(0:00 - 0:41) Reiner Fuellmich. Dr. Mark Trozzi. Pastor Art Pawlowski. Dr. Jordan Peterson. These are just a few from the long list of names of people who have been censored and persecuted in recent years for speaking the truth, a truth that the globalists must silence for their plans to proceed. In the pursuit of that totalitarian control of the narrative, they have used many tactics, from state-sponsored media to censorship laws, from making examples of those who speak out to destroying the livelihoods of millions with lockdowns. (0:42 - 2:23) But their most effective strategy for controlling information, for securing their narrative, has been done quietly, behind the scenes, and it's been going on for decades. Politicians come and go. Some are good, some are not. And while the globalists have worked to put their players on the political board, the real power does not reside with them, but with the agents of the deep state, and especially with the regulatory bodies, which have the power to control the flow of information from the top down. Law societies, school boards, medical colleges, and the governing bodies of sports are just some of them. They have infiltrated these regulatory bodies, and in so doing, created a system which is working toward a society of regulated persons. That means you. Their goal is to make all of us subject to one body or another, and then, if you go against the narrative, to use that regulatory body to censure you. Not just censor, censure. Isolate you. Punish you. Take away your rights and freedoms. Make you a non-person. Lawyer Lisa Miron has been on my show in the past, talking about 15-minute cities, the attacks on our food supply, and medical tyranny. Now, Lisa has written one of the important books on the globalist agenda I have yet read, World on Mute, how workplace speech committees are destroying our nations and eliminating our civil liberties. (2:25 - 3:38) In this interview, Lisa exposes how every attack upon free society in recent years is connected and subjected to regulatory bodies, which have the power to destroy lives and control the narrative, to the extent that if we do not dismantle these bodies, we will soon find ourselves living under totalitarian control without a single gun ever being pointed at us. Lisa, welcome back to the show. It's such a pleasure to see you again, Will, and to see your viewers. So, yeah, thank you for having me. And you've been very busy since our last interview. You've written quite a book, World on Mute. And there's so many important concepts in this book that I want to talk to you about today. But I want to start with the writing of the book itself, because you have cited in the book dozens of examples of people who have been subjected to censorship and persecution. And, you know, many of my viewers are aware of some of these people, like Reiner Fuellmich, Mark Trozzi, Jordan Peterson, but there's a lot more. (3:39 - 4:23) But because I've been reporting this for a long time, and you as a lawyer, you've been watching a lot of this happening, even, you know, representing some of these people. The question I have to ask is, how hard was it to filter the list down? Because there's so many examples. Well, so there's a lot of really important voices across the planet. And I wanted to take a cross section of people of different professions and different occupations. And because I have a thesis, you know, within the book that we are all linked, and that this is a linked system. And so while we have different occupations, different countries, different professions, they all have the same speech exactitude. (4:24 - 5:12) And they all have the new speech committees. And I thought to myself, what are the probabilities? What is the probability of that being a coincidence? And I started to really formulate my thesis system. So I really wanted to pull together examples from around the planet. And there's so many people that are silenced through this system. And they didn't, they just gave up their license, they gave up their right to earn a living. So beyond even the ones that we know, I think there's many, many more that are out there. It was definitely hard to do. Yes. And as you say, you've got this thesis that it's all linked. (5:13 - 9:57) And I think where that leads us to with the first question, and as I discussed with Lisa prior to the interview, that rather than focusing too much on the individual examples, go read the book, because it's a very good book, and you'll learn a lot from it. We want to talk about the concepts of the conclusions that come from that. And one of the things that you talked about in the book, and it's a term I hadn't heard used before, but it's a very, very good term, regulated subjects, that all of this is about turning the entire human population into regulated subjects, which is, I think it's a subtly different way of looking at it from say, communism, which in a way it is. But the regulated subjects concept, it often gives people the illusion of freedom. Because there isn't armed guards on the corners with machine guns, but it doesn't matter, because they're being regulated all the same. So I came up with that terminology of regulated subjects. And I wanted to come up with a concept that allowed people to envision the fact that we are being suspended from our rights and our citizenship in nations. So it's a hard concept for people to understand that in these professional bodies that regulate us, that it's actually an attack on the nation state. And it's an attack on our civil liberties. And so I wanted us to understand that every manner in which to earn a living is being collected. And whether occupation, you know, there's new regulated bodies for things that never were regulated 10 years ago, five years ago, even two years ago. And then within that, then comes the speech committees, and the ability to take that individual and, you know, what I call put them in social and economic apartheid. And so it delivers the way to run us through social credit, run us, and I have concepts in there about AI, and we can or cannot talk about that, depending on whether you want to, and then tie that all together. And so it makes us a global citizen. And these bodies are collected globally. And while you might have a bright light, you know, Jordan Peterson here, or Dr. Trozzi over there, or, you know, Dr. Willoughby over here. That is how I started to see that this was a global connected system. And the regulated subject is us. And so we get permanently denuded of our civil liberties, and our human rights through this system. And so that's a big concept. We go from being a national citizen to a regulated subject, regulated to a purpose. Right. And you made a really good comment there, you talked about how the globalist forces behind this are collecting all the various ways of making a living. And if you look at this regulated subjects concept, the proof is right there, because where were they most regulated? In the public sector, government jobs. And then from there, it went to corporations. And then the last ones were those who were self-employed, and they still had a fair bit of freedom, except of course, they're trying to bring along censorship laws to take care of that. So yes, you're absolutely showing this regulated subjects concept, where what they want to do is to leave people with this illusion that they're free. Oh, but you're not, because everything is being regulated. And that brings me to something else you talked about that really turned on another light for me. We've all been concerned about social credit scores, CBDCs, digital IDs, social credit scores. And yet in a way, the social credit score is already there. And it's a perversion of what has in a way in the past kept our societies running. When let's say 20 years ago, somebody started talking about intergenerational sex, which of course is their word for pedophilia, that person would have been censored by society, because the society would recognize what you're talking about is extremely damaging to our society. But what they've done now is they've turned that around. And under DI and SOGI and the trans agenda and all of that, they said, well, these people are being marginalized and criticizing them is detrimental. And if you do that, it's not just that the regulatory bodies are going to come after you. (9:58 - 11:58) A lot of society is going to censor you for saying those things. And so really, there's a social credit system in place already. What I found, okay, so there's lots of big concepts here. So the social credit system has to do with the type of speech that is being regulated. So there's a lot of really offensive things that can go on the internet, on social media and in personal interactions. However, when you look at what speech is actually censored, then you understand, and I push forth the concept in the book, that the speech that is censored hides, in effect, a pillar of the globalist state. So then the other thing, when you want to pull back and look at the higher level concepts, is that it's not the topic itself that's barred, right? So I go through and I look, the book has four domains, which is medical, you know, medical freedom in our community, the freedom community is very well aware of the medical freedom fight, but perhaps not in the way that I couch it. Two, legal, political, and, you know, legislative, MPs, even Lisa Robinson's councillors, then the gender and woke ideology. And finally, I conclude with the emergency powers. And this book touches all four. And within, if you looked at medical, it's not so much that you can't talk about vaccines, or you can't talk about big disease, as I call it, I call it big disease, or even in climate, you know, the CO2 agenda. I only mentioned that briefly, because that's the topic of my next book. (11:59 - 12:54) But it's the side of the topic. So you can talk all day long and not be censored on that topic. But it's the position that you take, right? And so that's, you know, that's a concept that you have to really understand throughout all this is pro-nation state conversations. So pro-nation state lawyers, pro-nation state politicians, you know, that cued me off was looking at the Jordan Peterson case, and the idea that one of his censored tweets was retweeting Pierre Poilievre's tweet. And I thought to myself, what should be more protected than your political speech? So if you are have a pro-globalist position, then you can have political speech.