All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 8, 2025 - Dinesh D'Souza
52:37
SOMALI BUSINESS MODEL Dinesh D’Souza Podcast Ep1226
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Is the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians the revival of an ancient conflict recorded in the Bible?
The nation of Israel is a resurrected nation.
What if there was going to be a resurrection of another people, an enemy people of Israel?
The Dragon's Prophecy.
Watch it now or buy the DVD at thedragonsprophecyfilm.com.
Coming up, I'll reveal the Somali business model, which involves a kind of political entrepreneurship that, well, rips off the American taxpayer.
I'm also going to ask whether Maduro's days are numbered, and I'll explain why he won't get on a boat.
And finally, a very interesting controversy involving the trans at an iconic American institution, the Daughters of the American Revolution.
Hey, if you're watching on YouTube, X or Rumble, listening on Apple or Spotify, please subscribe to my podcast.
This is the Dinesh D'Souza podcast.
The times are crazy.
In a time of confusion, division, and lies.
We need a brave voice of reason, understanding, and truth.
This is the Dinesh D'Souza podcast.
Since 1971, the year the U.S. completely abandoned the gold standard, inflation has averaged 3.98% per year.
That's the official figure, which the government manipulates to keep it lower than it should be.
But even so, it reveals if you start out with $1 in 1971, that money keeps dropping in value in purchasing power.
In fact, $1 in 1971 is now worth about 12 cents.
Crazy, but true.
How does this happen?
Well, it's because the government continually prints money.
When more money chases the same amount of goods and services, well, money goes down in value.
And because the money printing is not stopping, we know our dollars are going to continue to lose value.
The dollar goes down toward zero every single time.
But you know what?
The government can't print gold, and gold has been money for thousands of years.
Today, gold is a valuable protection against the ongoing depreciation of the dollar.
Is it any surprise that an ounce of gold worth around $44.40 in 1971 is today worth around $4,000?
I own gold as a long-term investment.
You can too, either by buying gold to keep in a safe place or by converting an old IRA of 401k into an IRA in gold.
How do you do it?
Goldco.
They have the best reputation, the best customer service, the best deals.
That's why Debbie and I buy our gold and precious metals from Goldco.
They're rated A plus by the Better Business Bureau.
They have thousands of five-star reviews.
Go to DineshGold.com and request their free 2025 gold and silver kit.
There's no obligation, just information.
And Goldco is offering first-time buyers a rebate of up to 10% back in bonus silver or gold.
So you can help protect your savings over the long term and get some extra gold or silver for doing it now.
Get started.
Go to DineshGold.com.
Well, guys, I'm delighted to be back.
I've been gone a few days, and I hope you enjoyed Danielle sitting in for me.
The, well, I guess the bulk of last week, I was, I did two actually separate trips.
I did one to Florida to speak at a Prager University event, which was at Mar-a-Lago.
By the way, just a gorgeous event with, I think it's their annual fundraiser.
And Glenn Beck was there and spoke, as did Larry Elder.
But there were also a lot of interesting people there.
And Mar-a-Lago, of course, is just this elegant venue.
Trump was not there.
But the mood was very upbeat.
And I was delighted to be a part of it.
The funny thing here, and this is, Debbie will chuckle over this, is that I was actually asked to give the invocation.
And I'm not normally a sort of invocation giver.
I'm certainly not, as you know, a pastor.
And so I had to give a very Dinesh-oriented invocation that Debbie goes.
That really wasn't technically speaking an invocation at all.
It sounded a little bit more like a five-minute speech with an occasional appeal to God.
But nevertheless, it seems to have been well received.
And of course, it was an audience of Jews and Christians, probably about half of each.
So the invocation had to sort of reach pretty broadly.
And so anyway, that was a unique challenge.
First time, I believe it's the first time.
Is it the first time, honey, I've ever given an invocation?
No, there was the one time, Kirk.
Yeah, and there was one time that Kirk Cameron, this was at an event, a big event in California, I believe, where he unexpectedly asked me to give the invocation.
I go, Kirk, I've never given an invocation.
He goes, that's why we're asking you to do it.
We're kind of eager to see where you're going to go.
Go with it.
In any case, later in the week, I did a, well, this is a very short three-day trip to Brazil.
I've actually never been to South America.
The furthest I've been in that direction is Guatemala.
And this was a flight to San Paulo, Brazil.
I was meeting with a bunch of film guys down there who, by the way, have a very successful operation that kind of resembles a, you could almost call it a Brazilian version of Netflix.
They've built a very effective platform and they've got close to a million subscribers.
And so we were exploring ideas for basically building something similar to that here in this country.
It's very much needed.
Netflix, by the way, has just made a massive acquisition of Warner Brothers, paid billions of dollars for it.
And Netflix is just nakedly and blatantly ideological.
I don't know if this is their corporate policy or if they just have people in acquisition who are just viciously left-wing, but they generally won't even look at content from the other side.
Even if the content would do very well with their audience, their point is we have the power to exclude it.
And so we're going to do that.
This is Netflix.
And this is my experience with Netflix now over a decade.
Now, Speaking of films, I want to highlight the dragon's prophecy right here available in DVD.
Also available, by the way, streaming.
You can stream it off the website, the dragonsprophecyfilm.
Don't forget thefilm.com.
But DVDs, it's not too late to order them.
You'll have them in time for Christmas.
You can use them for gifts, stocking stuffers.
It's a great way to get the message out and also to own the film for yourself.
It's just kind of nice.
At least for some people, it's like, okay, you know, I can stream it, but it's kind of nice for me to have just a kind of a physical copy, so to speak, that I can play at any time.
All right.
I've got a few things I want to cover today.
The first one might seem small in itself, but I don't think it's all that small.
It involves the Democratic congressman from southern part of Texas, Henry Quayar.
Now, this guy is a Democrat.
He's not the most left-wing Democrat in the world.
He is left, but not as left as perhaps the mainstream of the party.
But guess what?
Mostly he votes with the Democrats.
He votes on the team.
And he voted to impeach Trump.
And yet, recently, this guy who is facing prosecution on corruption charges, who claims he's being targeted, and that the only reason that he's being prosecuted is because he's for Board of Security and because he's not a Democrat who always plays along with the Democratic agenda.
So that's why they're going after him.
And his daughters evidently wrote a very heartfelt letter to Trump.
And so Trump pardoned him.
I think Trump pardoned him in the expectation that this guy would be like, thank you very much, Mr. Trump.
And I will now kind of step aside and I will maybe not be involved in politics or I will become a Republican because you're the one who kind of bailed me out in a situation where a lot of people in my own party were going after me.
But instead, Henry Queyar has decided I'm going to run for re-election as a Democrat.
The pathway has now been cleared for me.
So take that, Mr. Trump.
And Trump is posted something on Truth Social suggesting that he's annoyed, he's irritated.
Seems to me this is actually a catastrophic mistake on the part of Trump and Trump alone.
And I say that because it is a very close battle for the House.
We cannot afford to throw away a seat.
Now, I'm not saying we've thrown it away, but here is an incumbent Democrat.
He would surely have been defeated.
He would surely have been out for the count.
That seat is very winnable by the Republicans, and it's harder to win with the incumbent running.
That's just a law of politics.
So what's really happened is that the net effect of this pardon, which seems to have been motivated mostly by kind of humanitarian concerns, but also I think with Trump, you know, Trump thinks, well, look, you know, I'm a victim of law affair.
This guy's the victim of law affair.
But as Debbie and I were saying on our way to the podcast this morning, this guy is a victim of law affair in a special sense.
He's part of a gang.
It's kind of like I'm a member of the Crips.
And the Crips are bad guys.
And I'm a bad guy.
I may not be as bad as all the other Crips, but I'm still bad.
And I still want to belong to the team.
And so the team, my own team, has organized a hit on me.
And then somebody else comes from the outside and bails me out so that I can continue to serve the team.
This is not good.
This should not have happened.
And it will be very, very annoying if Queyar retains that seat because although he votes our way once in a while, it is only once in a while.
Most of the time, he votes against us.
So we will have thrown away a very winnable seat.
Let me talk about this Somali situation in Minnesota, the welfare fraud.
The point here is that the Democrats are very eager to make this situation about individuals.
If you listen to their message, Hakeem Jeffries, but also the people in Minnesota, Tim Walz and others, they're like, well, there were some individuals who engaged in some inappropriate behavior.
They want to make it about individuals.
But it's not just about individuals.
Yes, of course, all crime involves individuals, but it involves individuals who are functioning here as part of coordinated networks.
And the coordinated network involves the Democratic Party.
It involves Tim Walz.
It involves the National Party.
It involves a strategy the Democrats use in which they import these immigrants.
And by the way, these are not people who come the normal way.
We didn't get this huge concentration of Somalians in Minnesota because Somalis applied, quote, as individuals.
They're brought here en masse.
They're brought here for political motives.
And once they're brought here, you know, and some people think this is just a matter of, you know, barbarians are brought here.
They don't know about Western civilization.
That may be true, but they are somehow drawn into these corrupt networks where the people who are feeding the beast are very well aware of what they're doing.
And the reason that they can't stop and the reason that they won't denounce it or bust these networks is the networks exist to benefit them.
So, in other words, this is a way to strengthen an arsenal of nonprofit organizations that are all left-wing and that siphon off money that comes out of this corruption.
Then you have Democratic political candidates that rely on the Somali machine to deliver votes because there's nothing easier than getting the vote of 100 displaced, ignorant people.
Now, I'm not saying that they're ignorant politically, they actually know on which side their bread is buttered.
They actually know that the Democratic Party is basically there to serve them, kind of like a gang.
And so, what you have here is you have the recipients and the fraudsters at the local level.
These are the individuals, but there are also groups.
There are imams, there are mosques, there are NGOs, there are 501c3 nonprofits, there are campaigns, there are staffers connected with Democratic officials, both at the national and the local level.
All of these people are functioning together in a harmonious way.
Recently, to show his solidarity, Jacob Fry, the mayor of Minneapolis, there was a social media post.
It was slightly comical.
He was at a restaurant, and apparently, he was eating Somalian food to show his solidarity with the Somali community.
And you could tell that he not only didn't want to eat the food, I think he felt, I cannot eat the food.
So, when you watch the video, you see what he's really doing is he's pretending to eat the food, and all he's doing is, and this to me is reminiscent of a kid who's given like a bowl of porridge or just a stew, and the kid just doesn't want to eat it and is afraid it may come back out if they eat it.
So, what do they do?
They just like play with the food, they just like poke it, they stir it around, and that's what Jacob Fry is doing with his meal.
You can see that the meal looks like complete slop, but he's going to pretend like it's extremely delicious.
Now, so the question I'm asking is: why is he playing this game?
Why does he feel obliged to do that?
And the answer is: he's beholden to the Somali community.
He's beholden to the Somali voters.
He's beholden to the Imams.
He's beholden to the very groups that pull off the fraud.
And so there needs to be a crackdown on all this.
I realize that a lot of people think that they can just say, deport them all.
You're not going to be able to deport them all.
Many of those people were offered legal asylum.
It's not very easy to undo that.
So it's much better instead of pointing to these utopian remedies, deport them all.
Now, look, in the case of Ilhan Omar, if you can show that she married her brother and then deport her and make her resign.
If it were the Democrats, they would ruthlessly be doing this.
Their DOJ would be looking into the Ilhan Omar case.
I'm not sure our DOJ is up to it.
And this is really my objection to Pam Bondi: I think that there's just a kind of lethargic approach over there that is at a time when we really need much more vigorous action.
All right, let me say a few words about Venezuela and Maduro.
I think what's going on in Venezuela is that Trump has decided I have to get Maduro out.
Maduro, apparently, at least according to reports, was trying to buy his way out, but buy his way out at a pretty high price.
He's like, I want, you know, $200 million and I want my vice president, Del Cat, Rodriguez, I think it is, to take my place.
And or I want to stay for 18 months and then I'll have a free election.
And Debbie was like, hold on, wait.
And then you'll have a free election.
Are you conceding that all the elections that have been going on now for the better part of 20 years have all been fraudulent?
Is this a little bit of a Freudian slip on Maduro's part?
Yes, I'll agree to a free election.
Very telling.
But Trump is not having any of it.
I think Trump's point is: we've already crossed the Rubicon.
This has already gotten too far.
And I will say that I think that the issue of blowing up these boats and drug trafficking is something of a rationale or pretext.
It's a pretty good rationale, by the way.
Trump, by the way, does not want to get the United States entangled in Venezuela in any long-term sense.
I think his idea is to get Maduro out and then let the Venezuelans fix their own country, which, by the way, they're fully capable of doing.
In fact, I saw this morning that Maria Corina Machado has submitted to the Trump people a full-blown blueprint or plan for what comes next in Venezuela.
In other words, I think what she's saying and what the opposition is basically saying is: look, this is not a case where the society has to be turned upside down.
This is, by the way, not the same as, say, Iran.
In Iran, you had a revolution in 1979.
The revolution has had full power for really now 45 years.
And so you'd have to turn Iranian society upside down if you wanted to reform that place.
Because in a way, you could say that this Islamist ideology of the mullahs has seeped all the way down to every, you know, every municipal official, every dog catcher.
And so that is a problem.
It's a problem to remake a society from the ground up.
It's normally, it takes a long time and it's not easy to do.
Probably resembles something of what was attempted with Japan and Germany after World War II.
It was not easy, and the boat societies had to be flattened to the ground before that could even be conceived.
But in Venezuela, according to Maria Corina, that's not necessary.
You don't need to fire everybody in the armed forces.
Apparently, they've identified all the bad guys.
And their point is these are the people that need to be removed, that need to be ejected.
But a lot of the ordinary soldiers are patriots and they do what they're told.
And so there is no need in Venezuela to have this kind of an absolute leave-no-stone unturned approach.
Now, there's some debate about the quote-legality of blowing up these boats.
But let's remember that these boats do not have the normal protections of international law.
International law, by the way, is a set of rules.
And some raise the question of what do these, where's the legitimacy for these rules even coming from?
But let's assume that they are legitimate.
By and large, international law is a treaty among the countries of the world that says that a certain amount of deference has to be extended when a country is involved.
And so, for example, if you have a ship, let's say, that is flying the Chinese flag or the British flag, you can't just go into the international waters and blow up that ship because that would represent a violation of international law and to some degree an act of aggression against that country.
Now, the point I want to make is that none of this applies to these drug boats.
You can debate whether they are part of some narco-trafficking network.
You can debate whether what is the degree of involvement by the Venezuelan state.
You can debate whether this is just, well, listen, these are just people selling drugs.
They're not really terrorists.
They shouldn't be treated like terrorists.
They're just drug dealers.
They should be arrested, but they shouldn't be blown up.
You can have all those discussions.
But the point I'm trying to make is that when you have these boats that are by and large engaged in cross-national or intra-national trafficking, they don't represent any country.
So, to that degree, they do not deserve the protections of international law that say, for example, this is a merchant marine that represents Norway or represents Colombia or represents Sri Lanka.
International law is designed to protect, if you will, countries one from the other in this way.
I think Trump's idea here is to use the pretext, and I'm not afraid to call it a pretext, of this narco-trafficking network to bring about real change in Venezuela.
Regime change, yes, and regime change in Venezuela would be a very good thing.
It's still going on.
This is MyPillow's big three-in-one sale with a limited edition product, a back-in-stock special, and a close-out deal you won't find anywhere else.
MyPillow bed sheets, they're just $29.88, any color, any size, any style, even kings.
Regular price $119.98 and now just $29.88.
But go and get them now because once they're gone, they're gone for good.
My towels, they're back in stock.
Get a six-piece MyTowel set, regular price $69.98, now only $39.98.
And for the first and only time, get their limited edition premium MyPillows made with Giza cotton and a designer gusset, queen size $17.98, King's only $19.98.
Also, for a limited time, when you order over $100, you get free shipping plus $100 and free digital gifts.
Call 800-876-0227.
That's 800-876-0227.
Or go to mypillow.com.
When you use promo code Dinesh, you get the best offers ever.
Quantities are low, so move now.
Again, it's mypillow.com and the promo code is D-I-N-E-S-H Dinesh.
Guys, I'm delighted to welcome to the podcast Laura McDonald.
She is an attorney.
She is also a member of an organization called the Daughters of the American Revolution, the DAR.
Now, the DAR is an iconic institution and it's facing a very unique challenge, which is what is it going to do about the trans ideology?
In other words, we have trans people who are trying to get in to the DAR, and these are not biological females.
So basically, this is a very odd situation.
And Laura's not here as a spokesman for the DAR.
She is a member.
She has the office of recording secretary for the Texas chapter, but she does know all about it.
By the way, there is a website which I'll direct you to.
It's daughtersadvocatingrestoration.org.
Laura, thanks for joining me.
I really appreciate it.
I know, think of the DAR, the Daughters of the American Revolution, as a very traditional organization that maintains a kind of direct line of continuity or descent to the revolution itself.
But a lot of people may not know a lot about the organization.
Can you start by talking about what this organization is?
What is its size?
And how did it become this kind of iconic American institution?
Sure, sure.
Well, thank you for having me, Mr. D'Souza.
First, let me say I'm not an attorney.
I'm just a member concerned about this issue.
But the DAR was founded in 1890, and it was founded because the sons of the American Revolution had recently organized, and their wives and their sisters and their daughters wanted to be a part of that.
And they were told, no, you're not a man, you're not a son.
So they formed their own organization.
So again, it's 136-year-old organization, approaching 136-year-old organization.
It's made up of roughly 190,000 members.
Now, there have been several thousand resignations over the last couple of years over this issue.
So we're not exactly sure what the number is, but it's huge.
There are over 3,000 chapters across the country, and it functions like a republic, so to speak.
So we have state and national officers.
Each state has its own regent who represents their state at what's called the National Board of Management.
And each year at our annual meeting called Continental Congress, we send delegates to vote on various things.
So that's a little bit of background.
Let me tell you the motto of the DAR is God, Home, and Country.
And our mission is historic preservation, patriotism, and education.
All right.
So this is almost the definition of a traditional and one could even add conservative organization.
And I mean conservative here, not so much in an ideological sense.
It is conserving the principles of the American founding as embodied in people descended from the founding.
And of course, it's almost comical to say, but it is a women's organization, as the name suggests, Daughters of the American Revolution.
So when did it become clear that there was an attempt to kind of do a trans infiltration of the organization?
It sounded to me like this has been going on now for a couple of years.
So when did it start and how did it start?
Well, we've been knowing about it for a couple of years.
We've been told that it started maybe even as early as 2012.
We're not really sure, but I came upon the knowledge because as a member of the DAR, I was going to give a presentation to our local Rotary Club about Greeds Across America, which is something that we participate in.
And whenever I was preparing my speech for that, I was going to make a joke and tell the men in the audience, sorry, fellas, DAR is just for the ladies.
And as soon as I had that thought, the person that came to my mind was Rachel Levine.
the former health secretary.
I thought, what are we going to do when Rachel Levine decides he wants to join the DAR?
And so I immediately went to my mother, who is our current chapter regent.
This was back in 2023.
So she wasn't at that point.
But she said, I'm afraid it's already happening.
And so she told me that earlier in that year, there was an amendment to the national bylaws at our annual meeting that added additional anti-discrimination language.
So the bylaws already had anti-discrimination language there.
But they went and added these other things that said we cannot discriminate based on race, religion, sexual orientation, and then one key phrase, which was any other characteristic protected by applicable law.
And so there was a lot of confusion about what does that mean.
So during that debate at Continental Congress, the President General was explicitly asked, does this mean that we cannot vote against men who have an amended birth certificate?
And the answer was, no, you cannot.
If you're voting against a man who has a amended birth certificate that says he's a female, you can't do that.
That's discrimination.
So there's a lot of confusion around when and how it started.
But when we talk about that and we say that that opened the door for this, we're told by our state and national officers that that bylaw amendment had no connection to gender identity.
So then when we can see that and say, okay, maybe it did, maybe it didn't.
But nonetheless, we know that men who self-identify as women are eligible for membership.
So let's vote on that.
Let's have a debate and discussion on that.
They tell us, no, no, that was already decided at that Continental Congress.
So they talk out of both sides of their mouth on this issue.
So I don't know when it actually started, but that's what really brought it to light.
And since then, the former President General admitted in a message to the members that men are eligible for membership.
She calls them trans women.
So that has been confirmed.
And we know that there are currently men who are members of the DAR.
Just to be a, to try to hone in on what exactly is going on here, is this the case that the leadership of the organization is politically left-wing and supportive of trans ideology and is therefore at odds with the general tone of the members?
Or option two, is it that these are basically bureaucratic people who are afraid of controversy and lawsuits?
It's not that they personally support the trans.
They probably wish that they weren't, that the situation wouldn't arise at all, but they're not willing to confront it.
Is it A or is it B or a little of both?
It's a little of both.
You've nailed it perfectly.
So when I first found out about this, I wasn't sure if it was mostly B, where it's just we don't want to deal with this and let's just go along to get along.
We don't want the fight, which I still don't agree with that.
But I wasn't sure if that was the mindset.
It wasn't until I confirmed the veracity of a document that was internally circulated between state and national officers.
It's called a, it's an FAQ that the former president general put out to answer frequently asked questions about this topic.
And one of the questions was: if trans women are eligible for membership, then are men eligible for membership?
And the answer given was no, because trans women are not men.
Trans women live and identify as women.
So once I saw that document and confirmed the veracity of it, that it actually did come from the former president general, I knew that that is, that's an ideological statement.
If you're doing it because you think, if you're allowing these members because you think we must do it because maybe we'll lose our nonprofit tax status and we don't want to fight, that's one thing.
But to put out a document to tell members that trans women are not men proves and shows that this isn't, it's ideologically driven.
Now, do I think every single person at the top is ideologically driven?
No.
I think there's a relatively few that are.
But then you've got the other category, what you're talking about, which is they just don't want to fight it.
They just want to go along to get along.
So what you seem to be saying is that there's some maybe in each camp, but they come together because the result is the same.
In both cases, they're like, we, now, I'm sure that the leadership is aware that they are out of step with the members because if they thought that the members were on board, they would agree to a vote.
They'd say, all right, well, let's put it up to a vote and people are going to express their views.
But it sounds to me like they recognize that this is an organization that is traditional, it is conservative.
And so if they have a vote, they're likely to get crushed.
Exactly.
That's exactly right.
And that's what we've said from the get-go.
If this is a good thing, if the DAR is proud of this stance of being inclusive and welcoming of trans women, then why not make it known?
Why not post that on the website?
Why not publicize that everywhere?
They don't do that because they know it's not popular.
And I do believe they know that if it were to be brought to the floor for a vote, that it would be voted against, that the membership, the assembly, would vote to exclude or continue to exclude men.
We've excluded men since our founding.
But when it's framed in the right way and they understand what they're voting on, they know and we know that the membership would vote to keep the DAR a women's only organization.
What to me is really sad about all this is that, you know, we've kind of been here before.
And by that I mean I think of, for example, organizations like the Boy Scouts, which seemed to be very traditional and in fact a great incubator of, you know, outdoor activities, building strengths and character.
It was a really good boys' organization.
And then it got sort of ruined and destroyed over exactly this kind of issue.
I mean, obviously, it wasn't specifically the trans issue.
It had to do with homosexuality and a lot of other things.
But what I'm talking about is the outcome was a crippling of the organization.
And it seems like not only is that something that is possible here, I wonder if in some perverse way if that is even the goal.
In other words, activists like to identify these conservative organizations and bring them to their knees or knock them down.
Exactly.
And that's been my fear.
And to touch on that, whenever I first found out about this, I was talking with a fellow member who is very in the know with DAR, been in much longer than me.
She was taking the mindset of, you really think that there's an agenda?
Do you really think that these men are going to try to join the DAR?
The answer was, sadly, yes, I do.
I do believe that because I understand what's going on in the culture.
I understand that there is an agenda to see iconic American cultural institutions brought down, infiltrated, and to change them.
And I told her, and I believe it, to mark my words, that if we don't fix this, there will be a man that is president general before it's all said and done.
That's the goal, is to undermine and to destroy what we have built, things that are built on truth and beauty and the historic record.
That's what I believe is going on here.
What is the way out of this, in your opinion, as of now?
Because it seems like you've got the kind of unhappy situation that you've got a leadership that thinks that they are pretty secure in their leadership.
They're like, we're going to fight this.
We're going to resist the pressure of the members.
Even if we can't defend what we're doing, we'll claim that we have to stay in conformity with the law.
So it's like a done deal, a fait accompli.
So just kind of grin and bear it.
If you don't want to grin and bear it, what can you do?
Okay.
Right now, we have a call for a special meeting that's been published.
So our national bylaws say that at the request of 30 chapters in 10 states, the president general shall call a special meeting.
So up to this point, every attempt we've made to rectify this situation has been quashed by the National Board of Management.
I've been calling them gatekeepers because they won't let it come to a vote.
Well, we figured out that we can go around them if we get 30 chapters in 10 states to sign on to this call for the special meeting.
So if they will go to, members will go to Daughters Advocating for Restoration blog, there's a roadmap of how they can present this to their chapter to sign on to the call.
So right now we're at 12 chapters.
We published the call at the end of November.
So just within two to three weeks, we've already had 12 chapters sign on to that.
We're almost at 50% of what we need.
So I do feel like we're going to meet that goal, but we can't just go to sleep on this.
We've got to get the word out to members to let them know that they have a voice.
And at this special meeting, we're going to vote on a resolution that will define a woman, that will interpret the meaning of a woman in our bylaws.
So since we can't amend our bylaws, okay, well, here's a resolution that the Assembly says, this is how we interpret the word woman in those bylaws.
And it's very plain what it says.
It says that men who have an amended birth certificate are not eligible for membership.
So it will be a reckoning.
It will be, once we have the vote, there will be nowhere for anybody to hide.
Everybody will know what they're voting on.
Well, Laura, I want to commend you on the stuff you're doing because, you know, so often we are in these organizations, these kinds of things happen.
People are either too apathetic or they look the other way or they shrug their shoulders.
So it's really important to step up and make this kind of a challenge.
I certainly hope you succeed, but whether you do or not, this kind of fight has got to occur all the way through the culture.
And I think you're rightly identifying this as an iconic target.
If this wasn't an old traditional all-American patriotic institution, they wouldn't be going after you.
And I suspect that some of the people who are trying to become members don't even care about the organization and don't even care about being members per se.
What they want to do is make an example and they want to prove a point.
And you need to prove your point.
So, guys, I've been talking to Laura McDonald, member of the DAR.
By the way, the website daughtersadvocatingrestoration.org.
And there's also a give, send, go where you can contribute.
Laura, thank you very much for joining me.
Thank you so much, Mr. D'Souza.
Many, many thanks.
We are in the section of my book, Life After Death, The Evidence.
We're talking about biology.
And what we're trying to show in this chapter is that there is built into nature a kind of developmental pattern that is moving from the material to the non-material, or to put it differently, that is moving from matter to consciousness, because consciousness is something that is non-material.
And that's important because we're asking the question: can consciousness, in whatever form, survive death?
That's the question.
Now, I'm talking about the peculiar way in which our universe is designed, that is sometimes called the anthropic principle, but also the unique way in which our planet, i.e., the Earth, is designed.
And that is the anthropic principle as applied to biology.
The Earth has very special qualities.
And what I want to do is focus on a few of them to show how uniquely adapted they are to life.
If these properties were different, then life couldn't exist on Earth.
We are sort of tailor-made, you could say, for this planet.
And the evidence for this is overwhelming, but it's not something we normally think about or pay attention to.
So it's worth getting an idea of what I'm saying here because what I'm getting at here is that nature itself is not random.
Nature exhibits important characteristics and patterns and built-in structures.
And again, it's tempting to say, and this is something skeptics will say, well, that's evolution today.
Haven't you heard of evolution?
I've heard of evolution.
We're talking about things that did not evolve.
That's the key point.
None of what I'm talking about evolved.
So let's start by talking about the fact that human beings can live only within a certain kind of temperature range, right?
We normally say, well, it's really hot.
It's going to be 102 degrees.
Or it's really cold.
It's like, you know, it's seven degrees.
Or it's minus seven degrees.
Well, all right.
Let's create a temperature range of, let's say, 40 degrees below zero to about 120 degrees above zero.
That's our temperature range.
We cannot live on a planet where the temperature is not in that range.
And all over the earth, the temperatures are in that range, which is to say that if you take something like the sun, which happens to be eight light minutes away from the earth, if the sun were closer, we would bake.
If the sun were further, we would freeze.
Mars is, for example, further away than Earth, and temperature at Mars can go to 200 degrees below zero.
Can't exactly live, at least not without some kind of regulated temperature in Mars.
Elon Musk, I'm sure, is thinking about that problem, but that is a problem.
So, what that means is that our planet is just where it ought to be in order for us to be here.
The planet couldn't be located elsewhere, so to speak, because the temperatures wouldn't be right.
And those temperatures, by the way, have not, quote, evolved.
They're not the product of any kind of Darwinian evolution.
All right, let's talk about the moon.
The moon, many of you know, well, we all know, is responsible for the tides, the gravity, the gravitational force of the moon, and by the way, also the sun produces the tides.
But the moon actually also plays a critical role in the Earth having a certain tilt.
So the Earth is round, but it's round and tilted.
It's at a 23-degree tilt.
Now, interestingly, it has to be at that tilt.
If the Earth was not at that tilt, there would be sharp fluctuations of the climate.
It would make food production very difficult.
It would make human life much more difficult.
But the tilt is just right.
It is a very interesting quirk that our planet is tilted in the right way.
The planet Jupiter happens to be a giant planet.
It's in our galaxy, and it serves a remarkable function.
And that is to say, it has a massive gravitational force.
And over many, many millions of years, there are comets and meteorites that are headed to Earth.
But guess what?
They're diverted by the gravitational force of Jupiter.
They don't land here because Jupiter, in a way, pulls them away.
So, isn't this amazing?
Jupiter, which again didn't evolve.
Jupiter was part of the, you know, part of the explosion of the stars that began really with the Big Bang.
Jupiter plays a kind of necessary vacuuming function of steering away objects that would otherwise hit the Earth.
Now, most people know, you know, that the Earth is mostly made up of water.
And our bodies also are mostly made up of water.
And as it turns out, water is absolutely fundamental for human existence.
And water has all kinds of very odd qualities that are not typical of other substances.
And yet it has to have those qualities.
Otherwise, we wouldn't really be here.
Notice, for example, that with most other substances, if they can exist in a solid and a liquid form, the solid form is going to be heavier than the liquid form.
So that if you put a solid by and large, it's going to drop to the bottom.
That's fairly normal with substances.
It has to do with their properties of expansion and contraction.
But by the way, that's not true of water.
Ice is actually lighter than water.
In other words, the same amount of water made into ice actually weighs less as ice than it would weigh as water.
And as I say, that's kind of unique.
Why is that important?
Well, it's important because if it wasn't that way, the lakes and the oceans would all freeze.
Why?
Well, think about it like this.
During the winter, the surface layer of the ocean begins to freeze, and the surface layer of lakes begins to freeze.
Think of a lake.
So the top layer is starting to become hard.
It's becoming ice.
Now, if this ice were to go to the bottom of the lake, then the next top layer would also freeze and it would sink down to the bottom.
And so the lake would become a sediment of solid ice all the way down and it would permanently stay frozen, particularly if the temperature remained cool.
Or even if it didn't, the warming would begin at the top and the bottom would remain solidly frozen.
But ice isn't like that.
What happens is that the top layer freezes and it stays on the top.
So when the temperature warms, that ice then dissolves and it's back to water again.
So, in other words, we don't have to worry about permanently frozen lakes and oceans.
Why?
Because of this peculiar quality of water.
I want to quote the biologist Michael Denton.
He goes, water is uniquely and ideally adapted to serve as the fluid medium for life on Earth, not just one or many, but every single one of its known properties.
Without those properties, I guess what I'm trying to say is we wouldn't, any of us, be here.
And again, you know, evolution has nothing to do with any of this.
No one, we're talking about the conditions that have existed on Earth very often for hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions of years.
And these conditions didn't, quote, evolve.
In fact, they are necessary to make evolution itself possible.
And finally, I want to say a couple of words about the human cell.
Now, again, human cells do not evolve.
Human cells are the way they are, they are a finished product.
And in fact, when Darwin confronted the issue of the cell, he shrugged his shoulders.
He didn't know what to make of it.
He cannot answer the question: how did we get a cell?
All that Darwin said is: given the fact that we have some forms of life, I'm going to try to show you how they could evolve into other forms of life.
But if you asked him, How did we get life?
How did we get a cell, the basic unit of life?
Darwin's answer is, I have no answer.
In other words, this basic template of life has to be there at the beginning.
And without it, no evolution is even possible.
So let's look at the cell.
The cell is, as it turns out, functions really as two things at the same time.
And each of the two things is remarkable, but putting them together, it is incredible.
So the first thing is the cell functions like a factory.
I'm quoting from the biologist Franklin Harold: even the simplest cell is an exceedingly complex mixture containing thousands of different molecules.
These cells display levels of regularity and complexity that exceed by orders of magnitude any non-living object in nature.
Quote: The cell's molecular machinery works in an intricate way that suggests a unity of function or purpose.
Cell components, as we know them, are so thoroughly integrated that one can scarcely imagine how any one function could have arisen in the absence of others.
This is sort of like a fully functioning factory.
Cells break down foodstuffs, extract energy, manufacture precursors, assemble constituents, note and execute genetic instructions, and keep all this frantic activity coordinated.
The cell is already there.
It functions like a factory.
And here's the other thing: not only does the cell function as a manufacturing plant, it also functions as a digital software program of unrivaled complexity.
So the information in a single cell.
And by the way, the cell is so small, it can be likened to a speck of dust.
And yet, inside of that speck of dust, you have information equivalent to a hundred encyclopedias.
The processing power of the cell is comparable to any existing supercomputer.
And not only that, but the cell has the ability to copy itself.
One biologist somewhat humorously said, the dream of every cell is to become two cells.
And so think about this because clever as we are as human beings, we don't know how to make a cell.
In fact, the greatest achievements of mankind, of all of human civilization, don't compare with the creative and technical ingenuity built into every living cell.
I mean, we don't even know how to make a hammer that can work all by itself and, let's say, produce little hammers.
I mean, leave aside the idea that we don't know how to make even a bee or a house fly.
So in nature, you have bees, you have house flies, countless other creatures.
They all function autonomously and they reproduce themselves with prodigious fecundity.
So what we're getting at here, and we'll develop this point tomorrow, is that we're seeing that nature itself exhibits a built-in pattern.
I'm trying to show not only that nature suggests a patterner or designer, that's kind of obvious, but I'm also saying that the pattern itself is kind of showing us that nature is directional.
It's going in a certain arrow.
And where is that arrow going?
That's what we need to find out, because that's what will tell us something important about life after death.
Subscribe to the Dinesh D'Souza podcast on Apple, Google, and Spotify.
▲
Export Selection