Hearts of Oak Podcast

Brian of London - Israel/Palestine: Who’s Indigenous?

Shownotes and Transcript
The question 'who is indigenous' comes up a lot while discussing demographics and immigration.  And no country has this been asked more than Israel. Brian of London joins us to discuss a Twitter/X post and article titled "Israel Palestine: Who's Indigenous?". For some reason this question is contentious. Brian breaks it down (according to anthropologist Jose R Martin-Cobo) under a series of headings of Land, Culture, Common Ancestry, Language, Religion and Blood. Basically we are looking at a historic continuity. Brian uses these headings to look at whether it is the Jews or the Palestinians that fit this indigenous definition 
Brian of London completed a PhD in Computational Fluid Dynamics just as the Web was emerging.But then he left academia to do management consulting and eventually moved to Israel to do business.Brian's working on the cutting edge of the new Podcasting 2.0 to make sure this relic of the early web, stays free from capture by the centralising forces of Web 2.0 and their dangerous desire to turn us all into dairy cows.Brian was also the admin on Tommy Robinson's Facebook account that had over a million followers before it was nuked!In his spare time, he assists with a gigantic class action lawsuit in Australia on behalf of the entire crypto industry.
Interview recorded 2.1.24
Connect with Brian...X                        https://x.com/brianoflondon?s=20Connect with Hearts of Oak...WEBSITE            https://heartsofoak.org/PODCASTS        https://heartsofoak.podbean.com/SOCIAL MEDIA  https://heartsofoak.org/connect/
Support Hearts of Oak by purchasing one of our fancy T-Shirts.... SHOP                  https://heartsofoak.org/shop/
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on GETTR https://gettr.com/user/BoschFawstin and on X https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20 
Transcript
(Hearts of Oak)
And it's wonderful to have Brian of London join us once again.Brian, thanks so much for your time today.
(Brian of London)
Well, thank you very much for having me on. 
Not at all.There's lots to discuss in your neck of the woods, as they would say in the Brits, in your part of the world.And obviously we have had, we have a Tera Dahl who was just back from Israel.She'd been there three, four weeks for Real America's Voice reporting.We had Bridget Gabriel on actually discussing.But I think we want to go on a slightly different tact, and it was one of your tweets looking at, and I think part of it was from another article, Israel-Palestine, who's indigenous?and I've always had a very firm understanding because of biblical history and where I come at this from a Christian but even there's confusion amongst parts of the Christian world and community but that may mess this conversation up even more.But let's, Israel-Palestine, who's indigenous?Maybe tell us why this was of interest to you, and then we can go with some of the categories and how you define this term indigenous.Yeah, and I just realized I've got my window open. So if you're hearing background noise, tell me, otherwise I'll leave it open. I'm in my bomb shelter, which everyone should know.And fortunately, we actually haven't been in it for about 10 days now and the last major barrage of rockets was just to the south of us on midnight on new year's eve obviously they did the fireworks for us and that. 
We we had our Muslim mayor, Sadiq Kahn do the fireworks for us as well in London but it was different firework. 
Different and the thing with that was actually it was, they fired them. They always fire them at exactly on the hour.In fact, there's a joke that the guy controlling the missiles, his name is Abu Dekar.Dekar means on the minute.So we say, oh, Abu Dekar is firing again.Because they fire at exactly 12, so then the alarm goes at sort of 12.01, and the missiles arrive at sort of 12.01 or 12.02.Anyway, I didn't hear an alarm because it was south of me.I just heard the booms when we intercepted. But yeah, I'm in my bomb shelter. But what I sent you, I sent you an article which actually was published in 2014 by a friend of mine.And I helped get this published because Israeli Cool, the blog that it's on, the guy who runs that and me both found this guy who is a Métis Canadian indigenous person.Or they call them First Nations in Canada.That's the politically correct term. He doesn't mind being called an Indian.He's quite happy with that or whatever terminology, but he's Métis, which is a tribe that its original area was sort of somewhere in Canada.But he put out this article in a very obscure kind of place, and I just grabbed it and I said to him, can you just say all of this stuff again for the Israeli audience? And that's what we did.And because he has studied properly the way the UN came to regard what an indigenous person was.Because indigenous means something completely different from people than it does for plants and animals. Plants and animals are indigenous when they've been in the same place for thousands or millions of years.But people is a totally different beast. We have moved around the world ever since we were people.Vast migrations out of Africa.The term indigenous just doesn't mean anything.It doesn't mean the same thing for a person as it does for a plant.The kind of way that this is seen in the academic literature, and remember, this is infused with leftism, so we're picking and choosing here a little bit.And this guy, Jose Martinez Cobo, he came up with this definition. And this has stuck.And this really is the way the entire field looks at indigenous.And I'll just read or direct from the summary of his work what these rules are.Self-identification as indigenous peoples at the individual level and acceptance as a member by the community. Okay, so you have to actually feel that you're indigenous, okay?Historical continuity with pre-colonial and or pre-settler societies, okay?I'll read them off and then we'll sort of go through them and what they mean for Jews and Israel and what they mean for Palestinians, for example, and then we can sort of look at this in relation to Brits and Irish people and, you know, English, Welsh, Scottish, and, strong link to territories and surrounding natural resources, distinct social, economic, or political systems, distinct language, culture, and knowledge.I'm going to skip one, and then I'm going to say resolve to maintain and reproduce ancestral environments and systems as distinctive peoples and communities.Okay, this is anthropology language. But the basics are, and my friend summarizes them like this, land, language, culture, spirituality, and the last one is blood.And we'll get back to that because that's actually that's the one that's just the least important actually for Jews, especially for Jews. So Jews self-identify this is obvious it's like, we've been three and a half thousand years or so I mean the the numbers claim there's a book to my right, if you go full screen there's a book the atlas of Jewish history just behind me. And in that, this one here, the Atlas of Judaism, okay, we can go back to.If you go back to that, if you start looking for dates, Abraham kind of is dated at about 4,000 years ago, to 2,000 BC.He walked from Mesopotamia all the way down across the Middle East, Iran, Iraq.It's mixed up because none of those are real.Well, Iran and Persia became real soon, you know, later.Basically, none of it is what is there today.And he walked across that. And then he walked down through Israel.And he walked on a road that we have in Israel today called Highway 40.It's the road that runs down the backbone of what we call Judea-Samaria, what the Jordanians renamed the West Bank, that road follows the path that Abraham took and is described in the bible as the path that Abraham took and when you when you drive quickly down that road today you see the road signs in the order in which they appear in the bible. It's as real as that and that is 30 or 40 kilometres that way I'm pointing off to the east, the sea is that way that's my west, this stuff is real.Now, whether you believe the story of Abraham was real or not to the Jewish people, it is foundational.It is our ethnogenesis. It's the start of what led to being Jewish, but that's really.
But I just want, actually, when you say it, it depends what you believe is real or or not, the level of documentation to actually prove that actually the Old Testament story and New Testament story is more documented than nearly any other historical event.And yet the world believes parts of history, but you've got this mountain of evidence and they say, oh no, that's just fables.So when you say, if you want to believe it or not, actually, it's there staring you in the face that there is no more evidence for the biblical events than there is for anything else in the world.Correct. And it's even more than the biblical events.It's that the book that was woven around it, the Hebrew Bible, it was something that Jews preserved through an enormous act of preservation that I don't think has a parallel in the world. Okay.The Torah, as we call it, the way it is passed down is we write it out by hand.And the people who write the Torah, they write it without making a mistake.And if they make a mistake, they throw it away and start again.And there's no tippex and there's no scratching it out and there's no backspace key.This is and this document is so unbelievably well preserved that when you dig up the dead sea scrolls that were that were, you know in the caves of Qumran for three thousand years or two and a half thousand years when you dig those up, actually I don't know they might be a bit more modern than that but when you dig them up I can go and look at them and my Hebrew is not great but I can read the words.Biblical Hebrew is different from modern Hebrew, but I recognize the words.And if I open a modern Torah, they are the same.The transcription errors down the Torah is… We have this record.Abraham ends up in Hebron. He buys a cave to bury his wife in.That purchase of the cave in Hebron again.It doesn't matter whether you believe it happened exactly.That purchase forms the basis of our property rights in the modern world.That purchase of a cave is the oldest recorded land transaction that follows the modern form of transactions, offer, consideration, acceptance.Our whole edifice of modern contract law is built around that cave purchase.And that's part of Judaism.Judaism, then, of course, and I'm no biblical scholar, but Joseph goes to Egypt, the children of Israel become numerous, they leave Egypt in a hurry, which is also a story of the emancipation of slavery.Again, Jews led the way in that.What's interesting about our civilization today is not that we had slavery.It's not that the Americans had slavery. It's that it was abolished, and Jews abolished slavery within their own systems a millennia before.What's interesting about the West is not having had slavery.What's interesting is having got rid of slavery.I'll put forward that that's a Jewish.You get that because eventually, and it took the South Africans a lot longer than anyone else to realize this, but when you read the Bible and you read all men are created in the image of God, you just have to get rid of slavery. It doesn't work.Again, a Jewish thing.All of these stories, and then the Jews come back to Israel, and yes, there's wars and stuff, and there's Canaanites and Philistines and battles and Jericho, and the walls come tumbling down.All of these phrases I can just throw at you.The majority of a reasonably educated Western populace, they just understand those cultural references in a way.I don't need to explain Jericho.You know, I don't need to explain a lot of this stuff.David and Goliath, that's David the Jew versus Philistine Goliath.It happened actually near Gaza.Well, in the hills, sort of inland from there. But Samson, Samson and Delilah, that story is in Gaza.All of these foundational stories for Jews, which Christianity also adopts, the whole of the Hebrew Bible is basically part of the Christian canon.That happens here. Those are place names.Into the New Testament, Armageddon is Megiddo. It's 80 kilometres that way. I can drive there.Yes, I think I can still drive there. It's not closed.We have such ties. We have our ancestors buried.The reason why Hebron is special today and why Jews want to live there is because there's a massive building that Solomon built.It's the same era as the famous Western Wall, the Temple Mount.That building is built on top of this cave that Abraham bought.That's why it's there. That's where we buried our matriarchs and our patriarchs.This is a, and you know when when Martinez talks about historical continuity and strong link to territories and surrounding natural resources, the strongest link you can have is ancestral burial sites, you know everybody sort of knows the kind of, from America, the you know, how, oh this is this is ancient burial lands, well Hebron is the burial site of Abraham's family, basically.Nablus, who is the modern name. The old biblical name is Shem.That's actually closest to me. That's literally inland from me now.That's the burial site of Joseph. There's a building there called Joseph's Tomb.Now, the Muslims sort of revere it because they stole our prophets and stuff.But they only revere it because we do. The site of the temple in Jerusalem is the site on which Abraham was supposed to sacrifice Isaac, where the whole story of the ram and the burning bush, the.. sorry, the ram caught in the bush, not the burning bush, that's Moses. That story happens on what is now today the temple mount.That was the position of the high holies.That's why we built the temple there, twice. That's why the Romans destroyed it.That's why the Muslims came along when they conquered it and built a mosque and a mausoleum on that spot, because it matters.Those are elements of colonization.These other components like distinct language, culture, and knowledge.Now, yes, we revived Hebrew as a modern language.That was controversial because some very religious Jews would say that Hebrew is the language of prayer.It's the language of the Torah. are we shouldn't use it for day-to-day stuff when we're going to be obscene and tell jokes and in fact what tends to happen is we use Arabic for the worst stuff but um, that was controversial but it was also hugely important that there is continuity that any Jewish child living in Israel, any Israeli child, can pick up an ancient scroll that was buried in the desert, and all the letters look familiar. That's amazing.Nobody reads hieroglyphics. The Roman Catholic Church teaches their clergy to read Latin, but it's not a day-to-day language anywhere.Hebrew is a day-to-day language, and it has biblical continuity back 3,000 plus years.Now, when I read through this list, which we'll post later, I missed one.I said I was going to miss one.In the UN, they've got this one line, status as a non-dominant social group.I can't help, and I've discussed this with Ryan. Ryan Bellerose is the Métis Canadian.That's almost like they had to put that in to try and find some way to make Jews not indigenous in Israel.Because we are, Jews are now the dominant social group in one place in the world, Israel. It's like we we won, we're the only ones actually, we're really the only indigenous people that lost our land and got it back and that is essentially, Zionism is that, it is the return of Jews to Zion, you know, by the rivers of Babylon, where, you know, that psalm, that's, what, 600 years BCE?That's Zionism. We've been trying to get back to Zion, Jerusalem, Israel, for thousands of years, ever since we were cast out by the Romans.I think the last time Jews really ran the place was up until when we revolted too much and the Romans kicked us out on 135 or 132 or whatever it was, and changed the name.And again, this is colonizer versus indigenous.What do colonizers do? They bring a new language, they try to crush whatever markers there are of indigenousness.And then they destroy, they build their new stuff on top of old stuff.They try and erase indigenous identities.And that's what's actually happened all over the world.You know, Native Americans cling on in America. Across Europe there are sort of lots of indigenous identities that were crushed by the Romans that never reappeared.I would say that the EU itself was trying to do this, it's it's trying to sort of flatten Europe and you all become Europeans in a horrible Marxist sense and I think that's one of the reasons why Israel is so hated by this globalist elite type thing, is that we are just this total exception. We are the indigenous people that came back, made it work, and made it work.And it doesn't mean, and let's just sort of circle back to the blood, and then I'll let you get a word in edge ways.Blood. This is the bit that gets thrown at us all the time on the internet.Okay? Every time I post indigenous, oh, you're from Europe. Well, actually, I was born in South Africa, so I'm African.You know, bite on that, you chumps.I'm second generation. My parents were born in Africa. I'm second generation African.So I don't know where you think I should go back to.I grew up in London. Yeah, that's true. My accent is London, but I never felt English actually.I've got my British citizenship, but am I English I don't think so. I'm Jewish, Jews belong here, so blood is uniquely unimportant to Jews for one good reason and the reason is Ruth, the story of Ruth in the bible is the story that actually to this day means that Jews accept converts.As soon as you accept conversion, it means blood doesn't matter.Now, we do not have an easy conversion process, okay?And in fact, you know, whenever I've, and I know some of my best friends here are converts, and they're more orthodox than me, more, you know, they observe of Sabbath, Shabbat, more than I do. And in many ways. But there's no hint or there's no feeling for me personally, or you don't find it anywhere in Israel, that if somebody has gone through the process of an Orthodox-recognized conversion, nobody here looks down upon them.In fact, many of us realize that's a lot harder than just being born.So blood. I don't know where his blood is from. In fact, I think the two converts I know the best, Australians and both, I think, from Catholic families, doesn't matter.So I don't care about blood. Now, it turns out I actually am Kohanim, and you can check, but there's DNA markers.But that's not what makes me Jewish.What makes me Jewish is self-identification, keeping the rituals, doing Shabbat dinners. And it doesn't even matter the level of observance.It's some level of observance and some recognition that it means something to be Jewish.So when they throw at you this Khazar crap and go back to Europe, and I mean, even that is ala panim, on its face.That doesn't mean the same thing. On its face, it's just ridiculous, because more than half the Jews in Israel are of Middle Eastern backgrounds.Algeria, Morocco, Yemen, Iran, Iraq, Syria.All of these places is where Jews came from. Right now, and Ethiopia, of course, we've airlifted them.All of these things mean that we're just a mongrel mix these days.And our kids are all meeting and intermarrying between different...There really isn't a level of racism that I can certainly recognize in America.So blood, what does blood mean? It doesn't... It's important. It's one of the markers.But it is not who makes you a Jew.Well, I think, yeah, there are a lot of points to pick up. For me, actually, it's the history.Abraham 4,000 years ago, David 3,000, establishing Jerusalem as the capital.So you've got 2,000 years of history on the land, in effect, before the Romans took over.The renaming of that land as Palestine to remove Israel off the face of the earth, just like Iran want to do.. 
That's deliberate..
Just exactly.
Syria, Palestina and yeah of course the word came from the Greek from palash invaders from the sea, you can, it's like you can get you can get locked in all that crappy silly detail, it doesn't matter and it doesn't matter if it's Israel or the kingdom of David, it was or Judah or Samaria. Today it's Israel because when you form a modern nation, within the framework of modern nations that arose in the 1850s onwards.I can't remember the philosophical name for this, but Israel slots in within modern nationhood as the land of the Jews.Should there be a Kurdish nation? Yeah, sure.I just want to tell you something else about this. indigenous status is not zero sum, because there are indigenous people does not mean that nobody else is indigenous.Now, and I'm not coming to the Palestinians by any means next.We have Aramaic Christians living in the Galilee region.They are following a kind of Christianity that emerged very soon after Jesus died.And they are speaking Aramaic, or they're doing their liturgy in Aramaic.I've met one. There's a famous picture of Tommy Robinson standing next to a bearded guy with a big hat wearing his Mossad t-shirt.That's Father Nadav, and we went to meet him in Nazareth.That's in Nazareth. He lives there.There's a community of Aramaic Christians. The only place you can be an Aramaic Christian safely in the whole Middle East is Israel.And then we've got Druze. Druze is a kind of, it's wrong to call them completely Muslim.They're something else entirely.And their geographic region encompasses Syria and Lebanon and Israel.But where are they best off?Most of them, realize, in Israel.We've got some Baha'is who came from Iran, settled here.They're up in Haifa. We have Samaritans, actually. That's very close to me.This town of Nablus, okay?What's the Palestinian town of Nablus? Well, it comes from Neopolis, the Roman for new city.So even their name in Arabic of Nablus, it's a corruption of a Roman word. It's not Arabic.And you know this because Neopolis, anything with a P is not Arabic. So the P gets converted to a B. It's just like the Palestinians, when they say it, they call it a phalestini, because they can't say P, so they change it to E.So Nablus, which is the place of Shem, again, Romans, they knew Shem is in the Bible many times, but they have to rename the place Neopolis to assert Roman dominance, and that's what you do.The Samaritans live on a place called Mount Gruzine, which overlooks that. They're there.We've got Bedouin Arabs who have lived here for a long time, but Bedouins have moved across the whole Middle East for centuries.To call them indigenous, they have parts of their culture here, but it's not unique to Israel. That's the point, the Bedouin culture is across the whole of the Arab peninsula all the way out.So did any part of their culture arise in Israel? Not really.But they have something called rights of longstanding presence, for sure.And they serve in our armed forces, and we have all sorts of internal political disputes over where they live and how they live and what their place.But again, that's stuff we can deal with.It's not sort of virulent hatred all the time.But this point of, is Islam indigenous to Israel?No, nothing of it.The only bit that they talk about is the farthest, there's a passage in the Quran that talks about the farthest mosque, and that has been reinterpreted.And there's a very famous clip from Al Jazeera from years and years ago.Professor Mordechai Kadar, he went on Al Jazeera in Arabic and he asked the host, how many times is Jerusalem named in the Quran?And the Quran was written 700, 800 years after the Romans destroyed Jerusalem.Everybody in the whole world, the known, educated world, knew the name Jerusalem.But yet it does not appear once in the Quran.Not once. There's an oblique reference to a night journey by Muhammad to the furthest mosque.And he tied his horse up outside and ascended to heaven.That is the entire basis for Islamic claim to Israel and Jerusalem.Other than the fact that they assume everything. They're a replacement theology.So they brought in all of Christianity.They brought in all of Judaism. They then tell us we forged it to take out Muhammad.And they write their book, the Quran, which they then say, we're the corruptors of.Jews are worse than Christians because we went astray.Jews are the ones who went astray. Christians are the ones who were just led astray.You followed us instead of the Muslims so we're both cursed but Jews are cursed a bit more.But that's that's not the claim, that's the claim, that's what we're fighting over.
And of course well yeah and of course you'd, you've got the period of the Romans and then the period of Arabs or Muslims from what 600...
And crusaders, Sala in the Kurd, This history just goes, but all of it, the constant theme throughout is, one, there were Jews always here. Jews never left.
There were Jews in Sfat. They came back in 1200 and 600.The only people who ever regarded this land as the place of genesis of their entire civilization is Jews. 
Yeah. And then you go through, you're right, all those histories with the Ottoman Empire, whatever morphing of Arabness or Muslimness there was on there.And then you're right that Muslims tie Jerusalem to a story about a flying donkey, but we'll not even go into that.We'll not have to base what you believe in that. But the issue, I guess, you have now is that the clash between Romans and the Jews living there was a land grab and dominance.It's something much deeper in terms of Islam, and I 100% believe that Islam was started.One of the main reasons is to eradicate who Jesus is. You can't say Jesus, son of God.You cannot, that he was simply a man. And at its heart, and that means at its heart is also hatred of the Jews and the Jewish people, because without Judaism, you do not have Christianity.It's impossible. But that hatred we have seen over the whole time, and 1948, it is an absolute miracle to see what happens.I think maybe the hatred is from, one, the hatred that Islam has against Judaism.That's one. But also there's a second hatred that I think the miracle of modern-day Israel, that many people cannot accept that, and they look for something darker.You know, Israel being the centre of everything, being in control.And they come up with this idea to remove any understanding that actually you can't explain.1948, when you read about what happened, I've read it in 67, 73, and all of those, it is a miracle. It could not happen, should not happen.And yet Israel stands there as a proud country, hugely successful in the midst of basket cases of countries.But yeah, talk to us about that level of vitriol against Israel and against the Jewish people that exists not only in the Middle East, but actually exists in the media and across the world, really.Well, I, you know, every Jew does, you know, I guess my kids are starting to do it now.You start, you know, when you're brought up Jewish, eventually at some point you understand that this thing called the Holocaust happened. And what it does to a lot of us is you go through a phase where you try and, why? What's with the hatred?Why the hatred? And Islamic Jew hatred, I can see that in the Quran.I can see the hundred and whatever verses it is that mention Jews.And whereas we start off a little bit favourable in the early stuff, once Jews reject Muhammad and say no you're not a prophet we're done with our era of prophets, that was a thousand years ago, you're not one of them, once that happened he really then just goes on a the rest of his life is like, how can I f these Jews? And you know he kills a lot of Jews in Khaybar he takes their wives, their daughters, their and then also in Khaybar this other story, this very pivotal battle, after the battle when he kills all the men and he's got the women and one of the stories that's not well, it pretty authoritative, but again this doesn't matter whether it happened or not, it matters whether Muslims believe it, is that he was poisoned by this Jewish woman that he'd taken prisoner before he rapes her and that he died five years later from the poison he was was given then.Now, again, you get all sorts of scholars saying this is unlikely and it probably didn't happen. It doesn't matter.Do Muslims teach their children that a Jew killed Muhammad?Yes, they do. In large numbers, very large numbers.And so Jews rejected the prophet Muhammad.We don't call him a prophet. He isn't a prophet. He's their prophet.He's not our prophet. We rejected that.He fought lots of battles against us. He killed a lot of Jews, and eventually he was poisoned by a Jewess.These are not good things to teach your kids for coexistence.That's what they do. That kind of antisemitism, I understand that.That's ancient and it really hasn't changed.It can be dialled up or dialled down depending on the authoritarian rulers.UAE today might be dialling it down a lot. Great. In two or three generations, I'll feel a lot happier.Now, Nazi anti-Semitism, European anti-Semitism, again, Christianity had its creation stuff, and Christianity for a long time said that Jews killed Jesus.Despite Jesus being one of us, we, you know, and it took until, when did the Catholic Church change that?I mean, it was like in 1960 something or other, was the papal, you know, it's like, okay, thanks.It was the Romans. We can all agree on the Romans, but yes, Jews are stood accused of killing Jesus. That was one thing.Jews are successful. I don't know what it is. I personally have come to believe that Intel, the guy who founded Intel, Andy Grove, his autobiography was called Only the Paranoid Survive.I think Jews have been bred to be paranoid. There's other reasons which are genetically passed down.Whereas the Catholic Church, for a lot, makes its priests celibate, they become the most highly educated members of society, but yet they don't procreate.Jews did the opposite. You become a rabbi, the town supports the rabbi, and the smartest people who become rabbis then have 18 children.Perhaps that's the reason why we've got higher IQ. I don't know.We certainly value, as a culture, we value learning. We value books.We value, the fact that we've got troops in Gaza.What do they do at the weekends? Some of them, they drive armoured personnel carriers into Gaza with a gigantic Torah scroll so that they can stand in some house with bullet holes all around and do the Shabbat service with a real giant Torah scroll.First, they take in little ones, but once the roots are secure, what are we doing? Are we taking a book? This is the most ridiculous.And then what we do is, we do Talmudic rituals, as the Nazis and the anti-Semites would say.We're not doing it. It's not because, we're not out looking for the blood to drink and make my matzah.That's just utter crap.We're doing it because we value these traditions. We passed them down, and the continuity of Jews as a people has depended on us revering those words.That's why copying the Torah accurately for 3,000 years by hand, that's an astonishing cultural achievement that no culture on earth has managed.You know, Aborigines in Australia might have told stories orally, and that's a great sort of pass down.But we wrote it in a book, and the story of Abraham buying the cave becomes the root of Western civilization.So, you know, you can argue Judeo-Christian civilization for sure.And, you know, some people will say that democracy comes from the Greeks or whatever. Much more of our morality comes from the Jewish Hebrew Bible, the Ten Commandments, than any other foundational thing.And again, the Americans, I'll criticize the Americans and I'll criticize the West in a very specific way.Rights versus responsibility.Okay? If you read the Ten Commandments, what you are reading is not a charter of rights.You do not have the right to life. You do not have the right to property.You do not have the right to your wife. You read a responsibility.You read about honouring your parents. You read about not murdering people.You read about not coveting the other guy's ox or wife.Those are responsibilities. You follow those responsibilities within your tribe.Your rights are implied.And I think America and the whole Western notion of human rights and stuff, it puts the cart before the horse.What are your responsibilities? Your responsibility is not to lob rockets at civilian areas on midnight of new year's eve, your responsibility is not to break out through a fence and go murder and rape people in the most horrible way, if you follow the responsibility of not being complete and utter bleeps then you can have a right to life, we are going to remove we, you do not have a right to life when you commit those acts against us. That's what we're seeing now.We're not Christians, and the whole turn the other cheek thing, it's not in our book, and quite rightly.There's too much of that, and the modern Western Christianity has gone too far.Yeah. Yes. That's an interesting. Here, I'll not go down that route, but actually, I want to finish off with, I'm sure you've had, well, you face, I'm sure, a lot of abuse.And if you are a Zionist Shill, maybe you can share some of that, Brian, because I'll happily be a Zionist, but never get paid for it, which is a bummer. 
None of us get paid for this.It costs me a fortune living here. 
I know it would be much easier if we did get paid, but that's not how life works.But it's interesting what's happened. Maybe the backlash you get whenever you talk about Israel's existence and the history and that clash, and also what we are seeing at the moment.It's interesting, what's the term?Proportionality is the term that's used. And I always wonder, what's proportional to rape or murder of children?Do you really want to go down that? Because that's a very perverse path if you want to go down that.But yeah, tell us about that, the backlash, but also then Israel doing what it has to do to exist.And if other countries want to be peaceful, then that makes life a lot easier for everyone, including the Arab countries around.
Well you know the backlash, first of all, hurty words on the internet doesn't doesn't hurt me, you know I'm very much a bit of a free speech absolutist, I'll block and I'll mute if they're boring. I mean but mostly I like, you know and I'll spar with a few of them you know. I'm just looking to my left, I've got a screen here, sort of one of these things that kicked this off was because someone said, so I get that a lot of Israeli Jews are scared right now. So here's an idea.Why don't we offer them refuge in our own countries? Invite them to Britain, the States, and Canada. It's a win-win.Israelis get to live somewhere they feel safe, and the locals get their land back.Now, after everything I've just said to you, firstly, we've tried living in other people's countries.It doesn't always go so well.You know, German Jews felt great in 1929, and Polish Jews felt great also.This was not a long-term, tenable solution.And so what I replied was, lol, no, we're home. When you dig up London, you find Roman stuff.When we dig up Jerusalem, we dig past that crap to the city of our Jewish King David.Pithy, short, you can't put all the history of the Middle East in a tweet or an x-post or whatever we're supposed to call it. Praise be to Elon.Now, so I get this back. This isn't how the world works. Just because you've owned something thing doesn't mean you always will.Also, the Celtic tribes inhabited London long before the Romans, and Canaanites existed in Palestine long before Israel.Well, as and when some Canaanites show up, and as long as they're not still doing the child sacrifice shit, we will give them a nice little bit of the country, and they can live and practice their whatever Canaanite religion.But the point is, there is no continuity of Canaanites, because probably because Jews genocided them, whatever, I don't care.Canaanite was absorbed into the Jewish tribes. That's what happened.There's nobody doing Canaanite today, so they don't exist.The Palestinians are not Canaanites. They're not Philistines either.They don't know anything about Canaanites or Philistines.But, you know, you get all of this stuff.David, this is a good one, actually.Chrissy, David was a corrupt criminal whose family came from Iraq.That's the Koran version of David.
I was wondering. I missed that.
I know. I know. That one's just brilliant.And it's just very simple. And it's with a little Canadian flag.And Chrissy is the name. Compassion, confidence, something about a sire.170,000 followers.  You kind of and then you know you get from sama Lebanese when you check your DNA it's east European, okay my yes yes my DNA did come a bit, because before South Africa we were somewhere in northeast Europe but again and then you know when I look through all of this telling me that I don't belong where I know I belong.Look, I came to Israel when I was 39 years old.I married my Israeli wife some years before that, tried to learn Hebrew in London.I'm crap at Hebrew, okay? I can barely read.I can sort of read, but more often than not, I'm copy-pasting into... Oh, Apple.Apple does not translate Hebrew by default. It's like not not one of their default languages.It's like, get with this. Anyway, I arrive in Israel as a 39-year-old PhD physicist, basically illiterate, but I feel more at home than I did in London.Explain that. I can't explain that. There's this woman, Eve Barlow, she's here visiting right now.She lands and she immediately feels at home. She lives in LA, She's a writer or she wrote, and writes about music. Why does she feel at home?And so many Jews you talk to, and this is a funny thing, when non-Jews come here and feel at home, they then start looking through their family tree and discover that four generations back, they are Jewish.And they start questioning their self. There's something that I can't explain to you that is is magical about being in Israel. Because it's tough.It is more comfortable to live in America and Britain.It really, it wasn't the easiest place to move to, but it just felt better.100%.I think we'll finish it there. I think it's good to get a short conversation about this in Israel.And of course, you could take it wider into other countries.But that makes it very convoluted.And I think this perfectly fits to this current time. But, Brian, thank you so much.All the links for these will be in the description and our social media posts so people can follow the article and your post on it and have fun at the replies, which is sometimes the best part of Twitter posts.It certainly is. Anyway, yeah, we can do updates about the whole situation another time. But, yeah, thank you. This was really good.This is stuff I like talking about. This is positive. This is the reasons that people need to understand why Israel's not going anywhere.And that's the other. The last thing I'll say is this.You know, for 75 years, the Arabs have fought the correct, well, since 67 in particular, and through the 60s, basically, with the rise of Arafat and the PLO, which was a creation of the Soviet Union, the whole Palestinian identity.That's another point, but I'll just finish with this.They fought the correct battle to remove a colonial occupier from land.They fought the right battle that would have got the British out of India.Or the French out of Algeria, or half a dozen European countries out of bits of Africa.They fought the correct guerrilla warfare tactics, sort of terrorism, murders, all of this stuff.And it spectacularly fails to move Jews out of Jerusalem and Israel, because we are not colonial settlers.We will never be colonial settlers. The mindset, you know, and that's the other thing is, you know, when the Americans come here and tell us that we're not fighting the ground war in Gaza the correct way, and they're going to tell us how well they did in Iraq and Afghanistan, they were fighting thousands of miles from home.Our soldiers can actually stand at the top of a building with binoculars and see their homes.They go home, you know, if they're released at the weekend, they get taken to the border and they're home in 25 minutes.We are not projecting power as an imperial conquering army trying to make Iraqis be Democrats.It's not that. And so that the whole way in which the Palestinians are fought, encouraged by the entire world, encouraged by people shouting free Palestine from the river to the sea.When you do that, you encourage millions of poor Arabs to fight a war that they will never, ever win by the methods that they're fighting.They will never, ever win.They will never commit an act so atrocious that I will wake up in the morning and say, because believe me, October 7th was that act, that I will wake up in the morning and say, you know what?I think I'm going to go live in Berlin. That's not going to happen.You're not going to force me off my land with these acts.They don't work. it's wrong it's just totally the wrong approach, killing us doesn't matter, how many you rape, how many you kill, the only thing that will happen is the scale of our response and the sheer biblical nature of the response will come out, go read the story of Dinah, the men of Shechem, that's the story that's what's going on in Gaza right now, go read that story if you don't know your Bible.One woman was raped in the Bible. Dinah, go read that.Well, maybe those who live in Gaza, the Muslims or the Arabs, if they took this indigenous rights, then maybe they can move the refugee camp to Mecca.I'm sure it would be wonderful and they can enjoy that. 
Here's a little bit about Yemen.Yemen is Arabia, Arabs to Arabia. 

Stephen C Meyer - DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design

Shownotes and Transcript
Intelligent Design may not be an idea you are familiar with but it has interested me since I was a child. I find it impossible to accept that the world we live in and the complexity of human beings is all based on luck and chance. There has to be an intelligent designer. Stephen C Meyer is one of the most renowned experts on this very topic and his recent appearance on The Joe Rogan Experience has made many people question the theory of a universe without God.  At what point did intellectuals decide that scientific knowledge conflicts with traditional theistic beliefs? Is it even statistically possible for such complexity to just appear? What about the question of who is this intelligent designer? Stephen Meyer will help you view the world around you with a brand new perspective.
Dr. Stephen C. Meyer received his Ph.D. from the University of Cambridge in the philosophy of science. A former geophysicist and college professor, he now directs the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute in Seattle. In 2004, Meyer ignited a firestorm of media and scientific controversy when a biology journal at the Smithsonian Institution published his peer-reviewed scientific article advancing intelligent design. Meyer has been featured on national television and radio programs, including The Joe Rogan Experience, The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, CBS's Sunday Morning, NBC's Nightly News, ABC's World News, Good Morning America, Nightline, FOX News Live, and the Tavis Smiley show on PBS. He has also been featured in two New York Times front-page stories and has garnered attention in other top-national media. Dr. Meyer is author of the New York Times bestseller Darwin’s Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design and Signature in the Cell, a Times Literary Supplement Book of the Year. He is also a co-author of Explore Evolution: The Arguments For and Against Neo-Darwinism and Theistic Evolution: A Scientific, Philosophical, and Theological Critique.
Connect with Stephen...WEBSITE           https://stephencmeyer.org/                           https://www.discovery.org/                           https://returnofthegodhypothesis.com/X                         https://x.com/StephenCMeyer?s=20BOOKS               https://www.amazon.co.uk/stores/author/B001K90CQC
Interview recorded 13.12.23
Connect with Hearts of Oak...WEBSITE            https://heartsofoak.org/PODCASTS        https://heartsofoak.podbean.com/SOCIAL MEDIA  https://heartsofoak.org/connect/TRANSCRIPTS   https://heartsofoak.substack.com/
Support Hearts of Oak by purchasing one of our fancy T-Shirts.... SHOP                  https://heartsofoak.org/shop/
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on GETTR https://gettr.com/user/BoschFawstin and Twitter https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20 
Transcript
(Hearts of Oak)
Dr. Stephen Meyer. It's wonderful to have you with us. Thank you so much for your time today.
(Stephen C Meyer)
Thanks for inviting me, Peter. 
No, it's great to have you.And people can find you on Twitter @StephenCMayer. It's on the screen there.And also discovery.org, the Discovery Institute.And you obviously received your PhD in philosophy of sciences from England, from University of Cambridge, your a former geophysicist, college professor, and you now are the director of Discovery Institute, author of many books.The latest is Return of the God Hypothesis, Three Scientific Discoveries That Reveal the Mind Behind the Universe, and the links for those books will be in the description. But, Dr. Meyer, if I can maybe, I think I remember as a child, church loyalty, being at church and getting a stamp for attending.I remember asking for a book on creationism then, and we may touch on different creationism, intelligent design.I mean, it was 10 or 11. And I remember being fascinated by this whole topic of how God can be seen in the world around us.Maybe I can ask you about your journey. What has been your journey to being one of the, I guess, main proponents on intelligent design?
Well, I've always been interested in questions at the intersection between science and philosophy or science and larger worldview questions or science and religion the questions that are addressed about, you know, how do we get here and what is, is there a particular significance to human life, what is the meaning of life, in the early part of my scientific career I was working as a geophysicist as you mentioned the introduction and in the city where I was working, a conference came to town that was investigating that intersection of science and philosophy, science and belief, and it was addressing three big questions, and they were the origin of the universe, the origin of life, and the origin and nature of human consciousness.And the conference was unique in that it had invited leading scientists and philosophers representing both theism, broadly speaking, belief in God, and scientists and philosophers who rejected theism and who affirmed the more common view among leading scientists at that time, which was materialism or sometimes called naturalism.We have the New Atheist Movement with their scientific atheists and people of more of that persuasion.So it was, let's look at the origin of the universe from the standpoint.What do the data say, what do you theists say about it, what do you non-theist materialists say about it, and it was a fascinating conference and I was particularly taken by the panels on the origin of the universe and the origin of life because surprisingly to me it seemed that the theists had the intellectual initiative that the the evidence in those about the origin of the universe, and then about the complexity of the cell and therefore the challenges it posed to standard chemical evolutionary theories of the origin of life that in both these two areas, both these two subjects, it seemed that there were powerful, theistic friendly arguments being developed, in one case about the, what you might call, a reviving of the ancient cosmological argument because of the evidence that scientists had discovered about the universe having a beginning.And in the other case, what we now call the theory of intelligent design, that there was evidence of design in the cell, in particular, in the digital code that is stored in the DNA molecule, the information and information processing system of the cell.And was it that time? And still to this day is something that undirected theories of chemical evolution have not been able to explain.And instead, what we know from our experience is that information is a mind product, which is a point that some of these scientists made at this panel, that when we see digital code or alphabetic text or computer code, and many people have likened the information and DNA to a computer code, we always find a mind behind that.So this was the first time I was exposed to that way of thinking.I got fascinated with that.A year later, after the conference, I ended up meeting one of the scientists on the Origin of Life panel, a man named Charles Thackston, who had just written a book with two other co-authors called The Mystery of Life's Origin.He was detailing in that book, he and his colleagues were detailing sort of chapter and verse the problems with trying to explain the origin of the first cell from simpler chemicals in some alleged or presupposed prebiotic soup.And the three authors showed that this was implausible in the extreme, given what we know scientifically about how chemistry works versus how cells work.And over the ensuing year, he kind of mentored me and I got fascinated with the subject and ended up getting a fellowship.A Rotary Fellowship to study at Cambridge for a year and then ended up extending on.I did my master's thesis and then my PhD thesis both on origin of life biology within the History and Philosophy of Science Department at Cambridge.And while I was there, I started to meet other scientists and scholars who were having doubts about standard Darwinian and chemical evolutionary theories of life's origin.And by the early 90s, a number of us had met each other and connected and had some private conferences.And out of that was born a formal program investigating the evidence for intelligent design in biology, in physics, in cosmology, and in 96, we started a program at Discovery Institute.
You were very kind to me to call me the director of the whole institute.I direct a program within the institute called the Center for Science and Culture, which is the institutional home.A network of scientists who are investigating whether or not there is, empirical scientific evidence for a designing mind behind life in the cosmos and and the program just continues to grow, the network especially continues to grow, we've got fantastic scientists from all around the world now who are sympathetic to that position and I would mention too that it's a position that's kind of reviving an ancient view going back to certainly the time of the scientific revolution.In particular, we've discovered back to the scientific revolution in Cambridge where I had been fortunate enough to study.There's a, in the college that I was part of, St. Catherine's, there was back in the 17th century, one of the founders of modern botany, who was also one of the first authors of what's called British National Theology. His name was John Ray.Ray was the tutor of Isaac Barrow, a mathematician who in turn tutored Newton and so this whole tradition of seeing the fingerprints of a creator in the natural world is something that was launched in Britain, particularly in Cambridge there were other figures like Robert Boyle who were in other places but the Cambridge tradition of natural theology was very strong from that time period in the 17th century, late 17th century, right up to figures like James Clerk Maxwell, the great physicist in the late 19th century who was critical, sceptical of Darwinism and articulated the idea of design.And I think that's now being revived within contemporary science.There's a growing minority of scientists who see evidence of design in nature. Now, the understanding of intelligent designer, that's a new thinking, but through the millennia, that's been the norm.Individuals have viewed the world through the lens that there is a God, and that has helped them understand and see the world.But there must have been a point, I guess, when intellectuals decided that scientific knowledge conflicts with that that traditional belief, that traditional theistic belief.
Yeah, that's a great way of framing the discussion, Peter.There's a historian of science in Britain named Steve Fuller, who's at Warwick.And he's argued that the idea of intelligent design has been the framework out of which science has been done since the period of the scientific revolution at least and that the the post Darwinian deviation from that, denying that there's actual design and only instead as the Darwinian biologists say the appearance or illusion of design, you may remember from Richard Dawkins's famous book the blind watchmaker, page one he says biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose.And of course, for Dawkins and his followers, and for Darwinians from the late 19th century forward, the appearance of design is an illusion.And it was thought to be an illusion because Darwin had formulated an undirected, or had identified an undirected, unguided process, which he called natural selection that could mimic the powers of a designing intelligence, or so he argued, without itself being designed or guided in any way.And that's kind of where we've engaged the argument. Is that appearance of design that nearly all biologists recognize merely an appearance, or is it the product of an actual guiding intelligence?And that's why we call our theory intelligent design. We're not challenging the idea that there has been change over time, one of the other meanings of evolution we're not challenging even the idea of universal common descent though some of us myself included are quite sceptical of that, the main thing we're challenging with the theory of intelligent design is that is that the appearance of design is essentially an illusion because an unguided undirected mechanism has the capability of generating that appearance without itself being guided or directed in any way and that's, to us the key issue.Is the design real or merely apparent?You may remember that Francis Crick also once said that biologists must constantly keep in mind, that what they see was not designed, but instead evolved.So there's this, the recurrence of that strong intuition among people who have studied biological systems.And I would say, going back all the way to Aristotle, you know, this has been, the Western tradition in biology has been suffused with this recognition.That organisms look designed, they look like they're designed for purpose, they exhibit purpose of behaviour.And now in the age following Watson and Crick, following the molecular biological revolution of the late 50s and 1960s and 70s, we have extraordinarily strong appearances of design.We've got digital code. We have a replication system.We have a translation system as part of this whole information processing system.Scientists can't help but use teleological wording to describe what's going on. We see the purpose of nature, of all of the biological systems and subsystems.And so what we've argued is that, at least at the point of the origin of life, there is no unguided, undirected, or there is no theory that invokes, that has identified an unguided, undirected mechanism that can explain away that appearance of design.Many people don't realize that Darwin did not attempt to explain the origin of the first life. He presupposed the existence of one or a few very simple forms.And so he started it effectively with assuming a simple cell and then said, well, what would have come from that?We now know, however, that the simple cell was not simple at all and displays this many very striking appearances of design that have not been explained by undirected chemical evolutionary processes.Dawkins himself has said that the machine code of the genes is strikingly computer-like.And so you have this striking appearance of design at the very foundation of life that has not in any way been explained by undirected processes.Well, I want to pick up on a number of that, the new discoveries, how things have changed, the complexity.But I can go back, you're challenging, I guess, hundreds of years of new thinking that the complexity of the universe simply points to luck and chance.And I guess there's a statistical side of that, whether that's even possible.We look around and we see things just working perfectly.And I wonder whether it's even possible for a chance element to make all those things come together and make the world as it is.
Well, in my book, Signature in the Cell, which was the first of the three books that I've written on these big topics, I look at the argument for the chance origin of life and even more fundamentally, the chance origin of, say, DNA and the protein products that the DNA codes for.And one of the first things to take note of in addressing the chance hypothesis is that no serious origin of life researcher, no origin of life biochemist or biologist today reposes much hope in the chance hypothesis, it's it's really been set aside and the reason for that, I explained the reason for that in in signature in the cell and then do some calculations to kind of back up the thinking that most origin of life biologists have adopted and that is that the cell is simply far too complicated to have arisen by chance.And you can, and the large biomacromolecules, DNA and proteins, are molecules that depend on a property known as sequence specificity, or sometimes called specified complexity.That is to say, they contain informational instructions in essentially a digital or typographic form.So you have in the DNA you have the four character chemical subunits that biologists actually represent with the letters A, T, G, and C.And if you want to build a protein, you have to arrange the A's, C's, G's, and T's or the evolutionary process or somehow the A's, C's, G's, and T's must have been sequenced in the proper way so that when that genetic message is sent to the ribosome, which is the the translation apparatus in the cell, then what comes out of that is a properly sequenced protein molecules.Proteins also are made of subunits called amino acids.There are 20 or so, maybe as many as 22 now, protein-forming amino acids.And to get the protein chain that is built from the DNA instructions to fold into a proper functional conformation or three-dimensional shape, those amino acids have to be arranged in very specific ways.If they're not arranged properly, the long peptide chain, as it's called, will not fold into a stable protein.And so in both cases, you have this property of sequence specificity that the function of the whole, the whole gene in the case of DNA or the whole protein in the case of the the amino acids, the function of the whole depends upon the precise sequencing of the constituent parts.And that's the difficulty, getting those things to line up properly.Turns out there's all kinds of difficulties in trying to form those subunits, those chemical parts, out of any kind of prebiotic chemical environment that we've been able to think of.But the most fundamental problem is the sequencing. And so you can actually run, because there's, if you think of the protein chain, you have 1 in 20 roughly chances of getting the right amino acid at each site.Sometimes it's more or less because in some cases you can have any one of, there is some variability allowed at each site, but you can run numbers on all this and get very precise numbers on the probability of generating even a single functional protein in the known history of the universe.And it turns out that what are called the combinatorials or the probabilities associated with combinatorials, the probabilities are so small that they are small even in relation to the total number of possible events that might have occurred from the Big Bang till now.In other words, here's an example I often use to use to illustrate, if you have a thief trying to crack a bike lock.If the thief has enough time, even though the combination is hidden among all the possibilities, and then the probability of getting the combination in one trial is very small, if the thief has enough time and can try and try and try again, he may crack it by sheer chance.But if the lock is, we have a standard four-dial bike lock, but if the thief encounters a 10-dial bike lock, and I've had one rendered by my graphic designer to get the point across, then in a human lifetime, there's not enough opportunities to sample that number of possible combinations.If you've got 10 dials, you've got 10 to the 10 possibilities, or 10, that's 10 billion.And if the thief spins the dial once every 10 seconds for 100 years and does nothing else in his entire life, he'll only sample 3% of those total combinations, which means it's much more likely that the thief will fail than it is that he will succeed by chance alone.And that's the kind of, that's the, so the point is that there are, there are degrees of complexity or improbability that dwarf what we call probabilistic resources, the opportunities.And that's the situation we have when we're talking about the origin of the first biomacromolecules by reference to chance alone.Only it's not just that you would with those events, you know, all the events that have occurred from the beginning of the universe until now could only sample about one, I think I've calculated about one ten trillion trillionth of the total possibilities that correspond to a modest length protein.So it's like the bike thief trying to sample that 10-dial lock, only much, much worse.You know, it turns out that 14 billion years isn't enough time to have a reasonable chance to find informational biomolecules by chance alone.
I mean, is the whole scientific argument that removes God, is it just an attempt by science to play God, because whenever we are told that scientific principles break down and no longer exist at the very beginning, for instance, and it doesn't make sense, but we're told that that's just how it happened and you have to accept that.And it seems to be people jumping over themselves with a desperation to try and remove the idea that there is an intelligent designer.Well, I tend to think that the questions of motivation in these debates are kind of a wash.I think as theists, we have to, I'm a theist, okay, I believe in God.In my first two books, I argued for designing intelligence of some kind as being, of some unspecified kind as being the best explanation for the information, for example, in the cell or the information needed to build fundamentally new body plans in the history of life on earth.So, but in my last book, I extend that argument, I bring in evidence from cosmology and physics and suggest that the best explanation for that, the ensemble of evidence that we have about biological and physical and cosmological origins is actually a designing intelligence that has attributes that, for example, Jews and Christians have always described to God, transcendence, as well as intelligence.For example, no being within the cosmos, no space alien, and some scientists have proposed even Crick, Francis Crick in 1981 in a little book called Life Itself floated the idea that yes we do see evidence of design in life.The origin of life is a very hard problem, we can't see how it could possibly have happened on Earth so maybe there was an intelligent life form from space who seeded life here.He was subsequently ridiculed a bit and said, I think he was embarrassed that he'd floated this and said he would not, he foreswore any further speculation on the origin of life problem. It was too difficult, he said.But in any case, back to your question, I think the whole question is.Oh, I was finishing a thought, and that is that the evidence of design that we have from the very beginning of the universe and what's called the fine-tuning of the laws and constants of physics and the initial conditions of the universe, the basic parameters of physics, which were said at the beginning, are exquisitely finely tuned against all odds.And no space alien, no intelligence within the cosmos could be responsible for the evidence of design that we have from the very beginning of the universe because any alleged space alien would itself have had to evolve by some sort of naturalistic processes further down the timeline, once you have stable galaxies and planets and that sort of thing and so no being within the cosmos could be responsible for the conditions that made its future evolution possible nor could a space alien to be responsible for the origin of the universe itself.So when you bring in the cosmological and the physical evidence, I think the only type of designing intelligence that can explain the whole range of evidence we have is one that is transcendent, that is beyond the cosmos, but also active in the creation, because we see evidence of information arising later, and information, as I've mentioned, is a mind product based on our uniform and repeated experience. But as to the motivation issue, I kind of think it's a wash.I think theists have to acknowledge that all people, including those of us who are theists, have a motivation, maybe a hope that there is a purposeful intelligence behind the cosmos.I think there's a kind of growing angst in young people.Harvard study recently showing that over 50% of young people have doubts about there being any purpose to their existence.And this is contributing to the mental health crisis.And so I think all of us would like, to be possible, for there to be life after death, for there to be an enduring purpose to our lives that does not extinguish when we die or when eventually there's a heat death of the universe.I think theism, belief in God, gives people a sense of purpose in relation, the possibility of a relationship to our creator.That's a positive thing. I think there's also a common human motivation to not want to be accountable to that creator and to have moral, complete moral freedom to decide what we want to do at any given time.And so oftentimes theists or God-believers, religious people will say, well, you just like these materialistic theories of origins because you don't want to be accountable to a higher power.That might be true, But it's equally true that the atheist will often say, well, but you guys just need a cosmic crutch.You need comfort from the idea of a divine being, a loving creator, father, whatever, you know, the divine father figure.And Freud famously critiqued or criticized religious belief in those terms.So I think that those two kind of motivation, arguments about motivation are something of a wash and that what I've tried to do in Return of the God Hypothesis is set all of that aside, look at the evidence that we have, and then evaluate it using some standard methods of scientific reasoning and standard methods of evaluating hypotheses, such as a Bayesian analysis, for example, that come out of logic and philosophy.And set the motivation questions aside. And my conclusion is that the evidence foran intelligent designer of some unspecified kind is extremely strong from biology, and that when you bring in the cosmological and physical evidence, the evidence of fine-tuning and the evidence we have that the material cosmos itself had a beginning, I think materialism fails as an explanation, and you need to invoke an intelligence that is both transcendent and active in the creation to explain the whole range of evidence.
Well, let me pick you up on that change, because initially there is a change from someone who believes the evolutionary model, big bang, there is no external force.That step from there to there is an external force, there is intelligent design feeding into the universe we have.And then it's another step to take that to there is an intelligent designer, now there is a personal God. And that step certainly, I assume, is frowned upon in the scientific community.Tell us about you making that step, because it would have been much safer to stay, I guess, in the ID side and not to make the step into who that individual is.Tell us about kind of what prompted you to actually make the step into answering that who question. 
Right. Well, I've been thinking about this question for 35, 36, I don't know, since the mid-80s when I was a very young scientist.And it was at the conference that inspired it, because at the conference, there were people already thinking about the God question, especially the cosmologists.At that conference, Alan Sandage announced his conversion from scientific agnosticism he was a scientific materialist to theism and indeed I think he became Christian, and he talked about how the evidence for the singularity at the beginning of the universe, the evidence that the material cosmos itself had a beginning was one of the things that moved him off of that materialistic perspective, that it was clear to him that as he described it, that the evidence we had for a beginning was evidence for what he called a super, with a space in between, natural events, nothing within the cosmos could explain the origin of the cosmos itself, if matter, space, time and energy have a beginning and as best we can tell they do and there are multiple lines of evidence and theoretical considerations that lead to that conclusion and I developed that in return of the god hypothesis, it is the evidence from observational astronomy and also developments in theoretical physics converge on that conclusion.And if that's the case, if matter and energy themselves have a beginning, and indeed if space and time themselves have a beginning, then we can't invoke any materialistic explanation to explain that.Because before there was matter, before the beginning of matter, there was no matter to do the causing. And that's the problem.There must be something. For there to be a causal explanation for the universe, it requires a transcendent something.And when you also consider that we have evidence for design from the very beginning in the fine-tuning of the initial physical parameters of the universe, the initial conditions of the universe, the initial establishment and fine-tuning of the physical laws, then you have evidence for that transcendent something being a transcendent intelligent something.And if something is intelligent, capable of making choices between one outcome or another, that's really what we mean by personhood.I mean, this is very close to a, the idea of a personal gun, now that entity may not want to have anything to do with us, but we're talking about a conscious agent when we talk about evidence for intelligent design, and then we have further evidence I think in biology with the presence of the information and information processing system inside cells.And so when you bring all that together, I think you can start to address the who question.So after I wrote Signature in the Cell and Darwin's Doubt, a lot of my readers were asking, OK, that's great.We have evidence of a designing intelligence, but who would that intelligence have been? Is it a space alien, something imminent within the cosmos, like Crick and others have proposed?Or is it a transcendent intelligence?And what can science tell us about that question? So I thought it's a natural question that flows from my first two books.I would stipulate that the theory of intelligent design, formally as a theory, is a theory of design detection.And it allows us to detect the action of an agent as opposed to undirected material processes.We have this example that we often use. If you look at the faces on the mountains at Mount Rushmore, you right away know that a designing intelligence of some kind was responsible for sculpting those faces.And those faces exhibit two properties which, when found together, invariably and reliably indicate a designing intelligence.And we've described those properties as high probability and what's called a specification, a pattern match.And we have evidence of small probability specifications in life.If something is an informational sequence, it's another way of revealing design, so that we can get into all of that.The point is, we've got evidence of design in life, but, the cosmology and fine-tuning allow us to adjudicate between two different design hypotheses, the imminent intelligence and the transcendent one.And I thought, well, let's take this on. It's a natural, it goes beyond the theory of intelligent design, formally speaking, and it addresses one of the possible implications of the evidence of design that we have in biology, that maybe we're looking at a theistic designer, not a space alien. 
I just want to pick one or two things from different books. Signature in the Cells, you have it there behind you.And when you simply begin to look at the complexity of cells.You realize that they are like little mini cities, that actually everything, so much happens within.And I guess we are learning more and more about everything in life.And you talk to doctors and they tell you that they are learning more and more about how the body functions. And there's a lot of the unknown.But when you look at that just complexity of, we call it the simple cell, which isn't really very simple, that new research and that new understanding, surely that should move people to a position that, this is impossible, that this level of complexity simply just happens.So tell us about that, just the cell, which is not simple. 
Yeah, that's the sort of ground zero for me in my research and interest in the question was this origin of life problem.That's what I did my PhD on.And I think it's really interesting. We could have debates about the adequacy of Darwinian evolutionary theory.I'm sceptical about what's called macroevolutionary theory.But set that all aside. Darwin presupposed one or a few simple forms.And in the immediate wake of the Darwinian Revolution, people like Huxley and Heckel started to develop theories of the origin of those first simple cells.And they regarded the cell in the late 19th century as a very simple, as Huxley put it, a simple homogenous globule or homogeneous globule of undifferentiated protoplasm.And they viewed the essence of the cell as a simple chemical, it's coming from a simple chemical substance they called protoplasm.And so it kind of, and they viewed it as a kind of jello or goo, which could be produced by a few simple chemical reactions.That viewpoint started to fall by the wayside very, very quickly.By the 1890s, early part of the 20th century, we were learning a lot more about the complexity of metabolism.When you get to the molecular biological revolution in the late 1950s and 1960s, nobody any longer thinks the cell is simple because the most important biomacromolecules are large information-bearing molecules that are part of a larger information processing system.And so this is where I think, and in confronting that.And so any origin of life theory has to explain where that came from.My supervisor used to say that the nature of life and the origin of life topics are connected.We need to know what life is in order to formulate a plausible theory of how it came to be.And now that we know that life is much more complex and that we have an integrated informational complexity that characterizes life, those 19th century theories and the first origin of life theories associated with figures like Alexander Oparin, for example, from the 1920s and 30s.These are not adequate to explain what we see.But what's happened, and this is what I documented in Signature in the Cell, is that none of the subsequent chemical evolutionary theories, whether they're based on chance or based on self-organizational laws or somehow based on somehow combining the two, none of those theories have proven adequate either.This problem of sequence specificity or functional information has defied explanation by reference to theories that start from lower level chemistry.It's proven very, very difficult, implausible in the extreme.Here's the problem. Getting from the chemistry to the code is the problem.And undirected chemical processes do not, when observed, move in a life-friendly, information-generative direction.And this has been the problem. So the impasse in origin of life research, which really began in the late 70s, was documented by this book I mentioned, the mystery of life's origin and books, another book, for example, by Robert Shapiro called, Origins, A Sceptic's Guide.That impasse from the 1980s has continued right to the present.Dawkins was interviewed in a film in 2009 by Ben Stein, the American economist and comic.And very quickly, Stein got Dawkins to acknowledge that nobody knows how we got from from the prebiotic chemistry to the first cell.Well, that's kind of a news headline.We get the impression from textbooks that the evolutionary biologists have this all sewed up.They don't by any means. This is a longstanding conundrum.And it is the integrated complexity and informational properties of the cell that have, I think, most fundamentally defied explanation by these chemical evolutionary theories.And I think that's very significant when you think of the whole kind of evolutionary story.Darwin thought that if you could start with something simple then the mutation selection, oh, he didn't have mutations, but the mutation, sorry, the natural selection variation mechanism, could generate all the complexity of life. You'd go from simple to complex very gradually.Well, if the simplest thing is immensely complex and manifest a kind of complexity that defies any undirected process that we can think of, well, then you don't have a seamless evolutionary story from goo to you.Because I guess when you're Darwin's doubt, the next book you wrote, I guess when Charles Darwin wrote Origin of the Species, he assumed it was settled.But science is never settled.There are always developments. And yet it seems, oh, that's sacrosanct, and that cannot be touched and must be accepted.
Yeah, and what I did in the second book was show or argue that the information problem is not something that only resides at the lowest level in the biological hierarchy, at the point of the origin of the first cell, but it also emerges later when we have major innovations in the history of life as documented by the fossil record, events such as the Cambrian explosion or the origin of the mammalian radiation or the angiosperm revolution.There are many events in the history of life where you get this sudden or abrupt appearance in the fossil record of completely new form and structure.And we now know in our information age, as it's come to biology, that if you want to build a new cell, you've got to have new proteins.So you have to to have information to build the first cell.But the same thing turns out to be true at the higher level.If you want to build a completely new body plan, you need new organs and tissues.You need to arrange those organs and tissues in very specific ways.And you need new proteins to service the new cell types that make the organs and tissues possible.So anytime we see the abrupt appearance of new biological form, that implies the origin of a vast amount of new biological information. And so in Darwin's doubt, I simply asked, well, is there, can the standard mutation natural selection mechanism explain the origin of the kind of information that arises and the amount of information arises?And I argue there that no, it doesn't. That we have, there are many, many kinds of biological phenomena that Darwin's mechanism explains beautifully, the small scale variation adaptation, that sort of thing.So 2016, a major conference at the Royal Society in London.First talk there was by the evolutionary biologist Gerd Müller.The conference was convened by a group of evolutionary biologists who think we need a new theory of evolution.Whereas Darwinism does a nice job of explaining small-scale variation, it does a poor job or a completely inadequate job of explaining large-scale morphological innovation, large-scale changes in form.And Mueller, in his first talk at this 2016 event, outlined what he called the explanatory deficits of Neo-Darwinism, and he made that point very clearly.And so it's, I think it's a new day in evolutionary biology, the word of this is not percolating so well perhaps but that was part of the reasons I wrote Darwin's doubt is that within the biological peer-reviewed biological literature it's well known that the problem of the origin of large-scale form, the origin of new body plans is not well explained by the mutation selection mechanism.At this 16 conference, the conveners included many scientists who were trying to come up with new mechanisms that might explain the problem of morphological innovation.Afterwards, one of the conveners said the conference was characterized by a lack of momentousness.Effectively, the evolutionary biologists proposing new theories of evolution and new evolutionary mechanisms had done a good job characterizing the problems, but had not really come up with anything that solves the fundamental problems that we encounter in biology when we see these large jumps in form and structure arising.And in Darwin's Doubt, I didn't just critique standard neo-Darwinian theories of evolution, but many of these newer theories as well, showing that invariably the problem of the origin of biological information and the form that arises from it is the key unsolved problem in contemporary evolutionary theory. Mueller and Newman wrote a book with MIT Press called On the Origins of Organismal Form, which was a kind of play on the origin of species.Darwinism does a nice job of explaining speciation, small-scale changes within the limits of the pre-existing genomic endowments of an organism, but it doesn't do a good job of explaining new form that requires new genetic information.And these authors, Newman and Mueller, listed in a table of unsolved problems in evolutionary theory, the problem of the origin of biological form.That's what we thought Darwin explained back in 1859, and instead we realized that the mechanisms that he first envisioned have much more limited creative power and much more limited explanatory scope.So that's what my second book was about, and also I think it's still, this is still very much right at the cutting edge of the discussion in evolutionary biology.We can explain the small scale stuff, but not the big scale stuff.Let's just finish off with actually disseminating the information, because all of this is about taking issues which are complex and actually making it understandable to the wider public.And I guess part of that is, I mean, obviously being on the most popular podcast in the world, Joe Rogan, I was like, oh, there's Steve Meyer and Joe Rogan.And taking that information and that turbocharges that.So maybe just to finish off on the ability to disseminate this, because I think in the US, the ID movement is more understood, where I think maybe in Europe, it's certainly it's more misunderstood and not as accepted where there is an acceptance in the States.But tell us about that and how being on something like podcasts like that turbocharge the message.
Yeah, well, I can tell you, you know, now that I'm getting introduced at conferences and things after The Joe Rogan Experience, it's as if I never did anything else in my life.No, that's the only thing people care to mention.I mean, he's got a monster reach. He's extremely, his questions on the interview were very probative.Of course, slightly to moderately sceptical, maybe more, but I thought they were fair. I thought it was a great discussion and it was a lot of fun.And, you know, we've had not only, I think he gets something like 11 million downloads on average for his podcast.We couldn't even believe these numbers when we were told them.But there have been over 25 million derivative videos that social media influencers and podcasters have made about the Rogan interview, analysing different sections of our conversation.So, yeah, that was a huge boost to the dissemination of our message.But one thing I realized in our conversation that there's a simple way to understand the information argument.And that's one of our tools in getting some of these ideas out is distilling some of these things that we've been talking about at a fairly deep level to a more understandable level.So let me just run that argument, that argument sketch or the distillation of the argument by your audience.And then they would talk about some of the things we're doing to get the word out.Our local hero in the Seattle area here is Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft.And he has said, like Dawkins, that the digital code in the DNA, that the DNA is like a software program, but much more complex than any we've ever created.Dawkins, as I mentioned before, says it's like a machine code.It contains machine code.Well, if you think about that, those are very suggestive quotations because what we know from our uniform and repeated experience, which is the basis of all scientific reasoning, is that information always arises from an intelligence source.If you have a section of software, there was a programmer involved.If you have a hieroglyphic inscription, there was an ancient scribe involved.If you have a paragraph in a book, there was a writer involved.As we're effectively broadcasting, we're transmitting information, that information ultimately issues from our mind.So whenever we look at information, an informational text or sequence, and we trace it back to its ultimate source, we always come to a mind rather than a material process.All attempts to explain the origin of life based on undirected material processes have failed because they couldn't explain the information present in DNA, RNA proteins.So the presence of that information at the foundation of life, based on our uniform and repeated experience about what it takes to generate information is therefore best explained by the activity of a designing intelligence.It takes a programmer to make a program, to make a software program.And what we have in life is, from many different standpoints, identical to computer code.It is a section of functional digital information.So that's a kind of more user-friendly sketch of the argument but the point is some of these some of these key ideas that are that make intelligent design so, I think so persuasive at a high scientific level if you actually look at the evidence, can be also explained fairly simply and so we're generating a lot of not just Joe Rogan podcast interviews but coming on many many podcasts and that sort of thing but also we're generating a lot of YouTube video short documentaries that get some of these ideas across and for your viewers, one that I might recommend which is on of any it was out on the internet it's called science uprising and it's a series of 10 short documentary videos, another one that we've done called the information enigma which I think would would help people get into these ideas fairly quickly, the information enigmas I think it's a 20 minute short documentary it's up online and we've had hundreds of thousands of views so we're doing a lot to sort of translate the most rigorous science into accessible ideas and disseminate that in user-friendly ways.The best website for finding a lot of this compiled is actually the website for my most recent book, Return of the God Hypothesis. So the website there is returntothegodhypothesis.com.
Okay, well, we will have the link for that in the description. 
Dr. Stephen Meyer, I really appreciate you coming along. Thank you so much for coming and sharing your experience and understandings of writing and making that understandable, I think, to the viewers, many of them who may not have come across this before. 
So thank you for your time today.
I really appreciate you having me on, Peter.

The Week According To . . . Matt Le Tissier

Join us as we take a meander through some of the news, articles, stories and social media posts that have piqued our interest or made our blood boil this week and we are excited to welcome back a good friend and previous guest, the football legend, Matt Le Tissier.Matt has made a new army of fans through his straight talking and common sense over the last few years so we look forward to hearing his thoughts on tonight's topics, including...- Not So Rare: Footballers dropping at an alarming rate.- Bernie Sanders: 'I am glad to be fully up to date with the vaccine'- Are you or those around you are getting ill? What you can do to prevent illness and stay healthy.- Christmas Massacre: Jihadi nightmare for Christians in Nigeria.- Rishi & Co Don't Care: Millions of hardworking taxpayers in this country were purposefully left to rot during the 'pandemic'.- 40 candidates and 25 elected officials from 17 states demand that the COVID shots must be pulled off the market.- Diversity is our Strength? Fears grow of sectarian violence between Sunni and Shia Muslim migrants on the floating immigrant hotel, Bibby Stockholm.
Matt Le Tissier is a bona fide football legend, often described as one of the most naturally talented players of his time, the man that south coast residents call ‘Le God’ and one of the most famous soccer stars of the 1990's.Matt joined Southampton FC on the YTS scheme in 1985, signed professional forms with them the following year at 16 years of age and for the next 16 years he put loyalty above riches and remained at the club.A hero to his fans for his creativity, he was the first midfielder to score 100 goals in the Premier League and Matt's penalty taking abilities were renowned, converting 47 out of 48 from the spot.Then for 15 years he was on our TV screens every week on Sky Sports giving his commentary on the Premier League football matches.This all came to a screeching halt when he tweeted his thoughts on the Ukraine/Russia conflict, refused to wear a badge on-air of an organisation he had no interest in being associated with and also retweeting a post that questioned the government line on COVID.These actions were apparently outside the accepted new-speak and for these crimes he was sacked.
Connect with 'Le God'...WEBSITE           https://mlt7.com/ X                        https://x.com/mattletiss7?s=20
Recorded 29.12.23
Connect with Hearts of Oak...WEBSITE            https://heartsofoak.org/PODCASTS        https://heartsofoak.podbean.com/SOCIAL MEDIA  https://heartsofoak.org/connect/TRANSCRIPTS   https://heartsofoak.substack.com/
Support Hearts of Oak by purchasing one of our fancy T-Shirts.... SHOP                  https://heartsofoak.org/shop/
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on GETTR https://gettr.com/user/BoschFawstin and X https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20 
Links to topics...Not So Rare https://mlt7.com/ Bernie Sanders https://twitter.com/SenSanders/status/1740394578266792371Prevent illness https://twitter.com/lawrie_dr/status/1740333887736479778Christians in Nigeriahttps://twitter.com/PeterSweden7/status/1740127117961285722Excludedhttps://twitter.com/ExcludedFighter/status/1740087392084930770COVID shots https://twitter.com/MdBreathe/status/1738738547451179091Bibby Stockholm https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12906641/Fears-grow-sectarian-violence-Sunni-Shia-Muslim-migrants-Bibby-St

Jason Christoff - Mind over Medicine and the Power of Psychological Manipulation

Shownotes and Transcript
Over the last 4 years we have seen no end to government control, brainwashing and behaviour modification. I heard Jason Christoff speak on this very topic (Mind over Medicine) at the International Crisis Summit 4 in Bucharest. It was the first time I had come across Jason but his speech stuck in my head. He joins us to discuss how psychological manipulation is used and how we overcome self sabotage. Why do we conform? Why does our culture honour obedience to authority? How much is self worth tied to what others think of us? Where does fear fit into this? Jason delves into all of these topics and finishes by looking at the top signs of self sabotage.
Jason Christoff runs an international self sabotage coaching school where students are educated on the subjects of mind control, brainwashing, behaviour modification and phycological manipulation.Jason's students then use their knowledge in these areas to help reprogram their clients into better versions of themselves on all levels.Jason believes that the social decay we openly see in our world today has only come about because key players in our society are using this manipulative psychology against most of humanity.If we are to survive and thrive in the upcoming years Jason believes that each citizen must understand these processes, as to protect themselves from future psychological operations.
Connect with Jason...WEBSITE              https://courses.jchristoff.com/X                          https://x.com/JasonChristoff6?s=20
Connect with Hearts of Oak...WEBSITE              https://heartsofoak.org/PODCASTS          https://heartsofoak.podbean.com/SOCIAL MEDIA    https://heartsofoak.org/connect/TRANSCRIPTS     https://heartsofoak.substack.com/
Support Hearts of Oak by purchasing one of our fancy T-Shirts.... SHOP                    https://heartsofoak.org/shop/
Interview recorded 15.12.23
Transcript
(Hearts of Oak)
Jason Christoff. It's wonderful to have you with us. Thank you so much for joining us today.
(Jason Christoff)
Always a pleasure, Peter. Nice to meet you in Romania.
It was wonderful to meet you in Romania.It really was fun to meet different people who I hadn't connected with before.You being one of them and doing that short piece together for War Room.So great to meet you and great to hear you speak amongst the many people that were in Romania. I mean, I think you had you spoken to Brussels before.
Yeah, I did a similar speech at the EU Parliament in Brussels, just trying to bring whatever parliamentary members who dare to attend, basically bring them up to speed on sort of the foundation of why a lot of people during the COVID operation, you know, they ran east looking for a sunset.They were rearranging the furniture on the deck of the Titanic.And it was all based on psychological manipulation.And the MP and the members of the European Parliament who attended they were very impressed with the talk.
Well, for the viewers, you run an international self-sabotage coaching school where students are educated in the subjects of mind control, brainwashing, behaviour modification, psychological manipulation, of which we have seen a lot in the last three and a half, four years.And your speech was mind over medicine.Looking at that psychological manipulation, people can find you on your website, jchristoff.com. and you also have a mailing list.
Yeah, people would like to get, I send something out three to four times a week called the Christoff Report.It educates for free on these matters, very important matters.They can email me at info at jchristoff.com and just say, put me on the list and I'll make sure you get some important information.Okay, well, that's the description. People can make use of that info at jchristoff.com.Maybe you want to just touch on how you, this isn't really interesting area and it's important to understand what lies behind the information that we are being given I think we've possibly been guilty for a long time of accepting just the information we're given, what we're being told, many of us are questioning the media more than maybe any other time in our lives simply because of the COVID control that we've seen in the last couple of years.But maybe you want to just introduce yourself and what you do before we get on to the issue of psychological manipulation.
Well, I used to be a very high-end health coach.And unfortunately, I mean, I've got some very expensive certifications, so I was charging quite a bit, and the people that I was training, they would have a real hard time getting in shape.They were afraid to be their best selves.So I phoned the institute where I got my certification, and I said, you know, I'm charging people money.No one's getting in shape. It's getting quite awkward, and they seem very afraid to be their best selves. Could you help me?What am I missing here? And they said, well, no, there's something called the subconscious mind.There's mind programs in there. This is based a lot on group pressure.A lot of people that you're dealing with do live in a society where more people are out of shape, more people are addicted, and that group pressure is getting the better of them because we all want to be safe and we all want to be part of the herd.So if the herd is overweight and addicted, we feel very afraid being in the minority, being in shape and not addicted. And I said, well, why didn't you teach me that when I was there in California?They said, well, there was a couple levels ahead, but here are some books regarding how you can mind control and brainwash your clients and trick them into getting in shape. And I said, well, is that ethical?They said, well, it's used every day regardless, and they're paying you to get in shape, so feel free to apply these techniques.There's no good or bad mind control is basically the heart of the magician they said that determines the outcome, they said you're just trying to do some good, so I started to apply these mind control and brainwashing and behaviour modification tactics to my high end health clients and they were so, they were so successful, I quickly, I not only put myself out of business, I said, I got to bring this to a higher level.I have to start teaching more people about this.So I ended up coaching online for a little bit, and it got so busy, I couldn't handle the flow.So I opened an international sort of psychological reprogramming institute.I do have medical doctors, chiropractors, health coaches, and members of the general public.And I just show them these tactics and you can use these tactics on yourself so you can make your life better or you can apply to entrepreneurial pursuits where you can change people's behaviour and they can get what they want, they might want better relationships they want might want more money, they might want to get healthy, they might want to just be happier, these techniques really fit the bill, regardless of what the person wants to do.And there's a lot of mind control in media channels and government channels today that is doing the opposite.So we have this whole big mass of people that are off the path, very unhappy, very depressed.They don't know why. And of course, when they get educated on these matters, because the first process of the schooling is just to say, look, this is what's going on.This is how it works. And these are the players targeting you and your family for negative mind control.And then we say, we're just going to use the same tactics and we're just going to make your life better. And they're like, okay, well, that seems easy to understand.And that allows them to go out into the field, they're into their lives.And now they hear it on the radio because I pointed it out to them.Now they see it in the newspaper.Now they see it in the movies, the TV shows, and even the ads between the segments of the TV show. They see it there. They see it everywhere.They're like, thanks for pointing it out. It's everywhere. I never saw it before.
And maybe mention how you came to be invited to the International COVID Summit, International Crisis Summit now, because you had a lot of doctors, a lot of individuals bringing data and information, a lot of the political side.And what you brought to talk about what lies behind that manipulation, that was maybe a little bit niche, slightly different, and it dovetailed perfectly.So how did you end up being at such events?Well, a lot of the medical doctors and scientists would come with the data about, say, the people getting injured from the shot.And that's all fine and dandy. But how did so many people fall for, you know, or participate in the operation?So this is the sort of background question that is nagging in everybody's mind. How was this done?And I've been invited, I don't know, three, 400 times to give explanations and interviews.And I've sort of honed the explanation to make it easy to understand.And I was invited to a lot of medical Zoom conferences and a lot of scientific Zoom conferences as well, where they said, maybe you could speak to 15 minutes on this very important topic, because they have all the data of the injuries and the deaths.Well, where's the explanation about how people walked in, like this voluntary euthanasia?How do you explain that? So I got very good at sort of doing an elevator pitch of how mind control works, not bogging people down too much in the academia of it all, and just telling a good story.And I told the story so many times to so many medical groups.They said, like, you've got to come with us.Because no one else is really addressing this as effectively as you are.And although you don't have all the, I mean, I did graduate from university, but there's no master's or PhD behind my name.But they said, you make it so easy to understand, we have to sort of get this explanation in there.Because when the next psychological operation rolls out, and it's sort of disguised in a different way, if people don't know how this operates, they'll be eating from the hand that eventually cuts their head off again and again and again so they said this is as an important topics as any other topic and then I got invited of course I'm very happy to go all the people that are around me and talking before and after me at these conferences are people I've researched and listened to for anywhere between 2 and 25 years personally.Well, tell us your speech at, and I wasn't at Brussels, I saw a few of them, clips on the internet, but actually in the Romanian Parliament, I sat and listened to many of them.And it was mind over medicine.And I think we are all in a different situation now than we were previously where we trusted maybe the advice and recommendations from the medical field.Now, many of us question that.Maybe just that line, mind over medicine. Unpack that for us.
Well, when I was asked to speak, I'm no fool.So I knew I had to stick to the sighted psychology, getting called to the mat on anything.None of my opinions were going to be inside such a presentation.I don't walk a dangerous line like that at all.So the first question in my presentation was, you know, in regards to our response to COVID, was it based on clinical virology or was it really based on behavioural psychology?And my speech was the shortest out of the 50 talks that were given over the weekend.But the first thing I opened up with was a two-minute video.There's a something called the ash conformity experiment, it's very simple testing how compliant humans are to group pressure even when the group is wrong, so it's like a, it was basically experiment there's five people and then there was a researcher and out of the five people only one was the true research subject the other four were actors.And, of course, the researcher was sort of also another actor.He's in the white lab coat.And he would hold up a piece of paper. And on the far right-hand side, there was three lines. And they all had different lengths.And then on the far left side, there was one single line. And it had a matching length to the group on the three.And it was really obvious. It was like kindergarten sort of research.So let's say the line on the left matched of the three answer B, line B was the same length as the one out on the left and the actors were told to give all the wrong answers, so they said it was C and you know you hear it repeated, it's C, it's C and then the guy who's not, you know he's really in the experiment he's very confused, he doesn't want to now his psychology is getting the better of him, this natural sort of neurological impulse that all humans have to feel safe being one with the group because of four against one your safety could be in jeopardy if there was a conflict. So the guy who wasn't the actor, he said, no, it's, you know, it's this line.And that was his first time around. Then they gave another piece of paper.It repeated itself. But even on the second go around, the non-actor said, yeah, and he gave the wrong answer.And 50% of the people given this test, they gave the wrong answer, which proves that group pressure can make people ignore reality.And it's also proven that, you know, there's a part of the brain that gets into this for us, and it's counting what the herd is doing.There's a part of our brain very concerned with what the herd is doing, and it's counting the most repetitive content. What this really proves is humans aren't really interested, for most part, in the truth.They're interested in what makes them safe.And if agreeing to something you know is a lie will make you safer, you can modify and trick the human to go along with the lie.And this psychology, and that was just say the first portion of my presentation, but this is like one facet of the documented psychology that was weaponized against the public during COVID and what we were, what happened is we were sent home two weeks to flatten the curve, we're going home on purpose this is all part of the psychological manipulation because there was was another psychological research, the researcher that also cited that if you're going to train a human and really control the repetitive content of their environment, you don't want them around any other person to give them a counter narrative.So we were sent home purposely. This was the research of another psychological manipulation expert.His name's Dr. Yost Merleau. He said, send them home in isolation so you can train them so you don't have a counter-narrative.Other research pointed to the fact that most people watch the TV when they're at home, and then you have Facebook and YouTube and all the social media platforms censoring counter-information, any sort of counter-argument.So what was happening is when the person was sitting at home, they're getting all this repetitive content, which is picked up subconsciously by this part of the brain, which is always literally asking, what tribe am I in?You know, what group am I in? What do I have to do here to fit in?And this part of the mind also is proven, doesn't know the difference between real life, screen time, and imagined thought.So when you are at home and you're listening to ABC and CNN and Sky News and the BBC News, the British Brainwashing Corporation.You're getting the repetitive content that they know will tabulate in the subconscious mind, get identified as the behaviour of the group.And then this safety mechanism that we have to home in on that and mimic that as our own so that we're safer, this is all automatic. It takes care of the rest.And this is why you had everybody come out after two weeks, you know, back to work.Everybody's talking the same language. Everybody knows what the script is.It's almost like they got downloaded the script that they were going to act out personally over the next two years regarding masking and distancing and what the real solution was. And there's only one solution.And the thing about this part of the brain, Peter.Is that not only will it identify the group through the repetitive content and kind of say, that's my gang.That's where I'm safer. There's something more dangerous about this sort of neurological protection mechanism.As soon as it identifies the bigger group as where you're going to find protection, It kind of sort of fluffs itself up, and it wants to attack others that aren't in the group to sort of say, I'm loyal to you. Make sure you protect me.And the loyalty is shown by attacking people that aren't with that group.And that's why people that were psychologically manipulated with the repetitive content out of the mockingbird media you know they're parodying all the same thing, not only were they starting to get sort of having a Stockholm syndrome, sort of a passionate love affair with the repetitive content, their secondary neurology is about showing loyalty to that group and there's no better way to show loyalty in real time than to mock or even attack the smaller herd.So this was the weaponization of psychology.And I mentioned sort of the stock, I don't know if I mentioned the Stockholm syndrome, but this is where people can fall in love with an aggressor, someone who's a bully, because mind control is just based on weakness.And the government was being this very powerful, very intrusive, very aggressive bully.And there's another psychological researcher called Nils Bejerot.And he's the one who coined Stockholm Syndrome.And Stockholm Syndrome was about a bank robbery in Stockholm, Sweden, where bank robbers held tellers against their will for five days.And because of the fear of the bullies, of the people that can control life and death. Some of the tellers fell in love and got romantically involved with the bank robbers to try and protect themselves.It's a natural genetic response.So when the government bullied up and started getting very aggressive, and of course, psychological manipulation researchers would have told every government official, use harsher language.Be more aggressive, tell them stay home.Like Joe Biden, our patience is wearing very thin for the unvaccinated.This is all scripted psychological manipulation and triggering so many different facets of psychological research to bend the public in a very particular direction, which was get the junk under the skin.I mean, some of the, we saw in the UK, you obviously had it bad in Canada.We had it bad in the UK. You could argue who had it worse.But we had a kind of lovable character in Boris Johnson, which actually added to that.We had the nudge unit as well in number 10 Downing Street that was specifically set up to move people forward.And it kind of fits into what you say, one of the lines was you don't kill your granny, that you don't want to hug your family because you would kill them and who wants to kill their loved ones and therefore, so it fear was certainly I guess a large part of what went in, not only with the daily death numbers but if you hug your granny she will die and that seemed to be a line that was used not only in the UK but across the world. 
Absolutely, the thing about fear and a lot of humans don't really care about themselves, that's another thing, but they care about other people, so you can take the lads down at the pub they're like I'm going to the pub, if I die down there, I die down there.But if you tell them, look, if you go to the pub and drink with Jim, you could kill Jim and Jim could kill you, you're gonna get a completely different psychological response altogether.Because they're like, I don't wanna be, I'll be responsible for my own death, but I don't wanna be responsible for someone else's death.So you can really see the psychological manipulation just in this full gallop and fear, of course.All the logical and rational analysis capability of the human mind is behind the forehead and what's called the prefrontal cortex or the frontal lobe.Now, fear has been proven to shut that down. So they're going to use as much fear as possible to drive all electrical conductivity and even blood flow out of the prefrontal cortex.And when you're afraid, all the electrical conductivity and the blood flow, it transports to a very primitive part of the brain that you do not want on living in this society.It's called the limbic system or the fight or flight system.It has a notoriously low IQ.It has no ability to judge long-term consequences of its actions.And it's always in its childlike state. It is always looking for an authority figure to remove the fear because that's the only way you get back there is through fear.So there's always this childlike tendency to say, tell me what to do.I'll do it. Like, I just can't stand to be in this fear state.And so when you're ruling or farming human cattle, you go to war with the prefrontal cortex.And there's many ways to shut it down. And there's many ways to inhibit it.Fear is one of them. And of course, chemical or poisons is another way to trigger the shutting down of the prefrontal cortex.This is why the bottle shops were open in Canada, the weed shops.Canada now sells fentanyl, heroin, and cocaine openly to their citizens in British Columbia, which is a western province.And so there's always been an attack on the prefrontal cortex or frontal lobe through these poisons, every poison we see in our society today from Teflon to microwave food and everything.And I'll be honest with you, and people will not like to hear this, Peter, I realize this, but the most effective psychoactive drug ever found to shut down the prefrontal cortex is caffeine. I love that you've dropped that in, I love that.
Yeah people are like there's no way because in and you'll see it's also very addictive and alcohol used to be the favourite sort of mind control activator with these people and you know they couldn't get the work, the work potential out of the slave class when they were drunk and they they invented they came across coffee in Arabia during the Crusades at about 1680 quickly brought it back to the UK Royals and said you know you think your tea is good, you got to see this stuff you know people are losing their minds you can control them forever and they'll do twice as much work ripped up on the caffeine, the UK Royals were very interested in that psychoactive drug 
I want to pick up something that comes out from what you're talking about, and it's maybe cultures that honour obedience to authority.And I think Europe and North America have prided themselves in individual thinking.We maybe look to Asia or Latin America, individuals that follow authoritarian figures or follow figures and follow on the mass and much less the individual.But what we've seen the last three, three and a half years really calls that into question because there was little individual thinking and everyone just accepted.I mean, speak into that idea of culture that honours that obedience to authority.Well, it's easy to understand mind control is based on some kind of weakness.Even if I said to you Peter you gotta take this shot or you don't have your job, well if you had two million dollars in the bank it's not you know, there's the power differential isn't that great is it? But if you live cheque to cheque you're financially weak, so this is if someone says well is that mind control and I said yeah that's mind control, they're controlling your decision through a form of weakness, if you notice the Asian cultures or even the Mexican Mexican culture generally, I mean, I live in Mexico half the year, and the Asian culture, they're smaller statured people.And so there's physical weakness formulas that come into play.There's physical weakness, mental weakness, intellectual weakness.And this is also why, and this is an important topic to talk about, is that if you even go to a stage hypnosis show, which is great for learning about mind control, you'll notice that in most cases, not all, but in most cases, the people being put under the hypnosis or what's called transfer induction, they're sitting down and the hypnosis expert is above them, even behind them, kind of tapping on their shoulders and putting the suggestions into them.The body is extremely intelligent and knows that if you are sitting and someone's above you, you are weaker if they're standing.And if they're behind you, you're even more vulnerable.So in regards to societies that are more compliant or people that bend more to group pressure, you would have to factor in overall weakness.Not just sort of the physical stature of the societies that honour obedience but you will notice that the societies like the Asian cultures that honour obedience instead of rebellion, they would, it's because these people of our smaller stature don't feel as physically capable of going to battle with a group that they might disagree with, as Europeans and and I live in Europe sort half the other year, being Canadian myself.Being over in North America, I would tell you, especially for Europeans, they're a lot larger stature.It's been shown that people of larger and stronger physical strength can actually push away and deny group pressure to a higher extent.Tell us, the question that a lot of people will ask is why do we conform? And you've touched on some of them but I think people want to take control, they want to actually do what they want to do and not fit in the herd and there's a whole range of whether you're maybe introvert or extrovert or how you fit in, but people like to think they are, think their own things, free thinkers, they do what they want to do.And how do you answer that?
It's a simple question with a very complex answer, I get that.But why do we conform when individuals think I don't necessarily want to, and yet I conform?And certainly looking at the last three and a half years of tyranny, how do you begin to unpack that question?
Well, whether this research is done in different ways or by different researchers, they do find, and they can't really put their finger on it exactly, but there's 30% of the population who will conform to the group no matter what.And then there's 40% that sort of looks around and says, what's that other 30% doing.And they'll just sort of, they know it's wrong, but they still go along.And then there's 30% that actually will have no part of it.And generally, I tell people, look, there's usually in the 30% that will not comply with their own destruction.It's usually because they've had a real painful childhood, a real painful incident during their childhood where it was so painful, they absolutely refused to go back to that pain voluntarily.And they see truth from lies and they know lies bring pain and so they're like if pain comes to me and it's outside my control, so be it. But that person went through so much pain, they're so adverse to it, they're like I'm not going to participate in it just to make Jim, Joan and frank down at the pub happy, you know, Joe and Jane coffee shop will smile at me and be greater friend to me if I comply with my own destruction. I say no to that proposal and that's usually because in psychology you need pain to actually mature and individuate from child to adult. An individuation just means you can see yourself operating separately than the tribe. You can hold your own.And so somewhere along the line in that person's history, they experienced an extremely painful event.They did the very painful rite of passage from child to adult.They've individuated, so they are an individual.They're not, you know, they're not on their parents' apron strings.They're not bound by social constructs that make no sense.And they're certainly not going to comply to group pressure that makes no sense.Like for me, I've had a very painful childhood.And I just knew that the person who takes the most medicine out of, and there is no exceptions to this, the person who goes to the doctor the most is the most sick.The person who takes the most vaccines is the most sick. And the person who takes none of that is the most healthy.And although there was a parade every day down to the priests in the white butcher coats.For the medicine that never made anybody healthy.And although I was catcalled and marginalized for not following along with the parade, I said, you go ahead. I'm staying here.Because I, under no circumstances, want to experience the type of pain I've experienced in my life by my own hand.If it comes to my door and someone holds my hand behind my back and does it well, Well, then that's a different story.But I'm not participating in my own euthanasia. And that's because I've done pain and I want to minimize it in my life, regardless of who likes me or who doesn't like me for doing so.How does self-worth fit into it?Because I think we are often concerned of what others may think more than we are about ourselves.There is that identity and how others view us. Is some of this or a large part of this as boiled down to self-worth and how we see ourselves. 
Absolutely, this group we're dealing with that put on the whole COVID show, they're not a new group, they're a very old group. And if it ain't broke don't fix it, and so there's psychological weakness, this is the most dangerous weakness because you can't see it, you could be healthy looking like me and if I had low self-esteem you're not going to really see it. But if I have low self-esteem there's an internal weakness that my metabolism recognizes and tabulates and documents and says Jason's weak. And so he's not going to be able to put up a fight when it comes to the group and then psychological weakness, this shame or guilt.These are the lowest vibrations ever proven to come out of the human body.If someone's feeling guilty about something, if someone's feeling shameful.I mean, one of this group's favourite tricks is, and when I say this, I believe wholeheartedly in the foundations of the original religions, morality, ethics, justice.I believe that. And protection of the children, protection of the vulnerable.I believe that wholeheartedly. But when I hear a phrase like born a sinner.And I know that psychological attack, anything that weakens you, is going to leave you open over time to more psychological manipulations.And even the biology, they'll say, look, you know, you don't really have a reason to be here.You're just random happenstance, flying on a rock through space with no mission or no goals or no, you know, no reason to be here.Someone just, you can just see them, Peter, they start sinking into their chair, right?Born a sinner, biologically, you know, even the medical system, they're like, these are your genes.You're also faulty. And this group is known, right?You're born faulty, born a sinner, you know, sort of the biology, your random happenstance.I call this, you know, the triangular crossfire. Then the medical system comes in and says, can't be healthy.The best we can do with your faulty genes because you're faulty is that you take these poisons for the rest of your shortened life, that's the best you can do, so all these attacks add up over time to get the the human cattle between the crosshairs psychologically and make them so malleable to the psychological manipulation, there's so many facets of the attack, they're all based on weakness.And then self-worth, I guess, fear also fits into that.Fear of the unknown. Self-worth is fear of what people may think.But I have been blown away by how fear has been the major driver, I guess, to what we've seen over the last three and a half years.Not only a fear of not conforming, but a fear of the information you're giving.Everyone has lived in a state of fear more than probably what we've witnessed before for generations.Tell us how kind of that fits into pushiness to do something you wouldn't necessarily want to do.
Well, yeah, it's fear on top of fear. And these reactions were highlighted, obviously, in my talk, and you obviously witnessed them in 2020 forward.But this fear response, you only have one as a human being.And this is why, say, prior to 2020, they're going to get you afraid all the time.So that is just sort of natural.So that you feel uncomfortable when you're not in fear. And this is why all your Netflix, I mean, all people are doing is watching actors kill, stab, and murder each other on TV. This is now the entertainment.The reason it's on the screen, again, it's this old group thing.This is all done on purpose.All your Netflix productions are all fear-based to sort of prime the psychological system to almost permanently throw a switch in that direction.And then the average person doesn't know is that you have one fear reaction.Like if you're getting mugged, everybody knows the fight or flight phrase.If you're getting mugged or getting chased by a dog, a wild dog, you're going to get the fight or flight going.And this has all these negative repercussions inside your psychology. pathology.But if you consume poisons, and caffeine again, and coffee is one of their favourite poisons, you don't have to watch John Wick 1 through 4 or Equalizer 1 through 3 on Netflix.I can just give you a coffee, and I can scan your brain, and you're going to have the same negative neurological results as watching the horror movies or the killing.So the average person doesn't understand that when they don't get enough sleep, they go into the fear response.If they watch, if they think they're going to kill their granny, they're going to be in a fear response.It's like the people who rule you never want you to break out of it.Because you can break out of it if you have a good sleep and you have some peaceful time.And then if you have some peaceful time, that darn prefrontal cortex, the frontal lobe turns back on, and then you'll be able to see the tyrants.So for them, it's as much an attack on the frontal lobe as it is on any other facet of this attack is they got to make sure to prime your neurological system all the time with either, visual fear that you're taking in through the eyes, auditory fear that you're taking in through the ears, or chemical fear.And this is why sometimes you'd be in the middle of the night during COVID, at least I was, and there'd be an amber alert.And I know, I'm like, this is completely, this is scripted.And then there was a test of the emergency response system.And then everybody in my house, I was sleeping, other people were sleeping, and we all hear the phones.And it's at 2 o'clock in the morning or 11 at night when we're all sleeping.They're always trying to keep us in fear. It's all scripted.And the average person has no idea that this is how scripted the world is.Even the word government.Govern is French for to control and ment, M-E-N-T, is from the Latin mentis, M-E-N-T-I-S, which means mind.The word government literally means mind control. And the only reason that 8 billion people can be ruled by 10,000 mental defectives is through the act of mind control, which is controlling the repetitive content and then poisoning people to upregulate the content.It's been proven that 30% of the people will comply with the repetitive content group pressure.If they're natural, healthy humans, if I can poison you, I can get upwards of 60.Let me finish off on the huge topic and I just wanted to pick up on some of these issues to leave the viewers and listeners with some information and of course they can go to your website they can find them, where they can get that email info at jchristoff.com for more of that, but one article which really hit me and we'll just be able to touch on it was top five signs you're self-sabotaging and in that you talk about they were naturally hardwired to be afraid of success and then about the government and media purposely know how to use that fear and one of the the signs you mentioned is caffeine which you've obviously spoken about also about finances that is health and happiness.Maybe end that because people will be scratching their heads and thinking, I want to have the success, but I seem to be the one blocking it.Just maybe finish on that. And of course, people can find that full article on the website.
Yeah, well, basically it's a pretty short article. And it basically goes over the finances, the happiness factors and the wealth, the abundance, the satisfaction. And you, as we age, we're supposed to remember the lessons of the past pains and failures. So with the past pain and failures, the experience, we're supposed to be able to make better decisions over time.So as we age, we should have more experience and be more masterful of life.So if you're mastering life in this way, it's only logical to think that you're going to be better at life the longer you're here, with all these challenges.So if someone's getting less happy, more unhealthy, and more broke, it means the programs that your subconscious, basically the repetitive content that you are mimicking and emulating and mirroring from either your TV shows, your movies, or from the greater cultural tribe, which is your friends and family, the programs you're downloading and mimicking aren't good and that's what's holding you back in the self-sabotage, don't forget this is a group-based thing as well, you got only 20 percent of the population is healthy, pretty small tribe, only about five percent or ten percent are wealthy, it's even a smaller tribe so naturally we're afraid to go into the smaller group, so there there are ways to get over this.I teach it. I can help people for free.They can just sort of get on my email list.They can email me at info at jchristoff.com and I'll slow drip them the information over time.And if they want to participate in some of my programs, they're always there.But until that time, just get the information for free so that you can understand your own psychology, if you don't understand why you do what you do, you're going to fall for everything that the government and media are giving us as negative repetition on purpose so that we never get our footing on success mountain.Because you don't want to deal with successful people when you're doing a tyrannical takeover.You don't want to deal with healthy people. You don't want to deal with rich people because they don't bend.They're not easy to mind control so I teach all this inside for free inside my email list and people can get on that and I can help them find a better way to exist. 
Jason I really appreciate coming along, it's a massive subject and I thank you for coming along and unpacking some of that and obviously the website is there and the email info jchristoff.com, thank you so much for your time today Jason.
Thank you Peter always a pleasure, thank you for doing what you're doing.

The Week According To . . . Charlie Sansom

Our guest tonight is Charlie Sansom, a singer, DJ, former Conservative Party chairman and political commentator who is building a growing number of fans for his straight talking on all the big topics around today.Charlie joins Peter to discuss the headlines from the news and we go deeper into some of the posts he has made on his social media this past week.
- What's next after Colorado? Where are the other challenges to Trump's candidacy?- Snowflake Britain: The most complained about programmes in 2023.- The only reason why Tommy Robinson is always in court.- Transgender 'woman' who dumped soiled adult nappies at children's nurseries and 'hid inside a bin' appears in court.- Polish state TV halts broadcasting after new pro-EU gov't sacks ‘biased’ media chiefs.- Michael Gove reveals he has cooperated with criminal probe into Michelle Mone scandal.- Mass migration cost The Netherlands nearly half a trillion dollars between 1995 and 2019.
AVAILABLE NOW: An Evening of Conversation and Discussion With ANDREW BRIDGEN MP & CARL BENJAMIN https://heartsofoak.org/subscription/ 
Connect with Charlie...X                         https://x.com/CharlieSansom?s=20Instagram          https://www.instagram.com/charliesansom/
Recorded 22.12.23
Connect with Hearts of Oak...WEBSITE            https://heartsofoak.org/PODCASTS        https://heartsofoak.podbean.com/SOCIAL MEDIA  https://heartsofoak.org/connect/
Support Hearts of Oak by purchasing one of our fancy T-Shirts.... SHOP                  https://heartsofoak.org/shop/
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on GETTR https://gettr.com/user/BoschFawstin and Twitter https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20 

Dr Steve Turley - The Liberal Meltdown Begins in Earnest

Shownotes and Transcript
Dr Steve Turley has been enjoying the liberal meltdown in his recent videos and he joins us to give us an analysis of what is happening. The legal case against President Trump keeps hitting roadblocks making all those with 'Trump Derangement Syndrome' so mad. Whatever they throw at 'The Don' just boosts his poll numbers. And the J6 narrative is unravelling with all the footage being released by the new House Speaker. Even Vivek is openly opposing the liberal consensus. And with Biden's poll ratings tanking and Alex Jones returning to Twitter there is much to be joyful about.
Steve Turley (PhD, Durham University) is an internationally recognized scholar, speaker, and author who is widely considered one of the most exciting voices in today’s growing patriot movement.Dr. Steve’s popular YouTube channel has over 1 million subscribers and daily showcases his expertise in the rise of nationalism, populism, and traditionalism throughout the world. His videos, podcasts and writings on civilization, society, culture, education, and the arts are widely renowned.
Connect with Dr Steve and join the movement of Courageous Patriots...WEBSITE:           https://turleytalks.com/X:                        https://twitter.com/DrTurleyTalksYOUTUBE:         https://www.youtube.com/@DrSteveTurleyTVPODCASTS:       https://podcasts.apple.com/am/podcast/turley-talks/id1520478046
Interview recorded 14.12.23
Connect with Hearts of Oak...WEBSITE            https://heartsofoak.org/PODCASTS        https://heartsofoak.podbean.com/SOCIAL MEDIA  https://heartsofoak.org/connect/TRANSCRIPTS   https://heartsofoak.substack.com/
Support Hearts of Oak by purchasing one of our fancy T-Shirts.... SHOP                  https://heartsofoak.org/shop/
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on GETTR https://gettr.com/user/BoschFawstin and Twitter https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20 
Transcript
(Hearts of Oak)
Dr. Steve Turley, it's wonderful to have you back. Thanks so much for joining us once again.The honour's all mine, Peter. It's great to be back with you.
Good to have you. And of course, if people are not following you, which I can't imagine, but in case they're not, at @DrTurleyTalks is your Twitter or X, however you want to call it, and @DrSteveTurleyTV on YouTube.And of course, turleytalks.com is the website, turleytalks.com.All those are in the description, whether we have people watching on different media or whether they're listening on the podcasting apps on the go.Everything is in the description. Now, Dr. Steve, one of your titles of your videos caught my eye.Many of them catch my eye and many of the thumbnails catch my eye as well.But it was the, has the liberal media meltdown begun? And there are a lot of things happening, I think, to be hopeful about.And of course, you often bring out a hopeful side where I think sometimes we may be guilty of seeing the doom and gloom and the negative.So yeah, you're challenging the narrative on so many issues.I think I wanted to pick up on some of those, the collapse of the narratives that we've seen.And maybe we can start on the legal case against President Trump.And obviously this is to make sure he does not run because he is the biggest threat to the establishment.And that seems to be unravelling. Do you want to maybe let us know, again, half our audience is US, half is UK, but let us know what's been happening on that legal side?Yeah, it's absolutely fascinating. So, you know, there's been several indictments against President Trump, but the main one, the one that's kind of leading it all is what's known as his J6 indictment, his, an indictment for supposedly criminal behaviour in a deliberate attempt to overthrow a Democrat election on January 6th, where our electors are certified and legitimated by Congress.We go by an electoral college here.You need 270 electoral votes to win. Every state in our 50 states has a certain number of electoral votes.And then you send electors, 270 of them, you win.That's basically, you send them to Washington, D.C., they get confirmed, they get certified, legitimated by Congress, and you win.And there was a debate back a few years when this was happening of whether or not the vice president is the presider over the proceedings could actually reject electors largely because of ongoing controversies in their states or whether or not you could send alternative electors based on those controversies from your state.And then the vice president has leeway. He has some freedom to determine which electors is going to be, is going to recognize.That's all just part of the debate. I think it's relatively settled.We do have it historically. It's been over 100 years, but we do have some precedent where the vice president can come in and exercise some, shall we say, judicial privilege in determining which electors he's going to receive or send back and then have the state work out the issue and then come back at another date, say, you know, January 18th or whatever, just set an arbitrary date for those states to work out whatever, uh, election controversy is issues.They still have that, uh, play out. Well.Trump is being accused of criminal behaviour in promoting alternative electors and promoting the vice president to reject the electors that were sent because of the controversy surrounding the November 3rd election.And Jack Smith is the special counsel who is leading these charges.He has a history of pushing, as I understand it, bogus charges against people.He has a very, very bad overturning rate when it goes through the appellate process, the appeals court, the higher up court.A lot of his convictions actually get overturned because he seems to be a little bit on the seedy side of things.Anyway, what happened is that Trump's lawyers filed for appeals against Judge Chutkan's decision not to grant him or not to recognize his immunity as president.And Chutkan is also a very controversial figure. She's considered very radical, left-wing and the like.And the D.C. court circuit is seen as very radical and left wing and the like.
So what Trump's lawyers have been doing is they filed these appeals to higher up courts, the appellate court process to overturn Chutkan.And now they the the appeal process may reject those appeals and send it back to Chutkan's court.But as long as those appeals are playing themselves out, Chutkan can no longer conduct court.She no longer has jurisdiction over the issue, over Trump and the litigation that he's facing as long as this appeals process goes on.Now, Jack Smith knew that was going to happen.And this appeals process can take months.He knew that was going to happen. So he kind of, we have the expression here.He jumped the shark. It comes from a happy days. The old, if you guys all know the old happy days sitcom with Fonzie and all that, when they, when their ratings were tanking.They had a program devoted to Fonzie getting on some jet skis and jumping over a shark area.And I forget it was in Hawaii or something like that. It was just this absurd attempt to try to get, garner attention or try to get people to take them seriously again. Well, Jack Smith has jumped the shark.He's taking Trump's immunity claim all the way directly to the Supreme Court.He's actually bypassing all appellate courts, going directly to the Supreme Court.And then the Supreme Court said, fine, yeah, we'll take a look at it.But we're not going to tell you when we're going to rule.And that ruling could be this summer. It could be next.It could be the following year. We just don't know. It just depends when they put on the dock.So what happened is Jack Smith demanded, basically, in his appeal to the Supreme Court, You got to settle it.Whatever your decision is, you got to settle it in this session, this Supreme Court session.He never explained why they had to settle it in the Supreme Court.He never explained why such a decision was needed to be hastened and the like.And we all know why, because he needs it before the 2024 election.So he's basically overtly admitting that this whole thing is a political sham, that the court trial is scheduled right now for March 4th.Nobody thinks that's even remotely going to happen, not even remote, even before all of these appeals were being filed.Now that it's in the hands of the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court usually doesn't, you know, they don't publish their decisions until the summer.They'll make a decision now, but they won't publish it till the summer.Nobody's even taking that date seriously. And so it looks like Trump won't even be in trial before the 2024 elections.And so Jack Smith, Chutkan and Biden, they're all, even DeSantis in a sense, because the only way DeSantis could ever possibly have a chance is if Trump was somehow removed because he was convicted, which wouldn't even happen in and of itself.You can vote for anybody you want as president here in the States.I mean, we see it all around the world, Lula in Brazil, or even Netanyahu in Israel.I mean, there's plenty of people have been indicted who get who get elected no problem so anyway the uh right now you just have the weaponized legalist proponents with egg on their face and Trump looks like he's going to he's going to cruise through 2024 as things stand now we'll see what they come up with in terms of trying to take him out. 
Yeah because I always wondered why DeSantis was running I assumed that he was expecting the legal case to move forward and Trump to be stopped.But the more legal issues are thrown at Trump, the more successful he is doing in the polls.And I can imagine some strategists, there must be a few of them somewhere in the Democrat Party, wondering what we're trying is not happening.And the last thing, I guess, the opponents want is Trump in court months before election, because that simply plays to his supporter base over a deep state.You got it. And I don't think they understood this. It's part of, I get, I think we're seeing the same thing in Britain.Our ruling class just occupies such a different cultural space than the rest of the population, the vast majority of the population.They didn't recognize that when they took a mugshot of Trump, they would be moving him from one cultural sphere into another cultural sphere.Prior to the mugshot, he was a New York billionaire president.After the mugshot, he suddenly shared an experience that many people, particularly in our underclass, have experienced or know someone.So if you ask anybody in our inner cities, how many New York billionaire presidents do you know?Zero. But if you ask them, well, how many people do you know who've been unfairly targeted by the man?Who've had mugshots, been arrested? Well, all of a sudden that number goes up exponentially.So Trump in just that one act, in that one picture too, you know, pictures are worth thousands of words, in that one act, the deep state where they recognized him or not moved him from one cultural space where he's actually in many ways very much removed and aloof from your average citizen to another cultural space that has tremendous amount in common with your, you know, your average citizen.So that's where the populism starts to kick in.They don't recognize that we're going through a legitimacy crisis right now.I think it's both Europe, particularly Western Europe and the United States, where every poll shows that virtually all of our public institutions, from our government to our media, to our judicial systems, all are haemorrhaging trust and confidence among the people.If I recall, there was Matthew Goodwin, a good British scholar, I'm sure you know him.He did, in his book on nationalist populism, they did a study back in the 1960s, 70% of Brits saw the government operating for the good of most or all.Today, it's basically 19%. I mean, it's just literally plummeted.And in the United States, it's even worse.In many respects, the United States may be the single most divided country on the planet right now.I mean, that's not an exaggeration. The gap that exists between our ruling elite and the people is growing more and more by the day.And that's precisely why I think every time you see Trump becoming a victim of weaponized legalism his polls go up every single time. And I couldn't agree with you more. I think if he got convicted it might be the biggest landslide we've ever seen.
How does the J6 narrative fit in this because the footage is out, speaker of the house released it all. I thought Tucker had released it but maybe I don't know, the speaker has now released it. And you put a video out, could it actually be your latest video on Vivek Ramaswamy on with CNN and challenging the J6 narrative and taking great joy in the fact that maybe CNN viewers had never come across this before and enjoyed that platform.But how much does the J6 narrative and the videos release that information?How much does that fit in with kind of where Trump is and maybe challenging some of the narrative going against him?
It is. Well, again, J6 was used and we talk a lot about, say, like what happened with Alex Jones.J6 was used against Trump very much like the Sandy Hook shooting was used against Alex Jones.It was an effective tool that the regime uses to isolate and seclude dissent.That's a very, very important technique. We can develop that a bit more.So J6 was for three years, almost three years now, right?It was a very effective weapon against not just Trump, but the whole MAGA movement and America First that we're all in the end insurrectionists. That's what we are.Give us a chance and we'll just overthrow the government and install some authoritarian despotic rule.That is falling apart. That's just collapsing, especially, like you said, with the larger footage that Tucker had released when he was with Fox and just more and more of the footage that's been coming out via the network society where we have instantaneous access to digital information, bypassing the legacy media, the way email bypasses the post office, basically.So I think Vivek did a good job in that.In that CNN slaughter was, I think he articulated the process that a lot of people were going through.If you had asked me three years ago, you know, did the FBI set up a bunch of well-meaning, but perhaps overzealous patriots, I would have, I would never have believed it.But then, of course, we had the whole Russian collusion fraud of 2016, and that cost us $30 million with a special counsel and the like.We had the whole Jussie Smollett race victim hoax.We had the whole Brett Kavanaugh is a racist. We had the whole COVID lab leak theory is nothing but a conspiracy theory.We had the Covenant Catholic school kids were a bunch of racists at a pro-life rally, of course.Racists at a pro-life rally, you just let that hit you.Every life is sacred, but darn it, I'm a racist. Right.You know, the notion that Hunter Biden's laptop was just Russian disinformation.Suddenly people start to say, wait a minute, we we're getting lied to all the time here.Maybe there is something to this J6 setup.And so I think that's in many respects, as I know, just on a personal note, I can't even count the amount of people I've talked to who've told me.They always thought so-and-so was a crackpot who believed in a deep state and conspiracy theories and so forth.And he said, I'm a believer now. After all of this, I'm an absolute believer.And then the polls are proving it. The vast majority of voters here do believe the FBI had some involvement in it.And of course, we have court documents that prove there were FBI agents in informants among the crowd.There's still no confirmation of how many. There's a Louisiana Congressman who believes there's upwards of 200 that were in the crowd.And so the entrapment charge seems to be pretty clear.You know, we have a governor Whitmer, Gretchen Whitmer in Michigan, and there was a whole like conspiracy to kidnap her.We're finding out that was a conspiracy that was actually constructed and concocted by by the FBI to entrap some, I guess, militia members or people part of a patriot movement out there.And they were, I think all of them were exonerated in court and the juries were very apologetic. They even had to go through this.So more and more people recognize, yeah, there is a deep state that does try to entrap its citizens in a manner comparable to a Banana Republic.And now you have a president, former president, who's the chief opposition candidate, who's being literally trumped up with bogus charges.And they're recognizing something's not right here.And the de-legitimation continues to go on.That's the key. I think the division in our nation grows with every passing day.
And you've done a number of videos on Biden's poll ratings.I mean, you've got years worth of footage, basically, if you look at those poll numbers dropping, dropping.Obviously, everyone says, well, it's the economy, stupid. Generally, that's what hits election chances. But then with everything else coming in, along with Biden being,not knowing what day of the week it is, never mind when he is being led off stage.How do all those factors play? Is it simply inflation or is it all those other factors that are playing into those? I mean, horrendous poll numbers.Yeah, no, I think so. I think you set that up well. I think something much deeper is going on. 
Again Matthew Goodwin, I think, caught it very well in his book on national populism.If people haven't read that, yeah...
I went to his book launch. I loved it 
Yeah it's, Matthews... I don't know if you've had him on your program, we got to have him on our our respective programs because he is really, and he and he's, well I should finish my sentence. He's really doing excellent work and he's bearing a lot of criticism from the woke academic world that says you're not allowed to even think in the categories.Eric Kaufman is another one at the University of London, a Canadian expat out there.Yeah, Matthew would call it a realignment, political realignment.I think it's absolutely right.I think you're seeing very same things happening both across the pond, both sides of the pond.Back in 1960, 50% of the British population ascribed very strong loyalty to one of the major parties, either Tories or Labour.Again, that figure today has dropped to like 10%. I think it was like 13%, exactly.Just a huge, huge drop.We're seeing something comparable here. What's happening is that because both parties, in our case, Republicans and Democrats, are just perceived as just occupying just such a different cultural space from their constituents, it's opening up opportunities.I think it was Eric Kaufman who actually refers to them as bootleggers.It's opening up opportunities for bootleggers, right?So a bootlegger, You know, just for just we're all clear, you know, here in the States, we banned alcohol for a while during Prohibition.And bootleggers were the ones that provided alcohol in the black market for people who wanted it.When people want something, but the government isn't providing it, they're going to go and look for bootleggers to get it.What we're seeing all throughout Europe, all throughout Europe, 300% increase in nationalist populist parties just over the last 10 years, and they're winning, right?You guys are no longer in the EU because of a bootlegger. We're seeing bootleggers rise up.We're seeing third, what I like to call third party candidates that is outside of your centre right, centre left parties rising up and giving the people, voicing the concerns of the people.I mean, you just had that amazing election in the Netherlands a couple of weeks back with Geert Wilders.I mean, I honestly believe, there was a time I thought he could pull it off back in 2017.I think it was the last major election. It could have been at the tail end of 2016, where he's really, really close.And then Mark Ruda ended up basically stealing his platform.And they were able to paint him as the extremist and blah, blah, blah.Those days are done. People see the establishment as the extremists because the establishment refuses to represent their values, interests, and concerns and continue to represent the values, interests, and concerns of the elite ruling class.Again, I think it was Matthew Goodwin.I'm going to fudge the data. I don't have it exactly in my head, but there was a Chatham House, the think tank study that found that it was something like 60, 70% of MPs believe that immigration is always good, whereas only about 20% of the voting population believe the same.So the discrepancy between the worldviews is so dramatic.What we have to understand here in the United States, Trump is a third-party candidate that won a major party nomination.He's not a Republican. He's not a George W. Bush. He ran against George W. Bush.He ran, and you're seeing it now with Nikki Haley and Chris, Chris, Christie, sorry, I always say Krispy Kreme. We have a donut shop here called Krispy Kreme.So Krispy, we also call him Taco Bell.You know, I, sorry, we've all been Trump-ized here, you know, but he turns everything into a WWE match, but yeah, he, you know, Trump is running against the establishment, Republican establishment, every bit as much as he's running against the Democrats, he's a third party candidate.Who got a major party nomination. And so you can't, in my opinion, a real assessment of what's going on can't limit the dynamics solely to the economy.You have to see this radical realignment happening as well.And that's what we're seeing. We saw it in 2016 with the white working class who had always voted Democrat in every single presidential election since 1988.Iowa, for example, voted for Mike Dukakis back in 88 when George Herbert Walker Bush got over 400 electoral votes.They were one of the 10 states that voted for Dukakis.Well, today, as of 2016, they're now voting 10, 20% for Trump.We had almost 200 counties in Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan, Pennsylvania, very, very white working class counties that had voted for every Democrat candidate since 1988, suddenly switch en masse and vote for Trump, some with a 40-point swing.We saw, again, very similar dynamics happening during Brexit with the working class vote in Britain, as well as the December 2019 national elections where you had regions voting for the Tories that had never voted for the Tories, ever.And Boris Johnson, of course, destroyed that coalition because he's again, he's part of this aloof cultural class that might play populist, but it fell apart.And again, I think the Republicans are experiencing the same thing. Hence why.And to me, this is very important.When you put in a candidate other than Trump, the polls all re-equalize.Now all the Democrat constituents go back to the Democrats.Ohio is in play if you get rid of Trump. I've seen polls, if you put DeSantis in there, you put Chris Christie.Biden wins Ohio in a landslide.Very, very working class state that goes about 10 points pro-Trump.Would suddenly either be a swing state or would turn blue.So I think it's more than just the economy. I think it's this mass realignment of the working class toward a Trumpist populist paradigm.And now we're seeing the non-white working class join up with that.Obama won the non-white working class with a 70% margin back in 2012. Biden now has the non-white working class.He's winning them by only a 10% margin. So it's a stunning collapse.And they're not swinging to Republicans. They're swinging to Trump.So that's why Trump has got to do what Boris Johnson failed to do.And that is he's going to to have to, if he wins, he's going to have to command the authority to turn the Republican Party into a fully nationalist, populist, traditionalist party.As long as they remain globalist, their fate, I think, is going to be the same as the Tories.
I agree. And you touch on immigration. I think immigration is a key thing because here, our conservative party have promised tens of thousands of our immigration numbers and we're now up to 700,000.And the same there. I mean, Texas could build a wall and they're still arguing, discussing it. So I think that's a key issue.And I think that's, I mean, we even, I think you put a video up recently, even CNN having to read out those poll numbers and announce Trump ahead in a number of states.And I know we've had we've had Brandon Straka on before, the walk away campaign and Democrats beginning to realize that this is not the party they signed up to.And tell us about that, because it's the left media beginning to admit what the polls are telling them.And that is because Democrats are walking away.
Yeah, no, you're absolutely right. That's it.When we'll set it down, the Democrat coalition's unravelling.That's one of the reasons why Biden is is is falling apart.And the only gift we could give them is to put someone other than Trump in.If you want to realign their coalition, that'll do it because voters don't trust Republicans and Republicans are giving them a wonderful opportunities not to trust them.They try. They tend to stab them in the back every chance they get.Yeah, we've had a couple of some sort of really impressive studies of late.There was something called a split ticket analytics study.That was a meta study of national trends going on politically.And then Democracy Corps did more of a micro study of late on just the battleground states.So again, because we're an electoral college, we're all clear because we're an electoral college system.Forget California, they're going to vote blue. Forget Texas, it's going to vote red. Florida's going to vote red.Blue states, and sorry, our blue is liberal, right? And our red is conservative.I know it's the opposite there. Right, exactly.But hopefully everyone could translate, right? Just mirror it.And so for us, it comes down to about seven purple states, right?So that'll work. Seven purple states. They could go either way.And what is so fascinating, particularly in that democracy core study, is they really looked at the battlegrounds. And that's what we try to do in our polls.We try to look at what's going on nationally, some national trends, but then you're going to have to drill down and see if those trends are corroborated and what's going on in the battleground states.Because Biden could be doing great nationally.He might be up two, three points in a poll, but that's only because the poll is skewed more to the population centres in LA and San Francisco and New York and Chicago.They're they're going to vote blue no matter what. The question is, what's going on in those purple states?And when you look at the purple states, it really does look like the Democrat coalition has unravelled.When they divide up their voter demographics and they look at Gen Z and millennial voters, when you break them down by race, so you get really nitty gritty in the demographic breakdown.Gen Z white voters favour Trump by 30 points.It's stunning. Now, these are more or less you're under 30 voters, to make it simple.And millennials, I think, are between 30 and 40, something like that.So Trump is winning the white Gen Z vote. And again, overwhelmingly by 30 votes.The white millennials are voting for Trump by 20 points.Latino voters in the battleground states, Trump is winning them.He's winning them by three points. Nationally, it's Biden by around five points, but that represents a 20 point decline from 2020.When it comes to blacks, this is probably the most astonishing number.Trump right now has black support. Even the New York Times has admitted that no Republican has seen in half a century.He's up around 20 points.It's just we haven't seen this with any Republican candidate. Biden right now nationally.He's winning the black vote with 52% of the vote But that's down 30 points from 2020. He won the black vote far above that 85-90%. So Trump is seeing black support like we've not seen before. Women, I mean the battleground polling shows that Trump actually has a 25 point lead among not just white women, but even unmarried white women.It's the unmarried. We, married women tend to vote Republican in the United States.They tend to be much more traditionalist. It's the unmarried women that tend to be the Republicans women problem.They talk about unmarried white women now are with Trump by 25 by 25 points.We're even finding that he's within the hair's breadth of winning the college vote, those with college degrees.So in the United States, I'm sure it's comparable in Britain, there's a tremendous political difference between those who have college degrees and those who don't, so-called working class.And working class right now are just overwhelmingly voting Trump and are increasingly voting Republican, whereas the college degrees tend to overwhelmingly vote liberal.They kind of got what we say they got woke.You know, that's not going on in 2024.Now, Trump is even leading actually among women with college degrees, white women with college degrees.It's just, so we're seeing, in effect, the Democrat coalition just unravel right before for our very eyes.And now, yeah, you have articles coming out on CNN saying Joe Biden has an electoral math problem.I mean, it's a nice way of saying he can't win as these polls are playing themselves up, because it's not that Trump just has leads in these battleground states.He has leads that are far beyond the margin of fraud, which is around one or two percent.You can play around with the vote up to about 1% or 2%. Beyond that, there's really...You know, you've exhausted all the precincts that you can suck out some extra votes from.So he's winning by four, six, eight, 10 percent in these battleground state polls.And there's just, they're freaking out.They know they can't do 2020 again with the massive mail-in ballot campaign that they had.So they're left to the weaponized legalism to try to take Trump out through through a conviction, but like you said earlier, convict him, as things stand with this process of de-legitimation his poll numbers are even going to go higher. 
Well you, that's the meltdown on the political side and the legal side and a massive part to disseminate information is the media and you've done quite a bit also on the meltdown in the media, specifically the woke media.I think nothing signifies that more than Alex Jones going back on X or Twitter.And Musk said he would put it out to the polls.Here in the UK, we've seen our most probably high-profile controversial figures would be Katie Hopkins and Tommy Robinson, and they have both also been reinstated to Twitter.Tell us about that, because it is a joy to watch the left freaking out at free speech being allowed to reign.Yeah, and just let that hit you, right?Just so that a free press, a free media is freaking out over free speech.It's, I mean, what's up is down, what's down is up.Yeah, well, I think we all know what they're really freaking out about.And they're finding their mechanisms, their tools of social control being wrenched away from them.They are ultimately upset that Elon Musk is effectively disrupting one of the regime's most important tools of social control, which is the establishment's ability to isolate dissent.Silencing dissent seems to involve two things.When you read scholars of censorship, they focus on these two dynamics quite often.I've found this very, very fascinating because we all focus on one dynamic, and that's the censorship proper, knocking somebody off the platform.We saw that with, obviously, Katie Hopkins and Tommy Robinson alike.We saw it with Alex Jones.Just, you remove the microphone. That's it. You turn off the microphone, knock them off, problem solved, right?Well, scholars have noticed when you go all around the world and you look at censorship techniques from authoritarian governments.No, they know that the person is popular enough. You could turn off their microphone, but they're still going to have an audience.You can still have public meetups, right? Email lists, direct mail, whatever.There's all kinds of ways you can still drum up social dissent if the person is popular enough.So that's why it can't just be the censorship proper.There's another step to this, and authoritarian regimes use this all the time.It's what leftist dissidents like Noam Chomsky refers to as manufactured consent.And this is largely the role of the Western media. This is the role the Western media has been given, as it were, by the establishment or is carved out for itself by the establishment.What our legacy media does here is they put forward a uniformity of not narrative.It doesn't matter if you're looking at ABC, NBC, CBS, or channel four, BBC, or whatever. It doesn't matter what you're looking at.It is a uniform narrative. Everyone is reading off the same script.That's very important because if everyone is reading off the same script, no one person is saying it.That's very important, right? Our founding fathers had a saying that we need to hang together or else we're going to hang separately.They were going against the crown, as it were. And that's very much the principle.We need to hang together. We need a uniform message.And that way, no one person is saying it. We're all saying it.And that uniform message, Noam Chomsky did a very, very good job in analyzing this.The uniform message plays, it always plays off of pre-existing sentiments, pre-existing loyalties, prejudices, whatever you want to call them.But the key is that the narrative, the uniform narrative, manipulates those pre-existing sentiments in such a way that strengthens the power of the regime.And that's exactly what they did to Alex Jones.The media unilaterally depicted Jones.And again, that's the key. Everybody is saying it. He's a crackpot.He's a crazed conspiracy theorist.He's a threat to democracy. He's a Putin stooge. He wants you to poison yourselves in the midst of a pandemic.And the piece de resistance, he is a cruel harasser of parents mourning over their murdered children.That was the Sandy Hook elementary school shooting, actually, which happened about 15 minutes from where I grew up in Connecticut.So the key here is that the uniformity of the media's message deliberately creates, it aims to try to create a massive us, we the people, versus a very tiny, small them, or in this case, him or her.And the reason why they're doing it, massing that kind of support, ironically, playing off of our sensibilities of poor parents who are mourning their kids and so on.The reason why they're doing that is to silence any and all dissent against the regime.So that's the key. It's not just the censorship.That's bad enough. But again, if the person's popular enough, they'll find other ways of reaching people. No, no, no.Manufactured consent is the means by which you destroy that popularity.The media's unanimous narrative that deliberately seeks to isolate and thereby silence any and all dissent from the regime is its principal tool to increase its power and its manipulation.And so I think that's why it seemed to, for so long, work so well with Alex Jones.He seemed to have been pushed off the stage, and Tommy Robinson seems to have been pushed off that stage. Again, it's not just the microphone that got silenced.People didn't want to be be associated with them anymore because of this uniform narrative that plays on our sensibilities in such a way that exploits them to increase the power of the regime.That's the key. And so what did Elon Musk do?He provided a massive communication network platform that invites these personalities back and thereby disrupts the unanimity of the media's narrative.And destroys their ability to isolate and seclude dissent.That's the key, I think, to the significance of what Elon has done.And notice now what they're doing to Elon.It's the same thing.
It is. And to finish off on this, you've got the schizophrenia of the legacy media.I mean, I saw Piers Morgan in the UK was interviewing Zuby, the rapper, And they were discussing Alex Jones and Piers was saying, well, how dare you? How can you have Alex Jones on Twitter?And they're arguing about whether you could or not.But then I think back, well, Piers Morgan had Alex Jones on his show maybe six months ago, eight months ago.So he's happy to have him on his show because the left realise it's a boost of, I mean, the left must have been, the media must have been so sad whenever Trump didn't turn up at those primaries. because it does boost that rating.And going into election year, they want Trump, but they don't.That's the same thing, the debate on the social media.I mean, Twitter actually being free, that is a game changer.Not that Twitter is where everyone finds, it is part of society, but everything else, you've got TikTok, you've got so many avenues of information.And I think I'm curious to see how those play out in an election year with the mainstream media being desperate to get a glimpse of Trump for their ratings, but the new media, the Twitter is actually opening up and free speech reining.Yeah, you're absolutely right, Peter. We talk about a lot on the channel, this phenomenon known as the network society.We are moving into a very quickly, if not, we're already there, I think in many respects, we're in a whole different social order in many ways.So back in the day, social order was primarily determined by proximity.And so in the 19th century, early 20th century, it's where the great cities, industrialized cities amassed.And then we had a whole media world rise up around them, you know, from the Washington Post to the New York Times, the Philadelphia Inquirer, the L.A.Times, the Chicago Tribune, the London Times, the Wall Street Journal.They all revolve around these massive population centres, because if you wanted to go anywhere in the world for like, you know, if you want to go up the social ladder, you had to be where the action was happening.If I want to make it in the country music, I had to move to Nashville.Or if I want to make it in finance, I had to move to Wall Street or London.If I want to make it in gambling, I had to move over to Las Vegas.You had to be where the action is happening.We don't have to do that anymore.One of the most famous singers right now is Oliver Anthony.You probably see the rich men north of Richmond.And Oliver Anthony became this massive, massive country music hit, not by making it big in Nashville, not by getting signed by any kind of New York record executive.He made it big because of a camcorder and YouTube singing in his backyard in rural Virginia.
And he ends up on the Joe Rogan show. 
Exactly, exactly.Who again, and you just keep pushing that, who again is an independent content creator, totally independent of any kind of major network and so forth.So what we're living in the midst of now is the recalibration society, not around proximity, but around networks.So all you need is access to the network, namely the internet, just like you and I are doing right now. We're across the pond from each other, and yet I feel like I'm closer to you than somebody just 10 feet away from me over here.We now have access to what's going on, irrespective of proximity.You don't have to be where things are. You just have to tap into what things are, as it were.And what does that mean? That means now we all have access to disestablish, decentralize digital information instantaneously. We don't need a legacy media mediating it for us.They don't have a monopoly over that information anymore.The first pictures of some event around the world don't come to us from satellite trucks with CBS News splashed across the windows. They come from people's smartphones.Everybody with a phone is now a cameraman and everybody with a social media platform is now a commentator.We all have access to the same information, which means now we can fact check the fact checkers.We can fact check the legacy media in real time now.And they don't know how to handle this because they're still living as if the big mass industrial age is the primary mechanism of social order. It's not anymore. It's networks.It's instantaneous, disestablished, decentralized digital information.That's why the independent content creator with Tucker Carlson being probably the king of them right now, the independent content creators, the future of it.It's not big conglomerate media corporations like Fox.They're losing They're losing viewers.CNN is losing viewers. MSNBC is losing viewers. All the major newspapers are losing readers because the independent content creator who has just as much access to the information as anybody in the media is seen as more trustworthy precisely because they're not under the pressures, the professional pressures of pushing that uniformity of message.Absolutely. And that Tucker Carlson network will be one that we are all watching intrigued at what comes out of that.But Steve, thank you so much for coming.I love just picking off some of those videos that you've touched on, on the meltdown on those different sectors.So thanks so much for coming along and sharing your thoughts on those.
Oh, thank you, Peter. It's always an honour to be here.Many of your viewers may know I got my doctorate across the pond at Durham.And I always, always love visiting with my British brothers. So thank you, sir.

Ivor Cummins - Will Ireland Say No to Orwellian Hate Speech Law?

Shownotes and Transcript
Ivor Cummins, maybe better known to many of us as The Fat Emperor, has challenged the Covid narrative from the very beginning.  He joins us today to discuss a new tyranny happening not only in Ireland but across the whole of Europe. Compelled speech. Ireland's new "Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences" Bill has been waiting for approval in the Senate since the summer. This biggest curtailment of free speech was set to quickly pass until scrutiny from free speech champions stalled it. Ivor goes through the bill and the expected consequences. 
Ivor Cummins BE(Chem) CEng MIEI  completed a Biochemical Engineering degree in 1990. He has since spent 30 years in corporate technical leadership positions. His career specialty has been leading large worldwide teams in complex problem-solving activity.  Since 2012 Ivor has been intensively researching the root causes of modern chronic disease. A particular focus has been on cardiovascular disease, diabetes and obesity. He shares his research insights at public speaking engagements around the world, revealing the key nutritional and lifestyle interventions which will deliver excellent health and personal productivity. He has recently presented at the British Association of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation (BACPR) and also at the Irish National Institute of Preventative Cardiology (NIPC) annual conferences. Ivor’s 2018 book “Eat Rich, Live Long” (co-authored with preventative medicine expert Jeffry Gerber MD, FAAFP), details the conclusions of their shared research: https://www.amazon.com/Eat-Rich-Live-Long-Mastering/dp/1628602732/
Interview recorded 12.12.23 
Connect with Ivor...X                           https://x.com/FatEmperor?s=20WEBSITE              https://thefatemperor.com/PODCASTS          https://thefatemperor.com/podcasts/
Connect with Hearts of Oak...WEBSITE              https://heartsofoak.org/PODCASTS          https://heartsofoak.podbean.com/SOCIAL MEDIA    https://heartsofoak.org/connect/TRANSCRIPTS    https://heartsofoak.substack.com/Support Hearts of Oak by purchasing one of our fancy T-Shirts.... SHOP                  https://heartsofoak.org/shop/ 
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on GETTR https://gettr.com/user/BoschFawstin and X https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20 
Transcript
(Hearts of Oak)
Today, I'm delighted to have Ivor Cummins with us, The Fat Emperor.Ivor, thanks so much for your time today.
(Ivor Cummins)
No worries, Peter. Always good to chat about real truth and accuracy and avoid misinformation, shall we say.
Which is fast and thick and furious and being thrown at us from every angle.I have thoroughly enjoyed watching your different videos.I know recently you've done Dr Pierre Kory, who we had on, you've obviously been on TNT Radio, I saw I think recently with Darren Denslow who's been on with us quite a number of times and I think your title on that was Technical Manager, Biochemical Engineer and Technologist and obviously you've got your background in biochemical engineering and probably over the last couple of years you've been very vocal on pushing back against the COVID tyranny and then it's much wider.I think from 2012 you've been researching the root causes of modern chronic disease, focusing on cardiovascular and I'm sure that over the last three years a lot has been added to that, that you weren't expecting.But maybe you just take a moment and introduce yourself before we get on to what is happening in Ireland and the criminalization of speech.Yeah absolutely, so briefly I did biochemical engineering, I graduated in 1990, I spent five years in medical device and development of dialysis units and all that kind of stuff.So I got a lot of medical exposure there at the time, but then the next 20 years, plus I was on the high volume kind of, uh, electro fluidic devices.And it was great because it's extremely complex when you have around 10 sites around the whole world, making products, uh, billions, ultimately of complex devices, the slightest problem or the most subtle problems, it can become huge, you can lose millions of dollars overnight.So I was the master problem solver. Ultimately, I ran large teams on the most complex problems, multi factor.And I did that for 10 or 15 years, 20 years.And I was also a manager as well of teams of up to 20 engineers, directly people managing them, that was great experience.So, I just got this vast experience in complex problem solving and people management and essentially a form of politics, corporate politics, which was also very useful.And what we're seeing since COVID started, coming ultimately from Rockefeller Brothers Fund in the 50s, right through Club of Rome, Trilateral Commission, Council of Foreign Relations, UN, the EU, I'm beginning to view those as a complex problem solver as almost synonymous.So they're all so interconnected and countless NGOs and corporates and the World Economic Forum that people find it hard to believe.Well, how could this be orchestrated? Who could possibly organize it?And it's actually quite simple.It's a long game plan for a global governance structure.And it's funded by the people at the top and the most powerful political people and the US State Department has an interest.And they're all working for around half century or more since the Second World War towards a very tight, well-controlled global government.And yeah, it's not that hard to orchestrate, because all the right people are doing it.And they're doing it like we did things, corporate style. It's very structured.It's full of lovely language.It's got lovely goals that sound great. It's obviously highly sinister under the hood.But yeah, it's not that complex. But most people don't have the corporate experience to be able to decode something like this, find all the players and just see the whole picture.And that's the problem. Just like people have no knowledge of virology or epidemiology, you know, or immunology.So you can fool the people with ease.And that's the challenge we've been seeing. And that's what I jumped into in March, 2020, because I could see pretty quickly, I have five children, I could see where it was going, it wasn't hard.And I just knew that this is kind of the battle of our generation, there's no question about that.And if we lose, we'll have a China-style society in the West, and that's pretty much the outcome.Yeah, and I respect those views.I think Naomi Wolf actually mentioned that from day one, whenever it was announced shutting down Broadway, then her and her husband left New York immediately.Others has taken a little bit longer to see through.You're hoping for the best in institutions, in society, in media.I think we've realized there is no best there.But what has been then your last three and a half year because that's a world away from a background in the biochemistry, the research.What you're doing now is so different. So I mean let us know that change and what that has been like for you personally.Yes, it's certainly been interesting, but you live in interesting times.So 2012, 13 up to 2020, when COVID hit, I was deeply involved in biomedical and metabolic research, and I was going all over the world speaking.A wealthy Irish entrepreneur was funding me to travel all over the world to conferences, medical and nutritional, and to explain to people how what caused heart disease, Alzheimer's, most of the solid tumour cancers that cause the most death, and all of these modern chronic diseases go back to the devil's triad.So very simple, I named it that.It's sugar, refined grains, refined carbohydrates, and vegetable oils, seed oils.And that's what makes up most processed foods, which is around 60% of everyone's calories.So essentially, were poisoning the population for nearly a century now.So I was lecturing on all of that and on insulin resistance, which is the big thing you measure, because that's the target you have to get down low, and then you're pretty much okay.But then when COVID hit, I had been so involved in the corruption of the statin kind of industry, the cholesterol-lowering nonsense.I'd been involved in a lot of drug corruption, and also back in the 90s, I'd actually been directly involved, not personally doing things, but older engineers were doing things completely against the rules.And it was common practice, you know, in biomedical manufacture.And I'm sure that never changed. So I had all this experience in the corporate corruption.I had all the experience in my own corporate roles in the last 15 years, again, in the corporate politics and corruption.And I had all the medical and biomedical knowledge now and metabolic.So when COVID hit, I was on stage in Denver, big room and giving a talk and then I came down and Trump was shutting down the country and I said what the hell is going on?And my wife had said previously, she had said should we get masks?Now she's a first class honours engineer and she's aware of a lot of my work but she assumed COVID was a big deal and I just smiled and this was early March I think and I said not at all sure.I saw the Diamond Princess data and you could see from who died and who didn't that it was going to be a bad flu equivalent.I mean, there's no question about that. The ship had shared AC.They were crammed together. They got 25% positivity.It was an extreme maximiser of infection. So you see the end result.And a few people in their late 70s and late 80s passed away.That was it. So we knew. But when they shut the airports, I said okay they're gonna pull a swine flu and they're gonna pull a big swine flu, a scam. And got back to Ireland and after that I just started interviewing immunologists, virologists, epidemiologist because when I will call something constantly I check with my massive network and my massive network of specialist in all the medical fields grew rapidly because a lot of people out there who are seeing that this is crazy.And so within a few months, I knew not only everything you needed to know about COVID, the mortality impact, the lockdown ineffectiveness, mask ineffectiveness, seasonality, I cracked the whole lot with the help of my network.And I began to explain it in layperson's terms. And that's when I began to get smashed, put in the newspapers, and censored.Even though I didn't talk any anti-vax, any crazy stuff, everything I said was referenced to government data. I was very careful.But in September, my viral video shot up to millions of views, half an hour, just me with slides, just explaining all the factors in COVID, just what it was.And the New York Times did a half-page article on me. It's like, whoa, a half-page hit piece on an Irish engineer.But at that stage, I knew that this was a total orchestrated scam. There was no question.So it didn't actually surprise me that the New York Times devoted half a page to an Irish engineer because the system and the media particularly were owned.And my video had corporate CEOs.They actually said it in the article.A leader in the COVID scam in the US, I forget his name, said, I have people from major companies, CEOs, coming to me asking, is this Irish guy right?So it shocked them. Just truth. Just truth. That's all it was.Well I think we learned people are hungry for information and that information is becoming, can be more difficult to access.But I want to go, I mean, I'd love to pick you up on that, on the. Fascinating.I know your book, Eat Rich Live Long, is available.Links are in the description and people can get a hold of that.And that health is a hot topic, but I want to talk to you about Ireland and the restrictions on speech.I mean Ireland has had incitement to hatred, hate speech laws for I think it was 89 or 90 was introduced, the UK has had it across Europe, but what is happening in Ireland at the moment with this new piece of legislation has really woken a lot of people up.I mean I saw an article in Newsweek magazine a couple of days ago and they were saying this cannot go ahead, this is Orwellian hate speech.Do you want to just let us know what exactly has been proposed in Ireland?Yeah, well, for sure, you're absolutely right, Peter, to refer to the 1989 Hate Speech Act, because that was actually very good legislation.It is still 100% perfect legislation for what they claim may be a problem, because it is quite powerful.It's been used, I believe, 50 times plus.And if you go out and make hate speech that could cause injury or cause hatred towards people or minorities, yada, yada, yada, they can go after you. No problem.So the law is there. It's perfectly functional. Needs no upgrade.What they brought out, it seems to be, I don't know, a Soros, an NGO coming down from the UN, maybe using Ireland as a test case for the most extreme madness that they're willing to try out in the test bed of Ireland.But what's in it is just lunatic. Now, people listening, they know it's terrible and it's great to hear Newsweek featured it. And it is, of course, Orwellian.But the extent to which it's insane, I can't even believe the bad guys want this or wrote this.So essentially, there's layers of madness. One is that they don't define hate speech really at all.And Michael McDowell, the former Attorney General in Ireland, was fantastic in the Irish Parliament questioning the Justice Minister on this point, it's not defined.And he said, I've heard the reason discussed for not defining hate speech was it could make it more difficult to convict people.And he said, that's the point.It should be difficult to convict in these kinds of matters, so it should be defined, so you get the right guy.So that's one point, It's not defined. There's around 10 groups, arbitrary, that they've listed out, like traveling people, and trans, and sexual, and gender, all this nonsense, none of whom has a problem anymore with hate speech.There is no far right in Ireland worth a toss.None of these groups have any real issue, right? So that's the other layer, not defining.And the other thing is that they've put in that a single guard, based on someone whispering in his ear, can get a local, very low-level court warrant and come into your house and take everything, anything and everything. It's like, wow.It can be diaries, it can be phones, it can be computers. They could take them for weeks, I would guess.And if you don't give a PIN number, that's also listed as an offence.If you say, I don't know the PIN for that, it's an old phone, that's an offence with six months in prison potentially and a big fine.That's another insanity.And when they take it, if they find anything under the undefined hate speech kind of thing, right, they can say, well, okay, that's private.You wrote this down. You could write a diary and you could say, oh, I hate this group and I don't like that group and I think they should be thrown out. Whatever you want, which you're entitled to.Of course, you're entitled to write that stuff. I wouldn't agree with it, but if you believe that, go ahead. Keep it to yourself.It is up to you to prove to a judge that you would never in the future have shared that.So it's guilty until proven innocent has been put in this.It is thought crime. It is 1984. It is minority report.Remember the movie with Tom Cruise? They see that you will commit a crime in the future using futuristic technology and they come and arrest you.It's like that but much worse because your private writings, memes, God knows what's on your computer from stuff you've downloaded or had sent to you.You have to prove you would not in the future share that.I mean, it is just beyond notes, hopefully, you know, well, you know already.It's just insane. I keep using the word insane for this because I'm blown away, even me after three years of COVID.People need to understand that. It is insane. There's no other word.
Has this come in, I mean, the UK have obviously got the online safety bill.That's another issue. And then the EU passed a bill, proposed a bill, which now passed just days later.But this, you're right, it's difficult to understand when legislation exists to tackle a so-called crime or injustice.And that's already there and everyone says that can be used and there's no issue with it being used.And then something else is brought in place, supposedly to correct a problem that isn't addressed and yet it is.And it is this confusion, I guess, and of course, we don't have the media reporting this or asking why.It's simply, well, are you for hate?I'm not for hate, therefore you want this bill.I mean, talk to us about the pushback on this and has it been scrutinized at all?Yeah, there's no scrutiny at all.I mean, basically, we know now, and it's not even controversial, I think, recently a TD or an MEP, an Irish MEP was asked, oh, what do you think of coming back to Ireland, back to Irish politics and the Dáil?And he said, well, no, and he casually let a cat out of the bag.And he said in the interview on record, he said people don't realize that over 70% of legislation comes from Europe, down to Ireland. So he said, to be honest, I'm better off over here, because that's where the control is. He didn't say control, but he said the first piece.And that's it. So essentially, I would say this is the simple way to view it now.Over the last couple of decades, increasingly, and now it's largely complete, when people go into politics, first of all, people got to remember the skill that brings you into politics is the opposite of technical, mathematical, logical.You go in there with so-called people skills. You know the type, right? So they go in there and they're kind of useless technically.Anyone can fool them, even though they're cunning. Anyone can fool them technically.And with legal matters, will fool them. So the people that go into politics now, especially in Ireland, we're like a vassal state of EU, UN, WEF.You know, we're really bad. That's why we had the longest lockdown in Europe.So they go in anyway and they quickly find out, political people find out where the power is. Like a lady said years ago about Washington, when you go into the Senate in Washington, an old guy said to her, you got to lean to the green.And he didn't mean environmentalism, he meant the dollar, you got to lean to the big guys, the money, the lobbyists, if you want to be successful.So in Ireland, they go in, they quickly find out it's all about the EU and keeping the big boys happy, and the UN and the WEF.And if you get invited to Davos, oh my God, that's the pinnacle of Irish political success.So you get the idea. So when it came to the Dáil, this legislation, they all just said, oh yeah, yeah, great. Oh, hate, love.Oh, we're all lovey-dovey. Oh, trans, you know, Ukraine, all this stuff.So all the politicians just signed it off.Didn't even read it. If they read page 10 and 11 and they had a brain, they'd say, oh my god, but they didn't.You know they didn't read it. They were all told it's great and they all signed it.And then when it was coming up to the Senate and then it would go to the President, then people began to get wind of it and began to talk about it.And then it became a problem. And then Elon Musk began to talk about it and said, what the hell's going on in Ireland?And then they started and saying, oh, he's right wing, he's an anti-Semite.There are politicians judging Elon Musk.It's like an ant judging God.It's just crazy.So also, I think it was someone connected to Trump, not Trump himself, made comments on how crazy it was. And then he did a big article, oh, Trump.Trump doesn't want it, because they know people think Trump's bad.It was propaganda to the power of 10, because they wanted it true and the media wanted it true. You know, the media all wanted it true.So luckily the Senate actually, it didn't go past and it got delayed.You know, that's all they could do. They delayed it. And then shockingly based on the stabbings of some poor children, actually migrant children, I believe.They used the anger in the public from the gross, excessive, uncontrolled migration in the last year or two. There's anger.75% of Irish people or more in a Red Sea official poll said immigration has gone way too far, uncontrolled.It needs to be pulled back in control.So the majority in the country believes that.But the anger that's there in the country, smaller percentage of people are very angry. and a bunch of hoodlums caused a riot. They smashed windows, burned buses.They didn't beat anyone up and they didn't go after any migrants.They did a smash and grab spree on the back of public sentiment.And with the children being stabbed, it was an opportunity, it's happened before.Nothing to do with far right, nothing to do with political ideology.It was opportunistic from a bunch of hoodlums in hoodies.And the video showed that. and the government actually used that problem that they caused, right?They then tried to flip truth upside down and use the problem to ram the insane law through.You couldn't make it up unless you knew how loathsome, low-life's our politicians are and how utterly controlled they are from the NGOs and all the other groups up top. It is just shocking, right?
Well, I want to go down the Irish politics side, but you need a catalyst in the UK, the catalyst for the online safety bill was the stabbing and murder of David Amess MP and that immediately everyone came out and said we need this online safety bill.Even with that individual was possibly radicalised in his local mosque but that's a conversation you weren't allowed to have so we'll just focus on.We've seen the issue there in Ireland and the government have not wasted the opportunity to jump on that. I was even looking at that and thinking, is this contrived?I mean, governments need a catalyst to push forward. And if something happens, they can point and say, look, we told you so.This is why it's needed. And everyone comes together.I mean, what were your thoughts on how that happened? And has that been the main catalyst or have other things happened to push it forward?
Yeah, there was talk of, you know, there's always talk of kind of false flag and don't get me wrong, there's a ton of false flag and there's a ton of Hegelian kind of mechanisms that have been used since all of human history, problem, reaction, solution.You create a problem, essentially, you then use propaganda to get a big reaction to it.And then you come in with your pre ordained solution and everyone goes, yeah, we'll take it. So COVID's a classic example of that.A lab created gain-of-function virus.It comes out. They see that it's got a little bit of pathology to it or pathological effect. It's going to kill older people mainly.And they big it up. And then they say they have a solution, the vaccine.So there's a lot of that. This one here, I really think, because I'm a logic and data guy and I go on probabilities. That's the centre of my universe.The overwhelming probability, I would say, that guy has not worked, I believe, in 20 years since he came here, the person who did the stabbing, and probably has all kinds of issues.And I think they've even referred in some articles to some of that indirectly.They don't want to identify him.I think that was just a happening. And we saw it earlier, a girl was stabbed by, again, a migrant who had issues.And even locally in my area, a similar thing occurred a few years ago, a very tragic case with a family.So these things happen, you know, when migrants come to places, sometimes they're under pressure, they don't have the language, they develop issues.So I think that just did kind of happen.But the exploiting of it, well, like I said, is just criminal.And the reason it blew up, if that was a very rare occurrence and it just happened, and it wasn't after a year or two of increasing public discomfort, like the poll said, they know that the towns around Ireland, little towns, are getting stuffed with migrants.And they can see they're young males mainly.They're not women and children from Ukraine, come on. I mean, down in South East Wexford, there was a nursing home being built for a community of 1,200.And a couple of weeks ago, it transpired that suddenly it's not being built.It's being built in a different direction for 170 young male migrants, young male migrants, unmarried.And they're looking at bringing it up to 400 over time. Now, a thousand people marched and of course the media all sniffed and sneered at them like they're far right.It's their community. It's insane.I mean, the numbers that came in in the last six or 12 months is like 100k and the graph of the numbers coming in went through the roof.And O'Gorman, I think the minister last year, he did this, it's on the record, sent out a tweet, not in Ukrainian.In Ukrainian, Georgian, and African languages.And he basically said, Ireland's open. You'll have a house within four months.We get you a phone. We get you loads of money. Whatever. I don't know what was in it.But it was translated into all African languages and everything. So he's on the record.They want to flood the zone. And the reasons for that go back to the Pan-European Union in the 30s and speeches in 2009, I think, by, who was that CEO of Goldman Sachs who became a big UN guy, not Robinson, forget his name, an Irish guy originally.He gave a huge speech and he said it outright.We have to destroy nationalism. We have to destroy sovereignty in the EU countries.We have to break it down. And the mechanism, the best mechanism for that, besides pouring US junk television in, right?And phones, you know, the best thing is flood in very different people, ideally young males, and blend the country into a blob so we can get a big blob in Europe without any national identities.So they're actually destroying diversity because we had all these countries that you could freely travel to and see their culture. and then you come back home and you talk about it, that's actually diversity.They're all peaceful, all lovely, but they want to end diversity.They just want to make a blob because a blob can easily be translated into a super state or a China-style society.Very hard to do it when you've got identifiable nationalities in Europe.It's so simple, isn't it? This is a hundred-year-old brainstorm strategy that's clearly being deployed recently.Big scale. That's it, no racism. In fact, last thing I'll say, sorry I'm on a rant here, it's morning time, but Peter, the last thing I'd say, and this is so important for people to know and understand, The people who are using minorities from other countries as cattle, literally using them as pawns in their chess game to get their globalist Europe and globalist West, they are the ultimate racists because they have absolute scorn and contempt for poor people from all over the world that they're forcing into countries and creating difficult situations where there may be, you know, certain amounts of racism stoked and provoked, you know, like a hornet's nest, keep shoving in people, they don't have accommodation, our homeless can't get accommodation, they've ignored them for decades, and now they're shoving in hundreds of thousands with, we already have an accommodation problem, what's going to happen?But the people driving this, they are the racists.I am the opposite of racist, my record is clear, they'd love to call me one, but they can't because I have a full record on social media and forever.Absolutely the opposite. In fact, I've often shared anti-racial movies and films on my Twitter, like Kenneth Branagh, 2001 conspiracy, it's called, about Wannsee in Germany in 1942 or three.I'm clearly an anti-racist. They hate that.But that said, I know racists when I see them and the people driving the policy are racists.
And of course there's nothing you can say or push back if you're called names which is this legislation about offending and finding offense and if someone has been offended you cannot prove that in a court that, you cannot prove your feelings in court and of course when someone calls you whatever, racist, xenophobe, Islamophobe, the list goes on, you can argue and you can push back but it's already been decided by whatever individual has said.They have decided and therefore you are because they have spoken.And that declaration of speech, you know, truth goes out the window.It's the issue on pronouns. If someone wants to use a pronoun then they define that person who is a man, is a woman and that must be true.And that kind of removal of truth, not only in this legislation but I guess across Europe for all the hate speech which is simply if someone finds offense then it is decided that a crime has been committed.It's beyond absurdity but also it's very malign and clever.So the people I refer to are driving this as a geopolitical crucial strategy this is not small stuff, that's why it's getting so much funding and backing. it's very important for broader globalist.Kind of government desires and to make ultimately, we won't get into detail, the intention is to translate the UN into the world government or for the West.The UN is being built and built and built and we can see the insanity coming from Guterres, the head of the UN.We're now global boiling. We're no longer warming, all nonsense.The UN is being teed up.So there's a lot put into this thing and hate speech because it is important because free speech increasingly could cause a real problem for basically plans that have been grown beautifully for 70 or 80 years since post-World War II.So, you know, too big to fail.They can't let all of the plans of geopolitical, you know, structure and infrastructure that have been built for a half century, they can't let it fail because people all start becoming aware of it and talking about it, that's why there's this extreme kind of insane zeal to get in the laws, because they're important, and people need to realize that.And you say you can call. Yeah, once you call someone a racist, the judge is going to roll over.That's the sick thing. We saw in COVID, several people brought very good cases, and they assigned a lower-level judge to check if the cases were appropriate to bring forward in the system.I didn't realize they could do this. They did.So there were mask challenges and other challenges.This judge, she went in and looked at everyone. No, I don't think that's, no, that's not required.One judge threw them all out before they even got in the system.So you know what will happen. If the government don't like someone, they'll try to nail them on this law, and the judge will be in the pocket.The judges now are no longer really independent. We saw that in COVID.They know where the wind's blowing, and they do their job. A lot of them are appointed.So that's institutional corruption gone crazy. And another one I just thought when you were talking, Peter, there was a communist activist, a very significant person.I can't remember his name, but back in America before the McCarthy era, when America was big, there were a lot of activists who wanted America to go communisto or fascististo.And one of them was caught with, not emails at that time, but circulars to all their activists.And he said to them, and he was right, very clever. he said always call our detractors, our opponents, always call them a fascist.Now he said be careful, don't call someone a fascist if it can blow back on you.In other words, don't always do it, but whenever you can, call them a fascist.And he said if we keep repeating this on an individual, after a while the people will largely just come to believe it's true.And he said, it's the most dirty word and the dirty label you can put in someone right now.So use it. And you can see now that that advice was excellent, but it turned out it all failed in America until recently.Now they've got Biden and all the rest. They're getting, they're getting to communism.But yeah, exactly that. They know that racism is powerful. if you can make it even stick a bit and get your media to keep repeating it, people will assume, well that's the racist guy.I mean, it's shocking, it's criminal, but this is the game they play.
Yeah, you talked about the 70 year.I mean, I'm still blown away having grown up in Dublin, Limerick, first like nine years of my life.It was rough, but actually it was conservative as a country.You had Fianna Gael, Fianna Fáil, polar opposites in theory.Now they're all together, the union party.Has this been sped up simply with the bailout after the financial crash, with Europe then calling the shots?Because if you look at Italy and Greece, they've kind of held on to their identity.And Ireland has always been known for a strong identity. That seems to have gone out the window.Obviously, COVID has sped things up, and that's part of it. But is it the crash? Is it that Ireland is now beholden to Europe because of that or talk to us about that because the collapse in Irish society has been unbelievable.
Yeah, I think it's not so much the bailout more as the symptom of the problem.I mean the fact that Ireland kowtowed and the EU, the EU flooded the zone with money.They told Ireland flood the zone and the little Irish went off and they flooded the zone for the EU overlords and it suited them because there's money everywhere and everyone was happy.And then the piper came to be paid, and they went with cap in hand, and they gave away all our money to the bondholders.So I think Ireland back then was just a biatch, really.It wasn't that they got them then, they'd already got them.So I think it's been many decades, Ireland, maybe partially because of the history of the British rule, the Irish became culturally doff the cap to the big man.They might grumble, but they doff the cap. So Ireland, over the last 30 or 40 years, we saw it with all the referendums.They were rammed through or run several times to get through.The Irish intelligentsia, politicos, Europe was the big boy.And they dropped to their knees for Europe all the way.And then they took in the corporations, did the double dutch, the tax thing. They're allowing them to get away with 1% effective tax rate.So they played the kind of beggar to the American corporations.And I think over 50% of our GDP now is biotech and pharma.So we're just kind of biatches for the pharma sector. So you can see Ireland has made itself into a kind of a rent boy on the global market.Let's be honest. It's sad, but that's the way it is.But people are waking up to that and begin to realize, my God, our whole echelon of politicians are actually, by definition, essentially traitors.Because we're voting for them and they're immediately giving their allegiance straight up the chain to forces outside the country. So they're actually technically traitors.So I think that's kind of what happened to Ireland and it showed in the longest lockdown in Europe, it shows in the hate speech laws, a test bed for this craziness.It shows in every interview when you see these goons we have up the top.It's just disgusting, like, right?And was that the total question about why Ireland?Did I miss something there? 
No, it's just, I find it curious, having grown up there, first nine, ten years of my life, and just seeing that collapse, and you kind of think, that's not the Ireland that I knew growing up, and then you realise it's not.It's changed beyond all recognition, with no media pushback, no political pushback, And then if you don't have Fine Gael or Fianna fail, you've got Sinn Féin, you're thinking, hmm, could this thing get worse?
Okay, I'll tell you something about Sinn Féin. I mean, Sinn Féin during COVID, the government did the most insane, crazy-ass, unscientific, damaging, nonsensical measures, the worst in Europe almost.And Sinn Féin were screaming at them to do more. I mean, I'm not joking.They were literally screaming at the government, saying, you're not keeping us safe.And it was the same in all the issues. So Sinn Féin are an unmitigated disaster.They're the opposite of opposition.So they play this pantomime. And I think there's a hashtag, politics is panto.And it's so true nowadays.It's a fricking pantomime. And Sinn Féin go up and argue with the government, and the government argue back with Sinn Féin. It's all a joke. It's all a club.At the end of the day, they are all aligned with each other, really, at the Dáil bar and behind the scenes.And the reason that they're all aligned, this is the important thing, I've said it already, they all understand there's big power structures in the world, and we kow tow to them.Therefore, there's no point arguing amongst each other except as a pantomime for our voters.That's it. I mean, it sounds kind of conspiracy theory. It's basic geopolitics.Now that we have a world structure of World Economic Forum, UN, EU, and I mean, recently Professor Werner, who invented quantitative easing in 95, I interviewed him.He's an expert in central banking and all the political. He worked for the Japanese government during their financial challenges as a direct advisor, chief advisor.Learned Japanese, fluent German, fluent English, master's, PhDs from Oxford.Brilliant man. But he told me something that I actually didn't realize.He said, you know the European Parliament has no real power. It's a talk shop.The European Commission decides the laws, the Commission. And the Commission are essentially not elected.And he said, you know what other region in the last 100 years had that exact structure, and they've almost taken it from them?Soviet Union. They have a parliament, people aren't too aware, and they have a Politburo, a commission, and it's the same structure.The parliament, you let them all talk and pretend that they've got some control, but the party decides.He said, essentially, and he said, one or two or a couple of Russian historians, have noted this in the early 2000s, academically, that fascinatingly, Europe is recreating the Soviet model.And people don't know that. And of course, under that model, the EU Commission, who are diplomatic immunity, no army or police can enter their grounds under any condition, a bit like central banks, they decide, the parliament then, And blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, everyone, blah, blah, gets very high salaries, tax-free.All the people from the countries go over there and suck on the teat of Europe.They have a great time, meals for everyone, best of steaks. And they go, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.And that's that. And then the countries, of course, they just doff the cap increasingly.You look at Hungary, they say, we don't want to do this.And if you go against Europe, they take the whole European media, and they feckin' bury you.They bury you in accusations of far-right, nationalistic.They take away all the EU money. They cause you pain.So this is what we have. We have a new Soviet structure that wants to become a Chinese social credit-style full totalitarian structure.It's just what it wants. The organism of the geopolitical top strata in Europe, they want the full power.It's just natural, it's in the DNA now of the whole structure, it's not any one individual or one bad guy.Yeah, it's driven primarily from the late 50s by Rockefeller Brothers Fund and all the other bad guys and NGOs and CFR and all these groups and the Club of Rome, they're all pushing one way and that's it, it's simple guys, it's not a big conspiracy theory, it's just geopolitics has gone the wrong way for us.And a lot of bad guys have ended at the top.That's all. Happened in Rome.Jesus! 
Yeah, and you see pushback across Europe with the rise of populist parties.Ireland and the UK sadly are sitting on their backsides with now, but that's a whole lot.I just want to just finish off on where you think this, the bill will go.It's been, what my understanding was, been in the Senate since maybe July, so and it was passed up.It's been sitting there now with more scrutiny.Where does it go? Because the police obviously will have to be sent out to police all these tweets which I thought they could do under the legislation but this is darker.Is there a way of turning it around so we just accuse everyone on the left of hurtful comments and the police must investigate?I mean is there requirement for an investigation. I'm just thinking of how you push back because this is going to pass through. I can't see any way it stopped.Yeah, I'm not entirely sure, Peter.Yes, they say we need a true by Christmas and all this talk, but they're not divulging what's actually happening.So I'm not sure what's actually happening on the ground mind you a very senior politician secretly met with me and a team of doctors, surgeons and businessmen back in September 2020.Very senior I obviously won't name in private and pretty much told us that most the politicians knew most of what I was sharing about COVID but he said, no everyone knows you don't talk about it and you support the narrative. So there's that level of institutional corruption, and I'm sure now there's similar stuff going on.A lot of the senators will have found out from their bloody daughters from social media how insane this is, but they'll know, shit, this is important.It comes from the big boys up top. We can't let them down.So I don't know exactly what's going on. I'm still hoping absolutely that with the focus on it, that they'll have to hold back their nonsense about these riots being a reason to bring in this insane law.I presume they're thinking, hmm, that's not washing.So I hope it's not inevitable. If it does happen, we got a massive problem.There's no question about that, because once it's in, it is a tool for tyranny waiting there like a nuclear weapon. sitting there on the statute of books with no place there, a criminal law, criminal in its very drafting.Criminal in its drafting, that's how bad it is. It's bad, but I guess, yeah, possibly be able to use it against itself.But you know, the judiciary and all of these bent politicians will be striving to throw out any cases involving it for leftists or nut jobs.And they'll be hyper trying to influence judges and police to use it on the people the government doesn't like.God, it's very sinister, isn't it? It's literally a tool of government to suppress people who don't agree with the government, which is treason in my mind.I mean, it might not be the exact definition. I don't care. It's treason.
Well, we're all following this closely and praying and hoping that actually it is stopped.Ivor, great to have you on. Obviously, people can find you @FatEmperor on Twitter and thefatemperor.com.They can see all the videos, interviews up there on the website.Really appreciate your time today. Thanks so much for joining us.Thanks so much, Peter. And if people are wondering, I'm down south in an undisclosed location, but that's me fox there.I picked it up. It's from an old country estate in Wexford that was stripped.Guy had it for 10 years, got it for 200 euro.Beautiful case, probably 100 years old plus.So anyway, bit of trivia. 
That's probably a hate crime against foxes.But anyway, we'll leave it there. Thanks, Ivor.
Good luck, Peter. Bye now.

The Week According To . . . Elizabeth Barker

We roll out the red carpet for a new guest tonight and we know you will love her!Elizabeth is a free thinking, freedom loving Californian girl living here in the UK.A rebel for humanity and allergic to corruption, we look forward to Elizabeth's thoughts on the topics tonight including...- Father Christmas got his flu and COVID-19 vaccines.- White men recruited for jobs at insurance company Aviva have to be vetted first by the firm's first female chief executive.- Boston Mayor Michelle Wu proudly shares photo from her no whites holiday party.- Sharia for UK: Radical Islamists chant on the streets of England.- BladeRunners: The winds of change are blowing strong! ULEZ poles tumble in the wake of rebellion.- Whitewash: How the Covid Inquiry is spending £750K a day on barristers and solicitors.- Hundreds more middle-aged adults dying since Covid 'pandemic'.- Jug eared leftie Gary Lineker ignites yet another impartiality row.- Tory deputy chair Rachel Maclean accused of transphobic remarks after calling out a man in a wig.
Connect with Elizabeth on X https://x.com/CaliforniaFrizz?s=20
Originally broadcast live 16.12.23
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on GETTR https://gettr.com/user/BoschFawstin and Twitter https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20 
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on GETTR https://gettr.com/user/BoschFawstin and X https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20 
Connect with Hearts of Oak...WEBSITE            https://heartsofoak.org/PODCASTS        https://heartsofoak.podbean.com/SOCIAL MEDIA  https://heartsofoak.org/connect/TRANSCRIPTS   https://heartsofoak.substack.com/
Support Hearts of Oak by purchasing one of our fancy T-Shirts.... SHOP                  https://heartsofoak.org/shop/
Links to topics...Father Christmashttps://twitter.com/NHSEngland/status/1733771087316467947Aviva https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12863187/Aviva-chief-executive-Amanda-Blanc-senior-white-male-recruits.htmlNo whites https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12869885/Boston-Mayor-no-whites-party-photo-guests.htmlSharia Lawhttps://x.com/OliLondonTV/status/1734281639650287896?s=20ULEZ https://x.com/CaliforniaFrizz/status/1733953133116535022?s=20Covid inquiryhttps://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12844045/Trebles-round-lawyers-Lefties-GUY-ADAMS-investigates-Covid.htmlExcess Deaths https://archive.is/8X3GQAndrew Bridgen https://twitter.com/ABridgen/status/1733411382593294746Jug Earshttps://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/gary-lineker-row-bbc-impartiality-rwanda-brian-cox-b1126051.htmltransphobic https://twitter.com/bbcmtd/status/1733774669432410445Assange https://x.com/CaliforniaFrizz/status/1734952918392909849?s=20