How the 'Assassin's Veto' Is Stifling Conservative Speech

Inez Stepman of the Independent Women’s Forum fills in for Jim on the Thursday 3 Martini Lunch. Join Inez and Greg as they explain why the government shutdown gives President Trump the opportunity for DOGE 2.0, how the assassination of Charlie Kirk gives college administrators more ability to stifle conservative speech on campus, Hamas asking for absurd changes to the Gaza plan, and Islamist terrorism in England.

First, they welcome President Trump's plans to cut parts of government through powers he holds during this government shutdown. Inez explains what Trump and OMB Director Russell Vought can do in this situation and how it is long overdue.

They also focus briefly on the Dems' demand for extending Obamacare subsidies. Inez details how the high cost of health care is just one of countless ways the right has been proven right about the disaster of Obamacare.

Next, they revisit Inez's concerns from last month that the Charlie Kirk assassination would give colleges and universities a more plausible reason to reject conservative speakers on campus. The security needs are just too expensive. New York University Law School is proving her right. NYU Law refused to allow the campus chapter of the Federalist Society to host Ilya Shapiro on October 7. NYU officials say the likelihood of intense protests is just too great. Inez reveals why this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Finally, they shake their heads as Hamas reportedly like the Trump plan for Gaza, except for the part about Hamas leaving Gaza and being demilitarized. Inez says it will likely be up to the Arab supporters of the deal to force Hamas to comply. Inez and Greg also react to the Islamist terrorist attack in England, where two people were stabbed to death outside a synagogue on Yom Kippur. Inez reveals just how bleak the outlook is for the UK unless major policy changes happen very soon.

Please visit our great sponsors:

Get 20% off your first purchase of classic menswear. Visit https://MizzenAndMain.com with promo code 3ML20—shop online or visit a Mizzen and Main store in select states. 

Build your fall sanctuary of comfort with Boll and Branch. Save 20% plus free shipping on your first set of sheets at https://BollAndBranch.com/THREEMARTINI —offer ends soon, exclusions apply.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:02):
Welcome to the Three Martini Lunch. Grab a stool next
to Greg Corumbus of Radio America and Jim Garritty of
National Review. Free Martini's coming up.

Speaker 2 (00:13):
So glad you're with us for the Thursday edition of
the Three Martini Lunch. As you know, Jim Garrity is
away and here in his place, we're happy to welcome
and as Stepman of the Independent Women's Forum, and as
it's always great to have you with us. Thanks for
your time today.

Speaker 1 (00:26):
It's always great to be here.

Speaker 2 (00:27):
Thank you. And we have some topics that are right
up and as is Alley today, so let's dive right in.
We're going to be talking a little bit later today
about some of the bizarre edits requested by Hamas in
the twenty one point Trump Plan. We'll also be taking
a look at why it's tougher for conservatives to actually
hold events on campus now. But we start with the

(00:48):
government shutdown, and we've gone through all the arguments, of course,
from both sides. The clean resolution for the most part,
on the right, the Democrats wanted to add about a
trillion and a half in spending, but in a addition
to the fight over that and we're not going to
get another vote on possibly ending the shutdown until at
least tomorrow, maybe the weekend. President Trump has decided he's

(01:10):
going to exercise power that he now has, as well
as his Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vote.
And here is what Trump puts out on truth Social today.
I have a meeting today with Russ Vote, he of
Project twenty twenty five fame, to determine which of the
many Democrat agencies, most of which are a political scam,
he recommends to be cut, and whether or not those

(01:31):
cuts will be temporary or permanent. I can't believe the
radical left Democrats gave me this unprecedented opportunity. They are
not stupid people, So maybe this is their way of
wanting to quietly and quickly make America great again. President
DJT and you know he just loved twisting the Project
twenty twenty five knife.

Speaker 1 (01:53):
There obviously just the perfect little troll.

Speaker 2 (01:56):
So what exactly can he and russ Vote do? And
I know you have very specific ideas of probably what
you'd like them to do, so what are those as well?

Speaker 1 (02:05):
Yeah, this is really giving the administration an opportunity at
DOGE two, right, So what this gives an opportunity for
the administration to do is to go through a lot
of these programs and evaluate on several bases whether they
have actual streams of funding that are appropriated, what type
of appropriations that funding is, and what their status is
under the government shutdown. And then for those that don't

(02:28):
have particular types of appropriated funding, it gives them the
opportunity to review whether or not they want to continue
those programs and to continue paying those particular bureaucrats. So yeah,
I mean, I love the way that the administration is
playing this. It's kind of a you know, heads, I win,
tails you lose sort of situation. It's so unusual as

(02:48):
somebody on the right to watch Republicans be confident and
win one of these fights in these exchanges. Honestly. The
other thing, of course, aside from russ boat calculate and
you know, tentting his fingers in the corner over there,
is that we're not going to see the same kind
of shenanigans with Republican White House as we have in

(03:08):
shutdown's past. We're not going to see national monuments roped off,
We're not going to see the attempt to shut down
the privately run Mount Vernon, We're not going to see
shut down theater. And not only do I believe Republicans
are going to win this fight politically, I think Americans
are going to realize two related things. One that for
a lot of Americans this won't affect their lives until

(03:32):
you start to really get to some of those programs
that we're going to run out of money weeks from now,
months from now, right, So they'll realize that, actually, a
lot of what the government does does not affect your life.
But then the second piece, which is the more negative piece,
I think we're going to realize just how many Americans
are connected to working with the government. Right if this
goes on long enough, it's about what it's like twelve

(03:54):
thirteen percent of Americans work directly for governments, whether I
think that's federal or state. But then there's all the contractors,
Then there's all the NGOs that are being funded by
the government. I wouldn't be surprised if one in four Americans,
if you add up all of these things, works with
the government or related to the government in such a
way that this impacts their life. So there's going to

(04:16):
be a divide and We're all going to see if
this goes on long enough, right between the three quarters
of the country that earns the money to fund the
government and the one quarter of the country whose jobs
are reliant on that money.

Speaker 2 (04:27):
So, I don't know if US vote has called you
a naz but if he did, where would you tell
him to focus?

Speaker 1 (04:31):
Honestly, this is a very like nitpicky thing. I wouldn't
know the exact programs, but I imagine what he's evaluating on
the basis of is exactly what the line item appropriation
for various things is, because the executive has enormous leeway
where things are not actually specifically appropriated. We saw this
with the US AID fight, right. We saw this that

(04:52):
recently got affirmed in a certain way in the Supreme Court,
that the president has a lot of leeway when Congress
really hasn't specified. They just say, here's some money for
some stuff, and a lot of appropriations are like that,
and so he shut down. Provides the opportunity then to divide, Okay,
what are really essential functions, what are really essential programs,
who are really essential employees that are administering those essential programs,

(05:15):
and what is the bucket of money that is basically labeled.
Congress has labeled stuff to do stuff. I'm exaggerating, but
only slightly. It's usually the Department shall blah blah blah,
some vague stuff. So I think it's basically going to
be the same process as with Doge. You're going to
go through and look at the different funding streams, and
when you don't need people, you riff them, you lay
them off. This is what Russ Vote has been waiting for.

Speaker 2 (05:36):
Yeah, everything's at the discretion of the secretary or the
administrator and things like that. So if if Trump and
Vote get aggressive and do so quickly, do you think
that changes the Democrats' calculation on the clean extension?

Speaker 1 (05:48):
It should, and it will also forced a confrontation within
the Democratic base. It's pretty clear that Chuck Schumer is
doing this against his own better judgment, you know, several
months ago, is doing this at the demand to quote
unquote Douce Right. He's doing this because he doesn't want
to be primary from the left. He doesn't want the
kind of Tea Party esque rebellion which is already brewing
among Democrats, who, frankly, it's not that they've never been

(06:11):
in the political minority. In political memory that they have
never been actually in the minority of the country because
those leftist institutions always continue to function and the power
of the mirror media is much diminished. So they really
haven't felt what it means to lose in a long time,
and they're really furious about it. And so I think

(06:31):
Democratic leadership is stuck between a rock and a hard place.
They know that it's popular with their base to quote
unquote do something, but then the second part of their
base that is not as radically progressive. It's not that
they're saying, it's that that's exactly those people in Northern Virginia,
those professionals, the people who work for government, the people
work for contractors, that is the professional managerial class of

(06:52):
their base. And those people are going to start getting
really pissed in a couple of weeks, especially if some
of them get furloughed and they don't come back with
full pay. So I mean, I think this is going
to set off a conflict within the Democratic base.

Speaker 2 (07:05):
One exit note here. One of the things Republicans have
repeatedly pointed out is that the Democrats want to pay
for health care for illegals. The Democrats have claimed that's
a lie. Then the Republicans showed the Democratic legislation and
shows that there is a provision there for that a
lot of the money does, in fact that the Democrats
want to spend here would go towards renewing Obamacare subsidies.

(07:26):
And I find it fascinating in as that the Democrats
are pulling their hair out here about how much premiums
are going to skyrocket if taxpayer funds aren't used to
help people pay their Obamacare premiums. It's quite an indictment
of Obamacare, even though they're not willing to say it directly.

Speaker 1 (07:40):
Yeah, those were supposed to be temporary subsidies. But like
with every promise that was made in Obamacare, I mean,
this is one of the most frustrating things about following
politics for a longer period of time, is it doesn't
matter if you win on the claims. Ten years later,
Obama and Democrats lied over and over again. They lied
about how much Obamacare would call Famously, Obama said you

(08:01):
could keep your plan. I mean, none of us basically
have gotten to keep the plans that we had pre Obamacare.
I know for the younger members of the audience this
will sound crazy to you. But when I was in
my early twenties, I was not. I didn't there's no
you know, on your parents' insurance. Till twenty six right,
I had high deductible insurance. It was public basically catastrophic insurance,
and it was I paid for anything that I would

(08:23):
have to do day to day, but above five thousand
dollars it was basically fully covered, and that was considered catastrophic,
you know, sort of emergency coverage. But it cost me
like seventy bucks a month, eighty bucks a month. It
was very reasonable and it was very doable for a
young person who is healthy and wants to, you know,
make sure that if you get hit by a bus

(08:43):
or get cancer, you'll have coverage. Now, even the gold
plated plans don't cover you know, ninety one hundred percent
above the deductible. They don't even do that in the
fancy plans that you pay eighteen hundred dollars a month
for Now, I had better health insurance for eighty bucks
a month before Obamacare. I think there are a lot
of people in America who are in that position. They
know that the premiums are crazy, and Obamacare has made

(09:07):
all those problems worse against all of those promises, and
it's just so irritating to go back in time and
remember all the things we knew were not true. That
it was going to come in under a trillion dollars
in costs, that these subsidies would be temporary, that people
would not be kicked off their plans. I mean, every
single critique of Obamacare, you know, in two thousand and
nine has come.

Speaker 2 (09:26):
True, absolutely right. Yeah, Our family insurance deductible was three
grand before Obamacare. It immediately quadrupled and it's not gotten
better since then. So thanks a lot, Barack. All Right, Well,
that was supposed to be the good martini, and for
the most part it was but a little bit of
sour taste there on the follout, the real fallout of Obamacare.

(09:49):
But here's some good news once again. I am wearing
a shirt from Mizzen and Maine. A couple saturdays ago,
I got a couple of boxes from Mizzin' and Maine
with about five or six shirts and a couple pairs
of pants and been wearing him each day this week,
as Mizzen and Maine has been our sponsor. Started with
the golf shirt and then the short sleeve shirts with
the buttons down the center, and yesterday was kind of

(10:10):
a more casual dress shirt, in today a little more
formal dress shirt. But each one fits really nice, very comfortable,
very light. Mizzit and Maine makes classic men's wear with
performance fabrics, so it's effortless to look sharp and feel great.
Mizzen and Maine actually invented the performance fabric dress shirt
over ten years ago, and since then they've perfected it
with modern fabrics. The shirts and pants look refined yet

(10:32):
their stretchy, lightweight, moisture wicking, wrinkle resistant, and completely machine washable,
no ironing or dry cleaning necessary. So right now, Mizzit
and Maine is offering our listeners twenty percent off your
first purchase at Mizzinandmaine dot com promo code three mL twenty.
That's Mizzen spelled m i zz e N and Maine
m ai n dot com promo code three m L

(10:53):
twenty three mL the number twenty for twenty percent off
Mizzitanmaine dot com promo code three mL twenty And if
you'd rather shop in person, you can find mizz't and
Main stores in select states. All right and as yesterday
marked I think it was three weeks since the assassination

(11:14):
of Charlie kirk out in Utah. Still absolutely stunning and
hard to believe that it's actually true. So much reaction,
so many thoughts since then, and just a couple of
days after the fact, you put out a tweet that
got our attention here in the three Martini Lunch we
actually talked about you when you weren't here, in a
good way, of course, and your thoughts on how the

(11:36):
left would actually use this horrific event to their advantage
to stifle speech. Here's what you wrote back on September twelfth.
This assassination will accomplish what the left has tried to
do for so long, significantly shut down conservative speech on
college campuses. Not because of a lack of bravery, but
because of logistics. No more outdoor events, no more events

(11:57):
without very serious security, and that costs big money that
most organizations don't have, and universities are only too happy
to say they can't manage. Already they were using security
concerns to punish right wing organizations and prevent them from
hosting speakers. Now there's a real reason the assassin's veto
and your prophecy has come true. New York University Law School.

(12:20):
This is from the Free Beacon appears to have canceled
a Federalist Society events scheduled for October seventh because administrators
feared that protesters would disrupt it, According to people familiar
with the matter and emails obtained by The Free Beacon, Now,
NYU's Federalist Society chapter had invited the conservative legal scholar
Ilia Shapiro to discuss his new book, Lawless, the Miseducation

(12:41):
of American Elites. Shapiro has criticized anti Israel protesters and
taken schools to task over their handling of encampments. He's
also been the target of protests on other campuses. And
so basically what happened here is the school reached out
to the Federalist Society and said, ah, hey, how about
we move it from October seventh. That could be an

(13:02):
incendiary day, but we might have to move you to
this basement facility, which I assume would meant a much
smaller capacity. The group says, no, No, the hecklers don't
get the veto. We want to hold this on October seventh,
mainly because this is the only day that works for
Ilia Shapiro, and then the school just says no, no,
can't even do it that week at all. So the
fact that they're saying we can't do this because of

(13:25):
the protest that's likely to happen feeds right into your
concerns from a couple weeks ago.

Speaker 1 (13:31):
This has been happening for a long time, but now
they have a reason to do it right. So there
has been this back and forth, just like on many
free speech matters for so called speech codes, right free
speech zones where the right organizations like fire adjacent to
the right have one in court. But nevertheless the problems
continue because schools just are willing to settle every few

(13:54):
years in court with a particularly gutsy student who takes
it all the way to federal court and stuff. They'd
rather pay off that money to those students than deal
with the mob that that is getting ginned on college campuses.
And now they have this major new component, which is,
you know, the security that was necessary before was exactly

(14:14):
for the Heckler's veto right. So maybe you need like
a burly guy in the front in case somebody bum
rushes the stage, and if you're a high profile speaker
like Charlie Kirk. Maybe you need either a bulletproof vest
or you need, you know, somebody scanning the crowd waiting
for somebody to maybe take a pot shot at you.
Now you're talking about secret security, you know, secret service

(14:36):
level security. That is going to be necessary. It's massively expensive.
And schools in the past, those those protections for free
speech in cases in the past. You know, does schools
have claimed we had budgetary constraints. You know, how much
of our budget are we expected to spend on a
single speaker. Doesn't that harm free speech if we can't
invite anyone else, you know, other than Ben Shapiro for example,

(14:58):
because we can't, we have to spend all our money
on security for Ben Shapiro. And the reason that they
lost those cases is only because you know, basically the
course that this is not that much money. Look at
your budget, look at this like this is an excuse
it's protectual. Now it may not even be protectual. They
may legitimately have to use up a huge portion of
their budget in order to make campus safe for conservative speakers,

(15:19):
for right wing speakers. So it's moved from a Heckler's
veto to a assassin's veto and the dollar amount has
gone up accordingly. I think it's going to be a
massive problem. I think it's something that Trump administration needs
to address. They've done an excellent job in terms of
other violations both the free speech and of civil rights
laws that universities have been doing for decades. They have

(15:40):
threatened federal money and they've gotten very good results that way.
I think that's something this is something they should consider,
essentially threatening university funding from the federal government if they
can't make their campuses safe for basic right wing speakers,
they can't make their campus safe for debate because the
left is you know, stochastically roistic. Right to steal their phrase,

(16:03):
if university campuses can't make the campus safe for right
wing speakers, and of course left wing speakers, but that's
never an issue, right, It's not that and I'm saying
repeating right wing only because it's not an issue on
the right. But now they're using the very legitimate security
concerns because of assassination that it completed assassination against Charlie

(16:25):
Kirk to basically prevent other conservative speakers from speaking. This
is going to go to the courts, But I think
the courts are not the solution here. It's too slow
and universities are too willing to settle with an individual plaintiff.
I think that we have to threaten their federal money.
I hope the Trump administration is working on that now.
We have, you know, my orgument organizations passed on these
ideas to them. I really think this is something that

(16:47):
the Trump administration can do something about very quickly. Universities
have to eat this cost, and frankly, it's only fair
because they've fomented the ideas to begin with that have
made it so difficult and so dangerous for conservative speakers
on campus.

Speaker 2 (16:58):
Does it even dawn these administrators that when the left
wingers take over the quad or common to your buildings,
or block students from going to class who aren't part
of their protests, that they sit to go. I don't
know free speech to tread lightly here. We just not
sure what to do about this as they're trashing campus.

(17:19):
But if the left is threatening a Republican speaker, well
what are you gonna do? We can't secure the event.
Do they even understand the double standard they're employing here?

Speaker 1 (17:29):
I think they do understand it. It's simply ideological. You know,
you make things difficult for your political enemies. They don't
want conservative speakers on campus, first because they disagree with
them and also find them whatever hate mongers or whatever
it is that tonic you see Coat said about Charlie Kirk,
But second because it causes a headache for them, and
it causes a headache for the administration as the even
crazier students that they have been inculcating and indoctrinating into

(17:51):
behaving this way for decades take matters into their own hands.
Then they have to discipline their own students. Then they're
unpopular with the faculty lounge. It's just a whole basket
of problems that administrators in college campuses would rather not
deal with, but they're required to deal with, especially if
they're taking federal money. It is a ridiculous concept that
it is unsafe, and this is I'm using this word

(18:12):
for once in a real way. It is legitimately unsafe
without major security for anybody right of center to hold
a conversation on campus. So, you know, this is a
problem universities have a huge hand in creating, and they're
going to have to puney up the money for the solution,
which is going to be that you know, high profile
conservative speakers are going to have it is. It's going
to be indoors, it's going to be have to be ticketed,

(18:35):
it's going to be you know, hundreds of thousands of
dollars in security because that's what's necessary.

Speaker 2 (18:40):
Unbelievable they won't even basically tell the left wing students, hey,
you got to respect the space here, you got to
let this happen. This is part of why we exist,
is to have this free exchange of ideas on campus.
But instead, uh, they're ideologically in sync unfortunately with this
radical crowd. And unfortunately they're feeding into the radical crowd.
They're they're encouraging them half the time. So just very

(19:00):
very frustrating. So I don't know how those folks sleep
at night as they stifle free speech. But they even
they should be buying bowl and branch sheets. Missus Crumbison.
I love our new set of bowling branch sheets. I
talk about it all the time. I love the deep
pockets because we also got the new mattress. It's a
thick mattress, so some of the sheets don't get all
the way into the corners and the corners pop off,

(19:22):
not Bowling Branch. They fit great. Also super soft, you
get a great night's sleep. And the amazing part of
Bowlin Branch sheets is that they get softer with each wash.
I don't understand how that works, but it's true. Also,
they're made with the highest quality one percent organic cotton
and durable designs. They're also available in a new limited
addition fall colors for a deeply comforting bedroom and it

(19:43):
comes with a thirty night worry free guarantee. So start
building your sanctuary of comfort this fall with Bowl and Branch.
For a limited time, get twenty percent off your first
set of sheets plus free shipping at Bowlinbranch dot com
slash three Martini. You're gonna want to spell that all
out three Martini's Bowl and Branch B L l A
N D. Branch dot com slash three Martini to save

(20:05):
twenty percent and unlock free shipping. Some exclusions do apply,
all right. And as we're getting close to the deadline
for Hamas to accept or reject the Trump twenty one
point plan for Gaza, Israel, of course on Monday said
it was fully on board, although it did make several

(20:27):
requests and a couple of them were agreed to, and
so there were some changes to the deal. But when
it comes to Hamas, they have done what you expect
Hamas to do. This is from the Times of Israel. Basically,
Hamas is saying, yeah, we're all on board. Just got
a couple of revisions here that I'm sure you'll have
no problem with. So, according to a Palestinian source, quote,
Hamas wants to amend some of the clauses, such as

(20:50):
the one on disarmament and the expulsion of Hamas and
faction cadres. Hamas leaders also want quote international guarantees for
a full Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza strip and guarantees
that no assassination attempts will have made inside er outside
the territory.

Speaker 1 (21:05):
Quote.

Speaker 2 (21:05):
So far, there are two views within Hamas. The first
support's unconditional approval because the important thing is to have
a ceasefire guaranteed by Trump, provided that the mediators guarantee
Israel's implementation of the plan. But others have quote great
reservations on important clauses. They reject disarmament and for any
Palestinian citizen meaning Hamas to be taken away from Gaza

(21:27):
so except for point number one is getting rid of
Hamas and deradicalizing the Gaza strip, they're totally on board
with this. So I don't know exactly what their official
answer is going to be, but it's pretty sure that
their attitude towards this hasn't changed at all.

Speaker 1 (21:44):
Yeah, I mean this was always going to be the problem.
When I first read the contours of the plan that
the Trump administration proposed, I thought, well, this sounds like
a great plan if you have two reasonable actors, even
in a hot war where they hate each other. If
you had two reasonable actors, this is a really good plan.
But implementation with Hamas is going to make this plan

(22:05):
rise or full. I do think it's significant that all
of these Arab states signed on that Cutter signed onto this.
I think it is a significant step forward and diplomacy
in that way because it shows that the Arab world
is willing to accept this solution right, this plan from
the Trump administration, And in that sense, I think it's
a great diplomatic victory. Whether or not it's actually able

(22:25):
to be implemented with Hamas serious doubts, And I also
think Israel can't probably accept anything short of this plan
because the major war aims they have right two war aims,
sometimes in conflict with each other. Get back the hostages
and make essentially make the Gaza strip a Hamas free
zone and make demilitarize it, make it not able to

(22:46):
launch another attack like October seventh. Those are two very
existential aims for the country. So I just I don't know.
This is gonna take some very hard pressure. I mean,
I think this is where the Arab backers and friends
of Moss are going to have to basically say you're done,
You're done, or we're just going to continue this war
until you're done in a different way. So we'll see

(23:08):
how much influence they actually have over Hamas, especially given
the fact their major backer has gotten so much weaker
after the attacks on Run.

Speaker 2 (23:15):
Yeah, that's a huge part of it. The Kataris were
supposedly the broker. They've also said, you know, like you
said that Hamas needs to take this deal as it is,
So we'll see if they listen. Even if they do agree,
it's not going to be that long before they violate it.
I'm sure.

Speaker 1 (23:28):
It's just the question is going to be follow up,
and it's going to be what you know what cutter
and what they're essentially friendly Arab countries to Hamas, how
much they cut Homas loose and how much they just
let them with in the wind and move forward with
this plan. So because they're not going to they're not
going to either they're not going to accept it or
they'll say they'll accept it and try to violate it
as soon as they can exactly.

Speaker 2 (23:49):
Yeah, we've seen this movie before. Unfortunately, real quick and
as today is Yam Kapoor and there was an Islamic
terrorist attack against a synagogue in Manchester in the United Kingdom.
The photos make it very clear what was happening here,
yet the journalism here is typically vague. The UK, to

(24:09):
their credit, has declared it a terrorist attack. But here's
the AP lead and assailant drove a car into people
outside of synagogue in northern England and began stabbing them,
killing two and seriously wounding three in a terrorist attack
on the holiest day of the Jewish year. And that's
about as strong as it gets. Earlier headlines from the

(24:30):
AP car and knife attack at UK synagogue on Yan
Kippura kills two YAHOO two dead, three wounded in UK
synagogue attack even though we knew exactly what had happened there,
they don't want to put in the headline, and the
AP still can't even explain it in the lead.

Speaker 1 (24:44):
I mean, that's not anything new, right, These are always
this passive voice headlines around is Lama terrorism and particularly
is Lama terrorism against Jews. It's also not a surprise,
but is deeply saddening. I saw Constantin Kissen tweet out
something basically saying, I know everyone is angry about this.
It's my sad duty to remind everyone to watch their

(25:06):
words and what they say about the terrorists, what they
say about the terror the motives of the terror attack,
what they say about, for example, Muslim immigration to the UK,
because I'm here to warn you you can get arrested.
Obviously he doesn't support all that, but it's just a sad,
you know, commentary on the state of free speech in
the United Kingdom. That even talking in a blunt and

(25:27):
direct way about where these attacks are coming from, and
we don't have all of the details on this, I
feel pretty comfortable, you know, guessing what ideology is behind
these attacks, right, and everybody, everybody sort of knows that.
I almost never jumped the news in that way, it
just seems extremely likely that this is an Islamic terror attack.
He came immediately after Isis called on Muslims to attack

(25:51):
during this Young Kapoor period, and it was directly on
a synagogue during nonpre I just I don't buy it, Frankly.
I've heard a lot of people, you know, through sort
of extended friends of friends chains, people we're thinking about
leaving the UK. Jews are thinking about leaving the UK.
There are really only two places to be Jewish that

(26:12):
are safe. One is Israel, even during a war, and
the other one is the United States of America.

Speaker 2 (26:17):
The decline of the UK is so rapid and so
intense right now, it's hard to fathom that it's real.
But it really does seem to be. When you see
these hundreds and thousands of people getting arrested for what
they wrote on social media, it's just just mind boggling.

Speaker 1 (26:32):
Can I add something even more disturbing in a way
thinking about the future of the UK and contemplating a
world without England in a very real sense, I see
basically the people waking up to the problem that untrammeled
Islamic migration into the UK has caused not just for Jews,
but for the entire concept of England and of the
United Kingdom, all the freedoms that they cherish, the culture

(26:55):
that they shared. At one point, the solutions are going
to have to get more and more and people's understanding
of the problem is not keeping up with it to
the point where now you see when they do have
these demonstrations after October seventh, where it's just a lot
of Islamic men, you know, marching, you know, in a
very like physically aggressive way, and the police there aren't aren't,

(27:17):
so it is almost you start to sympathize almost with
the cowardice of the police, and not clearly police they
you know, not to the point where they're of course
they're arresting the one guy flying the union jack. You
start to sympathize because you realize, actually the physical situation
on the ground has changed. You can't have you know,
ten cops without guns to control very clearly like willing

(27:39):
to do violence band of men, and that problem is
going to get worse. So at some point they're going
to have to basically seed even if they didn't politically
seed it a long time ago, the idea of no
go zones, the idea of Islamic control over just territory
within Britain and governed the way that Islamic countries are governed.
They're not going to have any way to stop it

(28:01):
other than sending in the military, which is an extremely
radical solution, right, And so it's essentially territory taken without
firing a shot. And I just don't see, even physically
on the ground those videos of the confrontations between the
police and then the angry protesters, there's nothing the police
can do, Like, in a very real physical sense, there's
nothing the police can do even if people are blatantly

(28:23):
breaking the law. They're afraid to arrest them. Not only
because of political correctness. That has been the reason for
the last thirty years, but now the reason is I'm
not sure the police could carry off an arrest in
that situation. So, I mean, it is bad. It's going
to get worse unless something radically radically changes in the UK.

Speaker 2 (28:41):
Yeah, and the Prime Minister there has no intention or
doesn't have the ability to do what needs to be
done to try and reverse course. He's basically placating them
at every turn. So and as we did actually have
some good news on this one. It seems like every
Martini ended up on a sour note. But always appreciate you.
Fail in for Jim and we'll do it again one

(29:01):
more time next week.

Speaker 1 (29:02):
See then, see you then, Always appreciate it.

Speaker 2 (29:04):
Thank you an as Stepman of the Independent Women's Forum
and for Jim today. Please subscribe to the Three Martini
Lunch Podcast if you don't already, tell your friends about
us as well. Also, thank you for your five star
ratings and your kind reviews. Please keep those coming. Get
us on your home devices. All you have to say
is play Three Martini Lunch Podcast. Follow all of us
on x in is at Aez Felcher, Jim is At,

(29:26):
Jim Garrity, I'm at Greg Corumbus. Have a terrific Thursday,
and tune in again Friday for the next Three Martini
Lunch