Leighton Smith Podcast #311 - November 19th 2025 - Lord David Wolfson

David Wolfson (Lord Wolfson of Tredegar, KC) is one of the most sought-after commercial Silks at the Bar. 

He served as Minister of Justice in the House of Lords between 2020 and 2022, and is now the shadow Attorney General in addition to his full time legal practice.  

Wolfson is a man of principle, towering over so many who come up short in that department – especially in the political world.  

He recounts the background of his resignation from the Boris Johnson Administration, which was a matter of personal conviction. 

Also up for discussion was Wolfson’s thoughts on Donald Trump, education, the Middle East, mass migration, and the challenges facing England.  

And as always we finish up in The Mailroom with Mrs Producer. 

File your comments and complaints at [e-mail]

Haven't listened to a podcast before? Check out our simple how-to guide.

Listen here on iHeartRadio

Leighton Smith's podcast also available on iTunes:
To subscribe via iTunes click here

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:09):
You're listening to a podcast from News Talks ed B.
Follow this and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio.
It's time for all the attitude, all the opinion, all
the information, all the debate still used now the Leighton
Smith Podcast powered by News.

Speaker 2 (00:27):
Talks ed B.

Speaker 3 (00:28):
Welcome to podcast three hundred and eleven for November nineteen,
twenty twenty five. In last week's podcast, I may mention
of a question, will there always be an England? Silly question?
You might have thought, the country of magna carta that
gave the world liberal democracy and a whole lot more. Well,
there's an answer to that in this week's interview or
discussion with David Wilson. As in Lord David Wilson.

Speaker 2 (00:53):
K C.

Speaker 3 (00:54):
Described by fellow lawyers as one of the leading silks
of his generation. He has clients and judges eating out
of his hands and handles very difficult work with a
sense of humor. There's nothing he hasn't seen and take
me long to realize that he is a man of
integrity and principle, two characteristics that are widely missing across

(01:17):
the globe. And I couldn't help but think about the
current police scenario in this country and referring to a
headline by fran O'Sullivan full inquiry into police needed to
change old boys club culture, and I can only suggest
that they would gain certainly got nothing to lose through
listening to the discussion with Lord Wilson, as it seems

(01:39):
that we have a shortage of such advisories in this country.
Now at the back end of today's podcast, we pay
a little attention to education. Why well, there is a
letter in the mail room that inspired me to take
a little further after we'd finished the mail room, and
I want to quote you something not from the letter,

(02:00):
but it leads into it. Today we see many examples
of leftists supporting evil at the expense of good. Many
of our public schools promote degeneracy over virtue, and ignorance
over intelligence. Even some parents, who we expect would want
to protect their children sometimes support mutilating them over keeping

(02:21):
them whole. It's been said that if her liberal from
the nineteen sixties was brought forward to today, he'd be
considered a conservative, and if a liberal from today were
transported back to the nineteen sixties, he'd be considered a
dangerous lunatic. Many television shows from the early days of
the medium still heir today. I sometimes wonder if those characters,

(02:43):
if they were real, would say if they could read
today's headlines or listen to the likes of Rachel Meadow
h EMMISMBC. It turns out, however, that we just caught
a glimpse of how they might react. And interview with
one hundred year old World War II veteran from the
UK named Alec Penstone stirred emotions recently as he expressed

(03:06):
his disillusion with modern Britain. Now you may have seen this,
a lot of people did. During his appearance on Good
Morning Britain, Penstone poignantly reflected on his service in the
Royal Navy during the D Day Invasion, lamenting that the
freedoms for which he and his compatriots fought are no
longer evident in his country. What we fought for, he said,

(03:29):
what we fought for was our freedom. Even now the
country is worse than it was when I fought for it,
said this one hundred year old World War II veteran.
And when you align that comment with what's going on
in Britain today, even though some people argue are there's
no big deal no great problem. I think he spoke

(03:52):
the truth. Now after a short break David Wilson. Levericks
is an antihistamine made in Switzerland to the highest quality.
Leverix relieves hay fever and skin allergies or itchy skin.

(04:12):
It's a dual action antihistamine and has a unique nasal
decongestent action. It's fast acting for fast relief and it
works in under an hour and lasts for over twenty
four hours. Lebrix is a tiny tablet that unblocks the nose,
deals with itchy eyes, and stops sneezing. Lebrix is an

(04:33):
antihistamine made in Switzerland to the highest quality. So next
time you're in need of an effective antihistamine, call into
the pharmacy and ask for Leverix l e v Rix
Levrix and always read the label. Takes directed and if
symptoms persist, see your health professional. Farmer Broker Auckland David

(05:13):
Wolfson is one of the most sought after commercial silks
at the bar that in itself is a compliment that's
hard to beat. He attracts instructions in the most complex
and high value disputes and has been instructed in many
major banking and commercial disputes. His practice extends over a
broad range of commercial law, both in litigation and international arbitration.

(05:36):
Looking down the list of areas included in his scope
of practice indicates that David Wilson can talk on just
about anything. So maybe I should greet him a little
more formally and say, Lord Wolfson from Tredegar, welcome to
the Leyden Smith podcast.

Speaker 2 (05:52):
Well, it's behind of you to invite me on. And
should I just say that the only person who regularly
calls me Lord Wilson is my bank manager, and that's
only when I'm over to Rawn. So can we stick
to David?

Speaker 3 (06:04):
We can certainly stick to David. The place I want
to start really is with your position in politics, where
you were appointed by the Prime Minister Boris Johnson to
be what well.

Speaker 2 (06:18):
I was appointed to be a Lord's Minister in the
Ministry of Justice. As you know, we have two houses
in Parliament, House of Commons House of Lords, and we
have ministers in each and the Justice minister in the
Lords had resigned a couple of months previously. They were
looking for a justice minister, and I was asked I

(06:41):
should say that I wasn't actually asked, in fact by Boris. Indeed,
I hardly met Boris during the whole time I was
a minister. But I was asked by the government to
join the government as a minister, and therefore that's how
I ended up in the House of Lords.

Speaker 3 (06:59):
You're also a King's Council. Of course, the fact that
you had hardly any contact with the Prime Minister at
the time, was that a good thing or otherwise?

Speaker 2 (07:09):
Well, I think the reason they asked me was because
I had done a fair amount of work with Michael
Gove when he was a Secretary of State for Justice
and Lord Chancellor. I've got to know Michael. We'd work together,
we'd stayed in touch, and I think when they were
looking for a Justice minister, Michael suggested, I think, among

(07:30):
other people, that perhaps they should contact me. But it
was a bit of a surprise to be asked. Of course,
it meant I had to give up my practice, because
when you were a minister you can't do anything else.
So it meant giving up my practice at the bar
becoming a minister, and in the House of Lords. Most
ministers are unpaid, so it really meant giving up an

(07:53):
income as well. For several years and you did that. Yeah,
maybe I'm mad. No, I'm not mad, because it's a
great honor to be asked, and I mean, thank god
I could afford to do it. And when an opportunity
like that comes along, you should take it. Few people
have that opportunity to be in government to I know

(08:15):
it sounds very grand, but I really believe in public service.
I and my family have, over the generations we've been
in the UK, benefited a lot from the UK, from
its democratic and stable political system, and in some ways
I looked on this as an opportunity to give back

(08:36):
and do my bit for public service as well.

Speaker 3 (08:39):
Well. Now that you've mentioned your history to some degree,
let's expand on it just a little. Your great grandfather
was naturalized and converted his name into English from Hebrew
from Aaron, son of Wolf, and became Aaron Wilson. What
followed from there.

Speaker 2 (08:59):
Well, you're right, I mean all of my great grandparents
were born in Eastern Europe. All of my grandparents were
born in the UK, and on my father's side, the
great grandfather Aaron that you refer to, he went to Tredega,
which is a town in South Wales from there they

(09:20):
moved to London. From there, my grandfather moved to Liverpool.
My father was born in Liverpool and I was born
in Liverpool. On my mother's side. My mother's family ended
up in Manchester, and of course, as you know, that's
only thirty miles from Liverpool. And my grandfather, my mother's father,
was a GP He had a practice in Heighton and

(09:43):
eventually he moved from Manchester to live in Liverpool, and
that's how we all ended up eventually in Liverpool, where
I was born.

Speaker 3 (09:51):
How was Liverpool to grow up in in those days?

Speaker 2 (09:54):
It was formative in many many ways. Perhaps it's only
now that I look back I realize just what in
effect living in Liverpool had on me. I'd say perhaps
in particular in two respect. First of all, when I
was growing up, Liverpool was very active politically. Liverpool was

(10:15):
taken over really by the Militant Tendency. Students of British
politics may remember. This was a hard left group that
really threatened to take over the Labor Party and was
eventually thrown out of the Labor Party and Liverpool City
Council was run by these hard left activists. So growing
up in Liverpool was to grow up in a political

(10:37):
atmosphere and looking back that I think influenced my own
political views. It also had a big effect on me
in my communal work. I'm a member of the Jewish community,
and the Jewish community in Liverpool was small, and that
had two effects. First of all, it meant that all

(11:00):
parts of the Jewish community had to work together because
it was so small, you couldn't split along denominational lines.
So meant that relations between, so to speak, the Jewish
and the non Jewish communities were very good because the
Jewish community was too small to be insular. The high
school I went to, in particular, was a Jewish school.

(11:22):
It was a faith based school, a state school, comprehensive,
not not selective on academic ability. But when I was there,
it was about sixty five percent Jewish thirty five percent
non Jewish. So again it taught you to be open
to interact with people from different backgrounds, to listen to
what people with different viewpoints had to say. Looking back now,

(11:47):
all of that was really formative for me. I only
appreciate it now looking back.

Speaker 3 (11:51):
And recently I did an interview with a black American
who grew up in Montana, and I asked him if
if he had suffered any vigilante stuff, if you like,
and if it all, oh yes, and explain to me
how from the home they lived in had been plastered

(12:13):
with swastikas and whatever you at various times. None of this,
None of this affected him in a negative way. It
all added to his maturity, and he's only thirty two now,
to his maturity and the approach that he took to life.
So the question I'm asking to you is basically the same.

(12:36):
Did you ever suffer from assaults of any kind? As
you were growing up in Liverpool?

Speaker 2 (12:42):
There were the occasional pushing and shoving, to be the
occasional shouted remark from a passing car. Of course, there
was graffiti sometimes on Jewish buildings. Tombstones sometimes were desecrated
in the way that tragically they have been in many communities.

(13:03):
But I don't want to overplay it. I mean, we
didn't live in fear. You're certainly right, and your previous interviewee,
if I may say, was certainly right. The response to
that sort of action is not to retreat within your community.
It's not to circle the wagon, so to speak. It's

(13:24):
to be even prouder of who you are and what
you are, to be unapologetic, unashamed, to wear your values
on your sleeve. I've always thought that antisemitism is not
only a problem for the Jewish community. Really, anti Semitism

(13:47):
is a problem for everybody. There is. I don't want
to make this interview too serious too quickly, but there is.
I would suggest an iron rule of history that any
society which tolerates anti Semitism is a society which is
suffering from a terminal disease. So just as anti black

(14:09):
racism is not only a problem for the Black community,
antisemitism is not only a problem for the Jewish community.
It's a problem for society in general.

Speaker 3 (14:20):
I understand what you say, and I don't disagree with you.
Problem is, there are plenty of people who are growing
number at the moment who actually appreciate that fact from
their perspective, because it aids and abets them in the
what shall we call it, the chore that they have adopted.
I don't want to go any further with that at

(14:42):
the moment, because otherwise we're going to miss out on
some things that we should be covering. So let's return
to it when it becomes when it becomes apparent we should.
I want to make reference to your position that you
had with Boris, with Boris's government and the fact that

(15:02):
you resigned from it in twenty twenty two. How long
had you been in that position of that point, well.

Speaker 2 (15:09):
I was appointed in December twenty twenty and then I
resigned in April twenty.

Speaker 3 (15:15):
Two, so little over a year. Basically, the reason that
you resigned is a very fascinating one, and I enjoyed
digging around it into it. And if you don't mind,
I'm going to quote something of your letter of resignation.
This is to Boris Johnson, to the Prime Minister. It
was a great honor to be invited to join your

(15:36):
government as a justice minister. In my maiden speech I
twice used the phrase justice and the rule of law.
Justice may often be a matter of courts and procedure,
but the rule of law is something else, a constitutional
principle which at its roots means that everyone in a state,
and indeed the state itself, is subject to the law.

(15:59):
Second paragraph is where it all falls into place. I
regret that recent disclosures lead to the inevitable conclusion that
there's was repeated rule breaking and breaches of the criminal
law in Downing Street. I have, again, with considerable regret,
come to the conclusion that the scale, context and nature

(16:21):
of those breaches mean that it would be inconsistent with
the rule of law for that conduct to pass with
constitutional impunity, especially when many in society complied with the
rules at great personal cost and others were fined or
prosecuted for similar and sometimes apparently more trivial offenses. It
is not just a question of what happened in Downing

(16:43):
Street or your own conduct. It is also, and perhaps
more so, the official response to what took place. As
we obviously do not share that view of these matters,
I must ask you to accept my resignation. Now. That
was targeted at Boris Johnson in no uncertain terms. How

(17:03):
did he respond to that?

Speaker 2 (17:04):
Well, he sent me a very nice letter, thank King
B for bye service and accepting my resignation. He didn't
engage in a debate about the substantive points I've made in.

Speaker 3 (17:17):
My letter, but you've got a lot of feedback on it.

Speaker 2 (17:20):
Yes, I did. I sometimes think that people only remember
my time in government for the manner in which I
left it. I did do a few things while I
was in government, but the point I was making in
my resignation letter was, I think a serious point. The
rule of law is fundamental, not just if you're a

(17:41):
justice minister, as I was, but frankly to everyone in society,
once you lose that principle, I e. That the law
is important, that respect for law is important, that law
makers especially need to try to obey the law, and
mustn't denigrate breaches of the law or say that they

(18:04):
don't matter. Without those principles, we stop being the sort
of society which I think we do want to live in.

Speaker 3 (18:11):
Well, the main thing that came out of what I
read and how I interpreted it was that you established
yourself in no uncertain terms as a man of principle.
Has it caused you since any issues? And by that
I mean I mean along the lines of you found
yourself in a similar situation or something where you might
have taken a different fork in the road.

Speaker 2 (18:32):
Well, it's kind of you to say, I mean, I
don't mean to be you know, triggish or high for looting.
But I thought at that time it was a matter
of principle, and the response from number ten to the
breaches of the law was something which couldn't be condoned

(18:53):
and shouldn't just be passed over. As I made clear
in the letter, it wasn't so much the breaches of
the law themselves that was a problem. In other words,
it wasn't the holding of the parties which was really
the problem, although that was a lawful The real problem
the response to holding the parties I saying it doesn't matter,

(19:13):
it's not really important. That sort of dismissive approach to
breaches of the law, that is what threatens the rule
of law. I don't think it's had too much of
an effect on me or impact on me going forward.
You know, I try not to put myself in a
position where I need to reside from it. But I

(19:36):
think that what happened at that time was perhaps the
unique episode, and governments of all slides do generally try
to both obey the law and also to have respect
for the rule of law.

Speaker 3 (19:51):
Well, it doesn't seem to have affected your progress, because
you are now in quite a different position. You've been
appointed just a short while ago. Was it not to
the equivalent position as the shadow but Justice Minister?

Speaker 2 (20:09):
Not quite. I'm not the shadow Justice Minister. I'm the
shadow Attorney General.

Speaker 3 (20:13):
Sorry.

Speaker 2 (20:13):
So you know, we have law officers and we have
justice ministers. So I'm now a shadow law officer. So
I shadow the Attorney General and that means what. So
the Attorney General is the government's really chief legal advisor.
And what's quite unusual about the UK system it does

(20:35):
happen elsewhere as well, is that the Attorney General is
both a lawyer and a politician. So the Attorney General
sits either in the House of Commons or in the
House of Lords, and he or she heads up the
law officers, is ultimately responsible for the Crown Prosecution Service

(20:55):
and is, as I say, the government's main legal advisor.
So the Attorney General's advice will be sought by the
government when they are considering whether a particular course of
action is legal, what a particular treaty means, and things
like that. And the shadow attorney General, as the name implies,

(21:15):
I shadow. I monitor the work of the Attorney General,
and I do a similar job for the opposition. So
I work with the shadow Cabinet to try to make
sure that our policies are legal, that our policies don't
infringe any legal obligations, and I advise them on legal issues.

(21:37):
We may come on later. Recently, I did a very
long advice which was made public to the leader of
the Conservative Party about leaving the EU ping Convention of
Human Rights. So that's my role now as Shadow Attorney General.

Speaker 3 (21:52):
So I presume that this is again an unpaid position. Oh, yes,
that means that you well, I understand also that you
are operating from chambers and working for yourself as well.

Speaker 2 (22:10):
Yes, exactly. So when you're in opposition, unlike being a minister,
you can hold an alternative job, so to speak. So
I divide my time between my career at the bar
and I run a full legal practice, and on top
of that I have my role as Shadow Attorney General
and my parliamentary responsibilities. So really what that means is

(22:34):
I have zero free time. You know, I tend to
run a pretty packed diary.

Speaker 3 (22:41):
You left out being harassed constantly for interviews.

Speaker 2 (22:46):
That's a sole that's a sole joy in my life.

Speaker 3 (22:51):
Right that leaves that leads me onto something something else
that I think is very pertinent. At this point. You
have three children, two of whom are in uniform. Your
son is living in Israel and he's a member of
the service, and he's in uniform, and you have a
daughter in London who is also in a different kind

(23:14):
of uniform, and you told this story, I think in
your in your first speech after your appointment to the
House of Lords. I wonder if you'd like to retell
it here.

Speaker 2 (23:31):
Yes, it wasn't my first speech after my appointment, but
I think it was the first speech after the atrocities
of the seventh of October. And the point I made
was that at that time I did have those two
children in uniform on a Saturday night, and I made
the point that I was more concerned about my daughter

(23:52):
going into central London on the Tube in her uniform,
which was a T shirt and jeans and a Magen
David a Star of David necklace. I was more concerned
that she might be subject to physical violence than I
was concerned about my son, who at that time was
in uniform in Israel. And yes, I think it's fair

(24:16):
to say that speech did get a fair amount of attention.

Speaker 3 (24:20):
Did it bring you the wrong kind of attention?

Speaker 2 (24:23):
I think you learn in politics that whatever you say,
you're going to have the nut jobs and the wackos
who will respond to you. If you get put off
by people being impolite, let's say to you on social media,
then you wouldn't say anything at all. The important thing
is just to say what you believe, and you do

(24:45):
need a bit of a thick skin or broad shoulders
in politics.

Speaker 3 (24:50):
So on the subject of the Israeli military, which has
been very active of late, that opens up a very
broad horizon for discussion. So let me try and narrow
it down a little. Give me your take on the
situation as it is now in the Middle least in
the area that we're discussing, and what changes in London

(25:15):
might have been made since that story that was there
is now a couple of years old that you just told.

Speaker 2 (25:22):
Well, there's no doubt that there is a direct correlation
and there always has been between attacks on Jews in
London and conflict in the Middle East. Whenever there's an
increase in conflict in the Middle East, there's also an
increase in anti Semitic attacks, anti Semitic speech, anti Semitic

(25:47):
marches in London. Those two, those two go together. It's
said that they go together. I often wish that the
debate on the Middle East was more nuanced in London
because when you actually talk to people in the Middle East,
as I have now done really all my life. You

(26:09):
realize that for the majority of the people in the
region itself, they see the complexities, they live with the complexities.
It's only people outside, or mainly people outside the region
who see it as black and white, who see it
in this Minietzschean view of one side is always right

(26:31):
and one side is always wrong. And that is such
a simplistic, childish, frankly unhelpful way to view what is
a very complex conflict.

Speaker 3 (26:44):
But you've had plenty to say, I think, on the
situation as it has as it has rolled out over
the last few years. Am I wrong?

Speaker 2 (26:55):
No, You're right. I have spoken out, and I've spoken
out really for two reasons. First of all, because as
a fairly prominent member of the Jewish community in the UK,
I felt a need to speak out. When you go
to a synagogue, for example, in the UK today, there
will be people in stab vests patrolling outside it. I

(27:19):
don't see people in stab vest patrolling outside my local churches.
When I get invited to a Jewish charity dinner, the
invitation will say something like Central London venue, I'm told
the location maybe a couple of days before, sometimes on
the day itself. Again, that doesn't apply to any other

(27:41):
events which I go to. Jewish schools generally don't have
glass in the windows. They have heavy duty plastic. Our
Jewish schools have an evacuation alarm when there's a fire,
and they have a separate evacuation alarm in case there's
an attack from outside. And our five and six year

(28:02):
olds have to learn the difference. They have to learn
the safest place in their classroom to lie down if
people might shoot through the window. This is becoming normalized
for the Jewish community in the UK and many Jewish
communities around the world. And so that's one of the
reasons why I speak out. And I also speak out

(28:23):
because I believe in working for peace in the Middle East.
I believe that for as long as I can remember,
and that's the other reason why I speak out on
this issue.

Speaker 3 (28:33):
So many tangents to pick up. When do you think
the anti Semitism in England started?

Speaker 2 (28:40):
Well, that is a big question. I mean, I'm tempted
to respond to remind you that the Jewish community was
expelled from Britain in twelve ninety so you might say
there is a deep history. I mean the truth is
anti Semitism is a shape shifter. It started off, if

(29:02):
you go back in history, as religious antisemitism based on
Jews having a differ religion. Then it morphed into antisemitism
based on race, which was a course at the heart
of the Nazi ideology. Now Jews are criticized and singled
out for what the Jewish state does, so it's based

(29:26):
on nationalism. So I'm tempted to say that antisemitism is
always present. Its form changes over time, but there's no
doubt that I would say since the election of Jeremy
Corbyn as Labor Leader and then seventh of October was
undoubted the catalyst. In these last five, six, seven, eight years,

(29:51):
there has been an explosion of antisemitism in the UK,
both in terms of the number of anti Semitic incidents
and also the type of incidents with which we are
now dealing.

Speaker 3 (30:06):
Okay, ask that question. That was loaded slightly from my
perspective because I first came across the word program in
a comic on Ivanhoe back in the twelfth century, and
that was my first my first experience with what took
place there, obviously, and what has taken place since, and

(30:29):
I actually attribute to that comic my continued interest in
such matters.

Speaker 2 (30:35):
Yes, I mean that this is a subject with a
very long history. You know, if you go to York,
you'll find Clifford Tower, where roughly what is it now,
eight hundred perhaps slightly more than eight hundred years ago,
Jews decided to commit suicide rather than fall into the
hands of the mob. If you go to Norwich Cathedral,

(30:59):
you'll find a stained glass window commemorating essentially a blood libel.
I mean the church now put in place a plaque
explaining the origin of the window, but it was part
of the and is part of the fabric of the cathedral.

(31:20):
So these things are all around us. But we should
never be We should never be hemmed in by our history.
We should know our history. We need to learn from
our history. I'm more concerned about what's happening today, and
I think what's happening today is that there's a discourse

(31:41):
which is being normalized. What used to be only thought,
perhaps fifteen years ago, is now said. What used to
be only said is now written. What used to be
written is now published, and it's published in places where
it's also read and it's entering the general discourse. That's

(32:04):
what I'm concerned about, that there's a change in the
way society is looking at this issue and is dealing
with or failing to deal with this issue.

Speaker 3 (32:20):
In New Zealand we have demonstrations, there are people who
will demonstrate against anything or about anything, but they're there,
but nothing along the lines of what is being experienced
right now in Australia, specifically in Victoria, the State of Victoria,
and secondly in New South Wales where over the last

(32:44):
weekend there was a demonstration of Nazis outside the House
of Parliament in This is the State House of Parliament
in Macquarie Street in Sydney. The Victorians are subjected to, well,
they're subjected to the outcome the result of having, in

(33:07):
my opinion, of having not just tolerated, but ignored the
sort of leadership that Victoria had for quite some number
of years. And of course it exploded when it came
to when it came to COVID, New Zealand and Victoria,

(33:27):
just in case you're unaware, competed for the for the
most aggress aggressively suppressing societies in the world. And so sorry,
and so that that has now moved on. In fact,
the Daniel Andrews, who was the most incompetent but most

(33:51):
disastrous and i'd say wicked evil, even Premiere of Victoria
has moved on because he had to. But he's been
replaced by a female, and not that he's been replaced
by a woman who is arguably worse than he was

(34:13):
at this point of time. Why is it do you
think that Australia And you would know plenty about Australia
about it's about some of its history at least, and
the sort of country it is, or it was because
it was a country of freedom. I grew up there,

(34:35):
I was born there, and I grew up there in
Melbourne actually, which is now suffering terribly. And over a
period of years, I've asked the question of anyone who
I thought was worthy of responding to it, what is
going on? Why do you keep voting for this particular administration?

(34:58):
And most of them were shrugged their shoulders and say, oh, well,
what's the matter. It's you know, everything's okay. Well it isn't,
and it hasn't been for a long time. And that's
only one example from numerous countries and states all over
the world question, how did this come about? What happened
in Western civilization to turn this up?

Speaker 2 (35:23):
Well, I think that again that's a very big question.
I think a short answer would focus on the fact
that perhaps we are not as muscular about defending our
own values very good way. Yeah, I mean, you know,
the values of free speech, of tolerance, of liberalism, of democracy.

(35:46):
History shows that those values had to be fought for.
Often they had to be dark to people died for them.
They don't just arise, and if you don't tend them carefully,
if you don't really look after them, and sometimes, as
I say, in a muscular fashion, you will lose them.

(36:07):
And I think there is a reluctant sometimes in Western
societies to be confident about our own values. I mean,
I see in my own family. It's very simple. In
my family, those of us who emigrated all those years
ago to the UK and somewhere to Canada survived and

(36:32):
those who didn't were all murdered. And they were all
murdered because they lived in countries where fascism and communism
swallowed them up. So we have to defend the values
we have, and that means sometimes being fairly muscular about it.
We shouldn't allow people to undermine our societies from within,

(36:56):
and we shouldn't be naive that there are such people
who do hate a lot of what Western societies stand
for and do try to undermine those societies.

Speaker 3 (37:08):
How much is education got to do with it, as Sarah,
as you're concerned, all.

Speaker 2 (37:14):
The education has got a lot to do with it.
And I believe very strongly that our schools should be
places where we teach I don't know what it's called
in New Zealand, but it used to be called in
the UK civics. Teach people what it means to be
a citizen, Teach people how our democratic institutions work, Teach

(37:38):
people the value of those institutions, and not to be
afraid of them. I mean, when it comes to the
ways in which societies are ordered, I don't believe that
all societies are equal. I don't believe that a society
run by a despot is equally as good as a

(37:59):
democratic society. I don't believe a society which is subject
to religious fundamentalism is equally as good as a democratic society.
I think we shouldn't be afraid of saying that.

Speaker 3 (38:12):
Let me quote you from a short column. A civilization
is defined by its ability to discern truth from falsehood.
So what happens when every apparatus built for that purpose
is systematically dismantled. Brett Weinstein issues a stark warning, we're
living through a coordinated sabotage of our truth seeking institutions.

(38:34):
This is not a minor critique. It is a fundamental
attack on the very mechanisms of a functional society. And
he touches on the university system, once a beacon of knowledge,
now a source of unreliable research and curricula that teach
verifiably false concepts. As truth regulatory agencies, these bodies have

(38:54):
been inverted. Their purpose is no longer to protect citizens
from harm, but to protect the regulators and the system
from the citizens they're meant to serve. And scientific integrity,
we are left grappling in the dark on critical issues.
Determining something as scientifically straightforward as the potential link between

(39:14):
mRNA vaccines and turbo cancers should be a matter of
transparent data. Instead, we are forced to rely on buried
anecdotes and studies designed to fail. One more line, this
is the realization of Renee de car that the very

(39:35):
foundations of what we believe to be factual cannot be trusted.
Are we able to rescue it?

Speaker 2 (39:42):
Well, I'm an optimist. I always think things can be rescued,
and I do think all of this can be rescued.
I mean I should say I'm not sure I agree
with all of the points in that quote, but I
do agree. For example, when it comes to academia, it's clear,
certainly in the UK that there has been a significant

(40:04):
decline in the proportion of academics who would see themselves
as on the right, and a significant rise in academics
who see themselves as on the political left. And of
course the problem with that is that our universities ought
to be a place where all viewpoints can be explored, challenged,

(40:26):
up for debate. In the same way, I sometimes do
have a concern that it's a lot harder, for example,
to say certain things from a right wing perspective in
a university context than it is from a left wing perspective.
So this is part I think of what we were

(40:49):
talking about earlier, that we have to make sure that
all parts of our society, whether it's universities or regulators
or frankly anything else, all subscribed to and are part
of the overall ecology of our society, because if you
don't take active steps to protect it, you will lose it.

Speaker 3 (41:12):
It brings me back to something that I said we'd
come to till later, and we're closing in on headquarters.
I brought back from England a few weeks ago a
book by Sam Friedman failed state why Britain doesn't work
and how we fix it. More recently, this was published

(41:37):
written by Rod Dreyer, and it's been published in a
couple of a couple of journals, particularly I think European
conservative will there always be in England. Most Americans are
angler files It's in our blood. Yes, our ancestors fought
a bloody revolution to free ourselves from the British crown.
But outside of the United Kingdom itself, you will find
no people more eager to swoon over British royalty than Americans.

(42:01):
More substantively, our love and admiration for the British has
to do with a heady mix of Churchill, Wilberforce, Tolkien,
Lennon and McCartney, and other extraordinary examples of courage, wisdom
and creativity. He quotes a few lines from the song
There'll always be in England, and then says it has
become possible now to doubt that sentimental claim, precisely because

(42:25):
England has ceased to mean much to its ruling class
and to many Englishmen. A friend who is a respected
member of the British establishment wrote to me last week
in despair. No sign it's going to get any better,
or that there is any way the country can come
back from this. We faced wars, recessions and pandemics for centuries,

(42:45):
but this is different. And then there was another one,
and this was the one that originally triggered me, written
by Christopher Caldwell, Will there always be in England? That headline,
if you like, is appearing in numerous places. Now are
they on track or is your optimism more correct?

Speaker 2 (43:07):
I don't think thou on Tree in the sense that
I don't think I'm not apocalyptic about England. I think
there are significant threats to the United Kingdom in the
sense that Scotland wants to break away, and of course
there's always the bubbling issue of Northern Ireland. But I

(43:30):
do think there will always be an England. My concern
is what sort of England will it be? One of
the issues I think we have to face and we
have to deal with is that. And I'm not making
a party political point here. I think this is a
general point. There has been a significant decline in the
number and quality of people going into public service. Yes,

(43:53):
I think it's fair to say, and that I don't
mean to single out any party or any particular individuals,
but I think it's fair to say that the House
of Commons of say, twenty twenty five does not necessarily
measure up well when against the House of Commons of
nineteen sixty five or nineteen forty five. And there are

(44:14):
deep reasons for that. Social media makes it unattractive to
go into public life. We probably don't pay MPs enough,
although of course there will be a huge outcry if
we sought to pay them anymore. We've developed a political
class where people become MPs not having had any experience

(44:36):
in what you might call the real world beforehand, and
all of these lead to a decline in the quality
of people in politics and the risk that a political
class talks to itself. I think the greatest threat to
the United Kingdom is a threat actually which I think
is faced by many democracies, which is disillusionment of people

(45:01):
walking away from the political process, of people thinking that
politics is irrelevant to their life lives and can't provide
the answers to their questions. Because once that gets a hold,
history teaches us that there's only one way out of it.
And the one way out of it is normally that
people go for extremists and fanatics and people who who

(45:25):
apply and promise simplistic solutions to complex problems, and that
is even more dangerous. So I often say to school
children when I go to speak at schools, or to
young people who might be voting for the first time,
I would rather you vote it for a party other
than mine than you just didn't bother to vote at all.

(45:49):
I think we need to engage people again in the
political process, to engage them again in the society in
which they live, because that's all part of maintaining our
values of having a united society, of having a civic
society and civic vere virtues which we all subscribe to

(46:10):
and which we all believe in. And that's ultimately the
way to create a swung and I would say a
successful society.

Speaker 3 (46:17):
Speaking of successful or otherwise. Peter Tiel, the American billionaire,
has just done the last twenty four hours or so,
made some comment on the fact that free enterprise isn't
working for young people today, and on that basis, they're
responding to other trigger points that take them down the

(46:39):
road to well, in some cases self destruction. But demonstrations
and riots and demands, etc. Does that forward of the
same category as because I think it does the same
category but a different sector of what you just said
about people walking away from from politics because they don't

(47:01):
think it's relevant to them anymore.

Speaker 2 (47:05):
Yes, I think it does. I think as a society
we need to recognize that at the moment, if you
leave university, for example, at the age of twenty two,
you're leaving university often with a lot of debt, with
a degree which in many cases is not actually that
valuable in the workplace. You're facing a job market which

(47:29):
is very tight. You're looking at a housing market where
we haven't built enough houses and you'll be renting for
a long time. And this is a real problem. I
mean it's not only a problem for the Conservative Party,
my party in the sense that if people don't have
assets to conserve, why will they vote Conservative? If I

(47:51):
can be a little bit flippant about it, but there
is a real point there. But it's a problem for
society generally, because we want all parts of society to
be fully engaged in society, and I think there is
a perception that there is a general rational divide in
our society, and that is dangerous. I think you see

(48:14):
it in the opinion polls. I mean, that's why when
you look at who says they'll vote for the more
extreme parties, younger people are disproportionately represented in the people
who will vote for some of those parties.

Speaker 3 (48:29):
I think, finally, there's actually a couple more things I'd
like to touch on. One is Israel and take it
a step further. I think I'm right in suggesting that
you promote or believe a two state system is the answer.

Speaker 2 (48:47):
Yes, I mean I've always believed in what I call
a two state framework in the sense that ideally I
believe there should be a secure Israel and also a
Palestinian entity, and the nature of that is a matter
of negotiation, but I think at the moment that is

(49:07):
the best way to peace. Whether it's realistic in the
short term. After what happened on October the seventh is
a different question. But in the long term, I think
that's the most likely route to peace, together with a
large measure of involvement by the Arab countries in the
region and the Gulf countries. And that's why the Abraham

(49:30):
Accords are so important and really are a political game
changer in the region.

Speaker 3 (49:36):
It bothers me that I'm trying to rephrase what I
would normally say, and I won't. I'll just say it.
It bothers me that people think that a Palestinian state
with a border with Israel would settle down to a
calm and the friendly future with the belief and the

(49:58):
behavior that we've witnessed over a lengthy period of time. Now,
it would only be a matter in my humble opinion,
before the repetition starts, as to what we've just experienced
or what has been experienced there.

Speaker 2 (50:13):
Well, that's why I said that I think it's going
to be unlikely in the short term because what I
see in Israel, especially after October the seventh, is that
the Overton window has moved. People who used to vote
left on now voting centrist, people used to vote centrist
and now voting right, and people who used to vote

(50:34):
right and now voting extreme right, and you can understand
why that is, and certainly I'm not going to criticize them,
given the appalling nature of October the seventh, I mean,
it was the largest murder of Jews in a single
day since the Holocaust, So one can absolutely understand that

(50:58):
that's the reaction in Israel. And certainly there's no doubt
that the education system in the Palestinian authority, certainly in
Hamas run Gaza, of course, it needs to be radically overhauled,
and I, like others, am concerned about the at best

(51:19):
passive and naive role that UNRUH and other UN agencies
have played in that regard. When you look at some
of the Palestinian textbooks which are funded by these and
other international organizations, they are quite frankly appalling and contain
often direct incitement to violence and murder. With all of

(51:43):
that said, and without sounding like somebody who has his
head absolutely in the clouds, if you ask me, well,
if there is a solution, what is it, I do
continue to believe that ultimately that ultimately I hope that
leadership will arise on the Palestinian side which will be

(52:04):
able both to do a deal with Israel and also
to maintain order in their own territories. I mean, it's
a tragedy that yes Arafat refused the deal which was
offered to him at Camp David by Ehud Barak under
the presidency of Bill Clinton. And indeed, the history of

(52:25):
the Middle East has been of deals which have been refused,
only for people later to want that very deal which
before they'd said no to. So the history isn't good.
But as I said earlier, we shouldn't be trapped by
our history. We need to learn from our history, be
aware of our history. But we still need to move forward.
If I told you thirty years ago that there would

(52:50):
be a peace deal between Israel and the UAE, you
probably wouldn't have believed me. You know, there aren't now,
as we read in the papers, serious moves to a
normalization deal between Israel and Saudi Arabia. Indeed, some people
say that's why Hamas launched the seventh of October attacks

(53:11):
in order to try and scuffer that normalization process. So
there are positive developments. There is now a peace treaty
between Israel and Egypt, Israel and Jordan. One reads that
there are even talks going on between Israel and Syria,
perhaps through intermediaries. So I am an optimist. I hope

(53:32):
I'm a realist as well. But I am optimistic because
ultimately we have to work for peace. Jews have been
praying for peace for more than three thousand jurors, and
now that there is an independent jurist state, we have
an opportunity to work for peace and not just pray
for peace.

Speaker 3 (53:51):
I don't want to spend much more time on this,
but you mentioned unware, and therefore I am am forced
and obligated to raise this particular point. The person who
was in charge of unwar is an next New Zealand
Prime minister. She pooh poohs any criticism of unwar and

(54:15):
what pretty much and what has gone on at the
border and with regard to food supplies, etc. And suggests
that the Israelis are doing things that they shouldn't be
doing and not responding correctly when they're asked questions about it. Gosh,

(54:36):
I didn't know I could be that diplomatic. What would
you say to her?

Speaker 2 (54:40):
I think if I can pinch Mandy Vice Davis's response
to counsel in the famous Perfumer case, well, she would
say that wouldn't she, But the facts speak for themselves.
It's not just the ANOIR employees who took part in

(55:01):
the October the seventh massacres. It's not only the schools
run which were teaching frankly horrific stuff. It's not only
that some of the hostages, as I understand, were held
by people who maintained positions in unwor I e. Garzan's

(55:23):
who are connected with UNWA. It's not only the case
that when the battles were being fought that there were
entrances to tunnels right in Unrah institutions. These were entrances
to Hamath terrorist tunnels. So I think one needs to

(55:45):
look at those what should I say, denials, excuses, apologies,
Well it's not an apology, perhaps excuses. One has to
take a fair pinch of salt. Of course, there are
good things that UNWA does. I mean, of course, every
institution does some good things. But I am concerned that

(56:08):
AUNOIR has become, so to speak, one sided in its approach.
And I'm not the only one who has serious concerns
about both its leadership and its operation.

Speaker 3 (56:22):
There are any number of British people who live here,
and many of them are very concerned about a themselves,
be their families who are still there, and I'm talking
about in England who are still there and what seems
to be taking place. It's my opinion that the greatest

(56:44):
problem confronting you in England is the number of immigrants
that are coming into the country. And when I say that,
I'm talking specifically illegal immigrants who are pouring into the
country now in boat loads, and what we see from
that is a lot of chaos and a lot of

(57:04):
agro and I think those who are pushing back on it, well,
even if I don't, even if we don't approve of
what they what they do or say, are on the
right are on the right train. And then of course
you could clip onto that the grooming, the grooming groups
that have taken up so much space of recent times,

(57:26):
as brief as you like, how do you respond.

Speaker 2 (57:29):
Well, first of all, I mean, you're absolutely right that
there's lots of British people living in New Zealand, and
I'm also delighted that there are lots of former Kiwis
who live in the UK and they contribute a lot
to the UK and it's great to have such a
vibrant the Kiwi community in the UK. Of course, immigration
is a real problem. It's both the number and the

(57:55):
rapidity of the immigration that we have which is the issue.
In other words, it's not just the absolute number, it's
how quickly they've The one point I think I disagree
with you on is just when you sort of imply
that the only or the main issue is illegal immigration.

(58:18):
I think illegal immigration is a real issue, but legal
immigration is also an issue. And of course legal immigration
runs at ten fifteen times sometimes the rate of illegal immigration.
And I think what people want and what we tried
to do when we were in office and we succeeded

(58:40):
to an extent and we failed to an extent, was
to put in place an immigration system which stops illegal
immigration and limits or curbs legal immigration. Now, of course
it's not just the numbers, as the second part of
your question showed up, it's also about integration. When people

(59:05):
have come into the UK, we need to make sure
that they're integrate into our society. It goes back to
one of the first things I talked about in this
conversation about growing up in Liverpool and the way that
the Jewish community in the non Jewish community were mixing
I think we need to make sure in our society

(59:26):
that we don't create areas where there is a monoculture
of people who whose background is not the UK, because
it's it's particularly important for the immigrant communities themselves to
integrate into the UK, as my family did and my

(59:47):
community has done. I mean, you talk about the grooming
gangs and that that certainly had an ethnic element to it.
I tend to call them rape gangs because that's what
it was. Grooming gangs actually is a bit of a euphemism.
They're really rape gangs. And there is belatedly an inquiry

(01:00:10):
being set up. I don't think it's actually been fully
set up yet into the issue. Of course, over and
above the appalling horrors which these girls suffered. One of
the terrible features about these rape gaps was that when
people talked about it, when people alerted the authorities to it,

(01:00:35):
many times they were shut down for fear of being
called racist. And I think it goes back to what
I was saying earlier. We need to have the confidence
to be muscular about defending our values and defending girls

(01:00:57):
from being raped ought not to be controversial, and nothing
ought to stand in the way of doing that and
certainly not false fears of being called racist. It's not
racist to defend and protect girls from being raped. And
I really hope that the inquiry, which has been too

(01:01:19):
long in the setting up, will get to the roots
and really show what happened and why for so long
there was silence where there should have been action.

Speaker 3 (01:01:30):
Just finally, which country do you think is politically challenged
more at the moment? Britain or America?

Speaker 2 (01:01:41):
Well? I think I in some ways, I would say
Britain because Britain does not have a conservative government, and
whenever Britain does not have a conservative government, in my mind,
it is necessarily politically challenged, so I would say Britain.
I mean, the American situation is extremely interesting. I don't

(01:02:07):
always agree with ever think that any American politician says,
but there can be no doubt that whether you agree
with him or you don't agree with him, President Trump
has done two things. First of all, he's changed the
terms of the debate within the United States, and secondly,
he does have this habit of actually doing what he

(01:02:29):
said he would do, and that's something which I think
many politicians could learn from.

Speaker 3 (01:02:35):
Indeed, and on that rewarding note, let me say thank
you very much being a pleasure, and I've enjoyed it
and you're free.

Speaker 2 (01:02:46):
Well, thank you very much as well, and I look
forward to being back in New Zealand. I've done the Milford,
I've done the Abel Tasman and I'm looking forward to
the next big walk and.

Speaker 3 (01:03:00):
I have it soon into the mail room for number
three hundred and eleven, the missus producer, how are you good?

Speaker 4 (01:03:18):
Thank you?

Speaker 3 (01:03:19):
Lateron you get tired of my asking.

Speaker 4 (01:03:21):
That no I love it means you're caring?

Speaker 2 (01:03:25):
Do you really think so?

Speaker 4 (01:03:27):
I don't know if it sounds good?

Speaker 3 (01:03:29):
Okay, So Stephen rose quip that a lot of people
on the left have suicidal empathy really struck a nerve
with me. The Adern years have conditioned New Zealand to
adopt a nationwide persona of empathetic poverty and pessimism. It's
already been over two years since her fee inditionally divisive

(01:03:50):
government last ran our country down to the ground, and
yet we continue to lose New Zealanders to Australia. Carl
Defrain and his wife recently spent several weeks in three
major Australian cities and found themselves quote struck by the
general impression of prosperity and optimism. It stood in stark

(01:04:10):
contrasts with out polarized, anxious, demoralized and bitchy home country.
That was a quote as well. Where did it all
go wrong? In his recent Spectator article entitled the Keyweed Diaspora,
he traced it back to around the second term of
the Jasindar aderrnled government from twenty twenty to twenty twenty three.
He summed it up perfectly again, quote those three years

(01:04:34):
now resemble a bad dream in which a toxic amalgam
of aggressive mari ethno nationalism, virulent transgender activism, and a
tax on free speech, all endorsed by Labor and its
Green Party enablers, placed unprecedented strain on the broad consensus
that has traditionally underpinned New Zealand public policy. It didn't

(01:04:56):
help that the news media, previously a broad church, agnostic
in its news coverage and open to a wide range
of opinion, jettisoned its commitment to editorial balance along with
its credibility, by functioning as uncritical cheerleaders for the radical
And then that word is off the bottom of the

(01:05:17):
oh the radical left in short, Adirn screwed more than
one generation of New Zealanders. Yet now polls indicate that
we might happily return Labor and the Greens back into
power and even accept a capital gains tax to boot.
Perhaps the best election campaign national act then New Zealand
first could run is to ship a free copy of

(01:05:39):
David Cohen's to Cinder the Untold Stories to every single
living New Zealander before the election next year. Lest we
forget pretty, that was pretty pretty accurate, actually.

Speaker 4 (01:05:53):
Layton Eileen says, Laton, you are a brave man tackling
the subject of Charlie Kirk. But you've always been courageous
and diligent in your vocation New Zealand's best and brightest broadcaster.
In my view, Erica Kirk needs our prayers because she
is the victim of so much abuse and unfair conjecture.
Charlie Kirk used to describe his wife as a Proverbs

(01:06:15):
thirty one woman because of her dedication to faith, family,
and civil rights. As a child, Erica Kirk used to
help her mother set up soup kitchens for the needy. Yes,
she is naturally beautiful, and this might be the reason
why the Green eyed monstans are so jealous of her.
Erica Kirk's worst detractors seemed to be women, and this
includes prominent women who seemed to delight in dragging her

(01:06:37):
name through the mud. Every person grieves differently and in
their own way. The individuals who are maligning her and
her family are making money from their gossip mongering and defamation.
Charlie Kirk had a plethora of friends from all different
faiths and ethnic groups, and he always claimed that God
drew no distinction that were all his children as a

(01:06:59):
mart of her free speech. May Charlie Kirk rest in peace,
and God bless his long suffering wife as well.

Speaker 3 (01:07:06):
Another good letter, Brian writes just a note to say
how much I enjoyed Tony Coleman's interview on your podcast
three o nine. Having been interested in all matters gold
since university days in South Africa for twenty five years
and in New Zealand for the last twenty six years,
that wide ranging interview on gold was the best I

(01:07:28):
have ever listened to. Tony has a depth and breadth of
knowledge and experience with gold that I have never come
across before, and I've been to mining and investment conferences
in Africa, USA, New Zealand and even Argentina. I have
also been fortunate to have met the famous Doug Casey
on several occasions in the USA, New Zealand and Argentina

(01:07:49):
with one on one discussions regarding mining, investment and gold.
But Tony Coleman has that unique knowledge and experience spanning
all aspects including gold's historic international monetary role and economics
and refinery aspects, mining of gold, and current concerns about
who actually has any gold reserves, etc. It was such

(01:08:13):
an interesting discussion and I have forwarded it to all
my friends who share interest in this topic. As an aside,
Doug Casey and Matthew Smith, in their recent Doug Casey's
take entitled Gold Fever The Future of Precious Metals about
a month ago, mentioned if gold was to be re
monetized again, the value would have to be in the

(01:08:35):
range of you ready for this twenty thousand US to
fifty thousand US dollars per ounce. Please let Tony Coleman
know how much I loved his interview with you. On
top of his clear knowledge, he is blessed with a
communication style that is so rare these days, it would
be great to have him on your show again as
world economic difficulties continue.

Speaker 4 (01:08:57):
So Brian Layden Scott says, I'm a longtime listener and
have appreciated your thoughtful commentary over the years, especially when
you turn your attention to education. From time to time
you highlight the direction New Zealand schooling has taken. So
I thought you might be interested in an article I've
just written. It's a response to the recent New Zealand
Principles Federation complaints about the government's decision to remove Treaty

(01:09:22):
of Waitangi responsibilities from school boards. I'm the principle of
manikarw Christian School in Manueba, South Auckland, a small, independent
year one to thirteen school that aims to provide an affordable,
top quality Christian academic education. We added a high school
to our flourishing primary in twenty fifteen and by twenty

(01:09:45):
nineteen we had a full year nine to thirteen secondary department.
Since then, in three of those years, one hundred percent
of our graduating students have achieved university entrants, reflecting our
commitment to academic excellence and character formation rather than ideology.
It's hard to believe I know, but we achieve these

(01:10:06):
results by actually folk focusing on educating children rather than
woke social programming. And Scott has sent you his article
latent and I presume that you might be able to
find it if you're interested by going to the website
dubdubdub dot Manekowchristian dot school dot nz. That's for Scott.

Speaker 3 (01:10:29):
Scott, very good, thank you, and I congratulate you on
your run success with establishing a school primary and senior
fabulous and I guess along as similar note, Rick writes,
I have listened to all your podcasts since day one,
and I thank you for that, but I have some
issues with your latest guest. First, the person was a

(01:10:49):
Catholic and he had a Catholic worldview on AI and
other things. Well, at this point I'd say, well, so on.
He was very articulate, but his foundation was wrong. AI
is super dangerous, and the Bible clearly talks about the
one world religion Catholic and one world economic system AI

(01:11:14):
and a one world government. The world is primed. They
have a leader to solve all our problems. The Bible
calls him the Antichrist, and he uses AI. Revelation thirteen
to cause this image of the beast to speak, etc.
And cause everyone to worship him or be killed. Society

(01:11:34):
has rejected God and believed the lie a world government
the solution to climate change, which does not exist anyway,
as you know. Regards Rick, Well, I've got to say
there's a few long shots in there for most people anyway.
But what he's saying is about revelation is not untrue.

(01:11:55):
But I'll adopt the words of that previous email that
that you read out and say, Rick, you're very brave
to be taking well are you're doing it anonymously? Really,
because there's a lot of ricks about.

Speaker 4 (01:12:06):
But anyway, thank you, says it was great to listen
to Tony last week. I think there would be a couple
of teachers of old who'd be scratching their heads after
that chat, some of whom, if asked to put lists together,
would have put Tony in the not likely to achieve list.
He and I went to Scouts and in later years
school too. I knew him well back then, the fearless prankster,

(01:12:29):
not the slightest inkling of the pology has today, but
the smart, astute Tony was always bubbling under the surface.
Then I left New Zealand and fell out of touch.
I was acquainted with his father and knew his brothers
Chris and Richard. Had never met Peter until my return
to New Zealand in nineteen ninety five. I stopped him
for coffee in a chat with Tony at their old premises.

(01:12:51):
I thought, then this is the Tony who was hiding
away in our teens time. I stopped by to see
him again at the new shop, I think. And then
Paul goes on to say thank you both for hosting
a wonderful show, sharing some of your life with us,
and of course having some interesting people to chat to
on an array of hundred ideas.

Speaker 3 (01:13:09):
Got any interesting life from things you'd like to mention today?

Speaker 4 (01:13:15):
After having a bad fall last week, I'm quite glad
to be alive. So that's my that's.

Speaker 3 (01:13:21):
My little you really want to share that, I don't mind.

Speaker 2 (01:13:26):
You don't mind.

Speaker 3 (01:13:26):
She did. She had a bad four and came out
of it, according to the doctor, A very lucky woman.

Speaker 4 (01:13:36):
I don't want to see hospital again for a while.

Speaker 3 (01:13:38):
Thank you, you've been there a bit. Not for yourself though,
now from Vincent. According to Must Read Stories at the weekend,
there is a massive protest in Brazil to coincide with
COP thirty. This supposed protest was to demand action on
the climate crisis and to save the Amazon while others

(01:13:59):
quote held a mock funeral procession for fossil fuels, dressed
in black and pretending to be grieving widows as they
carried three coffins marked with the words oil and gas.
I can't help it be suspicious that the well choreographed
disruption to the locals lives was likely planned by the
climate change elites to highlight their annual gathering which has

(01:14:21):
failed to solve the climate crisis thirty years on from
its inception. It's extraordinary in it. How do people continue
to be such suckers to seek that anything is ever
going to come out of a cop after thirty years?
What have they achieved?

Speaker 2 (01:14:39):
Nothing? Nothing?

Speaker 3 (01:14:41):
Of course, for good measure, a giant Palestidian flag and
Free Palestine batterers appeared throughout the crowds. Or maybe they
could invite the Palestidians across to the amazon A. The
chance to take part in a march can't be missed. Obviously,
most of the globe's population will be sucked in by
this display. Perhaps the BBC covered it with all the facts.

(01:15:06):
Thanks as always for another week of en excellent podcasting.
Always appreciated. Regards Vincent and that will suffice. There was
a couple more at least, but we shall save them
for next week, missus producer, go and travel safely.

Speaker 4 (01:15:24):
Thank you later, step by step very slowly.

Speaker 3 (01:15:29):
Thanks a lot, See you next week. Now to take

(01:15:53):
us out for one past three eleven, I wanted to
introduce something else on the education field, and this follows
on the letter from Scott Kennedy from the Manecow Christian School.
And I'm not suggesting there's any connection to it at all.
It's just that I read this this morning. It was
published today and I thought it's worthy of inserting. You've

(01:16:17):
possibly heard of Matthias Desmont, if not. He's the author
of a book, The Psychology of Totalitarianism, and it has
endorsements on the back from Robert Malone, from Peter McCullough,
and then there is one at the bottom from Eric Clapton,
and that's the only one I'm going to actually quote.

(01:16:39):
Mattius Desmond's theory of mass formation hypnosis is great. Once
I kind of started to look for it, I saw
it everywhere. It's a bit like cars. You know, there's
no red cars on the roads. I'll have a red
car next thing. You know, the next week's red cars everywhere.
Same principle anyway. From his article today, published the nineteenth

(01:17:01):
of November, why schools make Us Dumber The celestial openness
of the child's mind. Now it goes five K. I'm
just going to read you a couple of quotes. But
he's spending some time in the Himalayas, and I believe
this is where he wrote this from, because he's talking
about some young students who came up to him started

(01:17:22):
asking him questions. Our education system has one merit. It
indeed transfers a substantial amount of rational knowledge from generation
to generation. But in general even the transmission of rational
knowledge is increasingly under threat. Whoever focuses too much on
a secondary matter in life eventually loses even that secondary matter.

(01:17:44):
Education is producing more and more illiteracy. Neither writing nor
reading reaches a reasonable level anymore, even among the highly educated.
With artificial intelligence, that problem will in all likelihood become
even more severe. There are already experts who apparently consider
the greatest goal of education to be teaching students how

(01:18:08):
to work with AI. Why should a human do what
a machine can do? After all? Little further on, the
great scholars of mass psychology and propaganda have repeatedly observed
the higher the education level, the more easily people allow
themselves to be deceived, the more susceptible they are to propaganda.

(01:18:29):
Jacques Illull, perhaps the sharpest thinker in the field of propaganda,
believe that formal schooling is ultimately a form of unconscious
indoctrination that makes children vulnerable to the propaganda that they
will encounter later in life. Two more paragraphs go by,
and then we come to does there exist an education

(01:18:52):
that is not in doctrination? Can one human teach another
in Brackett's a child without indoctrinating him? Any education that
sets rational knowledge as its ultimate goal is indoctrination and
does the opposite of what it should do. Knowledge always
belongs to a doctrine, to a system, But a good

(01:19:14):
system is ultimately always aimed at abolishing itself and making
itself unnecessary, like scaffolding that is dismantled once the building
is complete. With the idealization of reason in Enlightenment culture,
that was lost and the school system spread like a
tumor and a tyranny. A child has essentially become a

(01:19:36):
prisoner of the school bench. To place a being bursting
with the energy of spring on a school bench for
eight hours a day is something that we will one
day look back on as a kind of mistreatment. Well
there just outtakes from the substack piece that Madius Desmond

(01:19:57):
has produced Why Schools make a stummer The celestial openness
of the Child's mind, with twenty twenty five in numbers.
Just before you want that again, twenty twenty five Why
schools make us Dumber? The celestial openness of the child's mind.

(01:20:17):
And that'll take us away for podcasts number three hundred
and eleven. We shall return with three twelve, of course
shortly in the interim. As always, if you'd like to
write to us latent Newstalks at me dot co dot
nz or Carolyn at Newstalks at me dot co dot nz.
And again, as always, thank you for listening, and we

(01:20:39):
shall talk said.

Speaker 1 (01:20:48):
Thank you for more from Newstalk st B. Listen live
on air or online and keep our shows with you
wherever you go with our podcasts on iHeartRadio