Speaker 1: A lot of the fund the principles of Fido la
Speaker 1: little interest and an individual lots. This is the show,
Speaker 1: all right, everybody, welcome to your own book show. On
Speaker 1: this Tuesday, June seventeenth, and another incredibly suspenseful day, but
Speaker 1: the suspense was mostly and mostly Washington, DC. A lot
Speaker 1: of suspense today, but what Donald Trump would actually do?
Speaker 1: Not much suspense about what's going on in uh in Inuan.
Speaker 1: That that's pretty straightforward and uh and uh a knowledgeable. Anyway,
Speaker 1: this morning, well before we get to that, as you know, yesterday, uh,
Speaker 1: Donald Trump declared that he had to go to Washington,
Speaker 1: left the G seven meeting in Canada all in a
Speaker 1: huff and a puff and got on a helicopter and
Speaker 1: shootout I guess if it was Wan or whatever, and
Speaker 1: returned quickly to Washington, DC and meetings today with his
Speaker 1: National Security Council and everything. At this morning, Trump tweated
Speaker 1: an amazing statement. He treated, we now have complete and
Speaker 1: total control of the skies over Yon. Yon had good
Speaker 1: skytrackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but
Speaker 1: it doesn't compare to American maid conceived and manufactured stuff.
Speaker 1: Nobody does it better than good old USA and you know, okay,
Speaker 1: but everybody was wondering, what does he mean by we
Speaker 1: Americans flying in Yon? Have they entered the war? Does
Speaker 1: the US force now have complete control of the skies?
Speaker 1: And the answer was, well, no, none in that sense,
Speaker 1: that is, no American planes are flying up there. So
Speaker 1: who is the WII? And he was asked, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: the the accid in the White House came out with statement,
Speaker 1: he said, we means America. So no credit to these
Speaker 1: Israeli force, No credit to the planners, no credit to
Speaker 1: the to the you know, to the diligence, no credit
Speaker 1: to the fact that almost all the airplanes flying above
Speaker 1: Iran were modified by Israel. But but really no, you know,
Speaker 1: beyond the equipment, the equipment is amazing, the best in
Speaker 1: the world. American makes stuff. I mean, maybe this is
Speaker 1: just a message to China, don't mess with us, but
Speaker 1: we now have complete control of the skies over your
Speaker 1: on taking credit for other people's stuff. That that's great.
Speaker 1: That that that's part of the course of Trump. This
Speaker 1: is perfect visa e. Trump. And uh and again, how
Speaker 1: did how did how did they get all the trackers
Speaker 1: and defensive equipment? How did how did they get all
Speaker 1: the defense systems gone. It wasn't just the equipment. It
Speaker 1: was great strategy, great planning, great flying, you know, and
Speaker 1: it was it was a lot of that equipment was
Speaker 1: taken out by the mossade with drones on the ground.
Speaker 1: Those drones are probably not US drones made in Israel,
Speaker 1: maybe the little ones made in China. So I don't know.
Speaker 1: I don't think. I don't think Donald Trump and and America.
Speaker 1: But Badley is ready, should be ready yet to take
Speaker 1: full credit for everything that's happened in Iran. But this
Speaker 1: is Donald Trump, and he is going to and I
Speaker 1: told you he's waiting. He's he's not gonna intervene until
Speaker 1: he feels like it's one hundred percent safe, there's no downside,
Speaker 1: and he'll get all the credit. He'll get all the credit.
Speaker 1: I mean, as all these debates during the day, we're
Speaker 1: going Willy won't he? WILLI intervene? Won't he intervene? Willie
Speaker 1: sent the b twos won't he? I mean, it was
Speaker 1: like very mixed feelings. On the one hand, be great
Speaker 1: if the United States came in, it would make it
Speaker 1: fast that quicker, easier, and and regime change probably happens quicker.
Speaker 1: But on other hand, other hand, I was going, it's
Speaker 1: all should just finish it, and because if the US
Speaker 1: goes in, we will here forever is or can't get
Speaker 1: it done. It needs American help, you know, without American help,
Speaker 1: it can nothing. You know, it's just not it's almost not.
Speaker 1: It's almost sure it's not, but it's almost not worth it.
Speaker 1: Uh that that that actually that that actually happened. Anyway,
Speaker 1: That wasn't the last tweet, although that was the big
Speaker 1: one that took a lot of credit. Then about an
Speaker 1: hour later, Trump tweets one tweet unconditional surrender all caps,
Speaker 1: best tweet Trump maybe has ever tweeted. You know, if
Speaker 1: somebody knows a better tweet that Trump is tweeted, let
Speaker 1: me know. But unconditional surrender, Yes, that is the spirit.
Speaker 1: That's the kind of spirit we want America a resurrect
Speaker 1: to bring back. Yeah, Iran needs the unconditionally surrender. That
Speaker 1: is the that is the appropriate outcome for what is
Speaker 1: going on right now. And then he followed it up
Speaker 1: with this again kind of I don't know, we know
Speaker 1: exactly where the so called supreme leader is hiding. Here
Speaker 1: is an easy target, but it's safe there, not going
Speaker 1: to take him out in parentheses kill at least not
Speaker 1: for now. We don't, but we don't want missiles shot
Speaker 1: at civilians or American soldiers. Our patients is wearing thin.
Speaker 1: Thank you for your attention on this matter. You know
Speaker 1: how this mind thinks. I have no idea anyway. He's
Speaker 1: not allowing is Old to take out Hominy. He's not
Speaker 1: directly saying he will take out Haemony unless missiles are
Speaker 1: shot at civilians. They've been shot at civilians now every
Speaker 1: night since the war began, or American soldiers, and I
Speaker 1: think that's the key. American soldiers have not been harmed yet. Anyway,
Speaker 1: he tweeted these and and people in Israel got very excited,
Speaker 1: and uh and and people online got very excited, and
Speaker 1: there was there was basically speculation, uh that this was it,
Speaker 1: that that Trump had made the decision. Given his running
Speaker 1: away from leaving G seven in a florry. People decided, Yeah,
Speaker 1: he's made the decision. This is it. The United States
Speaker 1: is going to answer the phrase B two's photo has
Speaker 1: done how many potentially has done one bunker busting bombing
Speaker 1: on his bunker and he's finished. And people getting quite
Speaker 1: excited about this. And then Trump had his entire national
Speaker 1: security team at the White House and they were talking,
Speaker 1: and the meeting went on and on, and then rumors
Speaker 1: had it that as soon as the meeting ended, it
Speaker 1: was ending, Trump was going to make a statement, was
Speaker 1: going to make a statement. My expectation by everybody was
Speaker 1: he was going to make the statement announcing that the
Speaker 1: US is in, the US is coming in, and uh
Speaker 1: then there were then then the rumors were rumors. I guess,
Speaker 1: I guess news was a Tenny hour and Trump it's spoken.
Speaker 1: While this meeting was going on, there was a phone
Speaker 1: call between Natenaw and Trump, and then the meeting ended,
Speaker 1: and I'm like refreshing my Twitter feed and refreshing news feeds.
Speaker 1: Where's where's the Trump's statement? Where's that He's gonna announce
Speaker 1: any minute now that you know US is joining? And nothing? Nothing. Indeed,
Speaker 1: a while after the meetia ended, the White House announced
Speaker 1: that nothing. Trump would not make any announcements until Wednesday.
Speaker 1: Uh so so you know it's not gonna happen. Oh,
Speaker 1: it's not gonna happen.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 1: Who knows what he'll do tomorrow. Nobody knows what he'll do.
Speaker 1: Tomorrow exactly. But it's uh, classic Trump again. Uh. There
Speaker 1: is a lot of disagreement in his cabinet, there's a
Speaker 1: lot of disagreement in MAGA, and he's paying attention. I'm
Speaker 1: sure he's reading Twitter, reading other places, watching the disagreements
Speaker 1: on MAGA. Uh that those who say he should he
Speaker 1: should join those who shay he should not. In some
Speaker 1: ways it's closer to those who say he should not.
Speaker 1: And it's it's back and forth. And I'm sure in
Speaker 1: the debates inside the Security Council, I'm sure JD is
Speaker 1: against it, and uh, hex Sets probably and and you know, Hexays,
Speaker 1: I don't know, probably four he's pretty anti Islam. Rubio
Speaker 1: is probably four getting in hex Sets is probably neutral.
Speaker 1: And I don't know where anybody else is. But but
Speaker 1: I'm pretty sure JD. Vance is on the no side
Speaker 1: on the on the kind of Maga megasite. Uh So,
Speaker 1: who knows, will he won't he will he send in
Speaker 1: the B twos and one he Now what's interesting about
Speaker 1: this is it's the last two days they've been moving
Speaker 1: pieces from all over into the Middle East regions. So
Speaker 1: they move massive quantities, large numbers of refueling airplanes into
Speaker 1: who into Europe in close proximity to the Middle East.
Speaker 1: They've moved F twenty two's, F thirty five, F sixteen's,
Speaker 1: they moved all these airplanes there. The nimits should be
Speaker 1: arriving in the area soon, if it's not already there,
Speaker 1: should be arriving really really soon. And the pieces are
Speaker 1: all there. They they evacuated the air base in Qatar.
Speaker 1: It's empty. Was the point of it anyway, but they've
Speaker 1: evacuated it because it's very close to you to Yuan.
Speaker 1: All the American troops in different bases in Syria and
Speaker 1: in I York, those troops that Trump in his first
Speaker 1: term told us that he was going to bring back
Speaker 1: home and never did. Those troops, Well, they're in bases
Speaker 1: in Syria and Iraq. They're on full alert, you know,
Speaker 1: in case Iwan goes after the and so far nothing.
Speaker 1: It'll be interesting to see what happens in the morning
Speaker 1: and what he says in the morning and then what
Speaker 1: he does, because those are not the same thing what
Speaker 1: he ultimately what he ultimately does. But in many respects,
Speaker 1: at least we forgot that the nuclear program. Trump could
Speaker 1: end this very quickly. I don't know how many thirty
Speaker 1: thousand pound bombs you need to take out photo but
Speaker 1: you know, some and probably more than one, less than five,
Speaker 1: I don't know. I don't know, but that would hit.
Speaker 1: That would finish it. In terms of the Uranian nuclear program.
Speaker 1: Israel's taking out pretty much everything else. And then I
Speaker 1: don't know what Israel needs the US Air Force four
Speaker 1: Other than that, It's like Gusrael was going. I mean,
Speaker 1: no official was doing this, but Israeli's online. We're going.
Speaker 1: Just just lend us the plane, you know, just get
Speaker 1: a couple of hours, just lend us a B too
Speaker 1: and and a couple of bombs, and we'll do it.
Speaker 1: You know, you don't have to you don't have to
Speaker 1: do it. We'll just lane lease whatever the B two
Speaker 1: and we'll take care of it. You don't, you don't
Speaker 1: need to get involved. Just stay home. It's fine, sadly,
Speaker 1: you know, can't do that. Uh And and I don't
Speaker 1: know if Israel has a pilot who can pilot the
Speaker 1: B two? You know, I don't. I have no idea. Anyway,
Speaker 1: everybody's sitting and waiting, basically, I know in Israel this
Speaker 1: sitting and waiting. In the meantime, I did want to
Speaker 1: mention this related to to to you know, to Trump
Speaker 1: and JD. Vance put out a long tweet, kind of
Speaker 1: a long tweet, and which is you know, really interesting
Speaker 1: VISTI all, you know, he can write as compared to Trump,
Speaker 1: and he he's not bombastic and ridiculous. Obviously, he's much
Speaker 1: more of an intellect. But it's also funny because of
Speaker 1: how fonny it is, right, you know, it's it's it's
Speaker 1: it's like, we've got to just let Donald Trumbull decide
Speaker 1: and whatever Donald trumble will decide will be good because
Speaker 1: I trust Donald Trump and I'm completely trusting Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: I mean, here's what the fin of three paragraphs for
Speaker 1: three d in the whole thing. It's up online. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: the president has shown remarkable restraint and keeping on military focus,
Speaker 1: on protecting our troops and protecting our citizens. I don't
Speaker 1: know what that even means, you know, I don't know
Speaker 1: what anyway we may decide. He may decide he it's
Speaker 1: all about him. He may decide he needs to take
Speaker 1: further action to Andy Ranian and Richmond. That decision ultimately
Speaker 1: belongs to the present and of course people are right
Speaker 1: to be worried about found entanglement after the last twenty
Speaker 1: five years of idiotic found policy. But I believe that
Speaker 1: President has earned some trust on this issue, and having
Speaker 1: seen this up close and personal, I can assure you
Speaker 1: that he is only interested in using the American military
Speaker 1: to accomplish the American people's goals. Whether he does that
Speaker 1: is his focus. So I guess Trump has not taken
Speaker 1: the night off. He will go meditate and decide whether
Speaker 1: he is going to do it or not. In the meantime,
Speaker 1: Azrael continues to bomb targets all over western YUK and
Speaker 1: some even in the northeast. But Primelli in Western YUK.
Speaker 1: It's bombing several, has several targets in Tehran itself. Indeed,
Speaker 1: they evacuated a number of neighborhoods and bombed within those
Speaker 1: neighborhoods and outskirts of Tehran in the hills around it.
Speaker 1: There is a massive blaze going on. Supposedly this is
Speaker 1: a factory that produces the ballistic missiles, that makes the
Speaker 1: ballistic missiles. The idea now is that the Israeli Air
Speaker 1: Force continues to attack launchers and ballistic missiles getting ready
Speaker 1: to fire at Israel. But it is also now a
Speaker 1: key focus of THEIRS to destroy Iran's capacity to build
Speaker 1: more ballistic missiles. Anyway, they hit this factory. It's a
Speaker 1: massive fire going up in the hills up above Tehran.
Speaker 1: They also hit a petrol chemical plant, a petrol chemical
Speaker 1: plant that specialized in producing the kind of fuel that
Speaker 1: the ballistic missiles require in order to launch and fly
Speaker 1: all the way it Israel, so they are they are
Speaker 1: taking out, you know, all the infrastructure that is needed
Speaker 1: to build ballistic missiles. Other thing they did today which
Speaker 1: was interesting, remember a few years ago Israeli Mossad actually
Speaker 1: broke into the archives of the Uranian nuclear program. They
Speaker 1: they don't house their archives online on a computer because
Speaker 1: they're afraid is Well will hack it and steal it.
Speaker 1: They housed it in a physical location. And Israel a
Speaker 1: few years ago basically broke in and and made copies
Speaker 1: of everything, and Antennia I was showing them off and
Speaker 1: and and learned a lot about the new program, learned
Speaker 1: the names of the scientists, and learned the where all
Speaker 1: the locations are, learned a lot about the progress they
Speaker 1: were making. Anyway, Iran continued to house all the documents
Speaker 1: remain relating to the nuclear program in this archive. They
Speaker 1: didn't digitalize it, so there's one copy and it's in
Speaker 1: this archive. Well today is well destroyed that archive. And
Speaker 1: I think the logic there is, if they ever want
Speaker 1: to resurrect the nuclear program, no blueprints, no plans, no
Speaker 1: whatever is in that archive exists, they won't have it.
Speaker 1: It's gone, it has been blown up. It's unclear what
Speaker 1: some of the other targets have been today. Not a
Speaker 1: lot of information coming through in terms of the particular targets.
Speaker 1: Is those just you know planes. Again, whereas Trump said,
Speaker 1: we control their space, the reality is that Israel has
Speaker 1: complete control these really air foros, has complete control over
Speaker 1: the space above Tehran and above all of really western
Speaker 1: western Iwan. I mean, this fire above Tehran is if
Speaker 1: you can find a picture of it, it's quite quite spectacular,
Speaker 1: it's quite big, it's impressive. That's a ballistic missile. It's
Speaker 1: called the Kojir Garrison Aerospace Complex, and it's one of
Speaker 1: the largest sites manufacturing ballistic missiles. So I assume they're
Speaker 1: going after the other sites and they're just destroying capabilities.
Speaker 1: And again they're attacking governing infrastructure within the city of Tehran.
Speaker 1: Generally photos out of the city of Tehran show it.
Speaker 1: It looks like a ghosts down. A lot of people
Speaker 1: have left. I think a majority of the population has left.
Speaker 1: Sixteen million people living in Greater Tehran and many, many,
Speaker 1: many of them I don't know if majority, but many, many,
Speaker 1: many of them have left the city by car, go
Speaker 1: stay with relatives, or some of them have homes outside
Speaker 1: in other parts of other parts of Yuan. What else,
Speaker 1: what else happened today in terms of in terms of this,
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, I mean, Iran continues to send ballistic missiles
Speaker 1: into Israel. It continues to launch them. But what is really, really,
Speaker 1: really interesting is the numbers. I mean, the numbers are
Speaker 1: being ridiculously I mean in a positive way, ridiculously low, three, ten,
Speaker 1: most fifteen. Now, the thing about these numbers is that
Speaker 1: these numbers, Israel should be able to knock them all down,
Speaker 1: if you know, if not all of them, almost all
Speaker 1: of them, and the amount of damage that can be
Speaker 1: done is probably minimal. And indeed, most of the most
Speaker 1: recent launches have resulted in no damage, no casualty. They've
Speaker 1: even the bombs have either fallen in empty spaces or
Speaker 1: being shot down by Israeli air defense. So there was
Speaker 1: absolutely no question. Now that Israel has degraded dramatically, i'd
Speaker 1: say degraded Iran's capacity to launch ballistic missiles in its direction.
Speaker 1: The number of missiles is ridiculously small. Again, remember that
Speaker 1: the fear in Israel was that Iran would launch three
Speaker 1: to five hundred missiles out of once or even more
Speaker 1: and just overwhelm the system and cause dozens of not
Speaker 1: hundreds of casualties I mean in Israel. And the fact
Speaker 1: that even on the first night they could only get
Speaker 1: two hundred in there. Then it went down to one hundred,
Speaker 1: then there was like fifty. Now it's anyway from three
Speaker 1: to fifteen. And again an amazing testament to the ability
Speaker 1: of the Israeli Air Force to locate these things destroy them,
Speaker 1: uh and uh and again a testament to the fact
Speaker 1: that they have complete, you know, control over the skies
Speaker 1: and can fly anyway and chase these things down and
Speaker 1: destroy them. I mean right now, it's it's more of
Speaker 1: a hassle that every couple of hours the AREAD shelter.
Speaker 1: Eliot Simons, you have to go into the shelter and
Speaker 1: then come out, and then you go back to sleep,
Speaker 1: and then two hours later, there's a so's it's more that,
Speaker 1: it's more you know, Israeli suffering from lack of sleep
Speaker 1: and stress and all the emotion that goes along with it,
Speaker 1: rather than I think the worst of the damage has
Speaker 1: already been done and we will see if Elon can
Speaker 1: muster anything more. All evening today, the Ranians distributed propaganda videos.
Speaker 1: They claimed that they were going to hit Israel today
Speaker 1: with weapons that you cannot even imagine, weapons that are
Speaker 1: far more sophisticated, better could evade the defense systems, bigger bombs.
Speaker 1: They even hinted that they might have a nuke. So
Speaker 1: all evening they were doing this, and then so every time,
Speaker 1: every time you get a marriage of a ballistic missiles,
Speaker 1: I think some people certainly feared, Oh, do they have
Speaker 1: something different? Do they have something more powerful? Do they
Speaker 1: have something you know, more substantial that is going to
Speaker 1: cause damage? And so far, all of that's just being propaganda.
Speaker 1: As I've often told you, if you listen to the
Speaker 1: show regularly, as I've often told you, authoritarian regimes there's
Speaker 1: weapons are typically not that great, and they might tout it,
Speaker 1: they might advertise them, they might claim the greatest and
Speaker 1: best ever but when it comes down to real performance,
Speaker 1: they're just not that great. And uh, I think that's
Speaker 1: what we're seeing, at least partially seeing with you on
Speaker 1: right now. Uh. They have all they have large numbers,
Speaker 1: but but the weapons systems are a primitive, a bad
Speaker 1: are not sophisticated, and and all their promises for these
Speaker 1: latest generations greatest than ever as far as we know,
Speaker 1: if they've launched any they'd be knocked down. And it's
Speaker 1: not clear they've launched any.
Speaker 2: All right, let's see, Uh just check you to see
Speaker 2: if there's anything happening right now.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, here's the the Iuran's Islamic Revolutionary God.
Speaker 1: They made a statement a little earlier and they said
Speaker 1: this is what they said right Uh now, this is
Speaker 1: py MELI. This is for internal consumption and for Tucker
Speaker 1: Carlson and Dave Smith and all the other idiots who
Speaker 1: believe everything they read coming out of authoritarian regimes. Quote,
Speaker 1: tonight's missile attacks showed that we have gained complete control
Speaker 1: over the skies of the occupied territories, and then its
Speaker 1: residents have become completely defenseless against the Iranian missile attacks.
Speaker 1: So yeah, I believe anything you read from the revolutionary
Speaker 1: God with with the you know, with skepticism. Uh, you know,
Speaker 1: but I'm sure there's a bunch of Maga people out
Speaker 1: there and libertarians out there saying yeah, yeah, yeah, and
Speaker 1: we carry as if we can believe these rat leaves,
Speaker 1: we can't believe in that's their moral and and and
Speaker 1: and you know, just to qui that they make. But
Speaker 1: the reality is, yeah, you can probably believe the Israelis
Speaker 1: because these Raelis are going to be second guests and
Speaker 1: checked by their own media and and everything else. One
Speaker 1: of the fun things that is going on here, Oh,
Speaker 1: I told how many just posted. We must give a
Speaker 1: strong response the terrors Zionist regime. We will show the
Speaker 1: Zionists no mercy. He's eighty something years old, he's a
Speaker 1: little he's a little delusional. One of the funny things
Speaker 1: that's going around these videos is they've got how many
Speaker 1: giving a speech and they overlay it with with sink
Speaker 1: something completely different. Uh. And it's really really it's really
Speaker 1: really funny right about you know, he has no generals,
Speaker 1: it's armies dead. I mean a number of different versions
Speaker 1: of this, but it's it's it's pretty hysterical. Yeah, Oh,
Speaker 1: Mario Nofal actually has some you know, his take on
Speaker 1: what's going on after interviewing all these experts. Now he's
Speaker 1: interviewed a lot of experts who are not experts, who
Speaker 1: know nothing. But let's see what Mario nefal now in
Speaker 1: your father is like the guy who does all the
Speaker 1: news on acts on Twitter. Iran is running out of
Speaker 1: missiles and missile launchers to strike Israel. The attacks have
Speaker 1: dropped ninety percent based on the numbers of missile per wave. Absolutely,
Speaker 1: Israel this complete air dominance over Tehran and Western Iran
Speaker 1: probably more, and Mosada has infiltrated the Ranian military and government. Absolutely,
Speaker 1: Iran is trying to end the war, seeking a deal
Speaker 1: with the US and trying to avoid getting the US
Speaker 1: involved in the war. Absolutely. You know. One of the
Speaker 1: ways you know Ywan is really trying not to escalate
Speaker 1: visa VI the Americans is the Straits of Homos are
Speaker 1: still open. As I told you, twenty five percent of
Speaker 1: all the global oil supply flows through the straits. You
Speaker 1: get all from Saudi Araba, kata Quait, Iraq, Iran all
Speaker 1: goes through the straits. The straits are very narrow. They
Speaker 1: could mine the straits. They have mines, CEA mines. They
Speaker 1: have practiced this, they've trained for this. Israel is not
Speaker 1: taken out the Iranian navy. You know, I'm not sure
Speaker 1: why exactly. Maybe they don't want to encourage them to
Speaker 1: go to go close the Straits of Homos. But Israel's
Speaker 1: not yet you know, completely eliminated the Ranian navy, and
Speaker 1: of course it's not eliminated the ability to export oil
Speaker 1: yet and doesn't look like they're going to, probably at
Speaker 1: the request of Trump. I think it's a cowardly actor.
Speaker 1: I think it should have been one of the first
Speaker 1: things they did. But anyway, but they haven't closed the
Speaker 1: Straits of Homodes. And it could be the Saudis asked
Speaker 1: Israel not to attack the all facilities. It could be
Speaker 1: you know, Arab countries and the Abrama Cod countries have
Speaker 1: all asked Israel not to do that because it'll hurt
Speaker 1: their economies if Iran closes the straits. So the fact
Speaker 1: that they haven't closed the strait means they're trying not to.
Speaker 1: They're trying to kind of deal with the US. They
Speaker 1: think they'll get better terms from Trump than they will
Speaker 1: for Natanio. And one of the reassuring things today supposedly
Speaker 1: was when Trump tweeted unconditional surrender. I think a lot
Speaker 1: of Israelis took that as yeah, no deal, complete surrender,
Speaker 1: or the US is coming into the war. That hasn't
Speaker 1: happened yet, but that was the hope at least. All right,
Speaker 1: let's see what else. A threat against the assassination of
Speaker 1: Supreme Leader to Jamini are either a bluff to force
Speaker 1: Iuan to agree to a deal equivalent to surrender, or
Speaker 1: a genuine threat with the aim of regime change. That's
Speaker 1: pretty good. I mean, it's either bluff or it's not
Speaker 1: a bluff. I mean, it could be seven other possibilities,
Speaker 1: but it's one of those two, it turns out. According
Speaker 1: to Mario, Wow, that's insightful. Uh, the US could get
Speaker 1: involved in a limited strike solely on Uon's NYUKA facilities.
Speaker 1: Evan's response to this attack will dictate whether the US
Speaker 1: escalates an involvement. So they could attack, uh, the the
Speaker 1: the NUKA facilities, and then do the Uranians attack US
Speaker 1: facilities in the Middle East. They supposedly have all the
Speaker 1: missiles lined up to do that. They're saving those They're
Speaker 1: saving some missiles for you. Know, for the for the Americans,
Speaker 1: they're not using them on Israel. And then you know,
Speaker 1: so there's uh, there's that. And then if they attack
Speaker 1: the US, then the idea is the US would get
Speaker 1: more involved in the war. And then and finally, if
Speaker 1: Israel seeks any Radian regime change, this will be devastating
Speaker 1: for Iran and potentially the region. What that is such
Speaker 1: a stupid take. If their objectives simply to end an
Speaker 1: anti Iran's nuclear program and not a regime change, then
Speaker 1: the mission will be accomplished very soon, possibly this week. Historically,
Speaker 1: regime changes almost never go as planned. This is the
Speaker 1: the real crazies, right, the real crazy stuff. Stability is
Speaker 1: a value. Everything you know, you can't destabilize. Let's say,
Speaker 1: let's say it doesn't go to plant, they kill how
Speaker 1: many they kill the mulahs, and a civil war bakes
Speaker 1: out in Iran? Why is that a bad thing? I
Speaker 1: mean from the perspective of national security, from the perspective
Speaker 1: of American interest and Israeli interested? Why is that a
Speaker 1: bad thing? Why is instability in Yuan a bad thing?
Speaker 1: The likelihood that the next regime, whoever wins this supposed
Speaker 1: civil war, I don't see how a civil war breaks out.
Speaker 1: But let's let's play it out. Right, there's chaos. Everybody's
Speaker 1: afraid of chaos. They hate chaos. Chaos is terrible. They
Speaker 1: prefer order under an authoritarian, evil thug than chaos, right,
Speaker 1: even though that chaos is likely to lead to a
Speaker 1: better outcome, because chaos won't sustain herself in Iran, Iran
Speaker 1: will coal less around something. Now will that something be
Speaker 1: worse for America in Israel than the current regime? I
Speaker 1: can guarantee the answer is no. Is there a decent
Speaker 1: likelihood I don't know how much probability to put it
Speaker 1: on it, but a decent likelihood that the that the
Speaker 1: new regime, whatever it is is, actually is actually democratic,
Speaker 1: relatively free, friendly to the United States, or at least
Speaker 1: attempting to be friendly. I think they like this is
Speaker 1: pretty good for that. So let's shake it up and
Speaker 1: see see see what happens. I mean, it's going to
Speaker 1: be better. So why not go for regime change and
Speaker 1: accept the fact that it might be messy? But is
Speaker 1: all this far away from Yuan? It really is, The
Speaker 1: United States is really far with what is the what
Speaker 1: is the threat that instability in Yuan? Poses to Israel
Speaker 1: in the United States, I say, go for regime change,
Speaker 1: Go all out for regime change. And I mean short
Speaker 1: of putting troops on the ground. No troops on the ground,
Speaker 1: regime change from the air, No troops on the ground.
Speaker 1: What's the downside? So this is the kind of appeasing, compromising,
Speaker 1: cowardly attitude that too many Americans and experts, particularly military experts,
Speaker 1: incompetent military experts have. Oh you know, if they try
Speaker 1: regime change, I'll be instability and things won't go the
Speaker 1: way they want. Yeah, maybe they'll go better. And you
Speaker 1: know what. The beauty of going for regime change, The
Speaker 1: beauty of going for regime change is that it places
Speaker 1: the responsibility for what happens to Iran with Iranians. Let
Speaker 1: them fight it out, let them figure out what they want,
Speaker 1: let them determine their future. Isn't that something we should
Speaker 1: all want? This is not an environment you want in
Speaker 1: which ISIS will arise. Yeah she hees. They just had
Speaker 1: an Isis running the country. They don't want another Isis
Speaker 1: running the country. Now, could the regen be ooh maybe
Speaker 1: maybe maybe the new egene. I mean this, I mean,
Speaker 1: this is probably what scares the Trumpet administration. Maybe the
Speaker 1: new egene will be woke, maybe they'll have d I programs.
Speaker 1: Oh my god, oh my god, will miss the days
Speaker 1: of the Mulahs. I mean, what is what is the
Speaker 1: possibilities here? What could happen? I think that was a
Speaker 1: pretty good joke. I think somebody, somebody, there's lone the
Speaker 1: center is laughing aloud. I think that was a pretty
Speaker 1: good joke with a Wolkes anyway. So yeah, all this
Speaker 1: analysis and everything, even if they get the facts right,
Speaker 1: their prescription is completely wrong. Take comedy out, Take the
Speaker 1: Supreme Leadership Council whatever they call themselves out, Take the
Speaker 1: Mullahs out, Take the regime Apparatusis that make it possible
Speaker 1: to oppress the Iranian people? Out and let the Iranians
Speaker 1: figure out how they want to deal with the rest.
Speaker 1: Don't put anybody in the ground. I mean, here's a
Speaker 1: few things that might happen. There are rumors today, I
Speaker 1: have no idea if these are true or not, that
Speaker 1: certain military officers in the Iranian Army have been contacting
Speaker 1: the son of the chah Viwan to tell him that
Speaker 1: they are willing to beat at his side to help
Speaker 1: him take control of you on and they want to
Speaker 1: make they would like him to come and and and
Speaker 1: they will work with him. Now. I don't know if
Speaker 1: that's true or not, but that's the kind of things
Speaker 1: that could happen that you could start seeing happens as
Speaker 1: a shift. Now, a lot of people won't be happy
Speaker 1: with the show of you on coming back that want
Speaker 1: somebody else. And they'll be discussions, maybe they'll even be riots,
Speaker 1: maybe they'll even be violence, but it'll be inside Iran
Speaker 1: in order to determine Iran's fate. Why are we afraid
Speaker 1: of that? Why won't we nudge it along? Why don't
Speaker 1: we view that as a positive? Lindsey Graham likes the idea.
Speaker 1: Right here we go. I would like to see the
Speaker 1: regime fall if we don't take out the nuclear program
Speaker 1: now we'll all regret it. We're very close, be all in,
Speaker 1: mister President, and helping is well finish the job. And
Speaker 1: this is this is you know, this is Charlie Cook's response. Charlie, Well,
Speaker 1: love Charlie right, Charlie Cook, this is what he says.
Speaker 1: This is insane. Insane. Regime change will result in a
Speaker 1: bloody civil war, killing hundreds of thousands and creating another
Speaker 1: massive Muslim refuge crisis. Topping a leader is never as
Speaker 1: easy as you think. It almost always results in further involvement,
Speaker 1: a civil war and chaos. Resist us. Charlie Cook, an
Speaker 1: expert on Middle East politics, an expert on revolutions, an
Speaker 1: expert on civil wars in the Middle East, and an
Speaker 1: expert on Iranian culture and Iranian history, has now declared
Speaker 1: that regime change will result in bloody civil war, killing
Speaker 1: hundreds of thousands of people. I think this is the same,
Speaker 1: Charlie Cook. I might be wrong. Who's affiliated with that
Speaker 1: part of Mega that was just a couple of days
Speaker 1: ago saying World War three? World This is going to
Speaker 1: cost World War three? Of course. I mean, isn't it
Speaker 1: obvious all these countries are gonna come and aid you on? Well,
Speaker 1: Pakistan has closed the border off with Ivan, Russia has
Speaker 1: basically explicitly said we're not going to help you on.
Speaker 1: China is just silent, not talking. We know Saudi Braba's
Speaker 1: not going to help them. Woo door three breaks. Oh,
Speaker 1: the Brazilians are sending a platoon, the Brazilians and the
Speaker 1: South Africans, I eat sending a platoon. That's the level
Speaker 1: of expertise that these people have. They're so ignorant. Charlie,
Speaker 1: you should go back to listening to my talks and
Speaker 1: mimicking my talking points like you used to do on capitalism.
Speaker 1: You don't know what you're talking about. I mean, complete ignorance.
Speaker 1: Bloody civil war killing hundreds of thousands? Did even get this?
Speaker 1: Who's the expert feeding him this stuff? Who are the
Speaker 1: factions in the civil war that are going to kill
Speaker 1: hundreds of thousands? Now I'm not saying there won't be
Speaker 1: a s of a war, but the panic in hysteria
Speaker 1: and sudainty that they are, they know, they know. I
Speaker 1: don't know what will happen if you talk of how
Speaker 1: many and you get rid of the Mulas. Maybe there'll
Speaker 1: be a Savol. Maybe they won't. Maybe the Coods in
Speaker 1: the north will take Kurdish territory and declare Kurdish independent state,
Speaker 1: maybe take take advantage of the chaos. Maybe some other
Speaker 1: minority groups in other part of Iran will try to
Speaker 1: establish their own little states. Who kids, Maybe one day,
Speaker 1: when whoever you know gets control of Tehran decides to
Speaker 1: reunify Iran, there'll be a little There'll be some skirmishes
Speaker 1: around there as they take back their territory. Who kids,
Speaker 1: Maybe the different factions within Tehran there would like to
Speaker 1: take control and they'll fight in the streets. Who kids,
Speaker 1: hundreds of thousands. Well, what they don't I don't want
Speaker 1: is a massive refugee crisis. Why don't they want a
Speaker 1: massive refugee crisis. Charlie Coke cares about the refugees? Really,
Speaker 1: he doesn't care about the refugees. What does any want?
Speaker 1: He doesn't want them emigrate into Europe. That's what they're
Speaker 1: really afraid of. You create chaos and then people emigrate
Speaker 1: to Europe, and then a bunch of new Muslims in
Speaker 1: Europe anyway. Interesting, So yeah, that is maga. Take that
Speaker 1: is panic, hysteria. They just want to make it. Do nothing,
Speaker 1: Just be afraid. Don't touch the world. If you touch
Speaker 1: it over here, something really awful will happen and we'll
Speaker 1: all die World War three. Remind you, guys, we have
Speaker 1: a two hundred and fifty dollars goal for the first hour.
Speaker 1: Short a lot of five dollars questions, one ten dollars questions,
Speaker 1: lots of five dollar questions. How about some twenty or
Speaker 1: fifty one hundred dollars questions just to get us get
Speaker 1: us closer to that goal. So please consider asking questions
Speaker 1: and song and support through stickers with with the You know,
Speaker 1: if you're on YouTube, if you're on Twitter, you can
Speaker 1: come over to YouTube and support the show over here.
Speaker 1: Ask for stickers. Thank you for adem Thank you anonymous user,
Speaker 1: Thank you Jonathan Honing, thank you Dan, thank you mammae
Speaker 1: a Leen. Those are the stickers so far. Thank you guys.
Speaker 1: Send them over. Got about two hundred and fifty people
Speaker 1: watching live. A buck, two bucks, three bucks. Just do
Speaker 1: a sticker. There's a dollar sign at the bottom of
Speaker 1: your screen there. You can do it, all right. The
Speaker 1: President Trump is scheduled tomorrow to have a closed press,
Speaker 1: no press lunch, so secret press, a secret lunch meeting
Speaker 1: tomorrow in the cabinet room with Field Marshal Assim Munir.
Speaker 1: This is maybe why he's waited, because he wants the
Speaker 1: advice of Assim Munir, who is the Chief of the
Speaker 1: Army Staff of the Islamic Republic a Pakistan. Pakistan, by
Speaker 1: the way, is the only Muslim country in the world
Speaker 1: that has nukes. They definitely have nukes, mostly targeted at India.
Speaker 1: But who knows, maybe this is World War three. Anyway,
Speaker 1: Trump and Field Marshal Munir from Pakistan, will, I guess,
Speaker 1: decide the fate of you on tomorrow in the closed luncheon. Interesting,
Speaker 1: all right, let's see what is going on here. I
Speaker 1: don't know what that is, all right. I have not
Speaker 1: seen the supposed additional post that Trump did earlier. Y Yeah,
Speaker 1: all right, yeah, I mean the people, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: Mario has interviews are so anti Israel and they're so yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean it's so bad and and just incompetent, incompetent. Yeah.
Speaker 1: More fake videos, lots of fake videos.
Speaker 2: Cool his yeah, all right, Uh, let's see.
Speaker 1: Here's here's Charlie. He goes to this whole analysis Charlie
Speaker 1: Cook goes to the whole analysis of you know, the
Speaker 1: two two elements pulling Trump in different directions to intervene
Speaker 1: or not to intervene, to extremes. And this is what
Speaker 1: you write. President Trump is not an idea lgue. He's
Speaker 1: a pragmatic and he's a pragmatic and he prizes common sense.
Speaker 1: He rejects both extremes and tries to find in America
Speaker 1: first middle ground. When he came down escalated. Ten years ago,
Speaker 1: he was clear on two things. The Iraq War was
Speaker 1: a disaster and the Iran should never have a nuclear weapon.
Speaker 1: For the past ten years, he has remained firm on
Speaker 1: both positions. And here's the kicker. I don't know if
Speaker 1: President Trump will choose to involve America against Iran, but
Speaker 1: he is a man I trust to be making that decision.
Speaker 1: So don't worry, whatever the considerations or anything, World War three,
Speaker 1: whatever the considerations is Donald Trump. I mean, he's infallible
Speaker 1: and he will make the right decision, and things are
Speaker 1: going to be amazing. Things are going to be fantastic,
Speaker 1: all right, all right, yeah, uh, let us see, let
Speaker 1: us see, let us see. Uh yeah. I mean all
Speaker 1: prices surprisingly stable. I mean the high, but the stable
Speaker 1: above seventy it's stable, you know, as long as the
Speaker 1: oil continues to flow out of the straight or somos
Speaker 1: or prices are not budging. And I think the markets
Speaker 1: are basically signaling that they believe that the Saudiast Americans
Speaker 1: have basically placed constraints on the Israelis, that Israel will
Speaker 1: not do anything to jeopardize the straits, and therefore that
Speaker 1: the flow of oil globally is safe. There was a
Speaker 1: moment earlier today to a tanker full of oil collided
Speaker 1: with a a tanka. An empty tanker, a tanker full
Speaker 1: of oil is a blaze. So there's a big fire
Speaker 1: in the Persian Gulf and everybody was afraid that that
Speaker 1: was somebody had lit it, maybe the Uranians had attacked
Speaker 1: it or something like that. But now it turned out
Speaker 1: just to be an accident, an accident probably caused by
Speaker 1: all the activities going on around there, so it's probably
Speaker 1: not irrelevant what is going on to this. But the
Speaker 1: tank was not hit by military operations. All right, let's see.
Speaker 1: So yeah, so far, financial markets, primarily oil markets are
Speaker 1: taking the whole thing pretty well. Coude is, you know,
Speaker 1: is seventy five dollars, which is still reasonable you'd expect it.
Speaker 1: If they really thought the state of hormones were in
Speaker 1: real danger and could be shot, Coude would be over
Speaker 1: one hundred. So it's about it's about up about twenty
Speaker 1: percent from from what is it the low sixties or
Speaker 1: the yeah, low sixties. It's about twenty percent since the
Speaker 1: war started, But that's not a huge amount given given
Speaker 1: what's at stake here and given what's possible, and given
Speaker 1: how much of the world's oil again flows just through
Speaker 1: that area, and how much of Yeah, so it was
Speaker 1: sixty three, it's not seventy five, you know, quite reasonable,
Speaker 1: all right, stable coin regulations, stable coin regulations. So the
Speaker 1: Senate today passed a stable coin bill which will regulate
Speaker 1: the stable coin industry, and it's considered this is considered
Speaker 1: a big win for crypto industry. Now, I'm not sure
Speaker 1: what you know about if you don't stable coins work with. Basically,
Speaker 1: what a stable coin is is a it's a digital
Speaker 1: it's a it's a digital currency, or it can be
Speaker 1: used as a councy. It's a digital representation of money.
Speaker 1: And the reason it's called stable coin is for every
Speaker 1: coin that is issued digitally, there is a dollar to
Speaker 1: back it up, so it's stabilized by a reserve of dollars.
Speaker 1: Think about the gold standard. How the gold standard used
Speaker 1: to work. Right, There were dollars and then there was gold,
Speaker 1: and then there were dollars issued that were deemable into
Speaker 1: that gold, and you had to keep a reserve of
Speaker 1: gold to give credibility to the dollars that you were issuing. Now,
Speaker 1: this faction of resolve. But let's assume no fraction of reserve.
Speaker 1: There's just gold dollars. Every dollar is exchangeable into gold.
Speaker 1: A stable coin is the same thing, just instead of
Speaker 1: gold using dollars. And then you've got these coins too,
Speaker 1: you know that always exchangeable two dollars. You can go
Speaker 1: to the exchange, the exchange. The biggest exchange right now
Speaker 1: for for stable coins is tether. The problem with tether
Speaker 1: is Tether is not based in the United States, so
Speaker 1: it's not clear that these regulations will the tether will
Speaker 1: qualify under these regulations, and it might be there might
Speaker 1: be limited use in the United States for tether for
Speaker 1: tether stable coins. I mean, maybe this is one of
Speaker 1: the reasons the Senate passed this bill because it was
Speaker 1: lobbied for by Circle, which is the largest largest US
Speaker 1: based stable coin issuer. Circle recently went public and they
Speaker 1: want regulations makes it. They want rules of game, which
Speaker 1: I think they can abide by. Often incumbents in a
Speaker 1: field like regulations because they helped to keep out competition
Speaker 1: and they also take away down certainty. You know, is
Speaker 1: the SEC gonna come after us? They're not going to
Speaker 1: come after us. What's you know what counts what doesn't count.
Speaker 1: So today we got rules for what a what these
Speaker 1: stable coil companies can do. You know, what kind of
Speaker 1: reserves do they have to have? Do they They don't
Speaker 1: literally have to hold dollars. If they literally had to
Speaker 1: hold dollars, then you know they they would they could
Speaker 1: not make money, right, it would be one to one.
Speaker 1: So instead of dollars, they're going to be allowed to
Speaker 1: hold treasury securities so they can make interest on the
Speaker 1: treasury securities. Right now, that interest is pretty good. You know,
Speaker 1: they can make three four percent on these treasury securities.
Speaker 1: The stresses security is incredibly liquid, so anytime you go
Speaker 1: and redeem your stable coin, you will get dollars because
Speaker 1: they'll sell one of those treasury securities. The problem, of
Speaker 1: course with this is as long as interest rates are decent,
Speaker 1: like they are right now, I mean relatively high, that's fine.
Speaker 1: But what happens when interstates if interestates ever go back
Speaker 1: to zero, then all these stable coin companies go out
Speaker 1: of business because they can't make any money because they
Speaker 1: buy treasuries and treasuries and not yielding anything. Then then
Speaker 1: what they start doing, and this is what happens, and
Speaker 1: this is what this bill is trying to control. Then
Speaker 1: what happens is they start taking on risk. Instead of
Speaker 1: just buying treasuries short term treasures, they buy long term
Speaker 1: treasures which they can sell. But long term treasures can
Speaker 1: lose value if interestates go up, and then they can
Speaker 1: lose money. So these regulations are trying to make this,
Speaker 1: you know, safe. Government regulations almost never do this effectively
Speaker 1: without creating distortions and provisions and conflicts of interest and
Speaker 1: mobil hazard and a bunch of other things. Now, why
Speaker 1: would you want this because you didn't buy anything with
Speaker 1: with with dollars? Well, imagine if you're Amazon or Walmart.
Speaker 1: Now note that both Amazon and Walmart actually exploring issuing
Speaker 1: their own stable coins. Now what's interesting is this regulation
Speaker 1: has special burdens on Amazon and Walmart and non financial
Speaker 1: companies and not crypto companies to do this. So it's
Speaker 1: going to be more difficult for them. They're going to
Speaker 1: be more heavily regulated. Why because companies like Circle don't
Speaker 1: want to compete with Amazon and Walmont. But imagine you're
Speaker 1: Amazon and every time somebody uses a credit card to
Speaker 1: buy something, you have to pay I don't know two
Speaker 1: percent to visa and mastercout two and a half per
Speaker 1: cent to make an express something, right, but you could
Speaker 1: take stable coins, not pay anything and just convert the
Speaker 1: stable coin. It's a dollar immediately exchange at the Circle exchange,
Speaker 1: or if it's Amazon's exchange, it's your own exchange. You
Speaker 1: can issue stable coins to Americans, like if I have
Speaker 1: a prime account with Amazon, they tell me, you know,
Speaker 1: we'll you know, we'll take your money, we'll buy treasuries
Speaker 1: with it, and we'll issue you stable coins, and that'll
Speaker 1: make it much easier for you to buy stuff on Amazon.
Speaker 1: And because we're not having to pay Visa and MasterCard
Speaker 1: whatever two percent we're going to give you. We're not
Speaker 1: going to pay you interest on the money you deposited
Speaker 1: for the stable coin, but we are going to give
Speaker 1: you a discount of two percent, two percent, five percent
Speaker 1: something on everything you buy using the stable coin. And
Speaker 1: it'll just make transactions easier and simpler, you know. You know,
Speaker 1: for years people have talked about digital wallets. Well, stable
Speaker 1: coins can facilitate digital wallets. You know, they can facilitate
Speaker 1: small denominations. So there is actual use case here. This
Speaker 1: is one of those crypto uses that might catch on again.
Speaker 1: More likely to catch on if interstates are reasonably high. Now,
Speaker 1: Amazon and Walmart can do this even if interestates are zero,
Speaker 1: because they can offer you a discount because they didn't charge,
Speaker 1: they didn't get paid, they didn't get charged by Visa
Speaker 1: and master Card. They could also give you a higher
Speaker 1: discount because they're also getting interest on the money you
Speaker 1: gave them that they put in treasuries. They maybe get
Speaker 1: three percent there, they get two percent from Amazon. From
Speaker 1: Visa now they just say five percent and give you
Speaker 1: a five percent discount. That's a significant discount and everything
Speaker 1: you buy, so lots of different ways to do this.
Speaker 1: Visa and MasterCard of course realize this is competition, So
Speaker 1: Visa MasterCard are going to try to get into the sector.
Speaker 1: They're going to be the competitors to Circle, and I
Speaker 1: think ultimately they will probably dominate this, but we'll see.
Speaker 1: Sometimes it's a new up and comer that figures out
Speaker 1: how to do this better. The other thing that is
Speaker 1: big in terms of in terms of stable coins is
Speaker 1: moving money again across countries instead of buying bitcoin. Let's
Speaker 1: say you're in Egypt and you want to get money
Speaker 1: out of Egypt, and the capital controls see you buy bitcoin,
Speaker 1: you move the bitcoin to the US, and you sell it.
Speaker 1: But in transferring the money and going through all of that,
Speaker 1: you could gain or lose I don't know, because bitcoin
Speaker 1: is so volatile. Stable coins you don't lose. So you
Speaker 1: could move the money as a stable coin and you
Speaker 1: know you're going to have exactly the same number of
Speaker 1: dollars on the other side of the transaction as you
Speaker 1: did at the beginning of the transaction. So again, very
Speaker 1: very useful for moving money around, for moving money around.
Speaker 1: All right, So this is it is cool. It's a
Speaker 1: cool industry. I'm always I haven't read the regulation, but
Speaker 1: I'm always suspicious of these kinds of regulations and kind
Speaker 1: of the incentives that they provide. Republicans overwhelming he voted
Speaker 1: for this. They got a number of Democrats to vote
Speaker 1: as well, so they passed sixty eight I think to
Speaker 1: thirty two, so a lot of Democrats on board. The
Speaker 1: left wing of the Democratic Party was against it. Elizabeth
Speaker 1: One was against it. That gives me a little bit
Speaker 1: of more confidence in it, Elizabeth One. You know what
Speaker 1: did she say? I had it here a second ago.
Speaker 1: The quote disappeared on me. The Genus Act as the
Speaker 1: basic safeguards necessary to ensure that stable coins don't blow
Speaker 1: up our entire financial system. That's Elizabeth Wanan's World War III.
Speaker 1: But she's very anti crypto, very anti anything to do
Speaker 1: with crypto, So how to take her seriously? Kristin Gilbert,
Speaker 1: who is a Democrat for New York who's considered more
Speaker 1: of a moderate, got behind it after some tweaks are
Speaker 1: made to make it harder for non financial companies to
Speaker 1: issue stable coins. These are the tweaks that all make
Speaker 1: it harder for Amazon or Walmart. So she wanted to,
Speaker 1: I don't know, protect whom, protect Visa and master Card
Speaker 1: from competition for Walmart and Amazon. So this kind of
Speaker 1: wheeling and dealing going on. My guess is there's still
Speaker 1: enough there that Amazon and Walmart could still issue their
Speaker 1: own coins. Of course, there's one of the elephants in
Speaker 1: the room, if you will. There was a company called
Speaker 1: World Liberty Financial. You might have heard of it. It
Speaker 1: launched in September, and it is going to issue its
Speaker 1: own stable coin. Or oh, it's already issued its own
Speaker 1: stable coin earlier this year. Guess who owns World Liberty Financial.
Speaker 1: You won't be able to guess who owns World Liberty Financial. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, nobody's getting un chat yet, but it's Trump
Speaker 1: or the Trump Organization. Not Donald Trump, but the Trump organization.
Speaker 1: They owned World Liberty Financial. Now, the bill mandates the
Speaker 1: regulator supervis issuers of large stable coins in some of
Speaker 1: the same ways they regular banks. Stable Coin issues would
Speaker 1: need to comply with the anti money laundering rules and
Speaker 1: sanctions to helping sure that they aren't used by criminals.
Speaker 1: It also requires them to hold one dollar reserve cash
Speaker 1: or treasury bills for every dollar stable coin. Yep, I
Speaker 1: mean that makes sense. And then it also prohibits executive
Speaker 1: branch officials and lawmakers from issuing stable coins. And then
Speaker 1: the question is what about World Liberty Financial. And of
Speaker 1: course the Trump organization is saying, Dad's not evolved. It's
Speaker 1: just the kids. It's the kids, it's their adventure. Dad
Speaker 1: is not evolved. The money goes to him, but he
Speaker 1: is not going to use it while he's president. He'll
Speaker 1: use it afterwards, so he's not involved. It doesn't count. Yeah,
Speaker 1: So there you go. So it is. I'm all for
Speaker 1: making I think stable coins at the end of the day,
Speaker 1: you know, some of the more likely uses of crypto
Speaker 1: it's not real crypto in the sense of you know
Speaker 1: what mean people mean by bitcoin and stuff, but it
Speaker 1: is a probably under the right circumstances, and increase potentially
Speaker 1: increase efficiency in our payment system, which is not very
Speaker 1: efficient in the United States, although not bad if you
Speaker 1: think about Venmo and pepeal. All Right, finally, remember last
Speaker 1: week Trump put out this tweet saying, you know, he's
Speaker 1: talked to a number of people in industry and uh
Speaker 1: and and and it's really not good for ICE to
Speaker 1: go after people in the agriculture, hotel and restaurant industries.
Speaker 1: You know, they're they're good workers. They've been there a
Speaker 1: long time. And and it was actually like this movement
Speaker 1: to have ICE stop doing that. As ICE supposedly for
Speaker 1: a few days stop doing that. They stopped going to
Speaker 1: agricultural businesses, they stopped going to hotels. Uh, they stopped
Speaker 1: going to restaurants because you know, Trump, Trump thought it
Speaker 1: was a bad idea, and uh and and so on. Anyway,
Speaker 1: so so that happened last week. Trump had the tweet,
Speaker 1: and then he told ICE to stop it, and and
Speaker 1: supposed they did. Uh. Well, the problem is they can't
Speaker 1: reach the numbers they got numbers. They can't reach the numbers.
Speaker 1: So officials in the Immigration and Customer Enforcement, including its
Speaker 1: Homeland Security Investigation divisions, told agency leaders in a call
Speaker 1: Monday that agents must continue conducting immigration rates at agricultural businesses, hotels,
Speaker 1: and restaurants. According to two people familiar with the call,
Speaker 1: The new instructions were shared in an eleven AM call
Speaker 1: to representatives and thirty field officers across the country. This
Speaker 1: is Miller, evil Miller, you know, basically exerting his influence
Speaker 1: and getting them to reverse the policy and getting them
Speaker 1: to go after those evil, hardworking immigrants working in the
Speaker 1: fields and everywhere else. So this just shows you the
Speaker 1: power of Mega ICE and HSA. Field office supervisors began
Speaker 1: learning about a likely reversal of the exemption policy on
Speaker 1: Sunday after hearing from DHS leadership that the White House
Speaker 1: did not support it. According to one person with knowledge
Speaker 1: of the reversal, again, this is Miller. An official from
Speaker 1: DHS had sent an email Thursday telling the agents to
Speaker 1: hold on all work site enforcement investigation operations on agricultural
Speaker 1: including aquaculture and meatpacking plans, restaurants, and operating hotels. That
Speaker 1: message went out hours after Trump suggested he was sympathetic
Speaker 1: to concerns raised by farmers and hospitality execs about his
Speaker 1: deportation plans. Uh, this is from again, this is a
Speaker 1: this is all from the Washington Post quote. There will
Speaker 1: be no safe spaces for industries who harbor violent criminals
Speaker 1: or purposely try to under mine ICE efforts, the assistant
Speaker 1: security for the DHS said Monday, work site enforcement remains
Speaker 1: a cornerstone of our efforts the safeguard public safety, national security,
Speaker 1: and economic stability. Yeah, it's very economically stable to throw
Speaker 1: millions of workers from the country, all the ones. Just
Speaker 1: throw them up, and the businesses are going to be very,
Speaker 1: very very stable. White does the w Chief of Staff
Speaker 1: Steven Miller there he Is said last month that the
Speaker 1: administration wants ICE to make a minimum of three thousand
Speaker 1: arrests a day. Three thousand lives are being destroyed on
Speaker 1: a daily basis. In an interview last week, Trump Borders
Speaker 1: our Tom holman Is told the Post that arrest that
Speaker 1: increased around two thousand a day not high enough. They're
Speaker 1: not making that three thousand a day anyway. Trump had
Speaker 1: been pulled in two directions on the issue recently, coming
Speaker 1: under pressure from executives in agriculture and hospitality industries to
Speaker 1: loosen up on sweeping deportation policy and was costing them
Speaker 1: in migrant workers. You know so, he wrote. Remember he
Speaker 1: wrote that Tweet Miller, an architect of much of Trump's
Speaker 1: aggressive immigration policy, had privately opposed covering out exemptions for
Speaker 1: certain industries did rely heavily in workers without legal status,
Speaker 1: according to two people with knowledge of the advocacy in
Speaker 1: recent days against the measure. Brooke Rawlins, the Agricultural Secretary, meanwhile,
Speaker 1: was on the opposite side of the issue, stressing to
Speaker 1: Trump the concerns that those in the farming industry had
Speaker 1: raised about losing workers. Note, the workers themselves have no voice.
Speaker 1: Yet nobody cares about the workers. Nobody cares about these
Speaker 1: human beings. They're just pieces of meat. Yeah. Some immigration
Speaker 1: experts say ICE would need to ramp up worksite enforcement
Speaker 1: to meet administration's ambitious arrest quotas. Past raids and meatpacking plans,
Speaker 1: for instance, have led to hundreds of arrests once other
Speaker 1: labor intensive industries, including farms, factories, and clothing manufacturers. The
Speaker 1: June twelfth Memo acknowledged that avoiding these large scale employees
Speaker 1: would hinder ice officers' efforts, saying we acknowledged it by
Speaker 1: taking this off the table, that we are eliminating significant
Speaker 1: number of potential targets. Millowins liberty freedom in this country
Speaker 1: and business owners and workers people work lose, lose. Here's
Speaker 1: here's a post by the way, Uh there was posted
Speaker 1: by a mega guy you know. During when when Trump
Speaker 1: uh you know, said to know to enforcing this in industry,
Speaker 1: He says, the United States is the only country on
Speaker 1: earth we corporate profits are prioritized over national interests. Corporations
Speaker 1: that employ illegal aliens to work in their farms and
Speaker 1: hotels should be fined heavily. I'm surprised he is not
Speaker 1: calling for the execution. Why not we should call for
Speaker 1: the execution of employers. I mean, they're doing something illegal,
Speaker 1: very illegal, very illegal, World War III illegal type. They
Speaker 1: should they should really suffer the consequences. I think. Anyway,
Speaker 1: that is the news for this June seventeenth, as we
Speaker 1: wait for Donald Trump to make up his mind. Will
Speaker 1: he won't he join his well in its attack on Iran?
Speaker 1: All right, let me remind everybody that this is a
Speaker 1: viewer listening supported show. I means you have to support
Speaker 1: the show. You get the value of listening watching the show,
Speaker 1: you pay for it. Return the return express the trade
Speaker 1: that is involved by doing a super chat, doing a sticker,
Speaker 1: or going to Patreon Patreon patreon dot com and putting
Speaker 1: in you on book show and making a mont the contribution.
Speaker 1: So I will be answering questions. Now there's a bunch
Speaker 1: of them here, mainly two five and ten dollars questions,
Speaker 1: a couple of twenties. We need a lot more twenties.
Speaker 1: We're way behind today, not sure what's going on, and
Speaker 1: so I remind you of that. Also reminder that alex
Speaker 1: Epstein is the response of the show. Alex Epstein dot
Speaker 1: substack dot com is the you know, the most knowledgeable
Speaker 1: substack you will find, most knowledgeable anything you will find
Speaker 1: on for example, the grid energy electricity right now? What's
Speaker 1: relevant subsidies to UH, subsidies to UH solar and wind
Speaker 1: and you know, unreliable energies so someth like that, and
Speaker 1: and what the current big beautiful bill is, and what
Speaker 1: Republicans are offering in the Senate versus the House, if
Speaker 1: you all of that, if you're interested, and what's happening.
Speaker 1: Alex is your source of information and source of talking points.
Speaker 1: You will become a so much better communicator if you
Speaker 1: use uh. If you subscribe to Alex's substack. That Man
Speaker 1: Institute is hosting a July fourth event where there will
Speaker 1: be a special talk about how to complete the American Revolution.
Speaker 1: What we need to complete the American Revolution is a
Speaker 1: moral revolution. A talk about how how to engage in
Speaker 1: a maral revolution, how to defeat altruism. This is the
Speaker 1: most important thing we could be doing, is going after altruism,
Speaker 1: going after the sacrificial morality of altruism. And you can
Speaker 1: sign up for this talk. I think it's free. I'm
Speaker 1: pretty sure it's free. So you can do that by
Speaker 1: going to iran dot oag inn ran dot oak slash
Speaker 1: start here. The talk is by Ben Bear and uh,
Speaker 1: you know it's gonna be it's gonna be a fun talk.
Speaker 1: It's gonna be exciting. There'll be a live audience at OCNN.
Speaker 1: You can watch on the internet. You can sign up
Speaker 1: for that inran dot oak slash start here, inran dot
Speaker 1: og slash start here. All right, it's free. Michael Frost
Speaker 1: says it's free. You just have to sign up. That
Speaker 1: way you'll get the link and you'll get the information,
Speaker 1: and it is indeed free. All right, find a reminder,
Speaker 1: step up, ask a question, or just support the show
Speaker 1: with the stick up, Michael, Will this be Israel's last war?
Speaker 1: Ramas is gone, Risbela gone, and with you on cooked
Speaker 1: more Ara countries will sign the Abamac Cords. We'll see
Speaker 1: the beginning of a sustained peace and prosperity in the
Speaker 1: Middle East. Well, I mean, you know that that is
Speaker 1: one very optimistic view of what could happen. You know,
Speaker 1: Ramas might be gone, but Palestinians on the West Bank
Speaker 1: and in Gaza I have not accepted the existence of
Speaker 1: the state of Israel. They're not friendly towards Israel. Now
Speaker 1: the Allies are slowly disappearing, so they're going to struggle.
Speaker 1: I think it is a it's going to be unique
Speaker 1: opportunity over the next few months years to to kind
Speaker 1: of deal with the Palestinians one way or the other,
Speaker 1: to pacify them and to have a deal with them.
Speaker 1: I think that, Yes, I think, as I said, Iran
Speaker 1: is like the fall of the Berlin Wall. Remember though
Speaker 1: the fall of the Berlin Wall, ultimately we got Russia
Speaker 1: with Putin. So I agree with you in the short
Speaker 1: and medium term, short and medium term for the next
Speaker 1: twenty years, I think Israel has bought itself peace. I
Speaker 1: think we're gonna have peace in the Middle East basically
Speaker 1: for twenty years now. Now, a lot of work is
Speaker 1: going to have to be done to eradicate whatever Islamist
Speaker 1: elements still around. Isis and Arkada quite strong in North
Speaker 1: Africa in the subsh In just the Suhal the Sahala,
Speaker 1: which is just you know, the southern part of the
Speaker 1: Sahava Desert. Uh, they're very strong there. Uh, they're still
Speaker 1: We've got Pakistan with with nukes and and a and
Speaker 1: a Islamist leaning. Uh. You still got Taliban in Afghanistan.
Speaker 1: But yeah, the real threats to Israel, the direct certainly
Speaker 1: the direct threats to Israel will be gone and Israel
Speaker 1: can enjoy a pretty lengthy period of I think peace
Speaker 1: of peace and and the West now has to you
Speaker 1: don't get some balls and finish the job and and
Speaker 1: and destroy these Islamist organizations wherever they are so uh
Speaker 1: So that'll pacify Europe, It'll pacify the Muslims in Europe.
Speaker 1: You know, you know you know, eliminate their incentives towards Islamism.
Speaker 1: I mean the defeat of Iwan is a big step
Speaker 1: in that direction. The West will have to pick it
Speaker 1: up beyond that, and so uh yeah, I mean this, this,
Speaker 1: this is this, this is monumental. As I've said, this
Speaker 1: is the biggest geopolitical events since the follow the Berlin Wall.
Speaker 1: But to follow the Bolin Wall was not in spite
Speaker 1: of a certain book that was written. It was not
Speaker 1: the end of history. Conflict did continue. We sold Russia,
Speaker 1: we saw the rights of China, we saw the rise
Speaker 1: of Islamism. And there's still some problems. I mean, what
Speaker 1: if what if the lead of Saudi Arabia is taken out?
Speaker 1: What is Turkey's ambitions? What does Turki do now that
Speaker 1: Iran is out and Turkey becomes maybe the strongest military
Speaker 1: in the Muslim in in in the in the Muslim
Speaker 1: part of the Middle East. What has Turki learned from this?
Speaker 1: Uh So, A lot of challenges, bet a lot of upside,
Speaker 1: a huge amount of upside, and I think yes, short
Speaker 1: to medium term peace for Israel and the potential for
Speaker 1: real prosperity, which will of course depend on the kind
Speaker 1: of economic policy staying braced. You got a little bit.
Speaker 1: Can you recommend a book summarizing ideas of key philosophers? Well,
Speaker 1: I mean i'd recommend Lennapeacock's book on the History of
Speaker 1: Philosophy or his lecture series on the History of Philosophy. Uh,
Speaker 1: there's a number of other books that have been recommended
Speaker 1: over the years. I mean none, none of them is perfect.
Speaker 1: Let's see what do I have here? I need to
Speaker 1: find that section. Yeah, you know, here's one if you
Speaker 1: can find it. It's a History of Philosophy by William
Speaker 1: Wilderland Wilden Bund, wild and Bund. You know, will do
Speaker 1: Rant has a history of philosophy that is very accessible.
Speaker 1: So I think that Will Durrance that one. They're probably others,
Speaker 1: and maybe when we have a philosopher on we it's
Speaker 1: a good question to ask one of our philosophers who
Speaker 1: might have kind of more recent and recommendations for books
Speaker 1: that have come out more recently. These a lot of
Speaker 1: these books are very old, and this one, the one
Speaker 1: I showed you, is probably very hard to find. Will
Speaker 1: do Ont is good, but again, it was written a
Speaker 1: long time ago, and they might be better scholarship today.
Speaker 1: We just you know, the best thing is to ask
Speaker 1: somebody like Jason Ryans or Griggs Elmiry what they would recommend.
Speaker 1: But Leonid Peacocks is very accessible and it's done definitely
Speaker 1: from an objectivest perspective, so you have to take that
Speaker 1: into account. These are done with the attempt of you know,
Speaker 1: I don't think the authors have a sophical a strong
Speaker 1: philosophical perspective of their own. Really. Yeah, Graham, here's a
Speaker 1: twenty although it's Canadian, just so a posts saying Trump
Speaker 1: is going to have a chat with a Pakistani field
Speaker 1: Marshal I mentioned then on the show today. I'm not
Speaker 1: sure what to think about that, but maybe he's going
Speaker 1: to tell them, don't worry them, don't worry Pakistan. You know,
Speaker 1: I don't know why he's having this chat. The guy
Speaker 1: must be in Washington, d C. For other stuff. I
Speaker 1: don't think he came, especially because of the one you're
Speaker 1: on and it's I think he's gonna suddenly tell Pakistan
Speaker 1: to stay out of it. I think they've got a
Speaker 1: lot of issues to do with the war between Pakistan
Speaker 1: and India and to sustain that seas fire. I think
Speaker 1: that's part of the reason for the chat. And uh,
Speaker 1: maybe he'll get his opinion about whether the United States
Speaker 1: should enter the war with Iran because he's looking for
Speaker 1: different opinions from different people, and how the Muslim world
Speaker 1: will feel about the United States entering the war on
Speaker 1: the side of Israel. I don't know, all right, let
Speaker 1: me thank Oe for the sticker, Martin for the sticker.
Speaker 1: And I just saw Anthony Anthony from Australia, thank you
Speaker 1: for the sticker. Really really appreciate your support. Guys. We're
Speaker 1: slowly chipping away at the first hour goal. We haven't
Speaker 1: even started on the second hour goal. But anyway, justin
Speaker 1: this he posted yesterday, justin Wolf, he says, I started
Speaker 1: reading your essay just War Theory, as you recommended. I
Speaker 1: recommended it. He was he tweeted about civilian casualties in war,
Speaker 1: and I said, if you really want to get my
Speaker 1: views on that, go read this essay. I mean, really,
Speaker 1: Twitter is not the place to analyze a difficult philosophical
Speaker 1: question like what to do about civilians in war? So
Speaker 1: he says, I started reading your essay just what Theory,
Speaker 1: as you recommended. If any of the listeners have not
Speaker 1: read it yet, search it now and read it. I
Speaker 1: second that recommendation. It is a really, really good essay.
Speaker 1: I think it's an important essay as we are at war.
Speaker 1: It's a crucial essay, so please go ahead and read it.
Speaker 1: You know, I haven't done an update about the Ukraine
Speaker 1: War in a while. I'll have to do that. I mean,
Speaker 1: Russia's pounding civilian population centers in Ukraine. I just without
Speaker 1: any attempts to target military or anything like that, just
Speaker 1: pounding the cities. It's just terrific. Michael, By the way,
Speaker 1: I do want to say this and say this analysis.
Speaker 1: If Trump decides to go in on the side of
Speaker 1: Israel and attack you on I definitely think, definitely think
Speaker 1: he needs to go to Congress and ask for authorization.
Speaker 1: I think that that would be such a positive step
Speaker 1: too of putting us on a footing of constitutional government.
Speaker 1: Trump shouldn't just unilaterally decide to go bomba country. As
Speaker 1: much as I think it would be great if he did.
Speaker 1: You know, I'm mixed about whether I think it's great
Speaker 1: on it, But because I want Israel to get all
Speaker 1: the credit, I think Trump is going to steal all
Speaker 1: the credit from Israel. But the way to do it,
Speaker 1: the proper way to do it in America is to
Speaker 1: go to Congress for approval. Go to Senate tomorrow morning,
Speaker 1: ask them to rush a approval for military operations in Iran.
Speaker 1: Let's see who votes voting against it. I think some
Speaker 1: Democrats will vote for it, some Republicans vote against it,
Speaker 1: but we'll get a majority got the House. Get a
Speaker 1: majority in the House and then do it. Let's have
Speaker 1: constitutional government. That would be cool. Richard, Richard, haven't seen
Speaker 1: you in a long time. Hey, Richard, it's good to
Speaker 1: see you. Thanks for being here. And I have no
Speaker 1: idea what's going on with your career where you are?
Speaker 1: Are you still with the same firm? What happened anyway?
Speaker 1: Richard asked, Is there a valid reason for the US
Speaker 1: should not unilaterally attack Iran with nuclear weapons? Yeah? I
Speaker 1: mean nuclear weapons are a big tool in the tool kit,
Speaker 1: which I don't think is necessary here. The regime is
Speaker 1: on the verge of collapse. The nuclear program can be
Speaker 1: destroyed with monk combusting bombs. Nuclear means radiation that could
Speaker 1: take years and years and years to clear a lot
Speaker 1: of people dying. I guess unnecessary in a country that
Speaker 1: I think at least is ready to depose these molars
Speaker 1: and to actually establish a country that is friendly to
Speaker 1: the United States. This is not the case where which
Speaker 1: it was I think maybe twenty twenty five years ago,
Speaker 1: where this is a uniformly hostile country and they have
Speaker 1: to be brought to their knees like the Guzmans have
Speaker 1: to be brought to their knees in order to recognize
Speaker 1: their failure. I think they know they failure. They know
Speaker 1: they failed. They're ready to change path. They just need
Speaker 1: the nudge for us to get rid of this regime.
Speaker 1: And that can be done easily and effectively because of
Speaker 1: what Israel's done without the use of nuclear weapons. That
Speaker 1: would be my view, you know, less than five bunkalbusting
Speaker 1: bombs and this is over. They should, though, kill the
Speaker 1: political leaders of Yuan. They should go after the political leadership.
Speaker 1: The fact that they haven't is a massive failure and
Speaker 1: a sign of weakness. Thank you, Richard, and it's good
Speaker 1: to see you here. Michael, Chinese cargo planes anti Uoq
Speaker 1: after turning off tracking devices, arms transfers. Maybe you know
Speaker 1: how to tell exactly what's going on there, maybe getting
Speaker 1: sensitive Chinese equipment out of Iwan. I don't know, but
Speaker 1: if it was really significant arms. I'm sure is what
Speaker 1: was monitoring everything that came off that plane, and if
Speaker 1: it was significant, they would have destroyed it. I don't
Speaker 1: think Iran wants to get into the middle of this,
Speaker 1: so I don't believe it was weapons. I don't think
Speaker 1: it was weapons systems. I don't know what it was.
Speaker 1: It might very well be stuff that China wants to
Speaker 1: get out of there, or it might be a way
Speaker 1: to evacuate people. But it is. It's a mystery, and
Speaker 1: we haven't heard from anybody. Haven't heard anybody, but it is.
Speaker 1: But I really, really really doubt it's arms, weapons, and
Speaker 1: we haven't seen any Andrew Tucker Cousin infuriated the Ted
Speaker 1: Cruz wants the regime to collapse into Huan, despite not
Speaker 1: knowing the exact population of Iran, not its ethnic makeup.
Speaker 1: Tucker so scared of what might happen. I'm all for
Speaker 1: taking the chance. Yeah, I mean it's not a big chance.
Speaker 1: Population of you know, Iran is ninety million. It's a
Speaker 1: big country, ninety million, much bigger than Iraq. It is ethnically,
Speaker 1: it's religiously united, mostly Muslims, although the fastest growing religions
Speaker 1: in Iran are Zoa, I can't pronounce it. Zoroastrianism something
Speaker 1: like that, which is the ancient religion of the Persians
Speaker 1: and Christianity. A lot of Muslims leaving Islam and converting
Speaker 1: to those religions, but overwhelmingly Muslims, but a lot of
Speaker 1: different ethnic groups, for example, in the north of Tehran.
Speaker 1: But a third of Iranian population maybe a fourth. Put
Speaker 1: it this way, somewhere between twenty to thirty three percent
Speaker 1: of the population is a Zeri. A Zeri I don't
Speaker 1: know what that means, but it's a different ethnic group
Speaker 1: than the rest of the main group in Iran. And
Speaker 1: they there is an Azeri country, it's called Azerbaijan. A
Speaker 1: Jean is Assuri, and there's been, you know, some fear
Speaker 1: among Uranians that you know, there's series would rather be
Speaker 1: ruled by Azerbaijan Isabajean is an authoritarian state, but it's
Speaker 1: a secular authoritarian state with a lot of personal freedoms
Speaker 1: allowed in the state. Even though it is it is
Speaker 1: it is authoritarian, So you know, people people might be
Speaker 1: worried that the Asiris might want their own the one
Speaker 1: one might want the state that's affiliate with Azerbajeon instead
Speaker 1: of Iran. There are other ethnic groups. There's the Codes
Speaker 1: obviously in the north west, there are others in the south,
Speaker 1: there's some Arabs, you know, these all groups that are Persian.
Speaker 1: Those Arabs who who who might want to be more
Speaker 1: linked to Saudi Arabia. But the reality is that Persia
Speaker 1: is an ancient civilization. It's an ancient country. While borders
Speaker 1: have shifted through the many many you know, thousands of years,
Speaker 1: hundreds and hundreds and thousands of years, uh Iran has
Speaker 1: always there's always been an Iran, and you know, it'll
Speaker 1: figure it out. They'll figure it out. And if that
Speaker 1: means civil war, that might mean us of a war,
Speaker 1: that means some you know, some minority groups creating their
Speaker 1: own little states. So be it, so be it. I'm
Speaker 1: not sure why that is something American needs to worry about,
Speaker 1: or why that's something Taker Colson really worries about. He
Speaker 1: doesn't sleep at night because there might be a civil
Speaker 1: in Iran. Oh my god. But the reality is over
Speaker 1: fifty percent of the population hate this regime wan Agne,
Speaker 1: and once the regime is even weaker, that number will rise.
Speaker 1: By the time the regime falls, ninety percent of the
Speaker 1: population will want it fall, they'll all claim they were
Speaker 1: always in opposition and something else arise. Whatever rises will
Speaker 1: be better that I can guarantee it will be better.
Speaker 1: Richard coming back with a enough fifty dollars, Thank you Richard,
Speaker 1: single handed, They're going to get us our goal tonight.
Speaker 1: Why do you think people in client facing companies are
Speaker 1: so hesitant to tell client bad news to the point
Speaker 1: of concealing facts on the clients like inability to make
Speaker 1: optimistic deadlines. It seems profoundly irrational to do this, but
Speaker 1: seems common. Yeah, I mean, I think the idea of honesty,
Speaker 1: the idea of honesty and being honest with clients, not
Speaker 1: honesty to the point of telling clients irrelevant stuff, with
Speaker 1: stuff they don't need to know, but just dealing with
Speaker 1: them honestly in terms of providing them with irrelevant information.
Speaker 1: It's just it's just rare. People are afraid of being honest,
Speaker 1: they're afraid of disappointing people, and they turn to pragmatism.
Speaker 1: And pragmatism says, do whatever you can get away within
Speaker 1: the short run, and this is kind of whatever works,
Speaker 1: cut corners if it works. And yeah, so there's there's
Speaker 1: not so much explicit lying, but there's smoothing of the edges,
Speaker 1: there's avoiding confrontation, there's uh, and there's avoiding the blatant truth.
Speaker 1: I think there's harms. Generally harms businesses. They're less successful,
Speaker 1: less profitable because of it. I think it hurts people's
Speaker 1: careers to do that. You know, ambitious people who are
Speaker 1: going to be incredibly successful, brutally honest. I mean, Steve
Speaker 1: Jobs did not play games with people. If you did
Speaker 1: screwed up, you were told you good up. If you didn't,
Speaker 1: you know, if you did well, you were rewarded for
Speaker 1: doing well. So uh yeah, So they do it because
Speaker 1: honesty is a dogma. Nobody's taught them that honesty is
Speaker 1: in their self interest. Nobody's explained to them that self interest,
Speaker 1: their unhappiness depends on being rational, and being rational depends
Speaker 1: on being honest. Nobody's taught them the virtue of justice
Speaker 1: and why it's in their self interest. People have told
Speaker 1: them you got to be honest. Why, Because you've got
Speaker 1: to be honest. I mean, there's a commandment someway I
Speaker 1: shall not lie. You still have to do it, so
Speaker 1: you know, you it's it's it's something that holds companies
Speaker 1: back and something that the better companies struggle with. Okay,
Speaker 1: but what information? What does honesty mean? How much information
Speaker 1: I need to give the clients and finding that, you know,
Speaker 1: what does honesty require of you in terms of disclosure
Speaker 1: is tricky, It's not obvious. But I think some things
Speaker 1: are straightforward and easy, Like you can't meet a deadline.
Speaker 1: You can't meet a deadline. That's it. Let them know
Speaker 1: you're not You're not going to escape the consequence of that.
Speaker 1: One might as well get it over with. Yeah, it's
Speaker 1: fragmentism and the lack of moral teaching. Moral teaching as
Speaker 1: this is in your self interest, this is what you
Speaker 1: gain from it. Michael, is he run on the verge
Speaker 1: of collapse or readjusting the strategy to fire more rockets
Speaker 1: closer to the verge of collapse than fiving more rockets.
Speaker 1: They don't have more rockets, they don't have more launchers.
Speaker 1: There's nothing for them to there's no news strategy they
Speaker 1: can do. They are struggling to figure out how to survive.
Speaker 1: The collapse may take weeks, but they are struggling to
Speaker 1: figure out how to survive, and it could take days.
Speaker 1: Liam is China the same type of paper tiger. Euon
Speaker 1: turned out to be probably not probably well. I mean,
Speaker 1: I always thought Ewan was a paper tiger. Always for decades,
Speaker 1: I've been saying, you won is a paper tiger. See
Speaker 1: Juan's paper tiger at ness was zero surprise to me.
Speaker 1: China is not a paper tagert to this extent. China
Speaker 1: has legit tech companies, it has legit capabilities, it has
Speaker 1: a legit defense industry. You know, I think it's better
Speaker 1: than Russia. It's just I don't think it's as good
Speaker 1: as America. I don't think it's as good as Isue,
Speaker 1: but I think it's better than Iwan and Russia. There's
Speaker 1: only one people talk about the access of you. There's
Speaker 1: only one potential superpower out there to compete with the US,
Speaker 1: and that is China. Russia is nothing, And I think
Speaker 1: in some respect Putin's war is an act of desperation
Speaker 1: to kind of try to prove to himself and prove
Speaker 1: to the people around him that Russia still has it.
Speaker 1: And it doesn't. It just doesn't have it. Think about
Speaker 1: what Israel is done to Iran, which was supposed to
Speaker 1: have this mighty force, and what Russia has done to Ukraine,
Speaker 1: where Ukraine has never had a mighty force, was not
Speaker 1: supposed to have anything. Russia is four times larger than Ukraine.
Speaker 1: Israel is one tenth of the size of Iran in
Speaker 1: terms of people and one hundredth the size of Iran
Speaker 1: in terms of size. It's just unbelievable when you compare
Speaker 1: those two differences. Russia is a zero and nothing, a
Speaker 1: nonentity when it comes as military force as compared to
Speaker 1: the West, and Israel is you know, superpower. It's not
Speaker 1: because it doesn't have the numbers. You know, Israel has
Speaker 1: six hundred and fifty airplanes. I think the United States
Speaker 1: has fourteen thousand airplanes. Fourteen thousand, you can't match that.
Speaker 1: Hubert Campbell, is Trump's behavior that the downstream effect of
Speaker 1: the mall character of the country. Well, I think the
Speaker 1: fact that he is the president is the downstream effect
Speaker 1: of the mall character of the country. His behavior, the
Speaker 1: fact that he can get away with his behavior, is
Speaker 1: the downstream effect of the culture. But he is the
Speaker 1: effect of his own choices, the fact of his upbringing
Speaker 1: and his choices and the kind of human being he is.
Speaker 1: He has no excuse. Nobody caused him to be like.
Speaker 1: This is the m e K, a large organization in Iran.
Speaker 1: They give great speeches in English, but in FOSSi they
Speaker 1: talk about how the Mullahs don't go far enough. Soce
Speaker 1: Iranian American friends who listen to leader live in DC.
Speaker 1: There is an organization. I think it's Ak, which is Islamist,
Speaker 1: which is radical Islamist, and is anti the Mullahs because
Speaker 1: they're not Islamist enough. They don't follow Sharia. The Somk
Speaker 1: is more like the Taliban, which you know, forced us
Speaker 1: them to cover their face. Women can't talk in public,
Speaker 1: they don't go to school. In Iran women do go
Speaker 1: to school. So there is a radical but they're not popular.
Speaker 1: They're not they're not big in Iran. They also combine
Speaker 1: kind of a Marxist economics, so they're leftist Islamists. But
Speaker 1: I don't think they're real force. I don't think they're
Speaker 1: real force anyone. I don't think they are expected to
Speaker 1: be one of the main players over there, although you
Speaker 1: know they might be organized, they might be a player,
Speaker 1: but they I don't think there's a chance they achieve power.
Speaker 1: I mean, any people don't want to replace one set
Speaker 1: of mula's with another not you have as algorithm. If
Speaker 1: all humans suddenly lost the ability to lie, what industry
Speaker 1: would collapse first? I mean, if you lost ability to lie,
Speaker 1: you'd lose your free will, and all industry would collapse.
Speaker 1: I mean, I mean, you can't just lose your ability
Speaker 1: to lie out of context. I don't know what industry
Speaker 1: relies on. I mean politicians, politics and related fields, parts
Speaker 1: of the law, parts of government, contractors, but mainly politics.
Speaker 1: I don't think any business business relies online, even used
Speaker 1: cost salesmen. I don't really rely on lying at the
Speaker 1: end of the day, not Javi, y'all go with them.
Speaker 1: Could the Iron Dome potentially stop a nuclear warhead? Well,
Speaker 1: not the Iron Dome, but the the arrow the arrow
Speaker 1: system could, Yes, the uh. These are air defense systems
Speaker 1: that hit the the ballistic missile before it enters the atmosphere.
Speaker 1: UH and and you probably get You're probably going to
Speaker 1: get more powerful lasers in the future. They can also
Speaker 1: hit real hypersonic missiles. These are missiles that go at
Speaker 1: five mas plus and maneuverable. But lasers could probably deal
Speaker 1: with that as well. But the Iron Dome is secifically
Speaker 1: targeted at to intercept something at very low altitudes, and
Speaker 1: if it would not be appropriate for a nuclear bomb,
Speaker 1: because if you intercepted it there and it blew up
Speaker 1: at low altitudes, it would cause more damage, not less. Uh. Yeah,
Speaker 1: what is your genuine opinion of the abram Accords. You know,
Speaker 1: I'm positive, but I'm not. I'm not super enthusiastic because
Speaker 1: I think these regimes have to be watched and you
Speaker 1: have to be careful with them, and they're all authoritarian.
Speaker 1: But I think for Israel to do it it was
Speaker 1: a positive step. It just wasn't this. The world has changed.
Speaker 1: Everything's going to be peaceful and nice and friendly. Anybody's kumbaya,
Speaker 1: love each other from now on. I think as long
Speaker 1: as these countries are ruled by Islam, even though it's
Speaker 1: not islam Mism, it's still Islam and rulers who are
Speaker 1: still committed to Islam, it's a problem. And now maybe
Speaker 1: they're moving away from that. But I don't see any
Speaker 1: of them becoming liberal democracies or liberal countries in a
Speaker 1: classical liberal sense. So I'm suspicious, but I wouldn't turn
Speaker 1: away from them. I would just say, you know, be careful,
Speaker 1: be careful, sup. Kaski Christy Gnome has been hospitalized. Her
Speaker 1: dog spirit has come back for revenge. Yeah, I think
Speaker 1: she had an allergic reaction to something, Clark, Iran was
Speaker 1: a lot of bluster without ability. However, they would have
Speaker 1: gotten their ability with nukes, so it was crucial to
Speaker 1: deal with them now. Absolutely, you don't need a lot
Speaker 1: of ability once you have nukes, and nukes provide you
Speaker 1: with the ability to threaten, and then people don't even
Speaker 1: know if you have the ability or not. Yeah, let's see, Clark,
Speaker 1: there must be a lot of behind the scenes reasoning
Speaker 1: why as well decided to do this at this particular
Speaker 1: moment that we won't find out for months. Yeah, and
Speaker 1: we might never find out, it might never find out
Speaker 1: in any kind of reasonable time. Fame and uh but
Speaker 1: uh yeah, I mean it's a combination of intelligence that
Speaker 1: really did suggest to them that Iran was getting close
Speaker 1: to bomb and potential fears that Trump was going to
Speaker 1: stab them in the back by signing some kind of
Speaker 1: deal with the Iranians. Would be my guess, but I'm
Speaker 1: only guessing because I have no incie information. Richard back again,
Speaker 1: I think this makes it. Yeah, this makes it two
Speaker 1: hundred dollars. Thank you. Richard Wow. Was there an alliance
Speaker 1: between leftists and Islamis in the Middle East during the
Speaker 1: Cold War? Is there a link with the Muslim Brotherhood?
Speaker 1: Such alliances existed in a few countries. Ranian Revolution was
Speaker 1: the funity of left and Islam. Are they still common? Well?
Speaker 1: I wouldn't say the Aran Revolution was a fusion of
Speaker 1: lefton Islam in the sense that I told Homani Khanned
Speaker 1: the leftists to support his revolution, and then once he
Speaker 1: established power, he killed them all and destroyed them and
Speaker 1: eviscerated them right they were gone. So it was a
Speaker 1: con game, I told Hamani used to distribute these cassette tapes.
Speaker 1: That's how he became popular in UoN. People used to
Speaker 1: listen to his summons, and he was to sprinkle in
Speaker 1: his summons lots of kind of Marxist phrases and leftist
Speaker 1: propaganda items. Talked about colonialism and talked about exploitation and
Speaker 1: alienation and all the keywords for the leftists, and they
Speaker 1: got very, very excited and they support to the revolution.
Speaker 1: They hated the show, but I don't know that I'd
Speaker 1: call it an alliance because at the end of the
Speaker 1: day they were gone with the God. The Muslim Brotherhood. No,
Speaker 1: I mean there was never an alliance really other than
Speaker 1: in attempting to eliminate existing status quo regimes. The Muslim
Speaker 1: Brotherhood were not supported by the left in Egypt as
Speaker 1: far as I can tell. You know, they they they
Speaker 1: they grew out of an Islamist tradition that rejects everything secular,
Speaker 1: and they they So I don't know of an alliance
Speaker 1: between them and the left. You know, in in in
Speaker 1: Syria it is it is the kind of the fascist
Speaker 1: to control. In Rock it was the fascist the both
Speaker 1: party that to control. But I don't think I think
Speaker 1: there's a lot, I mean, anything in common between the
Speaker 1: leftists and Islamists for the most part, with excepting MK
Speaker 1: and Iran, is the hatred of the status quo, the
Speaker 1: hatred of the existing authoritarian regimes in the midd least,
Speaker 1: the hatred of the Saudi regime, of the regime everywhere,
Speaker 1: and usually what happens is they unite overthrow the regimes.
Speaker 1: I think this happened in Tunisia during the Arab Spring.
Speaker 1: Generally the Arab Spring was a unity of the Islamists
Speaker 1: and the leftists, but I wouldn't call it an alliance.
Speaker 1: They just they just came together to overthrow the existing order.
Speaker 1: But then what happened is that it turns out that
Speaker 1: the most that the Islamist are more popular than the leftists.
Speaker 1: The Islamist took over and they marginalize the leftist groups
Speaker 1: that demonstrated with them. So it's not that they ally
Speaker 1: themselves in governance. They ally themselves in opposition to the regimes.
Speaker 1: I hope that's helpful, James. Is the Mega phenomena unwinding
Speaker 1: in its first six months in the White House? No,
Speaker 1: I mean I don't think so. Trump is still there.
Speaker 1: He's still Maga JD. Vans. There's still a lot of
Speaker 1: Mega people out there talking, talking, talking and putting influence.
Speaker 1: You can see how Trump, you know, took away the
Speaker 1: exemption for the ice going after people who are working
Speaker 1: in certain industries because Maga spoke up. I mean, in
Speaker 1: the end of the day, Maga does influence control what
Speaker 1: Trump does. He is very much attuned to their demands,
Speaker 1: their wishes, their whims, and he folds and he folded
Speaker 1: on the immigration stuff. Amen, thank you, Amen. Amen just
Speaker 1: came in with one hundred dollars. Really really appreciate it
Speaker 1: and amend says, Imagine waking up on Christmas Morning and
Speaker 1: discovering Santa Is. That's how many Uranians feel today. My
Speaker 1: generation grew up in Iran wondering if the Mullahs would
Speaker 1: ever face justice. We thank Israeli's for giving us today.
Speaker 1: Well it's not quite today yet, but I think you're today,
Speaker 1: Your Christmas Morning is coming. It's getting very very close.
Speaker 1: And I think people are starting to starting to sense
Speaker 1: that it's getting very very close and starting to celebrate that.
Speaker 1: But but absolutely, amen, it is. It is amazing to see,
Speaker 1: you know, what potentially could happen in Iran once the
Speaker 1: mullah is gone, once the councils, all the religious councilors
Speaker 1: are gone, and and Iran has the opportunity to live
Speaker 1: up to its you know, the people of Yuan have
Speaker 1: the opportunity to live up to their potential, live live
Speaker 1: up to their you know, potential as individuals, and live
Speaker 1: up to their potential as a as a as a nation.
Speaker 1: I mean again, this is a country with an ancient,
Speaker 1: ancient civilization, a civilization was at the forefront of science
Speaker 1: and medicine when Europe was in the dark ages. And
Speaker 1: you know, Islam taking this idea of taking Islam seriously,
Speaker 1: degrade civilizations, destroy civilizations. And what it needs is to
Speaker 1: continue the secularization trend that started in the fifties and
Speaker 1: went through the Shaw and needs to be resurrected today,
Speaker 1: just this time without a Shaw, without a king, but
Speaker 1: establishing a true kind of liberal society, a republic, a democracy, anything.
Speaker 1: It'd be better than what they have today and what
Speaker 1: they had they with the Shaw. So yeah, I mean
Speaker 1: this is truly, I mean, this is exciting. As I said,
Speaker 1: it's like the liberation that I think that the Commune
Speaker 1: felt when the Berlin Wall fell and and the Soviet
Speaker 1: Union broke apart. Uh. This is the equivalent for I
Speaker 1: think the Iranians. But I actually think this is far
Speaker 1: has consequences far beyond Iran because I think this impacts
Speaker 1: the time Muslim world. I think this this takes away
Speaker 1: the aura of Islamism, It takes away the invisibility of
Speaker 1: the Mullahs, takes away the idea that Allah is with them.
Speaker 1: And and this this opens a new dawn I think
Speaker 1: potentially for for the most for many other Muslim countries, Uh,
Speaker 1: that that can hopefully embrace kind of a moderate, a
Speaker 1: moderated slam Arman is saying, we hope I'm daydreaming about
Speaker 1: moving back and rebuilding the country. Yeah, I mean that
Speaker 1: would that would be super exciting. Somebody was asking me
Speaker 1: yesterday about whether it would be an exciting investment opportunity
Speaker 1: right now in Iran. And I think, give it, give
Speaker 1: give give everything, Give it some time to stabilize, you know,
Speaker 1: give it, give it time for you know, for for
Speaker 1: for a new order to emerge. But once you get
Speaker 1: some stability there, once a new order does emerge, I
Speaker 1: think it's an enormous opportunity to invest in iuon Eon
Speaker 1: is a highly educated can be an incredibly productive place.
Speaker 1: Uh And and I you know, I think that I
Speaker 1: think they once they once they give up on this
Speaker 1: theocratic regime, there's a lot of money to be made.
Speaker 1: There's a lot of industry to be built, There's a
Speaker 1: lot of business to be done. Uh in Iuan, so
Speaker 1: you know, I mean, you know, all the best of you.
Speaker 1: I really really hope that the day dreaming comes true.
Speaker 1: The Christmas morning comes, the actual Christmas morning where you
Speaker 1: see the mullas you know, not there put it that way,
Speaker 1: uh and uh, and that you get a chance to
Speaker 1: go back and to and to build something there, and
Speaker 1: build something there. I mean I think that that it
Speaker 1: could be something really powerful. Thanks Amen, Richard says awesome
Speaker 1: as always, Thank you you on I declare a righteous
Speaker 1: jihad on the two hour goal. Everyone watching should donate
Speaker 1: or you know, just just just support. Just yeah, Alex,
Speaker 1: thank you, Richard, really really appreciated. I haven't seen you
Speaker 1: in a long time. Thank you for jumping in here
Speaker 1: with three hundred dollars and that is fantastic. Uh, it's
Speaker 1: good to have you back or I guess you've been
Speaker 1: listening all along, but thanks for being back and supporting.
Speaker 1: Alex says Richard. It's not a donation. It's a trade
Speaker 1: value for value. It's yes, it's it's it's a trade
Speaker 1: at the end of the day. Uh. And it but
Speaker 1: it's very much appreciated because it's very much a voluntary
Speaker 1: it's one sided until you guys reciprocate and and and
Speaker 1: that recuplication is unbelievably appreciated. Thank you, thank you, Thank you. James.
Speaker 1: Why was it always being American policies to cut deals
Speaker 1: saving terrorism so it has a chance to fight another day?
Speaker 1: I mean, it's a nature of pragmatism. America is a
Speaker 1: land of pragmatism. How American philosophers were pragmatic pragmatists, Dewey,
Speaker 1: James and others. This idea of principles don't matter. You
Speaker 1: just do what works, and what works in a short run.
Speaker 1: And who knows what happened in the wrong one. You've
Speaker 1: seen that with so many commentators. We don't know what
Speaker 1: will happened in Iran if it fails. So the safer
Speaker 1: path is stability, right, and and people have been grown
Speaker 1: up on that. And pragmatism is the dominant philosophy in
Speaker 1: the US. Cut deals, kick the can down the road.
Speaker 1: Look at our SOI security, look at how government dephesis,
Speaker 1: look at Medicaid, look at government spending, look at all
Speaker 1: of that. That's all the same thing, cutting deals rather
Speaker 1: than actually facing the problem and fixing it. And did
Speaker 1: your Peterson Academy prep go? Well? Today it did. I'm
Speaker 1: still like a week behind, but it did. Tomorrow night fly.
Speaker 1: So I'll work on the plane all the way there,
Speaker 1: and every morning I'll just wake up very early in
Speaker 1: the morning and work on the classes that I have
Speaker 1: to do that morning. But I like my outline now
Speaker 1: today I finally got my outline right. And if I
Speaker 1: can get the outline right, I usually everything else falls
Speaker 1: into place. So I think I've got the outline right.
Speaker 1: I mean, there's still a lot of details to flesh
Speaker 1: out the outline and fill it in, but I think
Speaker 1: I've got the basic the basic flow of the course,
Speaker 1: and now I just have to work on hour by hour,
Speaker 1: lecture by lecture. The content and so the challenges is sound.
Speaker 1: The content is a stoic and with history, I don't
Speaker 1: remember dates and I don't remember names of people, and
Speaker 1: so I have to after the history a lot of
Speaker 1: it after write down in bullet points so I can
Speaker 1: keep track of it. So a lot of that work
Speaker 1: still has to be done. And I'm using a couple
Speaker 1: of books as my main sources, and so I have
Speaker 1: to go back and forth with the books and type stuff.
Speaker 1: So there's a lot of work still to do, but
Speaker 1: I'm feeling okay. Thanks and for asking Hopa Campbell. If
Speaker 1: the Muslims Socialists become a If the Muslim Socialists socialist
Speaker 1: becomes the mayor of New York City, would you recommend
Speaker 1: people leave? You know, I don't know, I mean, you'd
Speaker 1: have to ask a New Yoka who lived through Deblasio's period.
Speaker 1: This might be worse. How bad did it really get
Speaker 1: versus the benefits of living in New York? You know,
Speaker 1: I don't know. I don't know. Mike, just getting here.
Speaker 1: I'll watch tomorrow. Thanks Mike, appreciate the supports events. Ask
Speaker 1: me how I'm motivating the class. I'm not even the class.
Speaker 1: Basically by saying, everything we have here is a product
Speaker 1: of business, of corporations, of this legal creation called the corporation,
Speaker 1: and yet everybody hates them. And I've got a lot
Speaker 1: of good quotes and a lot of you know, left right,
Speaker 1: even libertarians hate corporations and creatures of the state, and
Speaker 1: all kinds of myths like that. What's going on here?
Speaker 1: What's up? And how do we get so rich? How
Speaker 1: do we get so rich? How did these creations get
Speaker 1: us so rich?
Speaker 2: In it?
Speaker 1: We're trying to break them apart. So I'm going to talk.
Speaker 1: The course will include a lot of talk of antitrust,
Speaker 1: a lot of talk on government's attempts to do industrial
Speaker 1: planning all the way up to today with Trump and Biden.
Speaker 1: Course will also include a lot on regulations and our
Speaker 1: governments try to control whole industries. Think about how governments
Speaker 1: try to control I mean literally try to control every
Speaker 1: aspect of it. I mean, FM radio came out a
Speaker 1: couple of decades after it should have because the government
Speaker 1: wouldn't allow it, and it still controls the bandwidth. I
Speaker 1: mean it's still bandwidth. Is imagine a bandwidth was all
Speaker 1: privately owned and could be sold and traded. We might
Speaker 1: have had mobile phones much easier earlier. We might have
Speaker 1: had all kinds of goodies much much earlier than we
Speaker 1: actually did. But anyway, I'm going to get into all
Speaker 1: of that as part of the course. So it's a
Speaker 1: history of business in many respects. And I'm motivating by
Speaker 1: emphasizing the importance of business to the current quality and
Speaker 1: standard living and yet at the same time the hostility
Speaker 1: that exists the woods business and corporations. And we're going
Speaker 1: to get into the weeds about the legal status of
Speaker 1: corporations and what they represent, and the the problems that
Speaker 1: might exist and in the corporations, and how the market
Speaker 1: solve it, and how governments intervene and prevent the solutions
Speaker 1: from actually coming through. And there's a ton of ton
Speaker 1: of different issues that I think are really interesting but yeah,
Speaker 1: you have to love this stuff, and I'm going to
Speaker 1: try to help you love it by showing you how
Speaker 1: it affects the life you live Adridin. Do you think
Speaker 1: Israel will get all the weapons needed to finish this job?
Speaker 1: Can Trump stop Israel as the entire military operation in
Speaker 1: order to make a deal. I think Trump could probably
Speaker 1: get Israel to stop. I don't think he will, but
Speaker 1: he could. Can Israel get the whole job done by itself?
Speaker 1: I think the answer is yes. Will it get all
Speaker 1: the weapons it needs? I don't think it needs any
Speaker 1: weapons to get I think it just needs the time
Speaker 1: and the space to do it. The weapon that would
Speaker 1: make this quick is the big mother of all bamb
Speaker 1: the bunker Basta. Isra's not gonna get that. It doesn't
Speaker 1: have a delivery mechanism for that, and it's gonna have
Speaker 1: fined other ways to get rid of four Door, you know.
Speaker 1: I think probably by putting troops in there and blowing
Speaker 1: it up from within. But that's difficult, dangerous, super dangerous,
Speaker 1: super difficult, super SEVERER risky. They will only do that
Speaker 1: once they're convinced Trump is not going to do it.
Speaker 1: Trump will not bomb the place, so that's they're gonna delay, delay, delay,
Speaker 1: until until they convinced Trump's just not gonna come, and
Speaker 1: then they will take care of it without Trump. Friend,
Speaker 1: harp up, I'm listening through Peacock's podcast show, and I
Speaker 1: got far enough to hear your first episode, episode two
Speaker 1: hundred and forty ish. Uh, here's ten dollars in celebration.
Speaker 1: I would do more, but O'Connor soon. Thanks Ed Harper.
Speaker 1: I appreciate that, and there's still a lot more episodes
Speaker 1: that I did for the Land and Peacock Show. Jason
Speaker 1: says a pendul Let had a great quote about Trump
Speaker 1: worth repeating for fifteen dollars. Quote, trying to explain art
Speaker 1: to Donald Trump is like trying to explain art to
Speaker 1: Donald Trump. I get it, I get it. That's a
Speaker 1: penduled joke that fits him. Neil, do you think there
Speaker 1: will ever be a time where all countries will be
Speaker 1: in peace and militaries will no longer be needed? Well,
Speaker 1: I don't know if militaries will no longer be needed,
Speaker 1: but yeah, I do think one day the world will
Speaker 1: live in peace. That is the day where objectives and wins,
Speaker 1: where people, where people unplanet Earth are focused on their
Speaker 1: own individual happiness. It's the day where the morality of
Speaker 1: egoism wins. It's the day where selfishness wins. Selfish people
Speaker 1: don't want to go to war. War is a way
Speaker 1: of ending your life. It's not good for you. So
Speaker 1: I think yes, But objectivism, or at least objectives morality,
Speaker 1: has to win first. All right, everybody, no show tomorrow.
Speaker 1: I'm traveling, traveling all day, so no show tomorrow. After that,
Speaker 1: it really depends on how the course is going. If
Speaker 1: I have plenty of time and you know, I have
Speaker 1: no prep to do, which is unlikely, very unlikely. I'll
Speaker 1: try to do shows on Thursday and Friday, no show
Speaker 1: on Saturday. But the most likely scenario is, I'm warning you,
Speaker 1: the most likely scenario is unless there's kind of breaking
Speaker 1: news and I just have to no show Wednesday, no
Speaker 1: show Thursday, no show Friday, no show Saturday. I'll try
Speaker 1: to be back on Sunday. Now there's all going on,
Speaker 1: so there's a there's a chance that I won't be
Speaker 1: won't be able to resist coming on and letting you
Speaker 1: know what I think, particularly if there's something exciting this
Speaker 1: is happening, So we will see. Maybe I'll do short shows,
Speaker 1: just quick updates or something. But that will depend on
Speaker 1: really what's going on and how dramatic dramatic it is. Huh.
Speaker 1: I suppose he has all the striking targets at the
Speaker 1: Imam Hussein University campus. Maybe there's some labs there that
Speaker 1: they want to take out, and the headquarters of the
Speaker 1: Islamic Revolutionary God Corps in District four of Eastern Tehran,
Speaker 1: which is a district they asked be evacuated. All right,
Speaker 1: thank you guys, uh, thank you all the super chatties.
Speaker 1: You are great, in particular thank you to Richard and Amen,
Speaker 1: but thank you to everybody, and that I will see
Speaker 1: you all Sunday, but probably earlier than that. We'll see
Speaker 1: bye everybody.