US Military Moves Towards Due Process, Kier vs The British People | HBR News 521

Welcome to HBR News where we give the badger treatment to the news of the week! This week Pete Hegseth annoys feminists with his pro-due process statements and potential justice for the falsely accused in the military, British Prime Minister Kier Starmer seems to declare war on Reform, the Polish thot patrol, and more!

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:04):
This is HBr News number five twenty one. US military
moves towards due process here versus the British people. If
we discussed the news of the week and give it
the Badger treatment. Hello everybody, and welcome back to Honey
Badger Radio. I hope you guys are doing well this week,

(00:24):
and that you're laughing and all of this absurdity so
that you're not consumed by it. I'm your host, Brian.
I'm joined by, as always, my lovely co hosts, doctor
Ran Rakam and Hannah Wallen, Good and talk We Yes,
and you are back in Britain, right, you're back in
Ny fortunately, Yes, yes, well that's all right. You'll have

(00:45):
I'm sure that you'll have plenty to say about today's
story so and we hope that you guys watching will
also have plenty to say. Excuse me, so please continue
the conversations, both in the chat as well as the
common section. I'm sorry. I just eight dinner and then
I came to do the show right away, so things
are still processing inside of me. So I may make

(01:07):
unusual noises, but I'll try to keep that to.

Speaker 2 (01:09):
Myself at all.

Speaker 3 (01:10):
You said the word came with some emphasis.

Speaker 2 (01:12):
There.

Speaker 4 (01:14):
It was a really good dinner he described it.

Speaker 1 (01:17):
Yeah, that's how good it was. Anyway, on this week's show,
we're going to be talking about how Pete Hegseth has
basically upset people online, let's say, with some of these
statements he made that are pro due process, which kind
of validates the work that we've been doing here at

(01:38):
HBr by the way, but we'll get into that. So
and also British Prime Minister kier Sarma seems to have
declared war on the British people. There's a Polish thought
Patrol which I think could be a lot of fun
and more so, stick around, it's going to be a
good time and be sure to join us afterwards for
the patron only show by going to feed the badgeertor

(02:00):
Calm Force slash subscribe by the way, if you want
to join us. We're going to be looking at our
very own Wikipedia page. So the Honey Badgers have a
Wikipedia and we're going to see what it is. They say,
let's see how fair and balanced Wikipedia is in representing
who we are and what our positions are and if

(02:21):
we even exist, because I think that if Wikipedia doesn't
mention us, we don't actually exist, so some of us
may just that as it could be.

Speaker 3 (02:29):
Folks, they don't say misogyny anything like as much he
would as you would expect them to.

Speaker 1 (02:35):
Yeah, it might even be fair, but we will, yeah,
we will endeavor to figure it out.

Speaker 4 (02:45):
So what I have to say this, I'm not gonna
say who she is. But there's a Wikipedia entry on
my grandmother and I read it and it's one of
the those entries that has like stipulations on it. This
entry has problems, and the biggest problem they have is

(03:06):
that the entry, the entries information largely came from her
autobiography and they don't consider that to be accurate because
it's too close to the source. Oh and the and
and the website for her foundation. So basically they they
don't They don't like when information comes straight from the source.

(03:27):
They want information to come from somewhere else. And I've
I've got a couple of articles about Wikipedia on the
Honey Badger Brigade website explaining why that's bad. So but
go on.

Speaker 3 (03:44):
I am, by the way, still not on Wikipedia, not
even in this article. But I have been on Encyclopedia
Dramatica for the last six years.

Speaker 4 (03:56):
It's probably more accurate than Wikipedia would have been Encyclopedia Dramatica.

Speaker 1 (04:02):
Yeah, yeah, uh yeah. So anyway, we're gonna be looking
at that, and maybe we'll compare it to the Men's
Rights Wiki, because you know, I remember when I met
the guys that's set that up in twenty seventeen. I
think it was twenty seventeen when we went to Australia
for the ICMI and they were working on the Men's
Rights Wiki, So, which is a pretty good resource if

(04:25):
you guys. I don't know if they've been keeping up
on it, but it's a pretty good resource, especially if
you want to get like all of the factual data
for like a discussion you might be having with a
bluepill person and you want to like wake them up.
But anyway, we're gonna be looking at that, and if
you want to join us for that, you have to
become a Badger yourself by going to feed the Badger

(04:45):
dot com for slast subscribe to set up a subscription
five bucks a months. We'll get you into the Discord
server and we'll allow you to watch all the additional content,
which is probably almost twice as much content as we
already put out. So that's basically how big it is.
It's it's and you know, if you give it a higher levels,
you can be a part of the conversation itself. And

(05:06):
maybe you know that will give you an opportunity to
become a Badger in like the truest sense. Who knows
like we don't. You never know who's going to become
an actual honey Badger. So fed the Badger dot Com
forward slash subscribe, and if you don't wake up one
morning to find that our content has been yeaeded from
the Internet, then go to badgerfeed dot com or Honeybadger
Radio dot com to find all of our archives content.

(05:28):
And by golly, there is a lot of it. So anyway,
pop a til and all hold on your ostrich and
we're gonna get into today's stories. So I want to
open up.

Speaker 4 (05:37):
We will hire Etsy Witches to turn you into a
new See how that works.

Speaker 3 (05:43):
It's a lot going on, folks.

Speaker 1 (05:45):
Yeah, I can't cover it all, but I can sprinkle
it in. So anyway, So the US Secretary of War,
super cool Pete Hegseeth, addressed hundreds of generals and admirals
along President Donald Trump to unveil a series of military reforms.
The focus was unshifting the Department of Defense into a

(06:07):
war department ethos, emphasizing warfighting readiness and traditional standards with
initiatives including gender neutral fitness standards and relaxed grooming rules.
While the article does not directly address anonymity for accusers
or due process, it mentions Heseth call for a review
of the inspector general process, including the Equal Opportunity and

(06:28):
Military Equal Opportunity complaint systems. This review hints at potential
changes to how allegations will be handled, which could impact
the anonymity of accusers and the procedural rights of soldiers
facing accusations, though specific details remain unclear because this was
just like a recent recent announcement. So the system was

(06:52):
a circlely designed to protect accusers in cases of harassment
and misconduct. So like, if you've been watching our channel
for a while, you'll know that I've had a series
of interviews with various members of the military, and there,
let's say relatives, close relatives, and family members who have
had their entire lives destroyed by a false allegation. Now,

(07:15):
the reason why these worked were a couple of things.
Number One, the military was following a kind of the
same logic that the colleges were in terms of dealing
with allegations. Firstly, they had to operate under the study
that comes from the Merry Cost Study, which essentially says

(07:37):
that one in four women will be sexually assaulted in
her in her time at college or in her lifetime.
The actual claims vary because it's a moving target, and
so someone in the government said that, oh, well, this
number is true of colleges, so it must be true

(07:58):
of the military. They saw that the military wasn't getting
the same allegations, so they said, we got to pump
those numbers up. And because of that, the military did
in fact act on this kind of a preponderance of
evidence standard instead of the normal sort of, you know,
beyond a reasonable doubt standard, and this led to a

(08:20):
lot of men being unjustly accused, and a lot of
how this sort of thing happened was it wasn't women
in the military. I was talking to my wife about
this and she said, well, there aren't that many women
in the military, and I was like, no, but it's
not women in the military that this generally happens with.
It's women who meet up with soldiers, you know, like
on shore leave or on like you know, in like

(08:41):
a civilian environment, and they are cheating on their husbands
or boyfriends with these men, and then when it looks
like they're gonna get caught, and this is extremely common,
they basically say, oh no, no, I didn't cheat on you,
I was raped, and they'll make the allegation to get
out of trouble with their boyfriends. And the man who
was accused, because the standard is so low to find

(09:03):
a conviction, his life is destroyed. And also because the
military wants to look good, so they don't like this,
just like the colleges, you know, they're protecting their reputation
and so this is what they do. But Pete Hegseth
says that we're not going to be doing things that way.
So I'm going to play a clip from this. But
what this is what he just read a little bit

(09:24):
more so, Hegset's administration is going to or at least
they're planning on limiting anonymity to enhance accountability and transparency,
potentially exposing accusers to reprisal and shifting the balance towards
the accused. Due process rights for soldiers accused of offenses,
the lack of explicit mention of due process protections, and

(09:47):
heax set speech suggests that any reforms might prioritize disciplinary
efficiency over extended legal safeguards, aligning with his focus on
a combat ready force, because these false allegations and this
kind of like you know, this sort of kangaroo court
system they had was actually becoming a national security threat

(10:08):
to the military of the United States because men were
not signing up because they didn't want to deal with
that problem. And of course good men were being dishonorably
discharged or worse, thrown in jail. Again, look at my
fireside chats to see some of the people I've spoken
to about this. So, however, we don't have concrete policy details,

(10:30):
so we'll have to see where this actually goes. Has
remained speculative, but this was just recently announced and I'm
going to show you guys. This is a clip, and
I hope that we get some audio here of Pete
Hegsett's statements. So it's sort of like a general idea.

Speaker 3 (10:46):
Truth be told.

Speaker 5 (10:48):
For the most part, we don't need new standards. We
just need to re establish a culture where enforcing standards
is possible. And that's why today, at my direction, I'm
issuing new policies that will overhauled the IG, EO ANDMEO processes.
I call it the no more walking on eggshells policy.

(11:09):
We are liberating commanders and NCOs. We are liberating you.
We are overhauling an inspector general process, the IG that
has been weaponized putting complainers, id loogus and poor performers
in the driver's scene. We're doing the same with the
equal Opportunity and military equal Opportunity policies the EO and

(11:33):
MOO at our department.

Speaker 1 (11:36):
No more frivolous.

Speaker 5 (11:37):
Complaints, no more anonymous complaints, no more repeat complainants, no
more smearing reputations, no more endless waiting, no more legal limbo,
no more sidetracking careers, no more walking on eggshells.

Speaker 3 (11:53):
All right.

Speaker 1 (11:53):
And the last thing I'll say to that is, and
I do think this is uh, just something I want
to point out. I think that what we have been
doing on this channel, and especially working with the folks
over at would you doot care who made this a priority?
I think that what we have done has gotten us

(12:13):
to this point, and I think that we deserve a
pat on the back. We should put ourselves in the back,
assuming this goes through. But it looks like that's the direction,
so we'll see. This was just announce And of course
the left and the feminists are losing their shit. Particularly
there's a guy named Wick who's been like an attempt
to rise in popularity by buddying up with people like Destiny.

(12:38):
He's like a debate bro and Alison and I were
on their show a couple of times, and he has
been He basically claims to be like a veteran and
he made some ridiculous statement about like guys in his
unit or whatever that created like a whole like you know,
sex trafficking pimp thing, and that like the people were
too afraid to step forward and make the allegations. And

(13:01):
he's basically losing his shit over this, and a lot
of them are because they like that kind of chilling effect,
that eggshell effect that this ideological, these ideal like shackles
have put on people. So yeah, I think that this
is something that is worth I don't know celebrating is
the right word, but at least it's encouraging. So anyway,

(13:23):
I leave it to you guys to give your thoughts.

Speaker 3 (13:25):
It's it's it's admirably diplomatic of you to have skirted
around some of the more controversial points. But from what
I heard from the Excess himself in clips Beyond the
boneb just so, he did outline some general standards for
the military, basically along the lines of no more faties, right,

(13:49):
it's it's no more short fat like truths. I didn't
hear him mentioned truns, but he definitely emphasized that there
should be height and weight requires for military officials, including generals,
and that's kind of that's fair enough. It's okay for
the commander in chief to be a bit of a

(14:11):
fat bastard like Trump. The other edge of the sword
being it is okay for the commander in chief to
be a dribbling vegetable like Biden, and that's unfortunate but
perhaps unavoidable. But military generals are meant to act as
safeguards in the event of the commander in chief being

(14:32):
a dribbling vegetable like Biden, because military generals are supposed
to be the authorities informing the president of the geopolitical
details affecting the whole situation, so it's important that they
can be found to be in good health both physically

(14:54):
and mentally. Physically because they're supposed to be able to
be awake and lucid and physically upstanding at any given moment.
In the event of an emergency situation like if they
get a phone call in the middle of the night,
they ought to be able to roll out of bed

(15:15):
in one swift motion rather than flailing around like an
upturned tortoise. And mentally, because well, anyone in a position
of power ought to be mentally astute.

Speaker 2 (15:32):
If you have.

Speaker 3 (15:32):
Yourself a delusional oath like Rachel Levine telling obvious lies
like I'm a woman when they're obviously not a woman,
it throws a little bit of shade on the idea
that they're telling the truth about anything else. And it's
not just for the sake of the peace of mind
of the American people. It's for the sake of instilling

(15:55):
a reasonable amount of fear and respect into the minds
of the enemies of the American people. If America's enemies
are presented with a fat, cancerous, mentally ill blob like
Rachel Levine, then they're just gonna laugh in his or

(16:16):
her face. Sorry if this sounds racist or sexist, but
there ought to be standards of excellence, not in all
walks of life.

Speaker 2 (16:28):
Of course, if.

Speaker 3 (16:28):
You're an HR administrator in a diminutive company that sells
decorative charm bracelets, fine, you can be a useless fat
count and maybe it doesn't matter. But if you're the
top brass in the world's most powerful country to whom
the buck is to be passed in emergency situations, maybe

(16:52):
you should be subjected to high standards. Maybe in that
kind of high stakes situation you ought to be there
because of the merit you present, rather than the fact
that you're a fat, black, Islamic Mexican other king and
so on and so forth. Am I being controversial again?

(17:12):
I am I turning some of you off from this
unfashionable fringe of political thought we have here anibager radio. Well,
pardon my spleen and fuck you, sorry, not sorry, I'm
just a fat, alcoholic, degenerate insomniac, and so don't come

(17:34):
to me for military advice. I mean, why would you
therein I think I might have proven my point. Don't
do as I say and don't do as I do.
But can you see if you can do what Pete
Hegseth says no, all right, then fuck you be a fat,

(17:55):
useless true see if I care, I hereby drink and
so that I will drink, drink.

Speaker 4 (18:04):
There you go. As usual, HBr Talk has done a
show on this, like I'm starting to sound like a
broken record. But we talked about this when we were
going through the funding the funding site that Musk exposed,

(18:25):
and we discovered that there is a massive shitload of
money being spent on feminist organizations to come in and
tell the soldiers how to get along with each other
the way that women get along with each other, in

(18:46):
order to make females comfortable in the military. And we
came to the conclusion that it is really not cost
effective at all for there to be females in the
military if this is what it takes, and it seems

(19:06):
like this is what it takes, right that now that
we've got like something like seventeen percent of the military
as women, men have to be subject to allegations of isms,
phobias and misconduct and misogynies and stuff in order to
make the women comfortable, and civilians have to be able

(19:29):
to make these allegations and destroy a soldier's life, even
when the soldier has not, Like there's been a few
cases that I've been told about by people involved with
them where the soldier never met the accuser and still
got into trouble because of the way that the system

(19:54):
handled the allegation. And there are people that didn't want
to come forward and talk on they didn't want to
get any more trouble basically, But I know about it,
and so that's that's that's enough. But in any case
like this is this is too much. This is this

(20:15):
is rampant destruction of people's lives over false allegations. And
the best overhaul that could happen would be if you
make an allegation and it falls flat, you can't make
another allegation, first of all. And second of all, if
you make an allegation and it's proved false, you face

(20:39):
military justice. Even if you're a civilian. If you lie
to the military to try to get one of the
soldiers court martialed or otherwise disciplined, and you get caught lying,
you should face military justice under the military system, and

(21:02):
you should have to rely on a military lawyer, and
you should have to pay because they're not your lawyer,
they're the military's lawyer. And if you don't want to
do that, don't lie about the soldiers like that. That's
the way that it should That's the way it should
be handled. Our soldiers should be protected from this kind

(21:24):
of bullshit, and the the allegation system should use the
beyond a reasonable doubt standard for any crime that would
require a beyond a reasonable doubt standard in a civilian
court system. Our soldiers should not be less protected from

(21:45):
false allegations than our civilians are. You don't lose the
right to do process because you become a soldier, Like,
that's bullshit. We want to recognize honor, not take away

(22:06):
recognition of it because someone outside the military acted dishonorably.
So that's that's all I gotta say about it. That
system needs to be taken down. That that that's being
paid for by the military, Like they're telling the military
what pronouns to use and everything they're they're having the
same stupid consent training that universities are using then, and

(22:30):
military funding shouldn't be paying a dime for that. That
should not be done. Like everything that's that's within the
military should be done by the military. That's it.

Speaker 3 (22:42):
And by the way, consider yourself lucky that your Department
of War calls itself the Department of War, as opposed
to the Department of Defense. All well has warned us
about this, that the Department of War will call itself
the Department of Defense. Well, it sets up military bases

(23:03):
all across the world. The claim is defense. We're going
to get onto the subject of a government that completely
lies to its citizens all the time in the next story.
And yeah, yeah, a lot of us have been pointing
to the USA for the longest time saying that your

(23:23):
so called Department of Defense is obviously a department of offense.

Speaker 1 (23:31):
Yeah, yeah, for sure.

Speaker 3 (23:32):
But yeah, consider yourself thankful that you finally have departments
of government that call themselves what they really are. And yeah,
there's nothing wrong with having a Department of War. You
should have a Department of War and it should hold
itself to high standards, which it finally is. And calling
yourself what it is.

Speaker 4 (23:54):
God bless America, Apartment of Justice, I'm looking at you. Yeah,
all right, I just want to say a couple of
say what they really are A.

Speaker 1 (24:02):
Couple of So here's the thing. He made this announcement
and it was not popular with a lot of people.
So I talked about Wick the tick, because that's what
he is. He like attaches himself to bigger YouTubers and
tries to like increase his clout size and he just
gets fatter, but like he doesn't grow in popularity. But
there are also other comments right under Pete Hegseth's video

(24:23):
clip that I shared with you that I'm gonna read
really quick, just so you guys can get a sense
of like what kind of resistance and what kind of
uh dialogue is gonna be happening going forward. Okay, so
someone said slashing anonymous complaints and calling out frivolous EO
and ig gripes is just his latest move to shield

(24:43):
the good Old Boys club from any real accountability. Sure,
he says, is about letting commanders lead without fear, But
come on, this is the guy who's already fired top
women officers, nuked leadership programs for female troops, and erase
women's service histories from the record books. So this guy's
obviously approaching this. I don't know if it's a man,
could be a woman from a kind of like female

(25:07):
first perspective. Oh, Pete Hegseth his firing women, They must
have been qualified and he must hate them, and that's
what he's basically creating, a good old boys club in
the military. Can you imagine comparing the military where men
go usually to die and calling it a club. They're
not letting you in, that's what they're doing. That's the framing.

(25:31):
Another commentor said, calling accountability walking on eggshells, that's not liberation,
it's the death rattle of oversight. Heg Seth's September thirtieth
rebrand of whistleblower protections as frivolous complaints is authoritarianism in
a thesaurus. While announcing this, he summoned eight hundred generals
without agenda, causing chaos per DoD sources today. His February

(25:55):
DEI rollback already projected twenty two percent team efficiency loss
per September watchdog reports. Yeah, who cares what your reports say.
They're probably a good move. This mirrors February IGS Feb's
IG purchase for unwelcome findings, exposing a pattern silencing critics
weakened security. When you dismantle guardrails, the only thing liberated

(26:17):
is corruption. So people are mad one more and then
I'm gonna go on. So, yeah, people are just not
happy about this. Danny says, no, anonymous complaints. Those are
in place to protect victims from reprisals from superiors who
hold enormous power over their very lives. But whatever. But
it's really like no, because if you can make anonymous

(26:37):
complaints like like allegations of sexual assaults or rape against
like random soldiers, and no one can even like face
their accuser, which everyone should have a right to do,
that's not giving like accountability, you know, to the to
the person accused. That's that is essentially removing any account

(26:59):
of ability from the accuser and creating an environment or
a climate where anyone can be accused of anything by anybody,
and they can't. They many times they won't even if
they have evidence of the contrary. It doesn't matter because
they just have to get the convictions. And there's plenty
of stories of that too. Like I said, go to
the channel and look up the fireside chats for people

(27:21):
who I have interviewed and them there was a mother
of a guy who's still in jail for something that
he just did not do, like and they had all
the evidence and it didn't matter. So we're we're at
least trying to get close to something called due process.
But these feminists, and that's all I can describe them as,
they don't want that. They want the ability to just

(27:43):
throw people in prison, throw away the key for an allegation,
and that's what has to change. So all right, anyway,
I got I got some super chow's and then we're
gonna move on. But I'd like to know what you
guys think about this in the comments, all right, so
tell them now. Gave us.

Speaker 4 (28:01):
The commenters are relying on the same media that that
everybody knows basically lies about everything. So they when they're
making these comments and they're saying, they're pulling things directly
from headlines and uh like like the the statements about
women in the military being erased and stuff. I looked

(28:23):
into that and there were some women that had gotten
credit for things that the men around them had done,
and he fixed that, and now women are mad. That
is essentially what happened, Uh that that the news media
turned into he's erasing the service records of women in
the military. No, he's not.

Speaker 1 (28:46):
Yeah, all right, So I got a couple of super chows.
I'm going to read them out. Uh, let's see tell
him nar I gave us one hundred dollars yesterday late
and late last night and said, sending this in cause
in case Hannah wait. Sending this in cause Hannah was
so sweet during the meetup and she made excellent arm

(29:08):
candy for me when we went up Mount Sulfur. Thank
you Telenar for thee hundred and I'm sure Hannah appreciates that.
Remember she's married. Meredith g gives us five dollars. Old, yeah, Meredith,
she gives us five dollars and says, h barn News
five twenty one, honey for the Badgers. Thank you, Meredith.
All right, special chat is super special today. So there's

(29:30):
like four hundred and twenty three people watching on the vertical.
So everyone no idea like how you can get like
like suddenly we just blow up and they're mad at us.
They're mad, but you guys, like, you know, stop looking
at what you see on the screen and listen to
what we're actually saying because we're not lying. Yeah, they

(29:51):
don't like due process. No, they don't know. Not a
big fan, not not crazy about it. No, they don't
want due process for the people who sign up to
fight and die for our country. They want due process
for the illegals that aren't supposed to be here, though,
that's what they want to do. Process for people who literally,
like legitimately don't have that right because they're not citizens

(30:13):
of this country.

Speaker 4 (30:15):
You're a citizen of the United States and somebody accuses
you of a crime, the standard has always been historically
that there needs to be evidence that you committed that
crime in order for you to be punished for it,
not that just somebody says you did something. And the
reason is because every time we've deviated from that, we've

(30:36):
had something happen like the Salem witch trials, where people
can show evidence that they feel harmed, and that was
literally the only evidence that was in the Salem witch
trials was a bunch of people claiming that they felt
harmed and pointing fingers at other people. And it results
in executions, land grabs, ruined reputations, ruined marriages, people having

(31:01):
to go back to to home countries, and so on,
like all kinds of chaos. So until you know, we
we stick to that standard that if someone accuses you
of a crime, there has to be evidence that you
committed that crime before you can be punished for committing
that crime. Then you know, you end up being subject

(31:27):
to a system that can be exploited by people who
want something and not you know, used to ensure remedy
for people who had something actually done to them.

Speaker 1 (31:42):
Yep, all right, well anyway, let us know what you
guys think about that one in the comments. We're gonna
move on to the next story. Appreciate the super chats
and super childs from all the people who wanted to
add their own commentary, and those of you guys who
are in the special chat can also contribute to the conversation.
If you are so inclined, maybe you can school us

(32:02):
on our with your superior logic and reason.

Speaker 3 (32:05):
But thank you for being here.

Speaker 4 (32:07):
Yeah, thank you for being here.

Speaker 1 (32:10):
Really, no, really appreciate it. Okay, so let's move on
to the next one. All right. So at the Labor
Party conference on September thirtieth, twenty twenty five, United Kingdom
Prime Minister Kiir Starmer delivered a rousing speech that positioned
Reform UK led by Nigel Faraj, as a significant political adversary,

(32:31):
framing the party as an enemy of the British people.
According to the VBC article, of course, BBC would say
this Starmer emphasized a fight for the soul of the nation,
urging his party to confront and defeat Reform UK and
the broader populist right, suggesting that their policies and rhetoric
threatened national unity and progress. He sought to reclaim patriotism,

(32:55):
probably referencing symbols like the Union jack and other national flags,
while accusing Reform UK of fostering a politics of grievance
that undermines the collective good. This rhetoric was part of
a broader strategy to rally labor supporters ahead of crucial
elections in Scotland and Wales, positioning his government as a
defender of a united, inclusive Britain. Nigel Faraj responded sharply

(33:19):
expressing shock at Starmer's remarks, encountering that it was labor,
not Reform UK that was the true enemy of the
British people, asserting that only his party genuinely represented their interests.
The article that I Got This Problem highlighted that Starmer's
comments were intended to draw stark contrasts with Reform UK's
right wing populism, which has gained traction with five MP's

(33:42):
and growing local influence. As noted in related Wikipedia entries.
This exchange escalates political tensions, with Starmer's language potentially risking
accusations of divisiveness, while also raising questions about how due
process and democratic debate might be effected if such characterizations
influence poula or public perception. The ongoing battle for patriotic

(34:03):
narrative dominance suggests a contentious period ahead, with both leaders
vying to define the nation's future direction. Okay, I'm gonna
leave it to Mike, who I'm sure we'll have a
lot to say.

Speaker 3 (34:18):
Yeah, there's a a veritable treasure trove of quotes that
I could dissect from that circus of a conference, and
we haven't got all day, So I'll focus on one
example from kistoma uh from Kiss thomas Dense Comedy of Errors. Quote.

Speaker 2 (34:44):
If you.

Speaker 3 (34:47):
Say or imply people cannot be English or British because
of the color of their skin, if you say that
they should be deported, then mark words, we will fight
to you with everything we have.

Speaker 2 (35:05):
Quote.

Speaker 3 (35:07):
First of all, England is a people, a European people,
and Britain is an island, a cold, wet island in
the North Atlantic. It is a biome that necessarily and
undeniably produces humans with pale skin because of the distinct

(35:30):
lack of sunlight compared with more equatorial continents. To say
that phenotypes from those continents cannot be of this land
or this people is no more controversial than saying penguins
cannot be from the North Pole. We call it a fact.

(35:55):
There are plenty of people who don't know this fact,
but I won't hold it against you, unless unless you're
simply pretending not to know it, even though you clearly do.
But it seems if you even so much as imply

(36:17):
that penguins cannot be from the North Pole, you are
officially karst Armer's enemy. Well, that's good to know. But
if there are penguins that do manage to make it
to the northern hemisphere, indeed to the British shaws, perhaps

(36:40):
because they've been imported to British zoos, Okay, it's no
skin off my rosy nose that there are all a
bunch of black and white bastards?

Speaker 1 (36:54):
Is that racist?

Speaker 3 (36:56):
I may have unlocked a new kind of race is
in there. We'll see. But yeah, when it comes to
the matter of deportations, that's another story, and it's not
about the color of their skin, Starmer, It's not why
we want to depart people. It's about their nation of origin,

(37:22):
the one they only just left, when.

Speaker 2 (37:25):
They only just moved away from.

Speaker 3 (37:27):
If someone with dark skin has married into British citizenship
or their family has been here for a century, nobody
is calling for their deportation except maybe the hardest of
the hard right, and that most definitely does not include
anyone in the Reform Party. Trust me, Reform is full

(37:50):
of milk toast wave.

Speaker 2 (37:53):
Riders who will.

Speaker 3 (37:57):
Only take one baby step at a time towards what
the British people actually want. We're talking about the Boris Wave,
the millions of people who were gushed into the country
and given indefinite leave to remain over the past five
years or so, while the rest of us were banned

(38:19):
from leaving even indefinitely. We're saying Boris and his Conservative
Party you know your political rivals, Starmer, We're saying they
made a mistake in inviting millions of third world freeloaders

(38:41):
into the country, regardless of the color of their skin.
We don't even want to give Irish people automatic citizenship
and limitless access to our services, just like Ireland doesn't
want to give it to us, and that's fine. We
don't want Dutch or German people taking advantage of us either,

(39:08):
and we sure as hell don't want any French people
and those other countries' closest to us geographically and ethnically.
So it was never about race, It's about nationality. You
keep calling us racists, you keep calling the policies we

(39:32):
promote racist. But when you put down the magical incantations
for a second, you notice that what we are, if anything,
is nationalist. Not nationalists, socialists, absolutely not. We're just people
who are ready and willing to acknowledge and recognize the

(39:57):
concept of a nation. Just people who can't agree on
where we draw the line between where one nation we
where one nation begins and the other nation ends. They're
called borders, that thing called borders, you know, and we

(40:19):
and we think they should be policed. And in Britain
they're not even all that extreme because our border has
been conveniently drawn for us by Mother Nature in the
form of that mass expansion of salt water we called
the sea. You know how most borders work, You know

(40:43):
how most borders are policed and enforced across the world,
especially in the Africa and Middle Eastern countries whose vagrants
are being invited into our green and pleasant land. What
do you think happens when you cross those borders in
North Africa and the Middle East? You get shot, Starmer,

(41:07):
no questions asked. You get shot so many times that
you become a pink blob of unidentifiable entrails and bullets
that goes on to get sold for scrap metal and
street food. And we're not even asking for that. Even

(41:30):
the so called far right, whom you've declared your enemy,
is not in favor of such extreme measures. Well, some
of us are, and to be honest based, but certainly
not the Reform party. Reform just wants them to be

(41:52):
sent back. And pardon my vast difference, but I think
that's a much more sensible option than text notes introducing
a digital ID card system that does absolutely fuck all
to prevent this, but does have the convenient effect of

(42:13):
controlling all and every aspect of the lives of the
native British people. Like, if we want to spend our
hard earned money on let's say, red meat or booze,
or heaven forbid, traveling perhaps to another country, heaven fucking forbid,

(42:35):
you can go Nope, you're not allowed such luxuries. We
can't afford it with the money we're stealing from you.
We're far too busy handing endless gibbs to people from
those African and Middle Eastern countries whose border policies we

(42:56):
would not hesitate to call far right if there was
ever any hint of them being enacted in Britain. And
as I said, it's nothing to do with the color
of people's skin. It is to do with nations. But you,
mister Starmer, are ignoring what it is really about, and

(43:17):
you are masking it about the color of people's skin.
What do we call someone who ignores reality, who ignores
nationality and sovereignty, and instead decides to hyper fixate on
the color of people's skin. Do we have a word

(43:40):
for that, mister Starmer.

Speaker 2 (43:42):
I believe we do.

Speaker 3 (43:43):
It's a word that can be used descriptively, but which
you and your ecophobic milk use as nought but a
magic incantation. It's a word.

Speaker 1 (43:58):
Racist.

Speaker 3 (44:00):
On the one hand, we've reached the point where we're
finally starting to dispel this incantation and brush it off
as lazy, psychosomatic pieces of white noise that you've tended into.
But at the same time, it is a real word
with an applicable definition, And if it applies to anyone,

(44:23):
mister Stumer, it is you. You are the racist. You
are the leader of a party of racists, a party
that is and always has been a trojan horse for communism.
We are not talking about the color of people's skin.

Speaker 1 (44:43):
You are.

Speaker 3 (44:45):
All you can see is black and white and the
brown in between, and you have long since decided that
black is good and white is bad. You're every decision,
you're every policy reflects this. So I'm not gonna call you.

(45:05):
I'm not gonna I'm not gonna let you call us racists,
Nor am I gonna let you dilute the word racist
until it no longer has any meaning. It does have meaning,
and it applies to you. You are an micophobic racist.
Mister Starmer, Join me, brothers. It is not enough that

(45:30):
we disam these communist traitors of their magic incantations. We
must take back this word and this concept, and we
must apply it to those who would corrupt it and
project it onto anyone who does not align with their
anti white racism. Just like we must take back the

(45:55):
word sexism and the plights are those who would corrupt
it and protect under anyone who does not align with
their anti male sexism. And let us not labor under
any delusions, gentlemen, that all of our problems spawn from

(46:18):
this immigration crisis. Do you really think it fell from
a clear blue sky? Do you really think it started
with Tony Blair?

Speaker 1 (46:30):
It did not.

Speaker 3 (46:32):
The path had already been cleared for Tony Blair and
his icophobic miss Andre revolution, just like it was clayed
for the Clintons and their wicophobic centric revolution. If we
ever do fix the anti white racism problem, I do
hope we finally get around to fixing the anti male

(46:56):
sexism problem, because that's what came before. And yes, I'm
sure something else came before that. If we have to
work our way backwards, first by culling the leaves, then
by culling the stems, then by culling the seeds, so

(47:20):
be it. But let us not lose sight of the seeds,
wherever and whatsoever they may be. Needless to say, I'm
not a real botanist. None of this is gardening advice.

Speaker 2 (47:38):
Ignore me entirely. A's paradoxical. How's that might be?

Speaker 4 (47:47):
This is this is pretty much that the same situation
but that they tried to create in the United States
with them shoot, and I think that might be No,
it's not mine. I'm hearing static all of a sudden.

(48:11):
But with with mass mass migration, Uh, that was that
was illegal immigration and uh, you know, not not dealing
with it when crimes are committed and then accusing people
of racism when they didn't want to be victimized by

(48:32):
the fact that criminals were being allowed in as as
much as or more so than people who were actual
refugees from from nations where people were trying to kill
them for something they believe in. And the term refugee
got stretched from somebody's trying to kill this person in

(48:57):
their home country because they've they've done something political or
done something religious, and the nation as opposed to it
to these people don't make enough money in their home country,
so they want to come here and rely on our
welfare system and send the money back to their home country.
And that's called a better life. That was the cabash

(49:21):
was put to that by people who realized that you
cannot polite your way out of a group of people
trying to use a system like this to dominate you.
In the United States, what we had was a war
between this is a cold civil war between people who

(49:43):
want the government to control their neighbors and people who
just wanted to be left alone. And being left alone
includes not having a criminal population inflicted on your neighborhood.

Speaker 2 (50:00):
Uh.

Speaker 4 (50:01):
And and then then then used to control you by
telling you that a the police aren't going to do
anything about it, and b if you do, you're going
to get prosecuted, right and that that's basically been the
situation for four years prior to the Trump administration. That's

(50:21):
that's what was going on here.

Speaker 3 (50:24):
Uh.

Speaker 4 (50:24):
And what ended up having to happen was people in
the United States who don't normally get involved in politics,
who don't normally get involved in elections, and many of
whom don't normally vote, had to step up and and
actually involve themselves. They couldn't just want to be left alone.

(50:46):
They actually had to participate. And I think that that's
probably the case in a lot of countries in Europe
right now. You have a lot of people who have
been complacent, you know, content because things were okay until
they weren't. And if you allow your politicians to use

(51:08):
the people who want the government to control you so
that your life isn't better than theirs, even if you
work harder than them, harder than them, even if you
work smarter than them. You're going to have to participate
in your system, even if it's not perfect, even if
you don't like your system, even if you think it's

(51:29):
not a good system, You're going to have to learn
how it works and push on your end of it
as hard as you possibly can, in unison, in all
of the ways that you legally can, in order to
push it back away from the circumstances that currently exist

(51:51):
that you don't like. And I would say the same
thing to Canadians, because yeah, y'all have the same situation,
but it's there are a couple of things about it
that are worse. And if you don't like this circumstance,
I know, mumbling about it on social media is one thing,

(52:11):
but if you don't do everything within your legal power,
everything that is legal in your country to do to
push back on it, then it's gonna just get worse.
So you gotta do the same thing that we did, all.

Speaker 1 (52:32):
Right, Well, I can't add anything to that. So those
that's that's good. But whatever you guys think about this,
leave us your comments as well. It doesn't it doesn't
sound good whatever it is. But yeah, well we'll see
how things go and of course we'll follow up. Looking
forward to seeing your thoughts. All right. Next story a

(52:57):
little bit like smaller and scared, let's say, a little
less global. So there was a Guardian our article that
reported a woman named Roxana Laika I hope I'm not
butchering that a twenty two year old nursery worker from Hunslow,
West London, was sentenced to eight years in prison for

(53:19):
the sadistic abuse of twenty one babies across two nurseries,
Riverside in Twickenham and Little Munchkins in Hunslow between October
twenty twenty three and June of twenty twenty four. The abuse,
uncovered through CCTV footage analyzed by Metropolitan Police detectives, included pinching,

(53:43):
scratching and kicking children aged eighteen months to two years,
with one particularly harrowing incident involving a kick to a
boy's face. Leka admitted to seven counts of cruelty to
persons under sixteen and was convicted of fourteen additional count
at Kingston Crown Court on June twenty twenty five, as

(54:04):
corroborated by a related Guardian article from June sixteenth. Her actions,
which also involved pushing babies head first overcots and covering
a toddler's mouth to silence cries, were compounded by her
admission of smoking cannabis before shifts, further evidence by footage
of her vaping near infants. The sentencing followed a trial

(54:25):
where jurors and parents were visibly shaken by the video evidence,
with d Sion Hutchings of the met praising the family's strength.
According to the Guardian's coverage, Lecca's defense did not contest
the severity of the acts, and the court highlighted her
exceptional cruelty as noted by Senior Crown Prosecutor Gemma Burns,
aligning with reports from both Guardian articles. The closure of

(54:48):
Riverside Nursery reflects the broader impact, while the case raises
concerns about oversight and childcare settings. Though no specific mention
of accuser, anonymity or accused due process emerges, standard UK
legal processes were followed, ensuring Leca's right to a fair
trial cross referencing with the earlier web results provided confirms

(55:09):
consistency in these details, underscoring a robust investigation and judicial response,
though it does there are some questions about preventative measures
in similar facilities in the future.

Speaker 3 (55:22):
Eight years is that it?

Speaker 1 (55:25):
I mean, yeah, eight years.

Speaker 3 (55:27):
It's better than nothing, nothing being what most women get
for this kind of combat. Fox For all this shit
we hear about racial minority men getting led off with
fourteen violent crimes against adults before finally getting sent down
for stabbing a woman on a train, albeit in a

(55:47):
different country, Well, what is the excuse for a woman
violently abusing twenty one babies that leaves her with anything
short of the death penalty. This does appear to be
a difference between male serial abuses and female serial abuses,

(56:09):
but it's not. It's not a significant difference. They abuse
and murder anyone. They can abuse and murder without immediate retaliation.
I eat anyone significantly weaker than them. But I put
it to you that the strength gap between a man
and a woman on public transit pales into it in

(56:32):
significance compared with the strength gap between a woman and
a baby in a nursery and a significant discrepancy in
the outrage of pushback around such cases is that public
transport tends to be presented with CCTV, whereas nurseries are

(56:55):
not typically furnished with such video evidence. At least the
Guardian article from which we pulled this story has not
furnished us with it. Has anyone introduced the policy of
perhaps installing CCTV in nurseries or in children's wards, in hospitals,

(57:17):
or in the schools or universities, or any of the
institutions that have long since been populated by female employees
in the majority. I would like to see that. I
mean I wouldn't enjoy seeing it, because I get the
distinct feeling I would see a harrowing amount of female

(57:39):
made horrors beyond my comprehension. But if we are to
get to the bottom of these crimes committed in schools
and hospitals as such, then I think it might be
pertinent to be able to show video footage of the
crimes committed by the women who work in these facilities.

(58:02):
If we are to live in this surveillance age where
every violent crime can be viewed by the public like
we were able to see the real time murder of
Charlie Kirk. Then, I I don't want to sound morbid
on the carb, but I have to wonder, given the

(58:24):
outrage that happened as a result of Iriano Zaritzka getting
murdered on camera, I want to know how much outrage
could be stirred if we were subjected to video footage
of all the sixth shit that women do. I'm reminded
of the Johnny Depp versus Amber Heard case. I know

(58:45):
we all watched it like it was a TV show,
like it was a soap opera, and there was something
rather perturbing about the way we were all glued to
that shit like for a month or two. But if
that footage wasn't available, then we would have nothing to
go by except the spurious interpretations of the only journalists

(59:10):
who were allowed into the court at that time. If
we weren't allowed to see the footage of the Kyle
Rittenhouse case, we would have no way of interpreting what
happened except through the smear merchants of the legacy media
telling us what we should think about and what we

(59:32):
should think about it, which, as we saw at the time,
was a delusional hallucination of what was really going on. So,
despite what we're being told about this case about Roxana,
like the the baby batterer, I can't help but wonder
if we're only being presented with the tip of the iceberg.

(59:55):
Bear in mind is a British court where objective coverage
by video footage is not and has never had and
never has been permitted. And bear in mind we're only
being told what the guardian is willing or permitted to
tell us. We can only imagine how much worse the

(01:00:18):
reality is. At this point, I want to see the footage.
I know that sounds sick. I know at this point
I have watched footage of a man being shot through
the neck I have. On top of that, I've long
since listened to footage of babies being generously tortured at

(01:00:45):
eight days old, and I the oscillating screams they make
when their flesh is being ripped from their penis. I
wish wish I never heard it, because that sound will
never leave me because this is where we are now.

(01:01:09):
So yes, I have been partially desensitized from such horrors,
So I'm ready. I'm ready to see and hear the
footage of what these women do to these children. More importantly,
I want everyone else to see it. I want everyone
to know what women do to children, very often with impunity,

(01:01:35):
because exposing the public to these consequences, the consequences of
women's actions, might be the only way to set us
on the path to actually holding them accountable. The future
is going to be dark, as a gentleman, darker than

(01:01:58):
your worst nightmares can have visits. But that is what
it's going to take. We've been taken this far into
hell because we have been shielded from these consequences because
women have been shielded from this accountability. But shit needs
to change, and it's going to change, and not a

(01:02:22):
moment too soon. Sorry, I upset myself again. I almost
cried just now and I haven't cried since twenty twenty.

Speaker 2 (01:02:31):
That was close.

Speaker 3 (01:02:32):
I will, I will regroup. Let's sorry, let's go, let's
do the next Sorry, well, I regroup.

Speaker 1 (01:02:41):
Oh sorry, I'll let Hannah give her thoughts on this. Yeah,
go ahead, Hannah.

Speaker 4 (01:02:47):
I I I raised my kid without without sending him
to daycare. Because of this, I I try using a
local y MCA daycare system to my hometown for a

(01:03:07):
few months to to give him a different group of
kids to play with where he was there for a
few hours a day, and one day one of the
other kids bullied him and he didn't do anything back
to the other kid. He just moved away from the

(01:03:28):
other kid. But he got into trouble for fighting because
the other kid hit him, and I pulled him out
that day, and I told him why I was pulling
him out, like this is, you can't allow somebody to
abuse my child and and then tell him that he

(01:03:50):
is partially to blame because he was present for his
own abuse. That's that's not okay. And they were They
were completely shocked by my logic. They didn't understand why
that bothered me. And that told me everything I needed
to know about the daycare system in the United States.

(01:04:11):
Now I know this is this is in the UK,
but it sounds like it's fairly similar, uh, And that
that you know, parents are expected to drop their child
off and then not have any idea what's going on
with their kid. And by parents, I mean mothers, right,
because it's really normally mothers who stay at home to

(01:04:33):
take care of children when they're young. And it doesn't
matter whether you consider it sexist or not, that it's
usually mothers and not usually fathers. That's just the way
things have been. So it's usually mothers who are the
ones that if they decide they're going to work when
their child is young, they drop the child off at daycare.

(01:04:53):
There's a better way to handle if you want to
go to work. No one in your your your community
is going to be more invested in your child's welfare
than you are. Strangers do not care about your child.
And it's a harsh reality, even if they work in
child care, even if they are school teachers, they do

(01:05:15):
not care about your child individually the way that you do,
the way that your immediate family does, the way that
some of your extended family might, or your close friends.
And if you're going to pay somebody to watch your child,
and you know daycare costs X number of dollars, it

(01:05:39):
would be hoove women who think it's very important that
they go to work to offer that money to their mother,
their sister, their cousin, their best friend, somebody that you
know their child plays with that other person's children and

(01:05:59):
that person has watched their child grow up and has
some love and care for their child, and not strangers.
And and if you can't because you you don't make
enough money, do do it? My friends and I did.
We traded childcare growing up. We didn't use daycare centers.

(01:06:24):
We worked different shifts from each other. And sorry about
the sniffling. It's not tears, it's it's the weather. I'm
allergic to everything, so sorry. But we just worked together
and created a schedule with each other and we watched
each other's kids. You know, grandparent time is important. Grandparents

(01:06:51):
want to see their children. Let them. And women who
are divorced, you shouldn't be paying for child care during
hours when your husband, your ex husband is not working.
Let him see his kids. Give him time with his children.
It's a thousand times better than strangers. And this type

(01:07:17):
of incidence will go down exponentially, and daycare centers will
not be so understaffed and so desperate for employees that
they stop doing their due diligence. It takes three months
or something like that for POT to get out of
your system, and I don't know how it is in

(01:07:39):
the UK, but in the US you can't work at
a daycare center if you have that in your system
and they're supposed to be doing routine testing. Companies like
mine are supposed to be doing routine testing. I'm not daycare.
I take care of intellectually disabled adults. But we know
that at any moment of us might be told to

(01:08:01):
go get a blood test to find out if we've
been using drugs, or a urine test or a hair test.
They could do any method that is used to test
for drugs. And you know, it's easy for me because
being allergic to everything in the world, I'm afraid to
use those kinds of substances. But even people who are

(01:08:23):
okay with using those types of substances, no, well, I
can't do this if I want to be employed in
this particular profession because I could be fired for it,
and it's legal for them to fire me for it,
even if the substance is not illegal. Marijuana is still included,
even though in my state it is one hundred percent

(01:08:46):
legal to use marijuana. If I were to use it
and then my company tested me and found it in
my system, I would still get fired and they can
do that, And it's not wrong that they can do that,
because there should be a higher level of accountability for
people who are providing care for people who are extremely vulnerable.

(01:09:11):
In fact, there should be the highest level of accountability
every bit is high as the accountability that we should
have for police officers but don't always right every bit
the level of accountability that we should have for people
who work in psychiatric care, where people's perceptions might not

(01:09:32):
be accepted by the people around them, and they may
even be able to report abuse and be not taken
seriously because their perceptions are not believed by the people
around them. So this is heinous that this happened, but
it's also something that needs to be put at the

(01:09:57):
feet of women. Be a better judge of who you
leave your child with. Your child is the most precious
person in your life, and you and your child's father
are the most precious people in your child's life. And
you absolutely cannot be flippant with where you decide your

(01:10:21):
child goes and who your child is exposed to. It
is not your fault this person behaved this way, But
is your fault your child was with that person. So
that's that's my that's my take on it. Maybe less

(01:10:44):
women using daycare and a smaller daycare system with a
great deal more accountability is what is in order to
fix this.

Speaker 1 (01:10:57):
All right? Uh yeah, not much again, I think what
needed to be said was said. So let us know
what you guys think about this one in the comments. Yes,
she is a monster, but they they're you know, female.
My whole point has always been female monsters exist. Let's
stop pretending they don't. I'm sure that you guys that

(01:11:18):
are watching this know this, but there are a lot
of people who want to pretend like it doesn't happen
and that men are the only perpetrators of you know,
evil and harm in the world. So let us know
what you guys think about this one in the comments.
All right, we're gonna go look at the last story.
Let me just make sure I didn't miss any super
chats or anything. No, no, no, no, okay, So yeah,

(01:11:38):
I mean, if you want to send a super chat
in I will be sure to read it. Usually I
read them between you know, stories on the news show.
So all right, so this was kind of an interesting
one in Poland. All right, In Poland, there is there
has been an emergence of something called the zon Patrol,

(01:12:00):
which is a viral trend in Poland targeting girls and
young women. What are they doing, you might ask, They
are subjecting them to humiliation and the trend involves creating
social media profiles and groups where miners, predominantly girls, are
publicly evaluated and stigmatized based on their appearance, clothing, and behavior,

(01:12:23):
using the term zone as a derogatory label. This aligns
with the report from the Polish Office of the Commissioner
for Human Rights on September fifth, twenty twenty five, which
describes how the practice has led to stigmatization and instances
of peer violence which is not actual violence, with the
Commissioner urging meta and TikTok to monitor and curb the content.

(01:12:46):
So what has happened is a bunch of young men
are they basically formed the thought Patrol, the thought patrol
in Poland, all right, and they are shaming women for
our young girls, girls around their age, like their peers,
for their online behavior, for engaging in thoughttery basically, so

(01:13:09):
they're trying to curb that behavior by using shame. And
they're wearing they're wearing vests and calling themselves the thought Patrol. Essentially,
the viral nature has amplified its reach with examples of profiles, profiles,
rating and mocking young individuals, posing significant psychological risks according
to some, including potential suicidal ideation. Among victims. No, not really.

(01:13:35):
The Polish Commissioner for Human Rights has called for vigilance
from social media platforms, requesting the removal of the sound
patrol related content and preventative measures to address stigmatization and violence,
as confirmed by the report There's like a Polish report.
While the article does not delve into legal proceedings or
due process for accused perpetrators, to focus on platform accountability,

(01:13:58):
suggests an effort to protect the victims's annymity in safety,
though it raises questions about identifying and prosecuting those behind
the trend. So essentially, it's an online trend or sort
of like a trend online in public spaces of young
Polish boys basically thought patrolling Polish girls. And it's it's

(01:14:19):
made the news because, you know, you might say that
Poland is based or whatever. I know some people have
made this claim, but they're still extremely guynocentric, and they're
still really overprotective of their women, and they're not able
to see that, you know, women and girls can engage
in let's say, like anti civilizational or degenerate behavior, and
these boys are just calling it out and they're basically

(01:14:40):
doing their part. So I thought it was like a
funny story to end on that there is there's a
literal like a thought patrol in Poland. Of course they
would do it first. But anyway, guys don't.

Speaker 4 (01:14:52):
Don't you realize that boys and men are never allowed
to engage in this type of relational aggression. Only girls
can do that and get away with it.

Speaker 1 (01:15:03):
Right.

Speaker 4 (01:15:04):
This is on one hand, you know, nobody should be
doing what these guys are doing. You shouldn't be targeting
people online like just random if they're not journalists or
or somebody who has influence and stuff. It's it's bullshit
to just gang up on somebody and say a bunch

(01:15:25):
of shitty things about them, even if you don't like
the way that they're behaving. But at the other end
of it, this is standard female behavior and it is
so common among women and girls that it is it
is known for causing other women and girls to commit suicide.

(01:15:49):
And they're girls who will make it their goal to
drive another girl to suicide using using this kind of behavior.
It's it's tolerated.

Speaker 3 (01:16:00):
Uh.

Speaker 4 (01:16:00):
Girls are told to toughen up and learn to deal
with it because women do this all the time. Girls
do this all the time. Uh, and therefore you shouldn't
you should you shouldn't expect somebody to stop them.

Speaker 1 (01:16:13):
Right.

Speaker 4 (01:16:13):
It's the the girls will be girls of the feminist
boys will be boys meme, which the feminist boys will
be boys meme purports to be the UH answer to
society saying boys will be boys, but they always state
different circumstances than actually exist when people say that, uh so,

(01:16:38):
it's it's interesting when when boys act like girls, they
get painted as monsters, they get they get treated like
they've done some horrible, horrible thought crime against their their
UH community, and it's it makes international news and everybody

(01:17:01):
gets upset. What does that tell you about the way
girls normally behave that everyone tolerates that everyone says, oh,
this is funny when girls do it. Clearly you might
want to reconsider your opinion on this type of behavior
when girls do it, because if it is damaging, if

(01:17:24):
it is causing girls to say that they want to
commit suicide, if it is causing emotional pain and suffering,
if it is victimizing people, then it's also doing all
of those things every minute of every day that girls
do it and get away with it. Otherwise, if it's

(01:17:48):
harmless when girls do it, then nobody should be upset
when boys imitate them.

Speaker 3 (01:17:58):
Yeah, you're going to have to reiterate the things that
Hannaja said. And there's not much I could say here
that wouldn't be controversial, at least in somebody's eyes. But
it's worth pointing out that Poland doesn't have to deal
with the foreign rape gangs that are plaguing the rest

(01:18:19):
of Northwest Europe, so they don't have to temper their
shame culture, but the offset of the scourge of such anomalies. Now,
I'm no advocate of shame culture. I've been quite vocal
about how shame culture does not work. In fact, if anything,

(01:18:40):
it only pushes people away, especially young adults, whether you're
pushing them in a left wing or right wing direction.
There's a reason these shame nudgings tend to skip generations.
But someone needs to say this, so I'll say this.

(01:19:01):
There are two huge problems in Northwest Europe and indeed
in European North America. One is we keep importing foreign
men who see Western girls as nothing but sluts.

Speaker 2 (01:19:18):
Right.

Speaker 3 (01:19:19):
Another is we keep teaching our girls that there's nothing
wrong with being sluts. Actually, whether actually there's a third problem.
We keep teaching our girls that there's nothing worse than
white men. I feel like I should leave a pregnant

(01:19:42):
pause here for want.

Speaker 2 (01:19:45):
Of a better turn offraise.

Speaker 3 (01:19:50):
I want to let our detractors yell at me for
being a sexist and also a racist. How are you
doing over there in the special.

Speaker 2 (01:20:01):
Extreame.

Speaker 3 (01:20:02):
But like I said, Eliot, there are the battle cries
of actual racists and sexists. Actual racists and sexists who
conduct their racism chophobically and misandercally because they have no
conception of sexism and racism other than the xenophobic and

(01:20:24):
misogynistic kind. It's very possible, ladies and dead word, that
foreign men are indeed really quite rape and that our
own women and girls are indeed quite.

Speaker 2 (01:20:45):
Slutty.

Speaker 3 (01:20:47):
By no means does this excuse foreign men for their
systematic gang raping of Western girls. Nothing can excuse that.
But at the same time, we're all observing.

Speaker 2 (01:21:03):
This, this.

Speaker 3 (01:21:06):
Only found culture, this culture of I mean, if you
hang around outside nightclubs in any city, or any town,
or any small or large village, and you notice that
women and girls of all ages are hanging around dressed

(01:21:27):
as hawes, I'm reminded of that Dave Chappelle routine. You
might not be a whore, but you are wearing the
uniform of a whore. Again, to reiterate and clarify, your
choice of dress does not, and never should, excuse you

(01:21:49):
being raped by men who ostensibly do not know any
about it. This is something that Western men have learned.
We have grown accustomed to seeing women and girls, even
underage girls, dressed exactly as whores, with the boob tubes

(01:22:14):
and the miniskirts and the fuck me boots, like indistinguishable
from women who would dress to advertise themselves as whores.
I mean, to the point where you can't even tell
who is a whore and who is not, because the
average even underage girl attending a nightclub is dressed exactly

(01:22:38):
like the whes who are dressed in order in order
to get fucked for money. I mean, how far does
it have to go before it comes to us that
this is not normal? And how surprised can anyone really
be that when economic migrant fighting age men from the

(01:23:00):
Third World turn up in our countries and they see
streets full I mean lines of women dressed exactly like
hawes lining up around the street to get into nightclubs
and then leaving those nightclubs at three in the morning
trying to flag down cabs. Is there any wonder that

(01:23:22):
these fighting age men, these incredibly horny fighting age men,
get the impression that these women dressed as hawes want
nothing more than to get fucked in the pussy. And again,
I'm not saying that these fifty iq shadow beasts from
Pakistan are in the right. They're obviously not. I'm just

(01:23:47):
saying these fifty iq haws from pussy Stan are not
necessarily in the right either. What we have is a
confluence of the West women who have not been burdened
with any boundaries, and Eastern men who have not been

(01:24:08):
burdened with any boundaries either. We live in a society
in which the only people burdened with any boundaries whatsoever
are native Western men, and we're somehow expected to pick
up the pieces when these competing demographics of first class

(01:24:32):
citizens inevitably find themselves in this cultural clash. What I'm
saying is that maybe the answer to all this is
not to keep blaming European men for absolutely everything. Maybe
if we started blaming European women and non European men force,

(01:24:59):
so one thing, anything, Ever, maybe we could begin to
fix this. Poland right already fixed this problem with non
European men, and now they're starting to fix the problem
with European women. Maybe they're not in the wrong in

(01:25:24):
the wrong. Maybe they're doing exactly the right thing, one
thing at a time.

Speaker 2 (01:25:34):
But that's my opinion.

Speaker 3 (01:25:37):
I I'm not real whatever I am, None of this is.

Speaker 2 (01:25:43):
Real advice from a.

Speaker 3 (01:25:45):
Real human being. I doesn't matter, it doesn't matter, none
of it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter. Let's let's let's
end the show, all right.

Speaker 1 (01:25:56):
All right? So that was that. Let me know what
you guys think. Basically, these kids just for the for
the clarification, because the way the article frames it, it
was translated from the Polish as well. These boys were
going around essentially up to women that are girls that
were you know, being a little too I guess, let's say, liberated,

(01:26:20):
and they were using social shame to try to like
get them to change their ways because that was what
they wanted to do. And you know, whether you are
for that or not, I think that that we covered
why there is a double standard there. I mean, they're
talking about making it illegal or having like the state,
step in and do something about it. And the truth

(01:26:41):
is women that's all they do is check each other
online and in social situations. And if these boys are
gonna one day be men and they're gonna be looking
for wives, they're gonna want, like, you know, a chaste woman,
then it's okay that they're like trying to at least
move the needle or state their preferences so that in

(01:27:02):
the hopes that, you know, some women will listen. So
not saying this is the best way to go about it,
but I thought it was funny.

Speaker 4 (01:27:09):
On another note, guys, this doesn't work. Women have no shame.
They've made being being called out for for acting like
you are part of a profession. You are not part
of a right mimicking a hoe.

Speaker 3 (01:27:27):
Uh.

Speaker 4 (01:27:27):
They've made that a term now for shaming that that
as if it's inappropriate. Well you're slut shaming me? Yes,
Well are you? Are you acting like a slut then
then gonna you're gonna get slut shamed. Women have no
shame and they don't.

Speaker 3 (01:27:46):
Care for everyone who thinks they're going to fix this
problem by sending them back. Yeah, sending them back is
is just culing the leaves like we got this far
because became women the vote. And I don't know how

(01:28:07):
to say that controversial, but.

Speaker 1 (01:28:10):
There is no way to say it. But yeah, I mean, like, uh,
the the truth is is that women, the modern women,
are the ones that created this problem. So if you
think it's just send the brown people away, that won't

(01:28:31):
matter because they're just gonna vote them back in or
they're gonna go seek them out, like you you guys,
you know, I see that there are some people in
the vertical chat that think that there's a Wignat solution
to this. Guys, if you don't do something about your women,
no amount of like talking about your white race is
going to help because they're your own. Women are seeking

(01:28:52):
out foreign men full stop. Period. You gotta change that.
Otherwise it doesn't matter. They control reproduction, they are deciding
these things. They're not just being victimized by these men.
They are choosing these men. And you know that you
have to go, like go anywhere and you'll see it.
So you know. There, that's the thing, like the one

(01:29:14):
thing that I think, well, I don't want to get preachy,
but there, but there is something that we've lost in
the West, and it is effect it is more so
affected the way women make choices. And yeah, no amount
of Like, you can't white nationalists your way out of this,
You just can't. You have to do something about the women,

(01:29:35):
full stop. But anyway, we're gonna.

Speaker 4 (01:29:38):
By the way, by the way, zero days since some
stupid bitch on social media gave Hannah wall In an
internet sex change. I don't have the meme handy, but
it just happened. I'm not a dude, bitch, uh and
and and and don't tell me that you are a dude,
because that doesn't preclude you from being a bitch.

Speaker 3 (01:29:59):
Yep, saying you are a dude.

Speaker 4 (01:30:04):
Tell that to my obi jin.

Speaker 1 (01:30:09):
Dudes.

Speaker 3 (01:30:09):
There has always been a yeah, well you're you're a
bigger dude than I was than I have been.

Speaker 4 (01:30:17):
There we go, that's bro.

Speaker 3 (01:30:19):
Your dude, and dude, you're bo.

Speaker 4 (01:30:22):
So when it comes to what we just talked about,
this is about female accountability. No man could get away
with with walking around in public dressed the way some
women dress. Right, people would consider him dangerous, crazy, or offensive,
possibly all three, right, But when a woman does it, somehow,

(01:30:47):
criticizing it makes you a bad person. I have no sympathy, none,
and and I'm not getting I'm not gonna say that
I've never showed off. I always liked to show off
my legs when I was young because they were long
and muscular and attractive. But you weren't gonna see my
butt cheeks, right, that's those are special that you don't

(01:31:10):
get to see those, you know. So it's it depends
on the individual, but you have accountability when you communicate
with other people that you have a level of sexual availability.
It doesn't mean that you're triggering rapists. They're sick people.
They don't care whether you're signaling availability or not. And

(01:31:33):
in fact, they will take advantage of people specifically because
of the opposite reason that they're unavailable. They will, they'll
do a lot of harm because of that. But it
doesn't change the fact that men have a right to
their boundaries and they do have a right to say,
you know, I don't want anything to do with you
because you look like a hope. And that's probably the

(01:31:55):
most effective thing, not walking up to some woman and
handing her a note. You know you, shame on you.
You look like a hope. Just don't don't go out
with those women. Don't treat them to dinner, don't take
them to movies, don't spend any time talking to them
that you don't have to. If you disapprove of that,

(01:32:16):
you show your disapproval by withdrawing the thing that women
value most attention.

Speaker 3 (01:32:24):
I I have slept with Hannah by the way, quite recently,
and I have seen her lace, but I have not
seen her thighs, so I did not know how.

Speaker 1 (01:32:37):
I Okay, that was an overshare. Guys. Yeah, I know,
I know it's a joke. It's a joke. I know
it's a joke, all right, but we're gonna wrap it up.

Speaker 4 (01:32:48):
So it is technically correct. Correct, we slept in the
same room. But yeah, and I apologize for the snory.
I'm old, we do. I'm fat. Well, that's good, but
I am still old and fat, just so people know
so much, Just.

Speaker 1 (01:33:08):
So you know, I am not. You're only as old
as the You're always as young as the woman you feel.

Speaker 3 (01:33:15):
No, damn it, I wasn't.

Speaker 4 (01:33:16):
I'm about three. I get to be old when I
say I'm old. I am way past twenty one.

Speaker 1 (01:33:22):
I win. All right, all right, all right, but look,
we're gonna wrap it up there. We're gonna go into
the patron show now and look up ourselves on Wikipedia.
So if you guys want to join us, you have
to become a Badger yourself by going to feed the
Badger dot com and setting up a monthly subscription. Five
bucks will get you into discord Server, where you'll be
able to participate in all of the additional activities. And

(01:33:46):
if you want to check it out for free, you
can get into the free version of the discord by
going to Badger Nation dot online. That's Badger Nation dot online,
so you can check that out. All right, So we're
gonna wrap the show up there. Thank you guys so
much for checking us out. Thank you to Mike and
Hannah for joining me. If you guys liked this video,

(01:34:08):
please hit like subscribe. If can not already subscribe to
the bellf notification, leave us a comment, let us know
what you think about what we discussed on the show today,
and please please please share this video because sharing is caring.
Thank you guys so much for coming on today's episode
of HPR News and we will talk to you all
in the next one.