeah, put your money where your mouth is guys.
It will come back to bless us all and bless the future.
Yeah, I'm sorry one more question, but last one about; so people are thinking of turning up, they're thinking actually, I have kids, I don't know if they can come, I don't know if I can just come for the day, or if I can stay there, camp there, kind of what's the deal with some of those practical questions that people may have?
Yeah, we have day tickets.
We have camping tickets.
We have tickets for people that live local and want to just pop in each day. We have spaces for camper vans, motorhomes.
There's a massive campsite for tents.
We have glamping options.
So, if you just want to come and have a tent all built for you with a proper bed and, you know, it's kind of like a hotel.
It's like a hotel, they're beautiful, that's all there.
We do free tickets for children under 12, um and if you're a carer um of someone that's disabled then you can come for free you just need to send us an email and then we'll just confirm it all so we do loads of free discounted tickets and we have a discount code as well for the last 100 tickets which are on sale now and that code is FINAL100, I believe. FINAL100, yeah.
You can find that on our social media.
And join our mailing list as well, because we do loads of shows.
And we did a really fun show a couple of days ago for Assange in London.
And we do a lot of fun, free shows as well.
Although, I've got a baby now, and I don't live in London anymore.
So, it's kind of like I live up north.
So, it's kind of logistically not as easy to put on all the free shows that we used to, the last couple of years, but yeah, we're trying to do more.
We do other stuff, look we're sponsoring The Better Way fair which is run by world council for health, and we're putting on some bands there we're running a stage, and we've got another gig in Ipswich as well at an organic pub.
So, get on our mailing list and you can see more, but yeah please do support the festival, come along, come and get the final tickets, support Peter and Hearts of Oak. and if you've got any questions just drop us an email drop us a message, because we'd love to have you part of the festival.
Wonderful.
I hope to see people there.
Make sure the viewers and listeners go jamfreedom.com.
Put your details down there so you can be kept up to date with what is happening, not just the festival, but everything else.
And do come and be a part of that in St. Albans, just north of London.
Easy to get to, as Cambel said.
And it's the 8th to the 11th. 8th to 12th or 8th to 11th?
What is it?
8th to the 11th?
Yeah,
8th to the 11th.
Yeah, 8 to 11.
Wonderful, Cambel thank you so much for coming on and sharing love what you're doing.
It's exciting bringing people together, like-minded people, and being able to I guess connect together which is what we've been told is bad and you cannot do over the last four years and it's great to see something so against what we were told to do and something so natural and normal for all of us.
Cambel, thanks so much for your time today.
Thank you Peter
Yeah, jamforfreedom.com, check out all the artists, you can listen to their music as well and see the full schedule, so we'll see you soon.
Thank you so much Peter.

Mike Yardley - Navigating Censorship, Democracy, and the Future of Free Speech

Show Notes and Transcript
Mike Yardley joins Hearts of Oak to discuss his varied background, including military service and journalism, addressing censorship in contemporary Britain, particularly concerning vaccines and lockdowns. We examine the impact of censorship on free speech, social media algorithms, and the consequences of opposing mainstream narratives. The conversation delves into declining democracy, globalist agendas, and the suppression of individual liberties. Mike highlights concerns about powerful entities controlling public discourse and a lack of open debate on critical issues. We end on political changes in Europe and the necessity of open discussions to tackle societal issues, particularly the significance of critical thinking, diverse perspectives, and unrestricted dialogue to shape a better future.
Mike Yardley is well known as a sporting journalist, shooting instructor, and hunter and has written and broadcast extensively on all aspects of guns and their use.His articles (2000+) have appeared in many journals as well as in the national press. He has appeared as an expert witness in cases which relate to firearms and firearms safety. He is a founding fellow of the Association of Professional Shooting Instructors, and has formal instructing qualifications from a variety of other bodies.He is listed one of The Field’s ‘Top Shots.’ He retired from the press competition at the CLA Game Fair after winning it three times.As well as his shooting activities he has written books on other subjects including an account of the independent Polish trade union Solidarity, a biography of T.E. Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia), and a history of the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst itself. He is a contributing author and ‘Special Researcher’ to the Oxford History of the British Army (in which he wrote the concluding chapter and essays on the army in Northern Ireland and the SAS). He is also a frequent broadcaster and has made and presented documentaries for the BBC.Mike has also been involved as a specialist ballistic consultant, and presenter, in many productions for various TV companies including the Discovery and History Channels. He has re-enacted on location worldwide the death of the Red Baron, the Trojan Horse incident from ancient history, and some of the most infamous assassinations, including those of JFK, RFK and Abe Lincoln.Michael has worked a photojournalist and war reporter in Syria, Lebanon, Albania/Kosovo, Africa, and Afghanistan. He was seized off the street in Beirut in 1982 (before Terry Waite and John McCarthy) but released shortly afterwards having befriended one of his captors. In 1986 he made 3 clandestine crossings into Afghanistan with the Mujahedin putting his cameras aside and working as a medic on one mission. In the late 1990s, he ran aid convoys to Kosovan Refugees in Albania and on the Albanian/Kosovo border. The charity he co-founded, ‘Just Help,’ was honoured for this work which took 300 tons of relief to desperately needy people.
Connect with Mike...X/TWITTER        twitter.com/YardleyShootingWEBSITE            positiveshooting.com
Interview recorded 2.5.24
Connect with Hearts of Oak...X/TWITTER        x.com/HeartsofOakUKWEBSITE            heartsofoak.org/PODCASTS        heartsofoak.podbean.com/SOCIAL MEDIA  heartsofoak.org/connect/SHOP                 heartsofoak.org/shop/
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com and follow him on X/Twitter twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin 
(Hearts of Oak)
Hello Hearts of Oak, thank you so much for joining us once again and I'm joined by someone who I've been enjoying watching on Twitter for the last couple of years and delighted that he can join us today and that's Mike Yardley. Mike, thank you so much for your time today.
(Mike Yardley)
Yeah, great to be here and thank you very much for asking me Peter.
Not at all, thoroughly enjoyed. I thought I would But let our audience also enjoy your input.
And we had a good chat on the phone the other week about all different issues. And people can find you @YardleyShooting, which introduces the question, Yardley Shooting. Maybe you want to give just a one or two minute introduction of your background. I know you've written. You have a deep passion and understanding of history, along with many other things. But maybe give the viewer just a little bit of your background.
Well, I've had a wide and varied career. I studied psychology at university. I went to the army. Wasn't really, you know, content in the army. And I resigned my commission in 1980. But I was in the army at a very interesting time. Height of the Cold War. I was on what was then the West German and East German border watching the East Germans and Russians watching us. So an intriguing place. And I really left the army to become a war reporter, a photographer, particularly initially.
And also I went to Poland. I was in Poland for the rise of solidarity. I brought an exhibition back to the UK, which opened at the National Theatre. And memorably with Peggy Ashcroft doing the honours at that event, and Sir John Gielgud as patron. And then I've sort of made my way as an author and as a freelance.
And I've also had a parallel career as an arms specialist. I've written a, probably millions of words in that area, but I've also written the final chapter of the Oxford History of the British Army, essays within that, books on the history of Sandhurst and co-written with another ex-officer, a book about the army, lots of technical stuff, a number of technical books. And I'm very interested in mass communication. I have made in the deep and distant past, some documentaries for the BBC.
I made one on the history of terrorism for the BBC World Service. I made another on the media and the monarchy for the BBC World Service. And I think they actually let me broadcast once on another subject I'm very interested in, which is doubt. So since then, I've made my living with my pen and my camera. I was in Lebanon in the the early 1980s, again, not a good place to be there. And I made several sneaky beaky trips into Afghanistan, not as a soldier, but as a journalist when the Russians were there. And that was a very interesting time too. And, you know, gave me some ideas that perhaps other people didn't have the advantage of that experience. So yeah, quite an interesting career. I'm still a columnist for one well-known field sports magazine, The Field. And I am still at it. I don't know how long I'm going to be at it for. But one of the interesting things, I suppose, for me has been the advent of social media. And I thought social media was going to give me a chance to see what other people were thinking. But as well as what other people were thinking, to give me a chance for unfettered expression. Because I think it would be fair to say that I do feel that you cannot really say what you think in modern Britain. It comes with all sorts of disadvantages. As you get older and maybe you don't need the income as much, then perhaps not as important. You know, you can harder to cancel you as you get older and you don't really care. But I do think that's an issue in modern Britain. I think since the whole advent of lockdown and all the propaganda that was associated with it, and indeed with the Ukraine war, although I'm a supporter of the Ukrainians, I was rather horrified by the extent of the propaganda campaign to get us involved, as I have been rather shocked by all the propaganda surrounding lockdown and COVID, et cetera. And one other key point of my background is that I got very badly injured after I had the vaccine.
I collapsed the next day. I had the worst headache of my life. I was in bed for a month or six weeks. I got a thrombosis in my leg, tinnitus, all sorts of other shingles, all sorts of other horrible stuff. I couldn't really walk. And even as I speak to you now, I've got shingles. I've got this blessed tinnitus ringing in my head, which a lot of other people have had post-vaccination and constant headaches. So I just have to live with that now, which means that you're always having to go through that to talk to people and to get your point across.
Well, I've got a feeling that we may have you on a number of times, Mike, because there's so much to unpack there. But maybe we can start with a comment you made on censorship.
And certainly we've seen this over the last four years. I've noticed in different areas, but specifically since being in the media space, I think since 2020, I've certainly seen it, had seen a little bit back in my days with UKIP during the Brexit campaign also but we have the BBC in the UK I guess they are the gatekeepers of information or have been up until this point and I know they've just the BBC have just done a series on misinformation or extremism and they of someone they employ full-time to actually cover what they see as misinformation and that kind of re-galvanizes their position as gatekeepers. But what are your thoughts on censorship? And I guess where state media fit into that?
Yeah, I've been listening to that BBC series, and there's quite a lot of BBC stuff in that area at the moment. I think the first thing I'd say is this. I used to be one of the main voices heard in the media talking about security and terrorism.
I hardly ever broadcast now. I don't get the opportunity because I'm not on narrative. And I think that's often because I present a nuanced position. And that doesn't seem to be popular in the modern media. Is censorship a problem now? Yes, it is. It's a problem because I can't easily broadcast anymore, having spent many years broadcasting and making lots of stuff for all sorts of different programs, as well as making a few programs of my own. I can't do that anymore. I think I may have made half a dozen or seven Discovery shows as well, but the phone no longer rings. And I'm pretty sure it doesn't ring particularly because I took up a vaccine sceptical position.
And this is where it starts to get, this is the stuff we should unpack because it's really interesting. I was just listening before we started broadcasting to a BBC program that was talking about Russian operations promoting the anti-vaccine position.
Well, I get that. I can see that the Russians have been involved in that. And we can come back to my own Twitter account, where I see clearly that if I put up a comment that is in any way critical of the Russians, it gets no support at all. But it might get probably half a dozen or 10 times as much pro-Russian support. And I've been trying to work out what's going on with that. It's almost as if the Russians have some way of manipulating that particular platform. But on the other hand, coming back to this point about vaccine scepticism, it's not just the Russians who are promoting that. Maybe it was in their interest to do that. But there are people in the UK, myself included, who were genuinely injured by the vaccines and who want to talk about it and feel that their point of view has completely been suppressed by these big social media platforms and by the BBC. It is just a non-subject. They don't really talk about excess deaths. They don't talk about widespread vaccine injury. You hear occasionally about VITT thrombosis with young women who've had these terrible thrombosis in their brains, but you do not hear about quite widespread vaccine injury. Now, I put up a comment on Twitter, do you know of anyone who's had a vaccine injury?
I had something like, well, I think two, it depends on how you count them, but something like two million views, but 6,000 replies, and listing a lot more than 6,000 injuries. Now, I'm sure you can't necessarily take that as absolute gospel, but it is indicative of the fact that many people think they have been damaged by the vaccines, but also they can't talk about it. Their doctors aren't interested in it. The BBC don't seem to be interested in it. What in a free country are we meant to do? Well, we do this. We try and get our message out by other means, but it shouldn't be like that. And this seems to be a trend, this big state authoritarianism with a much more controlled media, which is facilitated by all the digitization that's going on. That is a real issue in modern Britain?
Certainly, we came across that with YouTube putting videos up, and you daren't put a video up on YouTube critiquing the vaccine narrative or the COVID narrative.
But recently, there has been some change. I know that there is legal action against AstraZeneca. I think in the last two days, there have been reports of AstraZeneca admitting that it did in in a tiny amount of cases but they haven't mentioned this before there were side effects. It does seem as though either it's the chipping away of those who've been vaccine injured demanding a voice, either it's been MPs becoming a little bit more vocal, obviously Andrew Bridgen, or it's been maybe a change in Twitter and the information out. I mean how do you see that because it does seem as though the message is slowly getting out?
Well, Facebook's interesting because they've changed their policy, obviously, because before I couldn't say anything, it had come up with a note. And I have in the past had blocks from both Facebook and from Twitter. And I've also had apologies from both. I've done my best, because I don't think I ever say anything that is inappropriate or improper.
That still doesn't prevent you being censored today. But twice, once with Facebook and once with Twitter, I've managed to get an apology out of them and been reinstated. So this is very disturbing stuff. And we're talking about this small number of injuries that are being acknowledged are about these brain thrombosis, the VITT thrombosis, which is an extremely rare condition, to quote an Oxford medic friend of mine. You know, rare as hen's teeth, hardly affects anyone. But it seems that thrombosis more generally, DVT and pulmonary embolism, and other things like myocarditis are comparatively common, and the re-ignition of possibly dormant cancers, which Professor Angus Dalgleish has been talking about at great length. And these are subjects which should be debated freely. I mean, when you see Andrew Bridgen in the House of Commons talking about excess deaths and he's almost talking to an empty Commons chamber.
Albeit you can hear some fairly vociferous shouting coming from or cheering coming from the gallery, which the Speaker or the Assistant Speaker tried to close down, but that is a bit worrying. What has happened to British democracy? What has happened to our birth right of free speech? I mean, it isn't what it used to be. In fact, not only is it not what it used to be, on many subjects, we are not free to speak anymore. Not just the ones I discussed, there are all sorts of other things which might fall within the boundaries of PC and woke, which you simply can't talk about. You might even get prosecuted in some circumstances. I mean, we're living in some sort of mad upside down world at the moment.
We've watched in Scotland the SNP collapsing, not least because of some of their very wacky legislation, which has also been enormously expensive.
Meantime, I'm of the opinion, and I'm not particularly right wing, but I am of the opinion that ordinary people, sometimes they just want to see the potholes mended. You know, they don't want this sort of bit of PC legislation or another. There are far greater national priorities. And I'm not saying that there aren't small groups in society that haven't been badly treated in the past. They have. I can see that. and there has been real prejudice. But I think we have very immediate problems now. And they were all exacerbated by the COVID calamity and the government's reaction to it. I mean, I'm not afraid to say, did we really do the right thing? Should we have locked down? Should we have gone ahead with the vaccines? Or would it have made more sense to have given everybody in Britain a supply of vitamin C and vitamin D and maybe just vaccinated some people? But we don't talk about these things openly. It's a very controlled environment. And I was talking to a close friend of mine who's across the water in Northern Ireland and who's a very wise and sensible guy and involved in quite a lot of official stuff there. And I said to him, what is it? What is going on now? And he said, well, if I was to sum it up simply, Michael, I'd say that I don't feel free anymore. Well, I don't feel particularly free anymore. Peter, do you feel particularly free anymore? Have you sensed a change in the last 25 years, 20 years? Certainly in the last 10 years, I have.
Well, I've certainly sensed a change, and I think that some of us actually want to speak what we believe is true, in spite of what happens, and other people cower away. And I always wonder why some of us accepted the COVID narrative and some didn't. And I mean, in the UK, I've been intrigued with the, I guess, few high profile people who are willing to talk. So you've got Andrew Bridgen in politics, but in the U.S. you've got many politicians. Or in the U.K. you've got Professor Dalgleish, on with us a few weeks ago.
In the U.S. you've got much higher profile people like Dr. McCullough or Dr. Malone. And even with the statisticians, you've got Professor Norman Fenton doing the stats. But in the U.S. you've got people like Steve Kirsch who are very high profile. And I'm kind of intrigued at why in the US, those who are opposing the narrative maybe get more free reign, but are lauded more, I think. And those in the UK seem to be really pushing up a brick wall every time. I don't know if you've seen that as well.
Of course I have seen that, yes. And in some senses, the US is freer than the UK, and they do have a First Amendment, which means a bit. There is a lot of, America's a strange society and I went to school there so I know it quite well and although America is free on paper and although they do have a first amendment traditionally there has been something of a tyranny of public opinion, but the people that have spoken out, as far as the vaccine is concerned, and indeed about the war in Ukraine. And I think often they're saying the wrong thing on that, but we can come on to that later.
But those people have been speaking out in a way that we haven't really seen in the UK, sadly. And you have to ask, what is going on? Why is that? I heard a comment by Ahmed Malik the other day. Do you know how many doctors there are in the UK, qualified medical doctors?
I was stunned when I discovered how many, but I believe it's about 300,000. And I think it's something like 75,000 GPs, which is quite a lot. But do you know how many doctors have spoken up and gone counter-narrative? I believe the correct number is 10. I mean, that is extraordinary, isn't it? 10. And I mean, just from our own experience of social media. It's very, very few. And those doctors who risk it, risk everything. They risk being cancelled. They're on comfortable livings. They're on £100,000 a year plus in most cases, sometimes quite a lot more than that. If they speak out, they risk being struck off. They risk losing a comfortable lifestyle, the mortgage, possibly the family and whatever. And the result that hardly any at all have spoken out. But what we can assume is that there are many, like one particular friend I'm thinking of, who are very sceptical of what's been happening, very sceptical of the way the vaccine was launched, the lack of testing, all this stuff that we might draw attention to. And they're not necessarily anti-vaxxers. They're just people that are normally sceptical. But it seems that we're not allowed to be normally sceptical anymore. You have to follow this big state, Big Brother, 1984 line or watch out.
And that really does disturb me. And I was listening, as I said, just before we came on with this program to a BBC thing on censorship, where the BBC is chastising the Russians and the Iranians, and, all sorts, the Chinese and talking about the billions that the Russians and the Chinese spread on info spend on information now, which they do. And much of it is mis and disinformation, but they do not talk about their own authoritarianism. And how they limited discussion on anything to do with COVID and indeed on the Ukraine war.
And my own position, I'll just interject very briefly. I mean, I think that, Putin has to be stopped and I'm fully with the Ukraine people in what they're doing. But it's also a fact that Ukraine is one of the most corrupt countries in Europe, arguably more corrupt than Russia. And if we're giving them billions and billions and lots of military materiel, some of that is going to go missing. Some of that's going to go to the wrong places. And we never really discuss that.
And it's not a particularly democratic place. And it's also the case that we probably pushed it politically in a particular direction because it was to our strategic interest, which is probably the right thing to do. But we can't discuss any of this anymore. And that does disturb me. Open discussion, open intellectual discussion on military matters, on health matters is becoming more and more difficult. And that's not a healthy sign, Peter.
It certainly is. And actually, it's intriguing because my line would be, actually, these are, when I was younger, it would be interventionist. No, actually, it's, well, it's a separate country. They can do what they want. And if they want to have a war, they can have a war. But talking to people who have been very supportive, maybe more of the Ukraine side, talking to Krzysztof Bosak, MP in Poland yesterday. Yesterday and he was saying that Poland have given so much actually now Poland have very little to defend themselves and you look at the UK military, we didn't have much before and now it seems that we're short of munitions, short of many items and it seems that the west have poured so much into this without thinking of how to defend themselves. I mean, you understand the military side. What are your thoughts on that?
Well, my thoughts at the moment, and it's been something I've been thinking about a lot recently, is that Britain is hopelessly under-defended. Our army is probably half the size it needs to be. Our navy is incapable of undertaking independent operations. It's probably just generally incapable. I think we're down to tiny numbers of jet fighters, tiny numbers of main asset ships.
And we're saying, we're being told the army's around 72,000, something like that now. I think in real terms, it's actually smaller than that. And it's not big enough to meet the threat. And what's quite clear from what's going on in Ukraine is that you have to have a supply of ammunition, of missiles, of men. And this is worrying because if they came to a global conflict, it would go nuclear very quickly now, if it did go nuclear, because would our politicians actually ultimately press the button or not? I don't know. But it would have to go nuclear or something because we don't have the conventional resources. You know, they're just not there anymore. And most people have no idea of this. They have no experience of the military. But I would say that, they're talking about increasing defence spending to, you know, something under 3%. I would say that our defence spending at the moment should be probably at least 5% and maybe quite a lot more than that. This is a very, very unstable period in the history of the world. And we are not ready to meet the threat that exists. And of course, the Russians, I mean, they're routinely saying on their media that they're going to sink, you know, they'd sink Britain. They talk about sinking Britain specifically.
And I don't think that they could do that. I don't think they would act on that. But we are incredibly vulnerable. We are essentially one big, you know, landing strip and It's not a good situation at all. And most people just block it.
It's not that they're not worried about it, but they don't want to be worried about it. It's just one thing more and too much to think about. And they don't have any experience of the military anyway.
But we're now looking to Ukraine and we're wondering, will the Ukrainians manage to hold off the Russians before the increased aid reaches them? I don't know. I don't know. No, I think the situation is not as positive for the Russians as some people might think. They do have problems. They can act at a small level. They can act operationally, but they can't necessarily act strategically. They don't have the resources to that, but they are building up resources. And I think something like, is it 30 or 40% of their available national resources are now going into defence, which is a remarkable figure. Now, they've lost a lot of men. we don't know really how many people have died in the Ukraine.
It's certainly tens of thousands and maybe into the hundreds of thousands. It's a meat grinder. And the Russians, of course, just threw all their troops into this sort of first world war-like encounter. And they didn't really care about losses initially. It's not the Russian style, but also they were throwing people who'd been recruited from prisons, Pezhorin, the Wagner group, you know, many of those people were sacrificed, and I don't think anyone really cared about them in Russia very much. A dreadful situation. We won't go into the ethics and morality of that. Pretty scary, though. They will want to try and overwhelm those Ukrainian lines, and it's a huge front line. I mean, we're talking a front line, I think it's extending over a thousand kilometres or something. It's massive. They will try and overwhelm that line, and probably with the help of US and our own intelligence and a few other things, they'll probably stem the tide. But it's a 50-50. It's by no means a given. And that is worrying, because what would happen then? What would happen to the Poles? What indeed would happen to us?
So yeah, good question.
I was, it was fun watching the response from NATO members to Trump's call for them to actually pay the bills. Because I think it was, I remember watching Desert Storm and being just, consumed by it I guess as a young teenager and you've got the cameras following it all, now we come to whenever Britain sent tornadoes supposedly to help Israel and we were just told that's what happened, there was very little independent reporting, who knows if it happened or not. I think it was probably, it hit me, the reduction size of our military, whenever we bought, it was 67 apache attack helicopters, I think 67, wow, what are we going to do with those, I mean, half of them won't work half the time if they're in the desert with sand in their engines. But you realize that if the West do not have a strong military, then that deterrent basically is removed. And it means that other countries like Russia, who will spend more in defence, actually think, well, we can do what we like. They can do what they like because the West just aren't, one, aren't able to intervene, I guess, because of weakness in leadership, which we see in the EU, the US, Europe and in the UK, but also because of lack of military firepower. And I guess that's just a changing of the guard from the power of the West over to other centres of power.
Well, I think the strategic implications of the weakness and the perceived weakness of our leadership are big. And, you know, that is in looking from Moscow. I mean, the farce we've seen in Westminster in recent years must be very encouraging to you where, you know, they have the strong, the classic Soviet era and now Russian era strongman. Putin is developing this aura as the strong man, which is a popular one in Russia. He has complete dominance of his home media, so he manages to mislead people as to what's actually going on elsewhere as well. He's looking for an external foe, an external threat, a long-time ploy of any authoritarian leader trying to make sure he stays in power. And of course, Putin doesn't have much choice, does he? If he doesn't succeed in staying in power, he's got a very scary future ahead of him. So that's another intriguing issue. The only good thing I would say, and this is, I don't think I'd like to fight the Poles or indeed the Ukrainians. They're both very, very tough nations. But where this now leads, and this is another critical question, we don't really know what's going on. When this conflict started, and I was a reporter in Lebanon, for Time, I was a photojournalist for Time in the Lebanon and we were sending stuff back that was really from the front line and it was really interesting and people, what I noticed when I went there, intriguingly to Lebanon in the 80s, was I was familiar with it all because i'd seen it all on the evening news. But I wasn't familiar with the feeling and the smell. Now, I can't say that with Ukraine, because for most of this conflict, I didn't know, and most people didn't know what the hell was going on. The quality of the reporting, I thought, was very, very poor. I've seen some better reporting since, but generally, I thought the reporting initially was awful. And there was also a tremendous amount of pro-war propaganda.
I know somebody who went to the theatre in London and apparently, you know, when it came to the intermission or something, a huge Ukrainian flag came down and the whole audience were expected to cheer as we're all expected to cheer for the NHS or for all the vaccine stuff. I'm just temperamentally opposed to that sort of control, that sort of psychological manipulation. It concerns me that people should be made to support anything unthinkingly and that seems to be what's happening now and you've got Facebook for example, I mean they were at one stage I think advertising how they could turn opinion to potential advertisers and we've seen all the Cambridge Analytica stuff, we're incredibly vulnerable now to all this online stuff and the thing that bothers me if I go back to Twitter where I have something of a presence, is I can't really tell my stuff now because nobody sees it, there is some sort of censorship algorithm or something in place. I've got 77 000 followers there allegedly, I don't know how many of them are bots but sometimes it's clear that hardly anybody sees something that I put out particularly if it concerns the vaccines or if I'm making critical comment about Mr Putin. I think I blocked 2000 odd, what I thought were probably Russian accounts. But ironically, I'm actually getting taken down myself sometimes by the Twitter algorithms. I don't know who's controlling them. I don't know if they're controlled by Twitter Central or they're controlled somewhere else. But hey, I hope so. I think I'm one of the good guys. But you're not allowed to be a good guy. You've got to be a black and white guy now. That's the thing I think you see on social media, which is also meantime, in a very unhealthy way, polarizing people.
It encourages the extremes. You can't be a traditional conservative very easily. You can't be a moderate very easily or a classical liberal very easily. You've got to go to one pole or the other pole. I think that's just very unhealthy. It's unhealthy apart from anything else as far as intellectual debate's concerned.
Let me pick up on that with where we fit in and the ability to, I guess, speak your mind and have a position where you put your country first, which I thought was always a normal position, but now supposedly is an extremist position. But how, I mean, I'm curious watching what's happening in Europe which is me slightly separate, the European parliamentary elections and the wave of putting nations first and it's called nationalism. I think it's putting your country first which actually should be what a nation is about and the second thing is your neighbour and those around you, but we haven't really seen that in the UK. I mean do you think that will be a change of how your because Europe is really a declining force in the world, not only economically, but militarily.
And of course, we haven't made the best of leaving the EU at all. We've cocked up big time on that. But then you look across to Europe and it is a declining power. And I'm wondering whether this new change, this opposition to unfair immigration.
Opposition to control, central control from Brussels, wanting to put the nations first, whether that actually will be a change in Europe's fortunes.
Bring me back to central control. But before we say anything else, just look at Norway. They had the wonderful resource of their oil reserves, and they spent it well. They created a sovereign national fund. And I think it means that everyone in Norway's got half a million quid or something like that. We, on the other hand, have squandered our national resources. And the country appears to be in tatters at the moment, and they can't even mend the potholes. Going to this business of Europe and the decline, yes, it's worrying that, Europe almost is losing the will to defend itself, or it seems to. But beyond that, if you look at Brexit, I mean, I was a Brexiteer, and I was a Brexiteer who could see some of the economic arguments for Remain. So again, I had a nuanced position on it. But overall, I wanted to preserve British sovereignty and democracy, and I thought it was disgraceful that we should be turning over that to some body in Brussels.
But what we didn't realize, those of us who were pushing for Brexit, that the real threat wasn't Brussels, but the real threat probably was some globalist entity that we didn't even understand. And nobody was really much talking about globalism at that point. They weren't talking about Davos and all that sort of stuff. They were talking about the threat from Brussels but what we've seen since Brexit I think is an even greater threat from,
I think what that Greek ex-foreign minister calls techno feudalism and the sort of, the onward march of somewhat Marxist influenced, capitalism facilitated by the whole digital deal, And you have WEF stuff where, you'll own nothing and you'll be happy, although they're withdrawing from that comment now. But who are these people? Did we elect them?
We had a sort of interest in the people in Brussels, sort of, but as far as these globalist characters are concerned, they have no democratic mandate whatsoever. And that is pretty scary. Their only mandate is enormous wealth and a sort of arrogance that they know best for us, the peons, what our future should be. I do find that a bit terrifying, but I also, this is where it gets interesting, Peter, because I see where it came from. If you look at the era after the Second World War, the Americans and us, we were very worried about Soviet influencing operations. So we started to do stuff. And one of the things, the European community was perhaps one of those things, NATO was the most obvious, but there were also all sorts of influencing operations to counter the then very common, prolific, and increasingly dangerous Soviet influencing operations directed at Europe, directed at Latin America. So, for example, at Harvard, and I found this out from reading a biography of Henry Kissinger recently.
At Harvard in the early 50s, they were running young leaders courses for foreign influencers. And it looked very much like the same sort of deal that the WEF was doing with everyone's Trudeau et al. They've all been a WEF young leader. Now, I would guess that that comes, that WEF stuff probably comes from Harvard or something like that via the State Department pushing into academia and then creating the WEF, maybe or having a hand in it as an influencing op. But this is where it gets really interesting. Has somebody penetrated that influencing op? Has it been turned?
Whose interests does it actually operate in now? We know big money. Yeah, big money. But is it really in our individual interest as citizens of these countries and as customers of these massive corporations that seek to influence so much now and trespass onto the realm of politics and social engineering? By what right? You know, what happened to democracy? Aren't we meant to be deciding what's going on in our country, what our values are? It seems not. Democracy seems less important, I mean you look at Andrew Bridgen lecturing to an almost empty House of Commons on excess deaths and you think what on earth is going on there, what is this? I don't get it and I don't get why there is not free discussion on many other subjects in parliament now and it disturbs me. We developed this system, it's a pretty good system with faults as Churchill said, the problem with it is more the case that all the other systems are worse. And I think that's probably true. I mean, I'm a believer in democracy, but our democracy is in a pretty bad way. And it's not just our democracy, all over the Western world. We seem to have rolled over. And I do wonder to what extent the Russians, the Chinese and others have deliberately undermined us, captured our institutions, maybe captured our media. You know, these are things that one isn't allowed to say normally, but I'm saying them now.
I mean, to what extent have we been captured and who by?
If you saw the Yuri Bezmenov film from the 70s and 80s, have you seen that? Oh, you must, Yuri Bezmenov, about subversion and the long-term KGB operations to subvert the West. Very interesting, and it all seems to have come true. Yuri Bezmenov, you'll find it on YouTube.
Yeah. What has happened to us? Our society is almost unrecognizable. Go back 20 years. I mean, think of the restrictions on driving in London, on smoking, let alone lockdown and vaccines, and thou shalt do this, and you must do that, and if you don't, we'll fine you, and you've got no power at all, and we've got complete control over your life, and it's a 200-pound fine for this and for whatever. We are so controlled and put down now. And again, I have an interesting theory and I don't get the chance to talk about it much, but I wonder if when you see a lot of crime and you see a lot of crime, particularly amongst young people, and you see a lot of strange, violent crime, I wonder if that is a consequence of too much central control. I wonder if that's a psychological and sociological consequence of a society which is becoming too controlled. And that's a subject I never hear discussed, but it's a very interesting one because I think a lot of us are concerned about crime, street crime, you know, mad people on the roads, which you see, I noticed personally, a lot more crazy driving than I was aware of maybe five or 10 years ago.
But we don't discuss this stuff. We don't discuss the fact that the average person isn't really very happy now, that the average kid, this does get discussed a bit, is very anxious, maybe having treatment for this or that sort of psychological problem, that what used to be the normal tribulations of life now become things that you need to seek out treatment for. Well, maybe what you really need to do is seek out treatment for your society because your society is creating people that just aren't happy.
And we should explore that. But again, that's another big subject.
Well, I've been intrigued talking to friends growing up behind the Iron Curtain and talking about the Stasi or the state police reporting on people, turning everyone into informers, and then having Xi Van Fleet on the other day. And she was talking about the Red Guards, who were Mao's army, in effect, in communist China. And you realize that control whenever individuals are called out by the media because they go against the narrative. We've seen that under the COVID tyranny or seen that when Andrew Bridgen spoke the last time, the leader of the House, Penny Mordaunt, warned him to be very careful of the dangerous language he is using on social media. She meant that he is saying something which is different than government, and that's not accepted. And in effect, it's the same, I guess, control as you saw under communism that we are now seeing here, where people are called out for having a different opinion and being threatened that if they continue, there will be consequences.
Would you have seen that sort of control 50 years ago or before the Second World War? I mean, you know, I'm no communist, but there used to be communist members of parliament. There used to be an extremely wide range of opinion represented in parliament. Now it seems we're entering the age of the monoculture and the mono-party, and alternative opinions just aren't acceptable anymore. There is one canonized text, and you've got to repeat that mantra, and if not, you're a non-person. I mean, where did that come from? That isn't our tradition.
But is that the push of the woke agenda, is it the decline of Christianity, is it weak leadership, I mean you kind of look and I want to understand where this is coming from, because if you understand where it's coming from then you can begin to tackle it. But it does seem to be many different facets of it from different angles.
I think, was it GK Chesterton 'once we stop believing in anything, we'll start believing in everything' I think that is part of it, I think people don't believe in very much so they just believe in their own selfish bubble and materialism and I think this actually goes back to Oxford, I think there is actually some school of philosophy that encouraged this idea that as the old authorities declined, whether that was the the monarchy or whatever it might be, a faith in authority that you would have to find a new way of controlling the public and that the simplest way to do that was by their material self-interest and this is what Thatcher and Reagan essentially appeared to do, well actually looking back at Reagan now I actually think he said some very sensible stuff, but it appears that we were manipulated by our material desires.
That replaced the old world. But it's meant that we're living in a rather scary, chaotic, morally upside down and confused world now. And it's certainly not the world that you and I remember. And it must be very scary for kids. I mean, I was speaking to a young person the other day, and I was really surprised because they told me that they didn't watch the news and they were a bright kid. And they said, well, why? They said, well, I don't want to. I don't want to have anything to do with it. And I don't want to have anything to do with history either. And I thought to myself, my God, if you have a young person who was soon to be a voting age, who's not watching any news, who doesn't want to have anything to do with history, how are they going to be able to make the right decisions for our future? And what sort of world are they living in? You know, where's their thought space now?
Yeah, I thought that was very worrying.
But that's, I mean, to finish on that, that's really just part of the information war because now young people get, I don't know how to define young people, but they get their information, their worldview from TikTok. So you've got the Chinese government actually pushing that and forcing that. And it is concerning whenever, from a 60 second video someone can decide what the world is and how they fit into it and that's the depth of knowledge they're going to find and I think that shallowness is where we are with the next generation coming.
Yeah I mean I've got to hope that there's some young people that aren't as shallow as that and I certainly do talk to to some who aren't, I mean I've got kids of my own, four kids, and generally speaking, they're pretty switched on. We don't have the same views, generally speaking, but they're pretty switched on. But it is scary that there's a whole generation of young people that, I mean, you see them, you wander down the street, you see every kid has got, there they are, they've got the mobile phone and they're like zombies looking at the mobile phone. And it's not just kids for that matter. It's, you see middle-aged people doing the same thing. You see them sitting at tables in a restaurant and they're still tapping at the screen.
Whoever controls this controls you, controls your mind, controls what you think are your opinions, because many of your opinions are not really your opinions. They're things that have been implanted in you by these massively influential modern means.
Now, television always did that to a degree. The newspapers always did it to a degree. But this seems to be a more direct route into people's heads, particularly young people's heads. And that is genuinely disturbing. Now, if you look to Europe, you mentioned Europe earlier. If you look at Europe, it seems to be swaying to the right. My guess is that, Britain will probably sway to the left until maybe there's a failure of the Starmer dream after probably, they might run for two terms.
And then our future is very uncertain and again, rather scary. But what I don't see is enough discussion, enough activity. I don't see a dynamic middle. Hopefully, I mean, very intriguing, isn't it? Who is Starmer? What does he represent? Is he a Blairite? So is that some sort of globalist, centrist, capitalized position? I don't know. I tend to think it is. I tend to think that's where it's coming from. It's not the traditional left. But of course, Starmer has some history of being on the left, not to a great extreme. But it is worrying that the left could still creep into power via Starmer's government.
It's also a bit frightening, and am I saying this, that what happens if Starmer's government fails? I mean, as it probably will. The economics are against it.
Britain is not looking in a good place at all. But what I think we need, the one thing that will save us is open discussion, proper, unfettered, open discussion about politics, about health, about philosophy, about everything else. And I try in my life in a small way to start those conversations with people. And I do it across politics. I do it across religion.
I talk to almost everyone I meet, if I can, and I think I get away with it, and start bringing up some of these difficult subjects.
Mike, I really do appreciate coming on. As I said at the beginning, I've really enjoyed your Twitter handle. And I know we've touched on many things on censorship, military and politics.
And I'm sure we will have you back on again soon. So thank you so much for your time today.
Well, I've really enjoyed the opportunity. And I'll just say this in conclusion. I've actually managed this. I've had the tinnitus and this terrible migraine all through the interview, but we got through it, which is great. I do say to people out there, do take seriously the people who tell you they've been vaccine injured because it's a big deal if you have. God bless you Peter.

Matt Strickland - The Relentless Targeting of MAGA Candidates in Virginia

Show Notes and Transcript
Matt Strickland, a veteran from Virginia, returns to Hearts of Oak to share his journey of challenging COVID mandates for his restaurant despite facing legal battles and political persecution. He discusses running for office against corrupt politicians and the challenges faced during the primary election, emphasizing the battle for freedom and justice in Virginia. Matt highlights the need for more veterans to join the fight for national values and freedoms, advocating for grassroots movements and citizen involvement in pushing back against oppressive mandates and corrupt systems. His determination serves as a call to action for others to stand up for their beliefs and fight for freedom and justice in their communities and beyond.
At the age of 17, Matt Strickland joined the United States Army to escape the gang violence of the neighbourhoods where he was raised.Inspired by his grandfather, who served as an Infantryman under General Patton in World War II, Matt enlisted in the Army in 2001.After completing basic and advanced training, Matt received orders to his first duty station, 25th Infantry, at Ft. Lewis, WA. He reported to 25th Infantry on September 10th, 2001, not knowing the next day, life as we once knew it would change forever.Matt knew he had a full life ahead of him, but he was ready to give it up in defence of his country. Matt spent most of the next ten years in Iraq & Afghanistan defending his country.Matt’s service to his country includes multiple deployments as a private military contractor as well, serving on Blackwater’s Counter Assault Team until 2010 when he decided to accept a position as an Intelligence Analyst back in Virginia.In 2014, when ISIS began sweeping through Iraq, Matt could not sit back and watch, so he deployed once again to join the fight against The Islamic State.In 2016, after fighting ISIS for two years, Matt hung up his combat boots.The previous two years allowed Matt to reflect on the legacy outside of combat that he wanted to leave for his children.Cooking has always been one of Matt’s hobbies and biggest passions, and owning a restaurant was always his ultimate goal.Matt opened his first food truck in 2016 which quickly became a success, and he and his wife, grew from one truck to three trucks in just over a year.Two years later he sold the food trucks and opened the doors to the restaurant version, and it continued to grow in success.Everything was great until 2020 when the government began using the Coronavirus as an excuse to control society.Matt continued to open without restrictions, regardless of the consequences, he and his wife opposed the unconstitutional mandates and the restaurant was filled with Patriots from open to close.Despite numerous threats and attempts to shut them down by the state and federal government, he remained open and stood with the people.The Attorney General of Virginia sued Matt in an attempt to shut their doors, but he won, restoring his hope for the country’s future.Through his fight against the tyrannical government, Matt realised there was a void in Virginia politics and that catalyst sparked his interest in running for State Senate and with him being a fifth-generation Virginian, his state and his country mean everything to him.
Connect with Matt...WEBSITE             mattforva.comX/TWITTER         twitter.com/mattforvaFACEBOOK         facebook.com/mattforvaYOUTUBE           youtube.com/channel/UCFArRLx6n7UTbOBN0EYjn7w
Interview recorded 7.5.24
Connect with Hearts of Oak...X/TWITTER        twitter.com/HeartsofOakUKWEBSITE            heartsofoak.org/PODCASTS        heartsofoak.podbean.com/SOCIAL MEDIA  heartsofoak.org/connect/SHOP                  heartsofoak.org/shop/
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com and follow him on X/Twitter twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin 
Transcript
(Hearts of Oak)
I'm delighted to have Matt Strickland back with us again from Virginia.
Matt, thank you so much for jumping on today.
(Matt Strickland)
Thank you for having me, Peter.
It's always good to be with you, brother.
Always great.
And if anyone is in the Virginia area, if they're in Fredericksburg area, then there's no better establishment than going to Gourmeltz for atmosphere, for great food, great drinks, great prices.
It's all good.
Good so make sure and check it out all the links will be in the description, but Matt obviously people can follow you @Matt4VA on Twitter or X but maybe I can ask you first you're you're a little bit of your background I know we had John donkeys ago.
It seems like a lifetime ago, whenever you're running for state legislature there for the the senate in Virginia and you had a whole backstory of how you oppose the the lockdown mandates in your restaurant there and maybe just give us a quick overview before we get on to the latest persecution that you're facing.
Yeah well, I'm a veteran you know, I joined the military at 17 years old spent a lot of time overseas both Iraq and Afghanistan and 2016 I was done with the serving my government, you know, as I I realized how corrupt it was while I was working as an intelligence analyst.
So, I wanted to jump into the private sector and I wanted to be a small business owner.
So, I opened a food truck in 2016 and it took off, grew to two trucks, three trucks.
And in 2018, I opened the first restaurant version of Gourmeltz here in Fredericksburg, Virginia.
And that was going well until March of 2020 when COVID happened.
And long story short about that, I realized very early on that those COVID mandates were more about control than health and safety.
So, I felt it was my duty to fight back, you know, because I had been fighting dictatorships in other countries for years and I was not going to allow a dictatorship to rule in my country.
So, I fought back.
And because I said these COVID mandates make no sense and I'll take no part in removing my customers' constitutional rights from them.
The health department in the state of Virginia, they took away my health department license, my license to serve food, and which in the state of Virginia, that automatically suspends your ABC license, which is your license to sell liquor.
So, I lost both of those licenses the same day.
And what I did from that point on is I said: "well, hey, listen, if the Constitution means nothing to you, then your licenses mean nothing to me."
And I continue to operate and I continue to sell food.
I continue to sell liquor without those licenses.
And when my story became public, the community just came out in droves to support me, and it was very heartening.
I mean, I had people flying from across the country just to come to my restaurant and shake my hand and thank me for what I was doing.
And it was at that point that I knew I was doing the right thing.
And I was standing up for those that didn't have a voice, you know, because small business owners, we did have a voice to stand up and fight back.
And I was disheartened that more small business owners didn't do so.
But I did.
And because I did, so many people supported me.
One of the things that happened is a lot of people in my community came to me and asked me to run for office, they said: "hey Matt, we need somebody that's willing to fight against the establishment the Uniparty, the globalist," whatever you want to call them and that is willing to fight against both parties because both parties are corrupt the republican establishment is just as corrupt as the democrats are and we need somebody to run for office that is going to fight against both of them.
So at first I wasn't interested.
I had never been interested in politics and or politicians.
In fact, Peter, the first time I ever voted in my life was in 2020 for president Trump.
And the reason why I never voted before that is because I got to meet a lot of these politicians when I, when I got out of the military, I worked for a company called Blackwater and I was on the counter-assault team with Blackwater.
I was a medic.
A medic on Blackwater's counter-assault team.
One of our jobs as Blackwater downrange was to protect all of the politicians that came downrange from congressmen on up to the president when they would come visit in country.
And the medic on the team always stays with the person that you're protecting, the principal, because in case something happens, they want the medic to be right there.
So as the medic, I got to meet all of these guys and they were all fake.
They were all full of shit.
And in fact, they would all say the same thing before they leave.
Hey guys, what do you need down here on the ground to successfully accomplish your mission?
I'll make sure you have it once I get back to DC.
And it got to a point where we'd have a list form.
Hey, we need this to accomplish our mission.
And same thing every time, no matter if it was a Democrat or Republican, we never hear from them once they got back to DC.
So, I just left a bad taste in my mouth and I didn't trust any politicians.
But, I'll tell you what changed for me in 2020, is while I started my food trucks and my restaurant, I was still working as an intelligence analyst for the military as a civilian, because when you first open a business, you're not making money.
So, I had to do something to provide for my family.
And as I was working as an intelligence analyst under the Trump administration, a couple of things happened that really made me come out and realize I need to support President Trump.
And I'll tell you, the first thing was, if you remember, Iran shot down one of our drones back in 2019.
And that's an act of war.
And all of these neocons up in D.C., they have been fiending to go to war with Iran forever.
And so this was their opportunity.
And I got to see these things behind the scenes.
And all of all of Trump's senior military advisers were asking him, you know, to to declare war on Iran.
They say, hey, listen, this is our opportunity.
This is what we've been wanting.
Let's do it.
Let's finally, you know, make make it happen.
There was one day, I think it was the day after the incident happened, and I remember it vividly.
I was at work working as an intel analyst and I got off at about five o'clock.
And I remember seeing the op water that came through that day.
And we had missiles trained on five different strategic military targets within Iran.
And of course, there was going to be some collateral damage if we hit those targets.
And I remember getting off that day at 5 p.m. thinking thousands of people are waking up this morning in Iran, not knowing this is the last time they're going to be waking up.
Thousands of people are going to be killed in just a few hours, and I know this and they don't.
It was an eerie feeling.
So, I forgot what time, U.S. time it was supposed to happen, but I remember checking the news at that time and nothing.
So I said, well, Michigan must have been delayed.
And I checked a couple hours later, nothing.
Kept checking, nothing.
So, I got off of work the next morning, turned on the news, nothing.
So, I got to work that day and Trump came on national television and he said: Last night, we had missiles trained on strategic targets within Iran, and all I had to do was give the go-ahead, and those targets would have been obliterated.
But I didn't.
And I didn't because I didn't feel that killing...
I didn't feel that you shooting down an unmanned drone warranted me killing thousands of people.
But make no mistake about it.
If it happens again, I won't hesitate next time.
And he caught my attention and he caught my attention, because it was about that time that I started to realize that these Iraq and Afghanistan wars were absolutely, totally corrupt.
And we were there for this.
We were there for money.
And that was it.
Of course, people had to die in those countries, but we could have accomplished those missions in just a couple of months, not 20 years.
And I started to realize that about that time.
And that's why when Trump said that, it caught my attention.
I said, well, this guy isn't the neocon, the warmongers that were used to having in this seat.
And I started paying attention to him and I started to support That day.
And then what really got me and what really made me say to myself, this man has earned my vote.
He's going to be the first person I ever vote for is, if you remember, just a couple of months after that, General Soleimani was killed.
And the reason why General Soleimani, the Iranian general, was killed is because he was the mastermind behind a weapon called EFPs, explosively formed projectiles.
And what EFPs are is they're an IED that form into a cone when they detonate, and they can penetrate just about any armour.
And they killed hundreds of soldiers in Iraq.
So, he was the mastermind behind that weapon and getting it into Iraq.
So, that's the reason he was killed.
And so we killed a top Iranian general.
So Iran called us, called Trump and said, hey, listen, you just killed one of our top generals.
I have to respond.
If I don't respond, I'll have a coup in my country.
And Trump's message to him was, yeah, Roger that.
I know you have to respond.
However, if... One U.S. soldier is hurt or killed, I will obliterate your country.
And if you remember, in response to us killing General Soleimani, Iran lobbed 17 missiles into Al-Assad air base in Iraq, if you remember that.
I think it was 17 that they sent over, only 13 hit inside of Al-Assad.
But out of 13 rockets, guess how many U.S. soldiers were killed?
Zero.
And zero were injured.
I know the media reported a hundred and something injuries, but those were, they were not injuries.
There were concussions and those were subjective injuries.
You know, people just said, oh, I've got a headache from the explosions, but that's a whole other story anyway.
O of 14 rockets or 13 rockets landing in Al-Asad, there were no casualties.
And it was at that time that I said, this man demands, he commands respect on the international national stage.
And this is a guy that deserves to lead this country, and from that day forward, I 100% threw my support behind Donald Trump.
And that's when I started to really pay attention to politics.
And then so when everybody started asking me to run, at first I wasn't interested, didn't want to be a part of it.
But what changed my mind is I started looking into who these people were locally that were representing us.
And I started digging into to specifically the Republican politicians, because if you support Democrat politicians and if you consider yourself a Democrat and you vote that way, at this point, there's nothing I can say to you that's going to help you.
But I was digging into these Republican politicians, because I suspected there was also some corruption coming from the people that I feel I align with.
And there was a whole lot.
And specifically from my Republican state senator.
And there were a bunch of things I found out about this guy that were straight up lies.
He lied to me, to my face.
And I won't go into those details.
But so anyway, I decided, OK, Roger that, I'll run.
And I asked everybody: I said, hey, what seat do you need me to run for?
You know, school board, president of the United States, where do you need me?
And the ironic thing is the vast majority of people said, we want you to run for state Senate against this guy, the same guy that I uncovered all of these things about.
So that's what I did.
I jumped in and I ran against this state senator.
And not even a week after it became known that I was going to jump in this race to run against him, a guy came into my restaurant who I had known because he had came in there previously.
And he asked, can you sit down and talk to me?
So I did. And he said: hey, I heard you're going to be running against this guy.
Why are you doing so?
And I said, well, because he's absolutely corrupt.
And I showed him proof of the corruption.
And he said, OK.
At that point, he knew he wasn't going to convince me not to run against him.
But he said: you know, if he can guarantee you a seat as a delegate instead of a state senator, would you not run against him?
And when he figured out that I wasn't going to fall for it, it turned into threats.
He said, well, listen, if you run against this guy, he's going to dig up every piece of dirt on you.
I said, listen, man, I joined the Army at 17 years old. I've been overseas more than I've been in America since I've been an adult.
And I've got a TSSCI clearance, man.
So, there's nothing to dig up on me.
Dig away.
And he said, he'll have you followed.
He'll have your family followed.
And at that point, you know, I started to piss me off, you know, because I started to realize he's threatening me.
I said listen you let him know that the first time anybody follows me or anybody in my family, it will be the last time they follow somebody, and you can let them know that, and you can let them know that all these things you're telling me is the reason why I'm coming for a seat, and I will win.
And not more than a week after that redistricting happened here in Virginia and this state senator had a guy on the the committee that redrew the lines and, I know the guy very well and I was redrawn out of his district by less than a mile.
If you look at my neighbourhood it was carved out of his district I mean I could throw a rock into his district.
So absolutely corrupt, anyways so I'm in this new district which is an open seat, there's no state senator filling.
So I ran in this district right here and I started heavily going after the Republican establishment while I was campaigning.
I started calling out all of the corruption from the lowest level to the top level to the governor here in Virginia.
And the reason I was doing that is because when Governor Glenn Youngkin here in Virginia and the Attorney General Jason Meares were campaigning for their seats, they came to my restaurant.
And they came to my restaurant because they wanted to garner the support of the support that I had for fighting COVID mandates.
They knew that the community supported me and trusted me.
So, they wanted to garner that support.
And, you know, being naïve, I hosted them at my restaurant.
I supported them, and they told me the same thing.
They said: hey, listen, if we win, not only are COVID mandates gone, but we're going to ensure that no other businesses are prosecuted for these COVID mandates.
I mean, these guys, I got a voicemail from Glenn Young and praising me for fighting these COVID mandates that I still have on my phone today.
Jason Meares made a video that's still on social media right now saying how unconstitutional it was, what was happening to me at my restaurant.
So anyway, these guys win, and guess what happens?
They continue to prosecute me for those COVID mandates.
And Jason Meares, the guy that made a video saying how unconstitutional these things were, not even a year after that he made that video, was in court prosecuting me for those same COVID mandates.
So, I started blasting these guys on social media.
And as a Republican candidate, when you're coming after the Republican party, they're going to fight back hard.
And that's what they did.
And so I started uncovering and unravelling and screaming from a mountaintop, all of the corruption that was going on.
And I'll give you one quick example.
There was a guy that came to my restaurant who lives in my district and he was on dialysis on a daily basis at this point, right after Glenn Young had took over.
So, this guy tells me that UVA called him and said, we've got kidneys for you.
Come on down.
We just need your COVID vaccine card.
And he tells them, hey, listen, I didn't take the vaccine because my immune system is already compromised and I'm just not comfortable with the vaccine.
Plus, I've already had COVID, so I'm good to go.
I got the best vaccine there is.
And UVA Medical Center told him, if you don't take this vaccine, you don't get these kidneys.
So, they were going to let a man die for not taking a vaccine.
It's just counterintuitive, isn't it?
So, he reaches out to every elected official here in the state of Virginia, including Glenn Youngkin, and he shows me the emails where he's getting no response from them.
So I told him, I said, hey, listen, I'm actually holding an event here at my restaurant for a congressional candidate.
And supposedly Youngkin is showing up in support of her.
I said, let's ask him to his face.
Let's bring this to him to his face so he can't deny lie that he didn't see these emails.
And so we did so.
He met him in person at my restaurant, told him his story.
And Glenn Youngkin's response was, had no idea, didn't get those emails, but I'll get right on it.
Anyways, long story short, man, he ignored him once again, never reached back out to him.
He allowed this man to be kicked off of UVA Medical Center's kidney transplant list, which is a state-funded hospital, to die because he wouldn't take the COVID-19 vaccine.
I was wondering, it just blew my mind. I
wondered why.
So, I started looking into Glenn Youngkin and who actually funds his campaign and who actually funds his PAC, Spirit of Virginia.
And hundreds of thousands of dollars, millions of dollars from Pfizer and other big pharmaceutical companies.
So, it made sense.
So, I started blasting that from a mountaintop.
And as soon as I did so, Glenn Youngkin, his PAC, Spirit of Virginia, and the rest of the so-called, quote unquote, quote, conservative organizations, they spent over a million dollars to beat me in my primary.
Republicans spent over a million dollars to beat a Republican candidate in a Republican primary.
Totally unheard of, It's never happened in the state of Virginia before.
But they did it for a reason, and they did it because they knew I was not going to be a shill for the establishment.
And I was actually going to come represent the people.
And that is not what they want in a political candidate.
They want somebody that can be controlled.
So once they realized that I couldn't, they made sure I didn't get across that finish line.
They took that billion dollars and they put commercials on TV that said, I'm in support of transgender ideology in schools, and I want to over-sexualize children.
And I'm actually a Democrat.
And obviously, total BS, total lies.
I'm the one that's at these school board meetings fighting against transgender ideology in schools.
But what they know is that majority of voters are uninformed.
They don't do their homework.
If they see a commercial on Fox News that says things like that, they're going to believe it like it's gospel.
And Glenn Youngkin put his face on every single one of my opponent's campaign signs.
It was like I was running against Glenn Youngkin.
He was sending mailers to my people in my district's house saying Glenn Youngkin needs your vote on June 20th, Glenn Youngkin needs your vote.
I didn't know I was running against Glenn Youngkin.
So anyway, I ended up, even though, and I only accepted campaign contributions from people, and I beat every candidate in the state of Virginia, delegate and state senate candidates, in the number of low-dollar donations, so donations from people.
And I raised $180,000, but $180,000 versus over a million, you're going to lose every time, and that's just how it is.
So I did, so I lost.
And they kept coming at me from all different ways when I did lose.
So, I told you that my health department license was suspended at my restaurant.
My ABC license was suspended.
Well, I went to court first for my health department license and I won.
I was able to prove in court that those COVID mandates were indeed unconstitutional.
So, then I went before the ABC board to get my liquor license back, because the only reason they took my liquor license was because the health department took my health department license and those two are connected.
So, we went before the ABC board and we said, hey, listen, I won my health department license back in court, proved it was unconstitutional for them to take it from me.
So in turn, now you have to give me my ABC license back.
And they said, no, actually, we're not going to give it back to you because you continue to operate without it.
And I said, yes, I did.
But I only had to because you unconstitutionally took it from me.
And they said, well, we don't care.
We're means nothing to you.
Your license means nothing to me.
And I continue to operate without an ABC license.
So, at this time I had a health department license.
I can sell food, but still no ABC license.
And Glenn Youngkin, a Republican, is my governor.
Jason Meares, a Republican, is my attorney general.
And so what happened is one day out of the blue, 25 Virginia state police raid my restaurant, And they take every drop of alcohol that was in my restaurant, take all of my kegs, all of my liquor bottles, tried to take my POS system so I couldn't even operate.
I stopped them from doing that.
And I live streamed that when it happened.
And that live stream went absolutely viral.
And people were asking me, hey, Matt, was this two years ago, you know, during the height of COVID?
And I said, no, this was yesterday.
And they said, how?
Glenn Youngkin's your governor.
How do you allow this to happen?
And of course, I knew the answer was because I was exposing him.
But I said, great question.
Why don't you ask him?
Because I can't get an answer from his office.
So at that point, people from across the nation just started pounding his office with emails and phone calls and social media posts.
And they were asking him, what's going on with this?
Why are you allowing a man's livelihood to be stripped from him for not following COVID mandates that were already proven unconstitutional?
So, long story short with that one is the only thing that these politicians respond to is political pressure.
So, he finally responded and and I won.
They had to give me my ABC license back and they brought all of my alcohol back and that fight was over with, but they still weren't finished with me.
I want to take you up to where you are today, because that that fight has continued, think actually it's gone away you've won in court, you've got Glenn Youngkin, but he's lost that, But it seems though you're being hounded by officials for being pro-Trump, pro-America First against these anti-government imposed mandates.
And I've seen your tweets about having to go and answer for your crime of loving freedom.
Tell us about that, about that quasi-court that you have to go and answer for people promoting your campaign.
What is that?
Yeah, you're absolutely right about that, Peter.
If you align with President Trump, if you align with the MAGA movement, with the America First movement, these establishment politicians, the globalists, whatever you want to call them, they will come down on you and use all of the resources you pay for against you.
And that's what happens.
And people think that this is only happening to Trump, but this is happening at the lowest levels.
There's stories like mine across the nation that you'll never hear about because how will you?
The media will give us no attention.
So, I appreciate shows like yours that do, but they're politically persecuting us at all levels.
It's not just happening to Trump.
So, what happened with me and what my latest political persecution story is, is once I lost that primary, I had a lot of people who supported me in that primary race that came to me and they said: hey, Matt, we saw the corruption that happened to you in that race.
And it awakened us to who these Republicans really are.
And no longer will we just vote for somebody because they have an R behind their name.
We want to write your name in on that ballot, because we can't in good conscience vote for somebody we know is corrupt and that's going to work against us.
So I said, well, you have my blessing if that's what you're asking for, go ahead and vote, write my name in.
And a couple of folks started a write-in campaign for me.
Now, I knew there was going to be some kind of blowback and they were going to try to come after me in some way for that, because I knew it would gain some steam.
So, I intentionally stayed away from the rioting campaign for those reasons.
And there were no doors knocked.
There was not one penny spent on the rioting campaign.
There were no mailers sent.
Nothing.
It was just a word of mouth.
People were telling people, hey, write in Matt Strickland's name for state Senate in the general election.
Don't vote for the Republican candidate, and I received a lot of write-in votes.
I received a ton of write-in votes without even actually running a campaign.
So, that scared these politicians here in the state of Virginia. And actually, they just submitted legislation that says now in the state of Virginia, if you run as a primary candidate, the citizens, and you lose, the citizens are no longer allowed to write your name in in the general election.
They're trying to make that a law here in Virginia.
Isn't that crazy?
So, this latest political persecution that I'm dealing with is, because citizens said that they can no longer support somebody just because they're a Republican and they saw the corruption that happened in my primary and they cannot in good conscience vote for the Republican candidate.
In it, they came to me and said they wanted to run a writing campaign for me.
And I gave them my blessing to do so.
But, I intentionally stayed away from that writing campaign, because I knew the state of Virginia would somehow come after me for that.
So I intentionally stayed away from that writing campaign.
I didn't get involved in it whatsoever.
And for that writing campaign, not one door was knocked, not one mailer was sent out, not one penny was spent on it.
The only money that was spent on it was people spent their own money to buy their own signs to put in their yards that said, vote for, write in Matt Strickland for state Senate.
That's it.
So, this is basically a groundswell of public desire for you Matt Strickland to be elected to a position that what this is, this is not your campaign, this is the public saying we want this person and rising up and saying we want him putting up yard signs.
So this is pure grassroots.
Exactly. 100. And that's what people did. They bought their own signs, they put them in their yard that said right in Matt Strickland for state senate and there was a Groundswell of support and we got a ton of votes And is scared the establishment. So the establishment actually submitted legislation that says If you run as a candidate in a primary and you lose that primary, Then citizens are no longer allowed to write
Your name in in the general election.
They actually are trying to pass a law that says that right now.
But because people bought signs with my name on it and put it in their yard, the state of Virginia, led by Glenn Youngkin.
Tried to fine me $75,000 for those signs.
$75,000.
$75,000.
And the reasoning they said was because, they said that those signs didn't have a disclaimer on it that said paid for by my campaign.
Well, they shouldn't have had a disclaimer on it because one, my campaign was over, I lost.
But two, they weren't paid for by my campaign.
They were bought by individuals with their own money.
And three, I had nothing to do with it.
And so and they knew that.
And so I had to go before this another administrative board, the Board of Elections here in the state of Virginia.
And I explained to him, I laid out exactly what sections, what articles of the Constitution they were violating by trying to prosecute me and fine me for this.
You must have pissed them off.
Oh, I pissed them off.
And actually, so there were like maybe like 15 other people there that were there for campaign violations.
And each of them all begged for mercy.
Each of them apologized.
And they all got like $25 fines.
And then I was up and I handed their ass to them.
And I explained to him how they were violating the Constitution.
And the representative from Jason Meares' attorney general's office that was there, one of the assistant attorney generals, he didn't even know if I was right or wrong in how I was saying they were violating my constitutional rights.
They had to research it.
So, what they did is, they kicked the can down the road and they continued my case until the next month.
So, I had to come back before them the following month.
And the following month, they reconvened and they dismissed those charges against me.
And I won once again.
I've been dragged in front of countless administrative bureaucratic boards into the court system here in Virginia.
I can't even tell you how many times throughout this fight.
And I've won every single time.
The punishment is in the process, Peter.
So they don't give a damn if I was found guilty or if the fines were handed down to me, or they don't care if I won or lost before these boards are in court.
The punishment is in the process.
The fact that I had to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to clear my name, and I had to spend countless hours, days, weeks, months in courtrooms, in front of boards defending myself.
That is the punishment.
And that is exactly what they're doing to President Trump.
It's happening to many other people across the nation.
Especially when you have a political candidate, especially when you have a Republican candidate that's running, that is anti-establishment, that is willing to fight against these globalists that are actually running this country now.
And it's actually the administrative bureaucratic system that runs this country.
So, when you have a candidate that's willing to fight against that, then the establishment will put as much money as necessary in that race to beat you.
And I mean they're doing it right now to a congressional candidate down in Florida, her name is Mara Macy.
She's running down in Florida and I hope like hell that she wins, because we need at least one person that loves this country that is in DC, you know, that's really going to fight for for us and there's another candidate here in my congressional district his name's Cameron Hamilton and I truly believe that he'll go up to DC and he'll fight for us as well.
So, when you find these candidates that are willing to fight the establishment and take all the arrows that will be slung at them for doing so, we got to get out and support these people, Peter.
We have to.
We have to get off the couch, man, because people are, they're just content with living in the comforts that we have in today's day and age.
And that's the biggest problem with this country in particular, but throughout the world as well.
I mean, you guys over there in the UK as well.
The problem with the UK, the problem with the US is people are comfortable.
They're not willing to give up a little bit of comfort in the near term, you know, for prosperity in the long term.
And one of the I think one of the one of the most strategic things that the government has done is they have employed so many people and they have so many people dependent on them.
The majority of people here in the U.S. are either they're dependent on the government in some way, whether they're dependent on them for government assistance or they work for the government, either directly or indirectly.
The government was very strategic in that, because they know that those people will not dissent.
Because they don't want to lose that pay check every two weeks and they don't want to lose those benefits.
You'd be surprised how many times I've heard, man, I would love to fight back and do what you do, Matt.
But, you know, I don't want to lose my job.
I've heard that so many times.
And it was very strategic.
My hat's off to them.
They, you know, they're very good at what they do.
That's for sure.
But Americans need to stop being scared, because if you continue to be scared and live for those creature comforts today, all you're doing is handing this fight off to your children tomorrow.
And by the time your children are old enough to fight this fight, it's going to be too far down the road.
We need to fight this fight right now, today, and give up whatever comforts we have to in the short term to do so.
Matt, tell me, you're obviously very high profile.
You've stood up for freedoms.
After fighting abroad for freedoms.
You've come back, you've realised you don't have the freedoms you thought you had and you've been vocal, you've stood for elected office, you've got involved in your community, you're fighting for your local business in your community.
What about others who actually have been abroad with you?
What about that, I guess, range of veterans who come back and find the country is not Is their appetite to push back?
Are you unique?
Are there others?
I mean, give us an insight into that.
I think a lot of people that I fought next to have the mentality now that the systems have just been too corrupted at every level and that it's not a winnable fight.
So, I think a lot of their mentality now is I'm just going to make sure my household and my family is protected.
And, you know, I'll be honest, I get it, but we can't take on that mentality.
It is winnable.
This fight here for America is absolutely winnable, because we are the majority, the vast majority.
I mean, we're allowing a group of people that can't even fight their way out of a wet paper bag to rule over us in a tyrannical manner.
That is not the American spirit.
That is not what we do.
But, I think that a lot of them are just waiting for the right signal, the right time to get them motivated once again to realize, 'oh, this is winnable,' and I do need to jump back in the fight in this way.
I think they're just waiting for that.
But not enough of them are fighting.
I mean, there's more than me, obviously, you know, veteran-wise that are fighting against this, that have, you know, risked a lot of their livelihood and put it on the line, but not enough.
Tell us, I guess, who's behind the witch hunt?
I've kind of learned a little bit about Virginia politics, but is that the Uni-party, the rhinos in Virginia that are opposed to anyone who is pro-Trump?
I mean just end on on that, because that doesn't just affect those who have served abroad affects every single person in the state and wider because this is not just a Virginia battle.
I am sure that there are individuals who are just like yourself actually who are in other states and are fighting a similar battle with the Uni-party that seeks to actually restrict freedoms and seeks to oppose the MAGA agenda and how dare you have America first.
So, what you're facing, I am guessing, is replicated across many states, across the U.S.
It is, it absolutely is.
And what people have to understand is that this fight to you and me, us realizing what's really going on, seems like it's overnight.
But this is decades in the making for these people.
They have taken over the government from the local level on up to the White House.
So that's why here, even at the state level there's so many hard fights going on between the establishment and those that have the MAGA mentality and the MAGA spirit and the America First agenda at the forefront.
And so, I mean, they have these institutions in place, these administrative bureaucracies that are very well funded and ironically funded by us.
You know, they're using our own money to fight against us.
And they make sure that these establishment politicians, even at the local levels, are protected and installed into these seats.
And, I mean, for example, Glenn Youngkin.
I mean, this guy, you know, his background is he was a CEO of the Carlyle Group, another private equity firm that is just as corrupt as Vanguard and BlackRock and all those other ones, one and the same.
And that's where this guy came from out of nowhere.
And he's proven to us that he's willing to accept publicly all of this corrupt money.
And what has he done as the governor of Virginia? He's done nothing.
He has the power right now today, just as every other Republican governor in the United States, to declare an invasion against illegal immigration and send all of his National Guard troops down to the border and close it without any federal permission or federal involvement.
He can do that today.
So, why won't he and every other Republican governor do so?
Because they don't want to, because their donors and the people that control them don't want them to.
And that's it.
Of course, it's Biden and the Biden administration's fault that the border's wide open, but it's also these Republican governors' fault as well.
They can stop it today, but they won't because the same people that installed them installed Biden and the rest of them.
The Uni-party is absolutely real.
And the reason why the fight is so strong against folks like me and you and the rest of the people in the MAGA movement and the rest of the people that support President Trump and support an America First agenda is because we're derailing their train that's on the track to global dominance.
And they know that there is a very strong chance that we win this fight.
And that's why they have to fight so hard, even on the local levels, but it's up to us.
I mean, the only way we lose this fight as the MAGA movement and as the America First movement, and even you guys in the UK to take your country back, the only way we lose this fight, Peter, is if we allow them to win.
They can't beat us.
They cannot beat us.
The only way they win is if we allow them to win.
And I'm doing my part to make sure that they don't.
And I just hope many, many more people step up like you are, you know, like Steve Bannon is and like so many other America First patriots are and fight with us.
Matt, thank you for coming on.
I know you've used your restaurant.
I know you had Robert Malone there recently and you've used your restaurant as an area for like-minded people who love freedom to meet.
And I think you talk about faith, family and flag.
I think you could add freedom, firearms, fitness and food onto that and many other.
But Matt, I really appreciate what you do.
Obviously, I will not even touch on about your viral tweet about the immigration issue with Afghan immigration and what that means for actually culture and freedom and people accepting what it means to be American there.
We're having the same issue here.
But people can obviously follow you @Matt4VA and track that, follow that, and see your many posts.
So, I do appreciate you coming along, Matt, Gourmeltz is the place to be for anyone in Fredericksburg, Virginia.
And yeah, thanks for giving us your time today.
Well, thank you, Peter.
Just like these globalists have a movement for a one world dominance, you know, our brothers and sisters over there in the UK, we're actually in a global fight together as well for our sovereign nations.
We want the same thing as well for our specific countries.
We want our countries to, you know, to be preserved and our values, the values that these countries were built on to be preserved and brought back once again.
So you guys over there across the pond, man, we're in the fight with you, brother.
And I appreciate you.

Tina Descovich - Compelled Speech Title IX Rule Change, Parental Rights to Access Lessons and Politicians Waking Up to Puberty Blocker Child Scandal

Show Notes and Transcript
Tina Descovich, co-founder of Moms for Liberty returns to Hearts of Oak to discuss the organization's growth, legislative victories, and commitment to empowering parents in navigating the education system and defending parental rights. We take a close look at federal policies like the Title IX rewrite and emphasized parental involvement in advocating for change, including options like home-schooling and school choice to safeguard children's education. Tina highlights the challenges that parents face in choosing the right education, navigating woke ideology, and the importance of monitoring children's education regardless of the setting. The need for transparency in curriculum, traditional teaching methods, and critical thinking in education for children's well-being is a must so please share this interview far and wide.
Tina Descovich has a long record of fighting for students and parental rights in Florida and at the national level. She was elected to the Brevard County, FL school board in 2016. She was selected by her peers in 2017 to serve as Vice Chairman and Chairman in 2018. While on the school board she was a member of The Florida Coalition of School Board Members and served as the organization’s president in 2018. Tina currently serves on several non-profit boards in her community that are aimed at helping children. She and her husband Derek have five children. She is passionate about America and is dedicated to protecting liberty and freedom for the future of all children.Moms for Liberty are Moms, Dads, Grands, Aunts, Uncles and Friends.They welcome all that have a desire to stand up for parental rights at all levels of government.The founders are Tiffany and Tina, moms on a mission to stoke the fires of liberty. As former school board members, they witnessed how short-sighted and destructive policies directly hurt children and families. Now they are using their first-hand knowledge and experience to unite parents who are ready to fight those that stand in the way of liberty.Moms for Liberty is dedicated to fighting for the survival of America by unifying, educating and empowering parents to defend their parental rights at all levels of government.Their vision is to see Americans empowered and thriving in a culture of Liberty.Moms for Liberty are joyful warriors who stand for truth, build relationships and empower others.
Connect with Tina...X/TWITTER        twitter.com/TinaDescovich
Connect with Moms for Liberty...WEBSITE           www.momsforliberty.orgX/TWITTER        twitter.com/Moms4Liberty
Interview recorded  6.5.24
Connect with Hearts of Oak...X/TWITTER        twitter.com/HeartsofOakUKWEBSITE            heartsofoak.org/PODCASTS        heartsofoak.podbean.com/SOCIAL MEDIA  heartsofoak.org/connect/SHOP                  heartsofoak.org/shop/
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com and follow him on X twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin
Transcript
(Hearts of Oak)
I am delighted to have Tina Descovich, co-founder of Moms for Liberty, back with us again. Tina, thank you so much for your time today.
(Tina Descovich)
Thanks for having me back.
Always good to chat to you, always good to follow what's been happening with Moms for Liberty. Obviously, people can follow you @TinaDescovich on Twitter and @Moms4forLiberty. And, of course, Moms4Liberty.org is the website. All the links are in the description. but Tina maybe start with an update of what's been happening in the world of Moms for Liberty and then we'll get into some of the issues but yeah what's been happening in your world?
Well that's a loaded question moving at 5,000 miles per hour just trying to, I don't know fix education and save this country, defend parental rights, the Biden administration here is moving so fast. And it's just a behemoth. They've got hundreds of millions of dollars within the teachers unions as kind of their foot soldiers. They have the media on their side. It's just endless what they can do. And then there's little old moms for liberty and just moms on the ground in this organization trying to fight back with all of our might to protect our children, to defend parental rights, to keep that division between the government and our families. And it's a
100-hour-a-week job for a whole lot of people. It's really a lot. But we have a lot of exciting things that we're doing as an organization. We're growing, obviously. We're in 48 of the 50 states, over 300 chapters, 130,000 moms on the ground. We are doing a ton of things and a ton of growth within policy work now. And so our chapters have come together in the states to form legislative committees and they put together a legislative agenda. Usually has a parental bill of rights to protect parents rights in that state. A lot of times there's bills about transparency in curriculum.
Protecting girls in their own locker rooms and restrooms, girls protecting girls sports, things like that. And we are having great success. The last legislative session, twenty four bills were signed into law over seven different states. And that was the last legislative session. we are still in session in a few states like North Carolina still has their legislative session going on and so we haven't even taken account yet for this session of how many more bills have been signed into law that our organization's been working on.
And is the main focus, your work at the state level or is it at the federal level?
So our mission statement is to unify educate and empower parents to defend their parental rights at all levels of government where we work at the the most local level, which is school districts, where honestly the most parental rights historically have been the most parental rights violations.
Lately, we've been doing a ton of work, like I said, at the state level with policy and laws. And then it looks like we now have to get involved at the federal level because of the Biden administration. They're just obnoxiously overstepping their bounds. I don't know how much you're following here in the U.S., butthe new rewrite of Title IX, which has, you know, Title IX was written to protect women, to give them equal opportunities. It was written in the 70s and itprotected women's sports. It gave them an opportunity to have women's sports. And anyway, he had just, he's just obliterated that with the new rewrite. He's pretty much made it allowable, made it mandatory in every state and every school district that they have to allow boys that identify as girls mentally in restrooms with girls on their sports teams. And at a federal level, at a national level, you know, those school districts are going to be held accountable to doing those things. And so our whole country is in an uproar over this. Moms for Liberty, we've put out a massive toolkit to educate people and to arm them with letters to their local school board, letters to their state legislators, letters to the federal government. We're giving them all kinds of ideas and suggestions and tools to go fight this because, you know, states left and right are launching lawsuits now against the Biden administration on behalf of women and kids everywhere.
Because it does seem as if that's full-on compelled speech. And I was looking at the website and I saw all those different tools. And it does seem to be one of the main focuses at the moment. And here in the UK, we've had legal cases of teachers not using preferred pronouns and ends up in the courts. But we don't have, at the moment, we don't really have compelled speech legislation that overarches everything. So it seems to be bits here and there. But what I'm reading into this would be in the States that then would cover everyone. So is that what because it does mean the teachers are forced to use whatever the kids come up with?
Yeah. So there's a lawsuit. I was reading an article this morning. It's coming out of California, a teacher that was fired for not using the students preferred pronouns, which were not aligned with what the child was born as and for not lying to the parents. And so the teacher refused to do that. They fired her. And now she's got a lawsuit going. It's just a disaster. You can't you can't compel speech in the United States of America. This Title IX rewrite is trying to do just that. And it's not going to hold up. It's not going to stand. But, you know, the American people don't even I don't think most of them are even awake to what's happening. You know also the rewrite was through the department of education it's not a law it wasn't passed by congress it wasn't um you know what he's doing is just he is, he's he's making a mockery of the rule of law too.
I mean has the pendulum swung too far for that because we have had I had Billboard Chris on a few weeks ago talking to him about what's been happening, and in Europe, and maybe we'll touch on what's been happening in Europe in regards to that but it, when you wonder how far can things go and with children being able to decide, with the children being the adults and they make the decisions and there are no adults left in the room. Do you think this title IX, do you think that will push it so far that people do wake up to it? I mean what's the media conversation in the mainstream media.
The mainstream media so far has really picked up on what this does to girls' sports, and that seems to be the only thing they're focusing on. Moms for Liberty, obviously, is because our mission is to protect parental rights, is really working hard to expose how this oversteps and destroys parental rights in the education system at a minimum. And so they're starting to pick it up. I think Fox here has picked up a couple stories of Tiffany, my co-founder, over the weekend and last week did some interviews, and they ran them this morning. And so we're really trying hard to make sure parents understand what's going on because they just don't know. And a lot of times they don't pay attention. They don't watch the news. They don't really realize how it's going to impact them until it impacts them, until their their daughter comes home and says, I have to compete against a six foot two, 250 pound man on Saturday. Mom, all of a sudden they're in a frenzy. Like, how did this happen? And I had a friend of mine who is left leaning, has voted Democrat her whole life.
And, we've been friends since childhood. And she called me like six months ago and said, you know, my daughter's in the bathroom. She just called me from high school. There's a boy in there. How did this happen? What's going on? And I'm like, I've been trying to tell you. And so, you know, they just people just don't know. Moms are busy. They just don't know until they know. And when they know they are looking for help. And so we want to be there to help them.
I mean, is it because obviously there has been lots of discussion here in the UK, we read every few days about another story, whether it's Europe or whether it's over in the States about women competing in sports, forfeiting that, walking away because they say, I am not competing against a man. I would rather give up whatever pay there is at that level. And that does seem to be getting the media attention. But then that's, I guess, a different focus than purely on the education. But surely that will filter through.
Yeah, I think it'll rise up. I mean, the shiny object is what's happening in sports because it's such a clear violation. And we'realready seeing news stories this morning in West Virginia, one of our states, I think four or five middle school girls said that they refused to compete. They withdrew or they did a bye, whatever it is, when you on a sports team say we're not going to compete in this session. And then the school district kicked them out of the next, I think it was a track meet, kicked them out of the next track meet because they withdrew from the previous one. And so now that's being handled in the courts too. But good for those four little girls. I mean, middle school here is 12, 11, 12, 13 years old maximum. And they stood up as a group and said, we are not going to compete against a man in track. It's just not fair. And so that's the shiny object. That's what's in the courts right now. That's what everybody sees. But I think the other stuff is going to start bubbling up soon.
Of course, this has been a long plan, march from the institutions, back from the 60s or however far back you want. And it does seem as though what you're doing is the most positive response for that, is the most natural way of actually tackling what's happening, which is parents coming together in groups and being vocal. And why it's taken this long, I guess none of us know, but it is happening. So it does seem what is happening there with Moms for Liberty is the most common sense and the most logical. and the only way really that this actually can be changed when the voice comes from parents themselves.
Yeah, parents is a powerful, a powerful group. And I think Moms for Liberty has proven that, even historically, when you look throughout history, when parents pull together and really rise up within a country, within a boundary, within a community, even at local school board meetings, that gets the attention. We are the taxpayers, we are the voters, and no one is going to fight like a parent to protect their child. And so, you know, we, we have captured that, I think, at Moms for Liberty, and our politicians know that and realize that, which is why, you know, last summer at our National Summit, we have all five conservative presidential candidates, we invited them all, President Biden, Robert Kennedy, Jr., all of them, five of them showed up to talk to us about their concern about parental rights. And you know we have a lot of influence in local elections our people are concerned they get out they knock doors they campaign for their favorite candidate we have a parental rights pledge that we ask all elected officials or candidates to sign to say that you will defend parental rights and this is all levels of government and we post those on our website so that people can go and say did my candidate for school board or state house or president sign the pledge and it helps people gauge on if these people are going to protect the right of a parent to direct the upbringing of their child.
What options are there of children in the States? I'm curious because in the UK we still have church schools, Roman Catholic and Anglican, but those are very rapidly adopting the woke mentality.
But there are still options, that's kind of quasi-state. Private education isn't as really a main area here as it is in the States. But when, because parents sometimes don't want to rock the boat, they think, well, don't worry, I'll just hold on and hope that it's all OK. And it's all about grades and they don't realise what's happening. So what options are there for parents? Or is it if they don't fight now, then actually it's gone?
So I'd like to like I'd like to change this this question a little bit, because as you know, I was there in your country several months ago. I saw you while we were there and I spent a lot of time talking to my Uber drivers because I spent a lot of time in Ubers while I was there. And one in particular said he currently, him and his wife home-school their child, their children there in the UK. And I was asking him about that. He said he pulled them out because of the woke ideology in the schools there. But in the UK apparently one of your government officials has to come and do home checks, quarterly or something of that nature to to prove that the children are learning what they're supposed to be learning at home and he said just last week and you know this was a few months ago now but he was telling me at the time just last week one of those people came in to do a home check and they said to the little girl, they didn't ask can you do math can you multiply do you know know, the history of the UK, he said, or the home check lady said to their daughter, what would you think if your brother decided he wanted to be a girl? That was the question, but they came to the home to check. And he was appalled, but he said he didn't feel like he could speak up or do anything. And I thought, oh my goodness, this is, this is so bad. Here in the United States, you know, the one thing about education in the United States is it's different. It's vastly different and the laws are different from state to state.
And so in some states, home-school parents are completely on their own. No, the states don't check in. There's no follow up. And in other states, in other counties, like in my county here in Florida, you're supposed to fill out a form at the school district just so they know they can account for a child and they say that they're being homeschooled. So there's been a big push in the United States the last 10 years, but really in the last couple of years for what we call school choice. And that means the money follows the child. So if our state spends ten thousand dollars for a public education school, the parent could apply and get ten thousand dollars and they could take that to a private school, a religious school. And they could take that in some states they can take that and give it to themselves to homeschool to buy books and things of that nature but it's such, a it's such an interesting argument because in some states like texas the homeschool parents have just completely risen up and they don't want school choice and they don't want those funds for homeschool because they know that's tied to government strings and they want to be free of it, in other states they've done complete universal school choice and homeschool parents gladly take the 10 000 or whatever the rate is some states it's 8,000. In America, some states, it's 30,000. In New York City, it's almost 40,000 per student, but they don't have school choice there.
And so, you know, we have a lot of options here. We have private schools. We have very expensive private schools. A lot of them have been captured and have the woke ideology in them also.
So there really is, there's nowhere to hide these days. It's even if you home-school, you have to like read every word in the textbooks that you purchase to teach your children with, unless you use original source documents and the Bible and things of that that nature, you have to watch closely because it's just everywhere.
Yeah we, home-schooling is different here, it's not, it's really a cottage industry, it's very small. I know in Europe there it's larger but in some countries they tried to ban it and it's a whole mishmash but yeah we have mostly left governments, some of them even call themselves conservative like the the UK but it's far-reaching in terms of state control and big government but I think what you're saying is then there's nowhere to go, you either stay and fight because there isn't down the road a nice school that will be nicely protected from the state and you can just get on, they will come for that really think we learned that in all our in dealing with the government they don't want to leave any part of your life alone they'll come for it so unless you fight now this is the battle line and this is where you have to fight.
Yeah, I mean, I pulled my son during middle school and during COVID and put him in a small private Christian school that doesn't take any government funds. And it was just, it was beautiful. My son was able, they checked temperatures at the door, washed hands thoroughly, and then they were normal kids all day long. They didn't mask, they didn't, you know, they didn't sit apart. They stayed with their classroom cohorts. You know, they didn't mix with the whole school in case someone was diagnosed, but he had a fantastic two years because they weren't tied to government funds and therefore they weren't tied to any government rules or laws or policies or anything. They were able to do what they want. But, you know, it's hard for those schools to stay in existence, especially with school choice now, because all of that money will be flowing into all the schools around it. And a private school will be very tempted to take those funds. And the minute they take those funds, you're now tied to all the laws. And so there are nooks and crannies to still hide, but they're becoming few and far between. And so that's what we tell everyone when we fight. We say even with homeschooling and private schooling, 80% of American children are still in public schools and we cannot leave them behind because your child may be homeschooled and will graduate at 18 to go vote. But if that's only 20% of America, they're going to lose the vote every time to the people that have been indoctrinated. And that's 80% of America. And so this isn't sustainable.
No, 100%. No child should be left behind, completely. Can I ask you about parents, what rights they have to access materials, this has been what was a debate in the UK probably six eight months ago, whenever it became obvious that parents didn't have a legal right to access teaching materials specifically in the area of sex education. What is it like in America? The parents have the legal right to access those materials or is it simply those, I guess, school board meetings where things come out and surprise everyone.
So I love this question, and I'm going to take it back five steps and say every parent in the world has the fundamental right from God to direct the upbringing of their children, and that is their education. And so you have that fundamental right as the parent of that child to see what they are being taught. Now, Government steps all over those rights and takes that right. We know that and that's what's happening. I know you phrased the question though, the legal right, you didn't say the fundamental right, but I had, you know, I had to get that in there if I had the opportunity. The legal right in the United States varies again from state to state, especially when it comes to sex ed. Some states, I think five out of our 50, you actually have to get parental permission before you can can teach sex ed.
But, you know, the tide is changing on a lot of these things, too. Many of the states, about 20 or so, have opt-out. Parents have to have the right to opt-out. But what we just saw with a lawsuit in Montgomery County, Maryland, for example, is the school district would not allow Muslim parents to opt-out of the comprehensive sex ed, which taught gender ideology. It taught homosexuality, and the Muslim parents were not having it. And good for them. They should assert their rights. But the school district said, you do not have the right to opt out of this. And I think there's a lawsuit now, you know, going in that direction. So it just varies. And thank goodness it varies. That's the one thing I love about education in the United States.
It's getting more federalized. It should not be federalized. For the most part, education is supposed to be controlled by local school boards here, which are elected. It allows parents to march down to their school board member, which they elected in their small community. Likely they see them at the grocery store and tell them off and tell them, you don't get to do that. And if you're going to teach my kid that, I want to see what it is. And that's your neighbor. That's someone that you maybe have known for a lot of years or your kids are on the same soccer team. And so you have the ability to influence and change that quickly when it is held by the federal government of the United States. You know, this morning I was reading an article that said somebody in University in California is pushing for federally mandated sex ed and I thought what a what a nightmare especially with comprehensive sex ed knocking at everybody's door, that should never come from the federal government in America ever.
Well it does seem everywhere that the parts of government are desperate to sexualize children through any way possible..
I know, like what is wrong with people and what is wrong with parents that are allowing this, sorry…
Yes, why is the anger not there because you're right we we saw a similar thing with Muslim parents rising up in the summer, cities in the UK and I was scratching my head thinking where are the churches, why are they not angry and then you realize they've fallen and they've accepted it so we are having the same issue where the fight back coming from, it's not coming from established churches or even the free churches, coming actually from the Muslim community and you think well, if they're going to lead the fight then then so be it and you can see the confusion with the government that they don't know what to do with this because there's all types of repercussions.
Well this is usually the victims that we've had to protect and now they're mad at us too, what are we going to do we can dig into that a little bit, but this whole victim mentality our schools are teaching that and our governments now, both your government and my government are are being moulded around it. And so, yeah, when the victim turns out and says, uh, now they're like, what are we going to do?
It's just confusion in our government. But in the argument in the UK for parents having no legal access or no right to have legal access, and it was a long court case, and the conservative government seemingly only realized the parents didn't have the right, even though they've been in charge for 14 years. But we'll put that to the side. And the argument was that these companies that run these courses have a right to protect it, because if they opened it up to the parents, to the public, that would damage their competitive edge. And that seems to have stuck. The courts have ruled that, yeah, that's a fair enough point.
What is it like in the States? Are there separate organizations, separate companies that actually put on those courses, or is it purely by the school? And would that same argument work, that you need to be able to hide because that's your business model? You don't want the competition seeing this.
Yeah, they're trying that here for sure. And it's working, I think, in some places. It's intimidating school districts into saying parents can't see it. From what I've heard mostly, though, the school districts, they're trying to find a compromise because they just want to make everybody happy. And so our moms are telling us, well, they're going to allow me to go in and for eight hours and review the book. I'm not allowed to take pictures. I'm not allowed to, because it's copyrighted by the by the publisher. You know that it hasn't quite played out yet here in the United States. I'm sure it's coming because this is what's happening as more and more parents are asking to see and more and more textbook publishers want to hide what they have. I will tell you several years ago, you know, I served on school board here in Florida 2016 to 2020.
And when I began this fight, I ran and started my campaign in 2015 on parental rights because I already saw the problem. One of the things we have here in the U.S. and you probably have it there is standardized tests. So a test that the whole country takes at a certain age so you can gauge where everybody is, which is fine. It's a great idea. Except what we were finding here in Florida and around the country is those testing companies were just like those textbooks publishers. And they were not allowing teachers even to see what was in the tests. And so not allowing parents, absolutely. So I went to our state Capitol and spoke about it at a legislative committee hearing as they were discussing this. And one of the legislators brought the testing company head up and said to him and asked him questions and said, if I, as a representative in the state house in Florida, want to see what's on this test that our children are being put in front of our children in the state, may I see it? And he said, no, we can't show it to you. It has to be. And then he went through a laundry list. He ended up, he said, if the governor of the state of Florida would like to see what's in that test.
Would he be able to see it? I think at the time, Rick Scott was governor, not Governor DeSantis. And the guy said, no, unfortunately, we would not allow him to see it. And I was like, oh, things are about to hit the fan around here. And so they are on such a high horse, these textbook companies, these test makers, They've had such straight access to our children for so many years without anybody questioning it. But the tides are changing.
Tell us about the tide changing on the political side, obviously, presidential election year. And I haven't seen a lot from, originally from from the candidates in the primaries on this and this being an issue. I mean, simply saying that parents should have access, that you think that is a right to any parent legally in any democratic country, but it's not. I haven't seen these type of things push forward. It's simply we're going to have a discussion on bathrooms and make sure boys can't go to girls. That kind of is and maybe the sports issue, but it doesn't seem to go far enough at all. I mean, is that a fair enough assessment that the conversation is not really being had, wasn't had in the primaries? And I haven't even seen it coming out of the Trump campaign massively.
So just to note, President Trump has, he's the only presidential candidate right now that, you know, a lot of the primary candidates had signed our pledge. But President Trump is the only one that has made it this far, that has signed the parental rights pledge through Moms for Liberty. We've had discussions.
He has signed it?
He has. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. agreed to come to our summit. We worked with his people to put out a press release on that. They sent us his bio and headshot. And one week before our summit, he cancelled due to a family emergency. A week later went on, you know, went on some talk show and said that we were anti LGBTQ. So he went on my wall here in my office, he's still up there, my coward wall, I call it, too afraid to stand up. Somebody pressured him, I believe, some people pressured him to not stand with parents for his, you know, to be politically expedient. And then, of course, President Biden is just in full on attack to parental rights. So I don't expect he would ever discuss transparency in curriculum. He sides with the teachers unions who don't want transparency in curriculum. We don't really know where RFK Jr. stands at this point because he's not talking about it. But President Trump has addressed it.
I wouldn't say at length, but he has signed our pledge. We have talked to members of his team about where he stands on these issues. And he supports the right of a parent to direct the upbringing of their children in education. So that includes transparency in curriculum.
And of course, you and Tiffany are regularly on WarRoom and you don't get a better way of connecting with the Trump's team and with conservative voters than through WarRoom so that seems to be a massive outlet for this information.
Yeah Tiffany usually does that one, I'm her backup, I'd say when she can't get to it, but yeah she is on WarRoom regularly, Steve Bannon is great about letting us get our message out and what we're working on and yeah the hope is that Trump and his team are watching and hearing and seeing, but, you know, they've reached out, we've had direct access with his team. He came to our national summit last summer, and I spent some, I would say I spent a pretty good time with him, green room, backstage.
And, you know, he sincerely seemed very concerned about what's happening to parental rights and with education in our country.
I think, does he still have a Moms for Liberty cup behind him when he hosts?
Yes, I'm not sure. I hope so. Yeah, we gave him or somebody gave him. I don't think we gave him. I think one of his listeners sent him one, one of our travel mugs, and he had it on the shelf behind him.
So I saw it for quite a while. So great advertising.
I think you had a quote on one of your tweets in the last few days. I said, are politics taking them? You said for this entire campaign, and Kennedy has refused to answer any serious questions about what he would do as president to protect kids from the predatory transgender industry. Instead, he upskirts trying to con voters into thinking he's on their side while taking no firm positions. I think it's fair to mention because he will have a big impact on, not necessarily, I don't think, being elected, but he will have a massive impact in a third candidate. And you kind of know where Biden lies. you know I mean I've been to three Trump rallies and and heard him speak, certainly talk about the trans stuff in schools regarding bathrooms, regarding sports and a big cheer, probably the biggest cheer when I last heard him, the biggest cheer went up for him said that he will keep boys out of girls bathrooms and girls out of the boys and it was heartening to hear such a massive cheer, but yeah you're right, Kennedy, I think people maybe forget that he is not socially conservative. Now, he shouldn't have to be socially conservative to worry about sexualisation of kids. It should go across the board.
But yeah, he does seem to be holding back, and I can't imagine he would go along with opposing what's been happening.
I have no idea. Look, a lot of our moms really have great respect for him. He stood up against the COVID vaccine. A lot of our moms, their children are vaccine injured, And so they really have followed him for a long time and appreciated his courage and bravery speaking out on some of those issues. But, you know, for the reasons you just said, I'm going to print out another picture of him and put him up on my coward wall because this is one issue you cannot be silent on. You know, there is a loud minority group that is radical, that is aggressive, I think, very angry. And if there's a terrorist group in the United States, you know, like they try to call us, it's these gender ideology terrorists. They harass people. They follow them around. They scream at them. You said you've had Billboard Chris on, the way they treat him when he all he does is just with the sign that says children cannot consent to puberty blockers or no child is born in the wrong body. This is not an issue that should be partisan. This is just like a general human, protect kids issue. I think history is not going to look kindly on any of us that allowed this to happen and did not speak out, including RFK Jr.
Yeah, 100%. What is the pushback on puberty blockers? I think we now see six countries in Europe where it's banned to some degree with now legal conversations taking place of whether these should be allowed or not here in the UK and across Europe. In the US, there doesn't seem to be that pushback. Am I correct on that?
We are about five years, if I had to guess, behind you on all of this, we watched you all open your gender clinics and the puberty blockers and you know you guys have learned, I think you're starting to learn and that's why the discussions and the debates are happening. We are just behind you know ours I think we've ramped up now, people are starting to become aware and I think what you're going through now is right around the corner for us.
Yeah, no, I really think so. I mean, we're having a lot of de-transitioners speaking out. We're having whistle-blowers from the centres and then realising, I guess, the industry, which is fairly profitable.
Just like whenever I talk to those in the pro-life, they talk about the massive industry on that side. And I guess this is what, just like under COVID, you're up against a massive big pharma industry that makes a lot of money through their products. And they're not saying this is right or wrong. They're just saying we were making money and we're going to do it anyway. I think that's the massive push. But yeah, we've been, certainly for 12, 13 years, the experiment in the UK. And now people are beginning to wake up. I don't know if you're having whistle-blowers in the States talking about what happens, because we had a single clinic in the UK, really, that was under government. I'm sure in America, it's much more fractured.
Yeah, just like everything else here, we like to localize a lot of things, the good and the bad.
Yeah, I think it was in Tavistock that you guys had?
Yeah, Tavistock.
We've learned so much from that. And, you know, I'm sorry that you and your country and your children had to go through that. But we follow it closely. We've learned a lot from it. And, you know, we have de-transitioners here that are starting to speak out, Chloe Cole and some others. They're speaking at state houses. I think there's been a couple of congressional hearings now. So again, we're behind, but I think it's starting to happen. But as far as big pharma and how this is an industry, I mean, just imagine, like you have got a, you've got customers for life when you give kids puberty blockers and you chop off their healthy body parts, customers for life. And we're watching the same groups like Planned Parenthood, who have been behind the abortion industry for so long, now jumping on the puberty blocker industry. And schools are letting them in, especially in blue, left-winging, radical cities and school districts. They're letting them on campus.
They're letting them right off campus next door. They're letting them set up shop in the parking lot. And in some states allowing them without parental consent or notification, allowing them to give puberty blockers to children at the schools and so, and they're just getting them for life like now you'll be a patient of mine forever, it's the most absurd horrible thing I think that we've experienced in America in a long time.
And the more side effects the more money to be made from a further product that will supposedly fix those side effects so yes.
Is it that you're going to amass a division in the country? I mean, you see the division happening in red and blue in pro-abortion at any side and then actually pro-life. And you see, obviously, in Florida, you've got the heartbeat bill being attacked or looked at at the moment, which is probably the furthest any state has gone to protecting life. But it seems to be the same in the sex ed in schools. You've got a massive division.
Is that how it's happening, the country being more divided over those individuals that want to protect children or want them to grow up as innocent as possible before they get sexualised and those who want sexualisation as early as possible?
No, I don't think this is divisive like abortion at all. So we've done some national polling and 70 percent across the board of Americans agree with us on these issues. So that's even, they've dug down into the data. That's even people that are pro-choice, that are Democrats. No matter your nationality, no matter your gender, no matter what religion you are, 70 between 68 and 72 percent of Americans all agree on this. So the hard division, although it may appear that way in the media or it may appear that way because the vocal minority is so loud and obnoxious and hate filled and rage filled and are on the streets, you know, here locally. And we've got a causeway that goes over a river. And the last few weeks as I drive home, there's people up and down the cause, like 10 of them. That's it. With signs, you know, protect whatever.
I'm like, what are you doing? Nobody cares. Nobody's listening to you. So I think Americans, I think people in general, when they are awake and know what's happening, they don't agree with this. The problem is, is the media helps deceive the messaging. They pick up the talking points of the radical left and say, for sex education, for example, oh, it's comprehensive sex education. It's important that, you know, children learn that they're, you know, that this is how a baby's made by sixth grade. And people aren't educated on what that really is, that they are learning about the different types of sex, that they are learning about abortion in grade school, that they are learning when they are five, that they can be a boy or a girl or neither or both. You know, none of that is told. The media just goes on and then people think they know. And soI would I would argue that that 70 percent number, if if that 30 percent was truly educated, it's probably only 5 percent that would really stand against children. And that's the radical lunatics.
Do you also think there's a danger? I know in the UK we had a case a week ago where a teacher wasn't there. So a stand in teacher came and it was a 'female' who was really a male, then started telling the children about how they were getting married and they started discussing how trans. And this was to maybe eight or nine, maybe 10, I think it was nine. And again, there's a massive issue in the media on this. Why were parents not told? And when parents did write, the response was, we are inclusive, we are diverse, and we will not stop anyone because that would be hateful. Again, there...
Whenever you have teachers, you've got the education side, which is there. You can access them black and white. But then, I guess, the other side are the actual teachers. And we're certainly seeing in the UK, a lot of them, it so happens, are certainly more liberal.
And that means you've got coming in with lifestyles and sexuality that is on show for the children.
And it's in their face. So it's not just on the sex side, but actually they could be teaching history or mathematics. And if it's a guy who thinks they're a woman right in front of the children, that's going to cause so much damage. I don't know it's probably the same in the US where you're getting teachers like that, who will really cause confusion throughout the whole day
[38:46] Not in Florida, not where I am.
That's an advert for Florida.
Yeah like we're gonna exclude Florida from this because Governor DeSantis said first round House Bill 1557 here in Florida, which was dubbed a name that it's not is at all, took care of that from kindergarten through second grade. It said no gender ideology should be an instruction to children. So it just should not happen. And then this past legislative session, they took it all the way through 12th grade. So that will not be taught, preached, encouraged from schools here in the state of Florida. You know, you want to go to New York or California. Yes, it's happening. You know, go follow Libs of TikTok on Twitter and she exposes them all. They're loud and proud. They laugh at, there's one teacher. I still have that video. I think on my computer of one teacher saying, Oh, look, I got my class. I put this flag up and study the American flag. And it's the, it's the the LGBTQ flag. And she's like, I'm going to have my class pledge allegiance to this. And she laughs and, you know, it's just, it's.
If more people got to see Libs of TikTok and could identify those teachers in their communities, more parents would be upset. And that 70 percent again would be 95 percent.
Yeah, not completely. Let me ask, finish off on something just quite different. And seeing all the the protests in the States and you kind of put up a quote, why action civics is more action than civics. K-12 students aren't ready to be activists. It seems so there's a push, I mean, not look at the issue, but simply kids should be in school learning. There should be a syllabus. And it seems they're being encouraged to be activists, to protest, to be demands before they actually know much. I mean, let us know, is that a push towards that? I guess those demonstrations instead of being concerned at what they are learning.
Our test scores show that, you know, I think it's like 30 percent, I'd have to go look at the numbers, of students in America could pass civics right now. They don't, you know, we have those joke commercials where people go out with a microphone and just grab even grown adults and say, how many branches of government do you have in the United States? One, you know, they don't know. Who, what is the House of Representatives? No idea. No idea what the Senate does. Some of them don't even know who the president is or the vice president.
We have a real crisis in civics. In America, I don't know how you're doing in the UK, but it is really, really, really awful. I watched my son who just graduated from college this past weekend, when he was in middle school in seventh grade, that's when you take civics. And I don't know how it's going there. It seems like the stuff is global, but he brought home a passage that he had to evaluate in civics. And it was Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg Address. And it had, it didn't have the whole thing. Like they never studied the whole thing. He didn't learn what it did or what laws came after that because of that address. He was just supposed to evaluate a middle section of it. He didn't know where the passage even came from. And so he called me in and he said, it's called a DBQ here. And it's the way that they learn. It's this inquiry learning, they call it. And he called me in and he's, mom, I don't know how to do this. I don't know what's going on? Well, because they never taught the context.
It's very bizarre what's going on in America and in education. And it's driven from the higher ed teaching schools and what they think works. And it doesn't work. I mean, it's all the way down to they stopped teaching phonics here in America. Kids can't read. We have the lowest reading scores in America since the 1980s and the lowest math scores ever because they started this new math, you know, about five or six years ago. And kids, you know, I don't understand it. Kids can't, parents can't help their kids because they don't understand it. Why do we need new math? Math has been around for a thousand years. We don't need new math. And so we are in a crisis between math and reading and definitely in civics. And so they've now transformed civics into something that's kind of easily teachable, especially to young people. I don't know about you, but when I was in high school, I remember walking out and we were protesting the lunch food or something. It wasn't anything important, But I remember feeling so like, yeah, we are going to change the lunch and marching out in the courtyard with the students. And I think we made signs. And there's something about youth that makes you want to feel like you are in it, that you are doing something. And so these schools and these ideologues, or capitalizing on that. And you said it, it started in the 60s and they have infiltrated, for lack of a better word, our teaching colleges. And now all those teachers are in our schools teaching and they're using that desire that students and young people have to make a difference to push them in a direction of their beliefs and their ideas. My civics teacher when I was in middle school, I know her now, she lives in my community.
And I know where she leans politically because we're adults and we interact. But as a middle school teacher, I had no idea. She taught me about the founders. She taught me about the branches of government. She taught me patriotism and to really respect and love our founding history. And that's not happening. Between critical race theory being taught and being pushed in the schools, teaching that America in general is bad and it was founded on slavery instead of being founded on the principles of freedom like it really was, it's really damaging to the future of our country.
Yeah well the British empire is the worst of the worst we're learning.
So yeah if we're bad you're like you guys are the worst of the worst behind us. I mean you're the ones that caused all our problems to begin with.
We are the worst! But just finally I think one talking to my older boy and realizing, he's very much involved in the debating society and thinking back to when I was in school and loved that and you realize that's not actually there. There are very few involved, law schools don't have it and that ability to reason, public speaking, all of that has gone and you don't get any now you know when you're given a subject and you may think the opposite but you have to argue and to understand the other side, now just kids are taught if you shout louder and be more obnoxious then you're in the right.
I assume it's the same in the States?
100%, but it's not only shout louder and be obnoxious. It's shout louder and be obnoxious about this because you are a victim or that person's a victim and you need to shout louder for them. There's no, let's look at both sides. Let's dig into this. I love how you said, I remember in school having to debate things that I didn't agree with to take the other side to prove I could. It really gets your brain going and thinking and looking at things from all angles. That is not happening to my knowledge in most schools in the United States anymore.
No. Tina, really do appreciate your time. Really love what Moms for Liberty are doing and I would encourage all the viewers and listeners to make sure and go on the website to look at that Title IX rule change and follow those action points and make sure and have your voice heard before. It's another, what, five weeks or so, I think, is the deadline. I think it's middle of June, is it, for people to respond? Is there a deadline?
I'll have to double check on that for you. But you know, if they don't know our website, they can go to momsforliberty.org. I'm not sure if you said that. Also, if you're here in the US, or you're going to visit the US, we have our National Summit coming up in Washington, DC. There'll be some great speakers and educational breakouts. And then we are a participant in the March for Kids. The National Mall in Washington, DC has had a march since the beginning of the the United States for everything under the sun, every foreign country, every war, every endangered species.
We've never had a march for kids or a march for children on the National Mall. And so we have a coalition of about 20 parent groups so far. We're working to build that to over 100, hopefully closer to 200 by August. We would love to have international partners show up too. We are going to march on the National Mall for kids to protect children.
When are you planning to do that?
It's August 31st, this summer.
August 31st make sure and follow the website momsforliberty.org and get all that information. Tina thanks so much for giving us your time today.
Thanks Peter.

Drew Allen - America’s Last Stand: Will You Vote to Save or Destroy America in 2024?

Show Notes and Transcript
Drew Allen joins Hearts of Oak to discuss his book *America's Last Stand* which explores his transition from a liberal to conservative stance and analyses  the impact of the 2024 election on global politics. We delve into threats to democracy, Trump and Biden presidencies, demonization of Trump supporters, and the importance of critical dialogues on sensitive issues. Drew analyses far-left ideologies and discusses concerns about democratic rights post-January 6 and looks at distortions of historical truths, and racial manipulation in politics. He scrutinises the consequences of embracing socialist policies, government intervention, and challenges to the American dream posed by leftist agendas. This interview highlights the erosion of foundational principles, the criminalization of patriotism, and the need for unified efforts to reclaim freedom and confront societal divisions.Will America vote to Save or Destroy their country come November? 
Drew Allen, AKA ‘the Millennial Minister of Truth,’ is the VP of client development at Publius PR, a premiere communications firm, where Allen has worked as a publicist for many of the biggest names in politics: Peter Navarro, Dr. Naomi Wolf, Dr. Ben Carson, Alan Dershowitz, and Kari Lake, to name a few.In addition to running PR Campaigns for some of the most recognizable names in politics, Allen is a widely published columnist, author, in-demand political analyst on radio and tv, and host of the popular Drew Allen Show podcast.
America’s Last Stand: Will You Vote to Save or Destroy America in 2024? in paperback, e-book or audiobook from Amazon... https://amzn.eu/d/1nrAfTY
Connect with Drew...X/TWITTER      twitter.com/DrewThomasAllenSUBSTACK      drewallen.substack.com/PODCAST        open.spotify.com/show/1MicC7w1c9DQLiA8ADoTIh?si=6124535c11a94df0
Interview recorded  2.5.24
Connect with Hearts of Oak...X/TWITTER        twitter.com/HeartsofOakUKWEBSITE            heartsofoak.org/PODCASTS        heartsofoak.podbean.com/SOCIAL MEDIA  heartsofoak.org/connect/SHOP                  heartsofoak.org/shop/
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on X twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin 
TRANSCRIPT
(Hearts of Oak)
And hello, Hearts of Oak.
I'm delighted to have Drew Allen with me today, and I've been thoroughly engrossed in his book, America's Last Stand, over the last week.
But Drew, thank you so much for joining us today.
(Drew Allen)
Hey, Peter, I've been looking forward to this, so thanks for having me.
Not at all.
It's a great book, and let me just bring it up on the screen.
That's what people can find, America's Last Stand, Will You Vote to Save or Destroy America in 2024?
2024 and it's a huge question which not only has repercussions for you over in the US but has repercussions for us I think here where I am in the UK and across Europe.
It is a global election I think the likes we have not seen before but we'll get into all of that.
Drew, for or maybe your UK audience, w e're probably 55% UK, 45% US, and you're obviously a conservative author, columnist, and host of the Drew Allen Show podcast.
But maybe you can introduce yourself to those of our audience who haven't come across you before we delve into the book.
Well, sure. I'm a guy that should be a far-left liberal Democrat based on my resume, And that's the truth.
I mean, you know, I was educated in Dallas, Texas, at an elitist all-male college preparatory school, high school.
You know, that was far left.
The Jesuits are notoriously left-leaning.
And that was the case at school.
All my friends were Democrats.
Every single one of them were liberal Democrats.
I went to Pepperdine for college, but I was a theater major.
So Pepperdine is typically associated with a more conservative leaning, if that even exists in the academia anymore.
It's still going left as well.
But, I was a theater major.
So, in the theater world, the acting world, again, I was the lone conservative, effectively.
And then I moved to New York City as an actor.
And it's a crazy story for another time, I'll write a book about it maybe.
But, I ended up getting a job working for Marc Jacobs in fashion.
And I moved to Milan, Italy, I speak Italian, and I opened the first retail store in Milan.
I stayed there two and a half years, ended up moving back to L.A. eventually and continued acting, ended up producing a movie.
I worked for Marc Jacobson managing some other stores in West Hollywood.
And, you know, I got I got tired of Hollywood.
Fast forward kind of to 2020 and all of that.
I lost all my liberal Democrat friends over politics.
Not my choice.
Not my choice.
Their choice.
People that were in my wedding, Peter, my best man in my wedding, doesn't talk to me anymore because of 2020.
And I wasn't a closeted conservative.
That's the thing, too, it wasn't like I was going hiding in Hollywood and everywhere else.
I mean, everyone knew what I thought, but it used to be that you could actually live together.
And that's what's so scary, and we can get into it about what's happening today globally in the world, this true intolerance.
And anyway, I ended up getting involved in politics after 2020.
I became a actually I had a publicist and then I ended up becoming a publicist.
So, you know, I do publicity for a lot of people, Tulsi Gabbard and Carrie Lake and Dr. Ben Carson.
And I mean, there's a whole lot of, a lot of people that I do publicity for.
And then also, because I didn't start out as a publicist, you know, I still write, I have my book, I have a podcast and I do interviews like this as well.
And I'm deeply concerned about this country.
And I never, I never swayed.
That's the thing; I've always lived my life in the lion's den.
That's why I went through the resume, not to bore everyone, but to help you understand that I've been around these people my whole life and I was not persuaded to join them.
I actually was forced and fired to some extent.
So, my point is everything I write about, everything I talk about, everything I do, all my positions, they're not just because somebody told me.
They're not because I watched some TV host that's conservative tell me to do it.
It's because I have been challenged my entire life on those positions and my ideas, and I have never been convinced otherwise.
A hundred percent.
I mean, the normal viewpoint has to be conservative on our culture and all the things that make it good and great.
We had Pete Peterson from Pepperdine.
I went over to see him two years ago and had him on the show and love what he is doing over in Pepperdine.
But yet that's a whole other conversation.
Well, let me pull out some of the things on the book.
And obviously, the book is available everywhere, the links are in the description, whether the viewers are watching on any of the platforms or listening on the podcasting apps, everything is available there.
But, you start off on just the introduction, saying that the 2024 presidential election is the most consequential election of our lifetime.
Democrats have already framed the likely rematch between former President Donald Trump and An incumbent president, Joe Biden, or as I like to call him, the former VP, Joe Biden.
That was a Stephen Crowder comment, but as an election that will determine whether or not American democracy lives or dies.
And that's a broad stroke.
But, I think you're buying on the money that this is one of the most key elections, certainly, that I've ever witnessed in my lifetime.
Time and I love politics and always loved US politics, but this is the most consequential election you're buying all the money.
Yeah, look, I mean, one of the reasons that I felt compelled to write this book is because, I understand human nature and reality.
And that is that it's very hard for mankind, human beings, when they're living in the present, before it becomes history, and right past hindsight becomes 2020, it's very difficult to actually confront and understand from, you know, a space view looking down at the earth, what exactly is happening, how serious it is.
That's what's so remarkable, by the way, about 1776, for example, and the founding fathers.
They actually did understand what was at stake and they made a decision.
And this is why I say, you know, what we're up against today is akin to 1776.
Now, we're trying to resolve this problem with our democratic process, if you will, or constitutional republic.
We are trying to vote to take back our destiny.
And what's so dangerous, of course, is Democrats and rhinos, too.
You know, the deep state, the Uni-party, it's all the same.
People who represent the government and not the people.
These individuals are trying to take away that peaceful means of taking back our destiny by prosecuting Trump and so on and so forth.
So, that's what's so outrageous, but, you know, 1776, you know, you had Thomas Paine who wrote Uncommon Sense.
And that was so consequential because, you know, you have to understand that back then all the colonists, the early Americans understood was, I mean, they were British subjects.
They were loyal to the crown.
They were British.
I mean, that's the reality.
And so for those people to make a decision that they were going to actually overturn that, fight against that and create a new nation was really big.
And so that's what's wild.
People have to understand about what people did back then, and it wasn't everybody, but it was enough people, obviously, to get that movement going.
And so we need to understand that today because, look, we have way more distractions today.
So we have, you know, Netflix, we have this fake economy where we're living on borrowed time and with printing trillions of dollars and so on and so all this nonsense.
And we have immense propaganda that no one ever could have understood or fathomed in the past to try and convince you that what you experience with your own eyes and reality is not true.
Perception becomes reality.
So we have all these things we're up against.
You could just go and turn on Netflix because it makes you feel better than having a conversation like this and discussing your responsibility in saving a culture, saving society and actually being truly progressive and maintaining those ideals that, you know, were revolutionary in America, which, of course, is that we, the people are master and those in government are servant.
And this is what we're up against globally, Peter.
It's not just the United States, although we are still the leader because we're such a massively important country.
We have so much power.
That's just the reality; so it does influence everyone else.
But, everyone in the if you look at Great Britain, if you look at what's happening in London, if you look, just look across the Western world and you have a government wherever you are, politicians that believe that rights are not unalienable.
They believe that your rights come from them.
They believe that they are the master and you are a servant.
And that is backwards.
And so this is what we're fighting against.
Are we going to say that we, the people, the citizen, you know, can make decisions for our own lives?
Do we have freedom?
Do we have self-determination?
Or are we just going to vote and support slavery for mankind again?
Because that's the quintessential what this boils down to in its essence.
Well, I want to go through chapter one the real threat to democracy and goes through the attacks on trump and not only from Biden, but the deep state by and large, but chapter two you talk about are you better off under Biden presidency than you were under the Trump presidency and you give the quote from Reagan where he looked into the camera in that one debate with Jimmy Carter and asked her, are you better off today than you were four years ago?
And of course, the answer is no.
Now, I am amazed.
Obviously, not there.
I crossed the pond over here in London.
But I wonder, how on earth has anyone decided to vote for Biden?
You look at the polling and Trump ahead in the vast majority of polling.
But my question is, how is anyone still deciding to put an axe beside Biden?
Yeah, I mean, it's borderline insanity.
Anyone who would do that.
I mean, you're voting against your own self-interest by doing that.
You're voting against your children's self-interest, your own self-interest, your country's self-interest.
I mean, that is a vote.
It's a cult vote.
And as much as the left likes to project in this country and around the world, too, and try and say that, you know, MAGA and Trump's a cult, that couldn't be further from the truth.
They need to look in the mirror because a cult is defined by, for example, somebody who would radically change their position simply because the party itself changes.
So, this is the Democrat Party in America throughout its history.
So, you know, one moment they say, for example, the abortion issue that they hope they can make this election about.
But, you know, they'll take the abortion issue and one day safe, legal and rare.
That's the mantra by Hillary Clinton, everyone else.
And today, the party unanimously, unilaterally, all supports effectively infanticide.
And the Democrat voter, not the politician, simply adopts that new position as its own.
So, obviously, even 10 years ago, the Democrat voter could agree and understand that there were two genders, two sexes, male and female.
You know, you would have been like screaming, you know, from the rooftops if you were to suggest a decade ago that it was appropriate for little Johnny, your 10-year-old boy, to chop off his pee-pee without your permission.
And today, the Democrat Party supports that, and the Democrat voter simply either supports it or just pretends like it's not an issue.
That's interesting that we are having that debate in the UK and in many European countries, and we had Billboard Chris on recently.
Sadly, the US are still not having that conversation, but I hope and pray that you follow, because is that sexual abuse of children has to be key.
But chapter four, you title fascists and semi-fascists, and you talk about, obviously, under Trump, there was peace, that he didn't start any war, and that's something our commentators seemingly want to forget.
But, this whole thing on Trump supporters, and you in the book, you talk about Biden claimed that Donald Trump and MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our public.
I don't think we've ever seen that before, where a whole group of society have been called extremists, fascists.
This is quite new language.
And of course, the deplorables.
I'm an honour to be an adopted deplorable, maybe from over here.
But, is that hatred of a section of society.
And I don't think we've ever seen that before.
No, that's never had any place in the United States of America, certainly.
I mean, this is a big turning point in our history for a president of the United States.
I mean, he's a puppet, but, you know, whatever.
Joe Biden, the diaper man himself.
Well, this, of course, is is something that is unprecedented.
And this is, you know, the Democrats love to get ahead.
They basically, the Democrats use this tactic basically just going and accusing Republicans and MAGA of what they're guilty of so that when MAGA turns around and points out the reality that they are that, they've already come out of the gate.
It's kind of like putting themselves in bubble wrap.
But, you know, that's something that Hitler would say about Jews, for example.
That is genocidal talk, by the way.
It's always the precursor.
You can look in African countries and elsewhere.
Us versus them, right?
I mean, this is the precursor to a genocide.
You dehumanize the other side.
And that's they know what they're doing by doing that.
And, you know, I mean, that's the we saw this in 22.
What's so scary is that you have Democrat supporters.
They are people who have been succumbed to the poison of tyranny.
They themselves have a tyrannical mindset themselves.
And they, you know, with the worldwide lockdowns and COVID and all of that, every country saw this.
There was a group of people that turned vicious towards the people that turned out to be right.
Like myself, like the writers of the Great Barrington Declaration, for example, these brilliant individuals who pointed out what science had already backed in the past, that mass, for example, didn't work.
The social distancing was more harmful than it was good and that you should have a targeted approach.
Well, we were obviously cancelled.
Those are the days where you're getting booted off of Twitter back then and everything else.
And, you know, you had people in this country that would wish harm upon you if you disagreed with the talking point dictated from the far left that wanted to use lockdowns to seize liberty.
And they would happily see you hauled off to prison over that.
J6, that's another perfect example.
The vast majority of those people who had been prosecuted, who were sitting in jails even, they weren't violent protesters.
And in fact, we know that many were invited into the Capitol building through open doors and their crime was selfies, misdemeanour offenses, and they've had their rights suspended unconstitutionally in this country.
And the Democrats support that.
So, here's what I say, Peter, I, and I actually, everyone listening, maybe you'll feel this way too.
I am far less afraid of the tyrants in government than I am the tyrants that are my neighbors.
Because, the government itself is a small minority of a population.
They understand this.
Even the Nazis going back to Germany, if they didn't have the complicity of German citizens, they never could have gotten away with what they did, for example.
I'm very fearful of my neighbors.
If the FBI were to show up at my house, because I did this interview with you, Peter, which is not, it's becoming less and less absurd.
Certainly if Biden and Democrats win in 2024, my neighbors would actually be cheering because I live in California, cheering as I was hauled off to jail for committing the crime of.
Speaking freely.
No, we're seeing that more, and we've seen exactly the same people willing, certainly during COVID, willing to report neighbors to the police, but we haven't gone down the full rabbit hole, as you have, of seeing that political change.
Can I, on chapter five, the myth of the big switch, and I find that intriguing, a couple of lines from the chapter, slavery, Jim Crow and discrimination were all championed by the left, by the Democrat Party.
But perhaps no lie is more egregious or offensive, insulting to basic intelligence than that of the big switch.
According to Democratic myth, in 1964, the Democrat Party miraculously became the party of civil rights and blacks in America, while the Republican Party suddenly became the party of anti-black racism in America.
I think we have actually seen the same turn the same twist the same lie here in the UK where we see the conservative party so-called conservative party conservative for name only who actually stand for basic values that the majority of those from a black or a Asian community actually will stand for, because they are traditionally conservative and yet, it's labor who on the left who seem to have vacuumed up those votes.
But tell us more about the Democrat Party rebranding to being the party of actually the migrant party or the market party of the black and that's the opposite of history.
Yeah, look, it's the greatest, most successful marketing campaign, PR campaign in world history.
I say this as somebody who's, you know, from involved in the PR world.
I mean, it's amazing that it took root.
You know, to make an analogy first, it'd be like if the Nazi party, you know, say they weren't forced to disband after World War Two.
It would be like after they killed six million Jews in the Holocaust, they were allowed to survive and in the subsequent elections, they claimed that, you know, they nominated, for example, some Jewish person to lead the Nazi party.
And they said, look, we are the de facto supporters of Jews and all of our rivals and opponents are anti-Semitic.
You would laugh, I mean, it would be absurd.
That is exactly what happened in the United States of America.
The Democrat party, it's not just that they were racist, it's that they still are racist.
OK, it's that it's not that their policies were racist.
It's that they're veiled in anti-racism.
But actually, they are the greatest obstacle that black Americans and minorities, for example, in the United States still face.
So, the entire history of America, right, the Republican Party was born.
And look, I'm not defending the Republican Party, by the way, because we got, you know, mushy losers in the Republican Party.
But I'm just talking about what the Republican Party historically stands for.
They're not the racist party.
Many of them are part of the unit party, but that's a different conversation.
Republicans tried to pass civil rights legislation for decade after decade after decade.
And they were opposed by Democrats, the same Democrats, in fact, that would later claim to be the proponents of anti-racism and friends of blacks in America. What happened was 1964, basically, let me do it this way.
Very short history lesson, I think is important, because Democrats depend upon the black vote in the United States of America.
They hitched their wagon to the black vote, not just the black vote, but like getting all of it.
It's crazy!
So, you got to go back to Herbert Hoover.
Herbert Hoover got a majority of the black vote and the Great Depression happened under Herbert Hoover.
It wasn't Herbert Hoover's fault, but the Great Depression happened and obviously he got blamed.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt won the election against Herbert Hoover when Herbert Hoover ran for re-election.
And since that moment Democrats have gone after the black vote and fought to keep the black vote, because they decided early on that because blacks were concentrated in these city centers, if they could get the majority of blacks to vote for them, they could win elections.
And they knew back then, before you had unlimited illegal immigration, everything else, that as long as they control the black votes, I mean, that was a key to that. If they lost the black vote, they couldn't win.
So, you go to 1964, they've opposed civil rights legislation, even though they're promising to be friends of blacks.
And you had LBJ, Lyndon Baines Johnson, who became president because Kennedy was assassinated.
Well, he signed into law the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which was actually Kennedy's bill.
Now, they had a supermajority in Congress, which means they did not need a single Republican vote to pass any piece of legislation.
But they couldn't pass it, because Democrats in the South would not support the legislation.
So, Republicans actually were responsible for getting that legislation passed.
And LBJ knew then that he was only doing that to virtue signal to blacks to keep that vote intact, because at this moment in history, blacks were starting to flee the Democrat Party.
So, they had to do something and act.
And so they replaced the Jim Crow laws with welfare and welfare is slavery, not just for black Americans, but for any American, any person in mankind's history, because the intention of welfare from politicians isn't actually to help you, it's to inhibit you, it's to enslave you.
It doesn't help you escape poverty, it prevents you from escaping poverty.
And this is what the Democrats have done.
So, it's all a sham.
Everything Democrats do is about poverty.
Political power and control, that's it.
It's all a big fraud operation.
And Democrats and that's why I read this chapter, because blacks are fleeing the Democrat Party right now.
And it's a threat to them.
And I want blacks to know and I want other Americans to know and I want everyone in the world to know what the Democrats are guilty of and what they've done and how absurd it is for them to claim that they're the friend of anybody.
They're the only friend of themselves in politics.
100% and we've had Brian Strachan talking about the walk away movement, and it's exciting to see that happening as people realise the shallowness of the Democrat position, but there are two other chapters that kind of pigeonhole each other, or bookmark each other and that's chapter 6: Black Votes Matter and chapter 8 The Democratic Party's Racism Industrial Complex.
And it's similar here in the UK that it seems though there is an agenda to actually stir up racial tensions.
And it seems that these parties are looking for colour in everything.
And by that, they are then stirring up a certain agenda, a certain narrative, and actually doing votes on that.
We have elections today as we record this in the UK.
And this race bidding seems to be a massive part of politics on the left.
Yeah.
I mean, look, you have politicians, whether it's Sadiq Khan in London or it's Democrats here in the United States of America, and they can't run on their record, because their record by design creates misery.
And so what they need to do, it's divide and conquer.
Communists did this, Marxists do this, proletariat, bourgeoisie, all that sort of thing.
It's the same thing here, just different names.
What's happening in America, of course, is they're creating as many victim classes as they can.
Then they present themselves as the unique saviors.
You guys are all victims and you can't escape your victimhood unless you vote for Democrats.
I am your champion.
I am your savior.
You need me.
Vote for me.
You know, they're creating rights where they don't exist.
They're saying, you know, rights are being taken away when no rights are being taken away at all.
So all of these things are intended to divide society up so they can come in and pick them off and play to the crowd; that's what's happening.
That's why, you know, I mean, it gets, it's a little bit more complex, because money gets involved too.
So for example, you know, the gender theory, for example, is a monstrosity, obviously, anti-scientific, creating confusion in children.
And it's destroying society because you need strong men and strong women.
And they're getting rid of that.
They're coming in between parents and their children, and they're getting rid of tradition, values, and so on and so forth.
And so it starts that way.
But then with hormone therapy, just for example, just like the COVID vaccine stuff, it's an industry now.
So, you have an entire group of doctors out there that are monsters themselves.
And they promote this because there's a lot of money to be made in hormone therapy, for example.
So, you know, it kind of of snowballs, if you will, but with critical race theory, in particular with race relations in America.
In that chapter it's important that I try to explain to people that just like Ford builds cars, the Democrat Party builds racism and racists.
And so they tell children that aren't racist.
I mean, no child is born racist.
That's fundamentally false.
That is instilled in them by men and women who have had their hearts corrupted over time in this world that we live in.
And so to tell some child that you're a victim because of your skin color or your oppressor, if you're white, for example, I mean, it's morally reprehensible that you would do that, but that is what they were doing to children.
And on top of that now, of course, as I mentioned, you've got gender theory as well to further create.
And that's what academia does all the way from, that's why they want universal pre-K in America.
It's not about helping kids and everything else, it's about getting control of your kids as early as possible.
And these public schools, the universities, all they are, it's like going to a terrorist boot camp, you know, for Al Qaeda, except here, you know, they're just creating new Democrat potential voters.
You're a hundred percent.
And yeah, that you've a whole chapter on critical race theory and DEI, diverse equity inclusion, which really has turned into didn't earn it.
I think that's really more or what that best thumbs it up I saw that, but chapter you touched on the whole thing on welfare and slavery, I think that's very specific for me in the UK and the European context.
And we have seen that, but you talk about, obviously, Lyndon Johnson starting modern day slavery.
And I guess encapsulating Americans and telling them, don't worry, we will look after you.
You don't need to look after yourself, the government is here.
And I think it was Reagan who said the worst words in the English language are, don't worry, the government is here to help or something like that.
Yeah, he said he said the worst.
I forget how many words I'll pull a Joe Biden if I try and think of it now.
But you have to count them off.
The worst words or scariest words are I'm from the government and I'm here to help.
Yes, exactly.
We've done across Europe, but you're adopting that socialism that we have in Europe.
That means that you don't need to work because we will actually look after you.
We will bring in a universal basic income.
We will bring in subsidized health care.
We will bring in free education and nothing is free.
Someone has to pay for it at the end, and maybe, I think you will learn that when you've got the cancellation of debts by Biden.
Someone has to pay for those billions in the end and it ends up being the taxpayer.
Yeah, I mean, this is one of those absurd lies that they've told for so long that people believe, which I mean, one is that the government is your friend.
I mean, that's insane to believe these days as well.
Well, but it's that something's free, that you can get a free lunch, that anything the government provides is free.
I mean, everything the government has must be stolen from the taxpayer first.
And the idea that, you know, but, you know, this is the thing, too, the Democrat preys on.
The greatest vices of mankind.
So, obscene selfishness, for example.
So, the college student will say, yeah, make that person.
The rich don't pay their fair share is perfect.
I mean, this sums up the insipid nature of the Democrat party and leftism and socialism also.
Also, it is always to foment division in society.
And I ask people, OK, the rich don't pay their fair share.
Now, firstly, that's fundamentally not true.
The rich pay far more than their fair share, an obscene amount of money.
And many people pay no taxes at all, of course.
But even that aside, the idea that any American citizen whining about, you know, some millionaire, billionaire having more money than they do, the idea that taking money from them, the government taking money from them is going to somehow make you rich is absolutely stupid.
No American citizen, no citizen on the planet has ever gotten rich because the government took more money from the rich.
It doesn't work that way, and obviously the government cannot create wealth.
They cannot create anything.
Now there's certain things, but you have to have a reasonable mind to make the exceptions.
When it came to World War II and it becomes vital, for example, that you defeat the axis of evil, if you will, okay, industry gets basically usurped to some extent, and it's all focused on winning a war.
I mean, that's about survival in some way.
So, you know, but this is the problem.
We live in an age of unreason.
We live in an age where people cannot think for themselves.
They can't carve out exceptions.
They can't comprehend any kind of complex or even simple problems that they may face and overcome.
It's really, I mean, That's why I have a chapter in there called The American Dark Age.
That's where I would point out that if you look at any facet of society right now, is there anything that hasn't been corrupted by the left, by the socialists, by the Marxists?
There's not.
Culturally, economically, everything is in decline, and that is because of a very sick, perverse ideology that is not new.
It's not progressive.
It has been around since the beginning of time.
Okay, since kings and emperors and everything else.
And that's what we're fighting against now.
But, we have a situation where in the West in many ways.
We've had it so good for so long We've become soft and obviously.
We don't, we don't understand ourselves how bad it's going to be because you know we're not like the patriots of 1776 that actually endured something and by the way I would argue that what we're experiencing right now King George iii, peter, was a much more benevolent monarch than the democrat party and Joe Biden.
I would take King George the third; he taxed us less he was nicer than the these criminals that are running the country today.
I love that you guys complained about your tax on t your two percent tax and now you get Biden, so no other comment to that.
No
But you talk about looking at the American dark age, and I mean, the American dream is known all over the world, and I talked to Xi Van Fleet the other day, and she talked about moving from America or from China to American and that was a dream.
Everyone wanted the American dream, the ability to work hard and achieve what is impossible in many other countries in the world.
And yet, it's turned around from the American dream to the American dream is now you sit on your backside, and actually you're just thrown incentives or money by the government, and it's sad looking as a foreigner thinking actually the American dream is one thing the ability to achieve and accomplish and that's now been turned on its head.
Yeah, look the American dream doesn't exist anymore, and I'll tell you why, it's not because it never existed, it's because the left in this country has been attacking and trying to prevent the American dream from being possible anymore.
The American dream is very simple.
It's not just an American dream.
I think it's a human dream that you can, through self-determination and with your own work ethic and intellects and abilities, you can make a better life for yourself.
That is it.
That is the dream, that there is not somebody out there allowed to impede in some obscene way your ability to improve your own life, that if you want to improve it, you can improve it.
It's not the guarantee that everyone's going to be rich, but you can be better off.
You can improve your circumstances.
That's it.
And so in America, was it having the home in the suburbs and the picket fence?
At one point, that was it.
That's fine, that represented something.
And it is Democrat policies.
It is left-wing policies that are preventing that and making that out of reach.
It's nothing wrong with America. It's nothing wrong with capitalism.
The problem is the politicians.
politicians it is their policies that have made home ownership unaffordable that dream is gone for so many Americans that are my age and younger they can't afford a home they can barely pay their rent.
They can't even buy groceries anymore and the left, of course; this is after you read my book read a book called rules for radicals, not you peter, but you know the audience like, read rules for radicals by Saul Alinsky.
I read it once a year because I want to know every year, and make sure it's in my brain, what these Democrats are doing, because it's not secretive what they're doing.
They talk about it.
They've written about it.
And what they do with destroying the American dream, for example.
Is, according to Saul Alinsky, you create a problem.
You create the problem, okay?
And then you have a piece of legislation.
You have a so-called solution prepared, and you present yourself as the sole person who is uniquely qualified to solve that problem that you created.
Of course, you're not ever solving the problem.
It's just a way to leapfrog into additional tyranny to get what you want.
So, you know, for example, you know, they will create tax policies where they make it, you know, look, when you tax the rich, for example, in corporations or raise corporate taxes, at the end of the day, the consumer and the employee are the ones who suffer.
So, their taxation policies claiming to the rich don't pay their fair share, that actually creates less employment, less opportunity, lower paychecks, and it actually ends up benefiting the rich in the end.
And then they'll come along after they've done that, and they'll say, again, the rich don't pay their fair share.
We need to do this.
So, they're creating situations in America, and then they're blaming Republicans for it.
Look at California where I live.
You can't blame a Republican for anything.
Who do you blame?
But they won't blame Democrats because people in the state belong to a cult.
Well, I was twice in L.A. 2022, and I probably never return to L.A. After seeing what the Democrats.
I wish I was there when Reagan was actually the governor and it would have been actually a beautiful state.
But at chapter 16, what are you voting for?
And you start by saying perhaps no singular human being in U.S. history has been subjected to greater and more relentless political persecution than President Trump.
Certainly no U.S. president has been unfairly treated by the media, the Democrat Party, and even establishment Republicans, nor has any president been the subject of greater unwarranted hatred than President Trump.
Now, in the UK, we may laugh at Trump derangement syndrome, but you have to live through it and you have to actually engage with people who have this absolute hatred of someone who is so successful in business and has walked away from that and given up a lot to actually enter politics.
And people don't necessarily get that.
But it's, yeah, who are you voting for?
Tell us about that because this hatred doesn't really stem from anything.
It simply stems from the media pushing a narrative that tells you you must hit this individual because he's been successful and because he's not Obama or he's not Biden.
Yeah.
This point in this chapter ties into an earlier one in which I say, you know, if you don't know whether to vote for Trump or Biden, then you aren't American.
And of course, I'm making fun of Biden.
I'm serious, actually, but I'm also making fun of Biden who said, you know, you aren't black if you don't know whether to vote for me or Trump.
Again, racist, right? Right.
You know, most of what has been said about Trump is not even true.
And that which may have a kernel of truth, if it's bad, pales in comparison to what Joe Biden or any other Democrat are actually guilty of themselves.
And so, obviously, I go and dispel some of those things and help people understand you have a propagandist media that will just invent lies about Trump in an effort to.
Because, at the end of the day, all Democrats are running on is the fact that they want to present to the American people and others around the world that Joe Biden's a nicer guy than Trump.
That's what it comes down to.
In the case that's happening right now, this criminal trial in New York, which is a disgrace about so-called hush money, there's no crime there.
And I get into it in the book and I explain all that very specifically and how absurd this is.
But the point is, there's a trial going on and no crime was committed.
So, this jury is being asked what?
They're being asked to vote on whether or not they like Trump or not.
That's what it comes down to.
That's what all of this is about.
And they're hoping that they can convince the American voter, for example, that Trump is just a monster and you just can't possibly vote for him.
They did this in 2020 as well, they've done it before, and it's fundamentally not true.
I mean, I got to tell you, I have so much respect.
I don't understand a person, even if you dislike something else about Trump, I don't understand how you can have respect for Trump for what he has suffered for the American people.
This is a man who has it all.
He doesn't have to do this.
And I guarantee you, by the way, if he would just bow out like Nixon did, it would all go away.
Or at one point, it would have gone away.
Maybe, they've gone across the Rubicon now in terms of their brains; I think they probably have.
But, they just can't believe that they can't defeat this man and that the American people won't abandon him.
And this is somebody, I mean, I ask people to try and imagine for a moment, Just being in Trump's situation, in one of these situations for a day, he's got multiple lawsuits against him.
They're trying to bankrupt him and his family.
Imagine the pressure you would feel.
I wouldn't be on your show, Peter.
I wouldn't be doing PR.
I'd be curled up in a ball somewhere crying, because the weight of the world would be crushing me.
I wouldn't know what to do.
I'd be concerned about my future and my family, and most people cave.
Dave, this is a remarkable human being who was built for this moment.
I am not saying he's Jesus Christ, by the way, because no man is Jesus Christ.
But, he is the right man at the right time in American history.
And we are so lucky to have someone that is willing to stand there amidst all these slings and arrows coming at him.
And the problem in America, it's not Trump.
It's a bunch of weak-kneed Republicans and cowards who won't take any slings and arrows for the man who will go to prison for them.
The awesome privilege of, well, seeing him speak three times, but twice this year up in Pennsylvania and South Carolina and actually meeting him and someone who has the energy, who can talk for an hour and a half.
Biden can do maybe five minutes and still he's reading the teleprompter.
Exactly what it says; completely different individuals.
That energy that Trump has is infectious, exciting and something I haven't seen in politics, certainly in the UK.
Let me just finish off with the issue on patriotism.
Your last two chapters touching on that.
And Chapter 17, the criminalization of patriotism.
And this is something that you're seeing in the U.S., we are seeing in Europe.
I mean, the EU are trying to criminalize any pride of nation states.
You give the story of a 12-year-old boy in Colorado who kicked out of class passed for having a Gadsden flag patch on his backpack. And of course, that is the picture, the don't tread on me, that snake.
You've got the front page of your book.
But it is that, and that of course has history back in the War of Independence, and you go through that in the chapter.
It's kind of where does patriotism lie, because under President Trump, it was America first, which should be what every leader of every country is about, putting their country first.
And Biden seems to be about America last.
Let's do everyone else in America comes last, American jobs, American benefits.
You're at the end of the queue after we get through everyone else.
Just let's face all that criminalization of patriotism, that the courts going after individuals, the education system, the media.
If you love your country, you are the enemy.
That's seemingly what everyone in the media is summing up patriotism.
Yeah, look, patriotism is so dangerous to tyrants.
I'll give you an example that the Biden administration a couple of years ago, the National Archives slapped a warning label, dangerous content label on our founding documents, on the Declaration of Independence.
Okay, look, tyrants have to, just like religion, they have to destroy patriotism.
You cannot permit a citizenry to feel patriotic because patriotism is one of the greatest bulwarks we have to tyranny taking over a country.
If you love your country and you feel unity, right, it's the antithesis of victimhood.
Democrats want to divide and conquer.
What does patriotism do?
It unites a citizenry.
It gives them a reason to love their country and love themselves and love one another and bring them together.
And that is problematic for people that want to rule over you.
OK, not just because you have numbers and that you're united in that sense, but there are a million different reasons.
And so this is why for a long time, the left has decades, decades, days before I was Trying to make people feel guilty to be American.
That's why the Democrat Party, for example, drudges up the history of slavery.
Slavery they want you to feel rotten about your country, because you can't convince a population to destroy itself and give tyrants permission to rebuild if they believe that their country is great, if they believe their country is good, and decent, and moral, and so that's what we have going on here.
And I am urging people that if you get anything from them from the book; lean on the memory of what previous Americans have done for us, the sacrifice, whether it was the founding fathers and the American, the revolutionaries, whether it was Abraham Lincoln in 1861.
I mean, this is a moment that is as significant to our history and world history as 1776 and 1861.
That is not hyperbole, t hat is the truth that I need people to understand.
And I want them desperately to understand, but I don't want them to be negative about it.
I want them to feel a sense of joy because our ancestors have overcome these obstacles.
And I want people to be thanking God that, hey, I am alive right now to meet this moment in history because all we have is ourselves and we are enough.
You are enough, whether you're in London or New York City or Chicago or Dallas or some rural place in the UK or America, you have the capacity to save and reverse course, to reclaim your destiny, which is a shared destiny of humanity, to live a life of freedom, free of oppression by your government, these elites that are the most inferior among us who are ruling over us.
And so at the end of the day, my message is one of optimism, because I believe in us.
I believe in you,I believe in myself, but we have to understand history.
We have to be devoted because this is never going to go away.
As long as mankind walks this earth, there will be tyrants, the Caesars and Napoleons and so on and so forth, the, you know, Sadiq Khans and the Joe Biden’s that are going to try and steal your liberty.
So, you know, this is something that's lifelong, and we just have to change our outlook and be a little bit more active.
We can't just leave it to the government to take care of us, because they're a necessary evil, not a necessary good.
It true thank you so much for your time, I've thoroughly enjoyed the book America's Last Stand and it does give that overview of the issues which you're facing but you can transcribe that over to the UK or Europe, and it's the same battles against common sense and freedom that we are also facing.
So, thank you so much for joining us today and of course the book is available as paperback, audiobook, kindle, however you want to get it it's available on all those formats.
So, thanks for your time today, Drew.
Thanks, Peter.

Krzysztof Bosak - The Rise of Christian Conservatism in the Polish Parliament and the Unmasking of the Law and Justice Party

Krzysztof Bozak, a Polish Member of Parliament and Deputy Speaker of the Sejm joins Hearts of Oak to outline his political journey, beginning with his participation in a youth movement and the founding of the Confederation of Freedom and Independence Party. Krzysztof lifts the veil on the Law and Justice Party's EU stance, economic policies, and immigration management. He tells us of the significance of upholding conservative and nationalist values amidst mainstream narratives. Krzysztof highlights his role in the Polish Parliament and his openness to collaborating with like-minded international entities. This interview offers deep insights into Polish politics, party distinctions, and the importance of ideological integrity in a changing political landscape.
Krzysztof Bosak began his political career as an activist and spokesman for the organisation All-Polish Youth. In 2005, he became one of the youngest Polish MPs in history, elected as a candidate of the League of Polish Families, a conservative party, at the age of 23. Krzysztof is now the leader of Confederation of Freedom and Independence Party, Member of Parliament and Deputy Speaker of the Sejm.
Connect with Krzysztof...X/TWITTER               twitter.com/BosakKrzysztof    (English account)                                   twitter.com/krzysztofbosak
Confederation of Freedom and Independence Party        WEBSITE                    konfederacja.plX/TWITTER                https://konfederacja.pl/
Interview recorded  30.4.24
Connect with Hearts of Oak...X/TWITTER                twitter.com/HeartsofOakUKWEBSITE                    heartsofoak.org/PODCASTS                heartsofoak.podbean.com/SOCIAL MEDIA          heartsofoak.org/connect/SHOP                          heartsofoak.org/shop/
TRANSCRIPT
(Hearts of Oak)
And I'm delighted to be joined by a member of the Polish Parliament, that is Krzysztof Bozak. Krzysztof, thank you for your time today.
(Krzysztof Bosak)
Thank you for the invitation and welcome everybody.
Great to speak with you. I had the privilege of meeting you back, goodness, 18 months ago, I think, with Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff , a good friend of both of ours. And you are a member of the Polish parliament and I'm looking forward to understanding a little bit about the Polish parliament setup. Each country is different but you are the president of the national movement and you're the leader of the confederation or confederation of Freedom and Independence Party, and you're the Deputy Speaker of the House, which is called the Sejm. And your a husband, father, you're a Christian, and I want to delve into all of those. But Krzysztof, you became a member of the Parliament back in 2005.
You were very young back then. Tell me why you got involved in politics. How did that happen and how did you end up standing as a member of parliament and being elected?
It's a long story. In fact, this time I was the youngest MP in this term and I started being involved in politics by a youth movement, a Catholic Eurosceptic and Catholic Nationalist youth movement. Since I was in high school. I was 17 or 18 years old when I joined. It was the time of the debate about joining the EU. All mainstream parties, mainstream medias, mainstream bishops, mainstream everything was in favour of joining EU. And a small minority of speakers and social leaders were against defending principles of independence, sovereignty, traditional values, and so on. And I was sure that they are right and I joined this movement, being against joining European Union at that time. I joined a youth movement, then in 2001 a conservative pro-family, pro-life Eurosceptic party was created.
It was League of Polish Families. It was kind of coalition of very different right-wing conservative or Eurosceptic or nationalist groups. And four years later I became the youngest MP being elected from my home town and constituency.
From the 10th place on the list. So I was not a leader of the list, I was on the 10th place and people elected me from this list as the only MP in this constituency. So it was a very big success and a very big surprise for many people. And it was short term, only two years, because this was a time of big political instability. We had two government changes. It was, let's say, right-wing government, many scandals, and after two years, earlier elections, and my political party didn't succeed. League of Polish Families disappeared from Polish politics. Law and Justice political party took everything, every right-wing voters. We were against, we were competitors of law and justice, competitors from the right. They were centre-right from our perspective. and after that for 12 years I was outside the Parliament involved in social movement and working in right-wing NGOs, in think tanks like Republican Foundation, defending the same values on the social level with my colleagues and people who didn't lose faith in being active and trying to create truly right-wing political movement. We tried many times different attempts to get into the Parliament we have 5% threshold and proportional system so it's quite hard if you do not have support from big business big media or big money and we succeed in 2019 I went back to Parliament this time as a co-leader of of Confederation, Freedom and Independence. It is a coalition now, coalition of three political parties, three political movements.
My movement, national movement, still the same values, still the same political tradition. So national conservative Catholic tradition, national democratic tradition of Polish political independence movement, and we created this national movement as a new political party ten years before, in 2013. So for six years we were outside the parliament, and after that we made a coalition with conservative libertarians and traditionalists. So conservative libertarians were created by long-term defender of economic freedom and civil liberties.
Janusz Korwin-Mikke, now he's not in his political party, he's pleaded, but he created this political party and now they have a younger leader, Sławomir Manczan from Next Generation, very popular young businessman and tax advisor and also a big defender of economic freedom and conservative values. So this is the second pillar first is national conservative Catholic second is let's say conservative libertarian and the third is citizens movement traditionalist movement of Jagger Brown is a quite popular right-wing movie a documentary movies director an artist and intellectual who who were involved in politics also a few years before, first being on anti-communist and right-wing position, and then shifting more to the right and building the coalition with us.
So now we have Confederation as a coalition, or let's say umbrella party, coalition party, for these three different movements and many smaller groups who joined us. And we work collectively, we have collective leadership and we challenge law and justice from the right. We were in opposition during eight years of law and justice government. From our perspective they are not very conservative and they are,
I know that sometimes media call them nationalists, but from our perspective they were a typical centre-right political party. And we made an alternative right party for Polish voters and now we even extended the number of voters who support us. So now we have 18 MPs and more than 7% in polls and now we fight to get into the European Parliament. Because for now there are only people from Law and Justice and their allies parties. And we believe that Polish voters deserve to have better representation in European Parliament.
Built by truly critical to European Union politicians, not supporters of EU who change only some narrative, but they always vote in favour of you.
Well, tell us about the... Because when I, as a Brit, maybe read the newspapers here in the UK, it would have talked to the Law and Justice Party as being an extreme right party. In a similar way, they mock Orbán in Hungary.
But I'm curious to see where you fit in, Because when I went over and met with you, I begun to understand the Law and Justice Party were maybe not as wonderful as the West may think. So what makes the Confederation different than the Law and Justice Party?
Yeah. It's a very complicated topic, but I think that it's easier to propose some metaphor or some example. So it's quite similar in my opinion like in the United States where you have mainstream Republicans and you have Trump supporters and for example Rand Paul or some people who are more nationalist-oriented.
So, in Polish politics, law and justice is like mainstream republicans. They use some words, some phrases, some ideas of conservative or even pro-national right, but they use it intentionally rather for propaganda and they act like centre-right politicians.
When they were in government in Poland, they even introduced many policies. We can say that these policies that they developed on social level or in economic policy, these are rather social democratic policy, not conservative or right-wing or not nationalist in any way. So, to go into the details, we criticise them because they supported European integration on the new level. First, many years ago, they supported Lisbon Treaty. They negotiated Lisbon Treaty being in government. Then their president signed the Lisbon Treaty. They made a propaganda with mainstream and center-left and leftists that the Lisbon Treaty is good for Poland. And we believe the opposite, that it was a disaster. Our situation is much worse in the EU under the Lisbon Treaty than before.
Then, during the last eight years, they supported the European Green Deal and their Prime Minister accepted the European Green Deal in the European Council. Now farmers oppose, they even criticise in the current electoral campaign. They made a pledge that they will stop the European Green Deal, but they do not say that their prime minister accepted it on the European Council in 2019 then in 2020 their prime minister Morawiecki accepted fit for 55.
So they increased the goal of reducing these emissions 15 percent percent more and they introduced many new policies in European union and it is all possible because they are accepted in European council on a 2020 meeting in fact prime minister Morawiecki also proposed us as a polish prime minister in Brazos creating new pan-European taxes it's completely It's completely against our Constitution, it's completely against our values. We believe that our phrase is that we need small taxes and only paid in Poland and they three or five new pan-European taxes and they accepted it and we paid this to Brussels, not to Warsaw and we have no influence on how this will be used, this money. Then they accepted European debt, we strongly opposed any idea of giving this right to Eurocrats in Brussels to introducing their own debt and building their own sources of income by that. And they, of course, accepted. Then they accepted also in 2020 a special pan-European COVID fund called Next Generation EU, even this phrase, next generation EU is evil and of course they accepted it and they made a campaign in Poland that it's a big success of Poland and that we will have billions of euros because of this success of Prime Minister Morawiecki and law and justice.
And there was a small minority of their MPs who criticised this but they were silenced in the party and in the media and in fact from the perspective of Polish voters we were the only one independent voice in Parliament. I took part in this debate in Parliament and criticised this next, please check this by some search engines, what is this, next generation EU. This is not only a European debt program.
It is paid by European taxes and by European debt for many years, but it's also a new attitude towards European funds. They accepted that we will have funds only under many new political conditions. So now we got some milestones, they call these milestones, and this is the list of tasks, of political tasks, and they program Polish policy by Polish so-called democratic government from Brussels without any base in constitution.
We have more than 100 milestones and these are the conditions to get this money. So, we made a new debt. This is not our debt, this is the European debt. And to use this debt, we have conflict with EU for almost 3 or 4 years. And they now lecture us on every issue from this list of 100 milestones. And Prime Minister Morawiecki from the Law and Justice Party in the Polish parliament said that he is not ashamed of this deal because, for example, Italians have more than 400 milestones, tasks. So it's a nightmare from the perspective of somebody who is in favour of Polish independence and sovereign policy and democracy and even democracy in Poland. They made a secret agreement in Polish parliament with leftists to support this, because even in their own political camp, they call it United Right, which is false, because the right in Poland is not united. But they use this phrase united right and theywere afraid that not every MP will support this but because it was so controversial so they made a secret agreement with leftists. They took some leftist agenda in this deal and they made majority with leftists to push it through the parliament.
Then they never discussed all this deal and this 100 milestones in parliament. We had never any debate on this issue. In fact, this negotiations were secret also against people in government. Not every member of government knew what they discussed in Brussels. Now we know this only from media. They never introduced this deal in parliament and explained what's going on. Then they accepted very, in my opinion, bad new rule called rule of law conditionality. So now without base in European treaties, Eurocrats in Brussels can lecture us what is rule of law. They can stop money for us. So these were some examples of their EU policy. There are many more, for example, their member of European Committee was in favour of European Green Deal. He even said that it's in line with political agenda on agriculture of law and justice.
So they had a big conflict, of course, with EU on this rule of law. And in this conflict they it was completely complete disaster for Polish state because they started this conflict and then they missed everything because they never finished any reform of courts in Poland and they made even leftists stronger in Poland because they tried to make some compromise with Brussels.
This compromise was never accepted by Brussels because it was not, let's say, 100% what Brussels wanted. But in fact we have a very big mess in courts and in law about courts and about independence of judiciary. And now after this conflict and these reforms never finished as I said the situation is worse than when it started worse on the sovereignty worse on the justice and the time that you need to wait in the court for the justice.
And worse, from the perspective of the power of liberal lobby in judiciary and right-wing people who, trusted law and justice government are in a very bad situation now because they took some positions or some propositions, and now they are nowhere, in the middle of nowhere.
It's a very sad story. Then we have economic policy. Their economic policy was, in fact, social democratic. So they raised taxes, they raised debts, they extended public spending. They tried to centralize every policy. They took money from local governments. they put this money to their national budget and they try to influence every policy by their political nominees and they work like, let's say, Maybe not autocratic, but it was a typical one-party government which tried to centralize and control everything. It's the opposite that I understand the pro-national policy or conservative policy.
It was, in my opinion, it was elitist and even social democratic when you analyse. For example, they were strongly against home-schooling and against independent schools. They proposed some legislation to ban homes chooling. After some protests of conservatives and leftists united, they stepped back. But after protests in their party and outside and from many directions.
But their first goal was to centralize everything under the government rule. And we said that it's stupid because they will not rule for forever and after them the left will come to the government and exactly this is what we have in Poland. Now we have center-left government, liberal and leftists, and the left took Ministry of Education, everything was centralized. And now they try to switch, oppose every institution and every policy that law and justice created. And we said that it will be so. And now we see the consequences of their stupid policy, which was not conservative, not Christian, not supporting any citizens' movement.
They believed only in their political party and that's all. This is their philosophy.
Then we have a very important issue for us in Poland, let's say, immigration. Law and Justice government was introduced in Poland, open borders policy. They were against illegal immigration and at the same time they opened borders.
For biggest immigration, legal immigration in Poland since maybe 300 years. Last time that we have so big immigration was maybe in 16th or 17th century. Now we have millions of legal immigrants in Poland, the majority of them are Ukrainians, but there are also people from different Asian and especially Asian countries. They didn't want immigrants from Africa, but they invited people from Asia. They made, being anti-Russian party, they made a special easier way for Russian citizens to come to Poland, to be a part of our labor market. They opened our market for people from Belarus, from Central Asia, from Caucasus. Now Georgian immigrants are the biggest group when you analyze crimes in Poland, they are in the first place. When you analyse people who smuggle illegal immigrants, Ukrainians are in the first place.
We have, it's strange, but there is no official statistics how many immigrants do we have in Poland. Nobody can count them, because these are millions and they opened borders for legal immigration, but they didn't build any administration to control the immigration. So, in fact, the best data that we have is not from the government, but from telecom operators, from big telecom business who can say how many people use different languages on their phones. So this is how we know. Or from banks, because these people from abroad open bank accounts.
But it's not all. It's not started with the war in Ukraine. This is what I would like to underline. We had much more than a million Ukrainian people in Poland before the war. They were intentionally invited and government worked also on some agreements with some Asian countries to increase legal immigration to Poland. These were also Muslim countries. During the law and justice government, Muslim population in Poland increased, in my opinion, more than ten times.
In fact, to be honest, it is still small, but they started this. So now we have information that a third mosque will be built in Warsaw, and the biggest one, of course, with the money from abroad, because they never, they always criticized any foreign influence, and they never proposed any legislation to stop the influence by money from abroad, for the politics, or for example, to found Islam, or Muslim movement in Poland. Then, when the war in Ukraine started, they opened borders for refugees and in fact not only for refugees but for everybody with Ukrainian passport because they made some legislation.
Giving every privilege that Polish citizens have for everybody with Ukrainian passport, even for people who came here from Western Europe. It's strange, but it's true. They made a special amendment, because their first goal was always to encourage as many foreigners to live and work in Poland as it is possible. It has two reasons. First is that they believe in multicultural society.
It is a part of, this is some branch of Polish pre-modern tradition, that we had a commonwealth with different nations and some of them are from this tradition and they believe that they can rebuild this commonwealth with different nations in encouraging these nations to build some community, not let's say Polish community, but they call it a Republican community, a new commonwealth of nations. From our perspective, it sounds very similar to globalist agenda, but they say, no, no, no, it's not a multiculturalism by globalists, This is our tradition of Polish multiculturalism. We as a national movement completely do not believe in this concept. We believe it's anachronic, pre-modern, and it didn't work. In fact, we had a commonwealth with different nations, but these nations don't want commonwealth with us. These nations like Belarusians, Lithuanians, Ukrainians, all of them wanted independent states. And it's normal, it's normal that every nation want to have their own independent states. So, some of law and justice politicians are people older age with their heads in the clouds, reading historical books and believing in some ideas, for example, from 17th, 16th or 18th century. And in my opinion they don't understand nothing from our times and especially they don't understand that mass immigration is a big threat for the society. In Poland this process started, especially in bigger cities. Warsaw under the Law and Justice government became much closer to London when we analysed the population. There are not many African people, but many people from Asia, as I said, and especially from Russia and Ukraine. The situation is changing very fast. They made a legislation and as I said, they gave every privilege, every policy for Polish citizens. They gave it also to the people with Ukrainian passports. And these are many millions of people who would like to live abroad.
We are the only European nation that pays for everything. And, of course, we have nothing in exchange. We have some agenda towards Ukraine, but they did nothing from our agenda, and we gave everything. And this is what we're against because we believe that it's impossible for one country to have two nations on the payroll, and this is how it works now. Then you have also Ukraine and supporting Ukraine agenda. At the beginning of the war we were not against, because we believed that this horrible Russian attack, is a crime and is a threat, but after two years we see that their government gave all that we have to Ukraine and the result is still not clear and other European nations do not act this way. They negotiate some things for them.
Americans are also not very fast to give everything what they have. And now, for example, our army do not have enough weapons because they gave new weapons from Polish army to Ukraine. And at the beginning they said that Americans or Germans will give us in change new equipment, all the equipment and the thing, but they didn't. So it's very hard being a Pole and seeing all of that. It's very hard not to be critical to law and justice and their government. In fact, we are not surprised. We know these people for many years. We know that during the debate about joining EU they were in the same camp as leftists, as centrists, progressives and all of them. In fact, they were never national or truly traditionalist or truly conservative right. They are a mix of people of different ideas and their leader of law and justice. It's not easy to understand this, being a foreigner, but to understand the situation you should know that the leader of law and justice Jaroslaw Kaczynski.
He always were against Polish nationalist tradition. He is rather from the tradition of Polish patriotic socialism. We had some pre-war tradition from interwar period of Polish, let's say, Polish patriotic socialists and this is their first choice. They do not talk about this last decades because they know that people would like to vote right-wing party, not patriotic left-wing party. But the leader is rather from, let's say, centrist or centre-left patriotic republican tradition, the leader of law and justice.
The members of the party are very mixed and very different. I would not say that every MP is bad. There are many probably MPs with good views but they vote bad or act bad being in government. I will give you one more or two more examples. For example, we had a very big debate in Poland about pro-life. Law and justice was always pro-life in declaration but when they got majority they did everything thing not to vote on pro-life bill so two times polish pro-life movement collected more than hundreds of thousands of signatures having majority so-called pro-life majority people had to collect hundreds of thousands of signatures to put citizens bill to parliament and they voted against. They voted against for two times, then we as right-wing MPs, some of their MPs and every MP from Confederation made written request to Constitutional Court and Constitutional Court with some nominees, right-wing nominees from Law and Justice waited few years to analyse this request, but after they analysed this, they made a judgement that it is against Polish constitution to kill unborn babies with some disabilities or health problems. And this is how the situation changed, not by the voting in parliament, And of course, people who are in favour of law and justice say that this was their secret plan to organise this this way. But I do not believe. In my opinion, it was rather by accident. They never wanted. And now their former prime minister Morawiecki said that he is against this sentence of the court, of constitutional court. That they should defend this. Yes. But they said that they are against because they are afraid of public opinion, people who like abortion, they want centrist voters and so on. So they do not defend, they controlled every media in Poland and they didn't defend this issue. Another example, their prime minister supported long-term EU LGBT strategy. Being prime minister voted in favour. Another example, their minister who was responsible for European funds sent a secret letter to local governments that if they want European funds they should cancel Anti-LGBT and pro-family statements. Many local councils made some statements that they are against LGBT propaganda in schools and they support normal family policy. It was then criticized by, of course, progressive media and some LGBT organizations, but there was nothing against citizens' rights. It was nothing against civil liberties or something. It was a declaration that we don't want propaganda in schools or something like that. And we know that they made this letter to local governments. We know that only from LGBT organizations because they published this, being proud that the so-called right-wing government is pushing the pressure with the EU to local governments to be not too much conservative. Yes, so it shows how they work and they say one thing and they do the opposite and it was always like that. We know we know these people for four decades So we are not surprised about normal polish voter don't know all of these facts because you need, hundreds of hours to follow every information and analyse everything to to gather these details and to understand what's going on and if you follow only mainstream media, even mainstream Catholic media in Poland.
In progressive mainstream media, you had an attack on law and justice, that these are nationalists, they are xenophobic, they are anti-European, they want to go back to the Middle Ages or something like that. So people said, okay, these are good people, yes, they are very conservative. And if you listen to some right-wing media or Catholic media, They are true conservatives. They fight very hard, tough fights in the EU and so on. And you had nowhere to have the truth about how they rule, how they govern the country. Everybody analyzed only what they said. And their speeches were quite good. I can agree. For example, two days ago, I listened to the speech of their leader and to their convention about EU policy and I could take this and it could be my speech, yes, but it has nothing to do with their government, what they did in Brussels. This is the problem and I think it's a problem in many countries. It's a problem also in Hungary.
Orban is also very pragmatic, yes, he's not a nationalist. And there's a problem in Italy with the Meloni government. It's not an independent agenda of independence. And in many other countries. So this is how it works. And this is why we believe that Polish politics deserve a truly right-wing party with truly conservative and truly pro-national and sovereign agenda and people who are against political correctness. This is what gathers us in Confederation. We are against political correctness. We don't want to be influenced in any way by anybody from mainstream. And we are proud that we are anti-mainstream. Of course, I had many debates in mainstream media, so I always go when they ask me and I always discuss.
And I believe that my views are not radical or far-right or anything like that. But I don't want to give up my principles and my beliefs. I don't want, I would rather, I would like to be rather outside politics, like being 12 years outside the parliament, than joining this, let's say, fake right political parties and saying good speeches and voting bad things. I don't want that.
Well, Krzysztof, thank you for giving us such an overview of Polish politics. And I wish that we had politicians like yourself in the UK with conviction, with beliefs that actually stood on a biblical principle on a lot of these issues. And I just the final thought is as deputy speaker, I mean, that is a that is a prestigious, important position. You must be Donald Tusk's kind of worst nightmare, that you stand for everything he is against. I'm sure it was difficult to actually get in that position, was it? I'm sure there was opposition. I know we only have a few minutes, but I'm just curious to know the opposition from people like Tusk to actually having you, a nationalist, a Christian, in that position.
It's a little bit different, in my opinion. To understand the situation, you should know that the main line of political difference, is in Poland between Civic Platform and Donald Tusk as a leader, and Law and Justice and Jarosław Kaczyński as a leader. It's not, on some level of course it's a, let's say, ideological and political different, but they have many things in common. This is our, let's say, talking point, yes, that they are not so different on the level of agenda of political program. When you analyze their EU policy, they could exchange their ministers, and in fact, they're exchanged in these two political parties many members of cabinets. In fact, Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki before was an advisor to Donald Tusk.
And there are many examples, I will not go into the detail because it's not so important. It is important to understand that it's a, let's say, ambition conflict between Kaczynski and Tusk.
It's obvious that they hate each other. It started in 80s in the opposition movement. They have very bad opinion about each other, very bad. This is a true conflict, a true personal conflict. Both of them try to be pragmatic and in fact they are very pragmatic, very. But not on this one issue, not all about them themselves. This is their weak point that they become very emotional. So going back to the situation in the chamber and me as a deputy speaker Donald Tusk and don't care he don't care he hate yaroslav kaczynski and me I'm the guy from the different generation, in my opinion he do not believe in anything he is a pragmatic politician after so many years in politics. He was a liberal, he was a classic liberal in 80s, maybe early 90s. So on the level of defending economic freedom, I think he understands everything what we say. And he's a former classic liberal.
Maybe he started on the same positions as Viktor Orban, but during years in politics, he lost belief probably in any principle. And now probably the only thing that he believes is pragmatism and power. Being in power and being pragmatic. This is how I understand him.
So, in my opinion, he used left-wing politicians as tools. He gave them the platform, as you say in English, he gave them the platform, he gave them the space, even in government, he gave them a very important part of administration because he doesn't care. Not because he supports these ideas, he doesn't care. In my opinion, he personally believes that these are stupid people with stupid program but he didn't care. So he also didn't care about my views, in my opinion. Of course, some of his members in his political party care a lot and hate very conservative people. This is, let's say, a pro-abortion lobby in his party, very strong now, because his party started as centre-right party. It is interesting that Civic Platform, the party of Donald Tusk, started in 2001, all these three parties that I talked about, so League of Polish Families, Law and Justice and Civic Platform, all these political parties started in 2001 and entered the parliament. League of Polish Families after seven years was kicked out from parliament by voters unfortunately, but Law and Justice and Civic Platform stayed there and both Law and Justice Party and Civic Platform started as centre-right political parties very similar to each other, so similar that some politicians in 2001 didn't know which one to join so it was like a lottery or you had colleagues here so you go there you have colleagues here you go there it was a time of big changes in Polish politics so a civic platform the party of Donald Tusk started as a platform with principles of defending western civilization defending Christian values defending economic freedom defending some some conservative values maybe not everything but some and being pro-EU this was the starting point and after 20 years, they are centre-left political parties with very big pro-abortion, progressive lobby inside, former post-communist politicians, former leftist politicians inside, Green Party inside, because they built a civic coalition, they extended civic platform into civic coalition. And in this coalition, you have people who split it from the post-communist left, you have Green Party, you have some citizens' movement, and
It's a central left spectrum. And Donald Tusk is a leader for everybody because now he tried to be pragmatic, not to be too close to any special views, yes? So for me it's completely not a problem. It's a problem with some MPs who are trying to be a little bit offensive or sometimes aggressive but I have my attitude which is always being very calm and polite to everybody no matter what are his views. I try to be polite and with respect to everybody this is I believe that how we should act in democratic politics and in Parliament and it works, because in fact even left-wing MPs or pro-abortion MPs have a good opinion about me as a deputy speaker, because I do not interrupt their speeches, I'm not nasty, counting their time. They could cooperate on this normal level with me, in my opinion, much better than, for example, with deputy speakers from law and justice, they were horrible, they were nasty, they were aggressive.
They used their seat to, not to push their agenda, but to push their emotions against other people. So they were, there were attempts to push me from the seat, to kick me from the seat, the left put this request, but nobody voted in favor of this request, because nobody believed that it's a good decision to take this position from me and give it to anybody else. I think it's a result of maybe 20 years of my work in public debate and people know who I am, people know that I have my views, but people even who do not believe in my views, they respect that I didn't change them for many years, that I, in fact, in my opinion, many people from centre-left also respect me, that I didn't join law and justice. Because they have very bad opinion about law and justice, also about how they ruled when you analyse what they did with public money. Yes, this is another story, what they did with public money, how they used this for themselves. Their interests.
Not very many bad stories. And we were not involved in all of that. So in my opinion, I have, I am lucky because I have a big respect. Of course, not everybody like me and especially not everybody like my views. But I have no reasons, I have no reason to say that I'm in a bad situation.
Well, Krzysztof, I do appreciate your time. I'm so thankful to have you on. I know you've got great demands on your time being in that high profile position and being a high profile figure in the country. So thank you so much for giving us your time to explain to our UK and US audience a little bit about Polish politics. So thank you.
Thank you very much for this invitation and this conversation and to finish this conversation with some good accent I would like to invite everybody who are true conservative people to come to Poland to meet us. We are very open to extend our international contacts. What I would like to say is that on the level of personal contacts.
If some of you have some contacts with people from law and justice, it's not bad for us. As a normal people, we talk with each other normally in Parliament and outside Parliament. So we are critical to their leadership and to their prime minister, but taking normal MPs, we talk like normal people.
And it is possible to have contacts with law and justice, for example, in European Parliament and with us in Poland or when we enter the European Parliament. So I would like to encourage everybody from truly right-wing movement to build contacts with Polish people, with Polish conservative organisations, political parties, editorial houses, NGOs, social movements. We have a big social movement, very many organizations and many good people. And please, come to Poland, have this contact, maybe also some people from the States. I believe that we should support each other. I always put some time and my energy to build this contact, so maybe some of my colleagues from abroad will watch this interview. I hope so. And me personally and our colleagues from Confederation, we are always very open to support every good people with good ideas to defend the principles that we believe, also conservative, traditional, Christian, Pro-freedom, pro-independence, and other good principles.
So, this is my word and I believe that despite all these bad tendencies that we see in Western world, in Europe, we should have hope and we should defend good principles and good values, because this is our duty and this is how I believe, this is what we should do. So I have very big respect for every people who work in politics and on social level in countries that are less conservative than Poland, because I know how it feels when your country is going in the wrong direction. I talked with people from different countries and I know how it feels and I have big respect if you do a good job and give hope to your people, to your nations.
Exactly. Well, thank you, Krzysztof, for your time. Greatly appreciate it. And I'm sure we will speak soon.
Thank you very much.

Jacqui Deevoy - Playing God: An Investigation into Medical Democide in the UK

Show Notes and Transcript
We are delighted to be joined by Jacqui Deevoy to discuss her latest documentary film "Playing God," which exposes medical genocide in the UK and sheds light on healthcare injustices. She highlights involuntary euthanasia, emphasizing the need for justice in cases of malpractice, and calls for transparency and ethical standards in healthcare. Jacqui delivers an important message and urges Hearts of Oak followers and supporters to engage in conversations that hope to promote a meaningful change in the system.
Jacqui Deevoy has been a writer and journalist for over three decades, working mainly for women’s magazines and national newspapers. Since 2020, she has been writing mainly for the alternative media. In 2021, Jacqui made her first film ‘A Good Death?’ with Ickonic. Her second film, ‘Playing God’, which was crowdfunded by the public was released on in April 2024.
Connect with Jacqui...WEBSITE                    jacquideevoy.comX/TWITTER                twitter.com/JacquiDeevoy1                                    twitter.com/PlayingGodUK
Watch 'Playing God'  ukcolumn.org/video/playing-god
Recorded  2.5.24
Connect with Hearts of Oak...X/TWITTER                 twitter.com/HeartsofOakUKWEBSITE                     heartsofoak.org/PODCASTS                 heartsofoak.podbean.com/SOCIAL MEDIA           heartsofoak.org/connect/SHOP                           heartsofoak.org/shop/
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on X twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin 
TRANSCRIPT
(Hearts of Oak)
And today I'm delighted to be joined by someone who I've had the pleasure of watching a lot on Twitter, bumped into once, but never had on, and that's Jacqui Deevoy.
Jacqui, thank you so much for your time today.
(Jacqui Deevoy)
Thank you for inviting me on to Hearts of Oak.
It's great to have you, and people obviously will know you from all different things from your Twitter handle, but also from Unity News Network.
You started writing, I was looking at your bio, back in the 80s for teen magazines and then women's magazines.
You've had articles published in all of newspapers, in the Mail, the Telegraph, the Sun, the Express and many of the women's magazines.
And I want to get into all that, but we're going to talk about this film, which you have written and produced and you have presented, and that is Playing God.
Playing God, an investigation into medical genocide in the UK.
It is a very hard-hitting film, very honest film, and captures the lives of individuals whose lives have been utterly destroyed with the death of family members. And it gives the personal stories behind the facts and the data and the stats, I think, which we often see.
And we're just going to play a clip of it; here is the trailer:
In the last 30 years, you can see good evidence that the National Health Service has become a killing machine.
Elizabeth was killed off after I was criminally assaulted and made to have my baby two months early for absolutely no reason at all.
You can imagine the trauma of watching your perfectly healthy partner of 21 years just die.
In his medication chart it appears he had midazolam and morphine two days after he died.
Now I want to know what happened with my steward.
When you go to a hospital like a national health hospital, you go there to be cured.
You don't go there to die.
The moment they go into hospital, they're being put onto these hospital protocols, which dictate which drugs, which treatment they're going to receive.
And it's a one-size-fits-all blanket policy.
Once procedures are put into a protocol, it becomes a straitjacket.
They're literally killing people at the moment.
She was in no pain, there was no shortness of breath, yet she was on six or seven different forms of medication We hadn't known about these side effects. There was nothing in the paperwork that he was given.
The night nurse just pumped him with midazolam and morphine.
Helena Bai was the first fatal case of the drug Epilim.
These big pharmaceutical companies are money-making businesses.
They're not healthcare companies.
That's what we're dealing with, a money-making, potentially fraudulent, certainly historically criminal enterprise.
And then children are also a market for unlicensed medications.
It's the luck of the draw whether they benefit or it's causation of death.
The CQC said they were doing an investigation, but NHS England stopped it. Those two doctors were playing God.
They were killing people.
She suffered much.
She died needlessly.
She could have been saved, but she was murdered, by the state.
I know people can get the full show, the full film, which is, I think, in our 10 minutes, and that is in the description.
So, whether you're watching any of the platforms, listening on Podbean or the podcasting apps, you can click that and watch it.
Now, maybe we'll start, Jacqui; your work, I think I looked on the Daily Telegraph and you'd written articles in 2020.
I think you'd written one in 2021, a joint article, fewer suffering as much as care home residents.
Why can't we hug our relatives?
And then your time there finished.
That probably seems like a world away, but do you want to just touch on some of your journalism background and maybe how that came to an end?
I assume as you became vocal about what you were seeing.
Yeah, I wouldn't say it's actually come to an end. I'm still working as a journalist, and I still aim to get my articles into the mainstream newspapers, into the mainstream media, because I think that the people we need to reach the most are the people who actually read the papers and watch the TV.
But I think a lot of the papers have got a bit fed up with me over the last few years because mainly because I've been trying to um get them to publish stories that are counter narrative. um government narrative and they don't seem to want to do that.
I realized that back in 2020, when I think the first thing I discovered, I mean I knew the whole thing was nonsense anyway anyway, because I've been, you know, following all sort of, that kind of stuff, world agendas for many decades.
But the first thing I noticed was that time when the government decided that the coronavirus, as they used to call it back then, was not a high consequence disease.
And they published this on the government website.
So, I was alerted to this and thought 'oh well that's really good news for most people out there who are scared and worried.'
So, I contacted a lot of newspapers and said, 'hey why don't we run a story' just just to reassure people that it's not a serious thing that'll blow over it in a couple of weeks and none of the papers wanted to run that story strangely, so I actually gave it to an alternative news site they were called News Punch at the time.
And they're now called The People's Voice and they ran it.
A lot of people did see it, but again, you know, it's quite echo chambery, isn't it, sometimes when you're putting stuff out on social media, and not everyone sees it.
The people that you want to see it don't often see it, but it was seen by a lot of people.
And the next story I tried to get out there was about DNRs, because my dad was in a care home in 2020, and I found out that he had a DNR on him; on his notes.
Which is a do not resuscitate, so allowed to die.
Yeah, I'd vaguely heard about them before but it never affected me in a personal way and I thought hang on isn't this when someone is eternally ill and then I kind of remembered my mum had been in a hospice and they had do not resuscitate orders on all the doors of the hospice, I remember.
I thought why has my dad got one of those he hasn't got a terminal illness he was recovering from a stroke and I I was aiming to get him out of the care home when he was better even though the care home manager when I first booked him in, I said 'oh, I'll probably pick him up and get him in a few months get him back home again.
And she went 'oh, no, people don't usually go home after they've been in here.'
He's like, really?
I was telling my dad that I mean my dad apparently had vascular dementia caused by the stroke but he was pretty compos mentis.
I was telling my dad about that story and he said: 'no it's true he said you walk in and you go out the back; he said you walk in the front door and then you go out the back door in a box.'
And he was actually right, most of the people that did go in there didn't ever leave alive and then especially after what we discovered was happening.
All the more reason that they didn't leave alive.
I was more determined than ever to get to get him out.
And some of the stories that the Telegraph did run of mine revolved around that.
So, I think the first one, they liked me writing about care homes, but they didn't really want me to write about anything else.
I wrote this, I did pitch the DNR story to the features editor at the time at the Telegraph and he commissioned it, and liked it.
And a few weeks went by and I said, are you going to run the story?
He said: ‘so, basically I'd spoken to a whistle-blower doctor at that point who told me that DNRs were being put on everyone coming into hospital over 60.
They were being put on people with physical disabilities, people with terminal illnesses, people with even mental health issues, like schizophrenia, people with autism.’
So, this was all revealed in this article and also about the blanket DNRs that were being put on people in care homes.
So, a few weeks went by and I said, when are you going to run the story?
And they said, oh, 'we're actually not going to run it now.'
So, I didn't really say why, but they rarely do.
And so I thought, well, that's a bit strange.
So, again, I got that published on an alternative site and it went out to a lot of people, but not the right people again.
You know, that they were the first two stories but yeah the ones that they did like were about me getting my dad out of the care home; I did a kind of series of four.
I think that last one you mentioned was the fourth one, but the first one was about me; a window visits, I think the first one was about and the second one, and how tragic that was, and how I couldn't leave my dad in that situation and how nobody should be in that situation.
It was like prison visits, it was awful, really awful.
And my dad was actually getting really depressed and actually quite suicidal.
He was saying to me things like through the window, what's the point of being alive if this is what it's gonna be like?
He wasn't old, my dad was 76 at this point in time.
I then decided to get him out of the care home.
People were saying, it's not possible, you're not going to be able to do it.
The care home staff initially said, no, you can't take him home.
That's not allowed.
And I was saying, well, you can't stop me, because I accused them of false imprisonment.
I said, I'd take them to court for false imprisonment and violation of his human rights and my human rights.
And strangely, they had him ready to take home the next day.
Yeah, my second article um along on that subject was um about how difficult it was to look after an elderly parent at home on your own.
I didn't think I hadn't thought it through basically, so I got him back to his house and I thought, 'well I'm gonna have to stay with him now and and look after him.'
After a couple of weeks it was just getting impossible so, because he's a bit quite a bit bigger than me and that was quite hard like just like getting him in and out of the shower and stuff like that.
I'd never done anything like that before either, and it's quite embarrassing, really, for him and for me initially.
You know, you get used to it very quickly, though, taking someone to the toilet and helping them wash, but it was too much, really, for me anyway.
And, yeah, so I got him a carer, and he had a carer for the next year until he sadly died in a most horrible way but that is a separate story I think.
So, all this was happening while I was making a film with Iconic called A Good Death.
That came about, because I was trying to take this story to lots of papers about the euthanasia that was going on in hospitals.
So, this is something I discovered along the way, because I'd been on a couple of podcasts with people talking about what was happening in care homes, that a lot of elderly people seem to be dying quite suddenly in mysterious circumstances.
And then someone came to me and said that their relative had been killed in an NHS setting.
And he had proof.
He had a big file of proof.
I had a look at it and thought, well, you know, this is undeniable that this has happened.
We need to do something about it.
I started speaking out about that.
More people came to me.
At the point when I had about 16 people with very similar stories.
I took the story to the newspapers saying, you know, this needs to get out there.
And I had meetings with two editors and face-to-face meetings.
And after they looked at the evidence, they were absolutely gobsmacked.
And they were like, this is massive.
This needs to be front page news, headline news.
It's the biggest story of the century almost.
I don't know if they actually said that, but they implied that it was a massive story.
And and then they took their copies of the evidence away with them and then over the period of the next few weeks they kind of stopped talking to me.
One of them actually interviewed some of the 16 people he came back to me and said: "yeah I've spoken to them there's not enough evidence really come back when someone's gone to court and won and then we'll consider running a story, but we can't run it now."
The other guy said, ‘oh, I'm a bit busy now, I'll pass it on to someone else, they'll be in touch.’
And then it just, they just disappeared, basically.
They've never really spoken to me since.
So, in any kind of depth.
And one, I do tag him in a lot of things on Twitter, but he's never responded to any of that.
I think he's stopped working in journalism.
I think he works for some pharmaceutical company or something like That's an even better reason to contact me.
I mean, how did the film come together?
It's a difficult-to-watch film because it is –.
You hear people's raw emotion and grief as you're as you're watching it.
It's very well shot and put together, because I think it's essential to tell a story you need to do it well, and you need to have a level of professionalism and certainly kudos to you and the others for for doing that and putting it together.
How did the conversation come around you had heard a number of these stories and you've got difficulty getting the information out.
So, how did the conversations to come and actually the beginning of this coming together?
Yes, so if you're talking about a good death, because this was back in 2021.
Jamie Icke from Iconic came to me and said he knew that I was having trouble getting this story out and he said, why don't we make it into a documentary?
So, that's what we did, we started filming in September and it was finished by December.
So, it's been out for, well, almost three years now and it's been seen by hundreds of thousands of people, I would say, maybe even millions.
I don't know exponentially people share it.
It's on iconic.com if people want to see it.
It's also on Rumble on the Iconic channel.
So, that's the first film.
And obviously after that film, I had more and more people then approaching me.
So, I'd set up a little group at the beginning of 2021 just to keep all the people involved in the film in one place.
And so I had about 16 people in the group to start with and I've kept that group going as a support group and it's now got 142 people in it.
And they've all got horrendous stories, absolutely horrendous, stories about what's how their loved ones were murdered in NHS settings in hospices care homes and hospitals, and the stories are just unbelievable, and I can completely understand how people don't want to listen to them and don't want to believe it because you don't expect your loved one to go into a care home or hospital and be murdered which is what's happening.
We kind of sugar-coat it slightly by calling it involuntary euthanasia but involuntary euthanasia I don't know why that phrase really exists because that is murder if someone is being.
Euthanized being being killed against their will, surely that's murder.
I can't see why it's called anything else.
When you mention euthanasia people generally think, oh that's you that's you can go off to that place in Switzerland you know and and have yourself put down if you're terminally ill or ancient or both.
But that's not that's voluntary euthanasia which is a very different thing.
I don't think that's a good thing either, but involuntary euthanasia is something else altogether, and it carries the same prison sentence as murder up to life in imprisonment.
If you help someone kill themselves that carries up to 14 years in prison so it is a crime in this country.
It's not legal, it's unlawful, and it's a crime, and anyone who does it should pay the price.
But if you or I did it to a loved one; if we drugged a loved one to death no matter what state they were in, whether they were terminally ill or not, we would be arrested, and probably jailed, but when a doctor or nurse does it seems to be okay, and and I don't really understand that.
It's not right and the stories I've heard about these medics who've been carrying out this crime are just horrendous.
They're just unbelievable.
It's almost like…It's hard to believe that doctors and nurses could be that heartless and cruel and murderous, but I don't think it's all doctors and nurses at all. I'd say 95% of them are absolutely brilliant, you know, but there was this kind of strange death squad that I am starting to believe were actually hired specifically to do this work, because the people I've spoken to, the relatives and friends of victims.
The way they've described them, they're not like your average doctor or nurse.
They're cold and they're sadistic and they're unpleasant.
Sometimes they won't even speak.
Some have been reported not to have any identification or name badges.
They've been very hard to trace afterwards in some cases.
It's very, very strange, and I'm starting to wonder if these people haven't been brought in to do this, because your average nurse or carer or doctor wouldn't be able to do that; that's not why they're doing their job.
They're doing their job to help people not to kill them.
I think a lot of us are more open and questioning than I think we were four years ago.
Certainly this to me actually I've begun to ask questions I think it was Wayne Cunnington putting up stories of how his mum had died and then it seemed to be that she was killed.
And I know there's a massive push this week, I know, parliament were pushing once again to bring in legislation, so individuals can be killed off assisted suicide.
Killing however you want to term it and I passed one of the demos actually against that and our politicians by and large are rushing towards ' actually we need to end life, we need to kill people,' but the the term you use in it is an investigation into medical democide which is the intentional killing of an individual by the state by the government.
And many people may think, actually that's a very strong term, surely this is just failings in the system.
How do you go from, it's not just failings in the system, it's not just the collapse of the NHS, which you've seen, it's actually intentional killing, because that is quite a difference.
You're talking about the new film now, Playing God.Playing God, yeah.
That was released in April, so just a couple of weeks ago, and it is as you say, an investigation into medical genocide in the UK over the last 50 years.
It's very different to the first film, it's formed very differently and it's much broader, we're looking at all kinds of deaths.
If you watch the film and listen to the people speaking, the people who've lost loved ones to democide, you'll understand what it's about.
So, we're looking at people who've lost loved ones in drug trials.
One woman has been fighting for justice for her 12-year-old daughter since 1978, so coming up for 50 years.
She herself is 90 now.
Joan Bye, she speaks in the film about her daughter, Helenor, who they used in a drug trial for a drug called Epilim, which was an epilepsy drug.
The child didn't even have epilepsy.
They just used her because she was there.
And she died as a result.
And Joan's story is absolutely horrifying.
It's heart-breaking, but it's also horrifying.
I don't want to go into too much detail, but they did have to have five funerals for Helenor, because they found her body parts in five different locations.
A shocking.
Then we have um a story of um Elizabeth and Graham Dixon's daughter, Elizabeth, she was a one-year-old baby when she died.
Terrible malpractice negligence, absolute awful things happened.
They described that in great detail in in the film.
So, then we cover a vaccine, I don't want to call it a vaccine, a jab death from the COVID jab.
That's Vicky, and she talks about the loss of her partner who had the jab and died shortly after.
Again, another shocking story.
We have Elena as well, whose 54-year-old husband was executed, shall we say.
He was euthanized in front of her in a hospital.
And finally, Stephen and his sister Deborah, who tell about the euthanization of their mother, who was perfectly healthy.
She was just grieving the loss of her husband, who'd just died 12 days before she was killed in hospital.
And she just wasn't feeling well, generally.
So, she She went to hospital to be checked out, and within days she was also euthanized.
So, these stories are absolutely unbelievable, but I think when you see the people telling them and see the grief and the suffering that these killings have caused, you will believe it.
I mean, it is hard to believe just when you hear me talking about it like this, but when you actually see them, you know they're telling the truth.
Because there were a number of the stories; one was the couple with the very young child, I think it was, and being in one hospital and then moving to different and things started changing.
And it makes you wonder where as you mentioned there are individuals, whether there are certain hospitals that that participate in this which many do not because if it's all fine in one they said everything was going okay then they were transferred suddenly things changed and the first wouldn't take the child back.
It does seem to be that there are particular hospitals, particular venues, that are maybe selected to allow this to happen.
Well, over the last um three years, I've been trying to find a pattern, and trying to find a reason, any kind of pattern.
I've been looking at that, is it certain hospitals?
It doesn't seem to be although, there do seem to be quite a few in Liverpool which is quite interesting, because that's where the Liverpool care pathway originated.
So, and there was that scandal, the the old hay hospital, wasn't there, years ago.
Yeah, so quite a few seem to be in the Liverpool region, but I haven't got a big enough sample really to say whether that's a coincidence or not.
I was looking at the ages of the patients, the sort of financial situation of them, because a lot of people believe this euthanasia is to do with saving money, especially on the elderly with pensions and hospital stays that a lot of them seem to have, you know.
But I can't really see any real pattern in my group, which is my sample, really.
I've spoken to hundreds of more people as well, but not everyone wants to join a support group.
I can't see a pattern, I mean, I could say most of them are elderly, and I could say almost all of them are not terminally ill.
Their financial statuses differ, their backgrounds differ, some are wealthy, some aren't.
I have noticed most of them are white, that is something I have noticed.
I don't know if that's relevant or not, again that might just be a coincidence.
But yeah, I can't see any pattern as yet, so for it to be random is also strange,
So yeah, I don't really, I can't say at this stage.
I think that would take decades to work out and as with all scandals, this scandal will probably take decades to come to the mainstream as well, because they're still not interested.
Only a few months ago I emailed them all again.
I've now emailed over 100 editors and staff writers and features editors on newspapers and I regularly just email them and say are you ready to run this story yet and send them the picture again.
And these days I just get tumbleweed.
I get the occasional, maybe some new person in the office, who writes back and goes, 'oh this sounds interesting, tell me more.'
And then I tell them more and then they go completely silent.
It's like someone said, no, you're not allowed to talk about that.
I'm wondering if there's some kind of de-notice on it or some kind of thing,
They've been told not to discuss it.
I've had arguments with them, well, not arguments, but I approached Isabel Oakeshott, I approached Beverly Turner, and...
It results in them blocking me, which is quite strange because I'm never rude.
I just say, would you like to look at my film and then get back to me and see what you think?
Isabel Oakeshott said to me, no matter how much evidence I would provide her, I could provide, she still wouldn't believe it.
So I thought, well, that's not very journalistic of you.
She used to be a journalist, didn't she?
Yeah, I know, that was strange.
So, we had a long conversation on Messenger.
I've never actually spoken to her on the phone or anything, and then out of the blue seemingly, out of the blue, she just blocked me.
I mean, Beverly Turner said she has tried to mention the midazolam stuff, but it's very difficult at GB News to do that and she didn't go into too much detail.
She just said she she doesn't have that kind of power, and she did unblock me after she blocked me, so hopefully she will be able to help at some point.
It's very difficult for me as a journalist to see these people, journalists, doing what they're doing, and working for places that won't let them speak.
Why would you as a journalist work for somewhere that is censoring you?
I don't know, maybe I'm weird because a lot of journalists are working for places that are censoring them, so maybe, you know, and they're a lot richer than me.
But I'd rather live in a tent than do what they do, than lie to the public like that, I just couldn't.
It's like when you talk to James Delingpole and he talks about life prior, and life now.
And realizing that he's a very different person and is now willing to ask difficult questions, but when you, I guess, your you see your role I mean I mean, the role as a journalist is to put a story out and then it lets the public decide.
Or you've got, I guess, a full on investigative piece where you're trying to piece it together.
They're the two ways.
But, I mean, is it for you?
Is it just you're telling the story and then see what happens?
Do you really want to delve into and understand deeper?
Because it's essential that these individuals have their stories told.
That is so important for them, but also the public to hear.
And it's the first time the public will hear many of these stories.
Yeah, absolutely.
I mean, in the old days, you know, journalists would investigate a story, write it up, the papers would publish it.
And it was the journalist's job to question everything and to try and hold people accountable.
But these days, it's just not like that at all.
The newspapers seem to have become, you know, judge and jury.
Like three years ago, when I was first trying to get the euthanasia story out they were saying, 'well, if you can if you if you can give me a story of somebody who's gone to court and they've won the case then yes we'll look at it.'
And it's like well why can't you just put the story out as it is saying people are saying that this is happening and then your readers can make up their own minds.
How it used to be, but they don't do that anymore, it's it's very frustrating.
Also, a lot of people a lot of the public believe and people I meet who say to me, oh you're a journalist, why don't you publish this and why don't you publish that?
And I said well it's not up to me as a freelance journalist what goes in the paper and they're like isn't it?
So, I said no, no, no, it has to go through a process, and invariably nine stories out of ten that I pitched to them they won't publish these days.
So, where it was at a much better rate back in the day, but now, especially talking about and writing about this kind of stuff, where I want the truth to get out there, they're not interested in that at all, so...
That's why I went on to make the second film, because I teamed up with award-winning directors, Ash and Naeem Mahmood.
And Ash has a channel called Planet Uplift and he interviews lots of people.
So, he had people, he said, need to tell their stories.
I still had people that wanted to speak out as well.
So, when we put them together, we came up with this idea that, you know, of playing God because, you know, the doctors and the courts and the nurses and the paramedics and so many people these days are in positions of power where they can play God.
That's how the film was kind of born, and Ash brought people to the film and I brought people too.
We could have included,50 more people in the film really, because we haven't covered all aspects of Democide side, because it's only an hour long documentary, but you could do part two, part three, part four, easily, you know.
Same with the first film, I would like to do, ' good death, part two,' because because we've got so many people and so many stories and they're still they're still coming to me as well.
It's still happening, although not at the same rate as as far as I can gather, as it was in 2020 and 2021, where people were just being euthanised left, right and centre.
And back in April 2020, you were mentioning earlier about the assisted dying bill that they're trying to push.
Matt Hancock in particular has been, you know, dragged out from under his stone to come and, you know, push that again.
He used to be against assisted dying and then in 2020, he did a big turnaround of opinion and decided he was all for it.
And you have to ask now, why have they been pushing it so heavily and so hard since 2020?
I think it's because they want to, once it's in place, and I think it will be passed at some point in the near future, because the way they're selling it, they're making it sound quite attractive, but it's a slippery slope.
And we could end up like Canada, where people are now being euthanized; they could just be poor, or they could be not feeling great or depressed.
I mean, I do know one person who actually was euthanized in Switzerland because they were depressed in 2020.
But it's just awful, it's not the solution.
It is the final solution, but it's not a solution.
There are other ways to get people past these terrible points in their lives.
And most people believe that the people who choose to be euthanized are terminally ill, but that's not always the case, and with the involuntary euthanasia that we've been seeing, I don't think any of the people in my group did their relatives were terminally ill.
I don't think; no, not I can remember.
The vast majority are not terminally ill, let's put it that way and the vast majority are not old either.
Well, a large percentage of them aren't old.
Well, it's like obviously in it's happening in Belgium as well, and they've got some of the worst legislation that if you're a teenager and you feel depressed that day you can kill yourself.
Not really the solution for a teenager feeling down in the dumps, but I mean is it because,
The government expected to push this through quite a while ago.
I remember being involved 10 years ago with demonstrations outside parliament where the government trying kind of force it, and are hell-bent on forcing this through.
And is it that actually the government the NHS decide actually we're just going to start on this.
We will produce I guess polling that shows the public are in favor therefore that that covers us and because they're doing something which is not legal and the individuals don't have a say.
If there is a conversation about, you know, if someone decides after six months that they want to end their life, I don't agree with that.
But that is a conversation.
But this is about people having zero say and simply being their life taken, being killed by another person.
They don't have a choice in that.
And to me, that's the most dangerous part.
And whatever the legislation says when it does come in, which it will come in, whatever it says, that's irrelevant to what will happen, because it's a massive slippery slope.
But yeah, how do you see the NHS doing this?
Well, it's not legal, but the government are clamouring for it to come into law.
Well, as a lot of newspaper editors said to me when I first started pitching this story, they were saying, well, we all kind of know this goes on in hospitals and care homes.
We all know that when someone's very old and very ill, that they get a little bit of helping hand at the end.
And they're given the end of life drugs and they're put on these care pathways, which are actually death pathways.
We all know that goes on, and I said, yes, we do.
And we also know that it's illegal and that it shouldn't be happening.
No one has got the right to hasten another person's death.
No one's got the right to end a life, no matter how ill or old that person is, even if they're terminally ill.
No one's got the right to do that, yet it's happening all the time, and that's bad enough, but when it extends to then killing people who aren't ill real or old.
I don't where's that going to end.
I don't know if you saw the film, Logan's Run, back in the 70s.
It's a sci-fi film where everyone's life ends at 30 and it's something that they all really look forward to.
It's a big celebration, and they go on this carousel thing and basically they're just blown up into smithereens but it's like a big celebration.
And Logan's run is about a man called Logan and a girl who's played by Jenny Agata, who was every every boy's fantasy back in the day, and they realize it's not a good system and they try to escape.
Everyone when they're born gets a kind of watch thing put on their wrist with a countdown to to the day when they're 30 and they can actually celebrate, there was a word for it, something like rejuvenation or renewal or something like that when they actually die.
But, yeah, it's a really interesting film, and it's like we're heading towards that kind of system where I think once the assisted dying bill is passed.
There then will be age limits put in place, I'm sure.
I don't think I'll see it in my lifetime, but maybe in our grandchildren's, children's, or grandchildren's life lifetime we might where you have to die at a certain age, you know, because we're going to be costing too much.
And then they'll be bigging it up like it's a good thing.
It's something that people will look forward to and and celebrate .
It's totally warped and inverted to the way life should be um you know that death is a sad a bad thing.
Although, obviously some cultures do celebrate it, but like no life should be ended artificially and to drug someone to death is one of the most horrific ways of killing someone.
These drugs that they've been using on people are used in many states in the US for executions, exactly the same drugs and in fact some states have banned those drugs, because the method is too barbaric, yet they're still using this horrible method on innocent people in care homes and hospitals all over the world.
So, I was going to say as well, back in April 2020, a protocol was put in place, NG163, which must have been handed down from the WHO.
Matt Hancock got his hands on it , he decided to get a panel of doctors and professors to look at it.
They had a look they said, 'no you can't use this.'
They wrote a letter to the BMJ stating that this protocol NG163 should not be used, because it will kill people; that's still available online you can see that letter on the BMJ.
One of the the signatories is Dr. Sam Amadzi, so you could probably look that up and it would it will pop up.
Matt Hancock basically said thank you very much and implemented it anyway, so even though you know he'd been advised not to put it in place he did.
And Matt Hancock also said in the COVID inquiry that he wanted to be the one who decided who should live and who should die.
If that's not someone with a God complex, I don't know what is.
He was playing God in a massive way or wanted to, but the people who were actually playing God were the doctors and nurses who were prescribing and administering these end of life drugs.
What what about because when I when I talked to Wayne and he said the difficulty he had of getting the the medical records from his from his mom, and only when he got that did he realize what had taken place.
Have you had those conversations with people about getting those records, because that proves what happens, but maybe they've suddenly disappeared or not available anymore.
It's bonkers that you have to fight legally to actually get the medical records of your loved ones, but kind of how does that come in this film and the people you've spoken to?
It's pretty shocking, because it takes a long time to get them, that's not accidental, you know.
And then a lot of people I know who've finally got the records after months and sometimes years of chasing them, they're redacted.
A lot of it is redacted, a lot of it has missing pages.
One person, I think Was sent you know a few pages of notes, but when she got a lawyer onto the case there was like a thousand pages of notes.
So, they actually hide a lot from the families and make it very very difficult for them to get the information and then I don't know how they're allowed to redact information, but one person you know got all the notes and there's just big black stripes through most of it, you know.
So, I don't know how they're even allowed to do that and it's obviously why they're doing it, because they're hiding what they've been doing.
I don't really understand why some people's notes are redacted but other people's are actually...
Maybe it's they just don't have the time to do it or something and it's or it slips through because a lot of people have found out, like Wayne, found out so much from the notes that they didn't know before.
You know, even more horrific than they imagined.
It's all there you know, So I don't know why some slip through and some actually don't, but it makes you wonder you know what is actually in the redacted notes.
It must be must be pretty terrible what they're hiding.
Yeah, know completely .
Can I just end off and asking about the big forum in the drugs companies these because obviously Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson have made a shed load of money from these jabs in the last four years, but at the flip side some of them mean talk about midazolam, but that's a generic drug so they're not necessarily making money.
You begin to ask what role the pharmaceutical industry have and obviously in America they're one of the biggest lobby groups on Capitol Hill.
I think maybe less here, but of course we don't have the same lobby power of organizations as as they do in the states, but where do kind of drug companies fit in to this is it failing simply in the NHS or groups within it actually passing this or do the pharmaceutical industries do; they have a part to play in this.
Yeah, absolutely.
I mean they They're pretty much controlling the whole thing, aren't they?
They're developing the drugs, they're doing the trials.
They're using people in the trials, in experiments, and they're paying people.
They're making a lot of money, but they're also paying a lot of money to the people who are administering the drugs so not the nurses particularly but GPs doctors; they they get massive commissions for prescribing these drugs with you know whether it's midazolam or any sort of drug.
They get money for doing that.
Yeah, it is all about the money ultimately and the the big pharmaceutical companies have all the power.
I mean even the The big ones like Pfizer, who've been fined many, many times.
I think Pfizer had the biggest fine ever, $2.3 billion or something they were fined.
They just pay it and carry on.
You know, it's like no skin off their nose.
They got that much money, They don't care.
They don't care who dies as a result, and they don't care if they get fined.
I don't know how they're allowed to continue to operate after such a huge fine, but they are.
So, it's very difficult for the little person to get any kind of justice because they're all in it together, they all close ranks as well, as far down as the police, the courts, the coroners and the pharmaceutical companies.
That hey all close ranks at the hospitals and stop people getting justice.
These people as well, these big companies have a bottomless pit of money.
If a small person is trying to sue, it's almost impossible to to keep up, because you'll run out of money at some point, even if you're wealthy.
Or you'll want to run out of energy, or time, or you might you might die, you might get ill in the process, a lot of people do get ill when they're involved in these sort of really traumatic sort of cases, and that's what they're hoping.
They, you know, the enemy is hoping that those things will happen to you, because you'll stop bothering them.
And I've known people who started going down the legal route and they've had to stop,because they've run out of money or because it's making them ill or because they just can't.
Yeah, it's very difficult.
We've got some brave people who are doing it in the background and they're fighting and I hope they're gonna win, and when they do it's gonna be a whole different story.
One other thing, but I just want to ask you about the response you've had from medical professionals, because my conversations with David Cartland, and he's one of the few, and it does seem as though most others are worried.
And in one way, you understand that, because you don't want to throw away your career, but if you're seen killing, then surely as a human being, you need to respond.
But have you had responses or people contacting you from medical community saying, actually, this is what we have seen, or have the majority been from individuals whose loved ones have been killed?
Very few medical professionals have come forward and spoken to me; the ones that have are terrified.
They're not sure whether they want to speak to me or not, but they feel they feel they have to say something, in fact I'm having a phone conversation this afternoon with somebody who's actually tried to speak out and been targeted and has got into trouble with the police and stuff.
It's terrifying when you're trying to do this on your own and no-one's backing you up.
I was trying to write an article for News  Uncut recently.
I wanted to investigate all the dancing nurses.
So I thought, well, it shouldn't be too difficult to speak to some of the nurses to say, you know, what were these dances about?
You know, how did you have time to do them?
They all look a bit weird, you know, can you tell me about it?
Couldn't find anyone.
I could find nurses who'd say, 'no, we would never have been able to do something like that, we wouldn't have been allowed.'
You know, you can't do that in a hospital.
But nobody has come forward and said, yes, we choreographed a dance and we did it and we got professional team filmmakers in to film us on the roof of the hospital with a drone camera, it's like because a lot of these films were very professionally produced.
And I couldn't find anyone who admitted to being involved in a dance like that, which then leads you to believe that they were actors.
They were hired to do these weird rituals in the hospital corridors.
For what reason, I don't know?
And in the same way, when it comes to trying to get people to talk about something even more serious like euthanasia.
Well, firstly they're worried that they'll get into trouble if they come forward and speak out publicly and the ones that have done that have got into trouble have lost their jobs.
It's just and and how many of them are going to come forward and say, 'yeah I actually killed quite a few people.'
They're probably in denial about it.
The lawyer in my film Anna, she's spoken to a lot of medics who are traumatized by what they've been through and what they've seen, but as far as I know we haven't had any confessions yet, we haven't had anyone come forward to say, 'yes, I administered those those fatal drugs.'
For example, people who've who know that their loved ones were euthanized, they can't find the names of the the nurses or they can't track them down or if they do have the names of the nurses they just they don't respond.
It's almost impossible to get any kind of response from the hospital, they just say, 'oh he was he was he died of Covid and they did everything they could to save him, and and we gave him the injections to ease the pain and we were trying to help, and then he died.'
It's when you get the more closing ranks like that and and saying we did our best and we definitely didn't kill anyone deliberately why would we we're nurses and doctors, it's very hard to argue.
You know, very hard.
Jacqui, I do appreciate you coming on.
It's a very well put together harrowing film, but I know that any of our viewers, listeners who have seen it will want to pass on if they haven't seen it then all the links are in the description.
I'd encourage the viewers and listeners to please do share it, pass it on.
It's the power of sharing information like this that actually will lead to change. So, Jacqui, once again, thank you so much for your time today.
Thank you, Peter.
 
 

The Week According To . . . Right Said Fred

Rejoice for the return of The Fred's! Richard and Fred Fairbrass, better known as Right Said Fred return to Hearts of Oak to give their opinions on some of the talking points and news stories floating around this week on the web, including...- UK ELECTIONS: Local and Mayor of London elections, is this the end of the Tories and will Khan remain as Mayor?- Safe and Effective: Dad who suffered brain injury after getting COVID vaccine sues AstraZeneca.- I’m not a Covid conspiracy theorist. I was right! - Rwanda Farce 1: Civil servants mount court challenge over new law.- Rwanda Farce 2: Failed asylum seeker given £3K to go to Rwanda.- NHS to declare sex is a matter of biology in historic shift against gender ideology.- Old phone boxes refurbed into defibrillators, what a time to be alive!- "London has opened it's doors to Jihad" Trump correct as he says British ‘culture’ had been eroded by tolerance.  - This will not end well: Irish Government ignores the wishes of ordinary Irish people as it continues to impose migrants on small communities.- Diversity: BBC reports that train drivers are overwhelmingly middle-aged white men.  *The UK is 82% white from the last census 
Right Said Fred are one of the UK’s most enduring pop exports. Since forming in 1989, brothers Fred and Richard Fairbrass, have a list of achievements as songwriters and a band that include number #1 hits in 70 countries, they were also the first band to reach the number one slot in the US with a debut single since The Beatles.As multi-platinum award winning artists and songwriters, their global sales total 30 million and over 100 million plays on Spotify.They have writing credits on Taylor Swift and Sofi Tukker’s songs, their music has been featured in over 50 films and TV Shows and in excess of 100 commercials.The boys have performed with Bob Dylan, Mick Jagger and David Bowie plus plaudits from Madonna, Jay Z, and Prince to name but a few.30+ years on and 10 studio albums later, The Freds have found a new legion of fans with their no-nonsense views during the Covid ‘pandemic’ regarding lockdowns, masks, vaccines, nonsensical rules and all the regurgitated hysteria that surrounds it.They have been a staple feature at the huge anti-lockdown and freedom protests seen in London and have shown their integrity on their social media and in interviews, pointing out and challenging all the lies, scaremongering and hypocrisies that have been forced upon the population from the government and the main stream media.Right Said Fred are living proof that two music-loving brothers with an ear for a hit, plenty of passion, self-belief and a bit of critical thinking can defy all expectations and conquer the world – long live The Freds!
Connect with The Freds...WEBSITE             rightsaidfred.comX/TWITTER         twitter.com/TheFreds
Recorded  3.5.24
Connect with Hearts of Oak...X/TWITTER        twitter.com/HeartsofOakUKWEBSITE            heartsofoak.orgPODCASTS        heartsofoak.podbean.comSOCIAL MEDIA  heartsofoak.org/connectSHOP                  heartsofoak.org/shop
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com and follow him on X twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin 
Links to topics...UK Elections https://news.sky.com/story/politics-latest-senior-snp-figure-expected-to-announce-yousaf-succession-bid-polls-open-in-local-elections-in-england-and-wales-12593360?postid=7616759#liveblog-body AstraZenecahttps://news.sky.com/story/a-shadow-of-what-i-was-dad-who-suffered-brain-injury-days-after-getting-covid-vaccine-sues-astrazeneca-13125842I was righthttps://web.archive.org/web/20240502183828/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/05/02/im-not-a-covid-conspiracy-theorist-i-was-right/Rwanda 1https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68934480Rwanda 2https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68932830#:~:text=A%20first%20failed%20asylum%20seeker,to%20the%20east%20African%20country. Gender ideology https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-13365651/Health-Secretary-Victoria-Atkins-term-woman-wont-eradicated-order-inclusive-NHS-declares-sex-biological-fact-bans-trans-women-female-wards.htmlPhone box defibrillators https://x.com/TheFreds/status/1784485065222742201London Trump https://web.archive.org/web/20240502120150/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/05/01/donald-trump-says-london-has-opened-its-doors-to-jihad/Irish Government https://x.com/DVATW/status/1785916898422530530Train drivers https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-68921391