(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 DEI 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 - 13:32) 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. But the political speech that is deemed dangerous is the pro-nation state. And it took me a really long time to write the book and formulate that this is the court system that will replace our courts. It is. And in very short order, if we do not push back, they make the courts redundant. And I can park that and go into that aspect of it. So I looked and I thought, what am I seeing? I am seeing that it's not the topics that we can't talk about. It's our positions on those topics. (13:33 - 19:29) And they're very specific things. Right. And then if you looked at the woke ideology and the gender ideology, and I'd like to park that and and go into it separately, because it is a very deep area to go into. And I think we should in this conversation. But again, it's not the topic itself. So within there, you know, like abortion, you can talk about abortion. You just can't have a pro-life viewpoint. Those viewpoints are punished. And so I kept collating and collating these ideas. And it was, you know, Jordan Peterson's case again, I'll go back to it. I, you know, wasn't so much what, what the decisions of the courts were, that was most interesting to me. It was the type of speech. And it was secondarily, who could be the complainant. And so the complainant was an activist complainant, not known to the practicing, the person who's an occupant, has an occupation or a profession. And that follows all the way you have activist complainants. And I did find out from a lawyer, Sue Gray, who's in the book, that she found out that the activist complainants through an FOI, she found out they were aptly funded. So it's a whole system where the censorship is gamed, government or USAID type funds, fund the activist complainant, fund the speech committee, and then go and root out the anti-globalist speech throughout society. So that was, you know, a big, I rewrote the book three times, because I was determining at a very high level, because that's where I like to operate, what the evidence shows. And so this is what it shows. It shows that this is a system that's globalist. So yeah, I had to rewrite the book, I think three times just to discover what it was that I was looking at. And I did look at, I did discover that it was the same side of a topic of speech. And so then I would investigate the topic. And I would find that indeed, I could prove that it was a globalist topic, that it was part of our future globalist state. So this system does so many things, right? Everybody thinks it's just, oh, I'm going to do my lunch and learns, I'm going to, you know, do my DEI courses and send them massive amounts of money. So this system does so many things. One, it's our future court system. It will govern us through social credit, right? It takes the topics that, the sides of topics that are pro-globalist, and it hides you the directionality of where our society is going. So then I followed through on where our society goes. And I do put that in the book and in every area, whether it's medical, right? Whether it's legal and political, whether it's, you know, the woke ideology and the emergency powers. And I want you to go to the book and if you have specific areas, go to the, that you're interested in, go and find out about that. So I found that it was topic oriented, the topics hid the directionality of our society, right? And then it creates this false impression because we are pack animals, essentially. And it creates this false impression of where the pack is. Because if people don't understand the silencing system, it creates a perpetual social and financial apartheid for those who dare speak, right? So it collects us in a social credit system. It creates a world court. This is a globalist world court. This is nothing, nothing about be turning out great professions, right? The complainants are activists. They are part of this system. And so once I discovered that there was globalist speech, it was easy for me to formulate the new idea that this is a global totalitarian regime that if you want your nation state to survive, must be taken down. There's no ifs, ands, or buts. The speech committees and our regulated bodies must come down. And I can give you an example of how it really affects the legal profession. I'm a lawyer of 25 years. I have a Bachelor of Science in Environmental Science with a minor in Chemistry. I have a Bachelor of Laws and a Master of Laws in Conflict of Interest. And, but I'm a very big at the top thinker. And it maybe has to do with being dyslexic. But imagine... Wait, hang on a second. I gotta, I gotta jump in on that one, Lisa. You wrote an almost 500 page book and you're dyslexic? I didn't know that about you. Yeah. (19:30 - 22:13) That must have been a challenge. It was. It is. It is. It is. It doesn't matter to me to have challenges though. The more fatigued I am, the more difficult it is for me. And otherwise, this is how I think of dyslexia. Okay. I think of dyslexia as a storage device. It's how we store information. It has nothing to do with reading or writing. You, that's how people, you know, put it together in terms of this is, this is your, your problematic issue. You have dyslexia, you have difficulty reading or writing. I actually think it is a storage device. So reading rules, for instance, tell you go left to right, right? And that's just a rule. People with dyslexia don't apply rules. So it has, how I store information doesn't have the same rules. It's not going to be stored with how people tell me to store it. It's not going to be stored how it's presented to me. A dyslexic person, and my theory is on this, is that they store information and see information and connect it in ways that the rest of the world doesn't who aren't dyslexic necessarily. And so they'll see, bright lights will flash in my head sort of, and that's a metaphor when concepts are being pulled together that are from a lot of different sources and that seem on, on connected. So I think is a, is a talent, is a gift. And to the extent that people don't like where my comments are sometimes, and I paid for an editor. But no, I think it's a gift and I think it's what makes me, me. And I really don't think it was something that hurt this book. I think it probably hurt the eyes of my editor for a little bit. But I think it allows me to bring things together. So like, for instance, I start out the book and I have a quote from President Xi who had wanted to have a world court system that could bring forth somebody, of course, and he's Mr. Social Credit and, you know, he's Mr. CBDC, a world court system where they could charge anybody anywhere. And this is the system he created. Or this is the system of that creation. You know, whether he's the source of it or not, that's up to you to, to consider. But there, we'll park that. (22:14 - 33:37) So Lisa, I'm sorry, I interrupted you with my amazement at the fact that you can write such a book when you're dyslexic. So thank you for that explanation. But where we were at was you were talking about your 25 year career as a lawyer, your degrees, and how this makes you a high level thinker. And so we were talking about those, those sort of mind wear concepts within that framework. Yeah. And so I wrote the book. Oh, and I kept scrapping it and going back and scrapping it and going back. And I kept collecting the titans, but I wanted to see what were the messages that were coming out of it. And so I've told you the speech program, and I want to tell you how it affects lawyers. And so imagine you can side, use a speech committee, right, with the Law Society of Ontario or Bill 21 in, in BC that has the ability to remove from practice all lawyers who would defend anybody or prosecute the government for overreaches of power on any of the issues that we've highlighted, right? So any of the pillars of the global estate. And in so doing, this rogue power that is just an administrative body that is not part of our constitution has succeeded in checking out all the lawyers. Then that means the perfection of the constitution, which is the administrative or sort of the executive, the legislative and the judiciary, no longer works because there's no longer anybody to file the cases, right? To file the cases for executive, administrative, legislative overreach. That is not an accident. When you park this issue and you make speech that lawyers have, and that was, that's what I came up with in my mind. I said, if this system, if this system attacks lawyers, we're hooped. If this system have attacks lawyers, we're hooped because everything will look the same. You'll have the courts, right? But no one's filing the cases. It makes them completely redundant. It's attacked the constitution, right? So we have this high level concept that we have no longer a constitutional perfection. We've changed the society that we've lived in. So I don't want to park that on the communism. And I'm going to jump in with something, if you don't mind, just in support of everything you've just said, because as you say, if they attack the lawyers, now we're really screwed. And I'm sure you're aware of the case here in Alberta with Roger Song, who's a lawyer here. He grew up in China under that kind of totalitarian regime, and he is currently suing the Alberta Law Society for their DEI policies, which, I mean, first of all, he's suing them because it's unconstitutional to try to program people with that kind of stuff, because it's an attack on freedom of speech. But the thing is, it's working, because the statistics show that 87% of the lawyers that are coming out of the law schools now actually buy into this crap. And so you're right, they're programming these people. This mind war is starting at the top with the lawyers, with the law societies. And you also mentioned Bill 21 in BC, which is putting the same thing to the medical industry there, putting it under this totalitarian regime. You're right, they're attacking it from the top down and putting in place these structures to control speech, especially for those who could use it effectively. So imagine, I thought, well, what if you couldn't make arguments in court? What if you couldn't make certain arguments? What if you couldn't file certain types of pleadings? What if you couldn't sue the government for a government overreach? What if you couldn't bring those constitutional cases? Because the types of lawyers that bring those cases are being checked. And I can tell you, if you want to read a good example, it's Sue Gray, where her representation of a COVID plaintiff got her really in hot water. And so I'll tell people, just please go to the book and go to the area that you're most interested in. And then the Bill 21 in BC is a bill that changes how many benchers are elected as a self-regulated profession. And it takes a self-regulated profession and puts it under a statute, i.e. the government, and the government itself puts on more benchers, right? I said earlier, Bill 36 is what I was thinking of. Thank you for pointing that out. So Bill 21, it creates the idea, and I can tell you this, that in my first SARS case, I had the Ministry of Labor investigating the Ministry of Environment, and the Ministry of Labor for Occupational Health and Safety to decide whether or not there was a problem, or sorry, not Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Health, decide whether the Ministry of Health should be sued. And I thought, what a conflict of interest that is. And I have a master's in conflict of interest. Now, imagine that your regulatory body is the government, right? And this is essentially what I am telling you, is whether they put it in a statute or not, the speech committees make it a globalist government. The speech committees in our regulatory and occupational bodies are a global government. And I want to park another idea out there, because this book is about ideas. I do put all the stories in there, but this book, all the ways to earn a living that are independent, that you cannot collect them into a regulatory body, end up being attacked. So, we saw the total attack on small businesses in COVID. And that was like, go to a small business to buy groceries or to buy things that you need, and maybe you're in the store with four or five people. Go to a big box store, and you're in a store with like 300 to 500 people, who knows, and how many go through during the day. So, it wasn't about public health. It was about that attack on small businesses, right? And of course, financial systems are easily gamed globalist, because it's all through central banks, right? And so, this wasn't in the book, but Carney was a member of the group of 30. And I put that, oh, look at, look what happened. Start talking about Carney and my internet connection went unstable there. And they have the C2 concepts that don't get my internet slowed down. So, what I started to see is that, what if, what if I thought in my head, what if they started attacking lawyers? And then I saw that through the PAC committees in the LSO. And I saw that through Bill 21. And I saw that through a lot of US lawyers. In fact, you know, the Trump lawyers, the example that I found, and it's the Trump lawyers, right? And they were all disbarred, and even had massive findings against them, fees of an enormous amount, you know, hundreds of thousands levied against them. And so, I thought to myself, well, that's because they, they were, you know, causing an insurrection or allegedly so. And I thought to myself, what could be less of an insurrection than going to court with pleadings? And asking the court to decide and giving the case over to a judge? What could be less of an insurrection than that? And nevertheless, they were all disbarred. And it goes to show you now, Trump is a pro-nationalist candidate. And, you know, Biden or whoever he was, whoever was running that regime, was a pro-globalist candidate. And you could just look at my chapter on USAID, you know, to decide for yourself. But I thought to myself, well, it's not an insurrection to ask the court to decide whether or not, you know, some, there's been some violations of elections. And then the next thing that you have to think about is nothing could be more important than who's in power. And that's why there's so many legislations that deal with election issues. It's one of the most regulated areas. And so certainly, there's all kinds of statutes. So why can't they ask for that relief? And I thought they're checking out the lawyers. They're checking out the lawyers. And I have other examples of lawyers and MPs and city councillors. You know, you think that you can beat the globalists in the ballot box. But now I show you in this book, you cannot, because the speech committees apply to your local town councillor, right? So if you bring a motion that is highly popular in your city, town, area, right, or you're elected as a global, as a pro-nation state, or, you know, I don't want rainbows and pillow symbols all over the banks and schools and hanging from every orifice, buildings orifice out there, then ye, that individual is going to go through a hearing for their speech within council. So council speech itself becomes something that cannot happen so that they take away your political speech. So you, you can't, they get rid of the candidate. Lisa Robinson, I think she had eight months or maybe more of not being paid, plus the law fair. (33:37 - 41:54) Total nine grand total. Yes. Nine grand. There was one three months and another back to back three months for a total of six or nine months when yes, they, they doctor paid because they didn't like what she was saying in the council chambers. In the council chambers, right? So it's no. So again, this system must be taken down or the votes don't matter, right? You don't get to choose your candidate. This system only presents candidates going forward that believe them. So it sounds like a very boring topic, you know, oh, you're, oh, your regulatory body, that regulatory body is the global court system. That regulatory body is going to use social credit and CBDC. That regulatory body has, you know, neutered lawyers and then neutered the rule of law and then taken down the constitution and made courts irrelevant for, for the constitution. That system, nobody's put this all together ever. That system takes down political speech. That system gets rid of any pro-nation state candidate. And so it doesn't matter that Trump won if he doesn't take up this book and start pushing that this system is taking down the entire world's government that is in opposition to the global estate. And then I reveal in the book, where are we going with this global estate directly using this system? Right. Now you, you began that, that whole speech that you just gave by talking about, there's a lot to unpack here and you're absolutely right, Lisa, there is so much to all of this. And folks, I know Lisa and I are talking about some very high level concepts, but stick with us, because if you can get your mind around these, it's not just a key to understanding everything that's being done right now. It explains everything. All these things that seem in some ways to not be connected, shows that they are connected, but it also tells you what they're going to do when you understand the mindset of what they're up to. And you made a really interesting comment there. You talked about when you first started talking about lawyers, you said, well, what if there were questions you just couldn't ask in court, but you're well aware that in Canada, there are questions you can't ask in court. For the last five years, go into a courtroom and try questioning the COVID narrative or the claim that vaccines are safe and effective. And what will the court do to say, well, we're taking that on judicial notice because the government says it is, because health Canada says it is. And we're not even going to investigate that. And so you're right. What's happened here is we have these regulatory bodies, the government, whatever you want to call it, it doesn't matter what label you put on it. And they've already, to a large extent, captured the courts to the extent that there's very important questions you can't ask. So it doesn't matter if you've got lawyers who are willing to stand up for people's rights, they're not allowed to ask those questions. The lawyers are systematically, I've spoken to the lawyers that bring these cases, they're systematically being punished. In some instances in Obertur, courts are making attacks on the lawyer that have nothing to do with the case that aren't even necessarily shown that there's evidence to make these Obertur attacks. So listen, people don't understand the silence. People don't understand why the professions haven't stood. And they need to read this book to understand, because they're being systematically called. And once you see your peer get called for, like Sue Gray, in her instance, she's getting attacked for her pleading speech, right? The Trump lawyers were all attacked for their, you know, election speech in pleadings for their work inside pleadings. That's a very dangerous thing, right? Because then you check out all those voices. And then, of course, the media has a role. And in every instance, I bring the counterpoints that the media don't cover. The media come out like rabid, vicious dogs, anti-vax doctor, blah, blah, blah, blah, anti-vax doctor, blah, blah, blah, blah. And then to really understand how that has an effect on us, you're going to have to look at mind war and menticide within the book, because there are very high level concepts that I review and break down what's happening to society and why they want to do this. But the media has a role. So you have this coordinated system. Let's review what we've learned. It's global. It's not the topic. It's the side of the speech. The speech that's hidden is always something that is a pillar of globalist state. Read the book to find out where that globalist state takes us under those speech. It has election interference. It takes out our political class that are pro-nation state, pro-civil liberties, right? It takes out our lawyers and thus neuters our courts. It becomes the judicial court system of the globalist state. And as it collects us, we become regulated subjects. And even the worst vision of it is for the UBI. I remember when I think it was in the Ontario election, the NDP's platform literally was, we'll have universal basic income so you can afford your groceries. And I'm like, so your actual platform is that your vote for us, you're so stinking poor under us that you can't afford your groceries. I thought to myself, where's this UBI coming from? And I have within the book the means to rat out your fellow citizens. So if you're not a regulated subject, your speech will nevertheless, and I give great examples in Africa, it will nevertheless be captured. And it's always towards elections. You can't be pro-nation state. You can't be pro-things like civil liberties and free speech. And you have to be a pro-globalist to be able to be put forward. So we're seeing things in our society that they go, oh, I can't understand it. You know, the empire's collapsing. It's a systematic attack. No, we have a subversion whose tentacles make us all regulated subjects and it must come down. It must come down. And, you know, to the doctors out there, you're going to have to lean in because you're being replaced wholesale by AI. Yes. So there's a concept here that you've just sort of painted the broad spectrum picture for. And I think we need to go down that rabbit hole, Lisa, because it's an example, a specific example from your book that between the two of us, in the next few minutes, we're going to draw connection lines for people here that they may not otherwise have seen. Because you were talking, we started out talking about things you can't say in court and how they're capturing the lawyers. And then, you know, we talked about within certain professions, things that you can't say. And earlier on, we were talking about, I use the term censoring, censoring to censor, to isolate someone, to eject them from the herd or from their profession, as opposed to censoring, which is, you know, silencing them. (41:55 - 42:32) So they are censored for speaking out, for saying those things, which yes, are against the globalist movement. And we're going to take an example from your book here to paint a picture that's going to, as I said, going to connect some dots. Let's talk very briefly about that gentleman. I'm sorry, I can't remember his name. Tommy Robinson. No, I don't think it was him. The guy who got in trouble for calling one of his colleagues a fat lesbian. Okay, right. But what happened to the guy for that? Okay, so Alain Bonnet is in the book, and he's a journalist. (42:33 - 44:18) And I started out right away saying, well, you know, he's had some difficult views for society on the Holocaust. He was painted as a Holocaust denier. I don't know. I didn't investigate that. And I should tell you that there are some speech legislations that are out there that minimize the Holocaust, put you in jail. But, or they say that's anti-Semitism. And the interesting part is it's comparisons to Germany in that era that actually are called minimizing the Holocaust. So if you make examples that the COVID era with the QR codes were like, you know, Germany, then that's minimizing the Holocaust and you can be labeled anti-Semitic. So I gave some examples of that. And that's, you know, personally a weaponization of the Holocaust. But let's go back to Alain Bonnet. He called a fellow journalist a fat lesbian. Now, I never, I looked for a picture to figure out was she plus size or not. And so, so he, you know, this is, this is criminalized and she was self-avowed a lesbian. So was it the, you know, shouldn't you be able to call her a lesbian? But he wasn't able to call her a lesbian when he added the term fat to her. (44:18 - 48:07) So, you know, here's this, this idea is, you know, every gay bisexual person is beautiful and thin and redeemable in every way. And every other version of it sends you off to jail. And, you know, I hired a gay man as my first associate and we're, you know, still very close. And I had a roommate who was gay, who lived with me, who's, you know, still a friend. You know, I have married cousins. I, you know, I didn't think the movement was going to go in this direction, but in any event, it has gone in this direction. And I know I don't want to, I want people to go to the book. I want people to buy the book. But so it's an attack on truth. You can't say, it's not the topic. You know, you can talk about gay things a lot. In fact, I put out that there are now in Canada, something like 260 days out of 365 that are recognized as trans identified or LGB days within the, within our calendar year. So that, you know, we can talk about gay a lot, but never from a criticizing perspective. And so that's really, really interesting. And so you have this personal dynamic that, you know, he should have called her a beautiful lesbian, a beautiful thin lesbian, and then gone on to critique her work, which is what he did. And they were at each other's throats and they had, and I think she was pro-globalist and I think he wasn't. So there he lost his free speech. And I thought to myself, you know, the left used to own free speech, right? And so we're losing it. And I want people to really, really understand this, that governments in all of history only have two ways to govern their subjects through force and violence or through dialogue. So no, the system must come down. All of it, all around the world. It is a threat to every citizen. Every citizen becomes a regulated subject. They lose in perpetuity their ability to discuss. And I, you know, to the trans, to the gay, to everybody who's pro-vax, to everybody who's a Democrat and who wants to key cars or whatever else it is. But, of course, I think that's activism that's paid, of course. To the media, it is not the topic, right? Or the speech that you agree with that you should be, you know, championing. You should be looking at the system of power that is being erected. It is so thorough. It will eventually cross everyone's toes. Yes. It doesn't matter what side of, you know, we're pitted against each other, you know, friends, family, we're pitted against each other in every way, pro-vax, anti-vax, right? And it's always anti-globalist individual who's demonized, right? You're a transphobe, right? Right. You're whatever the labels are. But if we do not take this system down, we are leaving our children and grandchildren to be governed in perpetuity through a cruel social credit. And I take people where we're going. Please come to the book and help support my work. (48:08 - 51:01) Yes. And folks do. This is, I read a lot of books. I interview a lot of authors. And this book, more than any that I've read, is going to paint the broad strokes for you of understanding everything that's going on right now. It's a very important book. And I'm going to make some comments here, folks, because I said we're going to connect some dots, Lisa and I. So, Lisa, I'm going to give a little rant here, and I'm going to ask for your comments on it. So, Elaine Bonnett, who called this woman a fat lesbian, was sentenced to 60 days in jail for that. Yes. Now, let's make some points. And you made the very good point that she's a self-acclaimed lesbian. So, okay, so she's a lesbian. So what? Even those of us on the right don't particularly care if she's a lesbian or not. Doesn't matter. But he gets 60 days in prison for calling her a fat lesbian. And the fat is important, and I'm going to get to that in a minute. But imagine for a second, if she, and I don't know this guy, maybe he's overweight. Let's say he is, just for the sake of argument. And let's say she called him a fat white colonialist. Nothing would happen. Correct. Right? Nothing would happen. But he calls her a fat lesbian, he goes to jail for 60 days. Now, this is something that it's really hard for us to get our heads around, especially those of us who are the older generation. I mean, I'm 60 years old. I certainly did not grow up in a country where that kind of thing would even have been. That would have been a joke in a bar to talk about something like that. That's just not going to happen. You're in your mind. You send somebody to jail for 60 days for calling somebody a fat lesbian. All right. So now we're going to start to connect some dots because we've been talking about this whole globalist structure of centralization of power versus pro-nationalism, which is really just decentralization. And we're also within the context of this whole framework, we're talking about your book and how we've got these regulatory bodies who are turning us all into regulated subjects. And what is that? But another centralization of power. And then you talk about the mind war, which is a psychological war to prepare people for a conflict. And so let's put all of this together, folks. So we've had for years now, the popularization of the trans movement, which really started back in the mid 2000s or early 2005, 2006, which is when it really started to take off. And if you want to know a lot more about that, watch my recent interview with Dr. Miriam Grossman. All right. So we get that. And this priming people's minds to dilute this concept of our identity as male and female. And that's where this guy got into trouble. Because one, he pointed out that she's a lesbian, which is, it's not really a problem, but it's antithetical to our ideas that we're men and women, that there's only it's part of the whole trans agenda. We are male and female. There's only two genders. (51:01 - 51:34) They don't like that. He's attacking her fluidity. And then he's attacking her weight. Now, why do they want that? Well, because for years now, started this, started out again 20 years ago with fat models. And I personally, I don't, I'm a fitness nut, but I don't go around denigrating people who are overweight. Everybody has their struggles. I get that. But I've always said, those pictures of fat models, overweight models, they should have the same kind of disclaimers on them that cigarettes do. They should say, obesity is bad for your health. (51:34 - 57:25) I mean, let's be honest with people instead of glorifying it. But they like that. They want people to be doing that because that's the way you end up if you eat the manufactured foods diet that they want to put everybody on, which is another form of control. And so when you put all these concepts together, the mind war, the decentralization of power, the regulatory bodies, suddenly it makes sense that this man, Alain Bonnet, goes to prison for 60 days just because he called a colleague a fat lesbian. Because that's an attack, right? And right back to what you said before, it's okay to talk about these things. It's how you talk about them. It's what you say. And if what you say attacks their structure, their agenda, they will come after you. So yeah, there's two really important chapters in there, menticide and mind war. And a mind war, once I figured out we were in a mind war, I want to tell you what it means. It means a kinetic war follows. Okay, so the concept behind this paper, mind war, which is found in the army, and it I think was 1995 or before, is when the US Army was going to invade someplace. They wanted to have people stand down before they entered. They wanted in people's minds to have given up, given up. Oh, I can't do anything. Oh, you know, it's all rigged. I can't do anything. Here, I'm giving you one thing, take down these committees. So they want total control and total and the opponent to be totally subjugated, right? So they want complete capitulation before the first tank runs in, right? And that's why you look at some of the hot wars. And we can go into that because that's more of a, it's not in the book, but I could could write in that area too. They before they put a boot on the ground, a tank, they want to have completely subjugated their people. So once, and you got to go to the book, once a mind war starts, the most important thing that I knew is that a kinetic war follows, right? Yes. I want to give support to what you've just said. For those of you who doubt that a kinetic war is coming, see my very recent interview with economist Martin Armstrong, where he explains everything that's happening in Europe and Asia right now. And when you see that interview, when you hear what he says, you will understand there is a war coming there between the European Union and Russia, and Russia will be joined by China. It's going to turn into World War III and it is inevitable. So you're absolutely right. War, real kinetic war is coming. So then we look at some of the different types of concepts that are, you know, attacking our foundation. And if every, I think you have to go to a different chapter, which is the population activities chapter. And that chapter deals with the concepts of, well, population is getting out of control. And since 1950, you know, the UN has funded population activities. And I want you to think, well, population activities is simply reducing births or increasing deaths. And I put some important concepts within there. I know, you know, I want you to go to the book. I want you to buy the book. And I don't want you to say, oh my God, it's almost 500 pages. I want you to say, hey, I'm curious about this concept. I'm curious about that concept. But where have we seen sterilization of minors, right? Where opposition to it is criminalized right now in Canada, it's criminalized right now in Canada. If you're a parent who doesn't affirm their child, then what happens is you go to jail for conversion therapy. Okay. They criminalized it. And how about abortion? Right? I give examples of nurses, or maybe it was midwives as well, who spoke out against abortion, and they were taken down by their speech committee or regulatory body. How about Christians? Why are Christians persecuted all around the world? Right? Why are 436 churches burned in Canada? 436 churches were attacked. (57:25 - 57:45) And that was some time ago, and that was pursuant to a parliamentary question. And the liberals had to write back on that. Whenever, you know, we have a Christian, Catholic, Mark Carney, he's a knight of Malta. (57:47 - 58:03) You know, yet there's complete silence on that. Why are Christians attacked? That's revealed in this book. And I don't want to discuss all, you know, I don't want to tell everybody why. (58:03 - 1:05:07) I want people to want to go to the next level and read the book. And it's an important question, because I mean, I know you're a Christian, and you know I'm not. I refer to myself as a respectful atheist. I respect the beliefs of others. And even I have said, the primary problem we have right now is that our society has lost its Judeo-Christian values. And so the answer to your question, folks, it's in the book. Why are they attacking the Christian churches? Why are they attacking Christians? Even if you're not Christian, it matters, because there's a very good reason why they're doing it. Yeah, and I have a lot of stuff in there that I want people to say, I'm now excited enough about this book that I want to go and take a look at it. And guys, I don't have a publisher. I only have the Freedom Movement to bolster this effort of mine to, and so, Will, thank you so much for, you know, deciding to do this interview, because I know what it means to read, read my book. Yeah, and it's in like a few days. So it's just really, really tremendous. Is there a couple? Oh, how about DEI? Did you want me to? Yes. Oh, stick with us for a few more minutes. And one thing I have to say about Lisa's book is we could do a four part, four hours of interviews on this book, but really read the book. But yes, I think one more thing we should talk about before we close this out is how the DEI fits into it all. Right. So, I mean, have you noticed that words are wordplay often in globalism, right? Have you? Like, I look at the who, but they're actually what I call the how. And when I look at TEHDAS, which is T-E-H-D-A-S, which is an acronym for something, it comes out to deaths, right? Mass deaths, right? Everything, you know, you take the words, I say COVID, it doesn't mean COVID, it means coronavirus identification, right? And 19 in the book, I say, is the first letter and the ninth letter, which are A-I. COVID identification, coronavirus identification by AI, right? And so they have all these play on words. And I looked at DEI in that way. And, you know, a lot of people will say, well, DEI is God, right? Deus. And so there's a lot of attack on Christian views. And Christian views being attacked, it's a sign of the occult, right? So if you morph a Christian symbol, like you, you make the cross rounded, or you put it upside down, it's a system of the occult. Well, the same thing with the words. So if you don't know Christianity, you know, the 10 commandments, perhaps out of the Old Testament, but during Advent, you have four commandments of sorts, right? Which is joy, love, faith, and hope. What does Obama take hope? Right? What did Harris try to take? Joy. And what did Biden take? Well, love as in affirmation, right? Affirmation means sterilization, right? And you have to really go to a certain chapter for that. You have to go into the woke ideology section for that. So I looked at diversity, equity, inclusion. And again, I do this because I think this is my dyslexic talent is that I see things and store things in a different way. And I capture things and put them in a different way. So first, I looked at equity. And equity for me, obviously, and equity for you is the same result. And of course, I do a lot of work on the smart cities and the C40 cities and the same number of calories, right? The carbon budget is your equity, right? That globalist speed, that's your equity, right? The same number of clothing per person per year, the same number of vaccines, the same number of CO2 that you expel, all of that, right? That's equity. And that's a communism, but it's a gulag, right? Equity is a gulag. And there's fools setting up the system and thinking equity means anything else other than that. And then I looked at inclusion. And so inclusion, you know, if you don't have this pedophile symbol outside your school, you're not inclusive. And why do I say it's a pedophile symbol? And I review this in the book, because a triangle within a triangle within a triangle, which is the side of the trans flag, that is the gay lover symbol pursuant to the FBI. So we've plastered pedophile symbols all across our municipal architecture, our banks, our corporations, you know, in our schools. And you really need to go into my woke ideology section. So inclusion, people think inclusion means, well, we're, you know, we're going to have brown people, we're going to black people, this people, that people, and we're going to have guys with breasts and dicks, and we're going to have lots of purple hair, and we're going to have all these people. What it really is, is inclusion, I found, was the only justification for CBDC. Inclusion means we're all in the net. It's the social credit system that attacks our speech, that prevents us and places us into the regulated subject that puts us in the globalist court, and then governs it by social credit. And we're all governed by CBDC. Inclusion, every single way, when you go back to the bankers, when you go back to the, um, looking at, uh, central bank digital currency, it's because we need to include everybody. Okay, so. There's another small important point I want to add to it, what you've just said. Yes. Because who's not included? Well, white people, but especially white Christians. Let's get that in diversity. Yeah, right. So, but why? Why? Let's get that in diversity. Who are the people most likely to resist the globalist power centralization agenda? That's in the book. So diversity is diverse. (1:05:09 - 1:09:02) Versus in the word of God, right? Kill the word of God, diverse. We think diversity is supposed to be what we have to represent statistically, all of the people that are there, right? This is where you're getting at, who does it not represent? But what the human rights legislations have now done is created a hierarchy in, in, in, in two ways. Yes. So for racial discrimination, only racialized people can be discriminated against. So then the worst systemic discrimination that I've ever seen ever set up, right? Systemic discrimination would be the system, and this is in modern times. There's, there's, you know, when, once society is, is based on complete slavery and oppression, you can, you can come up with worse systems, of course. But in modern times, if you outlaw one race based on tone of skin from accessing the regime that would right the wrong, then that's a systemic discrimination. Now, if you say, and we're seeing this, that you can't say certain verses in the Bible, and I have examples from Finland where an MP, you can't say those verses because it, the biblical concepts on gender, which affect Muslims, which affect Jews, which affects, you know, Christians. And, you know, those are the Abrahamic religions and other religions as well. The biblical concepts, once you cannot articulate the biblical concepts, you have a reason to outlaw the verse, outlaw the verse of God. And so I have examples where praying is outlawed, right? Preaching is outlawed. Quoting Bible is outlawed. And, and I know you're an atheist, and maybe there's a lot of atheists, but I think God is the final conspiracy theory. And I know that the, the, the globalists, they have indicated, because I've studied symbols of the occult a lot, they've indicated who it is that they worship. They believe there's an antichrist, and they've decided that Christians need to go, and you need to read the book to find out why. But diversity has to do with killing the verse of God on the basis of it offending in types of individuals within our society. And I, I thought to myself, I'm going to collect the speech that people can't say. I'm going to collect it, and I'm going to put it out there, and I'm going to say it all. I'm going to say it all so you don't have to. And I'm going to show you the system that needs to come down for us to win. And I'm going to expose them, and I'm going to expose what's coming. And it took me a long time to write the book, and, and its timing is its timing. But I also show in the conclusion that we've set up Stasi units within this system, and they are ready to deploy the minute someone writes the words emergency on a piece of paper. So it's time really to make this book viral. (1:09:03 - 1:11:12) Yes, and as you say, we have to disassemble these regulatory bodies, these agencies of the deep state, because that's the real threat. It's not, as you say, it doesn't matter that much who we've elected to office, because they'll be gone in a few years. But these regulatory bodies, these deep state agencies, they just stick stick around. And that's what the globalists are using to control us all. Yep. Right. All right. Lisa, thank you so much for your time for this interview today. As I've said to the viewers, we could be gone for hours on this. Folks, read the book The World on Mute by Lisa Miron. It is well worth your time to read this book, because when you do, you will really get a handle on everything that's happening, how it's all connected. Lisa, thank you again. I've got a request out there, people. My book is $8 USD on Kindle. You just download the Kindle app. You can just, you know, put it on and read it. And there it is. Yeah. I would ask that you start tagging my Titans. I want them to tag them on. I'm not on X. Tag them on X. Tag them, you know, on their sub stack. Tag them on LinkedIn. Tag them on Facebook and say, this is one of the most important books out there. You're in it. Dig in. Here's the interview with Will. Dig in. And I would really appreciate if you did that. This is a book that should go worldwide, because citizens are facing this worldwide. And every country where we win in taking this down is monumental. So I have examples all around the world of our Titans. They have their followers. We need, you know, the media is not going to help us. Big publishing companies are not going to help us. I can't even post on LinkedIn some reviews that I've gotten. And I've only gotten a few reviews. (1:11:12 - 1:12:00) I can't even post those on LinkedIn. The post won't go. Okay. So I am severely censored because of what this book says. So if you would help me out, regardless of what side you think you are on this speech, right? You think you're, you know, pro-trans, a queer individual. Well, ask yourself this. If trans rights are human rights, ask yourself if you have the human right to free speech. And when you no longer have it, what else are you losing? We all have loved ones that we want to protect. Please take down, help me take down the system. Thank you.