Andrew Clavin dissects the Orlando massacre, where Omar Matin—an FBI-investigated, bipolar G4S security guard with Taliban-supporting parents—killed 50 at a gay bar, later claimed by ISIS. His ex-wife’s testimony and a colleague’s account of workplace bigotry reveal systemic protection of extremist Muslims, yet media like the NY Times downplay Islam’s role while Clinton avoids the term "Islamic terrorism." Clavin argues scripture and Sharia justify LGBTQ+ violence, framing the debate as a clash between truth and political cowardice, where Trump’s Muslim ban emerges as the only honest response. [Automatically generated summary]
I had an opening monologue ready that trust me would have made you laugh until you fell out of your chairs.
You would have been sitting there in your cars or your cubicles or your underground bunkers.
You would have been thinking, Lord, have mercy that Andrew Clavin, he is a satirist of pure genius.
He combines a searing intelligence with sparkling humor and dazzling good looks that make him almost painfully attractive, speaking in a purely sexual way.
And all right, that might have disturbed your wife a little, but my opening monologue was so incredibly hilarious that you would have thrown caution and gender identity to the wind.
Unfortunately, these Islamist dirtbags just suck the humor out of everything.
I mean, a radical Islamist walks into a gay bar sounds like the beginning of a joke, but as it turns out, not so much.
Instead, it's the beginning of an atrocity.
An atrocity like eczema or Sarah Silverman just isn't funny at all.
See, I was going to make some absolutely uproarious jokes about gay people suffering from microaggressions from Christians who disapprove of their way of life because that's funny.
But instead, they're suffering from the genuine aggression of an Islamist creep who felt he had the right to kill people whose sexual pleasures offended him, and there's no humor there.
I had a couple of absolute screamers about how the police were out targeting unarmed black youths because that idea is funny.
But instead, the police were doing what they actually do, which is risking their lives and using all their ingenuity to rescue people of every color and kind, and there's not a lot of hilarity in that either when you come to think about it.
I had this one passage, believe me, you would have laughed your head off about how the left was going to blame guns for the killing and how Obama was going to make a speech without even mentioning Islam and how leftists were going to take to Twitter to announce that the real culprit was religion or hate or conservatism or masculinity.
But then all those things actually happened, which was a total comedy killer.
I also had this whole uproarious bit about how Islam was the religion of peace.
It made me laugh just to think about it, and then it didn't.
Finally, I was going to wind up with my big finish about how these little rad Mohammedan filth stains think they're going to go to paradise for robbing parents of their children in the name of their crap religion and how surprised they're going to be when instead they find themselves burning in hell for all eternity.
And okay, I have to admit right this minute, I still find that part kind of amusing.
Trigger warning, I'm Andrew Clavin, and this is the Andrew Clavin Show.
All right, let's get into this.
And I tell you to subscribe so you can not only, I'd like to hear from you in the mailbag we do on Wednesday.
So if you subscribe, you can add to the mailbag and send us your comments.
And of course, you can watch us.
Did you guys see the, you get to see possibly Lindsay came on camera last week.
Did you see the coyote meme that came over my Twitter?
Somebody sent me a howling coyote with more Lindsay, more Lindsay.
Because my audience, these people are animals.
This is why we can't have nice things.
Well, believe me, I would much rather be kidding around today.
And I always say everything in life is funny except other people suffering.
You know, a little bit too much suffering, a little too close to home to really be in a good humor.
So let's talk about this.
Omar Matin, he's an American-born son of Afghanistan immigrants.
The FBI investigated him a couple times, but decided they didn't have anything really good in him.
Goat on him to link him to ISIS.
He walks into a gay bar in Orlando, opens fire, kills 50 people, the worst mass killing in American history, mass shooting in American history, over 50 people wounded.
Here is a witness describing what happened.
He first hears the gunfire, and it's a dance club, right?
So he thought it was part of the music.
Bang, bang, bang, thought it was part of a song.
Sounds like something they come out with.
And then when you turn around, the person next to you is like screaming, there's blood splattering.
I didn't know if it was mine or somebody else's.
The person I was with was shot in the back.
I had to take my bandana off and tie it up, put it in a bullet hole that was in his back so that he wasn't bleeding because he was bleeding so bad his whole pant leg was red and it was still, it was so, it was so soaked.
It was just my hands were just covered.
So during the shooting, while he was talking to police, it became a hostage situation and the cops were talking to him.
They said he was very calm.
He pledged his allegiance to ISIS.
ISIS has claimed credit for the killing.
Somebody says that Matina has been to Saudi Arabia on the Hajj on that visit to Mecca, but it's not clear yet whether he was actually in contact with anybody, although I'm not sure that matters, as we will discuss.
He had a degree in criminal justice technology, and he worked for one of the world's premier private security companies, G4S.
And then in 2009, he got married and bought a home.
He married an immigrant from Uzbekistan.
Her name was, what was her name?
Do I have it?
Yes, Satoria Yousifi.
And she says that soon there were signs of trouble in their marriage.
Let's hear from her.
I was devastated, shocked, started shaking and crying because more than anything, I was so, so deeply hurt and heartbroken for the people that lost their loved ones, the families that are now suffering, the people that are wounded, that are healing.
A few months after we were married, I saw his instability and I saw that he was bipolar and he would get mad out of nowhere.
That's when I started worrying about my safety.
And then after a few months, he started abusing me physically very often and not allowing me to speak to my family, keeping me hostage from them.
And I tried to see the good in him even then, but my family was very tuned into what I was going through and decided to visit me and rescue me out of that situation.
Mentally, he was mentally unstable and mentally ill.
That's the only explanation that I could give, and he was obviously disturbed.
It's not the only explanation because, you know, the guy's father was also selling this line that this came out of nowhere.
I don't know why he did this.
Here's the dad talking about what happened.
I am as shocked as you are.
I don't approve this.
In the United States, anyone has the freedom and the choice to handle his life, what he likes, how to run his life.
And nobody has the right to do anything or impose anything.
So I don't approve of him, what he did.
Did you know that he had purchased these weapons?
No, I wish I did know.
I wish I did know.
If I did know that he purchased the weapon, this would not have happened.
This is very hard to understand.
You saw your son just hours before he went on this rampage.
Exactly.
And Seth was one person, and this person who did this murderous rampage was another person.
Two o'clock, he became another person.
Yeah, only not so much because we now know that the father was, as they put it on the today show, politically active.
That was how he put it.
He was a supporter of the Taliban, and he was posting stuff on Facebook about gay people and the judgment on gay people was coming from God and all this stuff.
So he was inculcated with this Islamism from the start.
And you know, this lady, his ex-wife, you heard her say that she was still trying, the guy's beating her up, and she's still trying to see the good in him, which, of course, we have all heard of that syndrome in battered women where they keep telling themselves the guy's going to reform and all this stuff.
She was very lucky that her family got on this and pulled her out of there.
I mean, that is a very lucky girl because that didn't happen so much in this guy's life.
In a story that is now becoming old, we said he worked at this G4S security company.
This is from MediaIDA, a former Fort Pierce police officer who once worked with 29-year-old Omar Mateen, the assailant in the Orlando night club shooting, said Mateen was unhinged and unstable.
Daniel Gilroy said he worked the 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. shift with G4S Security at the southgate of PGA Village for several months in 2014 to 2015, and Mateen would take over for him on a 3 to 11 p.m. shift.
Gilroy, a former Fort Pierce police officer, said Mateen frequently made homophobic and racial comments.
Gilroy said he complained to his employer, G4S Security, several times, but it did nothing because Mateen was Muslim.
Gilroy quit after he said Mateen began stalking him via multiple text messages, 20 or 30 a day.
He also sent Gilroy 13 to 15 phone messages a day.
I quit because everything he said was toxic, Gilroy said Sunday, and the company wouldn't do anything.
This guy was unhinged and unstable.
He talked of killing people.
And the article points out that following the San Bernardino mass shooting in December, another man told reporters that a neighbor of the suspects in that shooting didn't want to report his suspicions because he didn't want to be accused of profiling somebody because he was Muslim.
You know, in Germany, this story came out last week.
In Germany, three teenage girls colluded to cover up sex assaults against them because they felt bad for their attackers and didn't want to see them discriminated against.
So pupils at the Herder School in Kassel, Germany have been subjected to months of sexual assault by much older migrant males on their way to and from school, dating back as far as September 2015.
The three girls aged between 16 and 18 were repeatedly touched, inappropriately, and verbally abused, but they refused to report the incidents to the police or their schools because the perpetrators were refugees.
One of the girls identified by the pseudonym Anna said of their decision to suppress the sex attacks, quote, we do not want refugees to be discriminated against.
Refusing to Report00:06:00
We do not want people making sweeping accusations about migrants, and we didn't want to foment bad blood.
The school says many others may have experienced this harassment as well.
So we're dealing with the syndrome, right?
We're dealing with the syndrome.
You can't say anything if the guy is Muslim because that would suggest that Muslim people are committing more of these crimes than everybody else, which would be true, which would in turn cause trouble for them because, of course, the truth, we don't want the truth to come out because that would be a terrible thing.
Let's take a look at the way this is getting reported.
First, we'll talk about Obama.
I mean, he has the same problem, right?
He is suffering from this syndrome.
He cannot get the words Islamic terrorism or Islamist terrorism or radical Islamic terrorism or anything having to do with Islamic and terrorism.
He cannot get those words out of his mouth.
Instead, we hear the same old song about guns, as if this guy picked up a gun and that was the problem.
The gun forced his hand to suddenly go around shooting gay people.
This is the third Obama cut, Obama III.
Today marks the most deadly shooting in American history.
The shooter was apparently armed with a handgun and a powerful assault rifle.
This massacre is therefore a further reminder of how easy it is for someone to get their hands on a weapon that lets them shoot people in a school or in a house of worship or a movie theater or in a nightclub.
And we have to decide if that's the kind of country we want to be.
And to actively do nothing is a decision as well.
See, we could be more like France, where they, you know, have a very stringent handgun bans, and this never happens.
Stuff like this never happens.
I mean, we never have mass shootings in France or people with assault, assault, automatic weapons breaking into, you know, Charlie Hebdo and blowing people away or breaking into a rock concert and killing people en masse by the hundreds.
You know, we don't have that.
You know, we wouldn't have that if we just had no guns like France does.
You know, this is like if we had no guns like England does, where they wouldn't have people getting blown up.
You know, it's utter nonsense.
It's utter demagogic nonsense.
So here's Donald Trump, and this makes Trump look like some kind of genius, right?
I mean, this is like Trump.
All he has to do is speak the simple truth, the simple, simple truth, and suddenly, like the guy looks like, you know, he's brilliant.
Here's Donald Trump reacting.
All of us need to confront together the threat of radical Islam.
We have to do it.
Now Hillary Clinton, or as I call her, crooked Hillary Clinton, she's as crooked as they come, refuses to even say the words radical Islam.
Refuses to say the words.
This alone makes her unfit to be president.
In fact, in fact, she wants a 500% increase in Syrian refugees to come into our country.
No good.
Can't do it.
We don't know where they come from, where they are.
So now this devolves into a shouting match.
What are the protesters protesting?
What are they protesting?
You know, that he says that we shouldn't have waves of Muslim immigrants coming into our country the way they do in Germany, so that now the girls get molested on the way to school and can't even say, you know, what did he even say?
What did he, I mean, it's just little common sense.
You know, I hate to say it because the guy is such a belligerent.
Listen to the way the New York Times reports this.
I'm always calling the New York Times a former newspaper.
Here's why.
This is their news story.
This is not, sometimes they'll put news analysis on something when they want to express their opinion.
This is the news story on Donald Trump, okay?
Donald Trump, this is the headline.
Donald Trump seizes on Orlando shooting and repeats call for temporary ban on Muslim migration.
Donald J. Trump on Sunday sought to capitalize on the mass shooting at a gay club in Orlando, reiterating his controversial call for a temporary ban on Muslim migration to the United States.
Most people agree with it, by the way.
It's not that controversial.
And criticizing Hillary Clinton for what he claimed was her desire to dramatically increase admissions from the Middle East.
In a demonstration, this is their news story.
Okay, this is their flat, direct, this is just what happened.
In a demonstration of his willingness to flout convention and engage in a style of demagogic politics rarely displayed by a presidential nominee, Mr. Trump claimed he had warned of the sort of terrorism that marked the shooting.
Okay?
Here's their report on Obama's speech.
The tableau at the White House was chillingly familiar.
The somber president, nearing the end of his eight-year term, walked grim face to the podium to offer his condolences, promised action in the wake of suffering, and pleaded for a new resolve that just might prevent more deaths in a hail of bullets.
We have to decide if that's the country.
That's their lead.
I mean, you could have written the exact opposite.
You could have written the exact opposite.
Obama seizes on Orlando shooting and repeats call for useless gun ban.
I mean, you could have done the exact, written the exact opposite thing.
And then, you know, they even say the list of tragedies on President Obama's watch seems countless by now.
An elementary classroom, a church, a military base, a movie theater, and now a gay nightclub.
The point being that not all of those were Muslim attacks.
It's just, it's the guns, the guns are the only thing that link these things together.
And by the way, just in case you think that, I mean, the idea at the New York Times, I suspect, is there is no truth.
There's only our opinions.
So why shouldn't we report it as we see it?
It's just, let me just read you the headline from the Wall Street Journal, which is kind of a conservative paper, certainly conservative on its op-ed page.
Debating Islamophobia00:13:23
Terrorism again thrust into presidential politics.
The mass shooting in Orlando, Florida elevated an issue that Republican Donald Trump has been stressing throughout his presidential campaign, the threat posed by jihadists bent on killing Americans at home.
Hillary Clinton, his Democratic opponent on Sunday, emphasized other dynamics.
I mean, that's how you write a newsletter, right?
That's what a newslead sounds like.
It's only the left that's lying.
It's only the left that's lying, okay?
It's only the New York Times that lies.
And, you know, I swear they go to work thinking that they're telling the truth.
I swear they go in telling the public service every day, every day.
I read the New York Times front page every day.
And every day it's a new investigation into Trump's dodgy business practices.
And Hillary Clinton, they are scratching their head.
They can't understand why anybody would dislike her.
All right, so Hillary Clinton comes out, and she, of course, you know, she, at least now, has been forced by Donald Trump, and this is only because of Trump.
She has been forced to speak about this.
She is also calling for the federal ban on assault weapons, whatever that means, to come back, which was removed because it was shown not to have had any effect.
So she's calling for something that we know for a fact is useless.
That's her reaction to this.
And now she's questioned on CNN about the Islamic, the problem with not saying the word Islamic.
Here's her response.
First of all, from my perspective, it matters what we do more than what we say.
And, you know, it mattered we got bin Laden, not what name we called him.
And I have clearly said that we face terrorist enemies who use Islam to justify slaughtering innocent people.
And, you know, whether you call it radical jihadism, radical Islamism, I think they mean the same thing.
I'm happy to say either.
But what I won't do, because I think it is dangerous for our efforts to defeat this threat, is to demonize and demagogue and declare war on an entire religion.
That plays right into ISIS's hands.
So this is something that, you know, we can call it radical jihadism, we can call it radical Islamism, but we also, you know, want to reach out to the vast majority of American Muslims and Muslims around this world to help us defeat this threat, which is so evil and has got to be denounced by everyone regardless of religion.
So her argument, her rationale for not being able to link these attacks to Islam or Islamism is strategic.
It's always been strategic.
If we alienate all the nice Muslims, then they won't help us find the bad Muslims.
As opposed to the rationale that if we don't speak up against these guys openly and say this is a problem, then the good Muslims have no cover.
The guys who just want to, you know, nobody cares how people pray in this country.
Nobody cares.
Zero people care how you pray in this country.
But these guys are unprotected when nobody will name the, they won't name the face of the destroyer so that they have no protection at all.
But their idea is if you start to engage Islam, then the good Muslims will be alienated.
Okay, so she asks the question, what difference does it make, as she likes to say?
What difference does it make?
What you call people?
We killed bin Laden.
Why did we have to say that he's Muslim?
We killed him.
What difference does it make if we say that he's Muslim?
Here's the problem.
Obama explains the problem.
Let's let Obama, in more of his speech, this is the second Obama cut.
This is more of his speech.
Let's let him explain what the problem with that is.
But this is a sobering reminder that attacks on any American, regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation, is an attack on all of us and on the fundamental values of equality and dignity that define us as a country.
And no act of hate or terror will ever change who we are or the values that make us Americans.
Exactly.
The values that make us Americans.
We are a creedal country.
We are a country based on a creed.
We're not based on race.
We're not based on sexual orientation.
We are based on a creed.
Our creed formed us.
Our creed makes us who we are.
See, this is the argument of the left.
The argument of the left is there can't be any objective right or wrong because our culture makes us see right and wrong the way we see it.
And that's half right.
That is half right.
Our culture, we have a creed and they have a creed.
We are linked together as Americans by our Constitution and a creed that goes behind it.
And they are linked together by a creed and the creed has a name.
And if you don't name the creed, you can't fight the creed.
Did anybody, listen, this is a conservative audience.
You know, I've been on the, I have always, all my life, been on the liberal side of the gay question, but I know that there are people, many of them, my friends, who in good conscience are on the other side of the gay question.
They feel that gay marriage shouldn't be permitted.
They feel that being homosexual is immoral per se.
You know, I understand that.
They're people of good conscience.
They have their reasons.
We have discussions about it.
Did anybody in this audience, anybody wake up on Sunday and hear this news and think, good.
You know, I didn't like those gay people anyway.
They're not really Americans.
Not one.
Not one.
Here's the thing.
You know, we have this impression because we have been moved toward being stupid by our educational system.
They have taken away from us the basis of our ideas, the foundation of our ideas.
I was talking to a teacher just the other day telling me she has to fight in an English class to teach the Bible.
She has to keep fighting because they keep saying, why are you teaching the Bible?
Well, you're teaching the Bible because that's who you are.
You don't have to believe in it.
It made you.
It made you.
The West was formed by Christianity.
If you look at the countries, if you look at the countries that have gay rights, that believe in gay rights, you're looking at Christendom.
You're looking at countries virtually without exception, not entirely without exception, but almost without exception.
You are looking at countries formed by Christianity.
When somebody says he is against gay marriage and when somebody says he is for it, in the West, they are both arguing from Christian principles.
One is arguing from the judge not and one is arguing from the shall not.
Those are both Christian principles in the Bible.
It's a fair argument.
We are having.
They hate to hear me say this, but both sides yell at me when I say this.
We are having a family quarrel.
This is a family quarrel.
It's not about whether gay people have a right to live.
It's not about whether we love people.
It's not about whether we accept people as they are.
It is a family quarrel about the role of homosexuality in religion, in the spiritual life.
Is it a bad thing per se, or does it not matter?
Is it just another form of love?
That's the argument we're having as Christians.
And that goes for all of us, whether we're Jewish, whether we're atheist, whether we're Christian, and whether we're true, truly Americanized Muslims.
We are formed by Christianity.
That's the argument we're having.
There's no connection to the guy who says, I'm sorry, in my church, I can't accept that gay marriage is right.
There's no connection between that guy and this guy.
He is coming from another planet, another creed.
We are having a family quarrel.
So let's, you know, the question here is how much of this is Islamism, this radical Islam.
See, they want to make the question whether it has anything to do about Islam or not.
That's not a question.
That's not even, there's no debate.
There's no debate about that.
That's just lying.
The New York Times is lying.
Hillary Clinton is lying.
You know, these people who go on Twitter and say this has nothing to do, nothing to do with it.
They're lying.
That's lying.
There is a debate.
The debate is whether Islamism is a twisted, distorted form of Islam or whether it's a natural outgrowth of Islam.
Okay, that's the debate.
That's the argument we have to have.
The argument we have to have is: are we fighting with our, you know, this has nothing to do with whether a Muslim person is a good person or not.
It has to do with the way ideas form people.
You know, I'm talking about the way Christianity formed the West.
When you look at the Islamic world everywhere where Islam is dominant, everywhere where Islam is dominant, you do not see that kind of increasing tolerance.
You do not see those arguments between one form of loving tolerance and another form of loving tolerance.
You see something entirely different.
Everywhere, everywhere Islam is dominant.
You see inequality, you see oppression, you see ignorance everywhere.
And that raises the question whether there is something inherently wrong with this religion.
I'm not answering the question.
I feel that people who are wiser and more informed than me should stand up and debate this without fear.
They should go back and forth on it.
We should be able to see that.
Let's listen for a minute to Andy McCarthy, my pal, Andy McCarthy, great guy who was the prosecutor on the blind sheet case.
He put the guy away, he was the federal prosecutor, put the guy away for the first World Trade Center attack.
He talks about, he says, there are various ways to interpret Islamic scripture in order to attempt to evolve it out of violence.
This, of course, does not change the fact that supremacist, fundamentalist Islam is a legitimate, mainstream, virulently anti-Western interpretation of Islam.
But it does at least mean that there can be other mainstream versions of Islam that reject violence and Islam's politico-legal system.
Sharia, on the other hand, is basically set in stone, or should I say stoning, he has.
The mandate that homosexuals be killed is not from ISIS or al-Qaeda.
It is from Sharia, which draws on Muslim scripture.
You know, here is something that a local TV station in Orlando, WFTV, got exclusively.
This is from, I think, two months ago.
A Sheikh Farouk Shashkalabar from Iran was invited to speak at an Orlando mosque.
Okay, this is just a couple of months ago.
Here's his opinion on the homosexual question.
Death is the sentence.
I mean, look, there's nothing to be embarrassed about this.
Death is the sentence.
But we have to have that compassion for people with homosexuals the same.
Out of compassion, let's get rid of him now.
I love the reasonable voice, the reasonable voice in which this guy reminds me, reminds me of the last scene of Psycho, where he's talking, I don't know why they're, you know, after he's murdered everybody in town, you know, I don't know why I wouldn't harm a fly.
You know, we have to, out of compassion, we have to kill them.
You know, it's a what's it's why should we be embarrassed about this?
You know, he should be completely humiliated by it.
But there is, I hate to laugh because, of course, it ends in tragedy, but there is something hilarious about this guy with his crappy religion telling us that we have to kill our neighbors, you know, and it's all, and we shouldn't be embarrassed by that.
It's just what we have to do.
The book says so.
We have to kill our neighbors.
You know, anyway, this is, you know, I have a piece coming out today, this morning, in City Journal.
They called me yesterday and asked me to write about this.
It took me hours to figure out what I want to say because I hate this.
I hate this thing that people die, parents weep, friends are bereft, lovers are bereft, and we get into this political argument where we use this thing as a football.
There are legitimate debates to be had.
There are legitimate debates about how we handle the Islamic threat.
There are legitimate debates about whether it is just Islamism or whether it is partly Islam as well that has to be reformed and guarded against.
I mean, you know, I think, I don't think Trump is saying any, Trump can be a demagogue, but I don't think he's saying anything demagogic when he calls for a ban, a temporary ban on Islamic immigration, because maybe we have to rejigger our system to weed people out more carefully.
I mean, I just don't think that that is demagogic or crazy.
There is this debate to be had, and we don't have it.
And that's my only issue: there's this debate to be had whether this is a cancer on the body of Islam or its natural child.
And I think that we have to have that.
There's no point.
You know, instead of doing that, what we have is we have the system now.
We've locked in the system where we have a debate between lies and anger.
You know, we have lies on the one side.
What did Hillary Clinton say?
Muslims have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism.
Lies.
Okay, that's lies.
And on the other side, we have this rage, because when people lie to you all the time, you get angry.
And the thing is, lies and anger, a debate between lies and anger, can never be resolved.
The lies cause more anger.
The anger frighten people into lying.
I have to lie or else the angry people are going to take over.
That's the dynamic we get going.
And all you can have in the end is a kind of victory of one form of stupidity over the other.
And that's what this stupid presidential election is about, where the dishonest left is going to nominate the avatar of their dishonesty, and the angry right is going to nominate the avatar of their rage.
You know, that's what we're going to have.
And neither is the way forward.
The way forward is between those two.
Between lies and anger lies the search for truth.
And that is what we have to do.
We have to seek out the truth of who it is and why they are killing us.
And then we have to find the ways to stop them.
If they're just a fragment of this otherwise moderate religion, fine.
Send our law officers and our soldiers to kill them and it'll all be over.
If in fact we are in a clash of civilizations, if in fact we're in a clash of civilizations, we are going to have to fight them at every level of our society, in our educational system, at our borders, in our churches, on TV, we're going to have to gear up and really participate in this clash of civilizations so our civilization wins because it's better.
Suppose and Insurance00:02:55
All right.
I'm sorry.
I wish I could just kid around.
You know, like when we're talking about our politicians, it's all pretty funny because they're just clowns.
These guys, these guys are demons.
Let us not stop from having stuff I like.
The arts always go on and are always a consolation.
We'll do some great film noir, which is some of my favorite stuff ever.
Double Indemnity, one of the greatest movies ever made.
It is one of the greatest movies ever made, one of the best crime stories.
It is based on James M. Kaine's novel of the same name.
James M. Kaine with Dashal Hammett and Raymond Chandler are sort of the three pillars of tough guy American writing.
But James M. Kaine's novel was rewritten for the screen by Raymond Chandler and Billy Wilder working together.
They hated each other.
Wilder hated Chandler because he was a drunk, basically.
However, even James M. Kane admitted that the film of his book was better than his book and that Chandler did something to this film.
He introduced an element of personal relationships in it that just didn't exist in the book.
And it really is brilliant.
Let's take a look at one minute, just for a little bit of relief.
Let's take a look at one minute.
This is an insurance salesman who comes to a femme fatale and starts to sell her insurance and then starts thinking about something else as they're talking.
You're a smart insurance man, aren't you, Mr. Neff?
Well, I've been at it 11 years.
Doing pretty well?
It's a living.
You handle just automobile insurance or all kinds?
All kinds.
Fire, earthquake, theft, public liability, group insurance, industrial stuff, and so on right down the line.
Accident insurance?
Accident insurance?
Sure, Mrs. Dedix.
Wish you tell me what's engraved on that anklet.
Just my name.
Ezra Essence?
Tyler's.
Alyssa.
I think I like that.
But you're not sure.
I'd have to drive it around the block a couple of times.
Mr. Neff, why don't you drop by tomorrow evening around 8:30?
He'll be in then.
Who?
My husband.
You were anxious to talk to him, weren't you?
Yeah, I was, but I'm sort of getting over the idea, if you know what I mean.
There's a speed limit in this state, Mr. Neff.
45 miles an hour.
How fast was I going, officer?
I'd say around 90.
Suppose you get down off your motorcycle and give me a ticket.
Suppose I let you off with a warning this time.
Suppose it doesn't take.
Suppose I have to whack you over the knuckles.
Suppose I bust out crying and put my head on your shoulder.
Suppose you try putting it on my husband's shoulder.
That tears it.
Pure Raymond Chandler dialogue, and of course the conversation begins just to be just how much insurance do you collect if your husband happens to die.
And so that's Double Indemnity, one of the greatest of American films.
Terrific film noir.
We'll have more tomorrow.
We'll have more on everything tomorrow.
And please subscribe so you can get in touch with us for the Wednesday mail bag.
We will talk to you Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday.