Latest / Yaron Brook Show / When ‘Peace’ Becomes Cowardice: The West’s Moral Collapse Exposed | Yaron Brook Show

Transcript

When ‘Peace’ Becomes Cowardice: The West’s Moral Collapse Exposed | Yaron Brook Show · Yaron Brook Show

• 0:02
  Speaker 1: A lot of them, full of the little miss I'll
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: lead the little and an individual lots. This is the show,
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: all right, everybody, welcome to her one book show on
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: this Tuesday, October fourteenth, another edition of our news round up.
• 0:29
  Speaker 2: I hope everybody's having a a great, a great.
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: Week, all right.
• 0:36
  Speaker 2: I guess we can. We can just jump into it.
• 0:40
  Speaker 1: I mean, the chorus of congratulations, self, congratulations and enthusiasm
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: round the peace in our time is quite quite stunning.
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: I know that Trump has declared that he has established
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: peace in the Middle East for the first time in
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: three thousand years. There is quite a but is there
• 1:03
  Speaker 1: peace in the Middle East? Is the issue in Gaza
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: are solved? I mean, even Trump knows that's not true,
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: and it hasn't been yet finalized. He tweeted today somewhat
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: angrily about Haramas already having violating the agreement by now
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: releasing the bodies of Israeli dead that they are that
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: they're holding on to. According to the agreement they were
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: supposed to they were supposed to hand them out, hand
• 1:33
  Speaker 1: them over already. Indeed, everything is suggesting that Hamas has
• 1:38
  Speaker 1: no intention of living up to the agreement or to
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: the outline of an agreement. The agreement was never faced,
• 1:46
  Speaker 1: two was never hashed out that that Trump is advocating
• 1:52
  Speaker 1: for now.
• 1:55
  Speaker 2: You know, this could all change.
• 1:58
  Speaker 1: Qatar until Key in Egypt could get together and put
• 2:02
  Speaker 1: pressure again on Hamas and somehow changed their mind. But
• 2:06
  Speaker 1: at least as of right now, Hamas is openly stating
• 2:11
  Speaker 1: that they have no intention of disarming. They have no
• 2:14
  Speaker 1: intention of giving a power in Gaza, which are of
• 2:19
  Speaker 1: course two requirements for any kind of deal moving forward
• 2:23
  Speaker 1: and rebuilding and establishing an interim, interim governing body, and
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: all of that.
• 2:30
  Speaker 2: Hamas has suppressed no interest in any of that.
• 2:33
  Speaker 1: They said they would disarm when there was a Palestinian
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: military force in a new Palestinian state. They have no
• 2:41
  Speaker 1: intention of disarming before that, you know. The Ramas spokesman
• 2:49
  Speaker 1: declared that the group projects all of Israel's.
• 2:51
  Speaker 2: Demands related to weapons.
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: He says, quote, we will now be prisoner's to Israeli
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: terminology or demands. This will be a key focus in
• 2:59
  Speaker 1: the next phase of our struggle. And again there is
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: there's no interest in giving up rule over Gaza, and
• 3:08
  Speaker 1: died quite the opposite. Hamas spent the last two days
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: rounding up anybody who might be opposition in opposition to
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: them controlling Gaza, the various tribes, the various families clans
• 3:26
  Speaker 1: within Gaza that might object to the rule of Hamas.
• 3:29
  Speaker 1: Ramas is running them up and basically executing them. I mean,
• 3:32
  Speaker 1: there's there's vivid video online of people being you know,
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: on their knees, being shot in the back of the
• 3:40
  Speaker 1: head by Haramas.
• 3:44
  Speaker 2: This is not video.
• 3:45
  Speaker 1: They're trying to hide, this is not video. They're trying
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: to shield the world from. They don't care what the
• 3:51
  Speaker 1: world thinks. I mean, they know that the world is
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: not going to think any ill of them. The world
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: has shown that They have declared that they will continue
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: fighting and you know, basically until Israel ceases to exist
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: and there's a Palestinian state from the river to the sea.
• 4:15
  Speaker 1: You know, they, as I said, they have not returned
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: all the bodies. Also, this morning, there was a number
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: of Haramas armed approached Israeli lions. The Israelis told them
• 4:32
  Speaker 1: to back off, they shot into the air. They get
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: them of vindication to move away. They refuse. They kept
• 4:38
  Speaker 1: moving towards Israeli lions and Israel shot them. Hamas is
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: clearly trying to provoke Israel into continuing the war. Haramas
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: once the war to continue. It does not want peace,
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: It does not want it is fire. Maybe they appeased
• 4:58
  Speaker 1: their masters in Qatar and the a Turkey by releasing
• 5:02
  Speaker 1: the hostages.
• 5:03
  Speaker 2: You know, it'll be interesting looking back in a.
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: Few years to why exactly they did it and what
• 5:09
  Speaker 1: exactly happened that got them to do that. But they
• 5:13
  Speaker 1: have no interest in actually abiding by the the complete
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: deal that Trump has issued, submitted, tried to impose on them.
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: Now again, things could change. It could be that they're
• 5:32
  Speaker 1: just flexing muscles right now and their handlers and Katar
• 5:38
  Speaker 1: and elsewhere will climb down on them and get them
• 5:41
  Speaker 1: back in line. But as of now, there was no
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: peace deal in Gaza. Hamas has not accepted the terms.
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: I'm not sure when negotiations will stall up again, start
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: up again, and in between Hamas will do everything in
• 5:55
  Speaker 1: its power to well sort of complete suicide to provoke Israel.
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: And you have to ask the question partially why they
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: know They know very well that if Israel's decided to
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: come in back into Gaza again, that this time without
• 6:12
  Speaker 1: the hostages, it is quite likely that Israel will actually
• 6:16
  Speaker 1: destroy Hamas. That is, it'll kill many of them, It'll
• 6:19
  Speaker 1: destroy their tunnels, which are bound to be destroyed anyway,
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: one way or another, those tunnels when suspects are going
• 6:25
  Speaker 1: to be destroyed, and Israel has a potential to to
• 6:32
  Speaker 1: really really really really really this time cripple them or
• 6:36
  Speaker 1: destroy them completely. So why would Hamas want this? Well,
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: I think they see their primary victory since October seventh,
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: The primary victory since October seventh is the attitude of
• 6:53
  Speaker 1: the West. I think they see as their primary victory
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: since October seventh, thousands of people in New York and
• 7:02
  Speaker 1: London streets protesting in favor of Ramas. I think their
• 7:07
  Speaker 1: primary victory since October seventh with the announcement by you know,
• 7:11
  Speaker 1: the Prime Minister of the UK and of Spain and
• 7:15
  Speaker 1: Macan and Canada to recognize a palace in your state.
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: They're not winning on the ground, and they're not winning
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: even in the Middle East. They're losing allies in the
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: Middle East, but they are winning in the hearts and
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: minds of the West. And my views is their strategic
• 7:35
  Speaker 1: long term calculation is that that is more valuable than
• 7:38
  Speaker 1: anything else. Indeed, they are willing to die they're willing
• 7:43
  Speaker 1: to commit jihad.
• 7:44
  Speaker 2: They're willing to sacrifice.
• 7:46
  Speaker 1: Their own lives for the sake of more demonstrations in
• 7:50
  Speaker 1: New York, more calls for Israel as a genocidal nation,
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: more countries recognizing a Palestine Union state. They understand the
• 8:06
  Speaker 1: power of the West's sanction of their cause, and they're
• 8:12
  Speaker 1: willing to die for that. Shockingly, but they're willing to
• 8:15
  Speaker 1: die for a lot of things. Life is not that
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: precious for Ramas and Islamists like them. So what they
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: want is for the shots of genocide to return. What
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: they want is for Israel sub bombing Gaza again. What
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: they want is for more Gazan civilians, children, women to
• 8:38
  Speaker 1: die by Israeli hands. They don't care.
• 8:44
  Speaker 2: Quite the contrary.
• 8:46
  Speaker 1: What they want is to continue to create a wedge
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: between Israel and the West.
• 8:55
  Speaker 2: And you know, they think they can be successful with this.
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: Now again, their interests might diverge from the interests of
• 9:08
  Speaker 1: Kata or Saudi Arabia or Turkey or Egypt, who are
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: right now primarily focused on.
• 9:20
  Speaker 2: You know, appeasing and.
• 9:22
  Speaker 1: Being nice too and being friendly to Donald Trump and
• 9:27
  Speaker 1: a Trump administration. So we are going to see, but
• 9:34
  Speaker 1: it certainly is way too early to declare this an
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: amazing victory. It's really good to see the hostages released.
• 9:45
  Speaker 1: It's good to see the hostages released without Israel giving
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: up too much territory, particularly the Philadelphia corridor.
• 9:52
  Speaker 2: And I don't think that was on the table in
• 9:54
  Speaker 2: the past.
• 9:54
  Speaker 1: A lot of people saying, oh, they could have done
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: this deal nine months ago, they could have done this
• 9:58
  Speaker 1: deal last year. I don't think it was ever on
• 10:01
  Speaker 1: the table that Isel would stay in as much of
• 10:04
  Speaker 1: the Gods the strip as they are in right now,
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: and they get the hostages back. So anyway, I'm happy
• 10:15
  Speaker 1: for the deal because it is As in a better
• 10:19
  Speaker 1: position not.
• 10:19
  Speaker 2: To destroy Caramas.
• 10:21
  Speaker 1: I even will say I'm happy that Ramas doesn't want.
• 10:26
  Speaker 2: A piece because I think they need to be destroyed.
• 10:30
  Speaker 1: I think nothing short of the destruction will actually lead
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: to long term peace. So if Ramas gives his own
• 10:38
  Speaker 1: excuse to go in and destroy them, all the power
• 10:42
  Speaker 1: to them.
• 10:43
  Speaker 2: And and I'm I'm all in support of that.
• 10:46
  Speaker 1: So we will keep watching and keep following to try
• 10:52
  Speaker 1: to see exactly.
• 10:56
  Speaker 2: Exactly what is going on.
• 10:58
  Speaker 1: And yeah, I have no idea how this is exactly
• 11:04
  Speaker 1: going to play out, because I think This is going
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: to depend to a large extent on the incentives of
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: these other Arab countries and on Trump's willingness to give
• 11:15
  Speaker 1: it the attention that it requires, rather than the clear piece. Actually,
• 11:19
  Speaker 1: now the hard work of establishing that piece starts, and
• 11:22
  Speaker 1: whether he is willing to devote that time, that effort,
• 11:25
  Speaker 1: that focus to establishing that piece, we you know, to
• 11:30
  Speaker 1: trying to move towards that piece.
• 11:31
  Speaker 2: We will see. Yep, we can hope, we can hope.
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: Right in the meantime, in the United States, there was
• 11:43
  Speaker 1: a big bouja. Ha.
• 11:44
  Speaker 2: We talked about this.
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: I think we talked about this story a couple of
• 11:48
  Speaker 1: weeks ago. But there's a big bouja about new requirements,
• 11:55
  Speaker 1: new requirements for.
• 12:01
  Speaker 2: Reporters at the Pentagon.
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: So the Pentagon is as of today at five pm,
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: supposedly going to be requiring any reporter the once to
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: get a badge and wants to be able to be
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: in the building in the Pentagon and report from the
• 12:17
  Speaker 1: Pentagon have basically press coverage, press access. They're going to
• 12:23
  Speaker 1: require them to sign a twenty one page document. You know,
• 12:28
  Speaker 1: this document is going to restrict ability of journalists to
• 12:33
  Speaker 1: do their job. Journalists cannot ask anybody at the Pentagon
• 12:39
  Speaker 1: for any information, even on things that are unclassified, unless
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: that information has been approved, approved and give given a
• 12:50
  Speaker 1: thumbs up and actually been being what do you call it,
• 13:01
  Speaker 1: there has been in a sense of press release by
• 13:02
  Speaker 1: the Pentagon itself. It makes reporters dependent one hundred percent
• 13:09
  Speaker 1: on the Pentagon and nothing else. H uh.
• 13:22
  Speaker 2: So, uh, you know, the press obviously, you know, the
• 13:30
  Speaker 2: press obviously.
• 13:31
  Speaker 1: Is now saying they won't sign this. You know, let's see. Uh.
• 13:38
  Speaker 1: You know, the press is claiming that these restrictions are
• 13:41
  Speaker 1: intended to quote gag Pentagon employees and threatens retaliation against
• 13:45
  Speaker 1: reporters who seek out information that has not been pre
• 13:49
  Speaker 1: approved for release.
• 13:53
  Speaker 3: You know.
• 13:54
  Speaker 1: In their view, this pledge is part of an effort
• 13:58
  Speaker 1: by the Trump administration to limit information and being provided
• 14:01
  Speaker 1: to the public about what is going on in the
• 14:03
  Speaker 1: Pentagon and in the us n Forces. Basically, no news
• 14:08
  Speaker 1: organization except one has agreed to sign it. The one
• 14:11
  Speaker 1: news organization is the One American News, one American news outlet.
• 14:16
  Speaker 1: This is kind of a right wing rate of newsmax.
• 14:20
  Speaker 1: But in the meantime, the Atlantic Associated Press acces CNN, Guardian, Newsmax,
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: New York Times. Uh in, pr Reuters, Washington Posts, and
• 14:30
  Speaker 1: Washington Times have announced that they're refusing to sign this.
• 14:35
  Speaker 1: Fox supposedly has privately told their reporters that they do
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: not expect them to follow through with today's ultimatum. Uh
• 14:44
  Speaker 1: and they just should they should not sign the pledge.
• 14:48
  Speaker 1: Uh So even Fox, it seems, is refusing, is refusing
• 14:54
  Speaker 1: to have their reporters their reporters sign it. You know,
• 15:01
  Speaker 1: heck sext this claiming oh no, no, this is just
• 15:03
  Speaker 1: about waving badges and no, I mean, if you look
• 15:06
  Speaker 1: at the document, the document is clearly aimed at trying
• 15:10
  Speaker 1: to restrict information flows and trying to basically ban reporters
• 15:16
  Speaker 1: from doing their job. Again, the Pentagon is claiming this
• 15:22
  Speaker 1: is all part of their attempt to stop leaks.
• 15:27
  Speaker 2: Anyway, we'll see.
• 15:29
  Speaker 1: It does appear that's starting tomorrow, starting five pm tonight,
• 15:34
  Speaker 1: there will basically be no reporting out of the venegon.
• 15:38
  Speaker 1: That is, the news organizations will be barred from entering
• 15:42
  Speaker 1: the building and talking to staff.
• 15:45
  Speaker 2: Now, the consequence of this are primarily going.
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: To be that, you know, the news organizations will lie
• 15:55
  Speaker 1: on meetings outside of the Pentagon. Hush hush, meetings and
• 15:58
  Speaker 1: in different locations and uh, you know, and they will
• 16:06
  Speaker 1: know a lot less about what is actually going on
• 16:08
  Speaker 1: at the Pentagon. Reporters have said, uh, you know, this
• 16:14
  Speaker 1: has never been the case, not in the halls of
• 16:16
  Speaker 1: the Pentagon and not h you know, when they were
• 16:19
  Speaker 1: assigned to the military to report on in combat operations
• 16:23
  Speaker 1: with the military overseas. And you know, this is unprecedented,
• 16:33
  Speaker 1: It's not surprising. It is consistent with the attempt of uh,
• 16:39
  Speaker 1: this administration to kind of silence opposition and too uh
• 16:43
  Speaker 1: and to you know, restrict information flows. I think more broadly,
• 16:49
  Speaker 1: we will see how this plays out. So this is
• 16:50
  Speaker 1: a pout play between now the media and and uh
• 16:55
  Speaker 1: higseeth and we'll see how it plays out.
• 17:01
  Speaker 2: Yep, let's see, all right.
• 17:11
  Speaker 1: And yeah, I mean the idea is that they were
• 17:14
  Speaker 1: kicking them out today.
• 17:15
  Speaker 2: They will literally not allow them in anymore.
• 17:18
  Speaker 1: Of course, this is consistent with what they do in
• 17:21
  Speaker 1: other countries, the countries who are.
• 17:24
  Speaker 2: Significant list free.
• 17:27
  Speaker 1: And yeah, it's going to be interesting to see what
• 17:31
  Speaker 1: kind of impact this has on coverage of what's going
• 17:35
  Speaker 1: on in the military. I mean, coverage which I think
• 17:38
  Speaker 1: has been overly friendly to the military and overly friendly
• 17:42
  Speaker 1: to the defense the Department of Defense for the last
• 17:45
  Speaker 1: thirty years, I mean, or certainly twenty five years since
• 17:48
  Speaker 1: nine eleven, coverage that has not being critical.
• 17:52
  Speaker 2: Enough of Afghanistan in Iraq.
• 17:54
  Speaker 1: Not being critical enough of the behavior of the military,
• 17:57
  Speaker 1: not being critical enough of the rules of engagement, not
• 18:00
  Speaker 1: being critical enough of the fact that these missions that
• 18:03
  Speaker 1: the American military were sent on it was never intended
• 18:06
  Speaker 1: to win. So it's sad to see that the response
• 18:17
  Speaker 1: to the failure of our press to actually hold those
• 18:21
  Speaker 1: in power to account.
• 18:25
  Speaker 2: Is now, you know, even the little that they did
• 18:28
  Speaker 2: is going to go away.
• 18:30
  Speaker 1: I'm still you know, it's years now, but I'm still shocked,
• 18:35
  Speaker 1: you know, and it's still upset me. For if I
• 18:36
  Speaker 1: guess the fact that the Washington Post at some point
• 18:40
  Speaker 1: published this basically book ultimately critical of a book of
• 18:47
  Speaker 1: interviews with generals and Defense Department people, basically laying out
• 18:53
  Speaker 1: all the lies.
• 18:54
  Speaker 2: That the American public were told.
• 18:57
  Speaker 1: So the Washington Post did a brilliant job of just
• 18:59
  Speaker 1: showing but they said what actually happened, what they said then,
• 19:02
  Speaker 1: what they said later, and just the lying that went
• 19:05
  Speaker 1: on in terms of Ghanistan. And it was a series
• 19:09
  Speaker 1: of articles in the Washington Post and NK came out
• 19:11
  Speaker 1: as a book and nobody, nobody, nobody kid.
• 19:18
  Speaker 2: It was just no response.
• 19:21
  Speaker 1: I mean, thousands of American kids were killed and injured
• 19:25
  Speaker 1: in af Ghanistan and it turns out it was all
• 19:27
  Speaker 1: for nothing, not zero, zilch, nada. And this is not
• 19:31
  Speaker 1: a democratic or Republican thing. Both Republicans and Democrats participated
• 19:36
  Speaker 1: in this, and yet it got no coverage.
• 19:39
  Speaker 2: Nobody literally kids, they.
• 19:43
  Speaker 1: Shout, they go, they demonstrate the anti war, anti this,
• 19:47
  Speaker 1: and tell that. But when it comes to actual critique,
• 19:49
  Speaker 1: actual laying out the facts, nobody actually kids. Sad state
• 19:55
  Speaker 1: of the world, all right. In the last few days,
• 20:00
  Speaker 1: there's been a lot of people talking about the possibility
• 20:04
  Speaker 1: of an actual military engagement in a war between Russia
• 20:11
  Speaker 1: and NATO. We've seen over the last couple of months
• 20:16
  Speaker 1: lots of Russian provocations. If you go back further than
• 20:20
  Speaker 1: a few months, we've seen Russian sabotage in various European countries.
• 20:25
  Speaker 1: We saw over the last few weeks Russian using drones
• 20:28
  Speaker 1: to just harass and to stop, to shut down airports,
• 20:33
  Speaker 1: for example in Northern Europe, but to also infringed in
• 20:36
  Speaker 1: the air space of Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, in Estonia and
• 20:42
  Speaker 1: generally just harass, just intimidate. We saw Russian ships cut
• 20:50
  Speaker 1: communication lines in the Baltic Sea with almost no response
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: from anybody. And there just seems to be an accelerated
• 20:59
  Speaker 1: sense that Russia is inching towards greater and greater publication
• 21:04
  Speaker 1: and becoming more and more aggressive against the West. And
• 21:08
  Speaker 1: some are suggesting the possibility that and this is actually
• 21:15
  Speaker 1: NATO Secretary General Mark Route has suggested I think yesterday
• 21:22
  Speaker 1: that if China decides to move against Taiwan, which it
• 21:26
  Speaker 1: might sooner rather than later. Although Trump, of course, there's
• 21:30
  Speaker 1: the president of peace and China would never ever, ever,
• 21:33
  Speaker 1: ever ever think of doing such a thing when Trump
• 21:35
  Speaker 1: is president. But nonetheless, if China decides to move against Taiwan,
• 21:41
  Speaker 1: that China is likely to push Russia to act against
• 21:46
  Speaker 1: NATO as a massive distraction.
• 21:51
  Speaker 2: And that makes sense to me.
• 21:54
  Speaker 1: I think that's part of I mean, look, Russia is
• 21:58
  Speaker 1: beholding it to China is the senior partner between the two.
• 22:05
  Speaker 1: China has the capacity, you know, to shut down the
• 22:10
  Speaker 1: Russian economy. The Russian economy survives only because China makes.
• 22:15
  Speaker 2: It possible for it to survive. So the question here
• 22:22
  Speaker 2: is if that happens, what would be the outcome?
• 22:29
  Speaker 1: And look, I've I've told you what I think. I've
• 22:32
  Speaker 1: told you this for months, years really since the Ukraine
• 22:35
  Speaker 1: War started. The reality is the reality is that Russia
• 22:42
  Speaker 1: wouldn't survive a week. I mean former, I guess former,
• 22:51
  Speaker 1: what do you call it? General Ben Hodges? I think
• 22:56
  Speaker 1: also yesterday said you know, if Russia, if first you
• 22:59
  Speaker 1: got into dispute with NATO, Kaliningrad and Sevestopol, these are
• 23:07
  Speaker 1: two major ports Russia, you said it would be destroyed
• 23:12
  Speaker 1: in the very first hours of a NATO operation.
• 23:16
  Speaker 2: I mean, Russia would be devastated.
• 23:21
  Speaker 1: Poland today has a military that could alone take.
• 23:27
  Speaker 2: On the Russians and destroy them. Russia has.
• 23:32
  Speaker 1: Poland has almost double the size of its military, boosted
• 23:35
  Speaker 1: military spending to five percent of GDP, and today has
• 23:40
  Speaker 1: a most sophisticated, more modern, you know, far better equipped
• 23:46
  Speaker 1: with Western equipment than anything Russia has. One of the
• 23:53
  Speaker 1: things that we see in Ukraine is what happens when
• 23:58
  Speaker 1: no side has a super reality, but then a struggle
• 24:02
  Speaker 1: between NATO and Russia, a superiority would be established.
• 24:05
  Speaker 2: Very very quickly.
• 24:08
  Speaker 1: NATO would take out defense systems on the Russian side
• 24:12
  Speaker 1: quickly and thoroughly, at least, you know, if they've learned
• 24:16
  Speaker 1: anything from the Israelis, and with the use of F
• 24:18
  Speaker 1: thirty five stealth fighters, they ask four hundred batteries, there's
• 24:22
  Speaker 1: three hundred batteries. Maybe even there as five hundred batteries
• 24:25
  Speaker 1: would have no chance. And once NATO established a superiority,
• 24:31
  Speaker 1: it doesn't matter how many drones you have, it doesn't
• 24:35
  Speaker 1: matter how many people you have that are willing to
• 24:37
  Speaker 1: commit suicide, they will be you know, rushed to heaven
• 24:42
  Speaker 1: by NATO airpower. So NATO would dominate, I mean dominate
• 24:54
  Speaker 1: any conflict with Russia.
• 24:57
  Speaker 2: And I think I think the Russia. The Chinese know this.
• 25:00
  Speaker 1: So while such a distraction might be helpful to them,
• 25:04
  Speaker 1: is that a you know, is it a big enough
• 25:08
  Speaker 1: for distraction for them and would be distracting enough of
• 25:12
  Speaker 1: the Americans? Would a make it come to Taiwan's help.
• 25:15
  Speaker 1: It's not clear. Uh, there's a lot of unknowns and
• 25:19
  Speaker 1: a lot of unknowns from the Chinese perspective, What would
• 25:21
  Speaker 1: happen if they actually invaded Taiwan? What had happened to
• 25:23
  Speaker 1: the economy, What would happen to sanctions? What would happen
• 25:27
  Speaker 1: to their ability to trade? But but what would happen
• 25:31
  Speaker 1: to what would happen to their fleet? What would happen?
• 25:35
  Speaker 1: You know, the United States is deploying, as far as
• 25:38
  Speaker 1: I can tell, and I hope this is true, deploying
• 25:41
  Speaker 1: large numbers of stealth unmanned submarines into the into the
• 25:48
  Speaker 1: the that part of the Pacific Ocean, the Western Pacific,
• 25:53
  Speaker 1: off the coast of China. What could stealth unmanned submarines
• 25:59
  Speaker 1: or other types boats due to the Chinese navy.
• 26:02
  Speaker 2: Look what a few unmanned boats in the.
• 26:06
  Speaker 1: Black Sea, completely by help by the Ukrainians, completely devastated
• 26:11
  Speaker 1: the Russian navy. Russia has no presence in the Black Sea.
• 26:15
  Speaker 1: It has no presence now in the Mediterranean. Russia's navy
• 26:18
  Speaker 1: has been decimated. It's in port out of fear of
• 26:24
  Speaker 1: Ukrainian unmanned boats.
• 26:26
  Speaker 2: Very unsophisticated on the man boats.
• 26:32
  Speaker 1: Wonder Freeman keeps posting stuff on the chat and then
• 26:37
  Speaker 1: retracting it. What's going on? He wants you, guys ought
• 26:43
  Speaker 1: to see what he says, but then does not want
• 26:44
  Speaker 1: it to remain for posterity.
• 26:46
  Speaker 2: It's it's really weird. I've never seen anything like it.
• 26:50
  Speaker 1: I mean, I get retracting a few things, but every
• 26:52
  Speaker 1: single comment he's made, he's attracted.
• 26:56
  Speaker 2: It's retractive. Charcter attract attracted.
• 26:59
  Speaker 1: You can't explain yourself.
• 27:00
  Speaker 2: One of food him.
• 27:01
  Speaker 1: Maybe not anyway, Russia's poking.
• 27:09
  Speaker 3: Umm.
• 27:11
  Speaker 2: One of Femae says, what do you need repeated? I
• 27:13
  Speaker 2: don't need anything repeated. I don't read most of the comments.
• 27:17
  Speaker 1: I just find it bizire and I you know, I
• 27:21
  Speaker 1: can't read the comments because they've disappeared.
• 27:35
  Speaker 2: Yeah, let me just see. Is this something else?
• 27:37
  Speaker 4: Yeah, Poland is am other things, approaches fifty billion dollars
• 27:43
  Speaker 4: worth of US weapons systems, it's got new divisions, it's
• 27:47
  Speaker 4: got new territory defense forces.
• 27:49
  Speaker 1: It's got large scale exercises with its allies. It's got
• 27:53
  Speaker 1: right now a relatively thriving economy. See, he retracted even
• 27:59
  Speaker 1: the question of what I want to see that needs
• 28:01
  Speaker 1: to be repeated.
• 28:03
  Speaker 2: It just makes no sense.
• 28:09
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't know. He wants to make sure that
• 28:13
  Speaker 1: none of this is maintained forever that he can. He
• 28:17
  Speaker 1: has plausible deniability, deniability. Yeah, so anyway, NATO, I think
• 28:28
  Speaker 1: it's a good position to take on Russia. I think
• 28:30
  Speaker 1: it would be suicidal a putin to engage with Russia.
• 28:35
  Speaker 1: I think that many people in uh, you know, Russia,
• 28:39
  Speaker 1: who knows this. They're poking, they are harassing. But I
• 28:44
  Speaker 1: don't think they're going to do anything now. I didn't
• 28:46
  Speaker 1: think they would go into Ukraine because I thought that
• 28:48
  Speaker 1: would be suicidal for them. And indeed, if you look
• 28:50
  Speaker 1: at four years into the war, almost four years into
• 28:53
  Speaker 1: the war, it will be four years in February, Russia
• 28:57
  Speaker 1: is gaining no ground, inching forward. It's barely moving. Somebody
• 29:03
  Speaker 1: did a calculation, what was it wild ta him one
• 29:05
  Speaker 1: hundred years to occupy Ukraine at this rate.
• 29:09
  Speaker 3: So so it's not doing well.
• 29:21
  Speaker 1: It's not doing well. One of Fema says, I just
• 29:23
  Speaker 1: cleaned up all my comments from the last seven years.
• 29:26
  Speaker 2: I don't want to repeat the process.
• 29:28
  Speaker 1: I mean, there's an easy way to avoid that and
• 29:30
  Speaker 1: that just don't make comments. And if you're going to
• 29:33
  Speaker 1: clean up all the comments, imagine if I had to
• 29:35
  Speaker 1: clean up everything I've said over the last twenty years,
• 29:37
  Speaker 1: which is all basically public videotaped, audio, taped, in print,
• 29:42
  Speaker 1: in writing and stuff. God, that is a lot of
• 29:46
  Speaker 1: work and that Luckily, I have no intention of doing
• 29:49
  Speaker 1: that either stand by what I said in the past
• 29:51
  Speaker 1: or I don't and I said in the past I
• 29:53
  Speaker 1: was wrong.
• 29:54
  Speaker 2: I could be wrong. I'm allowed to be wrong.
• 29:57
  Speaker 1: In the meantime, Trump seems to be I don't know.
• 30:02
  Speaker 2: He seems to.
• 30:03
  Speaker 1: Be becoming more sane when it comes to phone POLSI,
• 30:09
  Speaker 1: he's more sane when it comes to Israel, and now
• 30:11
  Speaker 1: he's slowly becoming more sane with becoming Ukraine. It appears
• 30:15
  Speaker 1: Trumpet demonstration is.
• 30:16
  Speaker 2: Going to.
• 30:19
  Speaker 1: Approve these UH, these Kruis missaus, the Tomahawk cruise missiles
• 30:26
  Speaker 1: sale to UH, to the Ukrainians. And I don't know
• 30:30
  Speaker 1: what kind of conditions are place on the use, hopefully none,
• 30:34
  Speaker 1: but that is a game change. I mean, these Kruis
• 30:35
  Speaker 1: missiles can reach UH deep into Russia. They are precision weapons.
• 30:42
  Speaker 1: You can thread them through a window. They are very
• 30:47
  Speaker 1: difficult to shoot down because of the way they fly,
• 30:53
  Speaker 1: very difficult to detect. UH and UH. This is a
• 30:57
  Speaker 1: game change in terms of you know, Ukraine ability to
• 31:01
  Speaker 1: take out Russian assets deep within Russia. Now, Ukraine has
• 31:06
  Speaker 1: been doing a really, really good job over the last
• 31:08
  Speaker 1: few months and taking out oil refineries and oil assets
• 31:12
  Speaker 1: of the Russians. UH and Ukraine has developed their own
• 31:18
  Speaker 1: Tomahawk like Kruisms cells, but they can only produce small
• 31:22
  Speaker 1: numbers of their new Kruisms cells. I think they can.
• 31:25
  Speaker 1: They can launch three a day. They hope to bring
• 31:28
  Speaker 1: it up to six a day. The Tomahawks will give
• 31:30
  Speaker 1: them much larger capabilities. I'm assuming the United States will
• 31:34
  Speaker 1: send them Tomahawk missiles that close to expiration date that
• 31:38
  Speaker 1: the United States would have to destroy anyway, might as
• 31:41
  Speaker 1: well destroy them over Russian facilities. UH and and and
• 31:48
  Speaker 1: UH go out there and uh and do that. But
• 31:51
  Speaker 1: this this could be definitely a game change in terms
• 31:54
  Speaker 1: of the world. It's it doesn't change the reality on
• 31:58
  Speaker 1: the ground, on the in combat, on the line of defense,
• 32:04
  Speaker 1: but it shifts resources Russian resources. It basically makes oil scarce.
• 32:09
  Speaker 1: It makes it very difficult for Russia to sell oil.
• 32:12
  Speaker 1: It makes it very difficult to get for them to
• 32:14
  Speaker 1: get fuel, both for their armored vehicles and tanks and
• 32:17
  Speaker 1: everything else and for civilian purposes. It demoralizes the Russians
• 32:24
  Speaker 1: and it reduces the capacity to wage war over time.
• 32:29
  Speaker 1: As that gets eroded, you can imagine the Ukrainians starting
• 32:33
  Speaker 1: to make progress on the ground pushing the Russians out
• 32:36
  Speaker 1: of Ukrainian territory, which is ultimately their goal. As part
• 32:41
  Speaker 1: of selling Tomawk missiles to the Ukrainians, the White House
• 32:45
  Speaker 1: is also putting significant pressure on the Germans to deliver
• 32:50
  Speaker 1: tourist missiles to Ukraine. Tourist missiles also, I think these
• 32:54
  Speaker 1: Accuse missiles also with the significant range access into Russia
• 33:00
  Speaker 1: would be another game changer. Would just give the Ukrainians many,
• 33:03
  Speaker 1: many more tools to be able to devastate Russian facilities
• 33:09
  Speaker 1: behind the lines. Maybe go after some of the aircraft
• 33:13
  Speaker 1: the launch missiles at and launch the ballistic missiles at Ukraine.
• 33:19
  Speaker 2: Uh, maybe go after more of the all facilities. Maybe
• 33:22
  Speaker 2: go after uh.
• 33:23
  Speaker 1: You know, troops that are being a raid in the
• 33:26
  Speaker 1: back with anticipation of sending to the front.
• 33:30
  Speaker 2: Might as well kill them before they even make it
• 33:32
  Speaker 2: to the fund.
• 33:33
  Speaker 1: There are many many ways in which these uh, these
• 33:38
  Speaker 1: weapons can be used to basically give Ukraine an advantage
• 33:44
  Speaker 1: vis a VI visa v Russia.
• 33:46
  Speaker 2: So good for Trump for changing his mind.
• 33:48
  Speaker 1: Now ze Lenski's coming to the White House on Friday, UH,
• 33:52
  Speaker 1: who knows what will happen? Let's hope. I mean, I
• 33:56
  Speaker 1: think he's learned that, you know, basically gravel cup like
• 34:01
  Speaker 1: every second secon sentence, thank Donald Trump and emphasize his greatness.
• 34:07
  Speaker 1: And if you do that, and you do it regularly,
• 34:09
  Speaker 1: and you do constantly, then you will get everything you want.
• 34:12
  Speaker 1: I think he's learned that. I think he's being trained
• 34:14
  Speaker 1: by the Europeans. Europeans have learned that, I think, and
• 34:19
  Speaker 1: I think now that is the new way in which
• 34:24
  Speaker 1: to deal with with Trump and Zelenski's figured out. So
• 34:27
  Speaker 1: I expect the meeting to go smoothly on Friday, But
• 34:30
  Speaker 1: who knows. I mean, Jadvance is still pretty hostile to
• 34:33
  Speaker 1: Ukraine and he might try to sabotage whatever happens.
• 34:37
  Speaker 2: Uh.
• 34:38
  Speaker 1: So yeah, hopefully that'll prove the Tomawks, they get the
• 34:45
  Speaker 1: Germans to prove their missiles and uh and Ukraine will
• 34:49
  Speaker 1: be armed to be able to inflict maximum pain on Russia.
• 34:56
  Speaker 1: All Right, just a few more comments on Earth. We
• 34:59
  Speaker 1: talked about it Yester today and I think last week.
• 35:01
  Speaker 1: I mean, this is this is a big deal. The
• 35:03
  Speaker 1: trade war between China and the United States continues, in
• 35:08
  Speaker 1: spite of the attempt both of the of Trump and
• 35:10
  Speaker 1: the Chinese to kind of load the pressure. Today, the
• 35:12
  Speaker 1: Chinese announced kind of sanctions and a bunch of companies
• 35:18
  Speaker 1: owned by the South Koreans but doing business with the
• 35:21
  Speaker 1: United States. Supposedly there are shipbuilding companies that are that
• 35:25
  Speaker 1: are working with the with the US Navy on building ships,
• 35:30
  Speaker 1: so that you know, they they are sanctioning foreign companies
• 35:34
  Speaker 1: that are working with the Defense Department. This is again
• 35:37
  Speaker 1: one more escalation on a series of escalations. I mean,
• 35:42
  Speaker 1: I mean the biggest deal here is the rare earth material.
• 35:44
  Speaker 1: Rare earth material that have the potential to really shut
• 35:46
  Speaker 1: down military production in the United States, shut down the
• 35:51
  Speaker 1: defense industry both in the United States and Europe, shut
• 35:54
  Speaker 1: down innovation, shut down the technology industry. I mean basically,
• 36:01
  Speaker 1: you know, we are our economy is our tech industry
• 36:05
  Speaker 1: is completely dependent on these rare earth materials and some
• 36:10
  Speaker 1: of the magnets that ninety three percent of which are
• 36:14
  Speaker 1: made by the Chinese. It is pretty shocking that whoever
• 36:21
  Speaker 1: thought of this trade war didn't think of this in
• 36:22
  Speaker 1: advance and didn't plan for this. There's no reason in
• 36:26
  Speaker 1: the United States needs to be dependent on China for
• 36:28
  Speaker 1: any of this. Indeed, in the nineteen eighties, we were
• 36:31
  Speaker 1: the leading minor and refiner of rare earth materials in
• 36:35
  Speaker 1: the world. We gave that up. We gave that up
• 36:38
  Speaker 1: primarily for environmentalist reasons. We gave it up because we're
• 36:42
  Speaker 1: anti mining. We gave it up because we're anti refining,
• 36:46
  Speaker 1: because refining is a relatively duty business. It would take
• 36:51
  Speaker 1: some time, but it is not impossible. It actually is
• 36:54
  Speaker 1: quite easy to bring back the mining to the United States.
• 36:58
  Speaker 1: It would require appealings of the regulations and laws the
• 37:02
  Speaker 1: restrict ability.
• 37:03
  Speaker 2: To mine in the US.
• 37:03
  Speaker 1: It would be involve getting rid of on the regulation
• 37:06
  Speaker 1: and laws that restrict the production of these as well.
• 37:12
  Speaker 1: It seems like that as a direction of the Trump
• 37:14
  Speaker 1: administration would like to go, but it does seem like
• 37:19
  Speaker 1: in order to do that they're going to have to
• 37:21
  Speaker 1: really repeal some regulations and actually go to Congress and
• 37:23
  Speaker 1: get it done. In the meantime, the Earth government is
• 37:26
  Speaker 1: investing in rare earth material companies in the United States,
• 37:30
  Speaker 1: which is the wrong approach, which is only going to
• 37:32
  Speaker 1: distort the market, create winners and losers instead of letting
• 37:37
  Speaker 1: just lowering the barriers, eliminating government obstruction and letting the
• 37:43
  Speaker 1: market rip, which is the right way to approach things
• 37:46
  Speaker 1: like this. But you know, the United States could become
• 37:51
  Speaker 1: the world's largest manufacturer of rare earth and refiner of
• 37:54
  Speaker 1: rare earth.
• 37:54
  Speaker 2: It might be more expensive to.
• 37:56
  Speaker 1: Do in the US, but for national security reasons and
• 37:59
  Speaker 1: for other reasons, that.
• 38:00
  Speaker 2: Might not be that big of an issue.
• 38:03
  Speaker 1: And the quicker, the faster they do it. I mean,
• 38:07
  Speaker 1: if you care about national defense, if you care about
• 38:11
  Speaker 1: American national defense, then this should be like number one
• 38:16
  Speaker 1: issue on your agenda. This should be the thing that
• 38:18
  Speaker 1: you push Congress about. This is the thing to really,
• 38:23
  Speaker 1: you know, focus the Department of Energy and I'm sure
• 38:30
  Speaker 1: the Interior Department on allowing mining. We saw some of
• 38:34
  Speaker 1: that with this bill that was just passed that allowed
• 38:37
  Speaker 1: more mining in three states. Need a lot more of that,
• 38:40
  Speaker 1: a lot more of that. Now, some of that is happening.
• 38:45
  Speaker 1: And one of the ways we can see that it
• 38:48
  Speaker 1: is happening is that private investors are now focusing some
• 38:52
  Speaker 1: of their money on things like earth companies. Now, part
• 38:57
  Speaker 1: of that might be because they figure, well, if the
• 39:00
  Speaker 1: US government is investing in them, it's a no lose
• 39:04
  Speaker 1: proposition to invest in ourselves, because the government will always
• 39:08
  Speaker 1: bail out companies that they invest in. It's part of
• 39:13
  Speaker 1: this as a consequence of cronyism that for example, JP
• 39:15
  Speaker 1: Morgan just announced that they're going to be investing ten
• 39:20
  Speaker 1: billion dollars of their own money of JP Morgan funds
• 39:25
  Speaker 1: in the defense and rare earth companies. And here defense
• 39:30
  Speaker 1: we're meeting not old line defense, but cutting edge new
• 39:34
  Speaker 1: defense industry. They realize that the US is pivoting and
• 39:37
  Speaker 1: the US is going to be buying a lot of
• 39:40
  Speaker 1: kind of drones again, drones that are in robots that
• 39:46
  Speaker 1: have military applications, and also rare earth is going to
• 39:50
  Speaker 1: be required AI and so you know a lot of
• 39:56
  Speaker 1: these supply chains are going to come back to the
• 39:59
  Speaker 1: United States.
• 39:59
  Speaker 2: And that's good thing.
• 40:01
  Speaker 1: And all the US government really needs to do, really
• 40:05
  Speaker 1: needs to.
• 40:05
  Speaker 2: Do, is drop the restrictions.
• 40:10
  Speaker 1: The rest seems like China is helping by China restricting
• 40:15
  Speaker 1: the sale of all these goods and products. So JPM
• 40:21
  Speaker 1: Morgans when invest in real earth mining, missile manufacturing, and
• 40:26
  Speaker 1: maybe American made magnets, and that's the way it should be.
• 40:29
  Speaker 1: It should be private enterprise picking the winners and losers,
• 40:34
  Speaker 1: private enterprise putting its own skin in the game and
• 40:37
  Speaker 1: bringing its expertise to this kind of investment, and the
• 40:40
  Speaker 1: government should stay out of it.
• 40:42
  Speaker 2: It should.
• 40:45
  Speaker 1: Lower the barriers, lower the barriers to entry, a low
• 40:49
  Speaker 1: for investment, a low for mining, a love for production,
• 40:53
  Speaker 1: and then move out and then you know, buy the
• 40:55
  Speaker 1: goods that they need when they need them. Just as
• 41:02
  Speaker 1: an aside, not exactly relevant to were worked, but relevant
• 41:05
  Speaker 1: to tariffs and trade wars. This is a really interesting
• 41:11
  Speaker 1: confession by the CEO of Cleveland Cliffs, I think, the
• 41:17
  Speaker 1: second largest of the largest manufacturer of steel in the United.
• 41:20
  Speaker 2: States, Cliff.
• 41:26
  Speaker 1: In twenty twenty four, Cleveland Cliffs lost seven hundred million
• 41:30
  Speaker 1: dollars and in the first quarter of twenty twenty five
• 41:35
  Speaker 1: it announced that they were idling or closing down six
• 41:40
  Speaker 1: mills across several states.
• 41:43
  Speaker 2: But they're very happy.
• 41:46
  Speaker 1: With twenty five with Trump's original twenty five percent tasal
• 41:50
  Speaker 1: steel and super happy when Trump raised.
• 41:56
  Speaker 2: That ap to fifty percent in June.
• 42:00
  Speaker 1: The CEO of Cliffs, you know, said, the taff's are
• 42:06
  Speaker 1: already beginning to have a positive effect. Well, of course,
• 42:08
  Speaker 1: he's raised prices dramatically. He's raised prices on his customers, dramatically,
• 42:14
  Speaker 1: raise prices, and therefore it's having a positive impact on
• 42:18
  Speaker 1: his business. And then he says, and this is this
• 42:21
  Speaker 1: is a quote from him. I have been fighting for
• 42:24
  Speaker 1: this for almost thirty years. I am very happy with
• 42:27
  Speaker 1: fifty percent, and without giving any details, I have my
• 42:31
  Speaker 1: fingerprints on the fifty percent.
• 42:34
  Speaker 2: In other words, I influenced that.
• 42:38
  Speaker 1: So we now have American businessman proud of their own coneyism,
• 42:44
  Speaker 1: of their own you know, manipulating the government or the
• 42:47
  Speaker 1: president in this case, to put on a tariffs to
• 42:51
  Speaker 1: protect them, protect them, inflict huge damage on other parts
• 42:55
  Speaker 1: of the economy, on the customers in particularly the people
• 42:58
  Speaker 1: who used steal, but protect them. And and yeah, you know,
• 43:05
  Speaker 1: cliff Is, they're doing fine because they're raising prices significantly.
• 43:10
  Speaker 2: Even if demand drops a little bit.
• 43:12
  Speaker 1: They can raise prices so much because they don't have
• 43:16
  Speaker 1: to worry about it. Right, fifty percent hoists. That's a
• 43:18
  Speaker 1: lot of room to raise prices. All right, some good news.
• 43:25
  Speaker 1: We've got three good news stories. Three good news stories.
• 43:29
  Speaker 1: The first one is that the Supreme Court, Supreme Court
• 43:33
  Speaker 1: of the United States has refused to take up Alex
• 43:38
  Speaker 1: Jones's appeal on the one point four billion dollar judgment
• 43:43
  Speaker 1: against him.
• 43:45
  Speaker 2: Now, this is fantastic.
• 43:47
  Speaker 1: Alex Jones will actually have to pay up, pay up
• 43:51
  Speaker 1: to the families, you know that he had defamed the
• 43:58
  Speaker 1: families of the Sandy Hook massacre. Now, I don't know
• 44:01
  Speaker 1: if one point four billion dollars is the right amount.
• 44:04
  Speaker 1: I don't know if these amounts have not reached the
• 44:08
  Speaker 1: absurd level, absurd levels and so on. But I'm happy
• 44:14
  Speaker 1: to see Alex Jones completely bankrupted, and I think he
• 44:18
  Speaker 1: deserves it for his conspiracy theory, laiden lying and deception
• 44:26
  Speaker 1: of people, and in this case, the faming of parents
• 44:30
  Speaker 1: whose children twenty children and twenty and six educated died
• 44:34
  Speaker 1: were killed in what he called the government false flag,
• 44:39
  Speaker 1: which is just unbelievably disgusting and repulsive. Why anybody ever
• 44:48
  Speaker 1: watches Alex Jones is beyond me. I mean, please don't
• 44:51
  Speaker 1: tell me you listen and watch Alex Jones, because I
• 44:55
  Speaker 1: will be the post.
• 44:58
  Speaker 2: It's disgusting.
• 45:00
  Speaker 1: I mean, this ban should be banned, not banned by
• 45:02
  Speaker 1: the government, banned by social media, and certainly banned by you,
• 45:06
  Speaker 1: the listener. Anyway, he connected Jewey, you know, basically found
• 45:18
  Speaker 1: him guilty of defamation and he had to pay a
• 45:22
  Speaker 1: nine with damages of nine hundred and sixty five million
• 45:26
  Speaker 1: dollars plus four hundred and seventy three million in penalties
• 45:31
  Speaker 1: for the years of lies and harassment. It wasn't just lying,
• 45:34
  Speaker 1: he harassed these families. So while he argued free.
• 45:42
  Speaker 2: Speech, you do not have.
• 45:46
  Speaker 1: The right to defame other people. You do not have
• 45:48
  Speaker 1: a right to harass if it's real harassment.
• 45:53
  Speaker 2: This is great.
• 45:54
  Speaker 1: This didn't even take a hearing it in, you know,
• 45:59
  Speaker 1: didn't even blink. It had showed no sympathy. And basically, yeah,
• 46:04
  Speaker 1: he's now bankrupt. Now he's still broadcasting, and there's still
• 46:09
  Speaker 1: other lawsuits against him, but it does look like financially
• 46:14
  Speaker 1: Alex Jones has finished. It would be great if he
• 46:17
  Speaker 1: was kicked off the air. Maybe he can he can
• 46:20
  Speaker 1: co host a show with Tucker Carlson. But other than that,
• 46:25
  Speaker 1: I mean, the guy's finished completely. And that's good news.
• 46:28
  Speaker 1: That's good news.
• 46:30
  Speaker 2: Good news story number one.
• 46:31
  Speaker 1: We have four full good news stories.
• 46:33
  Speaker 2: I mean, that's a lot.
• 46:36
  Speaker 1: I promise more good news, right, I mean, this is
• 46:39
  Speaker 1: this is an interesting one. Right, So for years, I
• 46:43
  Speaker 1: and many other economists and others have been arguing that, look,
• 46:46
  Speaker 1: the reason tuition at universities goes up like this is
• 46:51
  Speaker 1: because basically the government is willing to write a loan
• 46:55
  Speaker 1: check for any amount, and the more the university raised tuition,
• 47:02
  Speaker 1: government is willing to write big loan checks. And students
• 47:06
  Speaker 1: are like, I just want to go to Harvard. I'll
• 47:09
  Speaker 1: figure out how to pay it later. And it's just
• 47:14
  Speaker 1: ramped up and ramped up and ramped up and ramped up.
• 47:16
  Speaker 1: And the government not like a bank. If you go
• 47:19
  Speaker 1: to a bank for a loan, they want to know
• 47:21
  Speaker 1: you can pay it back. They would ask you what
• 47:24
  Speaker 1: degree you're getting at, what university, what's your employment prospects
• 47:27
  Speaker 1: after after getting in the degree, And they would not
• 47:33
  Speaker 1: be willing to fund some of the outrageous levels of
• 47:36
  Speaker 1: tuition that are out there in the world because there's
• 47:38
  Speaker 1: just no way to pay those back, those kind of
• 47:42
  Speaker 1: loans back.
• 47:45
  Speaker 2: Anyway. So we've got an experiment right now. It turns
• 47:47
  Speaker 2: out in the big.
• 47:48
  Speaker 1: Beautiful Bill there was some good there's some good provisions.
• 47:52
  Speaker 1: In the big bad, big bad no big big beautiful
• 47:56
  Speaker 1: something something Bill, there was a provision basically said the
• 48:01
  Speaker 1: will for professional schools like law school, the government is
• 48:08
  Speaker 1: capping the amounts of bar lending it will do at
• 48:14
  Speaker 1: fifty thousand dollars a year with a total cap of
• 48:19
  Speaker 1: two hundred thousand. That if you can get fifty thousand
• 48:22
  Speaker 1: for four years, not more than that.
• 48:25
  Speaker 2: So if you want to go to.
• 48:26
  Speaker 1: Law school, whatever the tuition happens to be, you can
• 48:31
  Speaker 1: only get from the government fifty thousand a year. Now,
• 48:35
  Speaker 1: this is an interesting experiment, that is is this fifty
• 48:38
  Speaker 1: thousand cap going to have a mitigating impact on tuition
• 48:44
  Speaker 1: for example at law schools, at professional schools. Well, you know,
• 48:48
  Speaker 1: phase one of the experiment is in Santa Clara Law
• 48:53
  Speaker 1: School has just published its tuition raid for the twenty
• 48:55
  Speaker 1: six twenty seven school. Yeah, when this law goes into effect. Now,
• 49:00
  Speaker 1: let me just give you a sense of tuition over
• 49:03
  Speaker 1: the last ten eleven years at Santa Clara. Santa Clara
• 49:07
  Speaker 1: a university where I taught for many years at the
• 49:09
  Speaker 1: business school, this is the school of Law. In twenty
• 49:13
  Speaker 1: fifteen sixteen, tuition was forty three thousand, seven hundred. By
• 49:17
  Speaker 1: eighteen nineteen, it was fifty one thousand, six hundred and
• 49:21
  Speaker 1: seventy six hundred ninety six. By twenty one twenty two,
• 49:26
  Speaker 1: it was fifty four thousand, seven hundred and sixty eight
• 49:29
  Speaker 1: by twenty five, twenty six.
• 49:31
  Speaker 2: This year right this school year.
• 49:34
  Speaker 1: It's sixty three thousand, two hundred and eighty all bankled
• 49:39
  Speaker 1: by the government who's writing checks. Guess what it is
• 49:44
  Speaker 1: in twenty six twenty seven. In twenty six twenty seven,
• 49:49
  Speaker 1: tuition at Santa Clara is fifty thousand a year, which
• 49:55
  Speaker 1: is the cap that the government is placed on the
• 50:02
  Speaker 1: amount of lending exactly fifty. So, yeah, tuition has come down. Yeah,
• 50:10
  Speaker 1: you want to call it a win, it's a win.
• 50:12
  Speaker 1: I don't consider government manipulating these things a win. Governments
• 50:16
  Speaker 1: shouldn't be issuing loans periodment. If you really want to
• 50:21
  Speaker 1: do a way that a body of education, the best
• 50:23
  Speaker 1: way to do that is to get rid of all
• 50:26
  Speaker 1: government loans for education. You know, the government taking over
• 50:30
  Speaker 1: the loan business was something that Obama did to executive order.
• 50:35
  Speaker 1: It could be reversed to executive order, and the government
• 50:39
  Speaker 1: should stop guaranteeing all of this.
• 50:41
  Speaker 2: That probably needs legislation, but just.
• 50:44
  Speaker 1: Get out of the business of student loans and tuition
• 50:47
  Speaker 1: will plummet. Bring the financial markets in. Financial markets will
• 50:53
  Speaker 1: discipline universities. Governments can't. Governments won't.
• 51:00
  Speaker 2: Answer.
• 51:00
  Speaker 1: Markets can, and when they do just a little bit
• 51:02
  Speaker 1: by capping it fifty thousand. Great news.
• 51:05
  Speaker 2: This is good.
• 51:06
  Speaker 1: Once in a while, something happens in the big beautiful bill.
• 51:10
  Speaker 1: That actually is a small move in a positive director.
• 51:13
  Speaker 2: It's just small.
• 51:14
  Speaker 1: But the main benefit here is just to show the
• 51:18
  Speaker 1: truth of something we've been arguing for a long time.
• 51:21
  Speaker 1: He has a little experiment and we can show that
• 51:24
  Speaker 1: it works. All right, let me look, this is a
• 51:28
  Speaker 1: quick story about trans. I mean, one of the one
• 51:34
  Speaker 1: of the interesting phenomena about trans is the the fact
• 51:46
  Speaker 1: that there was a huge spike in trans identification among
• 51:49
  Speaker 1: young people.
• 51:51
  Speaker 2: In the early twenty twenties. I'll show you. I'm going
• 51:56
  Speaker 2: to show you a graph. Yeah, there's a graph, right.
• 52:00
  Speaker 1: And see that. In twenty sixteen, the number of young
• 52:03
  Speaker 1: students self identifying self identifying is neither.
• 52:06
  Speaker 2: Male nor female was two percent.
• 52:08
  Speaker 1: It actually went down by twenty nineteen to I don't
• 52:12
  Speaker 1: know a Nikelai Jill amount. It's hard to tell exactly
• 52:16
  Speaker 1: what that amount is. And then it started creeping up.
• 52:20
  Speaker 1: But starting with COVID, starting with twenty twenty, it spiked
• 52:24
  Speaker 1: and it got to the point where about nine percent
• 52:26
  Speaker 1: of all students refused to identify as male or female.
• 52:33
  Speaker 2: By twenty twenty, three.
• 52:36
  Speaker 1: What's amazing is immediately since then twenty twenty four, now
• 52:40
  Speaker 1: twenty twenty five, that number has plummeted, has gone down dramatically. Right.
• 52:48
  Speaker 1: These are, by the way, three different, three different surveys, Right,
• 52:54
  Speaker 1: they all show basically the same thing. The one from
• 52:57
  Speaker 1: andover is the one with the most data. But you
• 53:04
  Speaker 1: can see the fire data, you can see the brown data.
• 53:07
  Speaker 1: You can see they're all basically the same story. And
• 53:12
  Speaker 1: what the shows is that, to some extent, the phenomena
• 53:18
  Speaker 1: of trans in the early twenty twenties was a social phenomena.
• 53:24
  Speaker 1: It was people identifying as trans because it was the
• 53:27
  Speaker 1: cool thing to do.
• 53:29
  Speaker 2: It was the socially beneficial thing to do.
• 53:34
  Speaker 1: You know, being simply a male or female was somewhat
• 53:39
  Speaker 1: looked down on within leftist circles, within university circles. Non
• 53:46
  Speaker 1: Conforming sexual identity, you know, also is in decline if
• 53:50
  Speaker 1: you look here at this graph.
• 53:53
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 53:55
  Speaker 1: So these things are at least to some extent, driven
• 54:01
  Speaker 1: by fad, by fashion, by what's cool.
• 54:05
  Speaker 2: Now, why the change in twenty twenty.
• 54:07
  Speaker 1: Three, I mean, to LUs extent, kind of woke and
• 54:11
  Speaker 1: woke ideology more broadly peaked in twenty twenty three in
• 54:14
  Speaker 1: many respects. But if you actually ask people about their ideology,
• 54:22
  Speaker 1: you know they're not fewer leftists right now than they
• 54:25
  Speaker 1: were in twenty twenty three. The fall left is just
• 54:27
  Speaker 1: a break today as it was in twenty twenty three
• 54:29
  Speaker 1: among students. It's just the deep hot topic has shifted.
• 54:35
  Speaker 1: What happened in twenty twenty three, well, I think what
• 54:38
  Speaker 1: happened in twenty twenty three is Gaza. What happened in
• 54:41
  Speaker 1: twenty twenty three is they adopted a different agenda. It
• 54:48
  Speaker 1: wasn't cutting edge anymore, to be trans. What was cutting
• 54:53
  Speaker 1: edge now was to be prop Palacinian Paamas rather than
• 54:57
  Speaker 1: a peer and self identif as trans. You went out
• 55:03
  Speaker 1: and waved a Palestinian flag and yelled from the river
• 55:07
  Speaker 1: to the sea, even though you didn't know which river,
• 55:09
  Speaker 1: and we'd see, and it participated in sit ins over
• 55:14
  Speaker 1: Gaza and the Palestinians, and you hated on Jews and
• 55:18
  Speaker 1: Israelis in particular, and that became the sexy hot thing.
• 55:22
  Speaker 2: I mean.
• 55:22
  Speaker 1: The thing about the ideology on the left, the whole
• 55:26
  Speaker 1: postmodern ideology that they hold, is how malleable it is
• 55:31
  Speaker 1: to whatever group you think at any particular time, is
• 55:36
  Speaker 1: the one that is suffering is the one that the needs,
• 55:42
  Speaker 1: the needs your model support. It shifted from trans to Palestinia.
• 55:47
  Speaker 1: At least that's my interpretation. I have no no idea
• 55:51
  Speaker 1: if that is backed up by the data. Okay, let's
• 55:53
  Speaker 1: look that is so, that's good news. I mean, I
• 55:58
  Speaker 1: think the transition is always going to be around the atrans,
• 56:03
  Speaker 1: and they're around, but as becoming a big political, big
• 56:09
  Speaker 1: issue that everybody on campus, and I know a lot
• 56:12
  Speaker 1: of parents have had to deal with this their kids
• 56:14
  Speaker 1: suddenly identifying as trans and it being kind of a
• 56:19
  Speaker 1: thing that is all over schools and all over the
• 56:22
  Speaker 1: universities and just super popular.
• 56:26
  Speaker 2: That is probably a fad.
• 56:28
  Speaker 1: And one of the interesting things is going to be
• 56:30
  Speaker 1: what happens if there is some kind of deal in
• 56:33
  Speaker 1: Gaza and if Israel doesn't get dragged into a war there.
• 56:38
  Speaker 1: What does the left go for next? What is the
• 56:40
  Speaker 1: next faty thing? Now you would think you would think
• 56:46
  Speaker 1: that the thing would be illegal immigrants. For some reason,
• 56:51
  Speaker 1: I don't think that that's sexy enough for them, partially
• 56:57
  Speaker 1: because the left is not that pro image. All right,
• 57:03
  Speaker 1: I want to show you this video and you tell
• 57:06
  Speaker 1: me where it is right Where this video is from you'll.
• 57:13
  Speaker 2: Notice vehicles here.
• 57:15
  Speaker 1: I'll just point out, just in case it's too small
• 57:17
  Speaker 1: for you to see, that none of these vehicles have drivers.
• 57:25
  Speaker 1: These are all self driving trucks of various types, self
• 57:32
  Speaker 1: driving things. It's obviously in a port. You can see
• 57:35
  Speaker 1: the big queens in the background. So look at this.
• 57:39
  Speaker 2: It's really cool. I mean, look at them maneuvering, look
• 57:43
  Speaker 2: at them stopping.
• 57:46
  Speaker 1: These vehicles can achieve maximum speeds for thirteen miles an hour.
• 57:52
  Speaker 1: They can transport containers that are up to seventy tons,
• 57:58
  Speaker 1: and all of these Everyone that you're seeing in the
• 58:00
  Speaker 1: video is a self driving, self driving vehicle. Now where
• 58:05
  Speaker 1: is this? Now, everybody you know China? Somebody says the
• 58:10
  Speaker 1: Middle East. I'll go with China. Yeah, China. Actually this
• 58:14
  Speaker 1: is Los Angeles. This is in the port of Long Beach, California.
• 58:19
  Speaker 1: You can actually see on the side of some of
• 58:22
  Speaker 1: these trucks you can see English writing. This is happening
• 58:26
  Speaker 1: right now in California, of all places.
• 58:30
  Speaker 2: Right in spite of.
• 58:31
  Speaker 1: Whatever deal was struck with a longshore man about not
• 58:35
  Speaker 1: bringing in technology into the ports, technology is being brought
• 58:38
  Speaker 1: into the port. You're not going to stop technology from
• 58:41
  Speaker 1: being brought in. It could be on a much larger scale.
• 58:47
  Speaker 1: This is just one terminal which is fully automated. You
• 58:51
  Speaker 1: could automate a lot of the terminals, if not all
• 58:54
  Speaker 1: of the terminals. But I thought this was really, really cool,
• 58:57
  Speaker 1: particularly given that I showed you a bunch of videos
• 58:59
  Speaker 1: of China. I wanted to show you something exciting and
• 59:02
  Speaker 1: interesting and pretty cunning, edge and really cool.
• 59:07
  Speaker 2: Happening in the United States. And again, of all places.
• 59:10
  Speaker 1: Happening in the great state of California, and not a
• 59:13
  Speaker 1: state that many of you necessarily like. All Right, we
• 59:20
  Speaker 1: have very few questions, almost all of them, really, all
• 59:24
  Speaker 1: of them except for one from Michael, and we are
• 59:28
  Speaker 1: way way, way way behind on our targets for the day.
• 59:34
  Speaker 1: We've got a few stickers from Mary Ellen, Thank you,
• 59:36
  Speaker 1: Mary Ellen, and from Stephen Harper, Thank you, Steven. And
• 59:40
  Speaker 1: from Jacob but that's it. Three stickers. So I don't
• 59:44
  Speaker 1: know what's going on.
• 59:45
  Speaker 2: But there is seems to be a strike among.
• 59:50
  Speaker 1: The live attendance at the run book show in terms
• 59:56
  Speaker 1: of the financial support.
• 59:57
  Speaker 2: Remember, this is a trade.
• 1:00:00
  Speaker 1: You listen, you gain value, and there's value, and you
• 1:00:04
  Speaker 1: offer reciprocal value. So please consider asking a question twenty
• 1:00:09
  Speaker 1: dollar questions right now desperately needed. And you can also
• 1:00:15
  Speaker 1: ask any amount fifty one hundred dollars questions particularly good.
• 1:00:20
  Speaker 1: You can do a sticker fifty dollars. Stickers are also good,
• 1:00:23
  Speaker 1: twenty dollars stickers, one hundred dollars stickers. Any of those
• 1:00:26
  Speaker 1: would get us closer to our target quickly. Leven just
• 1:00:29
  Speaker 1: did three dollars. That's good too. We could do a
• 1:00:30
  Speaker 1: bunch of three dollars one. There's the doll lean doing
• 1:00:32
  Speaker 1: three dollars. Maybe we could just do a bunch of
• 1:00:35
  Speaker 1: three dollars ones. There's John for ten. Thank you all right.
• 1:00:38
  Speaker 1: Let me remind you of our sponsors. The ie N
• 1:00:44
  Speaker 1: Institute is a sponsor and nine minu in Student is
• 1:00:47
  Speaker 1: encouraging you to submit essays essays an apples shrug. The
• 1:00:53
  Speaker 1: winning prize is twenty five thousand dollars. Twenty five thousand dollars,
• 1:00:58
  Speaker 1: which is which is quite striking.
• 1:01:02
  Speaker 2: It's a lot of money. Maybe I should write an essay.
• 1:01:04
  Speaker 1: I don't think I qualify, but anyway, if you'd like
• 1:01:07
  Speaker 1: to write an essay, the deadline is really coming up fast.
• 1:01:10
  Speaker 1: It's October thirty first, and you can find out information
• 1:01:15
  Speaker 1: about how to write the essay, what the question is
• 1:01:19
  Speaker 1: you should write on how long?
• 1:01:21
  Speaker 2: And all of that.
• 1:01:22
  Speaker 1: You can find all that information out on the iran
• 1:01:26
  Speaker 1: on iran dot.
• 1:01:27
  Speaker 2: Oak slash dot here.
• 1:01:28
  Speaker 1: And yeah, if you qualify, please think about writing an essay.
• 1:01:32
  Speaker 1: Twenty five thousand dollars. That is quite an inducement, Quite
• 1:01:36
  Speaker 1: an inducement. Lincoln Gaffney is in college, so he qualifies,
• 1:01:41
  Speaker 1: and he should go to Ironman dot oak slash dot
• 1:01:44
  Speaker 1: here and think about writing an essay. What have you
• 1:01:47
  Speaker 1: got to lose a few hours of writing an essay?
• 1:01:50
  Speaker 1: And you might.
• 1:01:51
  Speaker 2: The upside is twenty five thousand dollars. That's significant upside.
• 1:01:57
  Speaker 1: Alex Epstein the number one you know, thinker and write
• 1:02:02
  Speaker 1: and proponent of freedom when it comes to mining and
• 1:02:05
  Speaker 1: when it comes to energy production.
• 1:02:07
  Speaker 2: If you want to understand the.
• 1:02:08
  Speaker 1: Rare earth material issue fully, Alex is the is the
• 1:02:13
  Speaker 1: resource to go to.
• 1:02:15
  Speaker 2: He is the go to resource.
• 1:02:16
  Speaker 1: On anything related to electricity, mining, en findamental regulations and
• 1:02:21
  Speaker 1: of course oil and gas, nuclear, all of that stuff.
• 1:02:25
  Speaker 2: So check him out.
• 1:02:26
  Speaker 1: You'll become a much better communicator. You'll do much better
• 1:02:30
  Speaker 1: in those arguments.
• 1:02:31
  Speaker 2: You have come.
• 1:02:32
  Speaker 1: Come Thanksgiving with family members around these issues. So check
• 1:02:36
  Speaker 1: out his substack alex Epstein dot substack dot com. And
• 1:02:39
  Speaker 1: then finally, hand a Shot Wealth, hand a Shot with
• 1:02:41
  Speaker 1: two Tasndershot Wealth dot com slash y b s. If
• 1:02:46
  Speaker 1: you have.
• 1:02:47
  Speaker 2: You know, if you have.
• 1:02:50
  Speaker 1: Coming up any kind of event where you are going
• 1:02:53
  Speaker 1: to take on significant capital gains and therefore have a
• 1:02:57
  Speaker 1: capital gains tax liability. May be at the end of
• 1:03:00
  Speaker 1: the year because you're selling some stock or maybe you're
• 1:03:02
  Speaker 1: selling your business.
• 1:03:03
  Speaker 2: Check out what what they're offering.
• 1:03:05
  Speaker 1: Check out the offering that they have in terms of
• 1:03:07
  Speaker 1: products that reduce your capital gains tax liability. Check them
• 1:03:12
  Speaker 1: out at hand a Shot two Teaswealth dot com, slash ybs.
• 1:03:16
  Speaker 1: You can also find the interview I did with Robert
• 1:03:18
  Speaker 1: Handershot on my on the playlist for sponsors and you
• 1:03:24
  Speaker 1: can find that video there. All right, guys, thank you again.
• 1:03:29
  Speaker 1: I'll remind you Stickers and questions welcome. We still got
• 1:03:33
  Speaker 1: a way to go in order to get to our targets.
• 1:03:38
  Speaker 1: We don't have that many questions, so we don't have
• 1:03:39
  Speaker 1: that much time to get to the targets. So if
• 1:03:43
  Speaker 1: you're going to do a stick or you do you
• 1:03:45
  Speaker 1: do a question twenty dollars, fifty dollars, hundred dollars would
• 1:03:48
  Speaker 1: get us to our targets a lot faster.
• 1:03:51
  Speaker 2: All right, let's start Michael.
• 1:03:56
  Speaker 1: Michael's asking a lot of the questions here. So you know,
• 1:03:59
  Speaker 1: whatever income we're getting today, it's largely from Michael. Well.
• 1:04:07
  Speaker 1: Twenty first century authoritarianism be more about cronyism than concentration camps. Yeah,
• 1:04:14
  Speaker 1: I think so probably, although you'll have a you won't
• 1:04:18
  Speaker 1: have quite concentration camps. So, but you still have the
• 1:04:20
  Speaker 1: goolag in a sense. You'll still have people disappearing. You're
• 1:04:23
  Speaker 1: still people dropping out of windows. I think, if you
• 1:04:26
  Speaker 1: want to see what of thebtarianism, I think that we're
• 1:04:29
  Speaker 1: heading towards, it looks much more like Putin's Russia than
• 1:04:34
  Speaker 1: it does Nazi Germany or.
• 1:04:38
  Speaker 2: Stalin's Soviet Union.
• 1:04:42
  Speaker 1: Less explicit ideal law, ideology, less no concentration camps, opposition
• 1:04:47
  Speaker 1: people disappearing, people who disagree with the governor, falling out
• 1:04:51
  Speaker 1: of windows. So a lot quiet, a lot more, you know,
• 1:04:59
  Speaker 1: still violent.
• 1:04:59
  Speaker 2: But quite as violent.
• 1:05:03
  Speaker 1: I don't know if Franco Pinochet, Yeah, Pinochet. Pinochet made
• 1:05:09
  Speaker 1: a lot of people disappear, So maybe more like Pinochet fruncle,
• 1:05:13
  Speaker 1: but they the Pinochet was a military coup.
• 1:05:16
  Speaker 2: I don't expect that again.
• 1:05:17
  Speaker 1: I think more like Putin, you get an elected official
• 1:05:20
  Speaker 1: who keeps getting elected, who starts cheating on elections, who
• 1:05:23
  Speaker 1: slowly cumulates power, and through cronyism, builds a collection of
• 1:05:28
  Speaker 1: oligochs who he surrounds himself with, who provide economic protection
• 1:05:35
  Speaker 1: and who he gives favors to, and when they step
• 1:05:38
  Speaker 1: out of line, he drops him out of a window.
• 1:05:41
  Speaker 2: That's the world we're heading towards, I feel.
• 1:05:46
  Speaker 1: Michael says, can you do another discussion with Destiny about
• 1:05:49
  Speaker 1: Mamdani Trump and objectivism. I've spoken to a few people
• 1:05:52
  Speaker 1: who discovered you an objectivesm for your interaction with him.
• 1:05:56
  Speaker 2: I mean, what's his name.
• 1:06:00
  Speaker 1: Destiny has made himself more difficult to talk to because
• 1:06:04
  Speaker 1: he has now, you know, after Charlie Cooke's murder, he
• 1:06:09
  Speaker 1: has said some pretty disgusting, hovable things, and it makes
• 1:06:14
  Speaker 1: me much more skeptical about going on a show and
• 1:06:17
  Speaker 1: engaging with him. So I don't know.
• 1:06:22
  Speaker 2: I might give it some time and see what happens.
• 1:06:24
  Speaker 1: But he's talked about the fact that conservatives should be
• 1:06:27
  Speaker 1: fearful when they got into the public and he said
• 1:06:30
  Speaker 1: some things. He said a bunch of different things that
• 1:06:34
  Speaker 1: are going to that I think are really disturbing and
• 1:06:38
  Speaker 1: taking up to the level of should I even.
• 1:06:41
  Speaker 2: Be associated with this person?
• 1:06:43
  Speaker 1: Now? I agree that going on a show like that
• 1:06:49
  Speaker 1: brings in a bunch of people, and we might want
• 1:06:52
  Speaker 1: to look for other places like that that can do
• 1:06:54
  Speaker 1: a similar thing.
• 1:06:56
  Speaker 2: We'll see. I'm hoping that this debate with the Socialist.
• 1:07:00
  Speaker 1: Will will also bring in some new people, will also
• 1:07:03
  Speaker 1: get some real views.
• 1:07:06
  Speaker 2: I you know, I don't know.
• 1:07:11
  Speaker 1: Toko says this, and he also sleeps with men? Why
• 1:07:14
  Speaker 1: is that a problem? You can sleep with whoever you
• 1:07:16
  Speaker 1: want to. I don't care if you sleep with men
• 1:07:19
  Speaker 1: or not. The question is are you Are you threatening
• 1:07:23
  Speaker 1: people with violence? Are you? You know, he's been accused
• 1:07:29
  Speaker 1: of sleeping with with with you know, very young girls,
• 1:07:34
  Speaker 1: you know, all kinds of stuff like that.
• 1:07:35
  Speaker 2: I don't know.
• 1:07:36
  Speaker 1: Of course, being a public figure, you get accused of
• 1:07:38
  Speaker 1: lots of different things, So the question is what sticks
• 1:07:41
  Speaker 1: and what makes sense and what doesn't. But his accusations
• 1:07:44
  Speaker 1: and his stance after Charlie Cook's death made him really problematic,
• 1:07:50
  Speaker 1: and then lots of people have come to me and said,
• 1:07:53
  Speaker 1: don't go anywhere near him because he's a pedophile, you know,
• 1:07:56
  Speaker 1: But that I just don't know that one. All right,
• 1:07:59
  Speaker 1: Let's see, I think I think Lemon and Darlene and John,
• 1:08:02
  Speaker 1: but I should thank Enrich and let's see lost some
• 1:08:06
  Speaker 1: logic and friend Hopper for this stickers, Thank you guys,
• 1:08:09
  Speaker 1: slowly slowly slow and Jason, thank you Jason, slowly, slowly, slowly,
• 1:08:14
  Speaker 1: very slowly chipping away. We have no whales today. The
• 1:08:18
  Speaker 1: only way we have is is Michael, who's decided to
• 1:08:21
  Speaker 1: spread his waleness over many many questions, which is all good.
• 1:08:26
  Speaker 1: So but yes, I mean in no whales study coming
• 1:08:28
  Speaker 1: in with big leaps that get us to the.
• 1:08:32
  Speaker 2: Number we need to get to.
• 1:08:34
  Speaker 1: Anyway, We'll we'll, we'll, we'll hold off on destiny for
• 1:08:37
  Speaker 1: a while and see how it all shakes up.
• 1:08:40
  Speaker 2: Michael.
• 1:08:41
  Speaker 1: Imagine Churchill letting Nazi stay in power in Germany and
• 1:08:45
  Speaker 1: being praised by making a deal with Hitler to release
• 1:08:48
  Speaker 1: some English prisoners. Yeah, I mean I think not only that,
• 1:08:52
  Speaker 1: I mean I'm god. I mean people are going after
• 1:08:55
  Speaker 1: me for not giving Trump enough credit and for not
• 1:08:58
  Speaker 1: seeing how great Trump is and what the giant trump.
• 1:09:01
  Speaker 2: Is and all of this stuff.
• 1:09:02
  Speaker 1: But you're absolutely right. I mean, what did he do here?
• 1:09:05
  Speaker 1: He made his or compromise with monsters. And I'm happy
• 1:09:08
  Speaker 1: that the hostage is being released, but compromise with monsters,
• 1:09:13
  Speaker 1: that's pretty disgusting. Yeah, I'll just say that's Soku just
• 1:09:24
  Speaker 1: because of this issue. He's mutual objectivism. I do not
• 1:09:28
  Speaker 1: have anything against people who sleep with who are gay.
• 1:09:32
  Speaker 2: I don't think.
• 1:09:33
  Speaker 1: Ultimately, you know, iron ran well, Ironman had you know,
• 1:09:37
  Speaker 1: did not like it. You know, Lenipeakov has said that
• 1:09:40
  Speaker 1: it is model not a model issue, and he landed
• 1:09:43
  Speaker 1: up Lenipeakov supported gay marriage, and uh so, you know,
• 1:09:47
  Speaker 1: the objectivist movement is.
• 1:09:51
  Speaker 2: Not anti gay at all at all.
• 1:09:53
  Speaker 1: Indeed, many gays objectivists and a part of this movement.
• 1:09:57
  Speaker 1: So no, I think Ironman was mistaken in her evaluation
• 1:10:02
  Speaker 1: of homosexuality. And yeah, and it's one of the issues
• 1:10:08
  Speaker 1: in which we disagree, and today it's very much normalized
• 1:10:12
  Speaker 1: within the objective's movement. So check out what Lennapeakoff said
• 1:10:16
  Speaker 1: about it. Cook, thank you for the sticker. I appreciate it,
• 1:10:24
  Speaker 1: all right, Alex A twenty dollars question. Finally, the first
• 1:10:27
  Speaker 1: one today I work with a convention in New Orleans.
• 1:10:32
  Speaker 1: It's focused on science and innovation. They are speakers who
• 1:10:36
  Speaker 1: focus on philosophy. It is fairly left and hostile to objectivism.
• 1:10:41
  Speaker 1: But would love to get you AARI or an AARI fellow.
• 1:10:45
  Speaker 1: To get you or an Aari fellow, assume you want
• 1:10:47
  Speaker 1: to get us on the program. Yeah, I mean that
• 1:10:50
  Speaker 1: would be great if they'll take us. So if you
• 1:10:53
  Speaker 1: can find some topic that might appeal to them, maybe
• 1:10:59
  Speaker 1: a thing that where we are defending the Enlightenment, where
• 1:11:03
  Speaker 1: we are we are anti Christian and defending the Enlightenment
• 1:11:06
  Speaker 1: and defending science and defending reason, maybe that would be
• 1:11:09
  Speaker 1: a good topic for them. It's it's the topic of
• 1:11:12
  Speaker 1: my book that's coming out with Don next year. And
• 1:11:17
  Speaker 1: there are a number of objectives who can talk about
• 1:11:19
  Speaker 1: this issue. But maybe that's what you can do. I'm
• 1:11:21
  Speaker 1: also gonna you know, uh we could also talk about
• 1:11:24
  Speaker 1: the philosophical Pea condition of Pea conditions uh on on
• 1:11:32
  Speaker 1: science and innovation. UH. So there are a lot of
• 1:11:35
  Speaker 1: topics we could do that this group might not find
• 1:11:39
  Speaker 1: as offensive as I don't know, a talk on capitalism,
• 1:11:42
  Speaker 1: although we'd want to slowly weave in capitalism.
• 1:11:45
  Speaker 2: Uh, get them, get them on board.
• 1:11:47
  Speaker 1: So uh anyway, Alex, Yeah, I mean if you if
• 1:11:51
  Speaker 1: you need anything for me, then just drop me an email. Right,
• 1:11:54
  Speaker 1: you're on at your on bookshow dot com. Your on
• 1:11:57
  Speaker 1: at yourn bookshow dot com.
• 1:12:00
  Speaker 2: We could discuss it all right, Michael.
• 1:12:03
  Speaker 1: How are the Nazis able to put the fashion in fascism?
• 1:12:10
  Speaker 1: Why do evil regimes have the nicest uniforms whereas free
• 1:12:14
  Speaker 1: societies have dumpy, oversized uniforms.
• 1:12:16
  Speaker 2: And don't march well? Information well?
• 1:12:19
  Speaker 1: Because authoritarianism requires, particularly fascism, you know, requires.
• 1:12:29
  Speaker 2: It's not strong in fashion.
• 1:12:31
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 1:12:32
  Speaker 2: Uniform is not fashion. Uniform is monotone.
• 1:12:35
  Speaker 1: Uniform is everybody looking the same, everybody wearing the same uniform,
• 1:12:40
  Speaker 1: everybody marching in lock step, which is all consistent with collectivism.
• 1:12:44
  Speaker 1: I mean, I think it's a tribute to the American
• 1:12:47
  Speaker 1: and Israeli military that they cannot march well and that
• 1:12:51
  Speaker 1: they don't look great information because Israeli and American militaries,
• 1:12:57
  Speaker 1: to some extent or another, are not collectivistic militaries.
• 1:13:00
  Speaker 2: They're basically individualistic militaries.
• 1:13:03
  Speaker 1: They emphasize individual you know, initiative and individual thought. This
• 1:13:08
  Speaker 1: is why special forces guys. It looks so sloppy, and
• 1:13:12
  Speaker 1: they have beards and they you know, they just look
• 1:13:14
  Speaker 1: like normal guys. They they don't wear any special uniform
• 1:13:19
  Speaker 1: with lots of ribbons. And the more elite the unit,
• 1:13:23
  Speaker 1: the more sloppy they are, because the more elite the unit.
• 1:13:26
  Speaker 2: The more individualistic they are.
• 1:13:29
  Speaker 1: So I do not I do not think that that
• 1:13:38
  Speaker 1: it's fashion that was brought into fascism. Fashion is individualistic.
• 1:13:43
  Speaker 1: Fashion does everybody wears something different?
• 1:13:45
  Speaker 2: Fashion?
• 1:13:46
  Speaker 1: Good fashion is where people are especially in themselves differently
• 1:13:51
  Speaker 1: through clothes, not all the same. So yeah, I mean
• 1:14:00
  Speaker 1: it's easy to get people to march and lockstep all
• 1:14:03
  Speaker 1: wear the same thing, keep everything cleaner. Need when they
• 1:14:07
  Speaker 1: are told that they as individuals mean nothing and they
• 1:14:11
  Speaker 1: are there only to represent the collective and the group,
• 1:14:15
  Speaker 1: and they must sacrifice the individuality for that group, and
• 1:14:19
  Speaker 1: they must disappear as individuals action Jackson, Which is more
• 1:14:27
  Speaker 1: important for progress? Art or science? Is one dependent on
• 1:14:31
  Speaker 1: the other? Or is this a false dichotomy? Yeah, I mean,
• 1:14:34
  Speaker 1: I definitely think it's a false dichotomy. You need both.
• 1:14:38
  Speaker 1: Art tends to come has historically tended to come first,
• 1:14:42
  Speaker 1: in a sense that the only example we have, which
• 1:14:45
  Speaker 1: is the Renaissance.
• 1:14:46
  Speaker 2: You saw art.
• 1:14:49
  Speaker 1: Become great, individualistic, positive sense of life based on science
• 1:14:56
  Speaker 1: and reason in a sense before science took off. It
• 1:15:01
  Speaker 1: took a couple of hundred years before science caught up
• 1:15:04
  Speaker 1: to the arts.
• 1:15:05
  Speaker 2: You could even.
• 1:15:05
  Speaker 1: Argue that in Greece, sculpture was first science for second,
• 1:15:10
  Speaker 1: or art was first science for second. But I don't
• 1:15:13
  Speaker 1: know if that's necessary forever. Maybe it's easier to get
• 1:15:20
  Speaker 1: the right philosophical ideas at the sense of life level,
• 1:15:24
  Speaker 1: which then is reflected in the art, and then to
• 1:15:28
  Speaker 1: get it at the level of okay, this is how
• 1:15:31
  Speaker 1: I do it in order to be it reflected in
• 1:15:33
  Speaker 1: science a lot more. But I don't know. I don't
• 1:15:36
  Speaker 1: know exactly what the mechanism is. But historically artists come first,
• 1:15:42
  Speaker 1: but it doesn't matter. They feed off of each other,
• 1:15:46
  Speaker 1: and art advanced partially through science. So for example, one
• 1:15:50
  Speaker 1: of the great achievements of the Renaissance was something, let's
• 1:15:54
  Speaker 1: say a perspective. Well, perspective had.
• 1:15:57
  Speaker 2: Is a science.
• 1:15:58
  Speaker 1: It's math, it's it's figuring out, it's geometry, it's figuring
• 1:16:02
  Speaker 1: out how perspective works. Or in sculpture and in painting.
• 1:16:06
  Speaker 1: I think anatomy. Well, I mean anatomy coughing up bodies
• 1:16:11
  Speaker 1: and figuring out how the muscles works. That's science. So
• 1:16:15
  Speaker 1: to some extent they have to go together. But there's
• 1:16:18
  Speaker 1: no one way to change the culture. You need it all,
• 1:16:21
  Speaker 1: and there's no way to guide this thing, because it's
• 1:16:24
  Speaker 1: not like the artists could be scientists and scientists could
• 1:16:27
  Speaker 1: be artists and just to flip them, just convince them
• 1:16:29
  Speaker 1: to be something else. Some people are going to be
• 1:16:32
  Speaker 1: more likely to be artists and some people are more
• 1:16:33
  Speaker 1: likely to be scientists, and you need them all.
• 1:16:36
  Speaker 2: So I think it's a false dichotomy.
• 1:16:40
  Speaker 1: Andy, thank you. Do you have any recommend read reading
• 1:16:44
  Speaker 1: regarding your West? Talk about population of a million plus,
• 1:16:49
  Speaker 1: it's interesting to see how cities rose, lasting one hundred
• 1:16:52
  Speaker 1: years then crashed and Compare you know anything like that? Yeah,
• 1:16:57
  Speaker 1: I mean there's a good book on the fall of Rome. Yeah,
• 1:17:00
  Speaker 1: but you're you're asking me for these book titles when
• 1:17:03
  Speaker 1: let me just give my kindo.
• 1:17:04
  Speaker 2: What's it?
• 1:17:12
  Speaker 1: I mean one of my I mean a really good
• 1:17:14
  Speaker 1: book that's broader than just your question, but a really
• 1:17:17
  Speaker 1: good book about rise and fall is the Closing of
• 1:17:21
  Speaker 1: the Western Mind. And then a second volume which is
• 1:17:24
  Speaker 1: the Reopening of the Western Mind. Those two book by
• 1:17:27
  Speaker 1: Charles Freeman. I think those two books are brilliant. I
• 1:17:30
  Speaker 1: really really, I really really recommend those. So the Closing
• 1:17:35
  Speaker 1: of the Western Mind and the and the Reopening of
• 1:17:37
  Speaker 1: the Western Mind. You'll learn a lot.
• 1:17:41
  Speaker 2: About about these things there.
• 1:17:44
  Speaker 1: And then there's this book about the Fall of Rome,
• 1:17:48
  Speaker 1: which I found really really good and you know, kind
• 1:17:52
  Speaker 1: of combating some of the politically correct stuff that's out
• 1:17:55
  Speaker 1: now that basically says, oh, Rome never fell, there was
• 1:17:59
  Speaker 1: no dark ages. I mean, this guy shows it shows
• 1:18:02
  Speaker 1: very clearly that there was a dockage. Uh let me
• 1:18:06
  Speaker 1: see where is it.
• 1:18:10
  Speaker 2: Let me just search.
• 1:18:13
  Speaker 1: Mm hmm in my library. God, yeah, I don't know
• 1:18:22
  Speaker 1: why it's not coming up. Hmmm yeah, I don't. I
• 1:18:42
  Speaker 1: don't remember the exactly something. The Fall of Rome.
• 1:18:46
  Speaker 2: Let me just do one more thing to look for
• 1:18:48
  Speaker 2: this uh in here and then uh and then we'll
• 1:18:54
  Speaker 2: go on.
• 1:18:55
  Speaker 1: Uh oh yeah. The Fall of Rome and the End
• 1:19:04
  Speaker 1: of Civilization by Brian Ward Perkins.
• 1:19:08
  Speaker 2: Brian Ward Perkins. Those are two. So that and the
• 1:19:12
  Speaker 2: Closing and the Reopening of the Western Mind.
• 1:19:15
  Speaker 1: That'll get you going. All right, Roland, thank you for
• 1:19:21
  Speaker 1: the sticker. I think I got everybody else, Okay, Michael.
• 1:19:27
  Speaker 1: Are they trying to restrict journalists because they think Trump
• 1:19:30
  Speaker 1: has dementia? No, this is restricting journalists in the Pentagon.
• 1:19:36
  Speaker 1: They want to restrict journalists because they don't like independent reporting.
• 1:19:40
  Speaker 1: They don't like people putting stuff that they don't want reported.
• 1:19:44
  Speaker 1: They want to be able to control. This is part
• 1:19:46
  Speaker 1: of their authoritarian tendencies. They want to be able to
• 1:19:49
  Speaker 1: control information as it flows out of the Defense Department,
• 1:19:53
  Speaker 1: for example. They don't want journalists to be poking around.
• 1:20:02
  Speaker 1: Have you heard of the Dutch government's takeover of management
• 1:20:04
  Speaker 1: control of next Period, Chinese owned chip maker company with
• 1:20:10
  Speaker 1: headquarters in Netherlands. I had heard of it. I think
• 1:20:13
  Speaker 1: this yesterday the day before yesterday. I haven't read about it,
• 1:20:16
  Speaker 1: so I don't know that much about it. But yes,
• 1:20:18
  Speaker 1: this is part of this battle going on between China
• 1:20:24
  Speaker 1: and the West around chips. There's a Chinese owned chip
• 1:20:30
  Speaker 1: manufacturer in the Netherlands and the government has just taken over,
• 1:20:36
  Speaker 1: violating the property rights of the Chinese owners. Now exactly
• 1:20:41
  Speaker 1: what was in the background, what motivated this and exactly
• 1:20:44
  Speaker 1: how who owned it? Was that the government of China
• 1:20:48
  Speaker 1: was at private Chinese investors. I don't know. I'll have
• 1:20:51
  Speaker 1: to read about it and get back to you, Mary Eleen.
• 1:20:54
  Speaker 1: How much control, if any, does Trump have over NATO?
• 1:20:57
  Speaker 1: Could he stop NATO from attacking Russia if you want
• 1:20:59
  Speaker 1: to to? I think he has a lot of control.
• 1:21:03
  Speaker 1: I think NATO. I'm not sure of this, but NATO
• 1:21:06
  Speaker 1: functions to alge extent by I think unanimous. But also
• 1:21:11
  Speaker 1: think that. Look, the United States has the largest number
• 1:21:17
  Speaker 1: of troops, the largest number of weapons. It's hard for
• 1:21:20
  Speaker 1: NATO countries to use American made weapons like if thirty
• 1:21:22
  Speaker 1: fives without American approval. Trump has a lot of control
• 1:21:27
  Speaker 1: and could, yes, could definitely stop NATO from acting in
• 1:21:31
  Speaker 1: defense of Europe if he wanted to. Yep, it doesn't
• 1:21:38
  Speaker 1: necessarily need it's full fledged support. It doesn't even need
• 1:21:41
  Speaker 1: necessarily to being to engage American soldiers. He could hold
• 1:21:47
  Speaker 1: that NATO even without the Americans could still defeat Russia
• 1:21:51
  Speaker 1: pretty quick, pretty easily. But he could probably veto it
• 1:21:55
  Speaker 1: if he wanted to. Yeah, why would the US want
• 1:21:59
  Speaker 1: to import oil from anywhere when they have so much? Well,
• 1:22:06
  Speaker 1: because oil, there's all kinds of oil. So, for example,
• 1:22:13
  Speaker 1: there is something called very heavy oil, which requires a
• 1:22:17
  Speaker 1: particular way of refining it in order to get what
• 1:22:21
  Speaker 1: you need out of it.
• 1:22:22
  Speaker 2: And a lot of.
• 1:22:24
  Speaker 1: The US refineries were built for heavy oil. This oil
• 1:22:29
  Speaker 1: is not produced in the United States. You can get
• 1:22:31
  Speaker 1: this sort from Canada, or you can get this sort
• 1:22:34
  Speaker 1: from Venezuela or from Russia, I think from Russia. So
• 1:22:39
  Speaker 1: refineries in Louisiana and in Texas very much depend on
• 1:22:43
  Speaker 1: the supply of this heavy kind of oil rather than
• 1:22:47
  Speaker 1: the relatively light oil that it comes from Texas and
• 1:22:53
  Speaker 1: from the United States. So now, if you were rebuilding
• 1:22:57
  Speaker 1: all the refineries in the United States from scratch, I
• 1:23:00
  Speaker 1: think you would just build them all to deal with
• 1:23:03
  Speaker 1: the kind of oil that is produced in the United States.
• 1:23:05
  Speaker 1: But given that the United States was importing oil for many,
• 1:23:09
  Speaker 1: many decades, the refineries were built for imported oil, not
• 1:23:13
  Speaker 1: for local oil. And it's those differences between the oil
• 1:23:16
  Speaker 1: the input and the local oil that explains why we
• 1:23:20
  Speaker 1: still need to input them the refiners who built for them.
• 1:23:24
  Speaker 1: Alex says, awesome, it would be next fall. Would love
• 1:23:29
  Speaker 1: for you and don to talk about the new book.
• 1:23:31
  Speaker 1: If it's out by then, Yeah, it would be out.
• 1:23:35
  Speaker 1: It should be out by then put it that way.
• 1:23:37
  Speaker 1: So yeah, let me know, you know, let us know
• 1:23:41
  Speaker 1: what we need to do in order to get on
• 1:23:42
  Speaker 1: the program.
• 1:23:45
  Speaker 2: Esoteric dichotomy.
• 1:23:46
  Speaker 1: Not a fan of creative compet competition, not a fan
• 1:23:49
  Speaker 1: of creative competitions. Unlike sports with defined rules, points and scores,
• 1:23:55
  Speaker 1: art writing seems awarded arbitrarily and subjective thoughts maybe, but
• 1:24:01
  Speaker 1: it doesn't have to be uh and and uh, the
• 1:24:06
  Speaker 1: goal is to make it objective. And there's no reason
• 1:24:10
  Speaker 1: it can't be objective. Certainly, writing writing skill, writing communication
• 1:24:15
  Speaker 1: skills are not subjective. They have objective criteria and uh,
• 1:24:21
  Speaker 1: and there's a saying, no reason why you can't have
• 1:24:24
  Speaker 1: creative competitions. Uh. Creativity, whether in the arts or whether
• 1:24:29
  Speaker 1: in essay writing or things like that. You can say
• 1:24:34
  Speaker 1: this is a good essay, this is a bad essay,
• 1:24:36
  Speaker 1: this is an excellent essay, this is mediocre. You can
• 1:24:39
  Speaker 1: absolutely make evaluations and rankings like that that are not subjective,
• 1:24:44
  Speaker 1: that are based on the actual facts. They have to
• 1:24:47
  Speaker 1: do with written communication and the and the and the
• 1:24:51
  Speaker 1: the art.
• 1:24:52
  Speaker 2: Well in the science of com.
• 1:24:54
  Speaker 1: Of writing, of writing, and when it comes to arts,
• 1:24:59
  Speaker 1: that's more complicated because you need a theory of aesthetics.
• 1:25:01
  Speaker 2: For that, but you can develop one and people know.
• 1:25:05
  Speaker 1: People know, yeah, this piece of music is good, that
• 1:25:08
  Speaker 1: piece of music is crap. People who know music know that.
• 1:25:12
  Speaker 1: Whether they can always articulately and explain why the fact
• 1:25:16
  Speaker 1: that they can't explain why it isn't necessarily make it subjective. Music,
• 1:25:21
  Speaker 1: for example, is very difficult to communicate about. All right, guys,
• 1:25:31
  Speaker 1: thank you to the super chatters. Really really appreciate the support.
• 1:25:36
  Speaker 1: I will see you guys tomorrow and yeah, see you
• 1:25:46
  Speaker 1: guys tomorrow. Have a great rest of your week, See
• 1:25:49
  Speaker 1: you soon. Bye, everybody,