The. Ladies and gentlemen, Madaz Messieurs, Jim Jatras, Myo Miser, we have we have something. To talk about. We have some things to talk about. Just a few things, just a couple. Where do you want? Where do you want to start? Originally when we were setting up show notes and stuff for you, we were going to talk all about Zolanski's time of the White House and that whole disaster. And then there's been the European responses, which we had.
Should we talk about that? And then, of course, Trump just spoke with Congress. So there's got, we got to talk about that. And then we were enduring great lengths. We got to talk about that. And I had this whole thing. I wanted to, you know, talk to you about Judas and all the other things. And like there's a my my, my tabs are overflowing, Sir.
Well, we were also going to talk about a series of posts on X about these really horrendous stories about Shanghai and guys off the street in Ukraine or men who've been locked up in their own homes for three years to avoid getting dragged to the front and literally going crazy there. And, and, and the human toll that this is taking on people in that country. And actually there is a Nexus
with those topics. You know, one of the things that really struck me about Trump's speech last night was when he talked about wanting to stop the war, wanting to stop the killing and accuse the Democrats of just wanting to keep it going. And I think there's a lot of truth to that.
It's true with Zelensky too, that there are a lot of people who for their own reasons, ideological or maybe monetary, just, you know, to them, these guys being thrown to their deaths or these other people being, you know, desperately trying to escape that fate, they don't care about them. That's just, that's just a non issue for them. Those are just expendable human beings.
And, and, and when you think about it, just how monstrous that is. Well, I mean, so the title to this, this episode is to the last Ukrainian Zelenska the betrayer, which I think gets us into a conversation about Judas Iscariot. Of course, we're we're this is the start of great length for the Catholics, but it's a Wednesday. And for us Orthodox, this is the, the standard fast of, of recognition of, of Judas, betrayal of Christ. And I, I think, you know,
spending this time in great land upon reflection and looking back at these stories and, and spending more, more time studying them and, and reflecting on them, what I think is the, the story sort of personifies these characters. And I'm not saying they didn't exist, but in terms of betrayal, betrayal for money, betrayal for out of cowardice, you know, etcetera. But they're all, they're all elements that are, that are present in the human soul.
You know, these, or even if I could say that someone hasn't betrayed someone for money, temptations can be there, you know, maybe just haven't been given the right opportunity yet. And not saying that someone is going to do that necessarily, but those temptations, those polls are really, I think what the, what these, what the gospels kind of illuminate is that as soon as you start to judge other people, you have to start to judge those elements within yourself.
And, and those things are, are omnipresent, but maybe we're getting ahead of ourselves. Let's start with the most recent thing first and then move backwards through time 'cause it is now, you know, then and now. So now, now and then we can, we can just do things. Jim, it's OK. So, so let's start with OK, Trump's speech to Congress. We're, we're, we're gonna do this yesterday. But you reminded me that the, that, that was going on.
And I think it was a wise idea as you are, Jim, Josh is the wise to move this conversation to today. And then that gives us some gives us some time to look at that and reflect. I just watched the full thing this morning, my morning, my morning or evening or afternoon. So I found it quite interesting. I mean, there's a lot of the standard Congress speeches I don't want to get too mired
into. Of course the Democrats didn't, didn't applaud him, You know, did the despicable things of like, you know, showing a kid and they're not clapping for the kid, like just basic human things that just it's, it's silly. Their little paddles that they had, the little paddles with words on it, Whatever. And there's already already memes galore now, with other words being posted on the paddles to make even further fun
of them. You know, or the egg cartoons, was that there or somewhere someone they're bringing up these egg cartoons so you didn't bring down the price of eggs so far. And we know that the. Biden. Administration killed off a bunch of chickens before he left office and you know, that's all that's that's the theater stuff that I don't really want to spend too much time. Well, see, there's no.
That's why. That's why I think you're missing here, Jason. I mean, if Morika cannot entertain the world, what good are we? You know, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, let's put it this way. If anybody was under the impression that this is a serious country rather, rather than a kind of a reality show, I mean, people said, oh, Trump T treats being president like being a star of a reality show. Yep. It's, it's, it's, it's sort of like that, you know, the, the, the, not the, the Truman Show,
it's the Trumpman show. Yeah, we can blame FDR for all that stuff too. I mean, we can go back. Well, that's true, true. Yeah, it's, it's this is a long story tradition of, of turning the president into a into a celebrity. It certainly didn't start with Trump because I don't think it's going to end with him either. Now the. Well, it actually, to tell the
truth, I kind of like that. I mean, in the past we had the kind of the God Emperor adulation as he comes into the chamber and he always starts out with the State of the Union as sound and they all stand up and applaud and all that kind of nonsense. There wasn't any State of the Union as sound, kind of stuff like that. Although I guess it was not technically a State of the Union
speech. But you know, I usually with something like this, you expect him to come in, lay out some real policy meat and try to bring everybody together. Americans are all united, blah, blah, blah, blah. None of that. I mean, I guess what really struck me about it was, hey, you, you, you want an America that's in a state of a cold civil war? It's right here in front of your eyes, folks.
And there they are. That's the enemy sitting over there in their pink jackets and their paddles and all that other nonsense who hate women, you know, who, who, who get smashed in the face with a, a ball by a a male player or, you know, some little kid with who wants to be a cop. I mean, it just I, I again, it was, it was, it was sentimental.
It was kind of sappy in some ways, but obviously Trump's base ate it up and he succeeded in making the other guys looked only stupid but heartless, which was, you know, and now I mentioned to you too, I got a call from Russian TV network wanted to talk about it. They thought it was a terrible speech. I guess it's not even worth talking about. I said, are you kidding? Because they expected to be like a Putin speech where he goes on with a lot of details about policy stuff.
And this is the facts, facts, facts. Well, obviously Trump didn't do any of that. I mean, he did some of it, but that wasn't the purpose of the speech. The purpose of the speech was to really stick the other guys. We're in charge, America's back. We're going to save this country. Now, if he could do any of that stuff, I don't know. I mean, he's actually done a lot more of it in his first month or so in office than I would ever have expected, but I don't know
to what extent. He's sort of already picked the low hanging fruit of what he could actually accomplish through executive action. And you know, whether that can be sustained in the long run or really make a dent in what's wrong with this country, I don't know. But he's given it a good shot it definitely. Seems like we're getting an American glasnost for better,
for lack of a better term. Whether we get a perestroika out of this as well is left of the debate and we'll have to see how things go. It's very, still very early on. You know, we're, we're getting swamped with so much data and so much news literally on the daily that it, it can sometimes you forget how long it's been. Has it been a week? How short it is three years. I, I, you know Mushugena man Oshevitz, but man O man Oshevitz.
But that's, that's the next way to put I, I, you know, 'cause I've been likening Trump in his first term to a kind of a Mikhail Gorbachev. And yeah, you're right. He's, he's going with the glasnost. That's an excellent way to put it. I'm going to steal that shamelessly, by the way. And, and, and also that Kenny actually accomplished a perestroika. We know how it turned out for Gorbachev. Rather than saving the system he was trying to save, he brought the whole thing come crashing
down. And I, I think that actually that's more likely outcome of what Trump is doing, given how fundamental the problems of this country are, then he can actually fix it. Sure, but I mean at the same time, if we're going to at least steal man Trump a little bit, he can learn from from the Soviets. So the Gorbachev had the, had the, the poor position of being, being in a position where this hadn't really been done before. Like this exactly.
And you know, Ottoman Empire, we can talk about empires collapsing and, and dispersing before. This is not something completely new in history, obviously. But we're talking this artifice. We're not just talking about, you know, let's say we're talking about an ideological empire that was held together by, by both ideology and, and some crazy stuff was going on in Romania and other places.
So you're not just, you know, dismantling the state apparatus in in many ways, you're dismantling like people's brains, like it's their whole Fronima is about to change, not just the borders. So, so that that was that was pretty massive. And I think maybe we gloss over how I think because of the speed in which it happened as well.
We've talked about this in the show before where you know, if you're if you go back to 91, you know, there was the Soviet Union existed and then suddenly it didn't. And we can place a date and OK, fine, it may not have been exactly what it was a January 3rd or January 6th, depending on which date you're going to go with. Maybe you can say it was May of that year, whatever. But certainly, suddenly you had a the Soviet Empire and then you
didn't in very short order. And suddenly a whole bunch of other countries just sprang up out of the ground, Ukraine being. One of these guys. What, what's, what border borders, nuclear lims. So a few things he mentioned in the, in the Congress speech, which I thought were notable. You know, I, I, I kind of was waiting for him to talk about Ukraine and Russia.
And maybe This is why the Russians didn't like it so much because it was a, it was a, he really didn't say much other than other than there's been some goods talks, Zelensky's back saying OK, with the with the deal. I've heard numbers this, this mineral agreement that they're hot for them to sign. I've heard numbers varying from 300 billion to 500 billion. No real parameters on the deal other than natural resources of some kind. They keep floating out this thing of rare earths.
But we know that that is mostly held in the East, specifically in the Donbass and other regions that Russia. I mean, I didn't even get to the war updates. So I've been trying to track things and you know, Donbass is being routed completely. Now that Russia's steamrolling over Donbass. I haven't heard any real new update updates out of Pavrosk. I know there was basic exchanges. I know that the curse adventure, misadventure by the Ukrainians is essentially done.
I think at last glance the estimated was that the Ukrainians have something, maybe around 100 soldiers left in the region and they're just being bombarded. The whole southern region of of Donbass is now being opened up. Aggressions, open aggressions towards Odessa are now really escalating. I saw one report and I this is Twitter stuff. So, you know, take away all the grains of salt that you can get, you can muster.
But there is one alleged rumor leaks from, from Russian Intel, etcetera, that Russia's now preparing to go into, to really mobilize, not full mobilization and war, but in terms of now they're going to start blowing out bridges. Now they're going to start to really start capturing certain regions like Carazon, another another city was mentioned and of course in the South and then Odessa. As well. Maybe quite possible, I'll see
if I can. Well, maybe if they're coming from where where the Kursk incursion collapsed, maybe they move towards Sumi or someplace like that. I know basically a lot of facial targets. Yeah, the base of the idea is, is that they're going to be moving. Let me just open my my goodness, this my bookmarks are I was I I was sending you stuff and then I had to stop because I'm like I'm sending him way too much. We're we're we're we're losing things here. Let me just see if I can find it here.
Maybe I've been deleted as well. Doesn't really matter. But essentially this is it. Is that the room the rumor is that now Russia's going to go into into real territory crap. And you know if and we've we've you've said this before, which is very confusing is why Russia's not taking up bridges. Why why the river is not you know is not being more more captured all that kind of stuff. If this rumor is true or has any truth to it, we might start seeing that now.
It might be the whole to get as much as you can before real formal negotiations begin. Any any thoughts?
I know I'm asking to. To speculate on speculation, but well, you know, a few weeks ago there was speculation that they slowed down in the Russian pace may have been deliberate tapping the brakes to see what the the Americans going to do now that Trump's in. Or maybe it's just because there was unusually warm there and the ground was muddy, they couldn't move it as much, etcetera, etcetera. And then we have the news. Wait, Trump has cut off all the military. It really has stopped at this
time. Even the stuff in the pipeline that Biden sent because he wants to strong arm Zelensky into signing the metals rare earth, whatever it is deal and then he agreed to sign it. In the news today is another news story that they've turned the aid back on, which means that the Russians are looking at this and say, what is he trying
to do? Is he walking away from Ukraine and pulling the rug out from under Kiev or and in order to prepare a deal with us or is he somehow trying to finesse this? You know, he hasn't, you know, he, he hasn't, he hasn't said he will back up the British and French. But Higgseth talked about what were obviously NATO personnel in Ukraine as peacekeepers, but they would not be under Article 5. So what is that supposed to
mean? And then now there's a report that maybe Trump has cut off intelligence and and communications aid. And of course, the real big question would be, are they going to stop the Starlink? Because that's what the Ukrainians need to run their drones, which is about the only major weapon system they have that they can rely on at the moment. And if that stops, yeah, they really are dead in the water. I mean, the Russians can just walk all over the place.
The question is, is that what they want to do? You, like you said, are they going to try to grab as much territory as they can before the talks or are they going to try to get essentially the Ukrainian army and state to collapse before these talks? And at that point maybe the
talks are moot, moot. I think at that point, what all the Russians need from the Americans to say, Yep, I guess that's what happened, that's the outcome, that's the settlement and that's we're going to have to accept it. Obviously the the Brits and the frogs and the other people in Europe aren't willing to do that yet given the nature of their governments, but that's a whole other topic.
Well, OK, let's let's let's dismantle this a little bit before we get to to the frogs and the and the roast beefs because we're we're dealing with two different things happening at very rapidly and and people are, I think getting lost in the narrative. OK, narrative. One Trump's going to suspend all aid to the Ukraine, OK, military and otherwise. Now that's that sounds nice in the headlines. Unfortunately, he can't.
The reason why he can't is that Biden during his in the last year of his office, signed deals, signed aid deals that were extended out to I think 2026 or 2027, something like that. So already, and this is ironclad. I don't think that he can really muck with that unless he wants to get into law fair with it. That would take some time. So, so that military and and and those aid packages are are are guaranteed.
Yeah, I think once the money's been obligated and the equipment is on its way, it's hard for him to stop it. The news reports the last couple days said he did that. I'm kind of skeptical that happened. Well, I, I think there's, there's from my understanding of it and maybe you, you have a better, better mind for this than I do. My understanding of it is that there are, are different layers of aid here.
So it's what aid we're talking about now what's being revealed with the USA was with the USAID scandals is that yeah, there's let's say aid package, let's say the the main aid package, military war, etcetera. Aid, OK. And that with the weapons packages, is that secure? That's safe, that can't be touched cause of reasons and lawfare and all the rest of it. OK. All the rest of the aid can be supplementary aid.
And that's like USAID, you know, we are programs LGBT promoting, you know, queer youth outreach and, and Podensk or some other. There's some silliness like that, that aid packaging that seems to be the things that they can cut out aggressively, like all those supplementary aid programs, unless you've heard otherwise, that seems to be and that's what he mentioned in the speech with Congress as well. He rattled off a whole bunch of
them. Those seem to be the ones that he can just like stop immediately. Like, you know, it's a we're not renewing our payment, our subscription payment this, this month. Sorry, right. So I, I think that's the, so the narrative and, and you know, Michael Malice once said something that I thought that's really stuck with me is that the, the media always can be factual, but not truthful.
And I think that's what's one of those cases where it factually, yes, this is aid, but it's not the aid that you think it is like the aid that we would assume that would be really detrimental other than lining the pockets of a of a whole bunch of oligarchs. Any. Unless you am I spot on on that at all or? I, I think, I think the bottom line is it's a complicated picture and it's not as easy a way as it waving a magic wand and we're turning a spigot on and off.
If there are a lot of different spigots, a lot of different hoses, they all are under various legal authorities and what you can do quickly or easily is is is highly questionable. Right. So, OK, so a, so narrative one, they've cut off some funding to Ukraine, but not the aid or military supplies that would make a would really excite people.
Narrative 1, Narrative 2. This mineral deal situation, I believe that this is sort of an open I, Ukraine's a proxy and the, the real, really real players at the table here are America, the UK and Russia. And everyone else is just everyone else. Maybe we can maybe let let let France in the room a little bit. I'm not even sure I would say the UK except if we're talking about MI 6.
Well, I would, I would say the UK because of their, because their financial situation that basically they're all they're trying to hold up their bond market completely and their whole economic situation is, is, is. There's not so much players in Ukraine, but they've got a lot of skin in the game when it comes to Ukraine because of their own domestic situation. They're all in because, yeah. And this is building off work from Tom Luongo and from Alex Cranor. Yeah, that makes sense.
Show listen to this. Go check out their work, especially guns, gold guns and and goats or sorry, gold goats. Sorry, gold goats and guns. I'm saying that comes in there, right? I thought the goats were out. You don't have goats. Tom still got the goats. Tom I what do I say? I don't have the goats. The goats are out of my house but Tom still has. But they did an episode called All roads lead back to London is building off of 1 of Alex's work on his sub stack.
I always recommend people to go check that out. And he's he basically breaks down. Maybe we'll do that next week. I'll I'll bring the article out and talk about it. Yeah, I'd like to see that. But Alex basically breaks down the the situation between other relationship between the UK and Ukraine, especially in their bond markets. So yeah.
And how UK, the UK, essentially the Bank of England is all in on Project Ukraine. So if that ends, they're in the, the, they're in some major, major trouble. And I think that the same thing goes for France and many other places in the EU. One of the, one of the interesting things about that whole story, because now you so Starmer comes out, we're going back a bit here. Sorry, folks, we're jumping around, but there's a lot to
cover. So Zolensky goes the goes the White House has that absolute disaster of a cluster F situation at the White House where he's tweaking, he's obviously high on cocaine, he's swearing, he's calling, he's saying sukkah, which if you don't understand Eastern Europeans swear words, It's a multi faceted word. It does a lot of heavy lifting. It's, you know, it's like Kurva shmata things you don't say to other world leaders or the vice
president or anybody, right? And, and I people may, may not understand this, but in Eastern European culture, although we're, we're certainly no Saints in general, saying this out loud, especially in a political position is horrible. Like the entire, all of Eastern Europe would have gone at that moment 'cause you don't say that, you don't swear. He, he did this with Lex Friedman too. When Zelensky was on Lex Friedman, he was swearing like
crazy. And all I could think of is like, if this gets to the Ukrainian people or to, I mean, I'm sure that it's being broadcast to them as well. It's not going to read well at all. Maybe. Maybe it was the the cook talking. I would have to, I would have to assume so in that meeting, of course, Trump and, and, and Vance just dressed down Zelensky very publicly, especially about
this, this rare earth order. They basically kick him out of the White House. They cancel the dinner he was supposed to be at this whole thing he was on. This guy gets creeps back to, to Europe and Starmer makes a, makes an announcement very soon after about committing the UK to the Ukrainian war, pledging that he's going to put boots on the ground and all these fine things.
And of course now we have Macron today saying that he's going to, he wants to, I mean, I've heard various things, things like he wants to basically build a, an Iron Dome in Europe with, with nukes 'cause we're back to nukes again. And you know, all this, all this silliness. So we, so let's deal with that narrative a little bit because my first response to it and I'll, I'll let you see what you're, what you have to say about it. Jim, was that with, with, with what army?
Like who, what, where, what are you going to do? Like, I don't, I don't understand any thoughts on this? Cause 'cause again, Starmer is like pledging to put it like a few 1000 people on the field. I'm like, OK, great. What would, what, what do you think that's going to accomplish? Sorry, Jim, go ahead. Well, I mean, back to what you said earlier about London and
the money and so forth. To what extent is all this talk in Europe revolving around, what is it, $300 billion in Russian assets that they're frozen in Europe and that they're they're trying to basically first use the proceeds for that money, but also threaten to confiscate the principle of those funds? Now, I don't know how much 300. Yeah, just, you know, I'm just a simple barefoot Greek boy. I mean, to me, $300 billion or EUR or whatever it is sounds like a lot of money.
I don't know how how far that would go towards filling in the hole that London has dug itself into, or at least could be used as collateral or something to try to at least kick the can
down the road for a while. So I don't know to what extent what we're hearing from all these guys relates to what you said earlier, that they've got to find some way to bail themselves out and preserve this project or else they're all going to lose, lose their shirts and they lose their shirts and it hasn't will have the predictable income impact on their economies. They're going to lose their jobs and they're already having trouble hanging on to them in
the first place. I mean, Starmer, politically speaking, I was hitting as a dead man walking. So is Macron, Mertz is, I don't know what to make of Mertz. We'll find out when he gets in, but I don't think it looks good. It's somehow though, it's still all revolves around the Americans. In other words, they could, they can talk a brave game here, but they can't actually do anything. As you point out, you and what army? They don't have one. None of them has an army.
Actually, the the Germans are the worst off of the lot and and at least the Germans don't seem to be willing to go in with this idea of putting boots on the ground like the French and the British. Interestingly enough, the Poles don't want any part of it either.
So maybe, you know, they're starting to wake up and smell the cavas here and, and realize that this kind of idiocy isn't going to get them very far, Especially since, as you know, the polls have sort of made a thing about trying to be, you know, the new Europe, the Poland, the Baltic states. We really love those guys. Well, you know, if Trump wants to go in a certain direction, what else can they do? The, the Baltic states are, you know, not even worth mentioning.
So I, I think the short, the short answer is they're clutching at straws. They're trying to find someone to bail them out and sells out politically and financially. But the so and they wanted somehow, you know, Clayton, you know, Keir Starmer, he sees the new leader of the free world, it seems, and that he's going to do a replay of the Crimean War, I guess. But they can't do it without the Americans. They know that and everybody knows that that they don't. They have no more cards than
Zelensky does. So I think they're still trying to find some way to throw some loop, some lasso around Trump to sort of egg him in and, and, you know, inch him in one way or the other where he gets a little bit pregnant. And so once he's a little bit pregnant, then they've got him snared. And that, that's where frankly, I, where I think this rare earth deal comes in.
Like Trump said, if we signed this deal and the Americans are in Ukraine because of this deal, then Russia can't can't mess with them because they won't dare come and touch us. Well, I think that's sort of their backdoor way to getting America involved in some way in the continuing Ukraine project. Well, I think it might also be Trump undermining the UK deal 'cause you know how the UK Starmer signed that, excuse me,
100 year alliance. And also, you know, honestly, just just just as an aside, sometimes I say these things, I'm like, this is stupid, right? Like this is, this has got to be the most stupidest thing that I've ever. I can't believe I'm reading these things. What? What do you mean 100 year deal? With the with the regime that might not be there in 100 days
from now. I mean, I mean, that, that, see, that's the other thing that I, I really again, don't understand what Trump thinks he's doing with this deal. Because does he really think the current Ukrainian state under any circumstances is going to be able to pay back the $350 billion he says we spend, which is higher than even I think we've wasted on Ukraine? Does he really think that signing this deal is going to get us paid back? So what's again, what's its purpose?
I don't know. I really don't. Well, the other thing too is that maybe, maybe with the rare earths there might be a slight difference here. But but otherwise the all the other things that Ukraine has, America has like America doesn't need it from Ukraine oil. We, we have rare earths. We have rare earths here too. I mean, if you look at the maps, rare earths aren't that rare. They're almost everywhere. But they're hard and expensive to to mine and and messy and dirty to process.
So yeah, I'm sure the EPA would never want those being exploited here in the United States, but it doesn't mean we don't have them. Right. And also then, OK, so let's say you exploit them over there. Well, you have to transport them. So I don't see why this is a sticking point. A few of the things that have come out with that, and I'm just going to read some super chats in a second as well.
But the the the other few things I thought was notable was that Maloney, the the leader of Italy, has come out and said publicly that if Starmer and Macron want to go have a military venture in Ukraine, they can do without Italian troops. Exactly. Which is for people who maybe not following geopolitics to understand a few things, that's massive for one reason that's already throwing divides and splits in the EU. Two, we know that well, let's say there's three reasons.
Two, we know that Maloney has been very chummy with Elon and, and Trump in general. And three, the, the, the location of the most of the most military U.S. military bases outside of, of sorry, in Europe is in Italy. Yeah. So the only country, the only EU country that has, let's say, a military infrastructure or like a legit one. I mean, it's not even theirs, but like it's at least it's present in their in their territory is Italy. So and just to throw a little
bit of other things too. And you know, the EU is rattling this war thing. Well, you've deindustrialized Germany. You've completely cratered out your your energy sectors. Your economy is on fire. You're about to enter into austerity that's going to make Greece in in 2010 look like a picnic party. And you're saying you're going to do what exactly? Mobilize people and invade an area troops who have zero combat
experience? You have 0 combat experience from all your generals and everyone else. What is Macron going to do? He's just jealous that Zelensky got to play up and got to dress up as a military man for a few years. Like, get me a hat. I want. No, no. I want the lapels, perhaps some medals. I want a hat with a, with a, with a Falcon on it. Something fierce. Talons. I want the talons over. Yeah, of course. Yeah, I want the pony. Get me a pony. I will ride. I will ride through the streets
of France with a with a pony. Napoleonette. It's ridiculous and I see people falling for this like what is wrong with you people? Well, well, well, who is really falling before it except for the media, the European media and and sort of some of the mainstream media in America. But I mean, are even most European publics falling for this thing? I mean, if they are, I guess they've been so idiotized by mainstream propaganda that they don't know which end is up. It's possible I guess.
I have no idea. I don't even know who it's for at this point. It's a headline. It's it's, but it falls in line. It's a bit of on brand because throughout this throughout this engagement for the last three years, we've seen that the the allies love headline wins every headline win they can get. If this if this war could have been fought with with headlines, it would have been over years ago. So instead of the ghost of Kiev, we have the ghost of Paris, the ghost of London, the ghost of
who knows where. Part of Macron's speech today, today, yesterday was detailing, he's saying that. He's saying that, you know, Russia's subversion of the Romanian elections must not stand. I'm like well fuck I I said this not but not the last talk I was talking but the week before. Who said Who said that? Macron. Macron, of course. JD Vance at the Munich Security Conference said the exact opposite the board would happen. EU media said the exact opposite
Jim, just like 3 weeks ago. I said it a few a few episodes ago. That's right, yeah. Where I'm reading the Kiev Guardian or Kiev Independent and I'm there now. It was around the the end of the of the energy. They claim credit for it. Yeah, well, the energy deal clicks over and Russia had been saying to them like, hey, if you don't, it's too late now. Like, you know, it's you haven't renewed, so it's just going to
die. So that cuts off formally energy to most of Europe, formally the the the energy transfer from Russia to through Ukraine to places like Hungary and Slovakia and many other places. And I'm reading one article from like from the then they start blaming Russia for the lack of energy and the soaring energy prices.
That's the article and they actually have a little link, a hyperlink where you can click it and it goes to an article from, I don't know, three months before and it says the exact opposite, that they were celebrating that this is going to be the end of energy deals with Russia. I'm like, this isn't the same article from the same paper. I, I written by two different people. Thank the Lord 'cause then I was, I would think I'm totally going crazy like it's it's clicked over to clown world,
absolute clown world. So I'm getting I'm getting animated my passions. Are no, no, let's see, here's the thing I mean, and again, this gets back a little bit to Trump's speech the the last night he's saying that clown world is no longer in power, at least not in Washington. Obviously that clown world is still in power in in the most European capitals, not all of them, not Budapest, but most of the the European capitals. And the media is still living in
clown world too. They're still living in a fantasy world where, as you say, propaganda victories are real victories, and that's the word they've been fighting all along. Funny thing, those guys in Moscow haven't gotten the memo. They seem to think that wars are actually won by facts on the ground, rather than whose propaganda is is more persuasive. Let's get to the Russian response in a second. We just read out some super chats, both from TK Thank you. Tom Luongo Mehrenchuk episode
when? Also, God bless you all. God bless you Sir. I already did talk to Tom. That's part of the tales of the Shadow Empire package. You can go over Gum Road and pick up a package. I Jim. I mean, my conversation with Jim is on there as well. My conversation with Tom was the the Shadow City detailing his his work on the City of London. That's also available if you buy a membership over on YouTube. You the $25 membership, you can get access to that.
I believe I have it in other places as well. But I will be releasing it out into the Wilds of YouTube this week or next because I've been holding back on a few things waiting for things to kind of really take over. And now that things are ticking over, it's time to really get aggressive. Say also $2.00 from TK Appreciate you. Your guest has a 10 out of 10 beard. Jesus would be proud. Well, there you are, Jim. I hate I trim it once every six months whether it needs it or not.
I'm growing the hair out and not by, are you? Yeah, well, not I didn't. I didn't plan on it but. Not as long as this, but. We're we're getting there. All right, Let me see anything else going on that chat, KJ says. My jaw literally dropped when I read that this morning. I believe that Macron's statements just absolutely shameless gaslighting of epic
proportions. Well, you know, just give it a second because the because we're in this really weird place, you know, OK, people mentioned nukes. Now this is the the day rigor thing. We have Christina Freeland, of course in Canada making a statement, the ongoing, the never ending leadership race, the leadership race to to that has no end.
Look, I said this when just right before Trudeau dropped out and it even right afterwards that I, I, I, I don't believe we're see, we saw the end of Trudeau anytime soon. And I don't believe that it is outside of the realm of possibility now the way that the Canadians have been spooling up their rhetoric that he may not now declare War Measures Act.
At which case, if he does that, this is the same thing he did with the truckers and a whole bunch of other people, at which case he can then prorogue Parliament even further and stay in power. And so strap in, folks, because war, you know, oh, war has been mentioned, the trade war. Well, you got to think like, you got to think like a stupid rat. And he's when he started thinking like a stupid rat. All of a sudden all their things go, oh, well, that's a that's on
the board. That's a possibility. So we can maybe save Canada for next week. But the Russian response. So you've been in negotiations, you know, you understand diplomacy. Let me throw out this and see what you can do with it. Initially, what I thought when I saw the the the the Zelensky White House debacle. Was that that was basically
signal to the Russians? Because I feel that Trump is in a in a very tight position of trying to build trust, as much trust as he can build before these negotiations really get underway. There's been preliminary, as we know, there's been talks in Istanbul, there's been talks in Saudi Arabia, But, you know, no big leaders have actually sat down to really do any kind of summits or any of that kind of
thing. We have reports that apparently Starmer, Macron and Zelensky are going to go to the White House next week as recording. This is what I've been. Hearing all three. All three of them. This is what I've been hearing for who knows what, but regardless, so that so that was my initial thoughts about and that course isn't the only reason that that went down, but it could always have gone down differently.
It was very public. It was very humiliating for Zelensky and the Europeans. I felt that that was a direct gift almost to to Russia. Like say, see, see, we, we, we don't, we're enemies. We, we have the same enemies. And then other rhetoric that's been coming out of there. Like you said, this aid, no aid, mineral deals, no mineral deals. Zelensky saying no, then saying yes, then they saying maybe, then saying no again, then saying OK, I'm I'm down for the deal. All this stuff.
It's very confusing. I have to think it's done at least partly on purpose and then partly on Axon as well. But since you're a Russian expert here, Jim. I wouldn't quite say that, but let's say I'm acquainted. OK, what would they be thinking? What's Moscow thinking at this point? Is this a trust situation? Have they been building trust? Do you think? Like it's, I'm, I'm trying to figure that out from what I understand about Putin and all the rest of it.
But as we've said in in the past episodes, it they're not acting seemingly rationally either. So. No. Well, So what was Reagan's phrase? Trust but verify, right. I mean, I, I think what the Russians appear to be doing First off is, is that indicating that any substantive progress needs to be based on a restoration of normal relations, so that, for example, getting the embassy staffing back up.
I think of one of the important signals we saw was I guess they gave a order in DoD to stop cyber warfare activities against Russia. Now, whether that applies to other agencies like the NSA or CIAI don't know. But apparently DoD is not supposed to be doing it anymore. So I think what they're going to have to try to do is to put US Russia relationship back on at least a normal with what is called a correct footing, even if it's not a cordial 1 yet.
And that after that they can start to talk like to normal governments to each other about substantive things. Now, I'm sure there are some people somewhere who are actually talking about, you know, details of what a peace plan could look like, but I don't know how far the Russians are willing to take that until normalization becomes an
accomplished fact. And meanwhile, frankly, I think it's the Russia's interest to not agree to much of anything while the war goes on and while they they continue to to take the Ukrainians down. You know what, By the way, one thing I don't understand. Maybe you do, Jason is. Why do Ukrainians so insistent that they don't want to see a ceasefire? I mean, if I were Zelensky, I'd be desperate for for a ceasefire. Oh, again, I don't think he's making any calls on this.
I you know. Well, I know, but he could at least talk. I mean, he could say, yes, we're all for a ceasefire. I think he did lay out some conditions where because he wanted to stop out, like for example, stop attacks on infrastructure and things like that. But probably, you know, of course, because he's getting the the worst end of that, that that exchange. But you'd think he'd be looking for any way possible to freeze this conflict.
The, the only thing I can come up with and we, we speculated this in our talk, which is part of the tale of the shadow empire is that and we've, I think reiterated a few times as well, is that we're just looking at the face of evil. That, that the, that extinguishing viable Ukrainian bloodline in Ukraine seems to be at least part of the plan. Now we're on YouTube, so we're going to be very careful how we
say these things. But there there is, and I'll probably do a episode of this off off YouTube. There's a gentleman. You're saying killing off orthodox slobs is not a bad thing from some perspectives? There was a there's a plan called Holy Jerusalem or or Kazaria 2 point O and I'll just leave. It Yeah, I've written this. Yeah.
The the other thing, of course, is that he may reckon that if the shooting actually stopped, if there was even a temporary freeze, that would then raise the question of Gee, why aren't we having elections? And that he would be in a position where he can't come out ahead. Oh, yeah, I, I think, 'cause I mean, he also, Zelensky's also come out and said that he's willing to, he's willing to quit. I mean, he's willing to to. In exchange for NATO membership, which isn't going to happen.
So it's an it's an easy offer for him to make. Sure, but I mean, but I still take that as a signal regardless of what what his condition might be, because it's a it's a it's a bizarre thing to say. He's been asking for NATO membership anyway. So like, why say that I'll step down for NATO membership? Like, well, nada likes you, right? You're you're, you're their boy. You're you're the golden child, you're the great general. Like, why would they want you to step down?
Why would that be a part of the package? So no, something that Trump's also basically alluded to is that is that if Zaleski doesn't play ball, they'll just revoke security, which is, you know, essentially just saying you're dead. Like Zaleski's a dead man walking. There's. Except isn't that mostly provided by the Brits, not the Americans? Who knows at this point. That's my that's my understanding, I could be wrong.
Sure, but I mean, again, you know, people been, people been under British security before and and they've and they've succumbed to a, a sudden bout of, of what was it poisoning? Lead poisoning? Yeah. Well, we could put in. We can draw a leaf from our Vietnam experience and put him on the per diem plan. Right, Yeah, I mean, hopefully Zelensky's got a very nice, very comfort, comfortable hole to to crawl into. But of course, we know how that worked out for Saddam Hussein as
well, right? So I, I honestly, I, I think they're going to, they're going to find a scapegoat, they're going to blame someone. And he's he's, he's. He's the obvious candidate. He's the very obvious candidate. He's got a big giant bell on his neck. So, so I think that there's those are there are there are all those conditions, as you said. But again, I don't think Zelensky's has ever been making any decisions. He's just the guy who who?
Stands there, but of course even if they replaced him, you would just get, you know, Zelusiony or some other Banderas in there anyway. Maybe one is more competent, but he'd also have to be dancing to someone else's tune as well because I don't think anything in Kiev can work without outside support. No, no, not at all.
I would think that. Well, I mean, that's the the interesting thing with even Putin's come out and said that he softened a little bit saying that he he'd be willing to to negotiate with with his with his sorry with with Zelensky if absolutely necessary, which is about as soft as as much as softening as you can get. But I mean, again, I if I was a Lensky, I, I, I would, I'd start making making my will and testament because that that kids.
Frankly, if I was him, I'd, I'd, I'd be out of there already. I mean, I'd take the money and run. You know, I think he's allowed to. Yeah, you're probably right about that. You know, they, they were not talking about sovereign actors. These are representatives of a, of, of factions and other things. I mean, I'm, I'm, I'm sure he didn't want the job to begin with. Imagine that sale, you know, don't worry, it'll be the role of a lifetime, literally the rest of your life.
You got about three years, kid. One one way or the other. Yeah, I guess. And of course, where could he go that he would be safe? I mean, a Tel Aviv, obviously, but you know, Paris, I don't know where else he could actually go that he would be free from either being assassinated or extradited. I would not be surprised. Well, look, here's the other thing too, is that why would you want somebody with that much Intel?
You know, he's, he's, he's got to know something in terms of he's just been in the rooms right where they've explained these deals. And, you know, tragic airplane accidents can happen, Jim. We see them all the time. So, you know, Ukraine Air Force One just accidentally just blows up out of the blue and everyone and everyone's is perplexed. You'll know that's you'll know that the worm is really turned when the entire media goes. It was it was a fuel leak.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. It was a pigeon, a tragic pigeon. Got on the, got on the the jet. These things happen. So Jim, I've been doing this series during Lent, basically doing a stream or an episode every day of Lent. My intention is do the full 40 that way. I am not a theologian. I am a very admitted white built when it comes to all things religion especially is basically an Orthodoxy.
But one of the things that I thought we could dovetail this conversation into a little bit and since we're talking about Zelensky is the, you know, every Wednesday, just, even just during the normal year, the fact that we the Orthodox fast is to on Wednesdays is to remember the betrayal of Judas Iscariot of, of, of Christ, and which sets off the, the sacrifice.
So, and then one of the things I really think about when reflecting these stories is that these stories aren't just, we can obviously examine the character of Judas, but in many ways, these are, these are, these are, these are characteristics that are, that are playing in the human soul. You know, you, me and everyone else, we may not have been given the opportunity to, to betray someone for money, but certainly those temptations can always be there.
And so when we, we started discussing this sort of concept of betrayal and the, and the, the character of the ultimate betrayal, I think we can start to see these characteristics being played out in a lot of these actors. Like the only way I can think of Zelensky as is as the Judas for, for the Ukrainian people, He sold them out.
You know, I took a lot of heat, a lot of heat from a lot of people when I came out as Ukrainian nationalist and said at the very start of it, like, no, Ukraine should take the deal. Like, take the deal. Don't do this. When, when when When was this? With for Minsk 1, you know when before the Oh, you. Know back in 2014, the. Very, the very start, yeah.
I was like, just take the deal. Don't do this because you're going to you're going to set out a series of of escalations that you can't win like you're not, you can't win this one. And then certainly Minsk too. I was like, really don't do not do this over Donbasket. You've, you've created this problem. The the best thing you can do is is back away from it and try to find some sort of neutral, well,
frankly. They they would be, you know, again, if you're trying to consolidate a pro western Ukrainian state, you'd be better off with that Donbass. You know, it's just sort of like when the, the everything was going on on on Maidan, when Yanukovych was there in the
Barracuda out of the street. People forget, but there were rumbles out in West Ukraine in the Lvov and Ivanov Frankievskin, places like this that maybe they would secede from Ukraine because they were concerned that Yanukovych was going to crack down and really clear out the, the, the the
protests. And in fact that what protest is putting in Mudley. But I mean, in fact, Putin, at least according to the reports I've heard, Putin offered Yanukovych, look, you do what you need to do when we will back you up. And Yanukovych refused to do it because he was afraid of how that would work out for him. As things turned out, didn't work out for him.
Well, well anyway. But in any case, you think that if I was like Ukrainian nationalist and I want to consolidate as much of A Ukrainian state that's a pro Western, NATO, anti Russian state, I'd want to dump Crimea and the Donbass that fewer of those people in this state and we control all the rest of it with, you know, doing a fans or butts. But they didn't think that way.
Evidently, they wanted to subdue these people and force them to live in their state and have their identity transformed according to their idea of what Ukraine ought to be. Yeah, or ethnically cleanse and then bring in the global S, which is no if, if, if, if a rum state Ukraine is allowed to limp on after this. That's exactly what you're going to see. You know you're going to see a lot of African, African Ukrainians, didn't you? Know. Yeah, actually I've seen some
videos with that too. Yeah, yeah, They're natives. They were. They were there before they were driven out. That's. Right. That's right. Like Cheddar Man or somebody like that. You know, it's yeah. We're all Turkish anyways at the at the end of the day. Right. So speak. Speak for it yourself.
I. Told, I told an Albanian that once that technically, technically, if you go back far enough, you know, there's, there were most, mostly ethnic area people in the in, in Eastern Europe were Turkmen, you know, just sort of very loose relationships to the Turks, you know, just, you know, whatever. And that did not go over well. And that's when the fight started. I was like, oh, oh God, there's a girl too. I was, you know, trying to woo, and I did not woo.
You you know how to sweet talk them, don't you? Oh yeah. Well, you know, anyways, OK, Great Lent we are. We are in the Great Lent. We have been. We, we have if we're Orthodox, we're observing Orthodox. We have been. This is day. Depending where you're at, the either day three or day 4. First of all, how's how's lead going for you, Sir? You've, you just came back from service from, from Liturgy. To you sanctified liturgy.
Yeah, that was great. It was nice to nice way to I I wasn't able to make it to comp line last night, but made it to comp line Monday night. We'll have comp line again Thursday night and then I'll you're going to the Greek Parish on Friday for the Akathist Tim. So it's a pretty good start. I'm I'm very pleased with it so far.
Yeah, I've been having a very, I've been trained on this stream, obviously, but I've been having a very, very peaceful, very calm first few days, which I'm hoping is will continue and is not just a calm before the storm because that's happened before. But let's let's let's let's deal directly with with the story of Judas, if you wouldn't mind. Oh yeah. And I don't know where you want to go with that. Well, let me let me let me throw
a thought on the table there. I've noticed that whenever you see like modern, you know, Bible based dramas on your TV or a movie or in a book that they relate to Judas. They always want to give him some kind of a almost noble motivation that he's a revolutionary feels that Christ is not really doing what he needs to do or, or that he's actually concerned about Christ and somehow he is trying to, you know, stop him from something that's going to hurt him or
something. I mean all sorts of convoluted reasons why he did what he did rather than the ones that the Scriptures make very clear and also very clear and all the the the hymnography of the church is that the guy was a thief and he was seduced by money and he was he was filled with the spirit of greed, which is why he sold Christ. Like the part where he says, well, you can't. Why was it this ointment used to sold and and money used to help
the poor. He said this not because he cared for the poor, but because he was a thief who used to take out what take what was in the box. Same thing with the, the, the 30 pieces of silver. I mean, all of him say he, he did it for the love of silver. And in fact, I think actually that might be the Greek word for greed, love of silver, something like that. I'd have to look that up. But what, you know, it's, it's some people, that's their passion.
Other people have other passions, you know, sexual or, you know, drunkenness or whatever, you know, drug problems, whatever they might be. That was his. And why do they need to try to complicate it? Or D Avarisify if I can use that word, Judas because it's it's pretty plain. Well, I mean, we can question the source of these of these
things. I remember when the Gospel Judas came out a little while ago and again that there is that refrain of, of, of Jesus is just misunderstood or, and I guess, and this is actually sort of a theological debate that you sometimes you will hear people talk about is that, well, Judas, Judas's act was necessary for Christ to be sacrificed. At least you know, that's how it happened. So let's just say that it was dependent upon that. So in some ways he was fulfilling his purpose.
Well, like Christ says in his prayer, I think it's the prayer of the garden where he says I've lost none of them except the Son of perdition that the the Scriptures might be fulfilled. So in a sense he was playing out a role that had been ordained from the beginning, but he wasn't forced to do it.
I mean, he was doing what God obviously knew he would do and what Christ did he, I mean, he knew he was who was betraying him when he said whoever gets the, the his, his, the the bread and the soup with me is the one who shall betray me. I don't know why all the other guys didn't say, Ah, it's Judas, huh? Because at that point, but apparently maybe it wasn't as clear at the time. You had to be there. You had to be there. Yeah, maybe he was just very stinky about it.
Just to the to the when everyone's back. Yeah, I did there is. Well, that's the that's the general trend in in your book. I tried to warn you. Yeah. We talked about this a little Tommy Salmon. That episode releases a special episode this week. I'm just just carving out where we had some Internet interruptions.
But in your you spend quite a quite a few chapters talking about 1. The subversion of Ukraine specifically, but just the more general subversions that are happening throughout the West. You do a great quote from the Confederacy of Dunces that I but. Saving. Saving the world through degeneracy. Right, yes, saving the world through degeneracy. I'm just trying to find the exact chapter. But anyways, we can just talk loosely about it. There's this.
I think it's sort of happening with the with the anti hero trope in the 1970s. Well, we'll just say we'll place in the 1970s. It was there certainly before that, but there's this attempt to redeem, redeem the, the, the scoundrel, you know, redeem, find some goodness in, in, in everyone and everything, which you know, from a Christian lens, there's there's some, there's some good things to that.
I don't want to discourage people completely from trying to find the good in everyone and everything. At the same time. We can still also call a spade a spade. Like I feel that this is this often times get into those conversations, those those, those, those those throw outs to people that you know about the border, right? You know, people say, well, aren't Christians supposed to be inviting everyone to their home and all that kind of stuff? It's like, well, sure, but there
are limits to everything. Like you don't have to give up your country or, you know, lay down all your arms and get slaughtered at the same time to in order to do that. And so I feel like there's, and I think that it is probably purposeful this this sort of kernel of doubt that's put into both a strict reading of Scripture and not, not being able to have Christian judgement, let's say, let's put it that way, yeah. Yeah, have you?
Have you? You've heard a book called Camp of the Saints. Haven't you? Sure, yeah. Yeah, and, and, and of course that was I think published in 1972 and I think the subtitle is The End of the White World or something like that. And for those who don't know, maybe I'll just briefly summarize. It's about a million starving Indians piling onto 100 derelict ships and I think Calcutta or someplace like that and setting sail for Europe. It's, it turns out France because the the author's French,
right. But what's interesting is that whereas most normal with people would say, hell no, we can't allow this because what spark this sparks is like a spontaneous mass movement from the third world to the developed countries, which basically swamp them and destroy them. That all the intelligence, you all the smart, beautiful people, the government's, the media and all cheering this on. Like, will they make it? Can they do it? I mean, it's is they're, you know, basically cheering of the
invaders. And that's what really writes the death sentence for the European Christian countries that they decide to commit suicide. And, and of course it's, it's, it's written almost like a parable in a way that it's sort of like a Fast forward how this process is going to occur and has been occurring over the last few decades. It is now reaching that critical
point. But a lot of it has to do with, as you say, that misplaced Christian altruism that, you know, basically we love everybody. We give everybody the benefit of the doubt. You know, there but for the grace of God goes another Sinner like me. And all of that's true. I don't think most Christians over the centuries, faced with invasion or the destruction of their homes and families and churches, looked at the world that way.
They decided to fight, you know, whether it's, you know, Carl the Hammer and Poitier or whether it's, you know, the East Roman Empire for centuries on end, whether it's my personal favorite, Vlad the Impaler. I mean, you know, it's. Yeah. He well, he, he, he, he made sure they got the point right. He was a real prankster, no doubt about it. No man, no Chavez. Yeah. So there, I think there's 2 split off points with that is discernment and intolerance.
I was, where was I just watching something somewhere Protestant obviously was talking about this idea of Christian tolerance again, that I feel these, these terms have been hollowed out. So when we talk about things like justice, tolerance, love, they do have meaning and they do have even Christian meaning. But in the modern world, because these things have been hauled out and been reduced to these sort of materialist, nominalist phrasing, that's like everything becomes subjective.
There is no absolute meaning to these things. They're just, they're just mean what we mean when we mean it, you know, when we when we want something. So maybe you can talk about a little bit of that, Jim. Is this, this idea of Christian tolerance what we should tolerate? Because in some senses that's very true. We Christians reformed the Roman Empire through tolerance, essentially tolerating being persecuted. Not that they had much of A
choice, but they did tolerate. They did, you know, they did persevere. So on there's, there's that story on one end and of course, what we're experiencing now. And I've, you know, said this very clearly that I'm not a race realist or, or any of those things. But at the same time, I, I can, I also understand that, that destroying your civilization through, by importing millions of uncivilized people. And you know, that's just, there's not even a criticism on, on them.
It's just they, they're going from 1 from 1 situation to another and being being asked to behave. There's there's no reason for them to do that. So maybe we can talk about that a little bit. Like what? Where do you see Christian tolerance being at play here? Because I know you just brought up Camp of the Saints and that seems to be a sort of natural
kind of bookend to that. Well, you know, Tucker Carlson just raised some eyebrows recently, like the last couple days where he said how come it's only white countries that don't have a right? White people don't have a right to have their own countries. Everybody else does. We're not supposed to, though, because that's racist. But it's not racist of, you know, Asian countries want to be Asian or African countries want to be African, But it's we're
bad. And of course, I think, you know, a lot of this just frankly anti white racism. And there's the element of it and you know, who is it? Somebody once said a liberal somebody won't take his own side in the fight. Is that that that there seems to be something. Let me back up a second.
I mean, you, you've heard of what they call the social gospel, the idea that the purpose of Christianity is not to change our relationship with God and reconcile us with God and to change us inside, as we say, noetically theosis to transform us, but rather it's to transform society. The idea that we're going to reform everything, you know, and we're we're going to abolish slavery, we're going to abolish
alcohol. We're going to, you know, make everybody, you know, everybody rich by sharing the wealth and through social programs and things like that so that somehow we can fix the world through social action, which by the way, is the same concept you find in Reformed Judaism like tikkun olam. The idea repair the world. The idea that we're going to, you know, so we'll make abortion legal and we'll have pornography everywhere, and we'll have, you
know, LGBT flags everywhere. We're going to fix the world. Well, what's your idea of fixing the world? I think that people who think of Christianity in terms of fixing the world never, you know, never don't really know what Christianity is. I mean, for example, you know, in Roman law, before pre Christian Roman law, there were there was death penalty for all sorts of crimes. In the Roman Empires, it became more and more Christianized.
Fewer and fewer crimes were treated with a death penalty. They tended to replace them with corporal mutilation. You know, if I write hand, offendi cut it off. If I offendi, pluck it out. So they took that literally. But it's not the death penalty. Now, there's nothing in the Gospels, nothing in the Scriptures against the death penalty, no matter what Pope Francis happens to think.
But there was a tendency over time, as people were, people were changed internally, that they wanted to be more and more merciful and kill fewer people when it wasn't necessary. You know, the same thing had to happen with regard to our attitude toward war, towards slavery. There's nothing in the Gospel that says we can't go to war. There's nothing in the Gospel says that slavery should be
abolished. But none the less, as the leaven of Christianity took root in people's souls, those things became more problematic for us and tended to sort of fade away. I mean, there's, there's, you know, there's always a strong impulse for peace in Christian countries, even when they go to war. There was always a, you know what, what far from the the civilization that spread slavery
around the world. It was only Christian European civilization that had any objection to it at all, ever who put a stop to it in in the 19th century, not only in the Atlantic slave trade, but even cutting it off in the Indian Ocean or by the by the Muslim slave traders. So I think these people put the cart before the horse. They say let's change society, let's fix this, let's fix that. Rather than saying no, we fix you and me, we have to fix
ourselves. And as we fix ourselves, yeah, then maybe things in the world will change for the better because we also see the humanity and other people. But it doesn't mean I allow my house to be invaded. I allow my country to be invaded. I allow Barbarians to run rampant to rape women and do all sorts of things because, oh, you know, I have to turn the other cheek because I'm not turning my cheek. I'm turning somebody else's cheek to start with, so I think
there's a lot of that in there. Yeah, I think because a lot of people have these arguments or these discussions from an assumed frame that that's like, for example, like and, and Christians fall into this as well, this idea of Christian nationalism. It's a wonderful idea to float around. The the only thing is you need a Christian nation to talk about Christian nationalism or you need a bulwark, a plurality of Christian people and, you know, pick your flavor of Christianity, let's say.
But when I was talking to to Curtis Jarvan a few years ago, we're talking about order and substantiating order, you know, almost any order will do at some point. And he said, yeah, you know, if you might be Orthodox Christian, but if you had to live in a Lutheran society, let's say, it would still be something, right? Like it's May. Not be my. Personal. Better than the Pagan 1, sure. Sure.
At the very least, and I think this is kind of what people sleep on a little bit, there's two aspects of it. You need these boundaries in order to know what to do. Like just even a moral standard to have that, you have to have a standard like at least like I said, if let's say you're living in a Lutheran society. OK, well, now I know if I know what Lutherism is and I know what Luther, you know what
devout Lutherans are all about. I know kind of what to expect from day-to-day or interactions, even if I'm not Lutheran, right? The, the other thing that on a global scale, and we've seen this play out time and time again with atheist or more, let's say super secular societies, is that other countries don't know what you're about. You lose your, I call it a Reggio. You lose your rule or your, your region and your religion.
The thing that binds and what that is offering people is like, OK, when you say American, I need to know what the hell that is. You know, that should give you me a, a, an idea of what you're about. Or you say I'm Christian. OK, you know what's what is that? And I need those frames of reference to have any kind of trust. I can't deal with you honestly if I can't trust you. And I can't trust you if I don't have any indication of what you might do tomorrow. Is is your word worth anything?
And for people who are, you know, for cultures that are religious looking at us like, well, you've given away your God, why would I ever trust you? So, yeah, I can. I can mistreat you. I can. Sure. I'll sign a deal. Yeah. Whatever. Yeah. I'm. You know, I don't. I don't. My word as a gentleman, certainly.
Absolutely. Or my or my as a Muslim or anything else like you know, and in some religions it be perfectly okay for you for them to break treaties and deals because they're not dealing with people of the book. So you know. Yeah. And, and this is especially problematic for a country like America, which has been welcoming of immigrants. But the fact is, I mean, you, you and I both come from fairly
recent immigrant stock. But America was not founded by Ukrainians or Greeks or Chinese or Indians or or Eskimos, wherever else it was founded by Englishmen. That's why we speak English here and why we assimilate to that kind of, you know, what they used to call a WASP identity. And that's where we get this big lie that America is not an
ethnic state. Our whole institutions resume the ethnicity of the founders, which the rest of us who came later more or less assimilate to, even though we may not be of that actual stock. But I mean, I don't look at people like George Washington or, you know, Ulysses Grant or Robert E Lee as foreigners. I look at them as my forebears, as in my country, even though I don't share their blood.
And, you know, it's, you know, this has all been through tossed out the window that we, we've gone so far down the road of the idea that, oh, the only thing that ties us together is a, is a, what is it a proposition? We're a proposition nation. What's the proposition exactly? You know, it was, it was some highfalutin Enlightenment language and the Declaration of Independence. That's what that's all this is.
Or maybe we're just an economy. We're just a bunch of people who are here to help increase the GDP. I mean, you, you can't, you can't sustain a country like that. No, I mean, again, this idea, if you're grounding it in, in the Enlightenment, well, you're then you're grounding it in anomalism. So again, only thing that are that only thing that matters is material. Everything else is, is subject
to change or or debate. So even everything else you're basing on. So your science, your technology, your nationality, your laws, your rights, everything that you would define and that liberals will, will, will, will, you know, the moton Bailey routine that will retreat to well, those don't actually really exist now, do they? In anomalous frame, like you can't, there's no universalism. You'll you'll make, you know, make some sort of passionate to
cry to universal human rights. But it's like, well, but in your framework, those can't exist. So. Yeah, so how, how, how, how, how do we not end up just being another version version of New Soviet Man, right? It's the same thing but a different name. Absolutely. And I think it's we, we've seen the Soviet experience and how that played out.
And I feel like we're speed running that throughout the West. Hopefully America will, I pray for America all the time that at least one Western nation. But of course, I lived out here in Australia and I'm, I'm always very cautious and respectful because I am an immigrant here. So I'm being the good immigrant and saying I'm not speaking out too much. But, you know, I, I don't have a whole lot of hope in some ways that Australia gets to have a making Australia a great again moment.
You know, it's I'm preparing to learn a lot of a lot of Mandarin in the future because I feel that that's the likely direction that this. This well. You know I haven't was it I'm I'm I'm bad with my Chinese anyways, so bring it back to Judas the the betrayer.
I mean, we'll circle this background to end this out because if we talk about the installment, the installment, the soul of the nation and something that Woodrow Wilson, of course, start, you know, was the the figurehead for well, if we if we can say this, a country can have a soul, I think we can say that the country can have a characteristic. And I certainly think that this the archetype of the betrayer is
being played out. And as I said before, if this is an American colossnose and things are being revealed, we're in this apocalypse. One of the things I've also speculated is that, you know, in small groups over the last, let's say, 10 years, more and more people become the red pill.
You know, as Yardville talks about this awareness of the lie, the awareness of the betrayal, the awareness of all these things and people who've been being aware of being brought on board of this over the last few years, myself included. Well, we've had that period of time where we, we are on the out and most people didn't want to hear it or didn't believe us. So we had to get a we kind of got accustomed to it. You know, you kind of, you see the lie everywhere.
And after a certain point you get past the anger, like, yeah, well, they're lying again. You know, what is it? Water's wet when today is Wednesday. So you, so we've gone through that period of, of normalization with even within, within the stark realization of how horrible it is, people who are being brought to it now are being brought immediately to it now. Like they're not getting those 10 years, five years, whatever of a customization to a normalization.
They're being, it's going to be shock therapy to which I think that could be the real disaster with within within the populace. Because, you know, I don't want to throw cold water on anyone's celebrations for the what's going on in America. But, and it's not just America we're talking about, of course, but the response, I think, from the general public to this sudden awareness might be the real disaster. I don't know if you have anything.
Any ideas on that? Well, if I understand you correctly is that it's one thing to get red pilled, but if you're red pilled and also white pilled, the idea that some, you know, OK, I've discovered everything that was being done was a bunch of fraud and corruption, etcetera, etcetera. But now, thank goodness, we're going to get to the bottom of it's all going to get fixed. I don't think that's appropriate. By the same token, I don't want to sound too black pilled either.
I don't want to say it can't be fixed or it can't be substantially improved. I don't think it's going to turn out as well as the white pilled. You know you don't. Trump is God types. I think it's going to be.
But you know, it is nice to see something like an American normalcy in an American spirit, not only rising up, but holding some substantial levers of power where those could prevail over the deep seated deep, you know, just deep down corruption and all of our institutions and some real vulnerabilities in the whole system. I I'm still I'm still not real optimistic that that can happen. But I don't want to say it can't. You know, I mean, I think you,
you know, maybe I'm Gray pilled. I'm not neither black pilled or white pilled, even though I'm red pilled. Well, I will be Gray pilled with you, Jim. Ladies and gentlemen, Madame Messieurs, thank you so much. Brothers and sisters too. I, I, I got to work on my Chris Hitchens. I feel like I can, I can, I can get that tagline a little bit. Always a pleasure, Jim. We'll be back next week. Of course, Jim Jotcher's book, I Try to Warn you, available on Amazon and all your fine
booksellers out there. It's an extremely good read. I think maybe we should dedicate a few shows coming up to picking apart some of your favourites. I I. Always return, but maybe Confederate, Maybe the Confederacy of Dunces, Maybe saving the world through degeneracy. The world didn't the world didn't know that they needed a Jason marriage of Jim Jatra's reading series of the Confederacy dunces. But we can we can probably pull that off.
Jim. Any last thoughts, anything, any last things you'd like to say before we maybe before he? No, no, just that, you know, there's it's, it's, it's really been, you know, I hate to say it, anytime you say something on a program like this, you always feel it's going to be obsolete the day after tomorrow because things are moving so fast. There's so many surprises. It's like, how do you keep up
with it, you know? But hey, I'm happy to live in times like this, you know, I mean, I'd rather have this and the uncertainty that comes with it than just so it's all so
predictable. It's all so boring and it's all so sad, which is frankly what we were looking at till, you know, basically in November. Yeah, I mean, I, I said in the show yesterday before I had listened to the Trump Congress thing, but, you know, people were getting my only, you know, maybe I'm just getting old, but I was warning people like, you know, passions, like keep your passions dry, Don't get them too excited, but at the same time, be a little passionate.
It's OK. Like keep a cookie have. A cookie. It's OK to have a cookie keep. Keep your passions dry and keep your powder dry too. Right. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But, I mean, you know, it's OK to it's OK to to feel good about it as well. It's we live in exciting times. So that's the that is something. Ladies and gentlemen, Madame Mesura's brothers and sisters. Thank you so much. He is Jim Jatra's. I am Jason Maranchuk. And it is later than you think. Yay.