Speaker 1: Welcome back, Oliver Lane. It's a pleasure to have you
Speaker 1: on the fifty five KRC Morning Show.
Speaker 2: And it's a pleasure to be on checking any loud
Speaker 2: and clear.
Speaker 1: Yes, you're coming in very loud and clear, and I
Speaker 1: appreciate that. You know, I'm not sure if you're familiar
Speaker 1: with what's going on here in my city, the city
Speaker 1: of Cincinnati, we've had a bit of a lawlessness problem.
Speaker 1: It's made worldwide news with the beatdown that some folks got.
Speaker 1: We have a law problem, and apparently there's a real
Speaker 1: law and order problem going on in the UK right now,
Speaker 1: and Guys Wonner for Prime Minister, Nigral Faraj has launched
Speaker 1: his Britain is Lawless campaign campaign. Apparently the situation in
Speaker 1: the UK has deteriorated dramatically. Please speak to this, Oliver Lane.
Speaker 2: Well, first of all, it's a sad irony for me
Speaker 2: to hear that Cincinnati, of all cities, is having a
Speaker 2: lord order its You've given the story that we're told,
Speaker 2: of course about Cincinnatis and his plow bringing law to Rome.
Speaker 2: So I hope that's something you can get on top of.
Speaker 2: But in terms of what's going on over here, we're
Speaker 2: having quite a lively summer for I can put it
Speaker 2: that way, nager Arge, as you say, who is in
Speaker 2: the running to be our next prime minister. But that's
Speaker 2: a whole big story we can get into if you like.
Speaker 2: Has been hitting these key points about the crime epidemic
Speaker 2: we're experiencing and the real sort of fundamental issue here.
Speaker 2: It's not even the crime, it's the perception that the
Speaker 2: government has given up trying to fight crime. And this
Speaker 2: is a real issue, and let's us be clear, it's
Speaker 2: a real issue in particular with the police. Just to
Speaker 2: mix a few stories here at the moment in the UK,
Speaker 2: Lord Toby Young tells us we are arresting thirty people
Speaker 2: a day on speech for putting posts on social media.
Speaker 2: And yet if you're looking at the statistics we have
Speaker 2: on the kind of crime that I think ordinary people
Speaker 2: want to see fort and they want the kind of
Speaker 2: thing that actually impacts them, like having their homes broken
Speaker 2: into or their cars stolen. And this is a basically
Speaker 2: a new epidemic that's sweeping London, our capital city, having
Speaker 2: your cell phone snatch out of your hand as you
Speaker 2: walk down the street, and that is that is huge.
Speaker 2: Actually it's claimed again by Nigel Faraj. I think he
Speaker 2: said that a fifth of all Londoners have now experienced
Speaker 2: having their phone stolen from my god, absolutely insane. But
Speaker 2: the police seem to have their priorities elsewhere now with
Speaker 2: some stuff, say investigating murders. I believe they're still very
Speaker 2: well regarded for that, and that's obviously your real key
Speaker 2: priority for police forces. But if we're thinking about the
Speaker 2: Rudy Giuliani plans of the world and actually tackling crime
Speaker 2: from the bottom up, it just feels like they're given up.
Speaker 1: Well could it be because the powers that be, whoever
Speaker 1: is in charge of the police department or elected officials,
Speaker 1: are direct the police department to focus on well free
Speaker 1: speech crimes as opposed to actual crimes that matter to
Speaker 1: Britain's I mean, I we had that problem here. I
Speaker 1: draw parallel with the city of Cincinnati. We have a
Speaker 1: curfew for young people on the books, but the since
Speaker 1: a police department was told not to enforce it, and
Speaker 1: we've had this real problem with gangs of teenagers collecting
Speaker 1: and committing crimes in downtown since Ay at all hours
Speaker 1: they could be subject to being arrested or at least
Speaker 1: given a citation, but the police chief was told directly
Speaker 1: by our city officials do not enforce the curfew policy.
Speaker 1: So is that the type of thing that's going on
Speaker 1: in Britain where the police are told no, no, we
Speaker 1: have higher priorities, we don't want you to, you know,
Speaker 1: arrest people for stealing phones. Or is it just the
Speaker 1: police not willing to go down that road.
Speaker 2: But the part of the problem we have is the
Speaker 2: opacity of the system. There's simply no interest or even
Speaker 2: I think a belief amongst Earl class that the British
Speaker 2: people arowede any answers. So if you like talking about London,
Speaker 2: obviously it's our capital city and it's yeah, it's the
Speaker 2: thing that's on everybody's everybody's lips. You talk about London,
Speaker 2: you say, well, look, London clearly has a prime crime problem.
Speaker 2: So let's go to the police and say why are
Speaker 2: you dealing with this? The police say, well, look, it's
Speaker 2: not actually our our decision. We're just implementing the orders
Speaker 2: given to us by the mayor. And London has an
Speaker 2: elected mayor. See can't do You go to see cart
Speaker 2: and you say, look, London has a crime problem. The
Speaker 2: police say that they're following your orders. What's going on?
Speaker 2: And the mayor says, no, no, this has nothing to
Speaker 2: do with me. The reason why the police are ineffective
Speaker 2: at combating crime is because they're not being given enough
Speaker 2: money by central government, by Westminster. So you go to
Speaker 2: the central government and say, look, London has a crime problem.
Speaker 2: They say, look, it has nothing to do with us, right,
Speaker 2: that's the mayor's issue. So you're kind of stuck in
Speaker 2: this feedback loop where nobody is willing to say the
Speaker 2: buck stops here. So that's part of the problem. But
Speaker 2: as I said, there's an opacity problem, which is you
Speaker 2: were saying in Cincinnati, you know there's a clear political
Speaker 2: imperative for the police to act particular way, and we're
Speaker 2: not privy to these conversations. In the UK. We believe
Speaker 2: that there is pressure from the government downwards on the police,
Speaker 2: and we see evidence of that all the time, but
Speaker 2: we never actually get to see those conversations. And it
Speaker 2: does seem to be very much the case that the
Speaker 2: pressure from on high is off on dealing with low
Speaker 2: level crime. They're not being told that this is absolutely
Speaker 2: essential to be dealt with, but dealing with like cracking
Speaker 2: down on political thoughts, on political speech, on well you
Speaker 2: know what they would call hate speech or malinformation. Seems
Speaker 2: to be no limit of resources there.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well that's a question of prioritization, because let's face it,
Speaker 1: it's still illegal to steal someone's phone in the UK.
Speaker 1: That law is on the books. That police choose not
Speaker 1: to go after folks that do that or otherwise arrest
Speaker 1: people who they know did it is suggestive of I
Speaker 1: think what we've arrived at here that it's a directive
Speaker 1: from on high because you know, otherwise you're going to
Speaker 1: blame the police for not enforcing the law. I'm sure
Speaker 1: they feel like as though they have their hands tied, and.
Speaker 2: This is this is the sort of the point I
Speaker 2: was building towards, which is a lot of low level
Speaker 2: crime has been de facto, if not djure legalized. So
Speaker 2: the plea the police really almost never arrests any body
Speaker 2: for taking drugs, for instance, the only people there You
Speaker 2: really have to have a colossal amount of marijuana on
Speaker 2: your person to be arrested for that, for instance, because
Speaker 2: then you're seen as a dealer, and that's somebody that's
Speaker 2: acceptable to go could go after. But in terms of
Speaker 2: like anti social behavior in public places. Drug uses to
Speaker 2: criminalize and I think effectively to criminalized. It is still
Speaker 2: technically illegal that that law has never enforced, and I
Speaker 2: think a part of the problem with that with that
Speaker 2: there is that the prison system that we have in
Speaker 2: this country is is you're groaning at the seams. It's
Speaker 2: essentially on the on the brink of collapse. In fact,
Speaker 2: last year, last summer, the UK government actually ran out
Speaker 2: of prison places. So the Prime Minister had this very
Speaker 2: this sort of dreadful few weeks where he was turning
Speaker 2: people out of prison who were not yet ready to
Speaker 2: be released and they hadn't you know, come up to
Speaker 2: their all or whatever. But they'll be run out of space.
Speaker 2: So if you happen to have been convicted a few
Speaker 2: months before at you go, because we've got more people
Speaker 2: coming through the criminal justice system that we need to
Speaker 2: put in the prison places we don't have. This was
Speaker 2: you know, this is very big news last year in
Speaker 2: the UK, and there were obvious problems with you violent
Speaker 2: criminals being released into the streets and then going straight
Speaker 2: back to what they've been doing before, sex criminals, et cetera.
Speaker 2: You know, and why were the prisons so full Well,
Speaker 2: we had rioting in England last year against mass migration,
Speaker 2: against migrant sex crime and other forms of crime, and
Speaker 2: you just got to you know, if you're the UK police,
Speaker 2: you've just got to arrest those people, all those anti
Speaker 2: mass migration protesters. So funny thing the prison's got full. Wow.
Speaker 1: Well, well, as you wrote in your piece on Breitbart,
Speaker 1: Oliver Lane, it was I mean, Britain once one of
Speaker 1: the most peaceful and best police nations on earth and
Speaker 1: I don't think anythbody who can argue with that. What
Speaker 1: has happened to cause this mass increase in violence and
Speaker 1: crime in the UK? Is it immigration, unchecked, unregulated influx
Speaker 1: of humanity from the four corners of the globe.
Speaker 2: Well, I think it's fair to say that there are
Speaker 2: plenty of people in this country who believe that may
Speaker 2: be the case. Obviously, the government has a total monopoly
Speaker 2: on information, really, and if they're not willing to allow
Speaker 2: those studies to be taken place, how can we ever
Speaker 2: know the truth? Wow?
Speaker 1: Leaving the citizens in the dark. Which we can pivot
Speaker 1: over to the UK Online Safety Act, which underminds free speech,
Speaker 1: Trump calling it unacceptable suppression of criticism of mass migration
Speaker 1: you know, as a citizen of the UK, if I
Speaker 1: was out in the street, am I not able to
Speaker 1: speak my mind about mass migration? Is that in and
Speaker 1: of itself a crime?
Speaker 2: That's a great question. There's law is it's really very
Speaker 2: deeply concerning I if I may say so, this isn't
Speaker 2: actually something that's been introduced by the current labor government.
Speaker 2: It actually goes back to the previous Conservative government. And
Speaker 2: before anybody on listening to this show gets confused and thinks, so,
Speaker 2: you know, why would conservatives act like that? We've got
Speaker 2: a bear in mind that in this country and the
Speaker 2: Conservative Party, they are conservatives in name only, right, it's
Speaker 2: a historical label that has applied to a party that
Speaker 2: has now drifted towards a globalist center. So that's before
Speaker 2: we have any confusion over that. We had fourteen years
Speaker 2: of conservative rule. It was thoroughly dreadful and we need
Speaker 2: some real conservatives in this country to mix it up.
Speaker 2: But I digress. A problem with the we have with
Speaker 2: this law, as I say, which was introduced by the
Speaker 2: previous government, is not as that it actually directly censors
Speaker 2: political content. It's a really doing is it is either
Speaker 2: incentivizing or essentially making social media companies feel like they're
Speaker 2: being forced to impose censorship restrictions because if they're allowing
Speaker 2: content on their platforms that the government then retrospectively says,
Speaker 2: actually we think that's you know, misinformation and hate speech.
Speaker 2: Whatever you haven't you taken down from your plat you're
Speaker 2: part your platform, We're now going to find you ten
Speaker 2: percent of your global revenue. And that's what the power
Speaker 2: of the UK government has awarded itself so to avoid
Speaker 2: these invisible trip wires. Because I've been saying this a
Speaker 2: few times over quite a few things, it really feels
Speaker 2: like we're going to a point where the police and
Speaker 2: the government in this country sort of making the rules
Speaker 2: up as they go along, and that's having a really
Speaker 2: chilling effect on freedom speech. But in the particular case
Speaker 2: of these social media companies, like we look at x
Speaker 2: formerly Twitter and there's a lot of political content that's
Speaker 2: being hidden behind the age wall that we now have.
Speaker 2: So you if you want to look at you know,
Speaker 2: the kind of important information you need to make an
Speaker 2: informed decision as a voter, have to prove you're eighteen
Speaker 2: years old, and how do you do that by handing
Speaker 2: over your ID? So you lose anonymity on the Internet
Speaker 2: and we're in it, and that sort of feeds into
Speaker 2: us thinking about this last night. This is sort of
Speaker 2: mind boggling. One of the other really weird things that
Speaker 2: Goverment's doing over here, as they're reducing the age to vote,
Speaker 2: which has been eighteen for a very long time, to sixteen,
Speaker 2: arguing that you know, sixteen year olds are they have
Speaker 2: a future in this country, they're right to make a decision.
Speaker 2: They're actually, you know, mature enough to vote at sixteen,
Speaker 2: even though you know, we say the age of criminal
Speaker 2: majority is eighteen. You can't get married till you're eighteen,
Speaker 2: you can't go and serve in the armed forces abroad
Speaker 2: till you're eighteen, So there's some contradiction there, But just
Speaker 2: honing in on this internet censorship point, the next election
Speaker 2: that comes, we're going to be in a weird situation
Speaker 2: where we're saying to sixteen year olds, you can cast
Speaker 2: a vote on the future of this country, but you
Speaker 2: can't old enough to view political content online.
Speaker 1: It's so absurd. I'm laughing at the outright absurdity of it. Oliver,
Speaker 1: I just that that is acceptable to the to the
Speaker 1: public there in the United Kingdom is just beyond my
Speaker 1: capacity for understanding it really is.
Speaker 2: It is non acceptable to the public in this country.
Speaker 2: If you look at the and the opinion polling, Sakis Starmer,
Speaker 2: who's the Prime minister, lect wing prime minister, has fallen
Speaker 2: harder and faster than any other prime minister in modern
Speaker 2: British history. And a key point I have to make
Speaker 2: we have a we have a first past the post
Speaker 2: election system in this country and that means winner takes all.
Speaker 2: And in the last election we had last year, okay,
Speaker 2: there's no you know, there's no there's no arguing around
Speaker 2: the fact that Labor absolutely definitely got the most votes, right,
Speaker 2: they definitely won that election. But if you compare that
Speaker 2: election to other elections in modern British history, they got
Speaker 2: the number of votes that in a normal election at
Speaker 2: any other time the losing party would get. So it's
Speaker 2: not like the British people flocked the polls to vote
Speaker 2: for Labor. Actually they, as I say, they got a
Speaker 2: losing amount. It's just the people who would have voted
Speaker 2: against them stayed at home. It was low turnout. But
Speaker 2: because of the as I say, winner takes all system,
Speaker 2: even on this insanely low number of votes. Labor got
Speaker 2: this incredibly just totally dominate Westminster. Now all the power
Speaker 2: and can do anything they want because there's no mechanism
Speaker 2: to force us nap election.
Speaker 1: Well, considering the direction the UK's gone under the current
Speaker 1: government and prior governments, as you illustrate, have the people
Speaker 1: woken up to the reality they need to get to
Speaker 1: the polls and actually cast a vote? Have they Have
Speaker 1: they learned a lesson from any of this?
Speaker 2: Well, looking at the polling is very evident there is
Speaker 2: a sea change underway. We look at Nigel Faraja's Reform UK,
Speaker 2: which is as every week passes, is again and again
Speaker 2: hitting new records in terms of the level of polling
Speaker 2: support they get. But you know as well as I
Speaker 2: do that polling companies very often get it wrong. Yes,
Speaker 2: and you know bird in the hand is worth two
Speaker 2: in the bush. All very well and easy to say
Speaker 2: on a telephone if you're canvas in the middle of
Speaker 2: the day. Yeah, yeah, I'd vote for Nigel Farrage. But
Speaker 2: elections are won by people actually feeling motivated to leave
Speaker 2: their homes, strive to a polling station and put a
Speaker 2: piece of paper in a box and it's four years
Speaker 2: away the next UK election, unless the thing very dramatic
Speaker 2: happens is four years away. So there's yeah. A week
Speaker 2: is a long time in politics, isn't it. That's what
Speaker 2: we always say.
Speaker 1: Yes it is London. Your achieve, Oliver Lane, appreciate the
Speaker 1: time you spill my listeners and me well in one respect,
Speaker 1: I guess it's nice to know we in the city
Speaker 1: of Cincinnati are not alone with our problems. I just
Speaker 1: wish we didn't all share the same kind of problem
Speaker 1: as Oliver Lane. I'll look forward to having you back
Speaker 1: on the program again. Keep up the great work at
Speaker 1: bright bart my friend, and thanks again for your time today.
Speaker 2: Thanks having me on.
Speaker 1: Always pleasure, always a pleasure. Eight Coming up on eight
Speaker 1: twenty two. If you have cares to the Detox station
Speaker 1: Daniel Davis Deep Dive coming up next. First, Foreign Exchange
Speaker 1: get your car fixed for less money imported traditionally imported
Speaker 1: cars Asia or Europe or your Tesla. You got a
Speaker 1: SCU certified Master technicians at Foreign Exchange work on your car.
Speaker 1: You will leave with a full warranty on parts and service. Yes,
Speaker 1: they have date access to your manufacturers technical ability. Your
Speaker 1: car will be fixed to your satisfaction. That's what that
Speaker 1: warranty is all about. The great thing about foreign exchange is,
Speaker 1: of course, the money savings. You're gonna save a lot
Speaker 1: of money versus the dealers, so don't take it to
Speaker 1: the dealer. I think I personally saved what thousands, I
Speaker 1: guess with the amount, but I know, at least as
Speaker 1: far as my oil changes are concerned, I've saved more
Speaker 1: than one thousand dollars on just oil changes by going
Speaker 1: to foreign exchange. So we've got more caughtter repairs than
Speaker 1: just an oil change. You're going to do yourself a
Speaker 1: great service by saving money from foreign exchange. Westchester is
Speaker 1: the one I choose. There's several foreign exchange locations. Take
Speaker 1: the tylers and the legs. It off of I seventy five.
Speaker 1: Just head east to short jog to Kingland Drive, hang
Speaker 1: a right and you're there online. You're there at foreign
Speaker 1: xform the letter x dot com.
Speaker 2: Tell them.
Speaker 1: Brian said, how when you call for the appointment five
Speaker 1: one three six four four six six five one three
Speaker 1: six four four twenty six twenty
Speaker 2: Six fifty five k R c our iHeart realm you