Speaker 1: Good evening, everybody, and welcome to another edition of The
Speaker 1: Cajun Knight Live. I am your host, the Cajun Knight,
Speaker 1: Jacob Mook. We've got a lot of things to discuss
Speaker 1: this evening. We got flotilla issues off the coast of Israel.
Speaker 1: We got some Russian submarine issues in the middle of
Speaker 1: the Strait of Gibraltar. We got some other things that
Speaker 1: Russia's got going on, which we'll talk about in kind.
Speaker 1: We got some things going on with Iran, with their
Speaker 1: nuclear situation or Iran depending on how you want to
Speaker 1: throw your vowel pronunciation, not here to judge. We also
Speaker 1: got some things going on in America. Pete heg Set,
Speaker 1: the Secretary of War, has decided that he is going
Speaker 1: to remove the bitch assness out of the military. I'm
Speaker 1: super stoked about this. I cannot express in words how
Speaker 1: much we got things going on in Portland right now.
Speaker 1: They're pissed Trump is sending troops. We got Trump sending
Speaker 1: troops to Estonia as well, and now we are quadrupling
Speaker 1: our missile production effective immediately. Good members of the Cajun Knight,
Speaker 1: Let's get ready to talk about some things we're gonna
Speaker 1: go ahead and share the screen at this time, and
Speaker 1: as I always do, I will give the shameless plug
Speaker 1: for any of the listeners to the Cajun Knight that
Speaker 1: would like to be a part of this conversation. We
Speaker 1: do this every Wednesday night at nine pm Central. The
Speaker 1: link is in the description below. One tier for entry
Speaker 1: for Cajun Night on Patreon. Please join us. We enjoy
Speaker 1: these Wednesday night get together. It's exchange of information, sometimes geopolitical,
Speaker 1: sometimes religious, sometimes history, sometimes boohert, whatever comes up in conversation.
Speaker 1: We're growing this slowly, but surely. If you want to
Speaker 1: be a part of it, go to the link in
Speaker 1: the description below. Now let's start off Greta Thumberg, who,
Speaker 1: if anybody doesn't know, I'm not particularly fond of. However,
Speaker 1: I can at least appreciate her trying to do what
Speaker 1: she feels to be right. I will give respec where
Speaker 1: it's due. She has a platform, and whether she deserves
Speaker 1: that platform or not, I'm not gonna start debating this,
Speaker 1: but what I am saying is that with the platform
Speaker 1: that she has, she is trying to do things, act
Speaker 1: change and do things for what she feels is the
Speaker 1: right reasons. And there's a level of respect to be
Speaker 1: said on that. That being said, she was on the
Speaker 1: most recent flotilla that has been making its way to Israel.
Speaker 1: Our resident correspondent on all things geopolitical, Tony, has been
Speaker 1: keeping his finger to the pulse of this flotilla situation.
Speaker 1: Last week we talked about how the Italian Navy was
Speaker 1: actually running interference and a bit of a defense for
Speaker 1: the flotilla. Now, I don't know what happened here, but apparently,
Speaker 1: as with the other flotillas that tried to make their
Speaker 1: way to Israel, this one was intercepted by the Israeli
Speaker 1: Defense Forces. Greta Thumberg has been detained. This is an
Speaker 1: article from Newsweek, and let's get into it. This was
Speaker 1: published to date October first, as of time recording. Let's
Speaker 1: get after it here.
Speaker 2: So, the Italian ship actually peeled off a day or
Speaker 2: two ago and it was replaced by Greek one, and
Speaker 2: the Turks sent a navy ship for temporarily a short
Speaker 2: amount of time. But they also sent some biract hard
Speaker 2: drones to escort the flotilla a couple of days ago.
Speaker 1: But rack drones, is that a slur or is that
Speaker 1: what they're actually called.
Speaker 2: That's what they're called. I think they're rushing or something.
Speaker 1: It sounds like it. Yeah, that's awesome. So they sent
Speaker 1: drones to try to run interference. And then all right,
Speaker 1: so the Italians peeled off and the Greeks took over.
Speaker 1: They peeled off and some drones took over, and then
Speaker 1: they still got intercepted.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and as the time of recording, I think they're
Speaker 2: down from forty two boats down to thirty. Twelve of
Speaker 2: them have been intercepted, the crews arrested, and they're just
Speaker 2: hoping they got enough people left to swarm the beach
Speaker 2: and you know, at least one will get through. That's
Speaker 2: the idea. And they're only forty four miles away. So
Speaker 2: let's see if any of them make it.
Speaker 1: Let's see. All right, let's watch this quick video Greta
Speaker 1: Thumberg speaking on one of the flotillas. Let's go. I'll
Speaker 1: put another little guest as well here.
Speaker 2: Wants to say something.
Speaker 3: So all the ducts and nurses, Hello, Nothing that we
Speaker 3: say or can express with words, can express the gratitude
Speaker 3: and respect that we hold for you, but just that
Speaker 3: we are in solidarity with you, We see you and
Speaker 3: we stand behind it. You should not have to do
Speaker 3: go through what you are going through right now, and
Speaker 3: yet you are showing us the biggest bravery ever.
Speaker 1: Okay, well, all right, there's some kind words from Greta,
Speaker 1: and again there is a level of respect to be
Speaker 1: said there. But let's get into the article here. Greta
Speaker 1: Thumberg has been detained after IDF intercepted the Global Summund
Speaker 1: Sumud flotilla as it approach Gaza's coast on Wednesday evening.
Speaker 1: A spokesperson for the flotilla told news Week that more
Speaker 1: than ninety participants, including Greta, have been abducted by the IDEF.
Speaker 1: None of the detained activists have been released and no
Speaker 1: information has been given about any potential charges. They added, Yeah,
Speaker 1: they're not going to be released. It's the evening time.
Speaker 1: It's been less than twenty four four hours since they
Speaker 1: were detained. It's not a catch and release type of thing.
Speaker 1: The IDEA have said in a statement on x that
Speaker 1: the flotilla had been safely stopped quote unquote and as passengers,
Speaker 1: including Thumburg, were being transferred to an Israeli port quote,
Speaker 1: Greta and her friends are safe and healthy end quote,
Speaker 1: it added on x sharing a clip of Thumberg after
Speaker 1: she was removed from the ship. Why it matters. International
Speaker 1: aid agencies have warned their conditions in Gaza have become
Speaker 1: catastrophic as the war approaches its third year. The Integrated
Speaker 1: Food Security Phase classification has declared a famine in Gaza city,
Speaker 1: while fuel and medical shortages have left civilians in dire need. Thumberg,
Speaker 1: who was accused, who has accused Israel of systematically starving
Speaker 1: and bombing millions of people, aiming to erase an entire population.
Speaker 1: That's a direct quote, has joined other activists aboard flotilla's
Speaker 1: to try and deliver aid to Palestine in her Palestinians
Speaker 1: in Gaza. Israel has vowed to block all flotilla's, arguing
Speaker 1: that a can be delivered through the Israeli sports under
Speaker 1: inspection because that's something that we can trust. I guess
Speaker 1: what to know. Thumberg was on the Alma Aid vessel,
Speaker 1: one of six ships that had been intercepted by Israel.
Speaker 1: The other are Diarra yesin Yuga, Spectra Adera, and Sirius.
Speaker 1: If I mispronounced any of those, my apologies. The rest
Speaker 1: of the ships are still bound for Gaza undeterred, the
Speaker 1: flotilla spokesperson told Newsweek. The flotilla, which featured around fifty
Speaker 1: boats carrying more than five hundred activists from around the globe,
Speaker 1: including Thumberg and several Americans, began its journey in Spain
Speaker 1: on September first. It set sail across the Mediterranean Sea
Speaker 1: with the aim of breeding bringing aid to Gaza on
Speaker 1: October first today, as of time recording, the flotilla was
Speaker 1: around sixty miles from the coast of Gaza when the
Speaker 1: ships were intercepted by the Israeli military. Global SimMan Flotilla
Speaker 1: has accused Israel of targeting several of its ships with
Speaker 1: water cannons and of ramming others as the military intercepted
Speaker 1: the vessels. No injuries were reported, which water cannons are
Speaker 1: seen as standard operating procedure for non lethal deterrence for
Speaker 1: things like this. Famously, if anybody's ever seen the movie
Speaker 1: about Captain Phillips, right, cargo vessels use water cannons to
Speaker 1: try to deter pirates and things. So the fact that
Speaker 1: the IDF could have used actual munitions and shows water cannons,
Speaker 1: I think is a statement that being said it's not
Speaker 1: it's not the best look. The public opinion of the
Speaker 1: situation in Gaza is getting worse by the day and
Speaker 1: not letting AID get through that. In the beginning, I
Speaker 1: could understand at least put the pieces together as to
Speaker 1: why you would do that. Now it's it's to a
Speaker 1: point where it's just it's not getting any better whatsoever.
Speaker 1: And it's yeah, go ahead, Sam.
Speaker 4: Like, okay, so I am.
Speaker 5: Isn't it isn't Israel like the whole thing with the
Speaker 5: I from what I understand, aren't they trying to like
Speaker 5: going into Gaza and like hearing the houses and everything
Speaker 5: and specifically looking for hamas.
Speaker 1: But depending on the source.
Speaker 6: And but okay, even before October seventh, like between thirty
Speaker 6: and thirty six thousand missiles since when since Amasa has
Speaker 6: taken over Gaza, before October seventh, between that time, between
Speaker 6: thirty thousand and thirty six thousand missiles were launched into
Speaker 6: Israel into densely populated areas.
Speaker 1: Yes, but so it's a little bit more of a
Speaker 1: siege at this point. And here's what I mean by that. Yes,
Speaker 1: they are going through and clearing buildings and what they
Speaker 1: suspect to be Hamas strongholds and points of contention, right
Speaker 1: buildings that maybe you might be being used for Hamas's purposes.
Speaker 1: Here's the thing. They cut off water to the city,
Speaker 1: they cut off power to the city, they cut off
Speaker 1: gas to the city, and they have cut off all
Speaker 1: food to the city allegedly. Now the IDF is saying no,
Speaker 1: we are sending food into the city for the non
Speaker 1: combatant civilians. But these reports are being conflicted by other
Speaker 1: eyewitnesses because again, we are living in the day and
Speaker 1: age where we have cell phones and satellite signals and
Speaker 1: things can be posted to social media almost instantly. So
Speaker 1: what once could be seen as like, Okay, well, you
Speaker 1: gotta do what you gotta do to root out the evil.
Speaker 1: And I get that there is now a very large
Speaker 1: chunk of human beings that are not getting food or
Speaker 1: water or medical aid, who are not enemy combatants in
Speaker 1: any way, shape or form. And I understand that siege
Speaker 1: warfare is not pretty. I fully understand that. But to
Speaker 1: the civilians that wanted nothing to do with this, it's
Speaker 1: not good. And this flotilla was being sent to give
Speaker 1: those civilians aid. Now here's the other side of that
Speaker 1: conversation with the flotillas and aid in general, depending on
Speaker 1: the source that you get what you look at the
Speaker 1: aid once it gets to Gaza, some are saying is
Speaker 1: being commandeered by the Hamas warlords and they're distributing it
Speaker 1: to their fighters, not to the civilians. Then we have
Speaker 1: other reports that are saying that no, Hamas is not
Speaker 1: taking these the aid packages in any way, shape or form,
Speaker 1: and the civilians are the ones left starving. So on
Speaker 1: one hand, you have people you know, playing well, I
Speaker 1: don't want to say, playing the victim, because they are
Speaker 1: really victims of a bad situation right now. I don't
Speaker 1: want to misspeak. Here. They are going out of their
Speaker 1: way and saying, hey, y'all, we didn't want this fight,
Speaker 1: we didn't attack y'all, and we are the ones that
Speaker 1: are starving right now and we just want the food.
Speaker 1: And Hamas is using that as a way to say,
Speaker 1: look at what Israel's doing to these poor victims and
Speaker 1: these poor citizens of Palestine. Then on the other hand,
Speaker 1: there are instances where the aid was taken by Hamas
Speaker 1: individuals and not distributed out. But that's not a one
Speaker 1: hundred percent rule. So it's that's the thing. It is
Speaker 1: such a messy situation, and nobody really knows which source
Speaker 1: they can verifiably trust. There's a lot of white noise
Speaker 1: and a lot of bad blood in the situation right now.
Speaker 4: It's nearly brother tribe killing mother tribe.
Speaker 1: That's all it's been for the last thousand years realistically.
Speaker 1: But yeah, Tony, I saw you on nude yourself. Please
Speaker 1: weigh in. I'm going to keep reading the article, but
Speaker 1: I want to hear what you got to say.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't think they consider themselves too brotherly. I
Speaker 2: think the Israelis think of themselves as the superior and
Speaker 2: rightful heirs of the land, and that's really the root
Speaker 2: of the issue. They both want that land, and the
Speaker 2: Gosins aren't. They don't want to leave. And there's also
Speaker 2: no country on Earth that's gonna let huge numbers of
Speaker 2: them immigrate. It's the same problem actually the Jews were
Speaker 2: facing in Europe and World War Two. There were discussions
Speaker 2: of okay, well where else can they go? And nobody
Speaker 2: wanted to give them visas, not even the United States. Yeah,
Speaker 2: there's been a long history of tip for tech. You
Speaker 2: mentioned thirty to thirty six thousand rockets from gods that
Speaker 2: have been fired at Israel over the last probably twenty years,
Speaker 2: but it's been tit for tat. Israel's also launched missiles
Speaker 2: and bombs at Gaza even before October seventh, and Gazans
Speaker 2: have been killed by the Israeli military. So that's why
Speaker 2: the Gaza, that's that's why the Gozlins have been so
Speaker 2: pissed off, and that's why October seventh happened. It's the
Speaker 2: culmination of a long history of tit for tats.
Speaker 5: What didn't Israel give the people in Gaza the place
Speaker 5: of Gaza I go six.
Speaker 2: What happened back then was there had been some Israeli
Speaker 2: settlements within the Gaza strip. These were, you know, a
Speaker 2: couple of houses here and there, or maybe a small
Speaker 2: block here and there, and Israel mandated all those people
Speaker 2: had to leave, and all those people were moved to
Speaker 2: the West Bank, which is the other two thirds of Palestine,
Speaker 2: and they built illegal settlements there. So and Gaza and
Speaker 2: the West Bank had been under pretty full military occupations,
Speaker 2: so IDF could just go wherever they wanted in Gaza
Speaker 2: until two thousand and five or six, and then the
Speaker 2: IDEF retreated to the perimeter of it. Basically turning it
Speaker 2: into what's been called an open air prison. So the
Speaker 2: IDEAF wouldn't go into Gaza anymore. They just stayed at
Speaker 2: the perimeter.
Speaker 1: And I'll say this too, as far as the open
Speaker 1: air prison conversation goes, I understand that they were under
Speaker 1: heavy surveillance, and I understand that there was some contention
Speaker 1: one hundred percent, But Gaza had a pretty solid tourist
Speaker 1: population before this skirmish kicked off. I've never seen an
Speaker 1: open air prison that has a thriving tourist population.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I tried to look into that. What I found
Speaker 2: was they had some tourism before two thousand and five
Speaker 2: and practically none after that. But the West Bank has
Speaker 2: always had a much much higher amount of tourism. Gaza
Speaker 2: doesn't have a seaport, they don't have an airport. They
Speaker 2: one group did build a water park in Gaza, hoping
Speaker 2: to attract tourism, but like nobody went there after two
Speaker 2: thousand and five.
Speaker 1: I found commercials. I found commercials of them trying to
Speaker 1: show it as a tourist destination. I'm not saying that
Speaker 1: it was a successful one, fair enough, maybe it wasn't
Speaker 1: as thriving as what certain sources, what have you believe.
Speaker 1: But even still, it's you wouldn't try to get that going.
Speaker 1: If the place was as much of an open air
Speaker 1: prison as they wanted it, it made it out to be.
Speaker 1: I think that there's and I'm not saying that it
Speaker 1: wasn't in some way, shape or form a I guess
Speaker 1: a surveillance state, like an absolute not a place you
Speaker 1: would want to live. I'm not trying to say, oh,
Speaker 1: they were fine, like no, no, I'm not downplaying it.
Speaker 1: But I also think it might be a misnomer that
Speaker 1: a lot of people have said to call it a
Speaker 1: full on open air prison. I don't know, uh huh.
Speaker 2: Well, clearly people have been living there for the past
Speaker 2: eighty years. Most people, more than half the population, has
Speaker 2: never left Gaza because you need you used to have
Speaker 2: to get a permit to visit Israel, and there used
Speaker 2: to be cross border traffic of Palestinians from Gaza who
Speaker 2: would work in Israel and across the border every day.
Speaker 2: And after two thousand and five, or actually two thousand
Speaker 2: and seven, I looked up that pretty much stopped. Nobody
Speaker 2: was crossing the border anymore.
Speaker 1: There was no more trade was it also, as far
Speaker 1: as the West Bank is concerned. I'm trying to remember
Speaker 1: the year here, was it two thousand and eight or
Speaker 1: twenty twelve where Israel actually gave more land to the
Speaker 1: West Bank and people were pissed about that. It couldn't
Speaker 1: have been twenty twelve. It had to have been before
Speaker 1: twenty ten, honestly.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't remember any stories like that. But the
Speaker 2: annexation has just been very slow motion. A couple houses
Speaker 2: here and there, Yeah, new settlement here and there, and
Speaker 2: they're just trying to keep it moving. And the last
Speaker 2: land negotiation I can remember hearing about was the Camp
Speaker 2: David Accords. I think that was in the early nineties
Speaker 2: where natsn Yahoo said well, we just want Area CE
Speaker 2: because Area SEE is what we deemed to be militarily important.
Speaker 2: And he bragged in a recording that was taken kind
Speaker 2: of surreptitiously of him that, well, what I didn't tell
Speaker 2: the Americans is that we can call anything we want
Speaker 2: militarily important. We can make Area CE as big as
Speaker 2: we want, and we'll just say we want Area of C.
Speaker 2: And when Palestine refuses to let us have Areas C,
Speaker 2: we can say, well, we tried negotiating with them, but
Speaker 2: they didn't want to hear it. Yea, it was a
Speaker 2: poison pill. And this has been going on since the beginning.
Speaker 2: I think that in nineteen forty seven, if the Palestinians
Speaker 2: had accepted the forty five percent of the territory they
Speaker 2: were offered, which seemed like a really bad deal to
Speaker 2: them at the time, that would have been a way
Speaker 2: better deal than what they got now. But it's like
Speaker 2: trying to negotiate over a pizza when one half of
Speaker 2: the party is eating the pizza. Yeah, and then it's
Speaker 2: going down and down and down, and here we are now.
Speaker 2: So if anything's going to make Israel stop, it's going
Speaker 2: to be international pressure.
Speaker 1: And the thing you said earlier about like nobody is
Speaker 1: gonna nobody is willing to take in the Palestinian refugees, that.
Speaker 2: Isnt Egept, not Jordan, not Syria.
Speaker 1: I think there's a reason for that, right, I think
Speaker 1: there's underlying cultural issues to that just right off the rip.
Speaker 1: And these are there. I'm not gonna call them, you know,
Speaker 1: brothers via their religion by any means, because Palestinian culture
Speaker 1: is very different than Egyptian culture, is very different than
Speaker 1: Jordanian culture. So there may be some sort of cultural
Speaker 1: clash even within the Muslim world that a lot of
Speaker 1: us in the West wouldn't understand. Possibly. That being said,
Speaker 1: so many European countries are willing to take in refugees
Speaker 1: from war torn places, and I understand their full to
Speaker 1: capacity right now. But I don't know. Maybe I'm just
Speaker 1: talking out of my ass here, but it seems like
Speaker 1: if you were to send back a bunch of people
Speaker 1: that were from Afghanistan, Syria, whatever, and you would send
Speaker 1: back the military aged males that you have in your
Speaker 1: country from these places, you would then make more room
Speaker 1: to possibly take in Palestinian refugees to the countries that
Speaker 1: are already doing that. But I don't know what the
Speaker 1: numbers of that actually looks like. I don't know how
Speaker 1: feasible these things are. But to your point, no one
Speaker 1: is willing to take these people in, and that's that
Speaker 1: is concerning in and of itself.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the proposals I've seen had only small numbers going
Speaker 2: to Europe or the United States. The lion's share of
Speaker 2: them to about two million people would be going to Egypt, Syria, Lebanon,
Speaker 2: and Jordan. And with regard to all of those countries.
Speaker 2: There are already a lot of Palestinian refugees and their
Speaker 2: descendants living in those countries who were kicked out in
Speaker 2: nineteen forty seven or nineteen sixty eight, et cetera, et cetera,
Speaker 2: nineteen eighty three in the case of Lebanon, and the
Speaker 2: demographic and political problem from that is that these displaced
Speaker 2: Palestinians and their descendants in the near abroad of Israel,
Speaker 2: they're severely anti Israel and they're always trying to stir
Speaker 2: up the governments of Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan, et cetera, to
Speaker 2: basically go to war with Israel. That's why Lebanon has
Speaker 2: had so many problems with Israel, and it's their Palestinian
Speaker 2: refugee population that has been causing it.
Speaker 1: Which, to be fair, it's not like these countries even
Speaker 1: if the Palestinians weren't there. It's not like these countries
Speaker 1: are like super fond of Israel either. They might have
Speaker 1: a cordial working relationship with them for geopolitical reasons because
Speaker 1: they see that you know, there's there's a bigger game
Speaker 1: being played here. But I would argue that the vast
Speaker 1: majority of the Muslim countries, the Muslim world are not
Speaker 1: particularly fond of Israel in any capacity. But yes, to
Speaker 1: your point, the pot is being stirred in these places
Speaker 1: by the Palestinian refugees from decades past.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, Yah, yeah, real quick. The government of Jordan, the
Speaker 2: Hassionites are pretty Israel friendly. They're kind of middle of
Speaker 2: the road, and they get a lot of American money
Speaker 2: to that position. Same.
Speaker 1: I think that's the kicker. Yeah. I think it's the
Speaker 1: American money that makes them cordial and friendly. It's not
Speaker 1: it's not because they just want to be neighborly. It's
Speaker 1: because they're being I don't want to say paid off.
Speaker 1: But again, they see there's more benefits to being friendly
Speaker 1: than being you know, antagonistic. Yeah, and they always raised
Speaker 1: what's up.
Speaker 5: Dude, just like since it since some y'all brought up
Speaker 5: that the Palestinians are the ones that like to stoke
Speaker 5: the fire, if we will call it like that. At
Speaker 5: that point, I'm this is a very complex.
Speaker 1: We cannot glass it, Sam, I know where're about to go.
Speaker 5: We cannot glass I wasn't gonna say glass it.
Speaker 1: I don't.
Speaker 5: I don't want there to be shadows on the sand anyway,
Speaker 5: But why don't at that point, why don't they just
Speaker 5: section off, build a wall around gaza and just like
Speaker 5: y'all do y'all, and build like an iron crate on
Speaker 5: top of it.
Speaker 1: Because then it is an actual prison.
Speaker 4: Then they get to have their own little secret gaza.
Speaker 1: And so what you are saying is essentially and it's
Speaker 1: not an apples to apples compared and on this one.
Speaker 1: But let's cut to America with the Native Americans. Why
Speaker 1: don't we just give them their this land and build
Speaker 1: a wall and they could just do their Native American
Speaker 1: thing on this land that we designate for I Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: they're like, bro, we're from Georgia, like we hit our
Speaker 1: tribe lived here for three thousand years, give or take,
Speaker 1: you're gonna give us this speck of land and in
Speaker 1: what Oklahoma? We don't even know this area, We don't
Speaker 1: know this region. This isn't our home. And it's like, well,
Speaker 1: you should be grateful for the acres you got. So
Speaker 1: sad you know, it's not it's not pretty. Now that
Speaker 1: being said, this is how conquest happens. This is how
Speaker 1: human nature has happened since the beginning of time. It's
Speaker 1: not good.
Speaker 5: I understand it's not good, but I guess my mind
Speaker 5: looks better on like, hey, if you can hold something,
Speaker 5: you can you can possess it, and you fight everybody
Speaker 5: else from taking it, then that's yours agreed. Since since
Speaker 5: Kane killed Abel, that's how the ship has.
Speaker 1: Worked, and that is not October seventh was about.
Speaker 5: I understand and that I just wish that the Middle
Speaker 5: East would be at peace.
Speaker 4: So I'm tired of people killing people.
Speaker 1: Well that's not gonna happen anytime soon. Brother, I agree
Speaker 1: with you. I absolutely wish people would let cooler heads
Speaker 1: prevail and bring it in to all the conflict. Uh,
Speaker 1: just going on, What.
Speaker 4: Can Jesus come on back down so we can just
Speaker 4: cut their shit in.
Speaker 1: The butt getting closer and closer every single day.
Speaker 2: Brother. But anyway, yeah, need borders over there, but Israel
Speaker 2: doesn't want borders. They think that they deserve to own
Speaker 2: all of it and probably a little more. I was
Speaker 2: just reading the Book of Joshua last weekend where it
Speaker 2: says Joshua came into the area that's now the West
Speaker 2: Bank from east to the Jordan River. And you know, scripturally,
Speaker 2: Israel probably has a lot of people who think they
Speaker 2: ought to own all that territory too, even though that's
Speaker 2: way out of bounds right now, and they've never owned Gaza,
Speaker 2: so in factor in the Herodian Hasmonian and you know,
Speaker 2: earliest days of Israel, they never had that.
Speaker 1: So there's a map that you can look up, and
Speaker 1: I want to say, it might be the designated areas
Speaker 1: in the Book of Joshua that the Israelis or the
Speaker 1: Israelites in this timeframe we're in charge of. It is
Speaker 1: a massive chunk of this area. So when people are
Speaker 1: talking about going back to their historical ancestral land quote unquote,
Speaker 1: it depends on which section of the book you're talking about,
Speaker 1: because there's a section where they owned pretty much half
Speaker 1: of what we would now call Saudi Arabia, half of Jordan,
Speaker 1: all of Lebanon, portions of Syria. It's like a massive chunk.
Speaker 1: We keep in mind that wasn't theirs for very long.
Speaker 1: This was theirs for I want to say, one king's lifespan,
Speaker 1: and then it were treated back to what we would
Speaker 1: think of more of the traditional Judea right, So I
Speaker 1: mean it's it was when they were on a conquest vibe.
Speaker 1: That's like the furthest extent that their empire ever stretched to.
Speaker 1: And even as I'm saying that's that's a source of
Speaker 1: contention because it's not this is the land that they owned.
Speaker 1: It was more like the land that adhere to their rule,
Speaker 1: you know what I'm saying. Back in those days, it
Speaker 1: was very uh open the air about what actual lines
Speaker 1: were being drawn and divided up as far as land
Speaker 1: ownership quote unquote goes. But yeah, nobody is trying to
Speaker 1: bring back that type of map by any stretch of
Speaker 1: the imagination. There's no way they could that that would
Speaker 1: kickstart illegitimate World War IIE in the Middle East. But anyway, Sam,
Speaker 1: go ahead, Yeah when.
Speaker 4: So isn't It's all like the land of Jujideo.
Speaker 1: It's about the size of New Jersey.
Speaker 5: The only thing I know about New Jerseys you can't
Speaker 5: pump your own gas. And that's just done America.
Speaker 1: It's very true. There's a few states where they don't
Speaker 1: allow you to pump your own gas. And it's like, bro, why,
Speaker 1: like you think I'm gonna start stealing gas from the pump.
Speaker 1: I had to swipe my card to do this, what
Speaker 1: are you talking about? And then they're like no, But
Speaker 1: it creates jobs. It creates jobs for the people. What
Speaker 1: else are they going to do, Like, I don't know
Speaker 1: a better career than being a pump jockey. But the states,
Speaker 1: I know, it's crazy. Like what happens to the people
Speaker 1: of Louisiana and Texas that can't they go and work
Speaker 1: other fuck Yeah.
Speaker 5: Now it's funny bringing up Texas because there's a fucking
Speaker 5: cult on a goddamn gas station.
Speaker 1: Well, or you're talking about BUCkies.
Speaker 7: Yeah, people worship a fuck I don't know.
Speaker 1: You keep Beaver's name out of your mouth. We respect
Speaker 1: him in this household.
Speaker 4: I love that one time. And yes, on substances. The
Speaker 4: bust outstanding.
Speaker 1: Is great, the store is great, there's whatever snack you're
Speaker 1: wanting now. Grants that, I agree that it has developed
Speaker 1: into its own cult following, and people do take that
Speaker 1: to the extreme. But I got to say, I like
Speaker 1: Boozy's dude, I.
Speaker 6: Shot you not.
Speaker 5: I saw I saw a man in his forties like
Speaker 5: head touching, the fucking, the the bowing down like like
Speaker 5: like five times a day, like to the BUCkies.
Speaker 4: I was like, the.
Speaker 1: Holy Beaver, dude, he is the Holy Beaver. That's the
Speaker 1: way it goes. But I will say it's like for
Speaker 1: especially for Texas BUCkies and Hb's that is like the lifeblood.
Speaker 1: See see that's how I know. That's how I know
Speaker 1: that you don't know. H B is a grocery store,
Speaker 1: but it's so much more than just a grocery store.
Speaker 1: It is. No, no, they don't, I know, I know,
Speaker 1: but it's if you actually look at the company itself,
Speaker 1: it's pretty phenomenal. This one family. HB actually stands for
Speaker 1: is it Herbert Ernest Butts And yeah, yeah, and I
Speaker 1: know it's the Butts family. I can't remember if it
Speaker 1: was Hubert or her I'm I'm just spacing on that.
Speaker 1: But the grocery store, i'd like I said, I don't know,
Speaker 1: but HB is the acronym. But they started this grocery
Speaker 1: store during the Great Depression just so his family could survive.
Speaker 1: And they got so smart with it. They instead of
Speaker 1: just buying a store, they bought like the acreage around
Speaker 1: the store, and they set up strip malls. At every HB.
Speaker 1: You'll see a small strip mall or some little section
Speaker 1: of other stores around here, and they own that and
Speaker 1: least those buildings out to other businesses and boutiques and
Speaker 1: shit like that. So basically, any way you slice it,
Speaker 1: HB is making money on top of making money with
Speaker 1: a little extra side piece of making money. And the
Speaker 1: Butts family are phenomenal people.
Speaker 4: So they're like pips.
Speaker 5: You just buy KFC Taco Bell and put your pepsi
Speaker 5: products in that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, except they're not commis. If anything, this is like
Speaker 1: ultra capitalists. But yeah, HB. They have no intentions of
Speaker 1: expanding past Texas either. This is like a Texas grassroots
Speaker 1: type of thing. I heard rumor that they were going
Speaker 1: to open an HGB outside of the state. I don't
Speaker 1: know whatever became of that, but yeah, anyway, uh ravenly,
Speaker 1: I see your hand raised. Before we get back to
Speaker 1: the article, please weigh in.
Speaker 8: Giving your pump gas your gas pumped is life. I'm
Speaker 8: just saying I grew up with it. Yes, I grew
Speaker 8: up with it. It was beautiful and I missed it every
Speaker 8: day of my life.
Speaker 1: Yes, of course Oregon would have that way. It's so
Speaker 1: tough we do so I'm expecting to also tip the guy, right.
Speaker 8: No, you don't tip the guy. They get paid a
Speaker 8: good hourly wage. They they either they have rainer shine,
Speaker 8: they'll be out there. It's amazing. When it's like raining
Speaker 8: and stormy outside, you just roll up, roll a little
Speaker 8: window down, half cracked hay filled with this one. They
Speaker 8: like type in your little Pasco. So it's like you
Speaker 8: go to a Safeway, which is like, you know, a
Speaker 8: fancy version of Walmart.
Speaker 9: I guess, well, no, no, like a neighborhood Walmart.
Speaker 8: You have like a little pass code you put in,
Speaker 8: you get your points, you get money off.
Speaker 9: Like it's fantastic.
Speaker 8: I love when I go home because then I'm like, yeah,
Speaker 8: pump gas for me.
Speaker 1: It's so nice. That's also crazy.
Speaker 8: Also, Sam, I understand the crazy colt of the BUCkies
Speaker 8: because some people are quite enthralled with the bucks.
Speaker 1: I literally have a six foot Christmas BUCkies inflatable for
Speaker 1: my yard and also a six foot Halloween BUCkies inflatable
Speaker 1: for my front yard.
Speaker 9: It really isn't that that, you know, dire, But I.
Speaker 1: Can respectfully disagree. You know, I get it.
Speaker 8: But yes, the pumping and the gas I do miss
Speaker 8: constantly down here.
Speaker 1: That just sounds wild to me. It sounds it's not bad.
Speaker 8: The only time is when you have to like wait
Speaker 8: for them. But now they've changed it in Oregon, so
Speaker 8: now they got the places where you can either pump
Speaker 8: your own gas have your gas pumped in the place,
Speaker 8: which was wild to me.
Speaker 9: When I went home last year, I was like, excuse me,
Speaker 9: so we can pump our own gas now?
Speaker 10: Oh?
Speaker 1: Really?
Speaker 11: Yeah?
Speaker 8: So now they've changed it to where you can pump
Speaker 8: your own gas and some of the gas stations and
Speaker 8: you can get your gas pumped if you want to
Speaker 8: from the gas attendance or not.
Speaker 1: Is that another side question of this these employees are
Speaker 1: they being paid by the state or are they being
Speaker 1: paid by the gas of the gas station.
Speaker 8: So Lake Fred Myers is like, is like warmer the
Speaker 8: better and they get paid at least my understanding is
Speaker 8: they get paid like from Fred Myers.
Speaker 9: Anthony. Anthony lives there too.
Speaker 1: Okay, Anthony, please weigh in on this.
Speaker 12: So I mean so here now, Okay, So, growing up
Speaker 12: up until about COVID, yeah, there was gas attendance.
Speaker 11: If you were in Oregon, you had to get your
Speaker 11: gas pumped.
Speaker 13: Uh.
Speaker 12: They the logic being wasn't actually jobs as far as
Speaker 12: as far as I understood growing up growing up, it was.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 12: It got to a point in Portland where people were
Speaker 12: forgetting to unhook the gas hose and uh and uh.
Speaker 11: Yeah, so there there were problems.
Speaker 12: About the time COVID really got into effect due to
Speaker 12: all the social distancing and stuff.
Speaker 11: They amended the laws.
Speaker 12: To where you could you have the option to pump
Speaker 12: your own gas.
Speaker 1: Uh and so what usually if you go to a.
Speaker 12: Gas station, most gas stations in Oregon, there's like half
Speaker 12: the pumps where it self served and the other half
Speaker 12: of the umps that that are attended. And that kind
Speaker 12: of killed a couple birds with one stone. It allowed
Speaker 12: the companies, the gas companies to have fewer employees, the
Speaker 12: like they only need one person inside and one person outside.
Speaker 1: So the same thing with the walmartself checkout. Once they
Speaker 1: implement and realize how much money they could save on manpower,
Speaker 1: they just said, screw it, this is the only thing
Speaker 1: we have now. Well yeah, there's that. Well and then
Speaker 1: two the other thing.
Speaker 12: It did, I mean you can, I mean it's a benefit,
Speaker 12: but from a negative.
Speaker 1: Result is that there were.
Speaker 12: It allowed more gas stations to stay open twenty four hours. Yeah,
Speaker 12: because what happens after dark is the inside is still locked.
Speaker 12: But you like go at you you can either do
Speaker 12: everything yourself from the pump or you go up to
Speaker 12: the thing as like, hey, sixty dollars on pump whatever, yeah,
Speaker 12: and not cut So it's fucking Portland. It ships Portland.
Speaker 1: So we are gonna be talking about Portland a little
Speaker 1: bit later in this episode. But to that point, I
Speaker 1: can understand the how nice that is, right, And I've
Speaker 1: had my gas pump for me when I swun through
Speaker 1: New Jersey before. I didn't realize that it was a
Speaker 1: state law. I told them, oh, no, you're good, Like, no, seriously,
Speaker 1: we have to pump your gas. I need you to
Speaker 1: get back in your car. And I was like, first
Speaker 1: of all, mister gas station attendant, I don't like your
Speaker 1: tone that you're taking with me. But okay, if it
Speaker 1: is a state law, well I was pumping my gas.
Speaker 1: I looked it up. Yes, that's a legitimate like by law.
Speaker 1: I would have gotten in trouble and so did the
Speaker 1: gas station if I would have pumped my own gas.
Speaker 1: I feel like that's an infringement on freedom. But like, okay, fine, fine, fine,
Speaker 1: it is nice to not have to get out of
Speaker 1: your car to pump your own gas, very similar to
Speaker 1: when you go get your five minute ol change. It's
Speaker 1: nice to not have to climb under your car and
Speaker 1: do that. I can appreciate the niceties and the ease
Speaker 1: and comfort of it. I fully get this, but it
Speaker 1: just sounds wild to me, especially now that you're saying that, y'all.
Speaker 1: Y'all's main one of one of the issues is that
Speaker 1: people driving off with the nozzle still in their fuel
Speaker 1: tank was so prevalent that they had to implement a
Speaker 1: actual statewide law. This is and I'm not shitting on
Speaker 1: the people of Oregon, but that sounds like some Darwinism
Speaker 1: needs to happen to a certain demographic of people. I
Speaker 1: have been pumping my own gas since I was fifteen
Speaker 1: years old, and even before that, I've been pumping my
Speaker 1: parents' gas. Never once in the history of my entire
Speaker 1: life have I even come close to driving off without
Speaker 1: putting the nozzle back. That's scary that there's that many
Speaker 1: adults that were doing that to where that was an
Speaker 1: actual conversation piece for the passing of this legislation.
Speaker 11: But living in when I am a firm believer, we
Speaker 11: need to if we just removed all the warning labels
Speaker 11: off of everything, Yeah, for a year, one singular year.
Speaker 11: You don't have to go beyond that.
Speaker 12: One year, at least sixty percent of the problems we
Speaker 12: are facing would be solved because nature would take its course.
Speaker 1: I can't disagree with this, bro, And it's not just
Speaker 1: organ I wouldn't even have a problem with doing that worldwide, nationwide,
Speaker 1: for sure, you know, just one year. Like blenders, you know,
Speaker 1: the little glass bottle with spinning blades inside, if I
Speaker 1: have to put a warning label on the box to
Speaker 1: tell you not to stick your hand inside of that,
Speaker 1: then I feel like maybe just a little trial and
Speaker 1: error might just set it off, you know what I mean.
Speaker 1: I know that I'm just a heartless ultra capitalist for this,
Speaker 1: but I agree with your statement. Especially ladders, Bro. I
Speaker 1: can't find a ladder without thirty five warning labels on
Speaker 1: it because people don't understand and that like when you
Speaker 1: go up to a height, there's a danger of gravity
Speaker 1: happening whenever you know it's it's just man, I'm with you,
Speaker 1: I'm with you, Sam, your hand was raised first, go ahead.
Speaker 5: Talking about the warning labels. And I've actually seen somebody.
Speaker 5: I actually had to stop a h a guy who's
Speaker 5: older than me. He was gonna take bleach and win.
Speaker 5: Not when they but ammonia.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we had that happen with us when I was
Speaker 1: in DC. Some of my young boots that I was
Speaker 1: having them clean the deck and everything. They were just
Speaker 1: kind of mixing a bunch of cleaning materials and a
Speaker 1: weird light yellowish gas started being emitted from the mop
Speaker 1: bucket and I didn't know what they had added. I
Speaker 1: left them to their own devices for two fucking seconds,
Speaker 1: and here we are, these eighteen year old you know,
Speaker 1: young grunts are doing this, and I'm like, y'all made
Speaker 1: low dose mustard gas? Essentially? Is that? Is that what
Speaker 1: I'm understanding here? One of their dads was a chemist,
Speaker 1: and he called them and asked them what the hell
Speaker 1: and his dad's like, yeah, what don't don't do that?
Speaker 1: Like bleach is more than enough.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 5: So I don't know if your diasm ever made you
Speaker 5: do it, but we had the mop bucket. Uh, aquavel
Speaker 5: a cool blue after shave.
Speaker 1: Yep and bleach yep. That is the proper mixture, which.
Speaker 4: I'm like, okay, that walks, you know, sure?
Speaker 5: Uh No, theseb motherfuckers uh did Like there was ammonia,
Speaker 5: like straight ammonia under the capt I don't know what for,
Speaker 5: but it was there. Uh, the dude would they were
Speaker 5: supposed to go moth and everything. Yeah, no, he put
Speaker 5: that in the bleach and dude gasped himself out to
Speaker 5: the point we had, Uh the the Sheriff's office had
Speaker 5: to come with a half match.
Speaker 4: So to get to get it out the thing.
Speaker 1: And I was like, that's hilarious, that's hilarious. We did
Speaker 1: the blue And this is also a telltale sign of
Speaker 1: the generation. And as far as Marine Corps boot camp goes,
Speaker 1: there used to be a colone they would use called
Speaker 1: Bulldog and it was the Bulldog and water mixture and
Speaker 1: it's not a bad smell, but it's a very distinct smell.
Speaker 1: Nothing else on earth smells like this bottle. And they
Speaker 1: used to use that. Then they phase that out and
Speaker 1: went with the Acavelva blue. Yeah, that was That was
Speaker 1: a part of the all mopping routine as well.
Speaker 4: Is it bad?
Speaker 5: If I could, I'd like to get a fave gallon
Speaker 5: bucket of the cool of Acavaila blue.
Speaker 1: By all means, brother, that is you You'll just you'll
Speaker 1: smell like you should belong in a Turkish bazaar somewhere,
Speaker 1: Smell like a full on Persian gin. But by all
Speaker 1: means I'm not.
Speaker 5: I don't want I just I just really wanted to
Speaker 5: make that that cleaning mixture again. And he goes, yeah,
Speaker 5: I actually, uh, it reminded me a lot. Boot camp
Speaker 5: factor remounded me a lot like home.
Speaker 1: We're gonna be talking about boot camping a bit too
Speaker 1: when we get to Pete Hegseth and his big meeting
Speaker 1: with the generals. But all right, let's move on, Tony,
Speaker 1: go ahead, brother.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Speaking of unusual state laws regarding filling gas, anybody filled
Speaker 2: gas in Wisconsin because I was to try to pay
Speaker 2: there one time and they said, no, no, you fill
Speaker 2: your tank first and then you pay at the end.
Speaker 2: And then there's these signs everywhere saying harsh punishment if
Speaker 2: you drive off without paying. And I'm like, every other
Speaker 2: state has solved this, you pay first, and not Wisconsin.
Speaker 2: You just you feel first and then you pay. And
Speaker 2: I was in Germany and they do the same thing there,
Speaker 2: and it's like, Wow, there's a lot of trust here.
Speaker 1: So much trust in the population. But I mean, to
Speaker 1: be fair, I don't think I've ever met an unkind
Speaker 1: person from Wisconsin. They're all like just the nicest, kindest
Speaker 1: Northwestern or north midwesternest people ever, is that I didn't know.
Speaker 1: I didn't know that that's pay after.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's how it wasn't twenty ten anyway. That's the
Speaker 2: only time I've ever been there. The other interesting place
Speaker 2: I've been it was Mexico with my parents and they
Speaker 2: were filling up their station wagon with diesel and this
Speaker 2: is one of those pomps that goes really really fast,
Speaker 2: and we're like, oh man, how many leaders pay soos
Speaker 2: what I? And I said, I think we need three
Speaker 2: hundred pesos worth of diesel, and then my dad pulled
Speaker 2: the trigger and it rocketed up to three forty four,
Speaker 2: and the attendant came.
Speaker 1: Out, I ain't kid.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I had to keep sticking of and I was like, oh, sorry, sorry,
Speaker 2: we just didn't know. Doesn't it cut off automatically? No,
Speaker 2: it just fills all the way past what you paid there?
Speaker 2: And I why would they do that here? This seems
Speaker 2: like a low trust society, but you would think, you know,
Speaker 2: you fill yourself there. It's like, sorry, I didn't know.
Speaker 2: I wasn't you know metering it out hit to hit
Speaker 2: three hundred exactly.
Speaker 1: That's insane. But then another insane thing. You just said
Speaker 1: your station wagon took diesel.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, it was an eighty two Mercedes best car ever,
Speaker 2: you know. Nissan Maxima also made a diesel wagon, and
Speaker 2: diesel's all over in Europe, but unfortunately not here.
Speaker 1: I wish diesel would become more prevalently used in our country.
Speaker 1: But yeah, it's it is a thing. Wow, And I
Speaker 1: didn't know Mexico is like that. Typically, you you pay
Speaker 1: them out and it stops at the proper mount. It
Speaker 1: doesn't just rocking. Okay, wow, people just be out here,
Speaker 1: live in their wildest you know. Anyway, A right, So
Speaker 1: let's get back to the flotilla conversation. God, we took
Speaker 1: many side tangents there. The interception of the flotilla has
Speaker 1: sparked global outrage, with protests erupting in Germany and Italy,
Speaker 1: with demonstrations taking to the streets with free Palestine banners.
Speaker 1: Colombian President Gustavo Petro announced that all Israeli diplomats in
Speaker 1: Colombia will be leaving the country following the blocking of
Speaker 1: the flotilla, while the Spanish Foreign Ministry said it was
Speaker 1: fully mobilized to provide all diplomatic and consular protection to
Speaker 1: our citizens. Interesting on Monday, nearly twenty, Democrat members of
Speaker 1: Congress called on President Trump to do everything in your
Speaker 1: power to ensure the safety of the flotilla and its
Speaker 1: unarmed civilian passengers, while also addressing the issue at the
Speaker 1: root of the voyage. Spain and Italy also said they
Speaker 1: would send navy ships to the area of the flotilla
Speaker 1: after activists said they were attacked by drones near Greece,
Speaker 1: reported the Associated Press. Although some vessels were damaged, no
Speaker 1: injuries were reported. We have another clip here. I want
Speaker 1: to say, this is Greta getting arrested. Let's check it out.
Speaker 1: There's no sound on this video, but oh here, yeah,
Speaker 1: so that was Greta. I guess getting ready to get
Speaker 1: off the flotilla. There was a troop there with the
Speaker 1: at least I would assume that's an idea of soldier.
Speaker 1: He's wearing a flack in kevlar. So anyway. Meanwhile, Israel
Speaker 1: has val to block the flotilla from reaching Gaza, arguing
Speaker 1: that an attempt to bypass the naval blockade violates international
Speaker 1: law and could support Hamas Obviously what people are saying
Speaker 1: Global s Mud flotilla said it in a post on Instagram.
Speaker 1: On Wednesday is a direct quote. The Israeli occupation navy
Speaker 1: forces are using active aggression on the global s mud
Speaker 1: flotilla Florida Florida vessel. I think that might have meant
Speaker 1: to say a flotilla vessel. Oh, the name of the
Speaker 1: vessel might be Florida, I don't know, has been deliberately
Speaker 1: rammed at sea. Yolaura, Metique and others have been targeted
Speaker 1: with water cannons. These illegal actions on unarmed humanitarian ships
Speaker 1: is a war crime. All passengers on board are unharmed.
Speaker 1: So that being said, when Greenpeace uses water cannons at
Speaker 1: ship of fishing vessels and things, is that seen as
Speaker 1: a illegal attacks on unarmed ships? I don't know. I'm
Speaker 1: not an expert of maritime law, but all right now,
Speaker 1: Greta Thumberg said in a social media post last month,
Speaker 1: Israel is systematically starving and bombing millions of people, aiming
Speaker 1: to erase an entire population as a continuation of decades
Speaker 1: of occupation, apartheid and deadly oppression. That's not inherently true,
Speaker 1: but again, if you look at the humanitarian crisis going
Speaker 1: on there, it's not it's yeah, under international laws, dates
Speaker 1: have legally legal obligations to act to stop this in
Speaker 1: their compliccency and apply real pressure. They are not just
Speaker 1: completely failing to live up to those obligations, but actively
Speaker 1: choosing not to. That is why we are sailing to
Speaker 1: step up our racist people to step up when our
Speaker 1: racist people in power failed to do so. We are
Speaker 1: sailing to challenge structures unable to prevent these war crimes
Speaker 1: from happening, not just in Gaza, but all over the world.
Speaker 1: We are sailing for world free of all kinds of
Speaker 1: racism and oppression. They gotta throw the buzzwords. They got
Speaker 1: to throw the buzzwords. That is how this goes. We
Speaker 1: talked about what the Columbian president says, a group of
Speaker 1: Democratic senators, we talked about them, and we talked about
Speaker 1: what the Israeli Foreign Minister wrote on X. So what
Speaker 1: happens next? I guess we'll see. This happened this today
Speaker 1: as of time of recording, So there's going to be
Speaker 1: a lot of things that come of this. With this
Speaker 1: being said, and we're still talking Middle Eastern kinds of
Speaker 1: conversation here. Associated Press report Iran begins rebuilding miss sites,
Speaker 1: but key component is missing. Now I should give the misnomer.
Speaker 1: Little disclaimer here, they are claiming that they are rebuilding
Speaker 1: their nuclear energy sites, not their missile sites. But depending
Speaker 1: on the source that you read, you don't need yellow
Speaker 1: cake in order to make nuclear power. So if you're
Speaker 1: going through the process of making yellow cake, one could
Speaker 1: reasonably assume that that is going to be used for
Speaker 1: other purposes. But let's dig in here in Dubai, this
Speaker 1: is where this report comes from. Iran has begun rebuilding
Speaker 1: missile production sites targeted by Israel during its twelve day
Speaker 1: war in June. Satellite images analyze the Associated Press show
Speaker 1: but a key component is likely still missing, the large
Speaker 1: mixers needed to produce solid fuel for the weapons. Reconstituting
Speaker 1: the missile program is crucial for the Islamic Republic, which
Speaker 1: believes another round of war with Israel may have happen.
Speaker 1: The missiles are of one of Iran's few military deterrens
Speaker 1: after the war decimated its air defense systems, something that
Speaker 1: Tehran long has insisted will never be included in negotiations
Speaker 1: with the West. Missile experts told AP that obtaining the
Speaker 1: mixers is a goal for Tehran, particularly as it prepares
Speaker 1: for possible UN sanctions to be reimposed on the country
Speaker 1: later this month. It's not later this month where that's
Speaker 1: the next art we're we're going to talk about. The
Speaker 1: sanctions would penalize any development of missile programs, among other measures.
Speaker 1: In address to the UN General Assembly on Wednesday, Iranian
Speaker 1: President Musad Pseshk Pezeshkin blamed the Israeli attacks on the
Speaker 1: separate US bombing oh and the separate US bombing of
Speaker 1: Iran nuclear sites for dealing a grievous blow to peace negotiations.
Speaker 1: So them bombing the nuclear sites of a nation that
Speaker 1: goes out of its way to support known terrorist groups
Speaker 1: bits on peace negotiat all right. Known as planetary mixers,
Speaker 1: the machines feature blades that revolve around a center point,
Speaker 1: like orbiting planets, and offer better mixing action than other
Speaker 1: types of equipment. Iran could purchase them from China, where
Speaker 1: experts and US officials say they've purchased missile fuel ingredients
Speaker 1: and other components in the past, which absolutely they have.
Speaker 1: If they're able to reacquire some key things like planetary mixers,
Speaker 1: then that infrastructure is still there and ready to get
Speaker 1: rolling again, said Sam Lair, a research associate at the
Speaker 1: James Martin Center for Non Proliferation Studies who studied Iranian
Speaker 1: missile sites. Iran's mission to the United Nations did not
Speaker 1: respond to questions about the country's efforts to rebuild the
Speaker 1: missile program. And then we talked about Israeli. They had
Speaker 1: a war that targeted solid fuel missile sites. Everybody knows
Speaker 1: about the Twelve Day War. Nothing new there. Chinese mixers
Speaker 1: are seen at a Syria missile site affiliated with Iran.
Speaker 1: Now Iran may choose to rely on China to obtain
Speaker 1: mixers and the chemicals to make solid fuel. Such chemicals
Speaker 1: may have caused a massive explosion in April that killed
Speaker 1: at least seventy people out of port in Iran. Iran
Speaker 1: has still not explained the blast, which happened as its
Speaker 1: diplomats met with Americans in Oman over its nuclear program.
Speaker 1: Just days after the explosion, the US State Department sanctioned
Speaker 1: Chinese firms it said provided the Islamic Republic with ballistic
Speaker 1: missile propellant ingredients. And if I'm not mistaken, we actually
Speaker 1: talked about that on a previous episode of The Cajun Night. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: Iran's Revolutionary Guard likely supplied a planetary mixer to an
Speaker 1: underground ballistic missile construction facility in Syria near the town
Speaker 1: of Massiaf some one hundred and seventy kilometers or one
Speaker 1: hundred and fifty Freedom Units are one hundred and five
Speaker 1: rather Freedom units north of the capitol of Damascus, near
Speaker 1: the Lebanese border. Footage released by the Israeli military months
Speaker 1: after the September twenty twenty four raid on the facility
Speaker 1: showed the mixer, which boy resemblance to others sold online
Speaker 1: by the Chinese firms. Iran's president and military officials visited
Speaker 1: Beijing earlier this month for China's Victory Day parade. I
Speaker 1: don't know what they're celebrating victory over, but they show
Speaker 1: enough have a victory Day parade. Iran's government has provided
Speaker 1: no detailed readout on what Pezeshkian said to the Chinese
Speaker 1: president Ji and China state run media offered no indications
Speaker 1: that Tehran as for help. So they're saying that it's
Speaker 1: possible that they will buy some things from China. It's
Speaker 1: not a guarantee. But with that being said, Iran is
Speaker 1: saying that if they continue these things, they may experience
Speaker 1: more sanctions and with that being said, you and impose
Speaker 1: a snapback sanctions on Iran over nuclear program. This is
Speaker 1: from three days ago. Let's watch this together.
Speaker 13: Sweeping United Nations sanctions on Iran over its long contested
Speaker 13: nuclear program have just been put into place. These sanctions
Speaker 13: will target Iran's ballistic missile program as well as senior
Speaker 13: leadership within the Islamic public, and it comes as part
Speaker 13: of Iran's twenty fifteen nuclear deal with world powers, which
Speaker 13: created a mechanism by which any party to that deal
Speaker 13: could declare Iran in non compliance. Now, France, Germany, and
Speaker 13: the United Kingdom put these sanctions into place after a
Speaker 13: thirty day window. They say that Iran hadn't done enough
Speaker 13: to negotiate with the West and also hadn't opened up
Speaker 13: its program to United Nations nuclear inspectors after its war
Speaker 13: in June with Israel. Now, Iran maintains that the implementation
Speaker 13: of these sanctions is not allowed. They say they're doing
Speaker 13: a lot to negotiate with the West. However, the European
Speaker 13: nations note that Iran has been enriching uranium to a
Speaker 13: level far beyond that which any other peaceful program does.
Speaker 13: Moving forward, it remains unclear just how Iran is going
Speaker 13: to react to this. Some within the country have said
Speaker 13: that Iran should withdraw from the Nuclear non Proliferation Treaty.
Speaker 13: Others have hinted that Iran could rush towards a nuclear weapon.
Speaker 13: But as of right now, Iran is waking up to
Speaker 13: a new world in which these sanctions are reimposed. Aron's
Speaker 13: economy is already ailing, and what it does moving forward
Speaker 13: could see tensions rice further in a Middle East already
Speaker 13: on edge over the Israel Hamas war in the Gaza strip.
Speaker 1: All right, now, let's read in here. This is an
Speaker 1: article from The Hill. US targets Iran's nuclear program with
Speaker 1: new sanctions. Again. This was actually released today as a
Speaker 1: time of recording this afternoon. You know what, let's see here,
Speaker 1: there's another quick clip. I wonder if there's actually gonna
Speaker 1: be decent sound on this One's listen. It's not gonna
Speaker 1: have any kind of real wording. It's just words at
Speaker 1: the bottom. Let's read about it. The Trump administration on
Speaker 1: Wednesday today, as a ton of recording, announced a new
Speaker 1: round of sanctions on Iran in support of snapback United
Speaker 1: Nations Security Council penalties on the country that mark the
Speaker 1: formal end of the Obama era nuclear Deal. Secretary of
Speaker 1: State Marco Rubio said that the US is designated is
Speaker 1: designating dozens of individuals and entities involved in Iran's nuclear program,
Speaker 1: its weapons procurement network, and military aircraft programs. The US
Speaker 1: is also adding a new export restrictions on twenty six
Speaker 1: entities and three addresses linked to Iran's procurement efforts. The
Speaker 1: secretary said, the United States today announced the imposition of
Speaker 1: sanctions in support of the snap back and UN sanctions.
Speaker 1: This is a direct quote from Rubio, pretty much reiterating
Speaker 1: what I just said. The action announced today shows that
Speaker 1: Iran is actively attempting to procure components and technologies in
Speaker 1: support of its proliferation programs. The move by the US
Speaker 1: follows a decision by France, Germany, and the United Kingdom
Speaker 1: to invoke the snapback mechanism to reimpose UN Security Council
Speaker 1: sanctions on around over its nuclear program. The three European
Speaker 1: countries face in October deadline to reimpose sanctions under the
Speaker 1: terms of the twenty fifteen Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action,
Speaker 1: also known as the Iran Nuclear Deal. President Trump withdrew
Speaker 1: the US from the Joint I'm sorry. The JCPOA as
Speaker 1: the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in twenty nineteen, and
Speaker 1: Iran remained a party to the agreement until twenty twenty.
Speaker 1: While Trump earlier this year engaged in Iran engaged Iran
Speaker 1: in talks over the nuclear program, the president Joint Israeli
Speaker 1: strikes against Iran's nuclear program in June. Trump's Special Envoy
Speaker 1: for the Peace Missions, Steve Whitkoff, said last week the
Speaker 1: US is still talking with Iran. Over the past six years,
Speaker 1: the three European countries sought to keep the JCPOA alive
Speaker 1: and negotiate with Iran to return to the terms of
Speaker 1: the deal. The country's delayed invoking the snapback mechanism until
Speaker 1: the last possible moment on September twenty ninth. The reimposition
Speaker 1: of UN sanctions is not the end of diplomacy, the
Speaker 1: country said. In a statement on Monday, These three countries
Speaker 1: said we urge Iran to refrain from any escalatory action
Speaker 1: and return to the compliance with its legally binding safeguards obligation.
Speaker 1: The E three will con continue to work with all
Speaker 1: parties towards a new diplomatic solution to ensure Iran never
Speaker 1: gets a nuclear weapon. So yeah, the sanctions on Iran
Speaker 1: are back on the menu, and they have no intentions
Speaker 1: of slowing down anytime soon. So with that being said,
Speaker 1: let's move on to another conversation here. I don't know
Speaker 1: how many people heard about the Russian submarine that sent
Speaker 1: up an SOS signal. There's a Russian nuclear sub that
Speaker 1: was traveling through the Strait of Gibraltar. Something happened, something
Speaker 1: cataclysmic happened on the submarine. This is four days ago
Speaker 1: this video is released. They sent up an SOS signal
Speaker 1: and the British, as a matter of fact, were on
Speaker 1: their way to try to help. There was a little
Speaker 1: bit of some contention. But let's learn about this together.
Speaker 1: This is a video talking about it, and then we're
Speaker 1: going to read an article. Let's get into it.
Speaker 14: A Russian submarine capable of carrying nuclear weapons suffered a
Speaker 14: serious accident in the Mediterranean. According to reports, fuel is
Speaker 14: now said to be leaking from Putin's two hundred and
Speaker 14: forty two foot kilo class submarine Novorossiska, creating an explosive hazard.
Speaker 14: The submarine was reportedly spotted surfaced in the Strait of
Speaker 14: Gibraltar this week. A Russian telegram channel which has links
Speaker 14: to spooks and other insiders with more than three hundred
Speaker 14: thirty thousand subscribers, reported that fuel is accumulating in the
Speaker 14: hold and the sub is at risk of explosion. The
Speaker 14: crew may have no choice but to pump out the
Speaker 14: hold directly into the sea. The report added it read Novorossisk,
Speaker 14: currently on combat duty in the Mediterranean Sea, is experiencing
Speaker 14: serious technical problems due to damage in the fuel system.
Speaker 14: Fuel is leaking directly into the hold. There are no
Speaker 14: spare parts for repairs or qualified specialists on the submarine,
Speaker 14: and the crew is unable to fix the malfunctions. The
Speaker 14: serious accident has caused other problems as well. The accumulated
Speaker 14: fuel in the hold is an explosive hazard. The source
Speaker 14: believes the crew has no choice but to start pumping
Speaker 14: out the hold directly into the sea. The channel, which
Speaker 14: specializes in leaks from the Russian security services and law enforcement,
Speaker 14: gave no further details on the incident.
Speaker 9: The incident is.
Speaker 14: A chilling echo of the Course submarine disaster, which sank
Speaker 14: after exploding in an accident on August twelfth, two thousand
Speaker 14: in the Barren Sea.
Speaker 1: We talked about that situation with that Russian submarine. I
Speaker 1: want to say just a couple of weeks ago as
Speaker 1: a matter of fact, but either way it goes. So,
Speaker 1: this submarine was on combat duty quote unquote in the
Speaker 1: Mediterranean Sea and when this took place. Per maritime international law,
Speaker 1: all countries that received the SOA signal have to buy
Speaker 1: obligation of maritime law have to help if there is
Speaker 1: a ship or some sort of a vessel in need
Speaker 1: like this. So I think it's actually kind of a
Speaker 1: cool thing that NATO nations are still willing to help
Speaker 1: a Russian sub if they come in some sort of
Speaker 1: a situation. But let's read more about it here. Russia.
Speaker 1: This is from the Economic Times. The Russian attack submarine
Speaker 1: suffered serious malfunctions at risk of explosion in the Mediterranean.
Speaker 1: The Russian Kilo class diesel electric attack submarine no novarusic. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I don't speak. The Russian part of Russia's Black Sea
Speaker 1: fleet and currently on combat duty in the Mediterranean Sea,
Speaker 1: is reportedly facing a severe technical malfunction involving a fuel
Speaker 1: leak that has created a significant explosion risk. The two
Speaker 1: hundred and forty two foot submarine manned by a crew
Speaker 1: of fifty two was forced above water near the Strait
Speaker 1: of Gibraltar recently after technical issues forced it above water.
Speaker 1: Reports from the Sun indicate damage of the vessel's fuel
Speaker 1: system that caused the fuel to leak directly into the hold,
Speaker 1: accumulating and creating a volatile situation inside the sub. Now
Speaker 1: the television channel a lot of letters there, known for
Speaker 1: its insider information from Russian security and law enforcement agencies
Speaker 1: warned that the crew's only option maybe to pump the
Speaker 1: accumulating fuel directly into the Mediterranean Sea to prevent a
Speaker 1: catastrophic explosion. The sub is known to have the capability
Speaker 1: of carrying a new your capable caliber cruise missile, representing
Speaker 1: a critical component of the Black Sea Fleet's offensive capabilities.
Speaker 1: The submarine can remain submerged for forty five days, underscoring
Speaker 1: its strategic value only forty five days. I mean, all right,
Speaker 1: I'm sure that Russia also has some subs that are
Speaker 1: capable of doing like longer stints. But all right, that's
Speaker 1: a thing, I guess. I mean, they're saying that it's
Speaker 1: a diesel electric sub. It's not a nuclear powered sub
Speaker 1: They're saying that it's capable of carrying the caliber missiles.
Speaker 1: So yeah, okay, nuclear sub doesn't mean nuclear powered on
Speaker 1: this one. Fair enough. The incident draws unnerving parallels to
Speaker 1: the two thousand Kursk submarine disaster, where faulty torpedo propulsion
Speaker 1: led to explosions that sank the Oscar two class submarine
Speaker 1: and killed one hundred and eighteen sailors aboard. Moving on,
Speaker 1: it says British Royal Navy officials have closely monitored the sub,
Speaker 1: which was involved in regional deployments, including earlier patrols through
Speaker 1: the English Channel. Additional region tensions accompanying the submarine's technical woes.
Speaker 1: A Ukrainian drone strike recently targeted the Russian port city
Speaker 1: of Novorosisk, killing two and prompting a state of emergency declaration. However,
Speaker 1: port infrastructure remained largely intact and oil and grain exports
Speaker 1: continue with minimal disruption. The sub shares its class with
Speaker 1: the rostov On Dawn submarine, reportedly destroyed by Ukrainian forces
Speaker 1: in August of twenty twenty four. Both submarines serve as
Speaker 1: key assets with Russia's nuclear capable submarine fleet. Some just
Speaker 1: wanted to bring this up as far as the international
Speaker 1: news is concerned, Russian submarine had some issues they surfaced.
Speaker 1: The crew is fine. Don't know how long it's going
Speaker 1: to take for them to actually get this fixed, especially
Speaker 1: as they are ported in a NATO country and NATO
Speaker 1: has all the kind of sanctions and barriers between anything
Speaker 1: dealing with Russia. Now that being said, the Russian naval
Speaker 1: base in Syria right now, I would believe would be
Speaker 1: where this sub would be trying to get back to
Speaker 1: to get the repairs made. Perhaps Russia will be able
Speaker 1: to send out another boat to give this one a
Speaker 1: tow to bring it back to the port and it
Speaker 1: could be you know, fixed in a timely manner. I
Speaker 1: don't know. I do know that this is a pretty
Speaker 1: major blow to the Russian naval assets in this region
Speaker 1: by a long shot. Moving on to the next course
Speaker 1: of action. Oh, y'all, y'all, I wish this was a joke.
Speaker 1: I wish this was a joke. As we're talking about
Speaker 1: the English that we're willing to help Russia in their
Speaker 1: time of need. England has turmoil right now between their
Speaker 1: Muslim refugee inhabitants and their English born and bred inhabitants.
Speaker 1: So now they are trying to outlaw first cousin marriages.
Speaker 1: You heard me right. England has had first cousin marriages
Speaker 1: legal precedent since nineteen forty, but they recently tried enacting
Speaker 1: a law to make them illegal. You have two sides
Speaker 1: of Parliament right now. Half of them are saying that
Speaker 1: this is obviously what needs to happen, because marrying and
Speaker 1: having children with your first cousin could lead to some
Speaker 1: serious birth defects and like, why are we even having
Speaker 1: this conversation. The other half is saying that removing this
Speaker 1: would be morally reprehensible and racist, ambigoted towards the Muslim
Speaker 1: population that's currently living in England, because this is a
Speaker 1: thing that they do so heavily and prevalently. And if
Speaker 1: you think that I am speaking on behalf of myself here,
Speaker 1: let's listen to the MPs discuss it themselves. Check this out.
Speaker 15: A ban on first cousin marriages could come into place
Speaker 15: in the UK. Conservative MP Richard Holden called for the
Speaker 15: ban in Parliament today, saying children of first cousins were
Speaker 15: at greater risk of birth defects, but independent MP Ikuba
Speaker 15: Muhammad said, instead of stigmatizing those in because of marriages,
Speaker 15: there should be further education for people from communities where
Speaker 15: these marriages are accepted. A band on first.
Speaker 1: Yes, yes, Ikbon Mohammad has taken to the stand and said, no,
Speaker 1: you cannot outlaw first cousin marriage. This is all right
Speaker 1: by HeLa and uh yeah, it's it's it's that wild.
Speaker 1: It's literally that wild. Sam, I see your hand raise,
Speaker 1: go ahead. I'm afraid of what you're about to say,
Speaker 1: by the way, but please weigh in.
Speaker 4: I'm sorry.
Speaker 5: When I first heard this, because I heard this earlier today,
Speaker 5: the first thing I thought my mind was damp down,
Speaker 5: damp now.
Speaker 4: And then I was like, no, I can't even do that.
Speaker 4: That's that's disrespecting Leonard Skinner. How dare I can't do that?
Speaker 4: That's a sin?
Speaker 1: How about ding ding ding ding?
Speaker 4: I got a banjo. I don't know the motherfucker yet,
Speaker 4: but I got a banjo.
Speaker 5: Now.
Speaker 7: The massed up thing is the the first pick image
Speaker 7: I after that I pictured was Hassan and his uncle
Speaker 7: Chank because uh, Hassan's grandparents are first cousins, and that's
Speaker 7: why he looked.
Speaker 4: That's probably why he so fucking retarded.
Speaker 1: It could be, honestly, And then what's the what's her name,
Speaker 1: she's the congresswoman oman Omar. Yeah, that she married brother
Speaker 1: to get America, Yeah, to get past this to the
Speaker 1: United States. She married her brother. And people sidestep that
Speaker 1: this is a real thing in that culture and this
Speaker 1: is a problem.
Speaker 4: This is a real question, dude.
Speaker 5: They also you gotta keep in mind that there's there
Speaker 5: is that there is laws here, thank god, But they
Speaker 5: this is the same groups of people that that that
Speaker 5: they believe. Besides marying six year old, you can have
Speaker 5: relations with a goat and be okay.
Speaker 1: Now, it depends on country to country and culture to culture.
Speaker 1: But if we are going to look at the stats
Speaker 1: and figures, yes, this is a thing that people of
Speaker 1: a certain religious faith deemed to be acceptable.
Speaker 5: But sure enough, I was shown a video phone like
Speaker 5: my my.
Speaker 4: Staff in c O. Cool guy.
Speaker 5: Oh, he showed me a video that he personally took
Speaker 5: when he was looking at on a bail of a
Speaker 5: rifle at night with the fucking but it ain't the
Speaker 5: heat sources I r Yeah, yeah, I ain't good with
Speaker 5: the I ain't good with.
Speaker 16: The he and I legitimate he showed the entire squad
Speaker 16: like the tire of male side and I was just like,
Speaker 16: why didn't you shoot the goat and to put the
Speaker 16: goat out of it?
Speaker 4: Because you can't hear it? Belton and all, hey you do.
Speaker 1: You got to pay them like two thousand American dollars.
Speaker 1: It's a thing, I know, I know, because you're taking
Speaker 1: away food from their table.
Speaker 4: They're gonna fuck it, then gut it, then eat it.
Speaker 1: I guess it makes them eat more tender big dog.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I don't know. What I will say
Speaker 1: is as far as this culture quote unquote, there's a
Speaker 1: reason why if anybody has ever seen videos of American
Speaker 1: troops in Afghanistan trying to train the UH the AA,
Speaker 1: and these dudes were like incapable of doing jumping jacks.
Speaker 1: There's a reason because when you do this for as
Speaker 1: long as they have been for thousands of years, just
Speaker 1: kind of cut off from the rest of the world,
Speaker 1: you'll get some inbreeding problems. This is this is a
Speaker 1: real thing. Now, before we get into it, I should
Speaker 1: say it is illegal in England for you to marry
Speaker 1: your parents, your aunts or uncles and your brothers and
Speaker 1: sisters like that. Is illegal, but first cousins it is okay, Tony,
Speaker 1: go ahead, Yeah, I.
Speaker 2: Got three thoughts on this. I've brought up my old
Speaker 2: Pakistani co worker in the past and I asked him
Speaker 2: how he met his wife one time. He said it
Speaker 2: was a family reunion. I didn't really know how to
Speaker 2: continue the conversation after that. I'm pretty sure they were
Speaker 2: cousins of some guy. I'm sure maybe people don't know this,
Speaker 2: but Frederick the Great and Albert Einstein were both the
Speaker 2: product of first cousin marriages, So I guess sometimes the
Speaker 2: offspring are pretty successful.
Speaker 1: There's examples of that. The rothschilds, they are not allowed
Speaker 1: to marry outside of their family. They have to marry
Speaker 1: their second cousins. That's how they've kept the wealth in
Speaker 1: the family bloodlines as far as they have. And to
Speaker 1: your point, there's all kinds of examples of royalty marrying
Speaker 1: their family members. Since I'm ancient Egypt even so, like
Speaker 1: that's not unprecedented, but that doesn't make it okay, And
Speaker 1: you could see all of the inherent problems, Like if
Speaker 1: we're talking about ancient Egypt, King Todd had a club
Speaker 1: foot hip dysplasia and a cleft lip because he was
Speaker 1: so inbred. Let's not even talk about the Habsburg jaw,
Speaker 1: like there's there's all of these things.
Speaker 5: But continue, that's the gentleman, not the Spanish, because there's
Speaker 5: two lines of the Hapspogs.
Speaker 4: Just to clarify.
Speaker 1: Fair fair, But anyway, Tony, you had another thought.
Speaker 2: One more thing. Uh, the there used to be a
Speaker 2: lot of incests throughout Europe and Pagan Europe, and the
Speaker 2: Catholic Church really tried to squash it. In the in
Speaker 2: the eleventh century, there was the Council of Verona, and
Speaker 2: it tried to completely outlaw ancestor worship, and it also
Speaker 2: wouldn't let you marry anybody closer than your sixth cousin.
Speaker 2: Sixth is like really hard to track down that right now,
Speaker 2: the rule is third degree is the limit. Yeah, you
Speaker 2: can do fourth degree and because that means you have
Speaker 2: the same great great great grandparent or something like that.
Speaker 1: But the cousins, Yeah, there's no birth defects that will
Speaker 1: happen with the child if you're marrying your third cousin.
Speaker 1: Genetically speaking, the rule is broken at that point.
Speaker 2: But even still, man, yeah, he got like twelve point
Speaker 2: five percent of your DNN Common or something. But they
Speaker 2: were really trying to break the clan power structure of
Speaker 2: Europe at the time where there was lots of incest,
Speaker 2: and the Catholic Church did break that and we've not
Speaker 2: gone back to that luckily. That's all I got.
Speaker 1: But England did. England absolutely did. And like I said,
Speaker 1: it has been the law of the land in England
Speaker 1: to like marrying your first cousin is okay since nineteen
Speaker 1: forty five. So World War two ends and England's like,
Speaker 1: you know, we need to do to help repopulate this island.
Speaker 1: You start hooking up with our cousins. It's like wait, wait, bro,
Speaker 1: you're you're across the English Channel from the rest of Europe.
Speaker 1: Like you don't have to look that far at all,
Speaker 1: but okay, go ahead, Sam.
Speaker 4: Sorry.
Speaker 5: Also, apparently in Alabama you can marry a second cousin.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And they actually faced some litigation issues a couple
Speaker 1: of years ago when they tried to make bality illegal
Speaker 1: there wastates. Well, in Alabama, it was legal up until
Speaker 1: very very recently. Out of seventeen votes of seventeen voters
Speaker 1: that were needed to make this happen, nine of them
Speaker 1: voted to keep be steality on the books. That's that's
Speaker 1: I don't know to what animal that it was, I
Speaker 1: don't I don't know, I don't know. I didn't look
Speaker 1: any deeper because at that point it's like Bama just
Speaker 1: be doing Bama shit, you know, and it's.
Speaker 4: It's crazy football.
Speaker 1: No, it's because most of their team wasn't born and
Speaker 1: raised in Alabama. That's what it is. But anyway, anyway,
Speaker 1: let's get into the controversial report on quote unquote benefits
Speaker 1: of first cousin marriage, pulled amid fierce backlash. A surprisingly
Speaker 1: common act with this that within some families, has become
Speaker 1: the center of national discourse, with calls to ban couples
Speaker 1: doing it in the future. We talked about this a
Speaker 1: moment ago year. The MP's outlined opposition calls to band
Speaker 1: first cousin marriage in the UK. Let's go ahead and
Speaker 1: listen to the some of the discourse.
Speaker 17: I believe to bring in the bell Bell Muhammad, thank you,
Speaker 17: mister speaker. As the right honorable Member for Basildon and
Speaker 17: Billaricky states there are documented health risks and marriage, and
Speaker 17: I agree this is an issue. There is this is
Speaker 17: an issue that needs greater awareness on virginity testing, forced marriages,
Speaker 17: and the freedom of women must be force marriage must
Speaker 17: be prevented, and the freedom of women must be protected
Speaker 17: at all times.
Speaker 1: Y'all realize he almost messed up. The freedom of women
Speaker 1: must be prevent I mean protected. You heard them, You
Speaker 1: heard them continuing.
Speaker 17: However, the way to address this is not to empower
Speaker 17: the state to ban adults from marrying each other, not
Speaker 17: least because I don't think it would be effective or enforceable. Instead,
Speaker 17: the matter needs to be approached as a health awareness
Speaker 17: issue and a cultural issue where women are being forced
Speaker 17: against their will to undergo marriage. In doing so, it
Speaker 17: is important to recognize for many people this is a
Speaker 17: highly sensitive issue and in discussing it which you try
Speaker 17: to step into the shoes of those who perhaps are
Speaker 17: not from the same culture as ours to better understand
Speaker 17: why the practice continues to be so widespread. An estimated
Speaker 17: thirty five to fifty percent of all Sub Saharan African
Speaker 17: populations either prefer or accept cousin marriages, and it is
Speaker 17: extremely common in the Middle East and in South Asia.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so that was your boy. That was a guy
Speaker 1: who thinks that they need to keep it on the
Speaker 1: books because to do otherwise would empower the state, and
Speaker 1: you're taking freedom away from women and by outlawing first
Speaker 1: cousin marriage. And I love how he said our culture
Speaker 1: as in, it's crazy that he counts himself as a
Speaker 1: Yeah anyway, okay. A major health authority has pulled in
Speaker 1: recent reports citing the quote unquote benefits of first cousin
Speaker 1: marriage after it sparked widespread outrage. The UK's National Health
Speaker 1: Service came under fire after publishing guidance that experts claim
Speaker 1: promoted inter family unions despite well documented concerns about the
Speaker 1: increased risks of birth effects. Research research cited in the
Speaker 1: articles titled should the UK Government ban first cousin marriage
Speaker 1: describes various potential benefits of marrying first cousins, including stronger
Speaker 1: extended family supports systems and economic advantages.
Speaker 11: Wow.
Speaker 1: But many were quick to point out the report published
Speaker 1: in NHS England's Genomics Genomics Genomics Education program last week
Speaker 1: failed to properly assess the risk associated with having children
Speaker 1: with a once removed relative. So we have a quick
Speaker 1: clip here. It says I just married my first cousin
Speaker 1: and I don't know what group these people would be,
Speaker 1: but just judging I don't know this for a fact,
Speaker 1: but just judging by the look and the apparel, I'm
Speaker 1: just going to guesstimate that these are gypsies. I don't
Speaker 1: know that, but let's check it out. This is a
Speaker 1: huge wedding that featured seventy three best men and seven bridesmaids.
Speaker 1: Let's check it out.
Speaker 18: Both families are out in force to celebrate tomorrow's wedding
Speaker 18: between Chantelle and Jim, her first cousin. But as well
Speaker 18: as throwing a party, the bride's family will often keep
Speaker 18: with another costly traveler tradition.
Speaker 1: In the olden days, the bride's father and mother had.
Speaker 11: To pay all the money to the groom's perils and
Speaker 11: it was called a tower rate.
Speaker 16: And there are tradition in the traveling community in well
Speaker 16: in Rakil anyway, whenever other people have still held on
Speaker 16: to the exposition, so the fouaries can be fairly substantial.
Speaker 1: Now I can't say for Deafinis.
Speaker 19: From when I heard they could.
Speaker 17: Range emyging between fifty to one hundred and twenty.
Speaker 1: Thousands, and I was correct. The traveler slash gypsy community
Speaker 1: would be the wedding that that was first cousins and
Speaker 1: that's just a tradition. In certain cultures, first cousins are
Speaker 1: determined as a relative who is the child of a
Speaker 1: parent's sibling. They also share a set of grandparents. In Australia,
Speaker 1: marrying a cousin is generally legal under the Federal Marriage
Speaker 1: Act of nineteen sixty one, as there is no specific
Speaker 1: prohibitions against it. Gotta say this checks out. Australia is
Speaker 1: still a part of the British Commonwealth, so you know. Anyway.
Speaker 1: The UK and other countries across Europe take a similar
Speaker 1: legal stance, though the Act is becoming increasingly scrutinized, particularly
Speaker 1: by doctors who warned that children of firstborn cousins are
Speaker 1: more likely to experience an array of health problems. The
Speaker 1: BBC reports, Yeah, that's not even a disputable fact. That's
Speaker 1: a disputable point. That's a documented fact, but all right,
Speaker 1: In every pregnancy there is a two to three percent
Speaker 1: risk that a child from two unrelated people will have
Speaker 1: a birth defect or disability. However, the risk will double
Speaker 1: to about five to six percent when the parents are
Speaker 1: first cousins. In western countries, the practice is now widely
Speaker 1: deemed taboo, but in other cultures such as the Middle East,
Speaker 1: Africa and Asia. It is still a common occurrence. Well,
Speaker 1: we're not talking about those places, are we anyway, We're
Speaker 1: talking about the West. Cultures that practice and encourage first
Speaker 1: cousin relationships have also been linked to the oppression of
Speaker 1: women in the since de deleted excuse me, yeah. In
Speaker 1: the sense deleted NHS article, it was explained that first
Speaker 1: cousin marriages have been legal in the UK since the
Speaker 1: fifteen hundreds, when King Henry the Eighth married Catherine Howard,
Speaker 1: his ex wife's cousin. That's different. You're marrying the cousin
Speaker 1: of your ex wife. That is not. Uh wow, okay anyway,
Speaker 1: and also noted that the inner family marriages have long
Speaker 1: been subject of scientific discussion due to the increased risk
Speaker 1: risk of inherited diseases, and discussed other external factors like
Speaker 1: alcohol use during pregnancy, smoking, and the age of the parents. Yeah, yeah, no,
Speaker 1: no shit. The report pointed out that none of these
Speaker 1: factors are banned in the UK, but they should be.
Speaker 1: That's the point here. Doctor Patrick Nash, an expert on
Speaker 1: religious law and director of the Pharaoh's Foundation Social Science
Speaker 1: research group in Oxford, called the guidance truly dismaying cousin
Speaker 1: marriage is incests, plain and simple, and needs to be
Speaker 1: banned with the utmost urgency. There is no quote unquote
Speaker 1: balance to be struck between the cultural lifestyle choice and
Speaker 1: the severe public health implications it occurs or incurs. He
Speaker 1: told The Telegraph. This official article is deep, deeply misleading
Speaker 1: and should be retracted with an apology so the public
Speaker 1: is not misled by omission or have truths. The NHS
Speaker 1: has since removed the report from its website in response
Speaker 1: to the backlash, after earlier defending its research. The article,
Speaker 1: published on the website of the Genomics Education Program, is
Speaker 1: a summary of existing scientific research and the public policy debate.
Speaker 1: A spokesperson for the National Health Authority said it is
Speaker 1: not expressing an nhsview. It is estimated that more than
Speaker 1: ten percent of all marriages worldwide are between first or
Speaker 1: second cousins. Those stats are difficult to accurately record since
Speaker 1: such marriages have long been an underground phenomenon, largely due
Speaker 1: to incest related stigma. Again, no shit. From October first,
Speaker 1: Connecticut has been knowingly marrying a first cousin. According to
Speaker 1: the US SUN, Currently twenty four US states prohibited and
Speaker 1: eight states allow it only under specific conditions. Those eight
Speaker 1: states are Illinois, Arizona, Indiana, Maine, Minnesota, Tennessee, Utah, and Wisconsin.
Speaker 1: Just so we're clear, Norway banned cousin marriages in twenty
Speaker 1: twenty three, and a planned ban is set to take
Speaker 1: place in Sweden from the mid of middle of twenty
Speaker 1: twenty six. They have a couple of other pictures here
Speaker 1: where it's how many months have you guys been together?
Speaker 1: Only two months? As we had to keep our relationship
Speaker 1: quiet because we are cousins. Like this, This is a
Speaker 1: thing that these people are proud of. Yeah, here we go,
Speaker 1: it continues. There are now similar calls for the UK
Speaker 1: to follow suit, with the Conservative Party recently proposing a
Speaker 1: bill that would see an end too cousin marriages amid
Speaker 1: growing public health concerns. However, God and always however, there
Speaker 1: are some that argue that the legislation would be discriminatory
Speaker 1: and culturally insensitive, with experts claiming education is way better,
Speaker 1: a better way of dealing with the declining trend. In
Speaker 1: the midst of the public debate, Faz, a woman from
Speaker 1: Grimsby in the portion of England, went public with her
Speaker 1: relationship with a family member, Ania, who is eighteen.
Speaker 11: Wow.
Speaker 1: But the couple have now found themselves at the heart
Speaker 1: of a barrage of abuse from mean trolls, who have
Speaker 1: described their story as something from the eighteen hundreds. Fair enough.
Speaker 1: Posting on social media, Faz or Faz answer their question
Speaker 1: about how long the pair whose parents or siblings have
Speaker 1: been together. That's the two that we see here. They
Speaker 1: have been together only two months officially because they had
Speaker 1: to keep their relationship secret because their cousins.
Speaker 20: Wow.
Speaker 1: Social media users were gobsmacked by the fact that the
Speaker 1: couples are related and declaring it wild and shocking. In
Speaker 1: the comments, he said, they are keeping it in the
Speaker 1: family hashtag relationship goals. So that's what's going on in
Speaker 1: the English House of Commons right now. They are debating
Speaker 1: if they should outlaw outlaw first cousin marriages. It's uh,
Speaker 1: it's pretty insane to me, but anyway.
Speaker 21: I think that the the incest thing is disgusting, but
Speaker 21: it's kind of uh funny in a way because the
Speaker 21: entire British fucking royal line from Britain to all the
Speaker 21: way to Russia was all just one big ass.
Speaker 4: Extended family that really turns into a bush.
Speaker 1: I mean pretty much. That's what war war was about, right,
Speaker 1: it was.
Speaker 22: Yeah, it was so the Nicholas, Uh George, I don't
Speaker 22: want to say his name is George Nicholas.
Speaker 1: Huh you're talking.
Speaker 23: No, I'm talking about, Yeah, the the one that he
Speaker 23: and his family ask you.
Speaker 1: But he was a child, he's uh.
Speaker 24: Oh it was hell uh the TiSER and uh all uh,
Speaker 24: mister money bags and the English king.
Speaker 1: They're all cousins.
Speaker 23: They would play chess and everything and the middle uh
Speaker 23: Winhelm just never he never liked losing. And they so
Speaker 23: instead of them playing with chess as I got older,
Speaker 23: they started playing with men's lives.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and that's that also ties into why Germany got
Speaker 1: such bad the bad end of the stick as far
Speaker 1: as the end of World War One, because you know,
Speaker 1: it started off in Austria between Austria and Serbia, the
Speaker 1: assassination that took place of Archid Ferdinand, and then Germany,
Speaker 1: because of their alliances, sided with Austria because they had
Speaker 1: treaties cool cool. All these other countries aligned themselves as
Speaker 1: their treaties dictated cool. When it all came down and
Speaker 1: Germany lost the war, nobody gained anything. No, no territory
Speaker 1: was gained by any country on some real scales. Yeah,
Speaker 1: the divided maps around the world to break up colonies
Speaker 1: and stuff. But what I mean is nobody could say, ah,
Speaker 1: we won this, this and this from this encounter. Basically
Speaker 1: everybody just had to acknowledge that they just killed all
Speaker 1: of these dudes for the hell of it, and essentially
Speaker 1: they just like, well, we have to do something because
Speaker 1: the people are going to be pissed if we don't
Speaker 1: have anything to show for this war. So they just
Speaker 1: threw all of the financial burden onto Germany and to
Speaker 1: a level that Germany could have literally never paid that back.
Speaker 1: If World War iiO wouldn't have happened, Okay, if Hitler
Speaker 1: wouldn't have come through and all these things, Germany would
Speaker 1: still be paying the war reparations from World War One
Speaker 1: like to this day in twenty twenty five. So that's
Speaker 1: why Germany was so destitute, and why Hitler was seen
Speaker 1: as the hero who was trying to bring Germany back
Speaker 1: to its glory days and all these things. But yeah,
Speaker 1: it was absolutely a slugfest between cousins, and that's why
Speaker 1: all of Europe was the Kingdom of dot dot before
Speaker 1: World War One and afterwards it was the nation of
Speaker 1: dot dot dot and why then it became constitutional republics
Speaker 1: or uh some sort of a hybrid like you have
Speaker 1: in England and things like that. But anyway, so yeah.
Speaker 25: My question is, uh maji, I'm from Georgia, so my
Speaker 25: geography is bump fucked at best. Okay, it wasn't like
Speaker 25: between Germany and everything. Was that Germania or that punchier
Speaker 25: in Germany? But where was Prussia at In all? This
Speaker 25: wasn't that Germany.
Speaker 1: So Prussia was what we would now call Germany. Although
Speaker 1: it's depending on which you're talking about. That yeah, they
Speaker 1: would say that, but I mean, you gotta keep in mind,
Speaker 1: it depends on which section of time, right, Like, uh,
Speaker 1: Lithuania Poland alliance was a massive chunk of northern Europe
Speaker 1: for a very very long time. Then over time they
Speaker 1: got taken bit by bit by their neighbors. Prussia was
Speaker 1: a massive empire at one point in time of Europe
Speaker 1: and then they got broken down to kind of a
Speaker 1: little bit of Germany, a little bit of Austria kind
Speaker 1: of thing. Ottoman Empire came in with the Austria Hungary
Speaker 1: conversation so it got subdivided before this, But Prussia was
Speaker 1: the predecessor to Germany. That's an oversimplification, but that's kind
Speaker 1: of the for the for the conversation we're having here.
Speaker 1: That's the best way that I could put it.
Speaker 5: I was just double jacking, yeah, because my times doesn't
Speaker 5: always match up.
Speaker 1: So if we were talking in like the seventeen hundreds
Speaker 1: and even into the mid eighteen hundreds, it would have
Speaker 1: been Prussia. That's the best way that I could put that.
Speaker 1: So anyway, all right, now moving on to the next
Speaker 1: topic of discussion for this evening. Now we've gotten the
Speaker 1: incest talk out of the way. England be wildin' uh.
Speaker 1: This is from Army Recognition dot Com. The US doubles
Speaker 1: Estonia's hi Mar's artillery to twelve amid growing tensions between
Speaker 1: Russia and NATO. Again. This article was released two day
Speaker 1: as of time of recording. The United States has moved
Speaker 1: to expand in Estonia's penning Himar package, doubling launch to
Speaker 1: twelve and vastly increasing adam at attackums. Yeah, that's how
Speaker 1: they're pronouncing it, attack ems and Gimmler's stocks. Kiev Post
Speaker 1: reports the surge in long range precision munitions strengthens NATO's
Speaker 1: eastern flank and raises the turrents amid rising Russian military
Speaker 1: pressure around the Ballic region. And this does come amid
Speaker 1: the the air intrusion of Russian jets over Estonia, which
Speaker 1: didn't happen once or twice. Six times this year Russia
Speaker 1: has invaded Estonia's airspace. They invaded Poland's airspace the first time.
Speaker 1: It was with drones and it could have been seen
Speaker 1: as an accident. They got blown off core, something happened
Speaker 1: with the glitch in the system, no big deal. Then
Speaker 1: they continued to do it, and then last week Russia
Speaker 1: invaded United States air space with a bomber over Alaska.
Speaker 1: It's it's crazy. I think that Russia is really trying
Speaker 1: to test limits to see what the responses would be
Speaker 1: from NATO countries. They're trying to like soft launch something.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying that they are about to start launching
Speaker 1: an invasion into other countries. I don't think they have
Speaker 1: the facilities for this. I really don't think they have
Speaker 1: the capabilities to launch another warfront somewhere. But they are
Speaker 1: testing things right now and I'm not sure if this
Speaker 1: is them saber rattling or if this is them showing
Speaker 1: incompetence or if this is them just trying to have audacity,
Speaker 1: I don't know, but anyway. On October first, twenty twenty five,
Speaker 1: Kiev Post reported that the United States has quietly moved
Speaker 1: to expand Estonia's penning HIMAR package, like I said, increasing
Speaker 1: the number of M one four to two launchers and
Speaker 1: enlarging stocks of long range attack them's and Gimmler's rockets.
Speaker 1: The development comes amid heightened Russian military pressure around the
Speaker 1: Baltic region and Tellen's drive to harden deterrence with precision
Speaker 1: strike options that can hold critical targets at risk well
Speaker 1: beyond Estonia's borders. The centerpiece of the package is the
Speaker 1: high MARS right, that is, the M one four to
Speaker 1: two High Mobility Artillery Rocket System, a wheeled launcher that
Speaker 1: can fire both six round pods of guided rockets and
Speaker 1: single missile pods of attack THEMS, giving a small force
Speaker 1: the ability to shift from saturation fires to pinpoint deep
Speaker 1: strikes within minutes. Estonia previously pursued six launchers. The new
Speaker 1: reporting points to doubling of combat power, as a far deeper,
Speaker 1: magazine sized for sustained operations rather than symbolic presence. Continuing
Speaker 1: on here, at the equipment level, High Mars is built
Speaker 1: on a medium tactical truck chassis carrying one modular pod
Speaker 1: and a fully digital fire control system tied to GPS
Speaker 1: and inter inertial navigation. Yeah, the system is pretty sick
Speaker 1: if anybody has looked up how High Mars are actually guided.
Speaker 1: They can be guided from satellites, that is a thing
Speaker 1: that can take place, but they also can be guided
Speaker 1: just off of GPS coordinates, and they have three gyroscopic
Speaker 1: lasers basically inside of them that the rocket knows where
Speaker 1: it is because it knows where it isn't that it's
Speaker 1: the overarching theme of it. They do not require satellites
Speaker 1: in any way, shape or form to accurately launch and
Speaker 1: get good effect on effects on target. They are groundbreaking
Speaker 1: as far as the technology goes on the high More systems.
Speaker 1: But anyway, the system's hallmark is speed of action. Crews
Speaker 1: can arrive in a hide align, the launchers transit a
Speaker 1: fire mission ripple, rockets and displays before enemy sensors and
Speaker 1: counter battery systems. Q A response transportability, that's a word
Speaker 1: matters for the Baltic theater. High Mars fits inside a
Speaker 1: C one thirty for rapid reinforcements, while road mobility allows
Speaker 1: dispersal across Estonia's forested road network and pre surveyed firing points.
Speaker 1: The launcher software accepts full MLRS family of munitions, enabling
Speaker 1: Estonia to mix effects from unitary high explosive warheads for
Speaker 1: point targets, to alternative warheads for area suppression against troop
Speaker 1: concentrations and so skin vehicles. They go in more talking
Speaker 1: about the capabilities of these things, but I just thought
Speaker 1: it was worth mentioning that America is doubling Estonia's firepower
Speaker 1: when it comes to this. Now this to be said,
Speaker 1: we are going to take now a shift away from
Speaker 1: the foreign conversations and speak about what is going on
Speaker 1: in America. I'm not sure if this has anything to
Speaker 1: do with Russia. I'm not sure if this has to
Speaker 1: do with China, Iran, Israel, whatever. I don't know, but
Speaker 1: I am happy to report that Pete Hegseth, our Secretary
Speaker 1: of War, has absolutely taken the reins back. He has said,
Speaker 1: and I quote, that they are going to make it
Speaker 1: to where all combat roles must be from people that
Speaker 1: can meet the highest level of male physical fitness. He
Speaker 1: is taking away fat bodies from even the upper echelon
Speaker 1: of military members. Every military member from the four star
Speaker 1: generals all the way down to the lowliest of privates
Speaker 1: are going to have to be height and weight measured
Speaker 1: twice a year, and they are going to have two
Speaker 1: physical fitness tests every year. Now, the Marine Corps has
Speaker 1: already been doing something like this. For those that don't know,
Speaker 1: the Marine Corps is something called a PFT and a CFT.
Speaker 1: The PFT is the Physical Fitness test. The CFT is
Speaker 1: the combat fitness test. One of them consists of a
Speaker 1: three mile run, pull ups and crunches. Okay, the other
Speaker 1: one consists of a half mile run, a AMMO can lift, crunches,
Speaker 1: and a maneuver under fire. It's not an obstacle course,
Speaker 1: but it is a timed event where you have to
Speaker 1: do some maneuvers. You have to fireman carry a person,
Speaker 1: buddy drag a person. There is a grenade throw component
Speaker 1: of it, and that's for score. It's not an actual grenade,
Speaker 1: it's a dumb and grenade. But beside the point, the
Speaker 1: Marine Corps been implementing this for years and years and years.
Speaker 1: He is now saying that this is military wide, not
Speaker 1: just Army, not just Marine Corps. The base force is
Speaker 1: going to be required to conduct these types of things.
Speaker 1: I have a quick clip of some of the highlights
Speaker 1: of what he said, and we're going to talk about
Speaker 1: it more in depth. It is a it is a
Speaker 1: great time to be joining the military right now. Let's
Speaker 1: get into it today.
Speaker 26: At my direction, we are also adding a combat field
Speaker 26: test for combat arms units that must be executable in
Speaker 26: any environment, at any time and with combat equipment. These
Speaker 26: tests that look familiar. They'll resemble the Army Expert Physical
Speaker 26: Fitness Assessment or the Marine Corps Combat Fitness Test. I'm
Speaker 26: also directing that warfighters in combat jobs.
Speaker 4: Execute their Service Fitness.
Speaker 26: Test at a gender neutral age normed male standard scored
Speaker 26: above seventy percent. It all starts with physical fitness and appearance.
Speaker 1: If the Secretary of.
Speaker 26: War can do regular hard PT, so can every member
Speaker 26: of our joint force. Frankly, it's tiring to look out
Speaker 26: at combat formations, or really any formation and see fat troops. Likewise,
Speaker 26: it's completely unacceptable to see fat generals and admirals in
Speaker 26: the halls of the Pentagon and leading commands around the country,
Speaker 26: in the world.
Speaker 1: It's a bad look. I have to agree with every
Speaker 1: single thing he just said. Let's keep going. It is
Speaker 1: bad and it's not who we are.
Speaker 26: Also today, at my direction, every warrior across our joint
Speaker 26: Force is required to do pt every duty day should
Speaker 26: be common SATs. I mean most units do that already,
Speaker 26: but we're codifying and we're not talking like hot yoga
Speaker 26: and stretching.
Speaker 1: Real hard PTE.
Speaker 26: There's either as a unit or as an individual at
Speaker 26: every level, from the joint chiefs to everyone in this
Speaker 26: room to the youngest private leaders set the standard, and
Speaker 26: so many of you do this already.
Speaker 1: Yes, there is no more kickball as your form of
Speaker 1: pt There's no more going out and doing some hot
Speaker 1: yoga as your form of physical training. No, we're talking
Speaker 1: about actually getting out there and moving some iron, getting
Speaker 1: out there and really doing rock marches and flak runs
Speaker 1: and things like this. Yes, I am here for this bullshit.
Speaker 26: Let's go active, guard and reserve. This also means grooming standards.
Speaker 26: No more beards, long hair, superficial individual expression. We're gonna
Speaker 26: cut our hair, shave our beards, and adhere to standards
Speaker 26: because it's like the broken windows.
Speaker 11: Theory of policing.
Speaker 26: It's like when you let the small stuff go, the
Speaker 26: big stuff eventually goes, so you have to address the
Speaker 26: small stuff. This is on duty in the field and
Speaker 26: in the rear. If you want a beard, you can
Speaker 26: join special forces.
Speaker 1: If not, then shave.
Speaker 26: We don't have a military full of Nordic pagans, but
Speaker 26: unfortunately we have had leaders who either refuse to call
Speaker 26: bs and enforced standards, or leaders who felt like they
Speaker 26: were not allowed to standards.
Speaker 1: Yes, this is true. Now. Granted, while I was in
Speaker 1: the Marine Corps, I had to shave twice a day
Speaker 1: and I hated it. I absolutely did, which is why
Speaker 1: I have grown the beard that I have grown and
Speaker 1: why my hair is long, specifically because I hated doing
Speaker 1: these things while I was in but I adhere to
Speaker 1: the standard because that was the way it was. They
Speaker 1: have in recent years said that if you, for religious
Speaker 1: reasons needed to grow a beard, the military was going
Speaker 1: to allow it. And for the record, it's not just
Speaker 1: Nordic pagan's, although there was that massive chunk of them.
Speaker 1: I even know personally some Christians that quoted a section
Speaker 1: of Leviticus and said that for that reason they were
Speaker 1: allowed to grow their beard. Secretary of War has said,
Speaker 1: no longer, you're either going to adhere to the standard
Speaker 1: or you're gonna find a new job. I like it.
Speaker 1: I'm liking that we are getting back to this. Let's go.
Speaker 26: Both are unacceptable and that's why today, at my direction,
Speaker 26: the era of unprofessional appearance is over.
Speaker 1: No more beardoz.
Speaker 26: The era of rampant and ridiculous shaving profiles is done.
Speaker 26: Simply put, if you do not meet the male level
Speaker 26: physical standards for combat positions, cannot pass a PT test,
Speaker 26: or don't want to shave and look professional, it's time
Speaker 26: for a new position or a new profession.
Speaker 1: I gotta say, I am so here for what Haig
Speaker 1: Seth is doing. And keep this in mind, peek hegg
Speaker 1: Seth is a combat veteran. He led troops in Iraq
Speaker 1: and Afghanistan. So it's not like this is some you know.
Speaker 1: Usually the Secretary of Defense, former Secretary of Defense now
Speaker 1: Secretary of War, which is how it should be, has
Speaker 1: been somebody that was appointed by a podus. Sometimes they
Speaker 1: were a veteran, sometimes they were not. I will give
Speaker 1: Trump credit for that. He did put in mad Dog
Speaker 1: Maddie the first go round, but unfortunately he would not
Speaker 1: listen when mad Dog said that we needed to do
Speaker 1: certain things a certain way. And for that reason, General
Speaker 1: James Maddis left the position. He resigned. Pete hegg Seth
Speaker 1: is trying to basically reattach the well, I don't want
Speaker 1: to say that because there are women that also serve
Speaker 1: in our military. Valiantly. He is putting real backbone back
Speaker 1: into the military. And because of this, multiple generals are
Speaker 1: saying that they're about to resign because this is an
Speaker 1: infringement on personal rights and liberties and freedoms. You sign
Speaker 1: those away when you join the military. You don't do
Speaker 1: that anymore. You don't have freedom of speech and freedom
Speaker 1: of expression and these types of things. Well, I'm still
Speaker 1: an individual, no. See, whenever you join the military, you're
Speaker 1: a part of a unit. You're a part of something bigger,
Speaker 1: and you have to adhere to the standards of that
Speaker 1: organization or you're no longer a part of the organization.
Speaker 1: And if you don't like it, don't join. I'm here
Speaker 1: for this, but let's get into the article here. General's
Speaker 1: silent as heg Seth ends Warrior Ethos rally with out
Speaker 1: with the millies and in with the patents now, I
Speaker 1: should also say, and I'm sure they're gonna get into
Speaker 1: in this article. He also has said drill instructors are
Speaker 1: now allowed to put their hands on recruits, and they're
Speaker 1: allowed to use foul language. They're allowed to flip racks,
Speaker 1: They're allowed to shark attack, which is something that Army
Speaker 1: boot camp would know a thing about. Basically, for the
Speaker 1: past I would argue ten years, but maybe even further
Speaker 1: back than that, boot camp and recruit training across the
Speaker 1: board has suffered. The standards have dropped to make it
Speaker 1: more inclusive, more open to people who you know, not
Speaker 1: so mean, easier, some might say, and heg Seth is
Speaker 1: saying no longer. The military is not a social experiment.
Speaker 1: It is a force that should be the most proficient
Speaker 1: and efficient at killing the bad guys. That is what
Speaker 1: the military is for the bar, none drop of the hat.
Speaker 1: It is what it is. The military needs to be
Speaker 1: the most vicious fighting force who is the best at
Speaker 1: killing the bad guys. Period. I'm here for this. Uh.
Speaker 1: Before I read the article, I see is Sam, go ahead?
Speaker 4: What does it mean the ads can put the hands
Speaker 4: on you now?
Speaker 5: I went in at in October twenty eighteen, and everything
Speaker 5: graduated January of nineteen. My I in my in boot gamp,
Speaker 5: I recruit Malvadoff, not smart and everything, and all I
Speaker 5: heard was the I saw it, but the drenal shout.
Speaker 4: He caught him in the gut and picked him up.
Speaker 5: He punched the shit out of him and picked him
Speaker 5: up off the ground with said punch, So.
Speaker 1: That drill instructor would have lost his job if that
Speaker 1: incident would have been reported, because for years now, drill
Speaker 1: instructors have not been allowed to use foul language at
Speaker 1: their recruits, let alone put their hands on them. That's mean,
Speaker 1: that's so mean. So when Hegseth gave this speech and
Speaker 1: I listened to it, it was about an hour long speech. Today,
Speaker 1: as a matter of fact, he broke it down like this,
Speaker 1: His oldest son is fifteen years old, and if his
Speaker 1: son wants to join the military, he would like for
Speaker 1: the military to be in a state where they would
Speaker 1: make sure that his son would be the safest possible.
Speaker 1: And he doesn't mean a boot camp, he means in combat. Right,
Speaker 1: we got to make sure that you're training these people properly.
Speaker 1: You are instilling within them the reality of combat and
Speaker 1: that this is not a place for feelings. As a
Speaker 1: matter of fact, there's almost nowhere in the military for feelings.
Speaker 1: So that being said, he said, using the Golden rule here,
Speaker 1: as Jesus said, do unto others as you had had
Speaker 1: them do unto you, Do unto your units what you
Speaker 1: would have these units due to your children. If your
Speaker 1: child was to join the military right now, would you
Speaker 1: rather be a place where feelings matter or would you
Speaker 1: rather be a place that is so well trained and
Speaker 1: so well equipped that they would be able to handle
Speaker 1: whatever combat situation came into the forefront. That's just the
Speaker 1: breakdown of it. So drill instructors are now and drill
Speaker 1: sergeants and cadres, and I'm not just saying Marine Corps,
Speaker 1: this is military wide, are going to be reinstilled. They're
Speaker 1: let off the leash. It is go time at boot
Speaker 1: camp and that's amazing. And the standards as far as
Speaker 1: physical fitness are concerned, are going to be back to
Speaker 1: where they once were. Now that being said, recruiting numbers
Speaker 1: have been down for a good little while here, but
Speaker 1: as they are making it more and more appealing to
Speaker 1: the younger generation to join the military. They're wanting to
Speaker 1: get the best of the best, and you can't do
Speaker 1: that if you drop standards. So let's get into it here.
Speaker 1: He also said, out with the millies and in with
Speaker 1: the patents. I like this a lot. As a matter
Speaker 1: of fact, more than eight hundred of America's top military
Speaker 1: leaders sat silent and showed no reaction as x Fox
Speaker 1: News host turned Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth issued a series
Speaker 1: of new directives that will make it harder for women
Speaker 1: to serve in combat and easier for personnel to engage
Speaker 1: in hazing and bullying without repercussions at an unprecedented gathering
Speaker 1: at the Marine Corps base in Quatico, Virginia, Tuesday. I
Speaker 1: gotta say this too. We need to bring hazing back.
Speaker 1: We really really do. Yes, there's also the possibility that
Speaker 1: things get taken too far, and when that does happen,
Speaker 1: we need to have real action against this. However, if
Speaker 1: we are talking about combat roles, he is invaluable to
Speaker 1: troop readiness. I see no separation between the two. You
Speaker 1: cannot have it without the other. And this is the
Speaker 1: way it's been in warrior cultures since the beginning of time.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry it is true. Anyway, let's move in here.
Speaker 1: The Secretary of War, a title not used by the
Speaker 1: US head of military since its establishment in nineteen forty seven,
Speaker 1: but revived by President Trump earlier this month, told the
Speaker 1: group of admirals, generals and their senior enlisted advisors he
Speaker 1: was ending the war on warriors, and complained that too
Speaker 1: many of their peers had been put in their roles
Speaker 1: for the wrong reasons, including their race and gender. Also,
Speaker 1: that's not hypothetical, that is a fact. DEI was the
Speaker 1: reason why a lot of promotions took place. A lot
Speaker 1: of people that were not best suited for the role
Speaker 1: were put into the role because of that. But anyway,
Speaker 1: Standing in front of a large American flag backdrop, he
Speaker 1: attacked by name several of the leaders retired peers, telling
Speaker 1: them that the department's compass heading was clear out with
Speaker 1: the Charelli and Mackenzie's and Millie's and in with the Stocksdales,
Speaker 1: Schwartzkoff's and patents, Hexeth said, denigrating former Army Vice Chief
Speaker 1: of Staff General Peter Charelli, US Central Command Command commander
Speaker 1: and Marine Corps General Kenneth McKenzie junior and ex Joint
Speaker 1: chiefs of Staff Chairman and Army General Mark Milly, each
Speaker 1: of whom had been critical of Trump and his administration.
Speaker 1: Y'all ill bet they were, And if anybody would like
Speaker 1: to look at what they did while they were in
Speaker 1: the military and some of the stances that they were taking,
Speaker 1: it's disturbing that these gentlemen were put in the positions
Speaker 1: they were in when they had that type of politicization
Speaker 1: of their roles. Inherently, the military is supposed to be
Speaker 1: a political You can vote however you want to vote.
Speaker 1: You can have your political ideologies. You can discuss that
Speaker 1: with your peer group if you would like. But while
Speaker 1: you're at work, your job is to follow the orders
Speaker 1: of the guy ahead of you, and at the end
Speaker 1: of the day, it's to the needs of the Marine Corps,
Speaker 1: the needs of the Army, the needs of the Navy,
Speaker 1: whatever the case is, and you answer if for no
Speaker 1: one else to potus. You may hate the guy, you
Speaker 1: may not have voted for him. You may disagree with
Speaker 1: the war that's being waives in dot dot dot and
Speaker 1: you don't want to be deployed to it. That sucks,
Speaker 1: That really sucks. But you signed up to serve the
Speaker 1: president regardless. I served under Obama. I disagree with almost
Speaker 1: every single thing that man ever did or said, but
Speaker 1: I served because that was what I wanted to do.
Speaker 1: That was my job. Didn't matter if it was somebody
Speaker 1: that I did or did not approve of. My job
Speaker 1: was to follow the orders, the lawful orders of the
Speaker 1: command ahead of me, plain and simple. Continuing here, it says,
Speaker 1: the sooner we have the right people, the sooner we
Speaker 1: can advance the right policies, he added. Heg Seth also
Speaker 1: growsed about efforts to open up combat roles to women
Speaker 1: and initiatives to weed out so called toxic leaders, and
Speaker 1: blamed foolish and reckless politicians for having set the wrong
Speaker 1: compass and causing the Pentagon to lose its way. I
Speaker 1: have to say I agree one hundred percent. I absolutely
Speaker 1: agree one hundred percent. Toxic leaders are a thing. They
Speaker 1: absolutely are. In every job you'll ever work, there's a
Speaker 1: possibility of having a toxic manager, a toxic foreman, a
Speaker 1: toxic leader. That being said, a lot of these toxic leaders,
Speaker 1: at least in the last fifteen years, were put in place,
Speaker 1: and we're allowed to be toxic because any initiative to
Speaker 1: correct actions of a lower enlisted personnel would be met
Speaker 1: with a case being brought against them because, well, he's
Speaker 1: only saying that to me because he's sexist, or he's racist,
Speaker 1: or he's bigoted. This is that's why he's being so
Speaker 1: mean to me. It's not because I suck at my
Speaker 1: job or because I'm an incompetent asshole. It's because he's
Speaker 1: such a bigot. And because of that, only toxic leaders
Speaker 1: really saw any true advancement. There is exceptions. I'm not
Speaker 1: saying this is one hundred percent rule, but anybody in
Speaker 1: the military right now, I promise you understand and resonate
Speaker 1: with what I'm saying right now. Resonate rather, heg Seth,
Speaker 1: an Iraq war veteran who attained the rank of major
Speaker 1: in the Army National Guard but became a critic of
Speaker 1: de Penton's effort to open up military surface to women,
Speaker 1: racial minorities and LGBT plus persons, said the War Department
Speaker 1: must restore a ruthless, dispassionate, and common sense application of
Speaker 1: standards that are uniform, gender neutral, and high. Again, this
Speaker 1: article is trying to spin this in a negative way
Speaker 1: because it's from the UK. But I have to say
Speaker 1: I agree for the record, it was never about racial
Speaker 1: minorities at all. If you want to see a really
Speaker 1: good snapshot of the American population, look at any Victor
Speaker 1: Line unit that's infantry in the Marine Corps right now.
Speaker 1: You will see people of all religious backgrounds, all socioeconomic backgrounds,
Speaker 1: all racial backgrounds. Some of them are a part of
Speaker 1: the alphabet people, some of them Martin, it doesn't matter.
Speaker 1: And at this current time you'll see women. And here's
Speaker 1: my issue with that. I don't inherently have a problem
Speaker 1: with a woman in combat roles if they can hold
Speaker 1: the standard. If you can carry a two hundred and
Speaker 1: fifty pound dude with his whole kit on and his pack,
Speaker 1: and you can fireman carry him to get him to
Speaker 1: safety if he goes down, hey, get after it. If
Speaker 1: you can meet the standards, I got no problem with it.
Speaker 1: If you can't, then you don't belong in a combat role.
Speaker 1: That's not sexist or racist or bigoted to say this
Speaker 1: combat doesn't care what color you are, what sex you are,
Speaker 1: if you're a good person. When bullets start flying and
Speaker 1: people start going down, the rules of what is quote
Speaker 1: unquote correct, politically correct and DEI and all it that
Speaker 1: is instantly removed from the conversation. It is now about
Speaker 1: what you can do and what you can't do. So
Speaker 1: heg Sath is trying to put that back in the forefront,
Speaker 1: and I agree. He told the assembled leaders that he
Speaker 1: was issuing a directive to ensure that every designated combat
Speaker 1: arms role in all branches returned to the highest male
Speaker 1: standards only because that's how it should be, all but
Speaker 1: reversing the twenty fifteen directive from the Defense Secretary Ashton
Speaker 1: Carter to open up all combat roles to women. And
Speaker 1: for the record, personally, I know women veterans who are
Speaker 1: super happy about this. As a matter of fact, very
Speaker 1: close to me. I have women who are veterans who
Speaker 1: disagree with having females anywhere near combat roles because of
Speaker 1: the reasons that I'm saying right now, if you don't
Speaker 1: meet the male level physical standards for combat positions, it's
Speaker 1: time for a new position or a new profession. He said.
Speaker 1: If women can make it excellent. If women can make
Speaker 1: it excellent, If not, it is what it is. But
Speaker 1: if that means no women qualify for some combat jobs,
Speaker 1: so be it. I love this, I absolutely love this.
Speaker 1: The War Secretary also claimed that the Pentagon had lowered
Speaker 1: standards to hit racial quotas as well, which it did,
Speaker 1: and said that the revised standards of the promulg promulgated promulgating.
Speaker 1: I actually don't know what that word is. The standards
Speaker 1: that he was talking about are based on what he
Speaker 1: called the nineteen ninety test, which compares today's standards to
Speaker 1: those in nineteen ninety, a time when women were barred
Speaker 1: from combat roles and LGBT persons were banned from serving.
Speaker 1: The nineteen nineties test is simple. What we are telling
Speaker 1: are what were the military standards in nineteen ninety and
Speaker 1: if they have changed, tell me why it was necessary
Speaker 1: a necessary change based on the evolving and landscape of
Speaker 1: combat or was the change due to a softening, weakening,
Speaker 1: or gender based pursuit of other priorities. That's a very
Speaker 1: basic question. If the standards changed, explain why that was
Speaker 1: a good idea. Because this standard made it more of
Speaker 1: an issue for us to be combat ready. And if
Speaker 1: you cannot provide that, it goes away. In addition to
Speaker 1: rolling back standards to make it harder for women to
Speaker 1: serve in combat. Heg Seth also told military leaders he
Speaker 1: was rolling back long standing policies meant to prevent hazing
Speaker 1: and bullying in the ranks. He complained the Pentagon initiatives
Speaker 1: to eliminate toxic leadership, including races and sexi's behavior by
Speaker 1: supervisors had effectively lowered standards and empowered complainers to attack
Speaker 1: effective leaders. This is true direct quote here. Real toxic
Speaker 1: leadership is endangering subordinates with low standards. Real toxic leadership
Speaker 1: is promoting people based on immutable characteristics or quotas instead
Speaker 1: of based on merit. Real toxic leadership is promoting destructive
Speaker 1: ideas that are in anathema to the Constitution and the
Speaker 1: laws of the nature and Nature's God, he said, adding
Speaker 1: later that the definition of toxic has been turned upside
Speaker 1: down and the definitions of bullying and hazing have been
Speaker 1: weaponized and bastardized. I agree with every single point that
Speaker 1: he made in the speech, and if you haven't watched
Speaker 1: the entire speech, I highly recommend that you do. But
Speaker 1: this kind of goes in line with what I think
Speaker 1: is about to take place. I don't know this for
Speaker 1: a fact, I really don't. I am saying this with
Speaker 1: no basis whatsoever, but judging from the writing on the
Speaker 1: walls here and acknowledging the telltale signs, I believe that
Speaker 1: within the next before Trump gets out of office, I
Speaker 1: should say it would not surprise me in the slightest
Speaker 1: if America does go back into war in some way
Speaker 1: against someone I don't know who. There's there's a list
Speaker 1: of countries that very well could be the new bad
Speaker 1: guy that you're gonna hear about on your mainstream media source.
Speaker 1: It just makes sense to me. America is a warring tribe.
Speaker 1: We always have been. Up until COVID we had only
Speaker 1: seen what was it, nine years of peace in over
Speaker 1: two hundred years of existence. There's a reason for that.
Speaker 1: We do best when we are at war America as
Speaker 1: a whole. Now, I'm not saying that we should go
Speaker 1: pick a fight. I'm not saying that we should go
Speaker 1: try to give some people some freedom. We na not that.
Speaker 1: There are plenty of bad guys around the world that
Speaker 1: need some killing for sure, and if America is going
Speaker 1: to play the role of the world police, then perhaps
Speaker 1: it's time that we do just that. I don't know
Speaker 1: this to be a fact, it's very possible that we'll
Speaker 1: be going to war against China or Russia or Iran
Speaker 1: or Venezuela or there's a list. There's literally a list.
Speaker 1: I don't know. There's a bunch of possibilities here. But
Speaker 1: the fact that they are upping signing bonuses the fact
Speaker 1: that they are trying to recruit all different people right now,
Speaker 1: and the fact that they are trying to raise the standards.
Speaker 1: Not to mention, they are talking about making it more
Speaker 1: accessible for military members to get on gear. Yes, we're
Speaker 1: talking doing a cycle getting some peptides in you. Which
Speaker 1: Before anybody says that that's unfair and unconstitutional, keep in
Speaker 1: mind China is giving their troops testosterone right now, and
Speaker 1: I'm not against that. For the record, I don't know
Speaker 1: why you wouldn't want your military to be at their
Speaker 1: absolute best and be the most efficient killing machines that
Speaker 1: you could have. That's their job now. I also believe
Speaker 1: that this should be done under the watch of the
Speaker 1: medical staff and personnel. I don't think that you should
Speaker 1: be giving your military members the go ahead to go
Speaker 1: and find street drugs in locker rooms and gyms and
Speaker 1: things like that and do this themselves. I'm saying you
Speaker 1: have to have a down cycle, you have to have
Speaker 1: an upcycle. There's a way to do this healthily. Right,
Speaker 1: So every year military members have to go in for
Speaker 1: a yearly physical, why not have the person conducting the
Speaker 1: physical and doing the blood work also be the one
Speaker 1: to administer the testosterone. And then the next year they
Speaker 1: don't get some, the next year they do. And you
Speaker 1: do this in a productive and healthy way. And if
Speaker 1: there is a situation where this one individual does not
Speaker 1: need any more testosterone, they don't need it, you have
Speaker 1: medical staffers that could be the ones to make that determination.
Speaker 1: I'm here for this. I am so so on board
Speaker 1: with this. But anyway, yeah, Secretary of War is putting
Speaker 1: the backbone, reinstating it, I should say, back into the
Speaker 1: US military. Praise be to God. All right now that
Speaker 1: being said, as we were talking about American military, Oregon
Speaker 1: mayors denounced Trump's troop deployment in Portland. That's right, Portland,
Speaker 1: Oregon is about to have troops deployed to it to
Speaker 1: protect the federal buildings. We're going to talk about that
Speaker 1: in the implications a little bit more, but for now,
Speaker 1: let's listen in to KGW News.
Speaker 2: For in Cook now a Catherine.
Speaker 1: More than a dozen local mayors are now pushing back
Speaker 1: against the President's plan to deploy troops David.
Speaker 27: With that show of solidarity, that group of mayors sent
Speaker 27: a message this is not just a Portland issue. They
Speaker 27: also stressed that the National Guard troops caught in the
Speaker 27: middle of all of this are our neighbors and friends.
Speaker 9: The number of troops that we want or need is zero.
Speaker 27: The number of Oregon mayors backing Portland Mayor Keith Wilson seventeen.
Speaker 27: On Monday, they stood behind him literally and figuratively, denouncing
Speaker 27: the Trump administration's deployment of Oregon National Guard members to
Speaker 27: what the President referred to as war ravaged Portland. Among
Speaker 27: them Beaverton Mayor Lacey Batty.
Speaker 19: We stand here today to tell the President he's listening
Speaker 19: to the wrong people. The President cannot watch footage from
Speaker 19: over a half a decade ago and believe this is
Speaker 19: the Portland that we're standing in today.
Speaker 27: In a joint statement, the mayors said they'd pursue all
Speaker 27: legal and legislative options to deny their jurisdiction's resources from
Speaker 27: supporting militarized federal actions, but to National Guard members themselves.
Speaker 27: The mayors, including Wilsonville's Sean O'Neil, offered only respect.
Speaker 20: I want to be clear, my criticism is directed at
Speaker 20: President Trump's decision, not at the men and women of
Speaker 20: the Oregon National Guard.
Speaker 10: When these volunteers answered the call to service, they made
Speaker 10: a solemn promise to their communities and to the nation
Speaker 10: that the federal administration is now dishonoring.
Speaker 27: Mayor Joe Buck of Lake Oswego said, it's worse than that.
Speaker 13: Being used as props to feign safety is actually not
Speaker 13: safe for anyone.
Speaker 27: Many living in the suburbs whose mayors spoke out appreciated
Speaker 27: what they did.
Speaker 28: Personally, I'm grateful for that united front because I also
Speaker 28: reinforces what our governor has said about resisting the concept
Speaker 28: that Portland is war ravaged and we need federal troops.
Speaker 11: You can go up to Portland.
Speaker 1: There's no riots in the streets.
Speaker 11: There's none of that stuff going on around here.
Speaker 1: I don't know what he's talking about.
Speaker 10: The justification for their presence in our cities is either
Speaker 10: a misunderstanding or a lie. I hope it is a
Speaker 10: misunderstanding that we can soon resolve.
Speaker 27: When it comes to potential protests in the face of
Speaker 27: National Guard troops. The mayor's urged people to be peaceful.
Speaker 27: They noted once again that Guard members are community members
Speaker 27: whose lives are also being impacted by the president's decision.
Speaker 1: All right, so let's break down a few things that
Speaker 1: they just said. Now, yes, it is within the president's
Speaker 1: jurisdiction to send Article ten troops, which is what they
Speaker 1: are to protect federal buildings. So I actually did a
Speaker 1: little extra deep dive into this, and we're going to
Speaker 1: read this article about it now from NBC News, and
Speaker 1: of course it's gonna make it out to be horrible
Speaker 1: that Trump is doing this. Here's the deal. Portland is
Speaker 1: war ravaged, and I know that from people that live
Speaker 1: in and around the Portland area. The eyewitnesses and the
Speaker 1: inhabitants of Portland that they just had on the news
Speaker 1: are living in a fantasy world. Now, I am not
Speaker 1: saying a fan they're living in because of cartels or
Speaker 1: the homeless population, or it's a combination. It is a
Speaker 1: cesspool Portland and it has been for quite some time.
Speaker 1: As a matter of fact, friends of mine that I
Speaker 1: had that live in Portland or outside of Portland, they
Speaker 1: would go into the city to go do a thing
Speaker 1: and event, whatever the case is. Multiple violent car break
Speaker 1: ins have happened every day, every single day. There is
Speaker 1: a homeless community there that is so large that it
Speaker 1: has basically taken over a massive section of the city.
Speaker 1: And these aren't just you know, just drug users that
Speaker 1: are not bothering anybody. These are people that are going
Speaker 1: out and committing violent crimes against the citizens of this city.
Speaker 1: And the mayor is doing nothing about it. The governor
Speaker 1: is absolutely not doing anything about it, because that's just
Speaker 1: what they do. And so now this whole thing started.
Speaker 1: The National Guard deployment to Portland is because of the
Speaker 1: ICE raids. There are so many protests because of what
Speaker 1: ICE is doing currently, and the last time Portland had
Speaker 1: protests like that, federal buildings were targets of some of
Speaker 1: the protesters. Currently, the National Guard is being deployed as
Speaker 1: of this moment, specifically to guard federal buildings in the
Speaker 1: city of Portland. And that is it. But this also
Speaker 1: goes in line with what Trump is talking about doing
Speaker 1: as far as sending troops to big cities all over
Speaker 1: the country to help clean up. Because here's the deal.
Speaker 1: If ICE raids take place and then there is I
Speaker 1: know what people are gonna say, don't they have police
Speaker 1: officers to protect these buildings. They have local police and
Speaker 1: stay police. Why would you need federal troops. Why do
Speaker 1: you need to deploy the National Guard? Hear me out
Speaker 1: protests take place? Cool police officers now have to leave
Speaker 1: their otherwise appointed place of duty to don riot shields
Speaker 1: and quell the riot. Okay, now more crimes can be
Speaker 1: committed all over the city because the police that are
Speaker 1: in this area have been allocated to deal with rioters.
Speaker 1: So in a way, the federal buildings are being protected
Speaker 1: by the National Guard so that the police don't have
Speaker 1: to have any personnel that way, so that the police
Speaker 1: can go and better effectively do their job. As of
Speaker 1: this moment, the National Guard are not going to be
Speaker 1: used to do anything towards protesters or rioters. Would that
Speaker 1: job change, would the mission statement shift? We shall see.
Speaker 1: But as of this moment, they are seeing so much
Speaker 1: backlash and protests because of this, and it's almost like
Speaker 1: the people are proving the point of why they need
Speaker 1: to be there in the first place. It's very interesting.
Speaker 1: Now I understand a lot of people are gonna say, well,
Speaker 1: this is the first step to living under a police state.
Speaker 1: I hear this, I see what they're saying here, But
Speaker 1: it's not going on all over the state. It's only
Speaker 1: in the city with the highest crime in the entire state.
Speaker 1: And honestly, at this point, the police are over taxed
Speaker 1: and overburdened by the high rates of crime in Portland.
Speaker 1: They are happy and they are really looking forward to
Speaker 1: getting the help. But let's go ahead and read this
Speaker 1: article here. Oregon sues Trump administration over deployment of National
Speaker 1: Guard troops in Portland. The suit comes a day after
Speaker 1: Trump announced he was authorizing the Guard to use full
Speaker 1: force in Portland. Let's go ahead and read in here.
Speaker 1: The Story of Oregon in the city of Portland have
Speaker 1: sued the I'm sorry, The State of Oregon in the
Speaker 1: city of Portland have sued the Trump administration to stop
Speaker 1: it from deploying National Guard troops in the city. The
Speaker 1: suit name's President Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegsat and the
Speaker 1: Defense Department, Homeland Security Christy Nome and Department of Homeland Security,
Speaker 1: and the Department of Homeland Security as a whole as defendants.
Speaker 1: It asks a federal court in Portland to stop the
Speaker 1: Trump administration from deploying troops and declare the deployment unlawful
Speaker 1: even though it is absolutely lawful. Look it up. While
Speaker 1: White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said that the Trump's actions
Speaker 1: were lawful and that they would make Portland safer. President
Speaker 1: Trump is using his lawful authority to direct the National
Speaker 1: Guard to protect federal assets and personnel in Portland following
Speaker 1: months of violent riots where officers have been assaulted and
Speaker 1: docksed by left wing rioters, She said yes. Pentagon spokesperson
Speaker 1: Sean Parnell said in a statement that Trump directed Headset
Speaker 1: to call the Oregon National Guard into federal service for
Speaker 1: sixty days to protect immigration and Customs enforcement and other
Speaker 1: government personnel in the city. The President called for these
Speaker 1: two hundred guardsmen to deter rampant lawlessness within Portland and
Speaker 1: to enable federal law enforcement officers to safely conduct their duties.
Speaker 1: DHS did not immediately respond to a request for comment
Speaker 1: on the lawsuits on it. In the suit, Oregon in
Speaker 1: Portland claim the federal government does not have the grounds
Speaker 1: to call in the Guard and said the city has
Speaker 1: seen small, quote unquote protests near an immigration and Customs
Speaker 1: enforcement facility in recent weeks. That is, that's kind of
Speaker 1: underselling it. When the President and I spoke yesterday, I
Speaker 1: told him in a plain language that there is no
Speaker 1: insurrection or threat to public safety that necessitates military intervention
Speaker 1: in Portland or any other city in our state. Democratic
Speaker 1: Governor Tina Cotech, which some might get her A Cotext,
Speaker 1: said in a news release Sunday, despite this and all
Speaker 1: evidence to the contrary, he has chosen to disregard Oregonian
Speaker 1: safety and ability to govern ourselves. This is not necessary
Speaker 1: and is unlawful, and it will make Oregonians less safe.
Speaker 1: I don't understand this. I'm trying trying to put myself
Speaker 1: in the shoes here. How does having two hundred National
Speaker 1: Guard troops guard federal buildings in personnel? How does that
Speaker 1: make Oregonians less safe? I don't understand. If what she
Speaker 1: is saying is true, and that there is no unlawful
Speaker 1: insurrection going on in Oregon, then these sixty days should
Speaker 1: be very quiet and nothing would take place, and everybody's
Speaker 1: gonna look at Trump like he's an idiot after this, right,
Speaker 1: I don't understand it. But continuing on here, crime statistics
Speaker 1: provided by the Portland Police Bureau, Strategic Services Division and
Speaker 1: to create crime in the city. So far this year
Speaker 1: is on par with the same period last year. The
Speaker 1: current year to date total of offensive tallies thirty seven thousand,
Speaker 1: eight hundred and ninety three, while at the same time
Speaker 1: last year total thirty seven thousand, eight hundred and fifty nine.
Speaker 1: That's that's not a good thing. That's not like a
Speaker 1: thing to be proud of, it says. However, there was
Speaker 1: a fifty percent drop in homicides and a four percent
Speaker 1: decline in aggravated assaults. Simple assaults, however, increased by eight percent.
Speaker 1: That's again, Yeah, you're fifty percent down in homicides. That's solid,
Speaker 1: that's good. Four percent decline and an eight percent incline
Speaker 1: is not like okay? Sure techs Cotech said at a
Speaker 1: media availability events Sunday evening that Trump had taken away
Speaker 1: her control of the National Guard and that the state
Speaker 1: did not have any information about a timeline for deployment.
Speaker 1: Literally just said sixty days, okay. She also said she
Speaker 1: did not have information about the number of troops set
Speaker 1: to be activated or whether they would be armed. The
Speaker 1: number is two hundred and yes, they will. How is
Speaker 1: it that we are able to get this from that's crazy.
Speaker 1: The plaintiff claim that the administration's moved to federalize the
Speaker 1: Guard violates the tenth Amendment of the Constitution, saying police
Speaker 1: power lies with the states. Oh okay, they're gonna try
Speaker 1: to misunderstand that. That's dope. Speaking to reporter Sunday, State
Speaker 1: Attorney General Dan Rayfield, a Democrat, compared the move to
Speaker 1: the administration's efforts to deploy National Guard to Los Angeles
Speaker 1: and Washington, DC. Yeah, let's look at that. DC is
Speaker 1: safer now than it was in the past few years. LA.
Speaker 1: Those riots that were going off the rails got shut
Speaker 1: down relatively quickly. Interesting how that worked out, because now
Speaker 1: you had more police force on the riots rather than
Speaker 1: the police guarding buildings because there were troops guarding the buildings.
Speaker 1: Interesting how that works. A federal judge in California ruled
Speaker 1: earlier this month that the administration illegally deployed the Guard
Speaker 1: and the Marines to Los Angeles in June. US District
Speaker 1: Judge Charles Breyers said the administration violated the nineteenth century
Speaker 1: law called the Posse Comatatis Act, which prohibits using armed
Speaker 1: force for domestic law enforcement. If that rings a bell
Speaker 1: to anybody, posse commitatus or commatatis, that is what the
Speaker 1: sovereign citizens used to call themselves posse coommatatus. It's a yeah,
Speaker 1: they they misinterpret the law for what that is. What
Speaker 1: that is basically in reference to, is back in the
Speaker 1: nineteenth century eighteen hundreds, if you were living out in
Speaker 1: the western frontier in an area that did not have
Speaker 1: a sheriff or any real arm of the law, it
Speaker 1: was up to the citizens to combine forces to make
Speaker 1: their own posse right to go out and enact law
Speaker 1: at their discretion. Yes, this led to some bad things happening,
Speaker 1: but it gave the citizens the right to basically deputize
Speaker 1: themselves in the case where it was needed. The sovereign
Speaker 1: citizens decided that that means right now they can deputize
Speaker 1: themselves and make themselves law enforcement to a different type
Speaker 1: of scale. But yeah, that's why they're also idiots, and
Speaker 1: why not a single one of them have ever actually
Speaker 1: won a case in court anyway. Trump said Saturday that
Speaker 1: he was directing Hegseth to provide all necessary troops to Portland,
Speaker 1: calling the city war ravaged. He said Guard members had
Speaker 1: to protect ice facilities that he claimed were under siege
Speaker 1: from attack by Antifa and other domestic terrorists. Trump's announcement
Speaker 1: came after he spoke negatively about Portland, claiming there was
Speaker 1: anarchy in the city. That's not you know. A co
Speaker 1: tech denied such characterizations at a news conference Saturday and
Speaker 1: said she shared her assessment with Trump. She added that
Speaker 1: she had been in contact with other Democratic governors who
Speaker 1: faced similar threats from the administration, such as Illinois and California.
Speaker 1: Trump had threatened to deploy the National Guard in multiple
Speaker 1: cities run by Democrat mayors, including Chicago, Baltimore, and New Orleans,
Speaker 1: and he really does need to. The mayor of New
Speaker 1: Orleans is now being indicted for federal charges. They caught
Speaker 1: her sleeping with one of her bodyguards while she was
Speaker 1: like on duty, and then they've also found a lot
Speaker 1: of embezzlement cases against her. So she's gonna see jail time.
Speaker 1: We can only hope and pray, but yes, she in
Speaker 1: the city of New Orleans. I can speak on behalf
Speaker 1: of somebody who at least represents New Orleans in a
Speaker 1: small way, but represents Louisiana in a larger scale. I
Speaker 1: can speak on behalf of this. Yes, send troops to
Speaker 1: New Orleans. Please, for the love of God, we're number
Speaker 1: three in the country of homicides. We were number one
Speaker 1: for a bit. That going from number one to number
Speaker 1: three is not like something to celebrate. We need the help. Absolutely.
Speaker 1: He authorized the deployment of the National Guard troops in Washington,
Speaker 1: d C. In August. He also established a task for
Speaker 1: US this month to mobilize troops in Memphis, Tennessee, a
Speaker 1: move that the Republican Governor Bill Lee supported. And I
Speaker 1: should also mention the Republican governor of Louisiana really supports
Speaker 1: him sending troops to New Orleans. He actually said, and
Speaker 1: I quote, start in Shreveport and work your way all
Speaker 1: the way down to New Orleans. We could use the help.
Speaker 1: Shreveport is one of our northernmost big He's just everybody's
Speaker 1: clear anyway, Moving on, this is an interesting one. The
Speaker 1: US Defense stocks jump on Pentagon's plan to double missile production.
Speaker 5: Now.
Speaker 1: I just wanted to bring this up because things took
Speaker 1: a rather aggressive turn right a couple of days ago. Again,
Speaker 1: as of time of recording, on Monday, the Pentagon was saying, hey,
Speaker 1: north of Grumman RTX formally rate the on We need you,
Speaker 1: we need you to double your production of missiles and
Speaker 1: they're like, wait for like for real and Lockheed, I
Speaker 1: should say Lockheed also, and you're like, is there a
Speaker 1: specific type that you would like us to double production
Speaker 1: of or just like however we feel He's like, okay,
Speaker 1: essentially if it goes zoom, I need you to double
Speaker 1: the amount of those that you are currently producing now.
Speaker 1: And they said, all right, dope, And because of that
Speaker 1: the stocks skyrocketed or on these few and they're only
Speaker 1: going up from here. That being said, A couple days later,
Speaker 1: Pentagon asked to quadruple missile production. Let's talk about this
Speaker 1: is from a politico. The Pentagon has told suppliers of
Speaker 1: missiles to the United States to double or even quadruple
Speaker 1: their production of weapons, according to a Monday report by
Speaker 1: The Wall Street Journal, Why it Matters. More than three
Speaker 1: and a half years of war in Ukraine, the so
Speaker 1: called Twelve Day War between Israel and Iran, and a
Speaker 1: general surgeon demand for long range weapons and air defense
Speaker 1: interceptors have depleted stockpiles of missiles, a cause of growing
Speaker 1: anxiety as the US looks towards a possible future conflict
Speaker 1: with China. Now again, I don't know for a fact
Speaker 1: if China is the one that they are worried about
Speaker 1: as far as the missile production goes here, but a
Speaker 1: war in general, especially when you look at Hegseth calling
Speaker 1: all all of the generals in for this mass assembly
Speaker 1: where he had this conversation with them, and I think
Speaker 1: I understand why. Now I couldn't understand why he wouldn't
Speaker 1: send out a memo, Why he wouldn't do this via
Speaker 1: a video and just kind of release a video to
Speaker 1: all these people of his directives and all this stuff. No,
Speaker 1: because heg Seth was an enlisted man and now he's
Speaker 1: a major, or he was a major anyway, So essentially
Speaker 1: he is gonna say this. I know that you heard
Speaker 1: me say this to your face that day at Quatico, Virginia.
Speaker 1: So if you're not enacting the policies that I am
Speaker 1: now implementing, you are fired. There's no Oh you didn't
Speaker 1: get the memo. Oh you didn't understand the commander's intent.
Speaker 1: Oh you didn't understand the mission. That is not that's negated.
Speaker 1: Everyone that needed to hear that message was in the
Speaker 1: room to hear that message. That's why, and I'm here
Speaker 1: for it. But he's also getting our military back in
Speaker 1: action and ready to see conflict. Couple that with the
Speaker 1: fact that all of our missile pro producers are now
Speaker 1: going to double or quadruple the amount that they're doing
Speaker 1: right now. The writing is on the walls everybody. Something
Speaker 1: is a gonna happen, Something's gonna kick off. I think anyway,
Speaker 1: I could be wrong. I hope I'm wrong. But also
Speaker 1: America just does better when we're at war. We're a
Speaker 1: warring tribe. Anyway. Missiles are typically very expensive and laborious
Speaker 1: to produce. There are pressing concerns about how often costly
Speaker 1: and increasingly scarce missiles have been used to shoot down
Speaker 1: disposable drones costing just tens of thousands of dollars what
Speaker 1: to know. The Pentagon officials have been meeting with representatives
Speaker 1: from US missile manufacturers. Citing anonymous sources familiar with the matter,
Speaker 1: One of the high level meetings in June was attended
Speaker 1: by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and General Dan Kine, the
Speaker 1: Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, President Trump and Secretary of
Speaker 1: heagseeth are exploring extraordinary avenues to expand our military might
Speaker 1: and accelerate the production of munitions. Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's
Speaker 1: chief spokesperson, told the newspaper this effort has been a
Speaker 1: collaboration between defense industry leaders and senior Pentagon officials. The
Speaker 1: Pentagon reportedly wants to up stocks of twelve weapons in
Speaker 1: particular for a possible military confrontation with China, including the
Speaker 1: vaunted Patriot missiles. The Patriot ground based missile defense system
Speaker 1: is one of the US's most advanced air defense systems.
Speaker 1: It is considered the gold standard, but there are relatively
Speaker 1: few of them. De Pentagon wants to wants industrial players
Speaker 1: to produce nearly four times the current number of Patriots.
Speaker 1: The administration said it intends to swivel away from Europe
Speaker 1: and toward an Indo Pacific into the Indo Pacific as
Speaker 1: Beijing plows ahead with its nuclear and conventional military build up.
Speaker 1: Heg Seth, speaking at a major defense forum earlier this year,
Speaker 1: said Beijing was preparing to potentially use military force to
Speaker 1: alter the balance of power in the Indo Pacific and
Speaker 1: was gearing up for the real deal of an invasion
Speaker 1: push on Taiwan. China's Foreign Ministry denounced the speech as
Speaker 1: filled with provocations and intended to sal or sow division.
Speaker 1: Beijing considered Taiwan a breakaway part of mainland China that
Speaker 1: it intends to one day reunite under central control. But Taipei,
Speaker 1: which has established a democratic government, has long asserted its
Speaker 1: independence from Beijing and aligned itself with Western allies. So
Speaker 1: what people are saying, I'm sure they're gonna say something
Speaker 1: negative here. Defense Secretary of Pete Heggs has said in
Speaker 1: May during a speech in Singapore, we are not going
Speaker 1: to sugarcoat it. The threat China possesses or poses as
Speaker 1: real and it could be imminent, adding that China's army
Speaker 1: is rehearsing for the real deal real. Admiral Hugh Gung Feng,
Speaker 1: vice president of China's National Defense University, set in response
Speaker 1: to hexeth May speech, per the Associated Press quote, some
Speaker 1: of the claims are completely fabricated, some distort facts, and
Speaker 1: some are cases of theft or of a thief crying
Speaker 1: stop thief. Okay. These actions are nothing more than attempts
Speaker 1: to provoke trouble in site division and stir up confrontation
Speaker 1: to destabilize the Asia Pacific region. So of course there
Speaker 1: are some people that are just not really about it
Speaker 1: and they think this is a really bad idea. However,
Speaker 1: like it or not, this is absolutely going down. Missile
Speaker 1: production is about to double and quadruple in some cases.
Speaker 1: And with that being said, I thought it was interesting
Speaker 1: to talk about a new munition that America is developed
Speaker 1: called the Angry Tortoise. It is a liquid fueled hypersonic
Speaker 1: missile in development from the US Air Force. And yes,
Speaker 1: I do mean an actual hypersonic, not the quote unquote
Speaker 1: things that other countries call hypersonics. This is an actual hypersonic.
Speaker 1: So we've had this capability for a while, but usually
Speaker 1: they have used solid fuel. This is a liquid fueled
Speaker 1: hypersonic missile, and not to get to in depth with it,
Speaker 1: but everybody could look this up for yourselves. Liquid fuel
Speaker 1: typically isn't used in cases of munitions like this because
Speaker 1: most liquid fuels are correc jo and they don't have
Speaker 1: a very good shelf life. However, this defense contractor partnered
Speaker 1: with the US Air Force, has developed a very stable
Speaker 1: liquid fuel that is going to be used in the
Speaker 1: Angry Tortoise. Hypersonic missile. I love it. I absolutely love it.
Speaker 1: The US Air Force is working to combine an aerial
Speaker 1: target design to simulate ballistic threats, and a liquid fueled
Speaker 1: rocket motor into a new, low cost hypersonic missile dubbed
Speaker 1: Angry Tortoise. The first test launch of the experimental design
Speaker 1: is expected to come by the end of the year.
Speaker 1: The project reflects growing interests across the US military in
Speaker 1: pursuit of new avenues to field hypersonic weapons and do
Speaker 1: so affordably after years of persistent struggles in this realm.
Speaker 1: The Angry Tortoise broke cover at the US Air and
Speaker 1: Space Forces Association's twenty twenty five Airspace and Cyber Conference
Speaker 1: earlier this year, at which TWZ was in attendance. Tw
Speaker 1: TWZ is the source of this article. Aerospace firms URSA
Speaker 1: Major has confirmed that it has confirmed to US that
Speaker 1: a contract it received from the Air Force Research Laboratory
Speaker 1: in May, valued at close to twenty eight point six
Speaker 1: million dollars, is for this particular effort. Neither the project's
Speaker 1: name nor its explicit focus was disclosed at the time,
Speaker 1: though expected end result was described as tactical flight demonstrator
Speaker 1: The Angry Tortoise Project works by leveraging partnerships with commercial
Speaker 1: companies to integrate their existing technologies into the Department of
Speaker 1: War's weapons systems, enabling rapid delivery of new capabilities. I
Speaker 1: gotta say it makes me smile to call it the
Speaker 1: Department of War not the Department of Defense, because defense,
Speaker 1: I mean, technically speaking, a good wall is a good defense.
Speaker 1: I don't think that that's what our military should be.
Speaker 1: I believe that our military should be a good offense.
Speaker 1: That's just me, so Department of War. It makes me happy.
Speaker 1: According to an information card AFL had available at the
Speaker 1: conference this week, the integrated advancements made through the Angry
Speaker 1: Tortoise Project will provide the warfighter with the ability to
Speaker 1: deliver quick, precise strikes on both stationary and moving targets,
Speaker 1: giving military commanders more options to counter threats. The project's
Speaker 1: focus on public private partnerships is crucial to accelerating the
Speaker 1: delivery of these new capabilities by combining commercial innovations with
Speaker 1: AFRL's technical expertise and resources. The key element of the
Speaker 1: Angry Tortoise design is the four thousand pounds thrust class
Speaker 1: draper rocket motor, a close cycle hydrogen peroxide kerosene design.
Speaker 1: Despite being liquid fueled, draper can be stored for extended
Speaker 1: periods of time at room temperature. Most commonly used liquid
Speaker 1: rocket fuels are volatile and corrosive, which limits how long
Speaker 1: rocket motors that use them can be left ready to fire.
Speaker 1: This also typically makes them more hazardous to handle after
Speaker 1: being fueled. This has long made more stable solid fuel
Speaker 1: rocket motors attractive for military applications, especially when it comes
Speaker 1: to tactical weapons. This by the performance advantages of liquid
Speaker 1: fuel types I have to offer. So anyway, they go
Speaker 1: into more of the details of the propulsion systems of
Speaker 1: this rocket. But long story short, the developers of this
Speaker 1: have developed a safe and stable liquid fuel for missiles,
Speaker 1: and I think that's just neat, honestly, all right, So
Speaker 1: before we head out, let me go ahead and check
Speaker 1: the chat. I am sure that people have commented in
Speaker 1: and saw some things here. Let's see happy spookery season.
Speaker 1: The flotilla is clearly pro Palestine, but not initiative from Palestine.
Speaker 1: Israel will do whatever it thinks it can to get
Speaker 1: away with to stop them, but Israel is rightfully afraid
Speaker 1: to just sync them. Yeah, I agree with that, Tony
Speaker 1: for sure. Yeah, Mike Hunt, thank you for joining us
Speaker 1: this evening, longtime listener, first time zoomer. But Tony doesn't
Speaker 1: look like Tony sounds usually. I'm a headphone type of guy.
Speaker 1: I don't know what that means, all right, personally, don't
Speaker 1: know what that meant. So you mean that Tony looks
Speaker 1: better or worse than what his voice would signify. I
Speaker 1: would like to know, Mike. I hope to see you
Speaker 1: next week on the Cajun Night Live.
Speaker 5: Brother.
Speaker 1: I know you had to head out earlier. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: he headed out actually like nine to forty five. Damn.
Speaker 1: So what does Israel? So why does Israel get a
Speaker 1: pass to do the very things they condemn others for?
Speaker 1: Let's see that. Yeah, I agree with that, Anthony for sure.
Speaker 1: Tony said Victory Day was August tenth or something for
Speaker 1: the nineteen forty five, for the end of World War Two.
Speaker 1: Ah okay, I get it. I get it. His whenever
Speaker 1: China got their statehood back from Imperial Japan, I guess,
Speaker 1: or when Imperial Japan basically surrendered. So fair enough, Anthony
Speaker 1: had to bounce out. Appreciate you, brother, bay roktar drone
Speaker 1: is a Turkish company bee raktar okay, and I might
Speaker 1: be mispronouncing that. Honestly, I don't know what would happen
Speaker 1: if Putin was to be taken out by another Russian. Well,
Speaker 1: they tried that, right, the leader of the Oh shit,
Speaker 1: what's their mercenary group?
Speaker 2: Yeah, any pregosion the leader of h Now I'm blanking
Speaker 2: on it too.
Speaker 1: It starts with a W, but they pronounce it with
Speaker 1: a V. Wagner. It's a Wagner, but it's Wagner for them.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, they tried to take Putin out and it did
Speaker 1: not go well, but they tried.
Speaker 2: Yeah, he looked up succession, segan, Oh, I looked up succession.
Speaker 2: In the next comment, I had to look this up.
Speaker 2: But the vice president in Russia only existed in nineteen
Speaker 2: ninety one to nineteen ninety three. The Prime Minister is
Speaker 2: the next in line. His name is Mikhail mit Schustein. Politically,
Speaker 2: not much would change in Russia if Putin were to
Speaker 2: die and be.
Speaker 1: Replaced, which would make sense, correct me if I'm wrong,
Speaker 1: But Putin has surrounded himself with very, very very like
Speaker 1: minded individuals. So if let's say, for whatever reason, Putin
Speaker 1: suffered a heart attack tonight and not was taken out,
Speaker 1: but like legitimately from stress or something suffered from a
Speaker 1: heart attack. Russia wuld pretty much continue on the way
Speaker 1: it has been. It wouldn't like it's not like the
Speaker 1: war in Ukraine would stopper anything like that.
Speaker 11: Correct.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And the party of Putina is called Yadina Yarosiya
Speaker 2: or Russian Unity. The second place party is a distant
Speaker 2: second place. It's the Communist Party Russian second place.
Speaker 1: I feel like that's like the vast minority, isn't it.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the Communist Well, what I read is Russian Unity's
Speaker 2: forty six percent and Communist is thirteen percent. I don't
Speaker 2: know what the rest would be. I don't think they're
Speaker 2: third parties. They may be just nonpartisan. North Korea has
Speaker 2: the same thing where there's only one party, but you
Speaker 2: can run as a non party candidate for school board
Speaker 2: or something. And in Russia, yeah, I don't know what
Speaker 2: it's like, but Russian Unity is by far the biggest party.
Speaker 1: I could see, like a third of the nation just
Speaker 1: kind of for lack of better words, if we are
Speaker 1: to try to compare apples to apples here in America,
Speaker 1: with the Republican Democrat and Independent party. I could see
Speaker 1: that kind of being the third option that a lot
Speaker 1: of people people would do in Russia, a third of
Speaker 1: the nation kind of going like you said, no party
Speaker 1: or something along those lines. That that makes sense to
Speaker 1: me for sure. And even if they don't vote, if
Speaker 1: of the voting people seventeen percent of one party and
Speaker 1: forty eight percent of the other or forty three percent,
Speaker 1: I think you said, yeah, it's a yeah, that makes
Speaker 1: sense to me. Let's see. Yes, yes, yes, just saw
Speaker 1: SDI dog the hell out of the DA.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 11: Yeah.
Speaker 1: So the sun is rising on the flotilla. Fourteen boats
Speaker 1: have been intercepted. Thirty left just about forty miles away.
Speaker 1: It is go time. We will keep our finger on
Speaker 1: the pulse of this one. I don't know what to expect,
Speaker 1: but I don't I don't know, I don't know.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, just to update, it's now seventeen.
Speaker 1: Seventeen boats have been intercepted intercepted. Wow, so you you
Speaker 1: posted this. It was fourteen boats at ten forty eight.
Speaker 1: It is now eleven twenty nine, not even an entire hour,
Speaker 1: and three more of them have been intercepted. I have
Speaker 1: a feeling I have a feeling that none of them
Speaker 1: are gonna make it to Shore. I could be wrong,
Speaker 1: but I just have a hard.
Speaker 2: Time believed possible.
Speaker 1: I don't know. We'll see, we shall see. Continuing, Tony said,
Speaker 1: for something completely different, Chinese car speed record three hundred
Speaker 1: and eight miles per hour.
Speaker 20: Wow.
Speaker 1: So China's BYD shatters world record for fastest production car
Speaker 1: and it's fully electric. Yo. I will say that I
Speaker 1: am not a fan of the production methods for creating
Speaker 1: electric vehicles, but they are fast. I mean, it's just
Speaker 1: I mean, when you look at what makes an electric
Speaker 1: motor spin, it's pretty much all torque like that's all
Speaker 1: it is, and it's it's pretty insane to watch. So
Speaker 1: three hundred and eight miles per hour is the new
Speaker 1: land speed record. That is impressive. The U nine Extreme
Speaker 1: ev hit a verified top speed of four hundred and
Speaker 1: ninety six kilometers per hour, which is three hundred and
Speaker 1: eight freedom units per hour, actually dethroning the Bugatti Chiron Cheiran.
Speaker 1: I don't know, I don't speak Italian.
Speaker 2: Yeah, something like that.
Speaker 1: Yeah. They also have a train that hit three hundred
Speaker 1: or six hundred and thirty two kilometers per hour. A
Speaker 1: train routinely travels at about four hundred kilometers per hour.
Speaker 1: Somehow we cannot have these things. We could, but we
Speaker 1: can't because reasons. Yeah, it's it's lobbyists. Let's be very
Speaker 1: clear about that. And yeah, you just put that. Now
Speaker 1: there's seventeen intercepted votes, so uh yeah, wild things are
Speaker 1: going on. I think we covered a very wide berth
Speaker 1: of information on this episode, everything from things going on
Speaker 1: with foreign nations, things going on in the American nation,
Speaker 1: we got incest, things going on in Europe or in Britain.
Speaker 1: I should say, it's just yeah, I gotta say, having
Speaker 1: legal having MP's vote and have their name associated with
Speaker 1: defending incest I did not have on my Bengo card
Speaker 1: for this year, especially in Britain. It's not like this
Speaker 1: is in Sub Saharan Africa, or in Middle Eastern countries
Speaker 1: or in Southeast Asia. Having a Muslim MP defend incest
Speaker 1: in Britain. I gotta say that one threw me for
Speaker 1: a loop when I heard about that one today. It's
Speaker 1: it is, it's very Yeah, it's wild times to be alive.
Speaker 1: And the jokes right themselves, I know they do, they
Speaker 1: absolutely do. But anyway, anyway, With all this being said,
Speaker 1: we are going to wrap up this episode of The
Speaker 1: Cajun Knight Live. I want to thank everybody for joining
Speaker 1: in on this evening and for contributing to the conversation.
Speaker 1: Once again, for any listener that would like to join
Speaker 1: into this, there are thousands of you that listen to
Speaker 1: every single episode that I put out with the Cajun
Speaker 1: Knight on the Cult of Conspiracy platform. If you would
Speaker 1: like to join into the conversation next week at Wednesday night,
Speaker 1: nine pm Central, come to the link in the description
Speaker 1: below to The Cajun Night on Patreon. There's only one
Speaker 1: five dollars tier for entry and you get access to
Speaker 1: the videos, you get access to the commercial free listening,
Speaker 1: you get to join into the conversation every Wednesday night.
Speaker 1: We are growing this to become the information sharing base
Speaker 1: that it has become. I am loving this. I know
Speaker 1: all the good members of this group are as well.
Speaker 1: Once again, thank everybody for joining I am the Cajun
Speaker 1: Knight and as always, God bless