 Welcome to Tiski Sawa. Our show tonight is structured around good guys and bad guys. Bad guys, three of them. Dominic Cummings, Boris Johnson, and Jeffrey Epstein. I don't have a story which connects all three. They're going to be somewhat separate, but interesting stories, nonetheless. Three legends, Bella, Jiji Hadid, and Dua Lipo. They've been smeared in the New York Times for speaking out for Palestine. We are joined by Navarra Media resident legend Ash Sarkar. How are you doing? Am I a good guy or a bad guy? You're legendary, and that can be ambiguous. Okay, like Maleficent. Yeah. No, I think you're a good guy. You're a good guy, honestly. Okay, all right. Cool. Cool. Well, I'm just pleased to be with you. The baddest piece in history. I was all for neutral. Before we go on to our first story, if you're new to our channel, you know what to do, do hit that subscribe button. Since leaving Downing Street, Dominic Cummings has made it his mission to undermine the credibility of his former boss. So far, that's come in the form of briefings to newspapers, including the claim that Boris Johnson pledged to let the bodies pile high in their thousands instead of implementing a third lockdown. It's also come in a blog post where Cummings made allegations about Johnson trying to block a leak inquiry into a friend of his wife and his sourcing of private donors to pay for fancy wallpaper for his Downing Street flat. However, whilst these briefings were difficult, they could all be thoroughly eclipsed by evidence Dominic Cummings will be giving on Wednesday to a Commons Select Committee. It's going to be three hours. He said he's going to say it how it is when it comes to Boris Johnson's handling of coronavirus, especially in those first weeks. Everything is suggesting he's going to be quite candid here. Now, that will be, I'm sure, our headline show for Wednesday's show. What we have for you today, though, is a 55-tweet long mega-fred, which Dominic Cummings has been putting out in preparation. Now, I think this is mainly to kind of plant questions for the MPs. He wants to put some, you know, topics of controversy out there and he's saying, maybe push me on these topics and I'll dish the real dirt. But there's a fair amount of dirt in there anyway. Now, you know Dominic Cummings. He's he's got a big ego. So a lot of this is him trying to vindicate himself. Say, look, the government were the civil service or idiants, Boris Johnson was an idiot, Matt Hancock was an idiot, I was right the whole time. I don't think we should necessarily trust his motivations here, but he does say quite a lot of interesting things and he does give some very interesting evidence, which is the most important thing here. So this 55-tweet long mega-fred, which you can find, I do recommend reading it all. It's nothing if not interesting. Some of the ground it covers, it gives a big defence of lockdowns. So it's sort of a bit of a dig at Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak for resisting a lockdown the second time around, complains about the mediocrity of the civil service, the kind of thing we hear from Dominic Cummings quite a lot and argues the government should be more transparent in parts of the fred. He sounds a bit like me back in March 2020. But the most striking parts of the fred critique the dishonesty of the government when it came to their original herd immunity plan and the gullibility of our mainstream press for believing the lie that they'd never adopted it. Now you'll remember at the start of March the government adopted a herd immunity plan, which was to say there's no point in trying to stop this virus spreading. We're just going to have to let it spread through the population at a manageably slow rate. That's what flattened the curve minutes. And instead of having a very big instant spike, what we'll try and do is flatten the curve over a three month period so that everyone essentially gets COVID, but they get it slow enough that hospitals don't get overwhelmed. They then had a dramatic U-turn when they realized that the general public weren't comfortable with quite that many people dying. So maybe we should do something a bit more extreme than just let it slowly spread through the population. Anyway, the press believed all the science had changed. The U-turn wasn't a real U-turn. It was just that the government are responding to new scientific evidence. Dominic Cummings is saying that's all absolutely bullshit. This is the key tweet when it comes to these claims about herd immunity. So Cummings writes, media generally abysmal on COVID, but even I've been surprised by one thing. How many hacks have parroted Hancock's line that herd immunity wasn't the plan when herd immunity by September was literally the official plan in all docs, graphs, meetings until it was ditched. Yes, the media is often incompetent, but something deeper is at work. Much of SW1 was happy to believe Hancock's bullshit, but it's not the plan. So they didn't have to face the shocking truth most political hacks believe in the system. So very harsh words. He was saying herd immunity was literally the plan when Matt Hancock said it wasn't and then all the the pestons, the Coonsbergs of the world, they all swallowed it. He's saying that's ridiculous. These people were kidding themselves because they wanted to believe in the system and ended up, you know, repeating a lie to the general public. And he goes on to be very damning about morality of number 10 when it comes to this lie. He says number 10 decided to lie herd immunity has never been part of our coronavirus strategy. Very foolish and appalling ethics to lie about it. So that was a quote herd immunity has never been part of our coronavirus strategy. Now the right line would have been what the PM knows is true. Our original plan was wrong. And we changed when we realized so he goes on. Lots of hacks have lost their mind. Herd immunity wasn't a secret strategy. It was the official public explained the official public strategy explained on TV radio. Now Halpern on Sage literally explained it on the radio explicitly on the 11th of March, as did others. Now you remember we showed that clip. I say you remember you might remember we showed that clip back in March 2020. That was when a key member of Sage, he was head of the behavioral unit said essentially what we need to do is let everyone catch this slowly so that we don't get a second peak. Then Matt Hancock said, oh, it wasn't actually the plan. We never had herd immunity as a plan. They actually still say that Dominic Cummings is basically blowing the lid on that. He's saying this is ridiculous. We kind of already knew this, but it's potentially interesting and meaningful that a key top advisor to Boris Johnson is now saying it and is going to come with the receipts even though as I say, many of these receipts were already public. Ash, how significant is this latest chapter in Dominic Cummings going to war with his old boss? Okay, so a lot of the stuff that's being said here was already in the public domain. So we did see Halpern on TV talking about herd immunity. We did read that Robert Peston piece where he was saying that this is the core of the government strategy. Peston, we know, won't put out an opinion piece like that unless he's got senior sources from within the government saying that that is the case. So all this stuff was public knowledge. It's just that there was a very plying media which was actively invested in papering over this abomination that essentially the government calculated that coronavirus would be much like the flu. You would suppress the virus but not eliminate it. And ultimately, that's how we would get through the worst of the pandemic. We know now that that was utterly reckless and it resulted in at least tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths. What's interesting about Cummings is that on one hand, he's got utter disdain for the institutions that he has most relied on for access to power, those being the government, the party political system, but also Westminster lobby media. So he's got utter disdain for these people but ultimately they still quite like him because he provides good entertainment. And because he comes from within Tory party circles though obviously not a Tory party member himself but because he's aligned with the right, he's seen as somehow being more authoritative than someone who is an ideological opponent. And I think that that's why Dominic Cummings even though so far he's not telling us so much that we didn't know already but adding flesh and meat and content to stories that were already out there then that can be dangerous for Boris Johnson because Dominic Cummings is somebody who time and time again has proved that he's very adept at setting the Westminster news agenda and he can really set lobby journalists running like hounds after a hair. Absolutely. I mean the danger as well isn't necessarily just for Boris Johnson because Dominic Cummings is really going for everyone and as I say this is partly I think to say look I was right all along that catastrophe that happened in March when the government looked at Italy where the bodies were starting to pile up where they'd had a lockdown looking at France, looking at actually the whole of Europe where they'd implemented a lockdown and British scientists, British government was still saying no lockdown would be pointless it's it would only be putting it off we'd get a bigger peak in in the winter we're just going to have to take the the tens of thousands of death or hundreds of thousands of deaths in fact. He's saying even though I was the top advisor at that point that was nothing to do with me that was all the other idiots who tried to pursue that strategy. Let's look through some of the idiots he's blaming for us pursuing that strategy obviously as well it's worth noting we abandoned the herd immunity strategy but we did abandon it quite late and one of the big reasons why there were why we had such a bad first wave was because we abandoned the herd immunity strategy so late obviously most of our deaths were in the second and third wave that wasn't a failure of science that was a failure of Boris Johnson but this is focusing in particular on that first wave so he writes in that week it became clear neither Hancock or the cabinet office understood herd immunity effects hundreds of thousands choking to death no NHS for anybody for months dead unburied economic implosion so we moved to plan B suppression Manhattan project for drugs vaccines test and trace etc so plan B is the one he's really associating himself with Manhattan project for drugs vaccines that's exactly what he's really really into. Let's go on to the next one critical as I am of the prime minister in all sorts of ways it's vital to understand the disaster was not just his fault the official plan was disastrously misconceived the department for health and social care and the cabinet office did not understand this or why and a plan B had to be botched amid total and utter chaos so that's the cabinet office the department for health and social care he's really having a go out there Matt Hancock the next person he's got it in for and to be honest I do think you some of this is very much justified is Jenny Harris she's the deputy chief medical officer of her he writes Jenny Harris told us the same week herd immunity was the official plan masks are a bad idea we don't want to disrupt people's lives acting too early we will just pop up with another epidemic peak later so Whitehall has promoted her obviously now I actually think this is a very fair point because of the people who chatted complete nonsense at the start of this pandemic and also you know nonsense in a way where they're like no this don't listen don't listen to the to the naysayers we don't need a lockdown we don't even need to test she said we don't need to test many people because we're not a third world country at one point completely bizarre she has now been promoted to become chief executive of the UK health security agency so that's going to be taking basically overall responsibility for things like future pandemics she's also now head of NHS tested trace so I do think he's got a point there that the people who got everything wrong have been promoted one other thing he provides and I say this is you know some of this is him rewriting history but what will be most interesting to come out of this war of Dominic Cummings against Boris Johnson is the concrete bits of evidence he has because whether or not you trust Dominic Cummings it doesn't matter when it's you know written down and it's a it's a bit of paper that was being discussed at the time now there are a couple of these in his Twitter thread so previously unpublished Cobra documents so Cobra that's the the committee where all the top people in government get together and look at emergencies so some of the the sage minutes have been published not all of the Cobra documents have now the two I'm going to show you are both from the week of the 9th of March and so the first shows you a graph which is very similar actually to one we showed you back in March 2020 but ours was derived from Newsnight because clearly someone at Newsnight had been briefed about this but it wasn't published and what this shows you is how the government back in March were assuming that it would be impossible to suppress the virus and keep it low until vaccines arrived so you can see there the green the green the green line is the early suppression and they say well if you've got early suppression you're clearly going to get this second peak because no one's immune what they were going for is is the red line which is the the flatten the curve strategy more interesting than that is the graph which showed the numbers they were assuming in their original scenario in their original best-case scenario important to remember that and this is let's show you here so you can see here they're modeling how many people will die and they've said in the do nothing scenario so if the government did absolutely nothing half a million people would die 510,000 people would die in the optimal single peak strategy which included case isolation home quarantine so that's only home quarantine when you know when someone in the household has been tested positive and social distancing only for people who are over 70 we would have 259,000 deaths now you remember at the time and this is actually something I went on loads about back in March which is that when the strategy was changed so when we moved away from herd immunity everyone reported oh the reason we've moved away from herd immunity is because there's a new model and there's a new model which suggests that over hundreds of thousands of people could could die if we pursue this strategy what was never made clear is when they decided to go down the herd immunity strategy when Boris Johnson you remember stood at the lexen and said many of your loved ones will die no one ever asked and got to the bottom of what was their original plan how many people did they originally plan would die and that's what Dominic Cummings here is for the first time revealing that the original plan and that doesn't say they didn't want these people to die but the original plan involved 259,000 people dying in the optimal best case scenario so completely bonkers and the science didn't change there what changed is that their plan was to you know go on kind of as normal herd immunity by September 250,000 people will die then what happened was a massive backlash people were like oh I'm not really sure about this whole we all get COVID-19 and then many of our family members die maybe we should you know do something a bit more proactive which was the lockdown which is how you know that policy changed ultimately we were never told that the original plan was that 260,000 people would die when it comes to how the policy changed this is probably the most telling tweet from Cummings Fred I mean it's also the last one we're going to show you from it if you're if you want to look at all 55 you're going to have to go to Twitter because that would take a whole show for us to go through all of them but this is this is a very significant one so Dominic Cummings writes on the 14th of March one of the things being screened at the Prime Minister was quote there is no plan for lockdown and our current official plan will kill at least 250,000 people and destroy the NHS and then he refers to the graph optimal single-piece peak strategy with the free interventions I just I just talked about that's household isolation what was it individual quarantine and then social distancing for the over 70s that was the official plan which was abandoned now as I say none of this is surprising to me this is all stuff that we guessed at the time we sort of knew that you know when there was a there was an imperial model that was sort of published mid-march that said if if we do nothing basically these numbers half a million will die if we do very minimal you know herd immunity strategies 250,000 people will die they said that was new in mid-march this was published early march when it was still the plan and you know none of the journalists at those press conferences managed to get out of Boris Johnson because they didn't actually ask in your original plan how many people were you comfortable with dying and the answer here is 250,000 people in their best case scenario they had 259,000 people dying so you look at our you know the death toll we have in this country 130,000 on you know depending on what method you use to assess it I think on excess deaths it's closer to 150,000 at this point in time that's very bad you know compare that to most other countries in the world very bad especially most other you know wealthy countries in in most other when wealthy countries in the world medium-sized countries in the world very bad it could have been worse if they'd kept to the original plan the original signed off plan would have had 100,000 extra people die which is quite remarkable and I mean his point that this is a complete failure of not just Boris Johnson but also the British establishment in a way you know it was the top scientists the top civil servants the top politicians everyone was saying look these whole lockdowns these are sort of these are kind of an East Asian thing you know these compliant people they might do this but we can't do this you know no one's ever going to stay at home we're just going to have to accept the 250,000 people dying and also we're grown up enough to know that sometimes people die that was the original plan thank god they changed course even though too late and then they fucking didn't learn any lessons by September and January the rest is history but anyway I'm going to get myself in a in a little strop now so Ash I'm going to pass to you it is quite remarkable isn't it how in their original plan 250,000 people are going to die but already their idea of what it meant to have a good pandemic was worse than Italy worse than Spain worse than China worse than countries which are a lot poorer than ours in the global south that was their idea of doing well so this I think hints at the completely delusional nature of British exceptionalism because on the one hand we were gifted by chronology a head start on other countries so we could see what was happening in Italy we could see what was happening in Spain and we saw what happened in China and how they responded to it and our government because of their attachment to these myths of you know British common sense and self-sufficiency absolutely refused to do any of the things that would save lives because they were so wedded to a particular image of national identity and that myth that myth of who we are cost hundreds of thousands of lives and I think that there's this thing of you know what the Britain would have you know the British would never ever you know abide by lockdown one we did and as a country we were remarkably uh you know compliant with lockdown rules and social distancing of course there was some rule breaking and all bending here and there but ultimately there was quite a lot of people sticking to the rules for quite a lot of the time and two what do you mean we're not a compliant society the entire media got together in a conspiracy this was years ago to tell us that Pippa Middleton had a good bum and we as a country believed it what does that tell you if not that we are sheep ready to be herded absolutely anywhere um and I think the third thing that's important to bear in mind is that we need to take Cummings's framing of this story with a hefty pinch of salt because we do also know that there are you know from Sunday Times reporting that there was something called the domicine moment where initially he was keen on herd immunity and then he heard some of the modeling from sage and he was like oh no no that's actually disastrous but what that does imply is that there was a moment where him and the other herd immunity ideologues in the government were of one mind and one purpose so that is something which is being erased in this telling of the story and then the second thing which I think is also being erased is that if you want to talk about the government telling lies barefaced lies to the British public absolutely shamelessly well one of the most absurd instances of that happening was being told that somebody drove to Barnard Castle to test his eyesight they was perfectly entitled knowing that he and his wife had coronavirus to go up to Durham and stay with his parents in a lovely country estate so if we want to talk about the you know dearth of honesty and integrity at the heart of government that was absolutely something that he was up to the bull sack in the whole time he was up to the neck in all of all of this right yeah I mean up to the bull sack isn't even that high you know that's just like it's you know there was a few misdemeanours no he was up to his neck in this as much much higher than the bull sack um so yeah I mean you're absolutely right the guy doesn't have much credibility to be making these arguments which means that what I'll be looking out for on Wednesday which is when he's giving evidence to the MPs is not so much what is Dominic Cummings analysis what is Dominic Cummings opinion when it comes to how Britain dealt with coronavirus because I think he's you know there's a lot of motivated reasoning going on here my analysis is kind of I think probably Dominic Cummings decided about two days earlier than the policy changed that there should be herd immunity he spent 48 48 hours sort of saying no we probably should have a lockdown and found in this strategy and now he sort of expanded that 48 hours into a sort of two month period whereby he always um had had this position and everyone was being an idiot for way way longer than him even though you know it's probably just a couple of days September January potentially a different story I do believe that by then Dominic Cummings probably did want to take COVID more seriously and it was you know especially Boris Johnson who was dragging his feet um so that's actually where I think Boris Johnson as a person is on the weakest ground I want to go to a couple of comments um Mitching Melecho on Meleco with a fiverr says Dom looks rather like Tony Robinson in that photo so that's probably presumably the photo we started the section with usually he looks like a haunted light bulb much love to you both on this windswept Monday night much love to you as well um great analysis of Dominic Cummings appearance um maybe I'll use that on on Wednesday's show in Twitch chat Liam Elaine says if Cummings felt this strongly he would have resigned long ago definitely before negotiating his massive pay rise he's an egomaniac who thinks he's smarter than everyone in reality he's a pound shop Malcolm Tucker a lot of truth in that I have to say I did read his 55 tweet Fred and kind of agreed with basically 90 of it but the issue is yeah the people briefing the press I mean he was he wasn't just any old fly on the wall in Downing Street he was the most powerful advisor in Downing Street we know that you know Boris Johnson wasn't paying much attention throughout this period which means that Dominic Cummings should have basically been you know making most of the decisions and he made them wrong right so I think there was a credibility gap when it comes to Dominic Cummings also for the Barnard Castle reasons and all of that but he's definitely saying some interesting things now and Phil the Red says I'm no mystic Meg but I can pretty much predict the outcome of the public inquiry sorry mistakes were made lessons will be learned um yep I agree that will be the outcome um 100 and they'll get away with it because there's a pandemic who saw it coming and I do think Dominic Cummings point that the person who seemed to be you know obviously you know Boris Johnson was one of the most wrong people but when it comes to the scientific advisors one of the people who seemed to get it most wrong and in the most sort of kind of obnoxiously complacent way where she was all like everyone else is an idiot was Jenny Harris who kept dismissing um anyone who wanted to take extreme or tough action and was completely wrong and now has been put in charge of future pandemics if you're enjoying tonight's stream do hit the like button we've got another bojo story for you this one's a a lighter one at the start of the coronavirus pandemic Boris Johnson was asleep at the wheel as cases were mounting in countries like Italy and France were locking down Boris Johnson had already missed five cobra meetings and a remarkable story in the Sunday Times gives an incredible clue as to why now the article is a preview of Dominic Cummings session with the science and health committee this week and they write officials in the cabinet office are concerned that Cummings will accuse Johnson of missing key meetings on the crisis because he was working on a biography of Shakespeare the money from which he needed to fund his divorce from Marina Wheeler his second wife Johnson missed five emergency meetings at the start of the crisis so this is really really wild now again this is another big we already knew he missed five cobra meetings I'll just say cobra meetings are the most important meetings which brings together the top civil servants the top people from government the top scientific advisors emergency planning essentially now when the COVID pandemic was it was clear a pandemic was coming he missed five meetings asleep at the wheel now to be honest I have to say I've never I just assumed he was kind of lazy you know that he would just sort of didn't fancy getting up in time it turns out according to this briefing that what he was doing was writing a book about Shakespeare biography of Shakespeare to fund a divorce from his second wife ash you did English literature does this make you have any more sympathy for the guy missing five cobra meetings at the start of a coronavirus pandemic is this something you can imagine yourself doing you know no it's breaking out people are dying in china and italy bodies are piling up you're like well there's this chapter on Shakespeare I just really need to get done well I mean to be fair Shakespeare also did all of his best writing during a time of plague but don't think that he was you know in charge of the pandemic response at the time in Renaissance London also there are plenty of biographies of Shakespeare that doesn't need to be another one essentially by a dilettante poshow who knows some florid words but actually has got no critical thinking skills whatsoever so let's just get the literary value of this book out the way it has none what it would be as a cash cow because Boris Johnson is one of you know the biggest names in the world a huge scalp for any publishing house because that book will sell it really will and he sort of made his name by writing these deeply unserious texts his awful novels which are absolutely shot through with anti-Semitism and racism and also just absolutely torturous extended metaphors um you know this is something that he's done he's you know a hack a shit journalist a terrible writer and because of he's been able to rise to prominence by virtue of his class and his connections he will never be out of a job he will never be out of money what is shocking is to prioritize this completely profit-driven move over and above diligence in governing it's shocking because it's hard to believe that anybody any human being who has attained the highest office it's possible to attain in this country would be so deeply cavalier and callous about the lives of the citizens which are entrusted to him I say it's shocking when it's Boris Johnson it's not surprising he's marked himself throughout his career first as a journalist and then subsequently when he entered politics into by this very deep carelessness for the demands of his role when it came to you know the comments made about Nazanine and essentially saying that you know well yes maybe she was there for reasons which are other than the reasons that she had told the Iranian government it was a huge spanner in the works when it came to negotiating her release when he was mayor of London one of his favorite things to do was just absolutely spunk money on these like white elephant projects which would go nowhere meanwhile neglecting the day-to-day demands of running a city like London and addressing the very real and pressing issues of which ordinary people were essentially lumbered with he's lazy he's cavalier he's uncaring he's callous but he won an election by a landslide because ultimately the media got together along with naysayers from within the Labour Party to torpedo the candidacy of somebody who might have done a better job who might have been motivated by values other than greed and self-aggrandisement. Ash, I think you've been a little bit unfair there because what you've done is you've judged Boris Johnson's book before I've read you the blurb which I am about to do. I found quite extraordinary about this story is I didn't know Boris Johnson had written a book about Shakespeare I don't think anyone did but it's been on Amazon for ages it's due to be published on the 31st of March 22 you could see it here 31st of March 2022 it's called Shakespeare the Riddle of Genius and what's amazing I find about this is in the blurb of Boris Johnson they seem kind of embarrassed that he's the prime minister because they don't mention it says from the inimitable mop headed New York Times best-selling British journalist and politician a celebration of the best-known Brit of all time it's almost like they feel like if they mentioned that he was the prime minister during a pandemic it would be kind of embarrassing that they're making money off this presumably not going to be a particularly good book but let's get to the blurb now so this is how it's being sold 400 years after his death William Shakespeare is more popular than ever but why what about Shakespeare has allowed him to stand the test of time with characteristic curiosity verve and wit Boris Johnson sets out to determine whether the Bard is indeed all he's cracked up to be and if so why and how he immerses us in the circumstances in which Shakespeare came of age he explores the endlessly intriguing themes the plays and how they speak to us across the centuries the illicit sex and the power struggles the fratricide and matricide the confused identities and hormonal teenagers the racism jealousy political corruption now ash the reason I think you may be judged this book too quickly is because you know to be honest who is better qualified to write a book about racism political corruption people you know hormonal teenagers people who put out quite a lot without much you know idea of the consequences this is Boris Johnson isn't it but there's the danger of being a literary critic who sees himself in everything that he reads that's not good literary criticism Michael but can I just say because I do have a real annoyance here which is I am you know a Shakespeare nerd I'm a Shakespeare lover and I think that there's all sorts of ways to become interested in his works he was one of the most populist minded writers of his time he knew about bombs on seats getting people into theaters watching these plays so I don't think that you've got to like have a phd in English literature and Renaissance history in order to grapple with Shakespeare however it pisses me off that here is this know-nothing posho who was a failure at Eaton a failure at Oxford and continue to fail his way up through the echelons of power and money and prominence now thinks that he's an expert on Shakespeare because what he's going to write the same flippant kind of essay that he's written a million times which is Shakespeare good bad I don't know but Romeo and Juliet were some randy teenagers weren't they like it really annoys me that there's actually all sorts of really interesting things that you can say and write about Shakespeare from all sorts of different perspectives and instead what we're being you know inflicted what is being inflicted upon us as readers is just this annoying hooray Henry back slapping unserious dilettante take on the bars that pisses me off so this is a double whammy Boris Johnson one you shouldn't have been writing the book in the first place you should have been dealing with the pandemic so we didn't have one of the worst death tolls in the world too if you were going to miss all those cobra meetings at least write something interesting right no real it's a real disappointment on two counts if you are enjoying tonight's show and you think you're going to enjoy the rest of it I'm pretty sure you are please do think about supporting us you can do so by going to navaramedia.com slash support we asked for the equivalent of one hour's wage a month if you are so inclined thank you so much if you are already a supporter you make all of this possible let's go on to our next story this is the goodies section I mean every story has bad isn't good anyway we've got free free good eggs in this one on a previous show we talked about how the Palestinian-American supermodel Bella Hadid was smeared by the state of Israel for supporting Palestinian rights well it's happened again only now Bella is joined by her sister Gigi and the pop star Dua Lipa all have recently made Instagram posts supportive of the Palestinian cause and all appeared in this full page advert in the New York Times so in this advert is a full page spread in the New York Times so you can see Bella Gigi and Dua and they are superimposed over an image of Hamas rockets and the text says Hamas calls for a second holocaust condemn them now then on the right you can see it is quoting some anti-Semitic lines from the Hamas charter so it's saying because they've supported Palestinian cause they now have to condemn Hamas none of them by the way have ever said anything supportive of Hamas never what they have said is being supported the Palestinian cause and now they're being smeared as supporters of Hamas who who have a responsibility to condemn them and not only this you know this isn't just a reply guy on Twitter this is a full page ad in the United States paper of of record from you know the most established newspaper in the world now the ad was placed by the world values network which is run by a right-wing American rabbi and below the image was a lengthy bit of text I'm a real essay there and it includes the complaints the world values network have about what the women have written on social media I'm just going to go to what I think is some of the key bits so they write bella hadid and duet leper even went so far as including the disgusting libel that Israel a country with two million muslim Arab citizens is engaging in ethnic cleansing so this is they're big these people are adjacent to Hamas responsible for anti-Semitism and it's because they had the temerity to accuse Israel of what they call a disgusting libel and that it's engaging in ethnic cleansing now what they were referencing in their instagram posts was the expulsions the evictions in Sheikh Jarrah now these expulsions are kicking out people from their homes who are Palestinian and they're moving in people who are Jewish and that's not a coincidence that's how the law works if you're a Jewish person then you can say oh before 1948 we held this claim to this bit of land and we can essentially override anyone who currently lives there and kick them out the same law doesn't apply for Palestinians so there is a law which is allowing Jews to kick out Palestinians because they're Jews and because they're Palestinians now that is kind of ethnic cleansing isn't it now their point is that oh it can't be ethnic cleansing because there are lots of what he says muslim Arab citizens just the word is Palestinian citizens of Israel because not all Palestinians are muslim but the the point he's saying is unless you're killing everyone it can't be ethnic cleansing now that's not really how the legal definition works so that one falls down another complaint let's go to this one this one is more ridiculous so this is of Bella Hadid and they write she also maligned Israel as apartheid even as it is the only country in world history to airlift Africans into freedom and sets the standard for multiracial coexistence now the airlifting question and is a reference to charter flights in 1991 which took Ethiopian Jews to Israel to escape a civil war it's kind of cool fair play it's somewhat overshadowed by Israel's military support for apartheid South Africa but we don't need to look to history to fact check Bella Hadid's claim that Israel is an apartheid state no we just need to look to reports from human rights watch reports from Israeli human rights organizations such as Betsalem and they argue that because Israel has occupied a people for 54 years because it kicks people out of their homes for not being Jewish and because it controls where Palestinians can and cannot live then the phrase apartheid counts right and he's now no essentially libeling Aaron saying this is ridiculous because they once airlifted people out of Ethiopia very terrible argument still you can pay for it to be full page ad in the New York Times one final quote I'm going to get from this advert and this is the one that I find particularly disgusting so the world values network writes Bella Gigi and Jewer should be aware that six million Jews were annihilated in the Holocaust just 75 years ago and the Hamas genocide or charter openly calls for the murder of Jews is the ongoing vilification of Jews in Israel on social media perhaps the reason we see Jews being beaten up in Times Square now this is a it's a really horrible thing to say anyway to say that someone standing up for Palestinian rights is essentially responsible for anti-Semitic attacks which they have nothing to do with but to say that in a full page ad in the world's most famous established newspaper I think is completely disgusting it's completely disgusting the New York Times allowed this ad to be placed and I mean the whole thing is is gross Ash I want to bring you in on this and particularly I mean I've read the text there but obviously the thing that stands out when you were originally see that advert is the call to condemn Hamas the picture of these three celebrities in front of images of Hamas rockets and I mean it is really disgusting isn't it to say because these people have spoken out in in favor of Palestinian rights and against Israeli you know war crimes essentially they have to condemn this organization they have absolutely nothing to do with so I actually think this ad works on two levels and there's a aspect of plausible deniability to the whole thing so the first level is exactly what you described which is setting up tenuous connections of responsibility and trying to box these three women into a point where they are implored to condemn Hamas despite having never offered words of support for Hamas in the first place and it's trying to set up connections between expressing support for Palestinian humanity for civil rights for Israel to abide by international law connecting it to support of Hamas and then of course to anti-Semitic racist attacks on Jewish people who live in the diaspora whether that is in Times Square or in London all right so that is the first level that this ad is working on but the second when you look at the image and the text placement what it does is invoke the reader to condemn Gigi Bella and Dua now right so when you look at the image it makes this connection between the three women to Hamas and it's almost in conversation with the reader saying condemn these three women now and that's why the image the picture is so prominent and the text is broken up the way that it is because grammatically it has the first meaning you're talking about but the instant impact and the gloss is the second meaning so I think that one of these things that the ad is doing is that is it's a tacit form of incitement and I think that it picks on three women deliberately because it plays on these tropes of women being treacherous of being aligned with terrorism and the jihadist force and it's a way of inviting a particular kind of hatred and backlash which I think is inherently gendered there's a reason why they chose these three women for the image there've been plenty of male celebrities who have spoken out during this period of conflict with the bombardment of Gaza why isn't Mark Ruffalo on there all right he's been a prominent and outspoken voice well it's because I think having three very beautiful very young women plays a certain role of activating I think quite a violent and hateful backlash and because it's intended to be intimidating right so if you can evoke a violent backlash then that's job done because what this ad is intending to do is to disincentivise other celebrities from speaking out and especially other celebrities who who might feel like you know having threats towards them seem more credible you know I imagine if you're someone like Dua Lipa you get a lot more threats than if you're someone like Mark Ruffalo which is why you know the the cause and effect of this ad might be how the people who placed it potentially want it to be I think absolutely what this is is a punishment it's not a debate of political difference right which is entirely legitimate to have I'm at completely a degree with the point of view of this organization it's fun to open up a conversation you're right this is about incitement and about intimidation and about inviting enough of a backlash that three young women in the public eye think twice about speaking out in this way again this isn't the first time this organization's taken out an ad really singling out a young woman in the public eye I think they did the same thing with with Lord we've got that coming up so I'm going to put that on on hold for one moment because they have gone after Lord before before we go on to that advert though I do want to bring up Dua Lipa's response because it was very good I thought so Dua Lipa this was a post you put on her social media accounts I utterly reject the false and appalling allegations that were published today this is the price you pay for defending Palestinian human rights against an Israeli government whose actions in Palestine by human rights watch and the Israeli human rights group Betsalem accused of persecution and discrimination the world values network are shamelessly using my name to advance their ugly campaign with falsehoods and blatant misrepresentations of who I am and what I stand for I stand in solidarity with all oppressed people and reject all forms of racism very strong statement very difficult to argue with anything she said that she could have gone further she could have said human rights welcome Betsalem say not only are they guilty of persecution and discrimination but apartheid but I've got no complaints very good response from Dua Lipa now as Ash mentioned this wasn't the first time the I mean not very convincingly named world values network has taken out a full page ad in a US newspaper after celebrities have come out in support of Palestinian rights so in 2018 Lord canceled a concert in Tel Aviv and in response the world values network ran this ad in the Washington Post now in this ad again it's very visual here you can see Lord's face superimposed over a picture of men running through rubble cradling babies and then the text of the ad says Lord joined a global anti-semitic boycott of Israel but will perform in Russia despite Putin's support for Assad's genocide in Syria you can see there in the that was probably slightly too small for you to read you can see there on the right 21 is young to become a bigot oh incredibly a really horrible horrible advert to place about 21 role because she stood in support of human rights for the Palestinian people now together as Ash said a common thread you've got here is that this is attacking young women in the press basically inciting when citing all sorts against them essentially also what you see in those two adverts is all of the arguments used against advocates for Palestinians you know completely you know crystallized concentrated against the Hadithis and Dua Lipa you've got if you oppose apartheid you support Hamas and if you criticize Israel you support anti-semitism against Lord you can't criticize the actions of Israel until you criticize every other bad thing happening in the world and if you criticize Israel without criticizing every other bad thing happening in the world that means you're anti-semitic that's the argument they put out in the in the Washington Post there obviously neither the Washington Post nor the New York Times should have allowed these adverts to happen and I hope that you know Dua and the Hadid sisters and Lord boycott anything that those papers do in in future because of what they've what they've done to them now Ash you know I want to bring you in on these arguments that are always used against supporters of Palestinian rights because as you said I think these adverts work on a level which is to incite threats against these people at the same time you are seeing these same arguments they throw out against everyone if you oppose apartheid you support Hamas if you criticize Israel you support anti-semitism you can't criticize Israel unless you criticize every other human rights abuse that is going on in the world it's all incredibly predictable I do feel like this time around it's potentially not working as well as it has in in the past for for people who are you know viciously supporting the Israeli government and everything they do oh yeah the shine's coming off the apple for sure but let's talk about some of these tactics obviously the specific nature of how Israel was formed as a state and by who presents problems for when you want to talk about it as a settler colonial endeavor which I personally believe it is you also have to take into account the historic violent persecution and attempted extermination of the Jewish people and so what the ideology of Zionism does is that it treats as one in the same the belief in the humanity of Jewish people a belief in their right to living in safety wherever it is they live and to self-determination as a people it says that those things can only be expressed in an ethno-state that is Israel right and so that's how you get this slippage between criticizing an ideology the ideology of a state its actions as a settler colonial state and then this notion that it is anti-Semitic at all to talk about the ideology the action and the colonial project so that's one tactic which has been used again and again and I think is more difficult to maintain in the face of these images being broadcast around the world where we can really see what's happening and then you've got this debate this rhetorical flourish that you see which is unless you speak out about x y and z whether it's you know the oil girls or Syria or Boko Haram then you are you know morally inconsistent and therefore you cannot you must not talk about Israel and Palestine and if you do you must be implicitly motivated by a kind of anti-Semitism that's why you're talking about this and not other things now one that's a ridiculous argument it's a completely ridiculous argument because one when people do speak out about these other things often it doesn't go on a very much attention and not as much and two well there is something different about the israel and Palestine conflict and that's because we as britain or they as america have sold millions and billions worth of weapons to this country which are now being used against the civilian occupation in maintaining the world's longest running occupation all right that is what is different about this conflict but these lines and arguments actually they had a life before and you actually saw them being mobilized in defense of apartheid south africa so one of the things that was often said in response to people who are saying apartheid is a moral abomination it is a stain on our collective humanity and we must not only call it out but participate in a movement of boycott divestment and sanctions you often had people go oh well you don't care about the human rights abuses in other african countries so why are you singling out south africa again this is an old move an old rhetorical gesture and it's being used once more in support of an apartheid state the state of israel and i think that this is something which again is harder to maintain because you can't have it both ways you can't have what i believe is true which is that it is antisemitic to align all jewish people with the state of israel hold one collectively responsible for the other and say that that is antisemitic that's racism and it's wrong and also at the same time say but any attempt to criticize the state of israel how it was founded what it does the continuing occupation the projects of ethnic cleansing the maintaining and deepening of an apartheid system within the borders of israel itself that that is also antisemitic because then in order to hold that line one requires you to deny the evidence before your very eyes to reject out of hand the judgment of human rights watch in betzelem but two it forces you into a position of doing an antisemitism yourself where you go oh i can't criticize israel because that means i'm criticizing all jewish people that i'm partaking in an act of racism against them so i can't have it both ways and i think more and more people are beginning to see that that was really really well put and a you know a very good point to to close that that segment on let's go to a couple of comments isaac and guji with 1999 the royal correspondent shoehorning in pit middleton's bum in comings revelations and using his ball stack as a form of measurement is the content and analysis you never find in mainstream media keep up the good work you don't get that on news night all power to you ash andy bass tweets on the hashtag tisky sour nero fiddled while rome burned borris johnson wrote a book whilst the uk was in froze the pandemic a very good comparison there and some real echoes and tc with a fiver says can i recommend the best podcast that i've ever encountered it is navara's acfm thanks to the gang james and everyone involved do check out that podcast acfm their latest um episode i haven't had a chance to listen to it myself not this particular one but it's getting great reviews on twitter it's on the long nineties and while so many you know parts of political discourse is still obsessed with them do check that out um on the navara media feed or you can go to their own feed acfm um we're going to go on to jeffrey epstein much of the official narrative around the convicted pedophile jeffrey epstein doesn't quite stack up but it's the official story around his death that is perhaps the most fishy epstein was the most high-profile prisoner on earth with potentially many secrets about the world's most powerful people however locked away in the best funded prison system in the world epstein in august 2019 was still able to hang himself now a big element of the supposed mishaps that led to epstein's death involved two prison guards tober newell and michael thomas now nova and thomas was supposed to check on epstein every 30 minutes however they instead slept and browsed the internet they then went on to falsify prison records to hide the fact they had failed to check on epstein for a period of over two hours so they were guiding or guarding sorry guarding the most high-profile prisoner on earth to stop him killing himself because this guy you know we really want to see him have his day in court they fall asleep they browse the internet they don't check on him whoopsie daisy he's dead now in a development that will surprise no one these two guards who didn't do their job very well and then falsified records have been spared jail time in a deal with federal prosecutors this is a story in the associated press we can go to the content of the article because the ap report that as part of the deal with prosecutors they will enter into a deferred prosecution agreement with the justice department and will serve no time behind bars noel and thomas would instead be subjected to supervised release would be required to complete a hundred hours of community service and would be required to fully cooperate with an ongoing probe by the justice department's inspector general the two have admitted that they willfully and knowingly completed materially false count and round slips regarding required count and rounds in the housing unit where epstein was being held so they falsified the documents that said we've done the round we've visited the prisoners they said they've done it they hadn't done it so what's happened here they said oh you know if you if you work with us you don't have to go to prison for this even though it led to the death of the world's most high profile prisoner and it would have actually been in the interest of lots of people to have a proper case here now not everyone is happy with this result according to ap senator ben sass who is a republican member of the senate judiciary committee called the deal unacceptable and said the public deserves to see a report detailing the prison agency's failures 100 hours of community service is a joke this isn't traffic court sass said in a statement the leader of an international child sex trafficking ring escaped justice his co-conspirators had their secrets go to the grave with him and these guards are going to be picking up trash on the side of the road now of course it's not inconceivable that this was all a cock up the article goes on to say that these were two members of staff who were incredibly overworked they'd been forced essentially to do lots of overtime one of them had another job you know I don't envy these people I'm also not really in favor of people going to jail because they fell asleep on the job because they've been worked too hard by their bosses you know I'm not saying these people should have should be locked up and have the key thrown away but the broader context of the death and the circumstances around it mean I'm not particularly willing to take this deal at face value now in a moment I'm going to explain to you why I'm going to remind you of the unanswered questions when it comes to Epstein's death but first lots of you watching tonight's show will not be subscribed so if that's you and you're enjoying this video hit subscribe for more Navara content now let's go through the quick timeline of why I'm not necessarily convinced that all is above board when it comes to this deal and why I mean there's lots of reasons to be suspicious when it comes to the suicide of Jeffrey Epstein by the way this is not this has not been particularly tin foil hat the majority of Americans believe this was not a suicide it's quite mainstream now let's let's go through why everyone thinks this so on the 6th of July 2019 in the midst of the Me Too scandal Epstein was arrested for multiple counts of sex trafficking minors you probably know that part of the story now these were the same crimes he had been let off lightly for a decade earlier he managed to get you know amazing deals with federal prosecutors such as state prosecutors in Florida they were essentially swept under the rug he did a few months in a prison where he essentially got to hang out in his own house the whole thing's completely ridiculous that but in the midst of the Me Too scandal he gets arrested he goes to proper prison and now the world's eyes are watching they can't just sweep it under the rug a year before that arrest and why many people were worried that Epstein was going to get you know killed in jail is because he knew lots of secrets about very powerful people indeed in the summer of 2018 Epstein told a New York Times journalist he had he had dirt on multiple powerful people so in his own words he got lots of dirt on lots of powerful people then that's why everyone's like you should you know make sure you watch this guy carefully because we want to know this dirt we don't want him to go to his grave with all of this dirt on these powerful people who've potentially done some really hideous horrendous things then a month before his supposed suicide in jail he was found injured after allegedly being strangled by his cellmate the multiple murder and drug conspiracy suspect Nicholas Tataglioni so you've got someone who is we know who's got lots and lots of very interesting information that would be useful to law enforcement about lots of powerful people who do they put him in jail with someone who is suspected of multiple murder and drug conspiracy now this sounds to me I mean that's that's what people who are involved in organized crime go to prison for right multiple murder and drug conspiracy charges Nicholas Tataglioni it sounds a bit ridiculous that you you put him in in jail with that guy if you don't want the guy to die now the prison authorities have I don't want to smear Tataglioni the prison authorities have cleared him and they say Epstein himself was responsible for his injuries and you can make it your own mind if that's particularly plausible however that same month lawyers representing Epstein's victims they weren't convinced Eva they told the son that they were worried Epstein would be killed before his case would come to trial now it was at this point after he'd been found strangled either by himself or his his cellmate it was at this point that Epstein was put on suicide watch but following a psychiatric examination he was removed from 24-hour surveillance after just six days then after being taken off suicide watch Epstein was placed in the security housing unit the jail had informed the justice department that he would have a cellmate you know because that's one way that you can stop people killing themselves and a guard would look into the cell every 30 minutes he was given no cellmate and you already know the guards did not check him every 30 minutes that's what that AP story was about they've they're not going to jail even though they didn't look at him every 30 minutes and they lied to say they did now this is all looking pretty suspicious it's all very very circumstantial though the biggest clincher for me and what wasn't mentioned in that AP story is the outside Epstein cell so the guards were asleep and maybe they were overworked maybe that's why they were asleep but outside the cell there were three cameras two of them were broken with no explanation as to why they were broken and the third has footage that was unusable so you've got a situation where we are supposed to believe that the guy with the most dirt on the world's rich and powerful of sort of you know anyone you can think of who knows more than Jeffrey Epstein when it comes to compromising material be hard to to name many people he's in jail in New York you know it's not some backwater place right and he manages to kill himself with no guards checking him and with a load of broken CCTV cameras nearby now as I say I don't want these guards to go to prison the guards that I started this story with at the same time the fact that they've got this deal seems quite convenient for everyone involved ash am I being conspiratorial or do you see the same gaps in the official narrative that I do I don't see so much gaps in the official narrative as a grand canyon of murder that's what I see um look people are free to make up their minds however they want but I've always been somewhat wary of that truism that cock up is always more likely than conspiracy because sometimes actually it's not in order to make this plausibly a suicide that could happen despite suicide watch despite the fact that he was supposed to be assigned to cellmate despite the fact that there were supposed to be three cameras trained on his cell at all times well that means a chain of causality which is so infinitesimally improbable that I can't get my head around it because I can imagine one of these cock ups happening you know the guards you know scrolling on their phones or doing whatever being so tired that they couldn't check on him but that plus the fact that he hadn't been assigned the cellmate that he was supposed to have I could imagine um one of the cameras not working just being broken by sheer chance but all three cameras so for all these things to line up neatly like ducks in a row and then Jeffrey Epstein uh taking his life without any coercion pressure or outside interference I find it difficult to get my head around and if this wants to you know be received by guido or the daily mail as evidence of the tinfoil hattered conspiracist left go for it but I do not think that this man made up his own mind to kill himself without any help I mean when it comes to conspiracies I think your argument there is absolutely right because you know often a strong argument against the conspiracy theories is Occam's raise you know potentially the simplest answer is the correct one the problem in this case is the simplest hard the simplest like explanation is he was murdered because the explanation that it was just cock up after cock up after cock up after cock up after cock up that's now more improbable it's a more complicated explanation than that he had some dirt on powerful people and the powerful people arranged it so that he would have no chance to reveal that dirt like Occam's razor says Epstein murdered maybe we'll never know I hope we do um let's move on to our very final story for the evening there are quite a lot of conspiracy theories I have time for often elites really do collude to defend their own power by telling elaborate lies but some conspiracy theories genuinely are quite silly and when you're a labour MP you should really be careful that you have at least some evidence before alleging any sinister plot this was Valerie Vaz on Politics Live I mean it was at the right hand of the prime minister at the time and remember the prime minister was in hospital for a while not quite at death's door that we were led to believe but he was there and I think it's quite extraordinary thing to say I think it's quite important that we don't forget the 127 000 people I mean really to say that I think it is genuinely wrong Valerie to question how sick the prime minister was he was in intensive care and very very ill and I think you know we shouldn't we shouldn't allow that to pass without comment that was simply wrong to say that um Valerie do you want to take back what you said I mean there's no evidence is there that Boris Johnson wasn't seriously ill he was or he was I don't know none of us were in the room none of us he was in care Valerie okay so he was in intensive care I don't know I can't I can't honestly I'm not his doctor but what's the point of saying I'm just saying people have died Dominic Cummings was at his right and we're talking about Dominic Cummings giving evidence aren't we we are so but you seem to imply that perhaps the Boris Johnson when the prime minister was in intensive care and I I don't know I mean honestly I don't know that that's not the issue the issue he was there running the government and he will have made judgment calls whether without the government whether without the prime minister at the time and yeah quite frankly he the prime minister was actually left there it was left to carry simons to to alert the the medics to call to call on uh to to look after Dominic to look after the prime minister that's not the point the point but why are you making it Valerie that's that's the right hand of the prime minister at the time making important decisions and he was there there are 127 000 people who have died absolutely then why are you making the point it was it was very um very very interesting interventions I actually you know she had no evidence for it she admits she's like I'm not his doctor you know who am I to say uh and and she's I kind of think British politics needs more of this because it does make it way more and say it's a very Trumpian thing to do it's just like put out this crazy theory which is that Boris Johnson wasn't actually that sick and the reason he went to ICU I presume reading into our argument because I can't see I assume the conspiracy theory here is that he went to ICU and pretended to be really sick to generate some public sympathy for him because he fucked up COVID I mean it you know it's not I mean it is completely implausible because you know Occam's razor which is to say the simplest explanation is probably the best one the simplest explanation here is definitely that he kind of overweight and he got COVID-19 not that there was this elaborate plan which involved all of these nurses in in Guy's and St Thomas's hospital um to pretend that he needed to go to ICU when he when he didn't but um Ash what do you think about this I I rate Valerie Vaz for like going you know she said it and then she's challenged it do you have any reason to say that she's like I don't know I'm not his doctor who am I to say I'm not his doctor but you know questions have to be asked but Michael you always like people who just say shit like that's your favorite genre makes much better TV is just say some shit and let the chips fall where they may whereas putting out there personally I like my conspiracy theories to at least have if not a shred of actually existing evidence at least Valerie tell us that you played a black Sabbath record backwards and it said Boris Johnson faked it something like that just some crumb of you know imagined uh connection or causality that's all I'm asking for I mean look I think that what this speaks to is an unfortunate tendency amongst labor MPs to snatch a negative headline out where they could have had a positive one here is an open goal which is a former ally of the prime minister really going in on him for his handling of the pandemic and instead of joining in and saying yeah this confirms what we knew all along Valerie Vaz decide instead to step on a rake on national TV and she's just like seeing that segment unfold it is like sideshow bob just again and again walking into it she can't just go yeah you know what I tracked that she has to go I'm just asking questions just raising it but I'm not making that point somebody else is making that point they pulled the string on my back now I am incapable of saying anything other than maybe the prime minister wasn't at death's door and obviously you know when you have a very very ill prime minister it's a useful moment politically because it provides a kind of buffer for criticism for that time people did have to tread carefully about how hard they were going on the government's handling of the pandemic because you couldn't look opportunist when the prime minister might be gravely ill and indeed his life could have been hanging in the balance we didn't know how severe or not it was at the time so of course that was something which was you know I think taken advantage of by senior people within the conservative party by cabinet ministers but that doesn't mean that it didn't happen you know it just meant that well okay as well as being something that's dreadful for us because our main guy is in the ICU it also gives us a bit of a breather because he did really fuck up the handling of the pandemic this is a great way to conclude the show because I think we're in agreement Jeffrey Epstein balance of probability murdered Boris Johnson balance of probability genuinely sick the guy was genuinely sick why don't we why don't we hear the labor front pages making the big original about the Epstein one that's the one where they got some evidence I don't know why I found the way you said Boris Johnson genuinely sick he's genuinely so funny I think I think it was because it was as if you'd come to the end of an episode of mythbusters or something like that and I just don't know why the delivery of that line was so funny it's obviously objectively not a funny thing but you managed to sort of you know the way that you brought these things together this this labor I mean the dude the dude was sick and he pulled through you know credit where it's due let's end there his immune system completely high ourselves credit to Boris Johnson's immune system and to the wonderful NHS and to that nurse by the way who's now resigned from her job because even after she you know got Boris Johnson better she's now disgusted at the way that that nurses have been treated and that they're not getting the pay rise they deserve that's probably the more politically astute point to be making instead of maybe he wasn't sick Ash Sarkar it's been an absolute pleasure as always my favorite bit of the week I say this every week but doesn't make it any less true I have no doubt mine too although my three favorite days the week with my three brilliant co-hosts I'll be back on Wednesday for another edition of Tiska Sauer for now if you haven't subscribed do hit that subscribe button give us a like you know the score you've been watching Tiskey Sauer on Navarra media good night