Speaker 1: Good evening, all members of the retinue, all members of
Speaker 1: the squires of the Cajun Night. I am the Cajun Knight,
Speaker 1: Jacob Mook, your host, and I want.
Speaker 2: To thank everybody for joining me this evening.
Speaker 1: We got a couple of things to talk about, a
Speaker 1: couple of world news things, a couple of robotics things,
Speaker 1: a couple of American news things, and we're gonna get.
Speaker 2: Into all of it.
Speaker 1: But before we do, I do want to take this
Speaker 1: moment to give a shout out to Brohemian Grove that
Speaker 1: is going to be going on in Florida in just
Speaker 1: a couple of weeks. We're gonna be doing the thing.
Speaker 1: It is being hosted by Nephelin Death Squad. We are
Speaker 1: gonna be hosting one of the panels on the twentieth
Speaker 1: of June. The event goes the twentieth and the twenty first.
Speaker 1: The twenty first is gonna be more of a comedy
Speaker 1: based night. Owen, Benjamin Sam Tripley, Shane Cashman and a
Speaker 1: couple of other big names are gonna be out there
Speaker 1: headlining that event. The first night, the twentieth is going
Speaker 1: to be more conspiratorially geared.
Speaker 2: And that is where we will be headlining one of
Speaker 2: those events.
Speaker 1: So for anybody who's listening to the Cajun Night, if
Speaker 1: you would like to be a part of that, if
Speaker 1: you would like to come and hang out with us
Speaker 1: and all the things, then come make your way to Leesburg, Florida,
Speaker 1: right outside.
Speaker 2: Of Orlando and be a part of Brohemian Grove.
Speaker 1: The website for anybody who would like to be a
Speaker 1: part of that is brogrove dot com and it's gonna
Speaker 1: sing you right to the spot. Now let's dive straight
Speaker 1: into it. I want to just start off with America
Speaker 1: as far as the news and conversations are concerned.
Speaker 2: Because I know we have people from all over this.
Speaker 1: Great country and all over the world that listen to this,
Speaker 1: but specifically a couple of people that I know that
Speaker 1: live in and around Oregon, Washington, Idaho, northern California, all
Speaker 1: of that region the Pacific Northwest.
Speaker 2: And this article was posted today.
Speaker 1: I did research into it offline, of course, and there
Speaker 1: is countless articles. Some of them were posted a month ago,
Speaker 1: some of them were posted two months ago. This one
Speaker 1: was posted to day talking about scientists that are warning
Speaker 1: of a one thousand foot megassa spurs from an active
Speaker 1: fault line, it could wipe a part of a excuse me,
Speaker 1: it could wipe a part of America off the map. Now,
Speaker 1: depending on what this is or what's causing this, I'm
Speaker 1: hearing that it's a fault line. I'm hearing that it
Speaker 1: is a volcanic tube that is coming off.
Speaker 2: Of this area. Either way it goes when slash, if.
Speaker 1: This blows, it's talking about a tidal wave, and it's
Speaker 1: talking about basically sectioning off a portion of the continental US.
Speaker 1: It's not like just the coastal regions. It talks about.
Speaker 1: Oregon's more of a was place rather than it is place.
Speaker 1: But let's get into it. This is from AOL dot
Speaker 1: com for anybody who's curious. Scientists are warning that a
Speaker 1: one thousand foot tall megasunami could potentially wipe a large
Speaker 1: chunk of America off the map if a strong enough
Speaker 1: earthquake hits a specific active fault.
Speaker 2: Line over the next fifty years.
Speaker 1: Alaska, Hawaii, and parts of the mainland America's west coast
Speaker 1: are at risk if any earthquake erupts along the Cascadia
Speaker 1: Cascadia subsduction Jesus Christ if any earthquake erupts along the
Speaker 1: Cascadia Subduction Zone, a fall stretching from northern Vancouver Island
Speaker 1: to Cape Mendocino, Mandocino, California. A recent study by Virginia
Speaker 1: Tech Geoscience, is published in the Proceedings of the National
Speaker 1: Academy of Science, estimates that there's a fifteen percent chance
Speaker 1: of a magnitude eight point zero earthquake hitting the region
Speaker 1: within the.
Speaker 2: Next fifty years.
Speaker 1: That quake, which would potentially flush away cities like Seattle
Speaker 1: and Portland, Oregon, could also sink coastal land by as
Speaker 1: much as six point five feet. According to the findings,
Speaker 1: they had these signs of the tsunami hazard signs. I
Speaker 1: don't know if this is actually outside of Oregon or
Speaker 1: where this particular one is, but I think it's just
Speaker 1: more of a you know, it's a marker kind of
Speaker 1: give an image to what they're talking about here. And
Speaker 1: I guess is that the Starbucks like main building here
Speaker 1: or is that just that Seattle is such a Starbucks
Speaker 1: place that they just put that on top of their
Speaker 1: main building.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 1: It says Seattle and Portland, Oregon, are two cities that
Speaker 1: could be wiped off the map if a one thousand
Speaker 1: foot tsunami hits. In that instance, the mega tsunamis waves
Speaker 1: could reach up to one thousand feet, putting millions of
Speaker 1: Americans at new risk.
Speaker 2: While ordinary tsunamis produce.
Speaker 1: Waves standing a few feet tall, mega tsunamis are characterized
Speaker 1: by extreme height, with waves often stretching hundreds of feet
Speaker 1: into the air. Unlike gradual climate driven events quote unquote,
Speaker 1: this potential earthquake would happen within minutes, leaving no time
Speaker 1: for adaptation or mitigation. The scientists warned the expansion of
Speaker 1: the coasts of the coastal flooplane following a Cascadia subduction
Speaker 1: zone earthquake has not been previously quantified, and the impacts
Speaker 1: to land use could significantly increase the timeline of recovery,
Speaker 1: said Tina Dura, lead author of the study and assistant
Speaker 1: professor at Virginia Tech's Department of Geosciences. The new research
Speaker 1: found the most severe effects would be in southern Washington,
Speaker 1: northern Oregon, and northern California. Alaska and Hawaii, though further
Speaker 1: from the fault line, are vulnerable because of their seismic
Speaker 1: and volcanic profiles.
Speaker 2: That kind of makes sense. I'm not gonna lie.
Speaker 1: There has also been a quake of large seismic magnitude
Speaker 1: along the Cascadies subduction zone since seventeen hundred, so I
Speaker 1: don't exactly know what is happening with the volcano as
Speaker 1: far as what's making them think.
Speaker 2: This could happen.
Speaker 1: Now, it says who is watching for earthquakes, volcanoes and tsunamis?
Speaker 1: Trump is cutting the guardians at the gate. It's a
Speaker 1: CNN article they tagged on here. So of course, if
Speaker 1: Portland gets wiped off the map because of a tsunami.
Speaker 2: It's obviously Trump's fault. Yes. Of course.
Speaker 1: Of course, sometime between today and two hundred years from now,
Speaker 1: scientists say the big one will hit the United States.
Speaker 1: There is a danger lurking in the seafloor of the
Speaker 1: Pacific Northwest coast. After centuries of two tectonic plates pushing
Speaker 1: up against each other, the Cascadia subduction zone that runs
Speaker 1: from northern California all the way to British Columbia is
Speaker 1: due to rupture, possibly in our lifetime. We know that
Speaker 1: we have the potential for a really massive scale earthquake,
Speaker 1: the largest we've ever seen on the planet, said Harold Tobin,
Speaker 1: a professor at the University of Washington and director at
Speaker 1: the Pacific Northwest Seismic Network. We know that the Pacific
Speaker 1: Northwest has that possibility. The resulting earthquake could be a
Speaker 1: devastating magnitude nine point zero, and the subsequent tsunami could
Speaker 1: be one hundred foot high, overwhelming coastline cities and towns.
Speaker 1: Around thirteen thou eight hundred people could die and more
Speaker 1: than one hundred thousand others would be injured. The Federal
Speaker 1: Emergency Management Agency has estimated FEMA how about that. In short,
Speaker 1: it could be worse than any natural disaster the United
Speaker 1: States has seen in modern times, and many scientists say
Speaker 1: we are less prepared for it than ever before. The
Speaker 1: League of accept of Excerpts and scientists who have spent
Speaker 1: decades keeping watch the Guardians at the Gate is being
Speaker 1: decimated by the Trump administration's staff cutting. I gotta say,
Speaker 1: you know, eh, yeah, go ahead, Raven, I see your
Speaker 1: hand raised.
Speaker 3: So a part of my minor is environmental substainability. And
Speaker 3: I took two of these environmental classes on just specifically
Speaker 3: talking about those plates, like I did my whole thing
Speaker 3: about those plates. And it's really interesting because how the
Speaker 3: plates have been growing, like shifting underneath each other.
Speaker 4: Pretty much.
Speaker 5: It just takes one volcano.
Speaker 3: And because the Cascades, it's not cascade of the Cascades
Speaker 3: is they have like multiple volcanoes along that line. So
Speaker 3: they have like Mount Hood Mountain near Jefferson, they have uh,
Speaker 3: watch a clut.
Speaker 2: I don't know why.
Speaker 5: I just went my head, Helen, yep.
Speaker 3: And like if they if they, if one blows, it
Speaker 3: can trigger a chain reaction down the entire thing. And
Speaker 3: that tectonic plate is like precarious balancing right now. And
Speaker 3: if it shifts into the ocean, the other two that
Speaker 3: are in the ocean, it pretty much will like collide
Speaker 3: and cause this like massive hit. And that's why that
Speaker 3: tsunami is so such an option of like potentially happening
Speaker 3: is because of that huge plate and all those volcanoes
Speaker 3: lining up the ridge.
Speaker 2: So wait, you said it's cascades.
Speaker 1: It's spelled like cascadia, but it's pronounced cascades.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean it's it's the cap Cascades. It's the
Speaker 3: type of ridge that's all the way down instead.
Speaker 2: I got you.
Speaker 1: But yeah, okay, so you already you've done studies into this,
Speaker 1: and so they're saying that. I don't know why it's
Speaker 1: becoming such a talking point right now, because I remember
Speaker 1: seeing news articles about it a couple of months ago,
Speaker 1: and today I'm seeing more articles about it. I don't
Speaker 1: know if it's just because they're just kind of re
Speaker 1: running the story keep a spirit of fear alive and
Speaker 1: well within the American population, or if they're seeing something
Speaker 1: with one of these volcanic tubes that would lead them
Speaker 1: to believe that it's going to happen more recently than
Speaker 1: you know, fifty years from now, more like this year
Speaker 1: or something.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 5: There's a volcano in the ocean that you can pull
Speaker 5: it up there.
Speaker 3: I've had a lot of articles talking about it, and
Speaker 3: it's off the West coast, and pretty much what they've
Speaker 3: said is that if that rupture, depending on how it ruptures,
Speaker 3: I've read a couple of articles saying that like it
Speaker 3: would the pretty much it would send seismic activity into
Speaker 3: the other like faults, and then it would cause a
Speaker 3: chain reaction that way. There's also like a lot of
Speaker 3: rumbling underneath a couple of the mountains in Oregon and Washington, that,
Speaker 3: like they even talked about it last year, like one
Speaker 3: of them might potentially blow up, and so it just
Speaker 3: depends on Like it's like kind of one of those
Speaker 3: scenes that like one thing can set off a whole
Speaker 3: bunch of things.
Speaker 5: I don't know why they're.
Speaker 3: Like pushing super hard right now, but I have seen
Speaker 3: a lot more seismic activity in the surrounding mountains. And
Speaker 3: the one out in a volcano, the under Yeah, the
Speaker 3: underwater volcano out there.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm looking it up right now. So this is
Speaker 1: on opb dot org. Under sea volcano off the Oregon
Speaker 1: coast could blow this year, but don't panic. Well, okay,
Speaker 1: that kind of seems counterintuitive. The Axial Sea Mount, the
Speaker 1: most active volcano in the Pacific Northwest, has been making
Speaker 1: headlines lately with signs that it could erupt sometime this year,
Speaker 1: but experts say there's no immediate cause for alarm. Located
Speaker 1: about three hundred miles west of Astoria, organ and sitting
Speaker 1: a mile beneath the ocean surface, the Axial Sea Mount
Speaker 1: shows an increase showed an increase in earthquake activity this
Speaker 1: past March, but that surge has since been.
Speaker 2: Quote unquote like a bit of a lull.
Speaker 1: It feels to me like Axial is just treading water lately,
Speaker 1: said Bill Chadwick, a volcanologist. Well, that's an awesome title
Speaker 1: with Oregon State University, you know, the ducks. In an
Speaker 1: April thirty thirtieth email to OB reporter Jess Burns, inflation
Speaker 1: of the volcano surface is marching along at a fairly
Speaker 1: steady clip, but the rate of the eques of earthquakes
Speaker 1: is down a bit lately. Okay, So again, it's saying
Speaker 1: that the inflation of the surface is marching along at
Speaker 1: a fairly steady clip, but the rate of earthquakes.
Speaker 2: Is down a bit lately.
Speaker 1: That doesn't sound like a cause for no alarm to
Speaker 1: me personally. If anything, that sounds like it's the calm
Speaker 1: before the storm.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 1: I'm not a volcano expert or an earthquake expert. I've
Speaker 1: only lived through one in my entire life, and that's
Speaker 1: why I was living in Washington, DC, and hell, I
Speaker 1: didn't even realize it was an earthquake until much much later.
Speaker 2: That was like a freak thing.
Speaker 1: But yeah, Axial is more geologically active than any other
Speaker 1: any of the Towering Cascade volcanoes. Yeah, see, they spelled
Speaker 1: it right here, including Mount Saint Helena, Mount Hood, and
Speaker 1: Mount Rainier. And it has erupted three times in past
Speaker 1: twenty five years, most recently in twenty fifteen. Unlike the
Speaker 1: explosive eruptions off in associate with volcanoes, Axial is a
Speaker 1: shield volcano, similar to those found in Hawaii or Iceland.
Speaker 2: When it erupts, it doesn't blow its top.
Speaker 1: Instead, lava steps through the cracks on its slopes, flowing
Speaker 1: slowly across the seafloor, which makes sense. I completely understand this.
Speaker 1: So what is it that's making them say that it
Speaker 1: could potentially blow this year? And if it does blow,
Speaker 1: is it just gonna be another kind of spewing of
Speaker 1: lava or is it gonna be this thousand foot tsunami
Speaker 1: tidal wave they're talking about. You're suggesting again. I'm asking you, Raven,
Speaker 1: because you've done the studies into this. The reason why
Speaker 1: it could potentially go to a thousand foot tsunami is
Speaker 1: because if this blows, it could hypothetically set off a
Speaker 1: chain reaction with other volcanoes, which could in turn set
Speaker 1: off a plate tectonic shift which would start the thousand
Speaker 1: foot tsunami.
Speaker 2: Am I about on track here?
Speaker 5: Yeah, So there's like multiple variables because it has so
Speaker 5: many different different themes.
Speaker 3: But like it could potentially, like say if Mount Hood
Speaker 3: blew up, right, it hasn't blown up in like two
Speaker 3: hundred and eighty years or three hundred years or something like.
Speaker 5: That, So it's a pretty large volcano.
Speaker 3: It could in theory send shock waves over into Washington
Speaker 3: because they're not too many not too far away is
Speaker 3: more mountains, and then you have the Sisters, and you
Speaker 3: have Mount Saint Helens, and you have all of them,
Speaker 3: and so it could potentially start a whole chain reaction
Speaker 3: down down and along the coast, and those plates will shift,
Speaker 3: Like there's the plates in the ocean are shifting anyways,
Speaker 3: and so like if there becomes that volcano, say it
Speaker 3: actually erupts and it's like intense enough to shift the plates,
Speaker 3: that could throw the plates off that are on land
Speaker 3: because they actually are butting up against each other underneath
Speaker 3: the service, and that could cause like a potential tsunami
Speaker 3: because when the plates shift is when tsunamis happen.
Speaker 5: That are that like catastrophic.
Speaker 1: Okay, So now I'm curious will the volcano cause the
Speaker 1: earthquake that causes the shift, or the earthquakes cause the
Speaker 1: volcano which will cause the plates to shift. I like
Speaker 1: you said, I guess there's multiple multiple facets to this,
Speaker 1: and one could lead to the other, or the other
Speaker 1: could lead to the one.
Speaker 2: It kind of could flip flop. Correct.
Speaker 3: Yeah, from like what I read in classes stuff like that,
Speaker 3: pretty much like they could go either way. I know
Speaker 3: that like the earthquakes can cause the mountains to want
Speaker 3: to rupture faster because like the way that they're shifting,
Speaker 3: and that causes the plates to move more. So it
Speaker 3: could very well be the earthquake situation happening that would
Speaker 3: cause all this to shift around.
Speaker 6: Wow.
Speaker 2: Wow.
Speaker 1: Okay, So for anybody who's living in the Pacific Northwest,
Speaker 1: specifically in the Washington, Oregon northern California area, if you
Speaker 1: hear a boom, I would say, get to high ground.
Speaker 2: Wow.
Speaker 1: And while we're on the topic of things exploding in
Speaker 1: booms and all of that, if anybody hasn't heard, our
Speaker 1: boy Royce, our resident Jewish correspondent, actually was in his home.
Speaker 2: When he heard four very.
Speaker 1: Loud sonic booms and went outside to investigate and found nothing.
Speaker 1: Come to find out he was not the only one
Speaker 1: that heard this. Let's read about this. This is from
Speaker 1: KOAA dot com. I think it's yeah, the local Southern
Speaker 1: Colorado News or Colorado how people pronounce it. Mysterious boom
Speaker 1: rattles southern Pueblo County leaves residents searching for answers. Sonic
Speaker 1: boom earthquake. Pueblo County residents share their theories after a
Speaker 1: mysterious event.
Speaker 2: Actually, I'm gonna play this little video here. Let's watch
Speaker 2: it together.
Speaker 7: Everybody Pueblo County heard it, describing it as a boom
Speaker 7: that came out of nowhere.
Speaker 2: I'm Michel Reyes, And while the explanation.
Speaker 7: Is still unclear, locals have a lot to say about
Speaker 7: what they felt heard and what they think it was.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think it was a sonic boom. It didn't
Speaker 2: seem like the planes, but it could have been. We
Speaker 2: thought maybe four Carson. We thought maybe the fault line
Speaker 2: along the Trinidad there.
Speaker 3: We thought it was just straight up above us, but
Speaker 3: we kind of heard it from afar.
Speaker 5: We weren't really sure what it was.
Speaker 7: A sound loud enough it was heard all around southern
Speaker 7: Pueblo County around ten Friday, morning, disrupting people's daily routines.
Speaker 8: Our neighbor was here and we were discussing a party,
Speaker 8: a birthday party, and it just started booming boom, boom,
Speaker 8: and it felt the floor move, the floor move. This
Speaker 8: whole thing was shaken like crazy. Things got moved around.
Speaker 7: Others like Bruce heard it in La Isabelle at the
Speaker 7: campground while he was paying an entrance fee.
Speaker 4: I was there with the person working at the booth.
Speaker 9: We heard this large boom and the whole booth shook,
Speaker 9: and you know, we didn't know what it was, earthquake
Speaker 9: or we looked for the mushroom cloud.
Speaker 2: There was no mushroom cloud.
Speaker 4: We didn't know what it was.
Speaker 7: But Ace employees like Jordan were also taken aback seeing
Speaker 7: the store doors and windows shape.
Speaker 3: Everybody just kind of like stopped and like looked up,
Speaker 3: kind of looked around. We had people show up into
Speaker 3: the store and asked, did you hear it?
Speaker 4: Did you know what it is?
Speaker 2: And we didn't have answers either, So we.
Speaker 7: Reached out to Colorado Department of Public Safety, Colorado State Patrol,
Speaker 7: and space based Delta one to ask if they knew
Speaker 7: what the loud noise residents were hearing, was all denied
Speaker 7: conducting any type of exercise in the area that would
Speaker 7: have generated the loud noise. For now, the source of
Speaker 7: that boom is unclear, leaving many residents here in Public
Speaker 7: County listening and wondering him.
Speaker 1: Okay, real quick, your boy was just very nonchalant about
Speaker 1: they looked for the mushroom cloud. The mushroom cloud, my boy,
Speaker 1: and you were just kind of like, you know, well,
Speaker 1: we didn't see a cloud. Like I feel like you
Speaker 1: were a little too calm about a potential nuclear bomb
Speaker 1: going on off. But all right, I guess people in
Speaker 1: Colorado just kind of they're on a different vibe. I
Speaker 1: suppose Royce, you were there, you heard these booms. You
Speaker 1: said there was four of them.
Speaker 2: Correct, Yeah, there were.
Speaker 10: There were four booms, and they progressively got more intense.
Speaker 10: The first one didn't actually bastly shake the mirror, but
Speaker 10: by the fourth one by the mirror and the bathroom
Speaker 10: was shaking. Then when I went outside, I actually saw
Speaker 10: four contrails in the air that were gone about twenty
Speaker 10: minutes later.
Speaker 1: When you say contrails, just for everybody who is not
Speaker 1: necessarily in the know, some might call those chem trails. Correct,
Speaker 1: they're talking about the streaks that are in the back
Speaker 1: of planes.
Speaker 10: Right, Yeah, there were there were four very distinct lines
Speaker 10: in the sky and then you said went away. No,
Speaker 10: they were completely gone. They completely complie them.
Speaker 1: Well, that leaves out the whole possibility of it being
Speaker 1: a chemtrail. Then things stay up there for hours. So
Speaker 1: that sounds like true contrails, which is you know, the
Speaker 1: exhaust off of a jet or or in some cases
Speaker 1: of rocket, and yeah, that dissipates. It's mostly steam which
Speaker 1: goes away after a few minutes. Four sonic booms. Now
Speaker 1: you were in the Air force and you know what
Speaker 1: it sounds like when a jet breaks the sound barrier, right, yeah, Okay,
Speaker 1: do you what is your personal take on this? If
Speaker 1: you had to completely hypothetical, complete out of left field,
Speaker 1: do you believe this is a plane that was going
Speaker 1: in and out of mock one and that's what made
Speaker 1: it hit the you know, the sonic boom multiple times?
Speaker 2: But no, you said it was four contrails, correct, it
Speaker 2: was for.
Speaker 10: So if they're they're needed by necessity, there would have
Speaker 10: to have been four different airport. It was an aircraft,
Speaker 10: but definitely four of them. That's it.
Speaker 1: Wow, but I mean even still, how close you got
Speaker 1: to be to the ground level for a sonic boom
Speaker 1: to shake and rattle the town? But below I mean
Speaker 1: that's not that's not something easily to do. How high
Speaker 1: help would you estimate these contrails were?
Speaker 10: That would be hard to say. I could not tell you.
Speaker 10: I can't judge, but like it was definitely lower than
Speaker 10: the clouds that were currently in the sky.
Speaker 1: Okay, interesting, Interesting would you if you had to guess,
Speaker 1: are you talking like a few hundred feet like these
Speaker 1: potentially were like low altitude flying jets that were just
Speaker 1: breaking it just to you know, what's it called, like
Speaker 1: rattle the tower, boom the tower or whatever they decided.
Speaker 2: To boom the county here?
Speaker 10: Possible? Okay, I would say I would say maybe a
Speaker 10: couple of thousand feet m and.
Speaker 1: That even that, like even I would guesstimate. I'm not
Speaker 1: an expert of aircraft or how that works, but a
Speaker 1: thousand feet you're not gonna feel the sonic boom. You'll
Speaker 1: hear it for sure, it's not gonna be enough to
Speaker 1: rattle the town.
Speaker 2: So I don't know what to make of that.
Speaker 1: Now Fort Carson being around there, do they test new
Speaker 1: ordinance or anything there.
Speaker 2: I don't I do not know, okay, hmm souse.
Speaker 1: I felt like most of the big the ordinance and
Speaker 1: things like that get tested in New Mexico or Nevada
Speaker 1: or somewhere where it's a desert, not Colorado around you know,
Speaker 1: decently inhabited residential areas or you know, so I would think.
Speaker 1: But I mean, okay, wow, interesting stuff. Everybody. Uh, we
Speaker 1: will keep it everybody posted on what comes out of this,
Speaker 1: because apparently the local government's keeping their mouths shut. The
Speaker 1: Colorado Department of Public Safety is keeping their mouths shut.
Speaker 2: The cops don't know anything either.
Speaker 1: Could this be a new aircraft that is being tested
Speaker 1: and that's why everybody's keeping their mouths shut about it.
Speaker 2: Possibly.
Speaker 1: I know there are some people that are gonna immediately
Speaker 1: assume that this had to have been extraterrestrials, and.
Speaker 2: That's the whole thing. I'm not saying it wasn't. But
Speaker 2: I could see it being more along the lines.
Speaker 1: Of a new aircraft, or maybe they're testing out new
Speaker 1: capabilities of an aircraft. I know, the F thirty five
Speaker 1: just got a new upgrade, or I should say a
Speaker 1: bunch of new upgrades. Because was it Lockheed Martin that
Speaker 1: was building a bunch of upgrades for I forget it
Speaker 1: was the F thirty five or maybe the thirty two,
Speaker 1: I don't know, but they were going to give them
Speaker 1: a bunch of upgrades, and then they scrubbed the program,
Speaker 1: so they basically decided to give it to another aircraft.
Speaker 1: And they might have just put a bunch of up
Speaker 1: grades on one of these aircraft and they just went
Speaker 1: out there to kind of stretch their wings a bit
Speaker 1: and test new capabilities.
Speaker 2: It's possible.
Speaker 1: It's equally possible that this is some sort of oopsy
Speaker 1: daisy on some ordinance. And for everybody who doesn't believe
Speaker 1: that that happens, I invite you to look at Operation
Speaker 1: Chrome Dome and how many broken arrows America has experienced
Speaker 1: when we accidentally, oopsie daisy dropped nuclear weapons on our
Speaker 1: own soil.
Speaker 2: The answer is like thirty two times.
Speaker 1: By the way, thankfully none of them went off, but
Speaker 1: that doesn't negate the fact that we've done that accidentally
Speaker 1: a few times, and that's not a conspiracy that's acknowledged
Speaker 1: by the DoD.
Speaker 2: So I don't know what to make of this.
Speaker 1: I'm more inclined to believe that it was probably aircraft
Speaker 1: and sonic booms.
Speaker 2: But even still, what kind of a sonic.
Speaker 1: Boom are you hitting to where they're able to feel
Speaker 1: it a thousand feet down? I don't know, but we
Speaker 1: will keep everybody posted as this story progresses. Now, let's
Speaker 1: talk a little bit about our president, our commander in chief,
Speaker 1: Old Donnie t uh Tony.
Speaker 11: Go ahead, sir, Yeah, thanks, one of the chiming a
Speaker 11: little bit, because yeah, sonic booms are all loud enough,
Speaker 11: but that's why the supersonic transport wasn't allowed to exceed
Speaker 11: one over one. It could only do it over the ocean.
Speaker 11: And yeah, it can't break windows and stuff, and the
Speaker 11: thousand feet is pretty low for that. So yeah, I'm
Speaker 11: not surprised that it was really loud.
Speaker 1: See you're saying that this is more than likely an
Speaker 1: aircraft that broke the sound beary, and that that's enough
Speaker 1: even a thousand feet is enough to rattle the town.
Speaker 11: Yeah, I would say it's definitely close enough. Okay, Yeah, Normally,
Speaker 11: normally they're flying way high up like the sst back
Speaker 11: to the concord back in the day, it flew at
Speaker 11: like fifty thousand feet or something. And it was only
Speaker 11: allowed to break the soundberry over the ocean. And planes, yeah,
Speaker 11: I have. My grandfather worked at an airport for many
Speaker 11: decades and he talked about how noise regulations have gotten
Speaker 11: more and more strict over time, and yeah, jet engines
Speaker 11: are quieter, but yeah, breaking the sound barrier is a
Speaker 11: pretty big deal. And the maximum speed below five thousand
Speaker 11: feet is two hundred and fifty knots, which is nowhere
Speaker 11: near the sound barrier obviously, but they try to do
Speaker 11: everything they can keep things quiet. Another fun fact about
Speaker 11: the sound barrier is the reason a whip makes the
Speaker 11: sound it makes is because the tip actually hits the
Speaker 11: sound barrier.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, I've seen the slow modes of that.
Speaker 1: You could actually see the little vorties or vortices i
Speaker 1: should say, off of the very tail end of it
Speaker 1: whenever it cracks.
Speaker 2: It's pretty crazy.
Speaker 11: Yes, So if something that small can be that loud, yeah,
Speaker 11: a plane is definitely going to be really loud. Even
Speaker 11: a thousand feet is not that high up.
Speaker 2: And I could see that too.
Speaker 1: Four pilots that just decide to say, you know, hey,
Speaker 1: screw it, let's just do it and see what happens,
Speaker 1: and then they get back to four Carson, and all
Speaker 1: of them get whatever the officer equivalent of an NJP is.
Speaker 1: I don't know what officers get to get their their
Speaker 1: peepe slapped whenever they make a big oopsie. But and
Speaker 1: of course, like everybody's being quiet a vout like Nope,
Speaker 1: that certainly wasn't our officers, no way, man, I could
Speaker 1: I could absolutely see that being a realistic possibility as well.
Speaker 1: I mean, nobody was hurt, no windows got broken out, no,
Speaker 1: no things got damaged, So it would be uh, it
Speaker 1: would be.
Speaker 2: Equivalent to that a little maybe ground.
Speaker 1: Them for a little bit, teach them a lesson, but
Speaker 1: keep it super in house and under the radar.
Speaker 2: I could believe this too.
Speaker 11: Yeah, and this has less to do with sound barrier,
Speaker 11: but it's not too hard to break windows with big sounds.
Speaker 11: My grandfather lived through World War Two in the city
Speaker 11: that got bombed, and he said one of the first
Speaker 11: things that happened was pretty much all the windows broke,
Speaker 11: even if they weren't that close to a bomb that
Speaker 11: went off. So yeah, everyone replaced their windows with bywood
Speaker 11: with a tiny little plastic window on it. And you know,
Speaker 11: I don't know if this is going to be useful
Speaker 11: to many of us. Hopefully we never needed to know this.
Speaker 11: But if if you are in a situation where there's
Speaker 11: extremely loud sounds like bombs going off around you, the
Speaker 11: key thing you gotta do, apparently is plug your ears
Speaker 11: obviously and open your mouth to equalize the pressure inside
Speaker 11: and outside of your lungs.
Speaker 2: It helps, it helps.
Speaker 1: I'm one hundred percent with you on both the points
Speaker 1: you just brought up. As a matter of fact. So
Speaker 1: when I was stationed in Washington, d C. They we
Speaker 1: do evening parades on Friday nights and outside of the
Speaker 1: Commandant of the Marine Corps house, right, And whenever they
Speaker 1: do this, they have a battery. The body bears run
Speaker 1: these cannons for like a big crescendo, and it's a
Speaker 1: whole thing. It's a big, big pompous parade and all
Speaker 1: this stuff.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: Originally they had two cannons, and I cannot remember the
Speaker 1: size of the original cannons was one hundred and twenty
Speaker 1: millimeter or something. Something that was a bit overly charged.
Speaker 1: And of course they're firing blanks. The first time that
Speaker 1: they fired both of them at the same time, because
Speaker 1: that's the thing, like they alternate, alternate, alternate, and at
Speaker 1: the very big crescendo they fire all at the same time.
Speaker 1: It blew out every window of the commonant's house. So
Speaker 1: they replaced those with three I want to say, they're
Speaker 1: like eighty one millimeters and they're the ones that are
Speaker 1: currently being used today. But yeah, the pressure alone, just
Speaker 1: from blank rounds being fired will absolutely shatter glass. So
Speaker 1: I'm with you one hundred percent on that. And also,
Speaker 1: one of my sergeants was telling me stories about when
Speaker 1: he was in Afghanistan, because a lot of the houses
Speaker 1: were basically, you know, mud hut type situations. He had
Speaker 1: this one guy who they pretty much nicknamed their breacher.
Speaker 1: He wasn't he was a regular rifleman, but for this
Speaker 1: intents and purposes, he was the breacher. And his big
Speaker 1: thing was he would take a flash bang, throw it
Speaker 1: into a room and push through the wall and like
Speaker 1: literally just collapse the wall in, get in the fetal position,
Speaker 1: plug his ears, and open his mouth woyoom.
Speaker 2: Then they clear the room and it.
Speaker 1: Would take him probably five or ten minutes to like
Speaker 1: not be nauseous. But yeah, I mean it's what they
Speaker 1: say as far as equalizing that, I know, I teamed
Speaker 1: up with some assaultmen on a range once, and I
Speaker 1: was watching them because to qualify they have to set
Speaker 1: off these shape charges that they make, and these homemade
Speaker 1: claymores and Bangalore torpedoes and all the stuff, all the
Speaker 1: fun stuff that you get to play with C four
Speaker 1: and do gangster things. And oddly enough, even as a
Speaker 1: basic rifleman, I was a road guard for that range
Speaker 1: for them, so I got to go play with all
Speaker 1: the C four with them and stuff, and to shield
Speaker 1: themselves from the blast, they hold up a sheet of kevlar.
Speaker 2: That's it.
Speaker 1: They don't get behind plywood, behind a burm, behind a barrier.
Speaker 1: They basically stack up behind each other like they're about
Speaker 1: to clear a room in an open field, and hold
Speaker 1: up a sheet of kevlar. And that's just for the
Speaker 1: potential of shrapnel. And every one of them was puking
Speaker 1: by the end of the day. It's beautiful. So yes,
Speaker 1: one hundred percent with you. They say, plug your ears,
Speaker 1: open your mouth, and get in the fetal position.
Speaker 2: It's the best you can do.
Speaker 1: But it still depends on radius of explosion and how
Speaker 1: far away you are from it. But yeah, one hundred
Speaker 1: percent with you now, sticking on the American continent. Let's
Speaker 1: talk a little bit about the Big Beautiful Bill and
Speaker 1: what's going on with that currently in Washington, DC. I
Speaker 1: know some people are not a big fan of Trump.
Speaker 1: Some people think that he's the Savior incarnate. Okay, and
Speaker 1: I'm not exactly on either one of those fences, but
Speaker 1: I should say in either one of those camps, I
Speaker 1: should say I'm on the fence.
Speaker 2: In a lot of these regards.
Speaker 1: But with that being said, he is trying to push
Speaker 1: the one, the Big Beautiful Bill. This is Fox News
Speaker 1: talking about it. Let's listen in.
Speaker 8: Work continues on President Trump's tax and policy bill, with
Speaker 8: some members of his own party is still holding out.
Speaker 4: The President hopes to get it done before the holiday weekend.
Speaker 12: Fox five anchor Rus Spencer joins us now at the
Speaker 12: Live desk with more on what's holding things up.
Speaker 2: Rus, spell Tom and Courtney.
Speaker 12: The bottom line is this ultra conservative members of the
Speaker 12: House Freedom Caucus what more spending cuts, and since the
Speaker 12: Republicans have a slim majority in the House, the holdouts
Speaker 12: constall the legislation.
Speaker 2: President Trump called them to.
Speaker 12: The White House with House Speaker Mike Johnson for some
Speaker 12: last minute arm twisting President Trump, How are you feelings,
Speaker 12: sir about your Big Beautiful Bill today?
Speaker 6: Very well?
Speaker 7: We know you're very well.
Speaker 1: I should mention also the guy standing next to Trump
Speaker 1: right here as the South African president and we're going
Speaker 1: there next. But anyway, learning more about the Big Beautiful Bill.
Speaker 13: I think progress is made.
Speaker 14: I think that.
Speaker 15: There is a pathway forward that we can see. But again,
Speaker 15: the leadership will have to figure out, you know what
Speaker 15: the timeframe of this is.
Speaker 1: The President yesterday laid out some real clear of the
Speaker 1: terms and we're working to achieve those.
Speaker 12: That's Chip Roy of Texas, one of the Republican opponents.
Speaker 12: Speaker Johnson worked out a deal with another group of
Speaker 12: holdouts who want to raise the cap on state and
Speaker 12: local tax deductions. The so called Big Beautiful Bill would
Speaker 12: extend tax customer President Trump's first term and remove taxes
Speaker 12: on tips and overtime, among other campaign promises. Democrats say
Speaker 12: millions of Americans would lose health insurance under Medicaid now.
Speaker 12: The bill is so big it even deals with artificial intelligence.
Speaker 12: Republicans are pushing for a ten year ban on AI
Speaker 12: regulation at the state level. They want to leave the
Speaker 12: rule making up to the federal government for the time being.
Speaker 12: Members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee ask some
Speaker 12: tough questions today about who should regulate AI.
Speaker 15: Much of the AI marketplaces comprive a small startups, and
Speaker 15: heavy handed regulations may ensure that the next great American
Speaker 15: company never makes it.
Speaker 4: The Republican's giant gift to big tech would.
Speaker 1: Block enforcement laws on the books right now that are
Speaker 1: protecting Americans from real world harms.
Speaker 12: Attorneys general from forty different states one that the ban
Speaker 12: would limit their ability to fight the use of AI
Speaker 12: for things like deep fakes and cyber scams. So that
Speaker 12: is another potential complication to the passage of the president's bill.
Speaker 12: If Democrats remain totally opposed as they are now, Republicans
Speaker 12: can only afford to have three members vote know and
Speaker 12: still pass it. At the live desk rus Spencer Fox five.
Speaker 1: All right, so let's break down a couple of things
Speaker 1: that we're just talked about here. This big, beautiful bill,
Speaker 1: as all bills are, that's ridiculously long, and it encompasses
Speaker 1: and brings in things that have nothing to do with
Speaker 1: anything else.
Speaker 2: But that being said.
Speaker 1: So they're talking about cutting taxes on tips and overtime
Speaker 1: I personally know most people in my life actually, with
Speaker 1: the exception of a very small handful, would benefit greatly
Speaker 1: from having that pass to where overtime is no longer taxed.
Speaker 2: We're talking you want to talk about stimulating the economy.
Speaker 1: Most people I were no work fifty to sixty hours
Speaker 1: a week on average. We're talking about complete game changer
Speaker 1: as far as take home income goes.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 1: Part of that bill also brings up Medicaid. I understand
Speaker 1: why people would be upset about that, but also if
Speaker 1: more people have more money in their pockets, and I
Speaker 1: know it's very case by case.
Speaker 2: I know there's a lot of nuance to that.
Speaker 1: I get it, but a lot of people would have
Speaker 1: more opportunities to afford their own insurance hypothetically speaking, if
Speaker 1: they had more take home income. Now, for the people
Speaker 1: that aren't working, I don't believe it's going to affect them.
Speaker 1: I got to look at it and see what exactly
Speaker 1: they're talking about. As far as the Medicaid cuts go,
Speaker 1: I know it's not for you know, children born with disabilities,
Speaker 1: or you know, not even single income house holds like
Speaker 1: no income households and stuff.
Speaker 2: I don't believe they're going to be affected at all,
Speaker 2: but it does change it to who does and does
Speaker 2: not qualify for Medicaid.
Speaker 1: And I understand that's a very touchy, very tricky subject.
Speaker 2: I get it.
Speaker 1: Lumping that in with the tip taxes and the overtime taxes, Okay,
Speaker 1: I can at least make sense of that. But then
Speaker 1: they're also lumping in AI because of course they are.
Speaker 1: They're basically saying that they want less restrictions on AI
Speaker 1: companies and development because they want to stimulate the American
Speaker 1: economy in that regard as well. The Democrats are saying
Speaker 1: that this will lead to more deep fakes and cyber scams,
Speaker 1: which I find to be a bit ironic, just speaking
Speaker 1: on behalf of myself here. Cyber Scams is not you know,
Speaker 1: no political party holds the reins as far as that goes.
Speaker 2: That goes all over the place.
Speaker 1: The Democrats are worried that more AI will lead to
Speaker 1: more deep fakes, which is something that they have absolutely
Speaker 1: run the roost on for the past I would argue
Speaker 1: twelve years longer. I'm just throwing this out here, Okay. Interesting,
Speaker 1: interesting that that's the position that they're taking. But you know, me,
Speaker 1: I have a very ridiculously strong distrust of AI in totality. Honestly,
Speaker 1: there's just I don't see many benefits to it. I
Speaker 1: see it as a tool. I see it as potentially great,
Speaker 1: and it can be used for so many things, and
Speaker 1: I get all of that, but I also see that
Speaker 1: there's no way to regulate it. And and I understand
Speaker 1: the conversation, right I understand saying that on either end
Speaker 1: of AI there is a human involved. There's a human
Speaker 1: that is putting in the things for AI to generate,
Speaker 1: and there's a human that gets final say so once
Speaker 1: it gets released.
Speaker 2: That's as of now, that's as of right now.
Speaker 1: We don't actually know what five years from now AI
Speaker 1: looks like, six months from now, what AI looks like.
Speaker 1: And I know that I'm probably being a little bit
Speaker 1: of a skeptic and a little bit or I should say,
Speaker 1: a little bit of a conspiracy theorist on this one,
Speaker 1: but that's kind of I just don't see it.
Speaker 2: Playing out well. I don't know.
Speaker 1: I'm hopefully I'm wrong, and that AI becomes not the
Speaker 1: thing that's gonna take over people's jobs and not the
Speaker 1: thing that's gonna ruin the American economy.
Speaker 2: I hope not.
Speaker 1: But all that to say, time will tell and we
Speaker 1: shall see what happens with this big, beautiful bill and
Speaker 1: what becomes of it. Speaking on that, however, we're talking
Speaker 1: about technology and things. Raven Lee actually sent a couple
Speaker 1: of these articles that I think now would be an
Speaker 1: excellent time to bring up. This is in the field
Speaker 1: of robotics. This is from singularly Hub singularity hub dot com. Rather,
Speaker 1: these tiny liquid robots merge and split like terminator. They
Speaker 1: literally have created the terminator to bad guy, the liquid robot.
Speaker 1: They've created it now made of teflon and water. The
Speaker 1: robots could one day shuttle drugs around the body. And
Speaker 1: of course it's for medical advancement. That's how it always
Speaker 1: gets shifted in right, just like neulink. That's for people's
Speaker 1: health and wellness. It's super not for yeah, okay, anyway,
Speaker 1: Reading in here, it says our cells are like the
Speaker 1: ultimate soft robots, made mostly of liquid interior wrapped inside
Speaker 1: a fatty shell. They split, stretched roam and squeeze into
Speaker 1: every nook and cranny of the body. Actual robots not
Speaker 1: so much. Even soft robots made a flexible material struggle
Speaker 1: to deform outside of the physical limits of their building blocks.
Speaker 1: This month, a team from Korea introduced liquid robots inspired
Speaker 1: by biological cells about the size of a grain of rice.
Speaker 1: Each robot is made of water coated with teflam particles.
Speaker 1: The gummy candy like blobs wow are controlled using sound
Speaker 1: waves and can slip through the graded fence or slip
Speaker 1: through graded fences, chomp up debris, and skim across solid
Speaker 1: and liquid surfaces. Oh wow, Okay, let's watch this little
Speaker 1: video and learn more about it.
Speaker 16: Research has demonstrated a liquid robot called PEB or particle
Speaker 16: armored liquid robot. It can change shape, grab things, fall
Speaker 16: from small heights, divide, and merge, all without collapsing or leaking.
Speaker 16: The team tested it on a little mission where it
Speaker 16: collected a dangerous material, neutralized it, and brought it to
Speaker 16: safety as we can see in this video.
Speaker 1: Wow okay, So in one regard that is really cool
Speaker 1: like that that's pretty cool. And the fact they're using
Speaker 1: sound waves to control it and manipulate it like that,
Speaker 1: that's also pretty phenomenal. Shout out to real life technologies.
Speaker 1: Use promo code cult when you check out for a
Speaker 1: massive discount and free shipping. Cannot say that enough, it's
Speaker 1: healing your body through soundwave technology.
Speaker 2: But either way, so I'm.
Speaker 1: Curious how this is classified as a robot or if
Speaker 1: this is like the beginning stages of it all. Let's
Speaker 1: see here it says they also can function as tiny
Speaker 1: chemical reactors. In the tests, the team directed two robots,
Speaker 1: each loaded with a different chemical to jump off a
Speaker 1: ledge and merge together without breaking, allowing the chemicals to
Speaker 1: react inside their teflon shells. Because the robots are biocompatible,
Speaker 1: they could one day shuttle drugs too hard to reach
Speaker 1: areas of the body, potentially loading up on chemotherapies to
Speaker 1: kill tumors.
Speaker 2: For example, Chemo Don't Get Me Started.
Speaker 1: Formations with other molecular tools embedded within the bots could
Speaker 1: also help diagnose diseases. There is a direct quote here.
Speaker 1: It is challenging to emulate biological forms to functions with
Speaker 1: artificial machines, wrote the team. But a promising avenue to
Speaker 1: tackle this problem is harnessing the supreme deformability of liquids
Speaker 1: while providing stable yet flexible shells around them.
Speaker 2: So it says here from T one thousand to liquid marbles. Okay,
Speaker 2: here we go. Those who have seen Terminator two Judgment.
Speaker 1: Day hot take, in my opinion, probably the best cinematic
Speaker 1: film ever comprised. I stand on that hill and I'm
Speaker 1: willing to die on it. That was the best Terminator
Speaker 1: movie of all of them. And I think it was
Speaker 1: at that critical, per perfect time where CGI was just
Speaker 1: good enough to look real, but also the actual artistry
Speaker 1: behind true cinematography was also at its peak, and I
Speaker 1: think they just blended together to make Terminator to Judgment Day.
Speaker 2: Just ugh, It's a masterpiece. Personal hot take here.
Speaker 1: Those who have seen Terminator to Judgment Day will remember
Speaker 1: the film's formidable robot antagonist, nade of liquid metal. The
Speaker 1: T one thousand, deforms, liquifies, and reconstructs itself on demand,
Speaker 1: instantly healing damage to its body. Scientists have long sought
Speaker 1: to capture this versatility in machines without the killer robot angle.
Speaker 2: Of course, of course, that's totally what they're trying to avoid.
Speaker 1: Previous studies have used a variety of liquid metals that
Speaker 1: change their shape when subjected to electromagnetic fields. These unconventional robots,
Speaker 1: smaller than a fingertip, can split, merge and transport cargoes
Speaker 1: on demand, but their high metal content makes them incompatible
Speaker 1: with most chemical reactions and biology, lemiting their practical use.
Speaker 1: Another way to buildquid robots is to encapsulate water or
Speaker 1: other liquids in an armor like barrier. It's a bit
Speaker 1: like making gummy candy with a squishy but supportive outer
Speaker 1: casing and a gushy core. In practice, researchers does a
Speaker 1: hydro hydrophobic powder onto a liquid drop, the mixture shrinks
Speaker 1: into a bead like shape thanks to a physical phenomena
Speaker 1: called capillary interaction. These forces partly stem from the surface
Speaker 1: tension between a solid and a liquid, like when you
Speaker 1: barely overflow a glass and water forms around forms a
Speaker 1: round top. I've used this argument on the flat earth
Speaker 1: community before, and they act like that's not a thing.
Speaker 1: I've literally had flat earthers tell me that that's not true.
Speaker 1: Whenever you take a glass of water and fill it
Speaker 1: all the way to the tippy top and like keep
Speaker 1: putting like pennies in the cup, you don't see a round,
Speaker 1: bubble like shape of water form. So like, the water
Speaker 1: is technically higher than the ridge of the glass, but
Speaker 1: it's not spilling.
Speaker 2: Why is that?
Speaker 1: Because water has a surface tension within it is a
Speaker 1: whole thing capillary forces anyway.
Speaker 2: Yes, this is not necessary.
Speaker 1: It is a phenomenon, but it's something you could very
Speaker 1: easily replicate in your home right now.
Speaker 2: Sorry, all the earth is round, moving on, it says.
Speaker 1: Appropriately Dubbed liquid marbles, these nonstick water drops can roll
Speaker 1: across surfaces. Researchers can control their movement using gravity and
Speaker 1: electrical and magnetic fields, allowing them to float and climb
Speaker 1: across terrain. Some versions can even shuttle ingredients from one
Speaker 1: place and release their cargo in another. But classic liquid
Speaker 1: marbles have a weakness. Small fluctuations in temperature or force,
Speaker 1: such as squeezing or dropping, cause them to leak or
Speaker 1: fully collapse, so the authors developed a stronger shell to make.
Speaker 2: Their marbles more durable. Ice.
Speaker 1: Wow, look at that. We're not going to read the
Speaker 1: entire article, but that is pretty insane. That is absolutely
Speaker 1: insane that they actually have. I know how you would
Speaker 1: classify that as a robot necessarily, but I think that
Speaker 1: maybe I am a bit too uneducated on that to
Speaker 1: know what is and is not technically a robot. But
Speaker 1: we do have another article that kind of talks about
Speaker 1: this same phenomena here. This is from Interestingengineering dot com.
Speaker 1: Cell inspired liquid robot beats hard bodied rivals in drug
Speaker 1: delivery tumor treatment. Again, they've got to make sure it's
Speaker 1: for medical uses. That's why they get the big bucks
Speaker 1: for the research right. The design boosts liquid particle composites
Speaker 1: by using extra super hydrophobic particles, ensuring stability and adaptive
Speaker 1: shape shifting. Wow, and this article was posted by the
Speaker 1: way May fifteenth, so it's relatively recent. Researchers have developed
Speaker 1: a particle armored liquid robot, a liquid particle composite capable
Speaker 1: of deforming, engulfing, and merging without losing its structure. The
Speaker 1: innovative material resembles the behavior of cells, could lead to
Speaker 1: advanced biomedical applications like targeted drug delivery and tumor cell deconstruction.
Speaker 1: The breakthrough, reported by a team in South Korea, marks
Speaker 1: a significant step towards creating miniature adaptive machines for medical use.
Speaker 1: Although water is used as the liquid core in our pbs,
Speaker 1: the fabrication method allows for the use of alternative liquids,
Speaker 1: provided they can be frozen and hydrophobic particles can adhere
Speaker 1: to their serface without sinking. Set The researchers in a statement. Okay,
Speaker 1: so that's where I was about to go with the
Speaker 1: other article about ice. That's how they kind of got
Speaker 1: the rigidity to make the stick happen. But okay, so
Speaker 1: they're saying that essentially, if the correct let's say, you
Speaker 1: have some sort of for their example here, you have
Speaker 1: a tumor that is very hard to operate on, very
Speaker 1: hard to get to, and you don't want to riddle
Speaker 1: the entire body with chemo treatments. If the chemo drugs
Speaker 1: themselves could be frozen and the armor quote unquote could
Speaker 1: be adhered to it, you could inject it into the
Speaker 1: body or in some way shape or form, place it
Speaker 1: in the body near the affected area, and through sound
Speaker 1: waves get it to deliver the chemo directly to the tumor,
Speaker 1: especially in hard to reach places. I mean, it sounds
Speaker 1: pretty groundbreaking, but you know, I also have a bit.
Speaker 2: Of a distrust for this. That's just me. I don't know.
Speaker 2: Let's read more here.
Speaker 1: Versatile liquid robots Robotics often draw inspiration from biological creatures,
Speaker 1: from humanoids and quadrupeds to microscopic bio robots designed for
Speaker 1: medical tasks like diagnosing diseases, delivering drugs or targeting tumors.
Speaker 1: Cells are remarkably adept to changing their structure, yet traditional
Speaker 1: solid based robots find it difficult to mimic this fluidity.
Speaker 1: Although they provide some versatility, liquid based robots, such as
Speaker 1: those that use ferrofluids or liquid metal there we Go,
Speaker 1: are not appropriate for biochemical or drug delivery apple cations. Alternatively,
Speaker 1: hydrophobic powders can be applied to liquid surfaces to create
Speaker 1: armored bubbles or particular rafts. Liquid marbles lms are powder
Speaker 1: coated water droplets that exhibit a variety of uses, including
Speaker 1: chemical reactions, cargo transportation, and movement. Despite their potential, lms
Speaker 1: are prone to collapse, leaking, or structural failure under thermal
Speaker 1: or mechanical stress, limiting their broader applications. Yeah, I could
Speaker 1: see that being a bit of a drawback, right if
Speaker 1: you have set the core of this is frozen, and
Speaker 1: I'm sure they thought of this, These people are geniuses.
Speaker 1: But you put that in the body and it experiences
Speaker 1: a change in temperature or pressure anything else and it collapses. Now,
Speaker 1: you just dumped chemo drugs in a spot where you
Speaker 1: didn't want it, which kind of defeats the purpose of
Speaker 1: using this robot in the first place. So yeah, I
Speaker 1: could see it having a few potential drawbacks. Let's see
Speaker 1: here soft growing robots, this video here.
Speaker 6: This rule robot is special because one day it could
Speaker 6: save your life. It can grow hundreds of times in
Speaker 6: size and push through any space and nothing can stop it.
Speaker 6: Even sharp objects are no use against it. So what
Speaker 6: is this magic? There is no magic, only the genius
Speaker 6: engineering of soft robots, a kind of robot that can
Speaker 6: be made out of almost any material, powered by compressed air.
Speaker 6: This innovation grows from the top and moves through tight
Speaker 6: space like it's nothing. It navigates passageways on its own
Speaker 6: and can't be stopped by something like sharp nails. As
Speaker 6: long as compressed air keeps pumping this robot up, it
Speaker 6: will go through any space. It's not technically a robot,
Speaker 6: but if we add sensors, steering and a camera, we
Speaker 6: could say it's a half robot. This is another technology
Speaker 6: inspired by a plan and you guessed it a vine.
Speaker 6: The way this plant works is magnificent. If you place
Speaker 6: it in a sunny place, you'll notice how it will
Speaker 6: pursue the sun's energy and grow towards it overcoming any
Speaker 6: obstacles on its way. That's how the innovation got its
Speaker 6: simple name vine Robot. But how can this silly inflatable
Speaker 6: tube save your life? Well, have you heard of intubation.
Speaker 6: It's a process of putting a tube into a patient's
Speaker 6: throat and allowing him to breathe in case they can't
Speaker 6: do it on their own. To do so, a doctor
Speaker 6: uses their lurrynioscope and starts passing it down the throat
Speaker 6: until they get into the trachea. A doctor can do
Speaker 6: it in about a minute or two, while the patient
Speaker 6: may need it as soon as possible. So the robot
Speaker 6: can help this process to be faster and safer. All
Speaker 6: the doctor needs to do is insert this smaller version
Speaker 6: of the vine robot into the throat and let it
Speaker 6: go through the throat on its own, providing the patient
Speaker 6: the ability to breathe. It's quick and all you need
Speaker 6: is a bit of air to pump up the robot.
Speaker 1: They said it's quick, but you notice they did not
Speaker 1: say it's painless. But I mean, I guess at that point,
Speaker 1: if you're suffocating, you do whatever it takes to get
Speaker 1: a breath of air.
Speaker 2: I get it.
Speaker 1: Wow, Okay, that's not exactly the liquid robots, but that
Speaker 1: is at least advancements in robotics technology. Continuing here with
Speaker 1: the article, it says the new PB design enhances previous
Speaker 1: liquid particle composites like LM by enveloping the liquid with
Speaker 1: a surplus. So it's kind of repeating what the previous
Speaker 1: article said versus the soft robots.
Speaker 2: Yeah, okay, so now.
Speaker 1: Controlled splitting with the use of external magnet fields might
Speaker 1: be possible with the inclusion of cell propelled particles such
Speaker 1: as magnetic particles. Additionally, PBEs can be driven by acoustic, magnetic, electric, aerodynamic,
Speaker 1: or gravitational forces. The breakthrough, according to researchers, represents a
Speaker 1: major step towards creating soft robots that closely mimic important
Speaker 1: mechanical processes of the natural cells, opening up new applications
Speaker 1: in domains that sells for robust and adaptable robotic systems.
Speaker 2: Wow, okay, what it's time to be alive, y'all.
Speaker 1: I you know, I understand the thought process to say
Speaker 1: that this would be, you know, something incredible that we
Speaker 1: need to do more research into and could save lives.
Speaker 2: And I am not negating those things at all. I
Speaker 2: get it. I agree with it.
Speaker 1: That being said, you know, maybe just because A saw
Speaker 1: Terminator two one too many times, I have a intrinsic
Speaker 1: distrust of liquid robots, just me. And then because they're
Speaker 1: gonna make this thing AI adaptable or it's gonna be
Speaker 1: powered or driven by AI and not. Currently they're not,
Speaker 1: but it simply will because everybody is putting AI onto everything.
Speaker 1: I just I don't see it as a net positive
Speaker 1: like they think it's gonna be.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 1: I mean, if any of y'all have any opinions on this,
Speaker 1: by all means chime in. But boy, oh boy, I
Speaker 1: just I can't see this ending well for everybody involved.
Speaker 4: So I kind of just have a question in general. Yeah, obviously,
Speaker 4: whenever we were growing up, we had movies like The
Speaker 4: Terminator and Eagle Eye and all these movies where the
Speaker 4: AI the machines turned out to be the bad guy.
Speaker 4: When did the narratives start to shift to hey, AI
Speaker 4: as your friend, Hey like do everything because it's a
Speaker 4: very interesting thing to where that's why we are more
Speaker 4: skeptical of it. However, the kids that are that are
Speaker 4: in his gen alpha whatever, they use it like, oh no,
Speaker 4: it's not bad. And how many movies now are geared
Speaker 4: towards the ai wor the machines being the quote unquote
Speaker 4: good guys. So that's an interesting thought.
Speaker 2: No, I'm with you one hundred percent.
Speaker 1: I don't know exactly when the culture shifted, but you're right,
Speaker 1: our generation on back, all of the movies, all the
Speaker 1: comic books, all of the everything talked about robots taking
Speaker 1: over technology, overtaking humanity. That was always the thing, that
Speaker 1: was always the thing somehow, And I think we could
Speaker 1: blame Wally a little bit for it, right, but I
Speaker 1: mean at that point, we could also blame Hollywood in
Speaker 1: general for shifting the narrative to where people liked robots.
Speaker 2: Right now, me and my kids are just watching this movie.
Speaker 2: I forget what it's called.
Speaker 1: It's some robot that was sent to a planet and
Speaker 1: is like observing things on this planet, and it like
Speaker 1: takes on a little duck as it's like baby, and
Speaker 1: it teaches it things.
Speaker 2: It's it's a cute movie.
Speaker 1: But again, this gener our children's generation, is being brought
Speaker 1: up with an unhealthy trust, in my personal opinion, and
Speaker 1: unhealthy trust of that level of technology and up until
Speaker 1: ten years ago, having a actual robot in your home
Speaker 1: was seen as like so crazy futuristic type thing. I
Speaker 1: know that our panirents generation thought that by the year
Speaker 1: two thousand we'd have flying cars.
Speaker 2: I get that.
Speaker 1: But even though the movie with Robin Williams bi centennial
Speaker 1: man right, it's not a good movie, I might add it,
Speaker 1: some would say one of the worst movies ever made.
Speaker 2: I personally liked it, you know, I dug it.
Speaker 1: But that was something this super ultra rich family afforded
Speaker 1: a robot to be an assistant in their home. And
Speaker 1: this robot slowly but surely went through the process of
Speaker 1: getting parts or placed with human organs, and then he
Speaker 1: died as a two hundred year old human being that
Speaker 1: started his life life out as a robot. But and
Speaker 1: you could see the way the world shifted between the
Speaker 1: year he was created and the year he died, the
Speaker 1: advancements in robotics and how much people started depending on technology.
Speaker 2: It was a wild movie.
Speaker 1: But all that to say what it wasn't portrayed as oh,
Speaker 1: robots are kind too. It was more like a robot
Speaker 1: understands its own I don't want to say mortality, but
Speaker 1: its own.
Speaker 2: It's only going to be good to a.
Speaker 1: Certain point, and it wanted to adapt itself to become
Speaker 1: a human, even though it knew that that would lead
Speaker 1: to its death. That was more of a good thing
Speaker 1: for it than to be a robot that can live
Speaker 1: in eternity or whatever the case is.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 1: I don't know when they made the decision, And by they,
Speaker 1: I mean like the upper elites, the deep state, whatever
Speaker 1: you want to call the they, right, I don't know
Speaker 1: when they decided that we need to lean more heavily
Speaker 1: into robots and advanced technology and computer systems that think
Speaker 1: for themselves and all these things as a net positive.
Speaker 2: But good God Almighty, you're correct.
Speaker 1: This younger generation not only is cool with it, they
Speaker 1: want it.
Speaker 2: They want AI.
Speaker 1: To be able to do their entire but they're looking
Speaker 1: at it from a different perspective, I think, right like
Speaker 1: they want AI to do their entire book report. They
Speaker 1: want AI to do all the studying for them and
Speaker 1: give them the overarching breakdown where they don't have to
Speaker 1: do the amount of work that we used to have
Speaker 1: to do with books and hours of studying too. And
Speaker 1: I could understand that from a child's perspective, but man,
Speaker 1: the younger generation is I don't know what's going to
Speaker 1: become of this, Like we.
Speaker 2: Talked about this before, how many jobs will AI replace?
Speaker 1: And I don't just mean and AI and robotics. We
Speaker 1: can use these terms not necessarily interchangeably, but I think
Speaker 1: it's the unison of both of them that's going to
Speaker 1: lead to our downfall. We have robots that are able
Speaker 1: to weld, we have robots that are able to perform carpentry.
Speaker 1: We have computers that can do all kinds of diagnostics tests.
Speaker 2: On name your machine, and all we need.
Speaker 1: Is a robot that's able to change out the component,
Speaker 1: and we no longer need the tech or the mechanic
Speaker 1: or the whatever. Yes, there's always going to be a
Speaker 1: need for human hands on it because eventually that computer
Speaker 1: program is going to have a fault that's going to
Speaker 1: need to get fixed or corrected. I also feel like
Speaker 1: that's also an AI program away to fix it, Like
Speaker 1: they'll have a program to run, to run diagnostics on itself,
Speaker 1: to self govern, to self check, to self improve all
Speaker 1: of these things. And it's not the whole sentience conversation,
Speaker 1: although that's an interesting one in and of itself. But
Speaker 1: whenever we completely remove the need for human beings in
Speaker 1: a certain field. There's no unremoving that. And I know that. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I've heard the argument too, like, well, we can just
Speaker 1: unplug it. We know where the power's at, we have
Speaker 1: we can unplug it, we can remove the power, we
Speaker 1: can all the way to the substation and just shut
Speaker 1: it down. I don't know how familiar people are with
Speaker 1: let's just use America as a as a litmus test here,
Speaker 1: And I know that every country has their own issues
Speaker 1: with their power grid, and most of the world is
Speaker 1: using antiquated grid and they're trying to update it and
Speaker 1: there's always improvements going on.
Speaker 2: I get it. America included, by the.
Speaker 1: Way, we don't know as much about our power grid
Speaker 1: as we would like to let people believe. And by we,
Speaker 1: I don't just mean the people on this podcast right now.
Speaker 1: I mean I have family members that work at basically
Speaker 1: they're running the entire board for the entire grid of
Speaker 1: a major city in Louisiana. I'm not gonna say which one,
Speaker 1: but one of the two biggest ones I'll.
Speaker 2: Leave it at that.
Speaker 1: And he knows pretty much, you know, yeah, the certain
Speaker 1: things about this grid and where you can shut things off,
Speaker 1: but where does he get the power from? Where up
Speaker 1: the river if you will, up the pipeline, Where does
Speaker 1: that power come from?
Speaker 2: Where does that power come from? Honestly, that's hackable.
Speaker 1: That's something that an AI program could come in and
Speaker 1: hack and route to where it's unable to be shut
Speaker 1: off by any kind of human That's a very real possibility.
Speaker 2: So I don't know.
Speaker 1: I don't like how people are getting so comfortable with it,
Speaker 1: and it's getting to the point to where it's going
Speaker 1: to become not just a comfort level and not just
Speaker 1: a tool. It's going to become a thing to where
Speaker 1: if you're not using it, you can't find work. I
Speaker 1: could see lawyers getting their jobs replaced with AI, because honestly,
Speaker 1: you plug in all the legal precedents of everything in
Speaker 1: your country and everything in your state, whatever the case is,
Speaker 1: AI will be able to give you what jurisprudence rules
Speaker 1: on whatever the case that's put before them is. In
Speaker 1: the very rare exception that it's something that doesn't have
Speaker 1: a legal precedent or jurisprudence, you would need a physical
Speaker 1: judge to rule over it and find that's I get it.
Speaker 1: But lawyers are going to be out by the wayside, Well,
Speaker 1: what about how to file it? AI could just do
Speaker 1: the paperwork. It's not that difficult either. Doctors, medical staffers, surgeons.
Speaker 1: How many surgeons are using well, I guess it depends
Speaker 1: on the type of surgery, but how many surgeons are
Speaker 1: using some type of robotics in the surgery?
Speaker 2: Now?
Speaker 1: Is it crazy to think that that robotics could be
Speaker 1: powered and driven by AI because it already ran the
Speaker 1: diagnostics off of a neuralink chip and planted in this
Speaker 1: person's head and knows exactly what to do.
Speaker 2: You see what I'm saying.
Speaker 1: It's not like just the medical field is at risk,
Speaker 1: not just the legal field, not just the craftsmen field.
Speaker 1: It's I see it just going way out of control.
Speaker 1: And once that snowball goes so far down the hill,
Speaker 1: I don't see us being able to gather it and
Speaker 1: collect it and recover. But that's because we're from this generation, right,
Speaker 1: the younger generation, and I don't think has any fear
Speaker 1: of that whatsoever.
Speaker 2: If anything, they see it as.
Speaker 1: A source, not a burden, or as a thing to
Speaker 1: be feared.
Speaker 2: I'm with you, Royce. I hope that a lot of
Speaker 2: things can shift.
Speaker 1: I don't, but with that being said, I'm also, if
Speaker 1: nothing else, I am a capitalist at heart, and I
Speaker 1: don't want government restrictions to limit AI. I want humans
Speaker 1: to restrict themselves from AI. And that's that's the problem.
Speaker 1: That's I feel like that's an unattainable goal. People are
Speaker 1: always going to choose what makes life easier and more
Speaker 1: convenient for them. I mean, I may sound a bit
Speaker 1: hypocritical here. I'm sitting in a air conditioned studio. I'm
Speaker 1: sitting here with all this technology around me, and I
Speaker 1: get that. But there's also got to be a limit, right,
Speaker 1: too much of a good thing can be a bad thing,
Speaker 1: and I think that that's kind of what we're seeing
Speaker 1: as far as technology goes. But anyway, end of rant
Speaker 1: on that point, let's shift over here to Trump confronting
Speaker 1: the South African president with videos defending the Afrikaner resettlement.
Speaker 1: Here's the backstory, and I wish they don't show it
Speaker 1: in this particular clip.
Speaker 2: That I'm gonna play for everybody, but Elon.
Speaker 1: Musk, an African American man I might add from South
Speaker 1: Africa of Bower descent. Obviously he's white, was in the
Speaker 1: room when this South African president said that there is
Speaker 1: no genocide going on in South Africa against white farmers.
Speaker 1: Bro his face. I wish I lost the video of it.
Speaker 1: You can find it. It's out there for everybody. But
Speaker 1: Musk's face changed from just kind of listening intently to
Speaker 1: like you saw hatred right there in his autistic eyes,
Speaker 1: Like I know this guy did not just say that.
Speaker 2: And then as a rebuttal, Trump pulls out.
Speaker 1: An entire television screen and start it's playing things for
Speaker 1: him to prove his point. And then the South African
Speaker 1: president plays like he's never seen this before, this mass grave.
Speaker 2: Oh, where is that?
Speaker 14: Oh?
Speaker 2: I would like to know where that's at. I've I've
Speaker 2: never seen that before. Bro.
Speaker 1: It's a thousand graves on either side of a main highway,
Speaker 1: one thousand graves of white boar settlements, settlers farmers that
Speaker 1: are now dead. And you're telling me you didn't know
Speaker 1: that that was happening. It's it's wild. So listen without
Speaker 1: further ado, let's listen into the conversation between Trump and
Speaker 1: the South African president.
Speaker 17: For you to be convinced that there's no bite genocide
Speaker 17: in South Africa.
Speaker 13: Well, I can answer that.
Speaker 14: For christ.
Speaker 1: Trump literally was getting ready to answer, and then the
Speaker 1: South African president cut him off like no, no, no,
Speaker 1: I got that there is none because of yeah, Trump's
Speaker 1: face is just.
Speaker 2: Like ogi yea.
Speaker 17: It will take President Trump listening to the voices of
Speaker 17: South Africa, some of whom are his good friends, like those.
Speaker 2: I'm just gonna make a quick, quick sentence here.
Speaker 1: It's gonna take Trump listening to the voices of South Africans.
Speaker 1: Keep that sentence in mind when the TV screen comes
Speaker 1: up here in a moment, let's continue.
Speaker 17: Those who are here when we have talks between us
Speaker 17: on the quiet at a quiet table. It will take
Speaker 17: President Trump to listen to them. I'm not going to
Speaker 17: be repeating what I've been saying. I would say if
Speaker 17: there was Africana farmer genocide, I can bet you these
Speaker 17: three gentlemen would not be here, including my Minister of Agriculture,
Speaker 17: he would not be with me. So it'll take him
Speaker 17: President Trump, listening to their stories, to their perspective.
Speaker 13: That is the answer to your question.
Speaker 14: But mister President must say, we have none.
Speaker 18: Noh, we have thousands of stories talking about it. Sure,
Speaker 18: we have documentaries, we have news stories. And that is
Speaker 18: Natalie here, somebody here to turn that I could show
Speaker 18: you a couple of things, and I would.
Speaker 14: I just I have to. It has to be responded to.
Speaker 14: Sure we have let me see the.
Speaker 18: Articles plays of what you would and turn excuse me,
Speaker 18: turn the lights down, turn the lights down and just
Speaker 18: put this on.
Speaker 14: It's right behind you.
Speaker 13: Johan's not this tournament.
Speaker 19: We talked to you people not went to occupie land will.
Speaker 1: Require no, bro, the South African presidents face. Oh huh
Speaker 1: what like yo, no, no, no?
Speaker 2: Trump?
Speaker 1: Trump had time on this one. He prepared for this meeting.
Speaker 1: I don't know if he necessary really knew it was
Speaker 1: gonna go this direction. But boy, when he opened the door,
Speaker 1: Trump's like, well, exhibit a, my boy. But all right
Speaker 1: him from you, from the president, from nor what, we
Speaker 1: don't care.
Speaker 13: We can do what nobody want to do.
Speaker 14: Who are you going to tell us where I can.
Speaker 6: Going to?
Speaker 19: That's pie, That's why, that's what he's at some point
Speaker 19: that must be kidding because the kiddy's.
Speaker 15: Who who?
Speaker 1: For anybody who can't really understand what he's saying, he's saying,
Speaker 1: shoot and kill the board, which is the term for
Speaker 1: the white Afrikaners that live there currently in South Africa.
Speaker 1: This is a massive rally that this guy has thousands
Speaker 1: and thousands of people in attendance, dancing and singing and screaming,
Speaker 1: kill the bowers, the.
Speaker 14: White man.
Speaker 1: There, So it's okay to kill a white man because
Speaker 1: they don't feel pain, and uh yeah, we gotta in
Speaker 1: their whiteness and all this now, and I'm not speaking
Speaker 1: on this specifically from an American perspective here, but as
Speaker 1: the President just said that that's not what's happening, all evidence.
Speaker 2: To the contrary here, And matter of fact, I'm going.
Speaker 1: To pause because they show a lot of these rallies,
Speaker 1: a good bit of these rallies for a while, the
Speaker 1: dancing and the singing, Kill the white man, kill the bores.
Speaker 1: This is a whole, the whole thing that goes on
Speaker 1: for a minute. And then they show the mass graves.
Speaker 13: They object, and.
Speaker 14: Now this is very bad.
Speaker 18: These these are burial sites right here, burial sites.
Speaker 1: For everybody watching this with me right now. For first off,
Speaker 1: anybody who's not watching this that would like to be
Speaker 1: a part of this, to see what we're talking about
Speaker 1: and be a part of this conversation. Next Wednesday night,
Speaker 1: come check out the Cajun Night on Patreon. The link
Speaker 1: is in the description below. Now what is on screen
Speaker 1: right now? All of these little white things that's not fences,
Speaker 1: those are crosses, and each one of them is a grave.
Speaker 2: This goes for miles.
Speaker 1: There's over a thousand grave sites for these murder victims
Speaker 1: of this genocide that he is claiming isn't happening.
Speaker 2: But let's continue.
Speaker 18: Over a thousand of white farmers and those cars are
Speaker 18: lined up to pay love on a Sunday morning. Each
Speaker 18: one of those white things you see is a cross,
Speaker 18: and there's approximately a thousand of them. They're all white farmers.
Speaker 18: The family of white farmers, and those cars aren't driving
Speaker 18: the stop there to pay respects to their family member
Speaker 18: who's killed. And it's a terrible sight. I've never seen
Speaker 18: anything like it. Both sides of the road, you have crosses.
Speaker 2: I mean, I don't know what else to call that except.
Speaker 13: Those people are all killed. Have they told you where
Speaker 13: that is? Mister?
Speaker 2: Wait, very real quick, they told you where that is?
Speaker 2: Mister president.
Speaker 1: Let's let's make sure that we are talking about the
Speaker 1: same guy who just a moment ago said this right,
Speaker 1: rather than have him and.
Speaker 17: It will take President Trump listening to the voices of
Speaker 17: South Africa, some of whom are his good friends, like
Speaker 17: those who are here when we have talks between us on.
Speaker 13: The quiet at the quiet table, it will take Prisident
Speaker 13: Trump to listen to them. I'm not going to be
Speaker 13: repeating what I've been saying.
Speaker 17: I would say if there was Africana farmer genocide, I
Speaker 17: can bet you these three gentlemen would not be here,
Speaker 17: including my Minister of Agriculture, he would not be with me.
Speaker 17: So it'll take him, President Trump, listening to their stories,
Speaker 17: to their perspective.
Speaker 13: That is the answer to your question.
Speaker 2: Ah, yes, what a what a great answer to that question.
Speaker 1: Now back to the back to the conversation of him
Speaker 1: eating his words.
Speaker 13: You know, I'd like to know where that is because
Speaker 13: this I've never seen.
Speaker 1: This, You've never seen He would like to know where
Speaker 1: that is because he's never seen that in his own country. Now,
Speaker 1: I don't know personally what number classifies something as a genocide,
Speaker 1: or if there even is a number like a designation
Speaker 1: to that.
Speaker 2: I know that like for instance, and it's not a worldwide.
Speaker 1: Rule, but in America, if four people die in a thing,
Speaker 1: it's called a mass casualty event.
Speaker 2: Four people dying is a mass casualty. Personally, I think
Speaker 2: that numbers a little low for it to be called
Speaker 2: a mass casualty. But neither here nor there.
Speaker 1: I don't know right out the rip how many is
Speaker 1: considered a genocide. I don't know if it's a thousand,
Speaker 1: oh know, if it's one hundred. But when it's all
Speaker 1: being done by one group to another group for political, religious,
Speaker 1: racial creed reasons, it seems to you know, it smells
Speaker 1: and tastes and sounds a lot like a genocide. You know,
Speaker 1: if if it walks like a duck and quacks like
Speaker 1: a duck, then affleck, it's a duck, you know. But hey,
Speaker 1: the president himself of South Africa says he's never seen
Speaker 1: this before.
Speaker 2: It's it's crazy to me.
Speaker 14: I mean, it said South Africa.
Speaker 8: This.
Speaker 17: Let me clarify that because what you saw, the speeches
Speaker 17: that are being made one that is not government policy.
Speaker 1: It's not government policy, but it's being spoken of by
Speaker 1: a political party leader.
Speaker 2: Currently.
Speaker 17: Okay, we have a multi party democracy in South Africa
Speaker 17: that allows people to acts press themselves, political parties to
Speaker 17: adhere to various policies and in many cases on in
Speaker 17: some cases those policies do not go along with the
Speaker 17: government policy. Our government policy is completely completely against what
Speaker 17: he was saying, even in the parliament. And they're a
Speaker 17: small minority party which is allowed to exist in terms
Speaker 17: of our constitution.
Speaker 20: But you do allow them to take land? No, no, no, no,
Speaker 20: do allow them to take land. Nobody can take take
Speaker 20: the land. They kill the white farmer. And when they
Speaker 20: kill the white farmer, nothing happens to them.
Speaker 1: No, there is quite For the record, I personally know
Speaker 1: multiple people that live in South Africa and they'll even
Speaker 1: tell you, Yeah, most of the violence is between the
Speaker 1: black South Africans. It's it's very much black on black
Speaker 1: crime in that regard. But realistically, like let's say a
Speaker 1: murder occurs, it might take the cops, I mean, in
Speaker 1: maybe best case scenario a day and a half to
Speaker 1: get to you to start their process of even doing
Speaker 1: an investigation, let alone bringing anybody to justice for this.
Speaker 1: That's just kind of status quo. So whenever it's something
Speaker 1: to this level, yeah, it's not more by and large,
Speaker 1: like I said, it's the nation of South Africa is
Speaker 1: majority Black Afrikaan and that's fine, so of course most
Speaker 1: of the crime would be done by them. Most of
Speaker 1: the murdering would be done black on black. This statistically
Speaker 1: makes sense and checks out. I mean, in America, most
Speaker 1: black people's deaths are attributed to black people, and that's
Speaker 1: a real statistic. Most white people's deaths are attributed to
Speaker 1: white people statistically and by the numbers. That's just a
Speaker 1: fair and true statement. But that being said the whole No,
Speaker 1: they don't take their land. Again, I personally know multiple
Speaker 1: white people and black people in South Africa.
Speaker 2: That is absolutely the case.
Speaker 1: And yeah, they won't take their land if you murder
Speaker 1: the entire family that lives on that land, and then
Speaker 1: a new group moves in and says that it's their land. Now,
Speaker 1: who's coming to correct that, Who's coming to give justice
Speaker 1: to this and say no, that was a murder, You're
Speaker 1: all going to jail. This land's going to their next
Speaker 1: of kin and their family and all that. That's not
Speaker 1: a thing that really works out like that in South Africa.
Speaker 1: So again, where are we drawing the line between a
Speaker 1: genocide and non genocide? But let's continue to let him
Speaker 1: try to crawfish his way out of this one.
Speaker 13: Nothing happens that is criminality in our country.
Speaker 17: People who do get killed, unfortunately through criminal activity. Are
Speaker 17: not only white people, majority of them are black people.
Speaker 18: And we farmers, the farmers are not black. I don't
Speaker 18: say that's good or bad, but the farmers are not black.
Speaker 2: It's very true. That's very true.
Speaker 1: And yes they have criminality in South Africa, but their
Speaker 1: legal system is I'm gonna put it as kindly as
Speaker 1: I can, a joke. And I mean, I'm again I'm
Speaker 1: looking at this and comparing it to an American system
Speaker 1: of law and order. And I understand that, and I'm
Speaker 1: not saying we're the golden standard on the world stage
Speaker 1: for this. But at the same time, we don't have
Speaker 1: this type of genocide going on against one particular group
Speaker 1: right now, so I mean, at least we have that
Speaker 1: going for us. But that being said, yeah, most of
Speaker 1: the farmers are of the Caucasian persuasion.
Speaker 2: Okay, fair enough, got you.
Speaker 1: And yes, most of the murders are black on black,
Speaker 1: like the President just said, sure, because by the ratio
Speaker 1: is the majority of the population in South Africa is black.
Speaker 2: This makes perfect sense to me.
Speaker 1: But there's no justice for anybody who gets murdered to
Speaker 1: this level and has all of their land and their
Speaker 1: livelihood taken. These people are now having to install like
Speaker 1: not just gates around their land, they're having to install
Speaker 1: bars on their windows, and they're having to arm themselves
Speaker 1: to the teeth, and they're having to teach their children
Speaker 1: to get into the most barricaded room in the house
Speaker 1: and like hope and pray for the best when these
Speaker 1: groups come knocking on their door, because that is what
Speaker 1: they're currently doing. They're going farm to farm to farm.
Speaker 1: That's why there's a thousand freshly buried bodies. It's not
Speaker 1: like that's a thousand over the course of three years
Speaker 1: that have been attributed. That's recent. That's all very recent
Speaker 1: that those graves were dug. So I'm just you know,
Speaker 1: I don't know to what level the international community will
Speaker 1: call this for the genocide that it is. But you know, hey,
Speaker 1: here we go. All right, So let's go over to
Speaker 1: the chat now before we go to our next article.
Speaker 1: What is this tech hold on Clairesen something here? Liquid
Speaker 1: robots can transform, separate, infuse like living cells.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we kind of already covered that one. Let's see here.
Speaker 1: This article a mysterious highly active undersea vall Canadyar, California. Okay, yep, yep,
Speaker 1: kind of kind of covered that one already. Article two
Speaker 1: of the Convention defines up Thank you, thank you.
Speaker 2: Raven Lee.
Speaker 1: Article two of the Convention defines a genocide as any
Speaker 1: of the following acts committed with the intent to destroy,
Speaker 1: in whole or in part a nation, national, ethnic, racial,
Speaker 1: or religious group, as such, killing members of the group,
Speaker 1: causing serious bodily harm or mental harm to members of
Speaker 1: the group, deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life
Speaker 1: calculated to bring about its physical destruction in a whole
Speaker 1: or in part, imposing measurements intended to prevent births within
Speaker 1: the group, forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 1: It says genocide is a crime on a different scale
Speaker 1: to all other crimes against humanity and implies an intention
Speaker 1: to completely exterminate the chosen group. Genocide is therefore both
Speaker 1: the gravest and greatest of the crimes against humanity.
Speaker 2: I agree. I fully agree.
Speaker 1: Now there's a long standing beef between the white Afrikaaners
Speaker 1: and the black or Bantu South African population.
Speaker 2: I get this.
Speaker 1: Okay, we can go back to the apartheid days. It's
Speaker 1: not a pretty picture. I understand this. I understand people
Speaker 1: wanting things to be more equitable, and I want I
Speaker 1: get that people want to try to get back what
Speaker 1: was taken and all these things. Fine, genocide is probably
Speaker 1: not the right way to go about it. Just throwing
Speaker 1: that out. Uh, most of these you know Afrikaners, the
Speaker 1: white opera connors, have been there for three, four, five,
Speaker 1: sometimes six or seven generations, all the way back to
Speaker 1: the first Boer Wars, and I just yeah, it's not
Speaker 1: like when they take over the farms from these white people,
Speaker 1: they like run the farms and they thrive, and it's like, yeah,
Speaker 1: black people are taking back South Africa for the black Baba. No,
Speaker 1: they let the farms go into disrepair, they let the
Speaker 1: crops rot in the fields, and then the land is
Speaker 1: completely unusable after a couple of seasons. It's it's actually
Speaker 1: kind of impressive, in a very disgusting way, how quickly
Speaker 1: these thriving farms can just go into desolate wastelands that
Speaker 1: can't be used anymore. And that completely negates their entire
Speaker 1: talking point of like make it for the Bantu again,
Speaker 1: we need to farm for our own people, and this
Speaker 1: and this and this. That doesn't work because they're not farming.
Speaker 1: They're just on a murdering spree, and they have no
Speaker 1: intentions of like getting this department, the Department of Agriculture
Speaker 1: for South Africa, which is right there in DC with
Speaker 1: the President. They have no intentions of taking those farms
Speaker 1: over and revitalizing them for the use of the people
Speaker 1: at all. Once again, a murder happens, it takes cops
Speaker 1: a day and a half maybe two, to make their
Speaker 1: way out there to take a report. We you think
Speaker 1: they're doing with a thousand Let's just assume that it's
Speaker 1: not a thousand farms, right, a thousand bodies like that.
Speaker 1: Let's just assume that it was families, let's say five
Speaker 1: per household something like that. So you're telling me you
Speaker 1: got two hundred farms that are just left by the wayside.
Speaker 1: What do we actually think the head of the Department
Speaker 1: of Agriculture for this country is going to be doing
Speaker 1: with that land in the short term to try to
Speaker 1: rectify it, to try to make it useful for the people. Again,
Speaker 1: when they don't even have the infrastructure or the means
Speaker 1: to report the crimes properly, what do we think is
Speaker 1: gonna happen next?
Speaker 3: You know?
Speaker 2: Anyway?
Speaker 1: Uh, so yeah, genocide is horribly is defined by these systemic, systemic,
Speaker 1: systematic targeting. Excuse me that, God, well, my eyes are
Speaker 1: getting worse and worse by the day, I swear to God. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and I would say that this is systematic targeting. And yes,
Speaker 1: while the president said that is a minority group, that
Speaker 1: was thousands of people at that rally, that we're all
Speaker 1: chanting and dancing and screaming, kill the bore, kill the.
Speaker 2: White e the whole nine.
Speaker 1: You get them motivated enough and just hand them macheties.
Speaker 1: We have a Rwanda situation on our hands that quickly.
Speaker 1: And I have seen atrocious videos. Uh, there's been multiple
Speaker 1: crucifixions that I've seen, drownings, shit with children, it's it's
Speaker 1: it's horrible. It is absolutely horrible, the worst of humanity.
Speaker 1: And that's going on right now. And the president of
Speaker 1: this nation is real time telling the world that this
Speaker 1: isn't happening.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And if I'm not mistaken, that would be a
Speaker 1: bricks nation. Shocker that most of the bricks nations are
Speaker 1: currently in some sort of a political or economic disarray.
Speaker 1: Most of them also actually, I would say all of
Speaker 1: them by their own hand, with the exception of you know, India.
Speaker 1: But with that being said, let's shift the conversation over
Speaker 1: to India in the situation between it and Pakistan right now,
Speaker 1: because for anybody who doesn't know, there is a section
Speaker 1: of disputed territory. But for the longest time it's been
Speaker 1: understood to be Pakistan. Well I say the longest time,
Speaker 1: it's only the last century or so. And they were
Speaker 1: their free and independent own country for the longest time
Speaker 1: until certain people with rulers started drawing maps and next
Speaker 1: thing you know, you know, they're just a part of Pakistan. Now,
Speaker 1: this situation when Pakistan and India has given the people
Speaker 1: of balak Balokistan the ability to claim their independence back
Speaker 1: from Pakistan, and they say, we are not Pakistani. This
Speaker 1: is from first post, by the way, the quote we
Speaker 1: are not Pakistani reports from Blokistan's independent spike on x
Speaker 1: amid BLA attacks on pack forces. Let's dive in and actually,
Speaker 1: if anybody's curious, look up Balokistan. It has a very
Speaker 1: interesting and rich history like it. It really seems like
Speaker 1: a pretty pretty solid place. Reports are swirling that a
Speaker 1: blok activist has declared independence from Pakistan. We are not
Speaker 1: Pakistani's goes the declaration by someone identified in reports as
Speaker 1: mir Yar Balok or Balak, who was also reportedly declared
Speaker 1: the new entity as the Republic of Blakistan. I'm not
Speaker 1: sure if it's Blakistan or Balokistan. I've heard it said
Speaker 1: both ways, but it's kind of like saying Iran or Iran.
Speaker 1: I've heard it said both ways, but you know, I'm
Speaker 1: trying to remember what the locals call it.
Speaker 2: I try to be as respectful as I can.
Speaker 1: First Post has not been able to verify the veracity
Speaker 1: of these reports, but for decades, the Ballak people have
Speaker 1: waged a self determination movement against the Pakistani rule over
Speaker 1: the province. They consider their province as an integration into Pakistan.
Speaker 1: In nineteen forty eight, forced and seek a separate nation.
Speaker 1: In addition to the political and diplomatic campaigns, the self
Speaker 1: determination movement also comprises armed groups such as the Bloch
Speaker 1: Liberation Army or BLA, that wage an armed movement against
Speaker 1: the Pakistanstani regime. In the declaration mentioned in reports, the
Speaker 1: Balok people have urged India to allow them to have
Speaker 1: an embassy in New Delhi. They also urge the United
Speaker 1: nations the UN for recognition of Blakistan as an independent state.
Speaker 1: A possible announcement soon should be done. As the collapse
Speaker 1: of the terrorist Pakistan is near. We request India to
Speaker 1: allow Blakistan's official office and embassy in Delhi. The message
Speaker 1: attributed to Mir Yar Block. The bl BLA claims coordinated attacks.
Speaker 1: The so called decoration of independence has come at a
Speaker 1: time when the BLA has claimed seventy one attacks in Pakistan.
Speaker 1: In a message issued on May eleventh, the BLA claims
Speaker 1: responsibility for seventy one coordinated attacks across fifty one locations
Speaker 1: in recent days as part of its operation Hereoff against
Speaker 1: the Pakistani rule over the province. The BLA said it
Speaker 1: targeted Pakistani military and intelligence facilities, police station's, mineral transport
Speaker 1: vehicles and major highway infrastructure. The BLA said a new
Speaker 1: order has become inevitable in South Asia and warned that
Speaker 1: Pakistan's military setbacks and use of religious extremism has created
Speaker 1: lasting impression instability. The group rejected Islamabad's overtures for ceasefire talks,
Speaker 1: describing them as a deceptive tactic, and urged regional powers,
Speaker 1: including India, not to place trust in Pakistan's intentions. The
Speaker 1: BLA is neither a pawn nor a silent spectator. It
Speaker 1: will not rest until Pakistan is dismantled as a terror
Speaker 1: exporting state.
Speaker 2: The statement read, God, I'm.
Speaker 1: Kind of liking the BLA right now, dude, this is
Speaker 1: me the woes of Bolok people. Balokistan is Pakistan's largest
Speaker 1: province by area. It was once part of the princely
Speaker 1: state of Kalat before being annexed by Pakistan in or
Speaker 1: Pakistan in nineteen forty eight. The move triggered the first
Speaker 1: of several insurgencies with nationalist groups demanding greater autonomy or independence.
Speaker 1: Successive military operations by the Pakistani regime have led to
Speaker 1: repeated cycles of rebellion and suppression. Human rights organizations have
Speaker 1: documented reports of enforced disappearances, extra judicial killings.
Speaker 2: And targeting of civilians.
Speaker 1: The recent killing of prominent Ballock rally driver Tarik Balok,
Speaker 1: allegedly under a kill and dump policy quote unquote killing
Speaker 1: dump Wow.
Speaker 2: Okay, why do I hear this lady talking? These ads
Speaker 2: are insane? Yeah? So where was I?
Speaker 1: Allegedly under a killing dump policy has further inflamed tensions
Speaker 1: and drawn criticism for international rights activists, the Blakistan strategy
Speaker 1: strategic importance stems from the presence.
Speaker 2: Of deep water Guadar Port, a.
Speaker 1: Critical node in the China Pakistan Economic Corridor. Oh no,
Speaker 1: Belokistan's independence gets directly in the way of China's Belton
Speaker 1: Road initiative.
Speaker 2: Well, isn't that neat?
Speaker 1: While the sea peck has brought billions of dollars in
Speaker 1: Chinese investments to Pakistan, block communities have maintained that they
Speaker 1: have been excluded from its benefits and forced off their
Speaker 1: lands without proper compensation. For decades, the Bolock people have
Speaker 1: maintained that while Pakistani regime and its foreign partners have
Speaker 1: enriched themselves from the province's resources, the natives have been
Speaker 1: subjected to marginalization, exploitation, and system systemic violence in form
Speaker 1: of state sponsored killings and force disappearances. Talking to another
Speaker 1: genocide over here, Okay, here we are. The port and
Speaker 1: surrounding areas have been the target of repeated attacks by
Speaker 1: a baller consurgents, some of which have directly threatened Chinese
Speaker 1: personnel working on infrastructure projects.
Speaker 2: Wow, okay. End of article.
Speaker 1: So it sounds like we've got a lot of things
Speaker 1: going on as far as the world stage is concerned.
Speaker 1: Here last week, as a matter of fact, I was
Speaker 1: oddly enough watching a documentary on that region, and it's,
Speaker 1: like I said, it's been a week, and there's been
Speaker 1: a lot of things that have happened in this past week.
Speaker 1: So don't really remember the correct pronunciation of that land
Speaker 1: to any of the bloque people or ballock people listening.
Speaker 1: No disrespect, I'm only an American that speaks American English,
Speaker 1: not even that well.
Speaker 2: But the region itself had a royal class.
Speaker 1: It had royalty that was leading it until nineteen forty
Speaker 1: eight when they were annexed. The royal family was allowed
Speaker 1: to kind of manage it in what we in America
Speaker 1: might see as like as a governor, right, and it
Speaker 1: was fine in the royal family. They weren't happy about it,
Speaker 1: but it wasn't It wasn't as big of a kick
Speaker 1: to the Gonads as what the Belton Roade initiative has
Speaker 1: led to. With that it is on the coast of Pakistan,
Speaker 1: which is directly where China's Belton Roade initiative is trying
Speaker 1: to get to them. Declaring their independence means that the
Speaker 1: entire deal that was struck between China and Pakistan is
Speaker 1: null and void for that port and their argument. Also,
Speaker 1: you could find videos of this region. It is and
Speaker 1: again I'm not saying this to be disrespectful.
Speaker 2: It is a dump.
Speaker 1: But that is also because most of the Chinese money
Speaker 1: and investments have gone to the capital city in the
Speaker 1: form of you know, kickbacks and bribes and all these things,
Speaker 1: and it hasn't trickled down nor will it ever trickle
Speaker 1: down to the people of this region. So they feel
Speaker 1: completely ostracized and like, yeah, you're getting rich off of
Speaker 1: our land, our essentially forced slave labor, and if we
Speaker 1: don't capitulate, we end up missing or dead and there's
Speaker 1: nobody coming to save us. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 1: I have a friend of mine that is running a
Speaker 1: ministry in Pakistan. It is a two percent Christian population nation,
Speaker 1: and he is one of the two percent. Legitimately, just
Speaker 1: slave labor is the standard for a lot of regions
Speaker 1: of this nation. And like the Ballock people were saying,
Speaker 1: it is a terrorist breeding ground style nation. I know
Speaker 1: that America was okay with Pakistan for a good while there,
Speaker 1: except for the fact that they let the enemies that
Speaker 1: we were hunting you know, hide in their mountains for
Speaker 1: a good while. But that's not what the conversation today
Speaker 1: is about. What I am saying is that this group,
Speaker 1: especially now that Indian and Pakistan are at it right now,
Speaker 1: they have a decent shot of declaring their independence from
Speaker 1: a Pakistan that cannot retort. Now is the time for
Speaker 1: that power play now. I know that last week, Tony,
Speaker 1: you and I both talked about this and we said
Speaker 1: that this conflict may very well be over in a
Speaker 1: matter of a couple of weeks, maybe a couple of months,
Speaker 1: because this happens every so often with them.
Speaker 2: These people haven't sought.
Speaker 1: Their own independence until now, and I think that a
Speaker 1: lot of that has to do with the Belton Roade
Speaker 1: initiative from China. I don't necessarily think that this will
Speaker 1: get in the way of Chinese business as long as
Speaker 1: China is willing to cut them, specifically them in on
Speaker 1: the deal. But that also means that they're gonna have
Speaker 1: to renegotiate and do a bunch of things that I
Speaker 1: don't necessarily think.
Speaker 2: China is keen on doing at this time.
Speaker 1: I already know there's gonna be people saying that it's
Speaker 1: possible because the India Pakistan situation. Most Western powers, actually,
Speaker 1: if I'm not a second, all Western powers.
Speaker 2: Have pretty much kept their hands off of it.
Speaker 1: They're gonna let India and Pakistan kind of duke this
Speaker 1: one out, and they're just gonna see what shakes out
Speaker 1: from it, and they're just gonna let it go.
Speaker 2: China is homies with.
Speaker 1: Pakistan currently, and they have, depending on the week, a
Speaker 1: decent or tumultuous relationship with India.
Speaker 2: Modi and G.
Speaker 1: I've seen them be very cordial and friendly with each other,
Speaker 1: but they also have a lot of border disputes and
Speaker 1: a lot of other issues that they're not, you know,
Speaker 1: the tightest on. They're both bricks nations, so they can,
Speaker 1: you know, at least get down on that vibe together.
Speaker 1: But also Modi and G are not really that tight
Speaker 1: with each other. China is absolutely going to back Pakistan
Speaker 1: in this conflict, especially if it gets prolonged and as
Speaker 1: more and more things ramp up, and if big, big
Speaker 1: capital underlined italicized, if it progresses more than just some
Speaker 1: skirmishes here and there and they come to.
Speaker 2: The negotiation table.
Speaker 1: If it does blow into it's a full out war,
Speaker 1: just like the Ukraine situation, just like the well, honestly,
Speaker 1: we could have this conversation, the Israel situation, the multiple
Speaker 1: places in South America situation.
Speaker 2: There's all kinds of stuff all over the world. There's
Speaker 2: conflict going on.
Speaker 1: If this does continue to grow to the point where
Speaker 1: it is a war, like an acknowledged war rather than
Speaker 1: just some skirmish, is China's gonna throw their way behind Pakistan.
Speaker 2: I'm pretty confident on that one.
Speaker 1: India is I think they're fine to stand on their
Speaker 1: own as far as it is concerned. However, I could
Speaker 1: envision a world where some West, certain powers, some of
Speaker 1: them maybe America maybe not, maybe England maybe not. Making
Speaker 1: you know that there's a few that I could see
Speaker 1: as a way to throw China a middle finger, would
Speaker 1: throw their weight in support behind Blokustan literally just to
Speaker 1: kick in the face and try to do what they
Speaker 1: can to prevent the Belton Road initiative from getting to
Speaker 1: its full strength. That's just how I envision it. If
Speaker 1: anybody has anything they would like to chime in with
Speaker 1: this one, then by all means, please do so.
Speaker 11: But yeah, hey, yeah, I've heard of this Baluchistan place.
Speaker 11: I've heard it called Baluchistan or Balochistan, Okay, thank you.
Speaker 11: They've been trying to gain independence I think from Iran
Speaker 11: for a while, and I guess they had a presence
Speaker 11: in Pakistan too, but I haven't heard as much about
Speaker 11: that one. And they are kind of covertly supported by
Speaker 11: the US and they are resistant to China, and they're
Speaker 11: basically a bit of a US proxy the belicious Stan
Speaker 11: independence movement.
Speaker 1: I agree with that one hundred percent. Anything to stop
Speaker 1: China's growth and development. I can see a certain three
Speaker 1: letter agency going and spreading a little political dissidents in
Speaker 1: certain areas for sure.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Anyway, Well, I would like to thank everybody for coming
Speaker 1: for another episode of the Cajun Night Live again for
Speaker 1: anybody who would like to join in next week every
Speaker 1: Wednesday night at nine o'clock. We do this nine o'clock
Speaker 1: Central time, I should say. On the Patreon website is
Speaker 1: down below. The link is in the description Cajun Night
Speaker 1: on Patreon. As always, thank you everybody for coming and
Speaker 1: being a part of this. Thank you everybody for listening
Speaker 1: to this on the Cult to Conspiracy and until next time,
Speaker 1: God bless