Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 7, 2015 - No Agenda

02:45:20

728: It's the Mold!

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Yeah.
	No.
	It would...
	No.
	Yeah, no.
	Yeah, no.
	But...
	No, no.
	Adam Curry, John C. Dvorak.
	It's Sunday, June 7th, 2015.
	Time once again for your Gitmo Nation Media Assassination Episode 728.
	This is No Agenda.
	Analyzing every glitch in the data sets and broadcasting live from FEMA Region 6, the Crackpot Condo in downtown Austin.
	Good morning, everybody.
	I'm Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley, where I have nothing funny to say, I'm John C. Forack.
	It's Crackpot and Buzzkill in the morning.
	Thanks for the effort.
	I put it all out there.
	It's appreciated, man.
	Welcome to the show.
	Swinging for the fences.
	How you doing?
	I'm doing good.
	How you doing?
	How you doing?
	I'm doing...
	Eh, the mold thing is still there, but it's not as bad as Thursday.
	Oh, yes, the mold.
	It's not as bad as...
	This is a mold update.
	Do they give you...
	During the news, do they do a mold thing?
	Yes.
	Oh, yeah.
	Pollen count?
	Yes.
	Oh, yeah.
	Pollen's not mold.
	No, but they have the pollen...
	Okay, they have the allergy alert.
	Okay.
	See, right now we have grass, which is low, but the mold spores, as I've learned, very high.
	Oh, you've been ingesting spores!
	I'm telling you, man, that stuff gets in your nose and messes with your shit.
	It seems like two different parts of the body, but go on.
	But I have the ionizer.
	Remember I had that from the old place?
	Yeah, well, don't you want a HEPA filter?
	Yes, it has a HEPA filter, a UV filter, it has an ionizer, and it does ozone.
	What is the ozone supposed to accomplish?
	I don't know.
	It makes it smell fresh.
	Yeah.
	I always find ozone smells acrid.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Maybe.
	A little bit.
	It's not supposed to be good for your nasal membranes.
	Yeah.
	Okay, it's alright.
	I'm good.
	I've been popping my Sudafed pills.
	I'm good to go.
	I'm very productive.
	I'm ready, John.
	Let's go.
	Let's have a good show.
	Sudafed is all over me.
	I'm good, good, good, good, good.
	I don't really want to start with where we left off.
	What did we start with on Thursday?
	Did we start with Agenda 21?
	No, yeah.
	Yeah?
	I think.
	Or was it Geller?
	Geller?
	Yeah, Pamela Geller.
	I already forgot about her.
	Oh good, well then I'll bring her in.
	I'll bring her in right away.
	Do you recall when we first analyzed this Garland, Texas attempt to kill her?
	Because of the cartoon contest.
	Or bomb her.
	We must bomb her or any of those things.
	And it was, to me at least, it was pretty obvious that we have two sides kind of playing together.
	I don't think we talked at all about this on the last show.
	Maybe it was the show before?
	No, I think it was a while ago.
	Go ahead.
	This is the woman who puts on these events.
	Well, she puts on the event.
	She's really the spokeshole for this...
	What's the name of the outfit?
	We Hate Muslims, Inc.
	Yes, that would be it.
	We Hate Muslims, Inc.
	And, of course, she is...
	You can't get past the fact that she is just the biggest Yenta in the world.
	So it really is a lot of Jew, Arab, Israel, Palestine, crazy Islam.
	Stereotypes.
	Big stereotypes.
	Big stereotypes.
	But she seems now to be pushing a single message, which is...
	And I picked this up on actually two things I got from her.
	And the main thing is they're here.
	She's got new information in this little piece as well.
	She's got new information?
	I've got information, man!
	New shit has come to light!
	Thanks for joining us.
	We're glad you're okay.
	What was your reaction to finding out that these extremists allegedly wanted to behead you?
	Now, I'm going to stop this from time to time.
	So...
	The thing that bothered me about this, because we did talk about this, the knife-wielding, very dangerous jihadist who the cops in Boston had to kill because he had a knife.
	Never bring a knife to a gunfight, son.
	Apparently, he wanted to behead Pamela Geller.
	But where did we hear this information?
	Where did she hear that he wanted to behead her?
	We don't know, do we?
	I have no idea.
	My reaction was it was chilling.
	Not surprising because this is what happens when you violate the blasphemy laws under the Sharia.
	You will be targeted.
	And so I'm not surprised.
	But one thing is clear.
	ISIS is here.
	Islamic terrorism is here.
	We are here, hashtag America, near our hashtag target.
	Soon.
	That was painfully obvious in the wake of the Garland Jihad shooting, and a lot of positive developments came out of that shooting.
	Oh, really?
	First, she's coined a term here, the Garland Jihad shooting.
	Positive things, new shit has come to life.
	That they drove 1,000 miles to Garland.
	Thank God they picked Garland.
	And they didn't pick a softer target.
	Clearly, my events, which I've had security at for the past...
	You've got to stop it for a second, because I've got to ask a question now.
	If they're there...
	Why do they have to drive a thousand miles?
	A thousand miles is not being there.
	And imagine if it had been a softer target, like, I don't know, my crotch.
	Because I've studied the jihadic doctrine, and I understand the enemy.
	This is good.
	I understand the enemy.
	I understand the enemy.
	That's cool.
	Listen carefully to what she's saying.
	She is on a mission to promote something here.
	But if they went to a mall, there's no telling how many people were killed.
	Plus, they gleaned an enormous amount of intel off the computers of those jihadists.
	Oh!
	Did you hear about this enormous amount of intel off of the computers from those jihadists who were there?
	By Chinese hackers?
	Mm-hmm.
	And they upped the surveillance on high-profile suspects, perhaps even Boston.
	And I want to thank the Boston Police Department.
	They did a superb, superb job.
	Now, it gets better.
	So recall now that...
	Is she in Texas?
	She was in Texas.
	I think she's from New York.
	I don't think she lives in Texas.
	I know, but where is she now?
	I don't know.
	She must be in Boston.
	She's thanking the Boston police for something.
	For killing the crazy, knife-wielding jihadist who was going to take her head off.
	Oh, that was the guy.
	And they got a treasure trove of information off of Intel, Intel, off of the computer.
	What did they tell you exactly when it came to how much you were a target?
	I had heard from CNN initially.
	Oh, hold on a second.
	CNN had told her that he wanted to cut her head off.
	Well, that's nice.
	And then what?
	And then upon their request, multiple agencies, we had a meeting, but I'm clearly not at liberty to discuss.
	Why not?
	Why not?
	Yeah, I don't know.
	So CNN told her, hey, that guy wanted to take your head off.
	And they knew that almost immediately.
	And then the agencies requested a meeting with her, which clearly she's not at liberty to speak about.
	I'm calling bullshit.
	What?
	What is that?
	Fair enough.
	Well, you're going out on a limb.
	Are you afraid for your life?
	Of course, there's an element of fear.
	You know, I would be silly to say that it's not fearful.
	But to me, it's scarier, Jake, to do nothing.
	Because complying with the Sharia leads to more demands for Sharia compliance.
	And while it is very scary that an innocuous and clever cartoon would cause or warrant me to get my head chopped off, this is the state of freedom of speech in this country in 2015,
	and that I would be the object of attacks Across the board, not you specifically, but instead of the jihadists being the focus of the media, instead of the mosque, the same mosque as the Boston Sarnia, the marathon bomb.
	No, listen to this.
	This is interesting.
	It seems like Boston is a hotbed of head-cutting-off jihadists.
	Same mosque as Anwar al-Awlaki.
	And here we have one of the jihadists who was a security guard at the Islamic Society of Boston.
	I don't understand why the focus is on my work in defense of freedom, but again, this is why we're so far down the rabbit hole.
	Okay.
	Yes, we are down the rabbit hole, Ms.
	Galler.
	I'm going to play one more clip, also from CNN. She seemed to be all over CNN this weekend, and I do have a point to this.
	This is now with...
	Is it Cuomo's kid who's on CNN? Is that Mario Cuomo's kid?
	I don't know.
	Some Cuomo guy on CNN? I don't know any.
	I don't watch CNN. Yeah, I do.
	I take one for the team, but I watch CNN. And here's Cuomo on CNN with Pamela Geller, and she has more of this messaging.
	Have you thought that, oh, maybe I went too far.
	This wasn't worth it.
	I'm going to change how I do what I do now.
	Drawing a cartoon, an innocuous cartoon, warrants chopping my head off?
	That's too far?
	I just don't understand this.
	They're going to come for you too, Chris.
	They're coming for everybody.
	And the media should be standing with me, particularly in light of Foley.
	You can show the cartoon.
	This is so good.
	I love it how she's telling the media continuously, they're coming for you.
	Now it's Chris Cuomo.
	They're going to come for his head.
	Yeah, it is Mario's son.
	It is.
	People have the equal right to criticize your showing the cartoon as an overt provocation of a religion.
	An overt provocation.
	First of all, we see Jesus blasphemed mercilessly on South Park.
	We see the cross immersed in a jar of urine.
	We see Mother Mary, you know, immersed in dung.
	Nobody says anything about that.
	That's not true.
	Where was the Mother Mary in dung thing?
	Yes, there was a dung.
	It was called Dung Mary or something.
	I miss that exhibit.
	Those things get criticized as well.
	Nobody gets killed.
	Embassies don't get burned.
	The question that...
	Embassies don't get burned.
	Oh, did she not get the memo that it wasn't because of a cartoon or because of a stupid movie on YouTube?
	No.
	The embassies get burned for it now.
	I think your behavior raises is why go slight for slight with the Muslims?
	Why not do what we often teach as a function of virtue when we're dealing with savagery, which is show that we are better than this?
	Now, I think when I...
	This is really interesting.
	You watch this crap.
	Well, not a lot, but people watch this.
	It's repeated over and over and over again.
	But CNN always has the messaging, and they're always pushing it out there.
	And this woman is a part of it.
	She really is.
	There's no doubt about that.
	And as I was thinking about this, Sometimes I even have to step back for a second.
	Could we talk about the jihadists and ISIS is here and ISIS is going to kill you and you're next and you're going to take your head off?
	All this fear over terrorism.
	We have TSA now becoming uber douches after this.
	I've got multiple emails from people saying it was horrible these past few days going through TSA checkpoints.
	Because, you know, whoa, they let so many red team members through, 95% of all bombs were not caught.
	So there's really, there is no terrorism to be afraid of for aircraft, but we are being pumped full with fear.
	And I'm thinking, you know, is it possible that I will die from a terrorist attack?
	Yeah, it could absolutely happen.
	It could absolutely happen, and you could also win the Texas lottery.
	Or...
	No, I would say more likely I'll be hit by a truck.
	Lightning.
	No, the truck is much more likely.
	An Uber driver will go berserk and drive me off the road.
	I could die of lung cancer.
	Citing Thelma and Louise.
	Yes, cancer could just suck the lifeblood out of me.
	And what I worry about most, John, is that I will die one day, no matter how I die, regretting spending time on the stupid shit these people are making us afraid of.
	We should just do away with it all.
	Who cares?
	Okay, so a couple hundred people die a year of terrorism.
	Oh, well, we'll stop some.
	We won't stop others.
	But the fear that's being pumped into us is so illogical.
	So illogical.
	What 400,000 people a year die from traffic accidents?
	No, 40.
	40,000?
	Yeah.
	400,000 from something else.
	Cancer?
	I don't know.
	Probably.
	Heart disease, I'm sure.
	So, you know, I guess the message for me today is just stop worrying about it.
	You're gonna die.
	This is the mold.
	We're all gonna die!
	It's the mold talking.
	It's in you.
	The spores.
	The spores have got me, man.
	Okay.
	Alright then.
	I just wanted to say that.
	Well, there's a counter-argument to it, and I think Rick Perry in half of the clip says it best.
	Oh my goodness.
	Yes!
	The beaches are back open!
	Woo!
	Yeah!
	You got me again!
	This is like your Rick Roll.
	I did watch Perry as he announced.
	It was so sad because, you know, never let him see you sweat, bro.
	This is not the way to do it.
	That was poorly thought out.
	Because that's all people talk about.
	Oh, he's sweating.
	Oh, boy.
	Look at him.
	He's sweating.
	He's a loser, this guy.
	He's perfect for Texas.
	He did a good job down there.
	But he's not a national type.
	No.
	I saw Jeb Bush on, maybe it was last week's.
	I really dislike Jeb Bush.
	Yeah, me too.
	And it's for this very reason, as Schieffer, on his last show, asked him about the Patriot Act, which was about to run out last Sunday.
	I don't know if you played this one?
	About the Patriot Act?
	Yeah, the one that should be, yeah, we gotta sign it over and we gotta, as is.
	Yeah, okay, I'm sorry.
	Yes, you should be honking a horn on this one.
	It's worth replaying that.
	We ask him if he believes the nation's security will be in danger if the program is allowed to expire.
	I do.
	I do.
	And it's not a violation of civil liberties.
	There's no evidence, not a shred of evidence, that the metadata program has violated anybody's civil liberties.
	The first duty of our national government is to protect the homeland.
	Oh yeah, that was it.
	I do remember that clip.
	It's the spores.
	Yeah, it's the spores.
	No, that's not the first duty.
	The first duty is to protect and uphold the Constitution.
	Yes, and you did that bit again.
	It's the spores.
	Yeah, the spores.
	I want to thank Student33.
	I went to the P.O. Box.
	I want to thank Student33 for sending me the gigantic Ready for Hillary poster.
	Ooh!
	Hashtag ready.
	Was it rolled up?
	It's like an artwork now.
	Yeah.
	I'm keeping it.
	It's an investment.
	Yeah, it is.
	It is.
	Well, I got a couple of interesting little items here.
	We had, of course, the big deal.
	This was the China hack.
	Although they never really blamed China, but the media does for some reason.
	And how would they know?
	I'm surprised.
	It's as though they say, well, let's blame North Korea for this, and then let's blame Russia for that, and let's blame China.
	Do we get any official confirmation that it was China, or is that just the media saying it's China?
	It's just the media.
	In fact, if you listen to most of these guys doing their analysis, they say, well, the White House hasn't confirmed, this hasn't been confirmed or confirmed.
	They keep saying that, but then they blame China over and over.
	And the guys are nuts about this.
	Everybody on the talk shows, everybody on the talking head shows, they're all going crazy.
	Let's play the China hack rundown one.
	It only took one government agency that had not taken the simple step of updating its server software to open the door to an unprecedented and alarming cyber attack believed to be by the government of China.
	Are they still running an internet information server or something?
	Windows 7?
	And where is the NSA on all this?
	Well, they've been hampered because, you know, we didn't pass the Patriot Act.
	This happened last December.
	Oh, wow, okay.
	To China.
	Though the White House still is not publicly naming the culprit, it is acknowledging the growing threat.
	We have seen our adversaries use innovative techniques and to learn from their previous efforts to try to find vulnerabilities in our system and to exploit them.
	This attack appears designed to lay the groundwork for future attacks, using the stolen personal information to fool government employees in so-called spear-fishing attacks.
	Now, it's not really called spear phishing.
	Is it just phishing?
	I think spear phishing is a specific variant.
	And to impersonate them to carry out insider attacks.
	And crucially, by revealing who has security clearances and at what level...
	What's that noise?
	That's the sound effect of cyber, dude.
	I think that that sound effect is trying some sort of mind control.
	Yes, it means look out.
	Hackers.
	Chinese hackers.
	Brrrr.
	Security clearances and at what level?
	They may now be able to identify, expose and even blackmail U.S. officials around the world.
	Targeting the personal information of federal employees is new.
	Chinese hackers had previously focused on stealing military and government secrets to enhance national security and corporate data for financial gain.
	I don't think that's stopped, but this is just a new attack vector, which is typically...
	Stop, stop, stop.
	A new attack vector.
	Is it on the skip logic board?
	A new attack vector, which is typically being used by organized crime for monetizing.
	The Chinese.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	So that is one of the earlier reports.
	And it went on and on, and then it went to all the talking head shows.
	And so they're going and saying, oh, and they're trying to dream stuff up to make it more exciting than they can because they don't know anything.
	And so we finally got the PBS NewsHour Weekend, where they came up with a new thesis.
	This is the PBS Weekend Report of Hack Clip.
	Four million current and former federal employees, stealing data from the Office of Personal Management's computer network.
	According to the Washington Post, experts suspect the hackers are collecting massive amounts of personal information.
	Their goal?
	To find and potentially recruit spies inside the U.S. government.
	The Post quotes government officials who call the theft part of a strategic plan.
	This is the third major cyber attack on a federal database in the past year.
	The White House is calling on Congress to, quote, come out of the dark ages and pass cybersecurity legislation.
	Critics say the Obama administration hasn't done enough to secure federal databases.
	Recruit spies.
	Let's try to figure out how that's going to work.
	You have four million employees.
	Can I be an employee?
	Can I be a government employee?
	Sure.
	Okay.
	The phone's got a ring.
	Oh, yes.
	Am I answering the phone?
	Am I the employee?
	You're the employee.
	I'll be the Chinese.
	Okay.
	All right.
	Hello?
	It's the government office.
	What?
	No, I'm obviously, since it's all the personal information, I'm obviously calling.
	I could be, okay, I'll be calling.
	You're calling me.
	I'm answering.
	You're calling me.
	I'm not calling you at home.
	You wouldn't be answering.
	Oh, okay.
	But hold on a second.
	I can be at home.
	I can be at home.
	Hold on a second.
	Okay.
	All right, here we go.
	Hello, government guy at home.
	Hey, dude.
	Yeah, what's up?
	I know you're...
	What's up?
	I am from China, and I want to ask you a question.
	This is just a survey.
	I'm giving a survey.
	That's it.
	Okay, survey.
	Okay.
	If you had the...
	Question number one.
	If you had the chance to be a spy...
	For China.
	Would you take it?
	Do I get cool gear?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	You take it?
	Okay.
	Now, would you do it for $150,000 a year?
	Does that come with hookers?
	Yes.
	I'm in.
	Would you do it for $60,000 a year?
	Does it come with hookers?
	Yeah.
	I'm in.
	Would you do it for $20,000 a year?
	I'm in.
	I'm just in.
	Ah, best price.
	In the morning.
	I'm glad you had a punchline.
	Good.
	Best price.
	Best price.
	Yeah, this is stupid.
	It's idiotic.
	So stupid.
	And if anyone with a brain just listens to this and thinks like we just did, you can see it's stupid.
	Stupid.
	The only thing that I'm, you know, this, was it Hastert?
	Hastert?
	Is that the guy?
	Hastert.
	Hastert.
	I have a feeling, you know, there's a lot of, of course, we know that a lot of this espionage is for blackmail purposes.
	Yes, that's what the NSA is all about.
	And the FBI traditionally has been a blackmail in the operation.
	Thank you.
	So, Hastert, who was former Speaker of the House, and I think that's a message to everybody else, because this guy is unimportant in the grand scheme of things right now.
	But to me, it seems like, hey, you know, you're getting hookers, you're doing something, we know all about you, we can get you whenever we want to.
	Yeah.
	That's what it has to be.
	And it comes out, I got an offbeat clip I picked up off of ABC. This is Hastert and the media.
	Now I want to listen carefully to what they're saying here because it's an indictment of the media.
	Jolene says she decided to come in hopes others who say they are victims of Hastert will know they are not alone, George.
	And Brian, she's been trying to get this story out for a long time.
	Right.
	She contacted us and other members of the news media about nine years ago off the record.
	But she said that she watched Hastert rise to prominence as Speaker of the House.
	It just made her angrier and angrier.
	And now she finally decided to go public with the allegations.
	So Hastert's not being charged actually for this misconduct.
	He's being charged for this bank fraud.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, nine years ago.
	Nine years ago they knew about this guy.
	But this also broke on ABC News.
	And ABC News is doing things that I find completely out of order when it comes to journalistic integrity by just some woman who's saying, oh, this happened.
	That's it.
	ABC has got this marching order for the White House.
	Exactly.
	Exactly.
	So the Chinese hack is a dead end.
	Meanwhile, I watch Bill Maher as much as I don't like watching Bill Maher.
	You always tell me not to watch him.
	I don't like watching him either.
	This particular version of his normal bigotry posing as humor, it was just over the top.
	We can play the bigotry clip and tell me if this is not what he's exhibiting, his anti-transgender Bruce, Jenner, Christine, whatever, Caitlin.
	Question.
	Would you mind, just for our international audience, explain bigotry?
	Oh, yeah.
	Well, actually, let's go further than that.
	Let's open up our browsers and actually read the definition.
	Consult!
	I don't think a lot of people understand the subtle differences between racism, hate speech, bigotry.
	Bigotry.
	Intolerance to those who hold different opinions from oneself.
	Intolerance.
	And that's really the key.
	Intolerance, right.
	Intolerance.
	And it takes all kinds of forms.
	I mean, racism is a form of bigotry, but bigotry does not mean racism.
	Racism means you're bigoted, probably.
	Just liking people because they have a different opinion.
	Right.
	Is that close enough?
	That would be, well, not disliking, but intolerance.
	Intolerant of people, okay.
	In other words, whatever, I don't care.
	And Marr is a classic bigot.
	If you're a Republican, no tolerance for any of that.
	But he's also a comedian, so he gets to do that.
	That's what comedians, they have that license.
	That's funny.
	And by the way, now this is something interesting.
	I said, by the way, I don't know if that was good or bad.
	It wasn't good.
	I've...
	I'm looking at him because he had Louis Black on the comic.
	And they talk about they're both being lifelong bachelors.
	Yeah, because they're assholes.
	Well...
	I get a kick out of Black.
	Yeah, Black's okay.
	He's funny.
	He has Tourette's.
	Oh, terrible.
	I looked at the two of them and I realized, and I don't know for sure, but based on my thesis about vasectomies...
	Let me...
	Stop.
	This has come up mainly, I think, in after-show conversations.
	I don't know why we talk about anything but the show.
	Because we're either done or we don't want to ruin anything for the next show.
	Then John has always...
	There are a number of...
	Let me go into my theory and why I came up with this.
	Hold on, let me run down the important John C. Dvorak life hacks.
	One, never eat seafood before traveling.
	Never marry an actress or an artist.
	Or a musician.
	There are also female musicians.
	You don't want to marry those.
	That's definitely on the higher end of the list.
	And never, ever, ever get a vasectomy because you will turn into an old woman.
	Well, a lesbian-looking person.
	Okay.
	An old lesbian-looking person.
	Here's where I got this.
	I had a book that...
	I collect books.
	And there's this book from the 20s.
	You're an archivist.
	I'm an archivist.
	I wish they wouldn't just pile up on the floor.
	That's another story.
	It will kill you one day.
	Now, there was this book on, I think it was called Stay Youthful or Youth something or other.
	And this was done in the late 20s when I think the vasectomy first became popularized.
	And it became popularized for one reason only, not for population control, but to make you look younger.
	Because after you got a vasectomy, you would have traits.
	Physical traits, if you're male, obviously a female is not going to get a vasectomy, your traits would change.
	You would get kind of a puffy face.
	Your skin would look different.
	To me, it always looks kind of like it gets more pale than it normally would be.
	And they showed a lot of before and after pictures, and that's where I first got this notion that, oh, I can spot somebody who's had a vasectomy.
	I'm really accurate at it.
	There's been a few guys who've told me they've gotten vasectomies, and I see no evidence of it in their appearance.
	But...
	I see evidence in a lot of people.
	And you can look at them and they have this kind of a...
	It's not like they get totally feminized, but they start to look like, to me, old lesbians.
	And I realized, and it's a certain look, and you have to really practice this to get it down, but I'm 90% accurate when I say somebody's had a vasectomy.
	Mainly because I did this, I had this old book on it.
	You know, your kids must be very proud of this talent you have.
	They know about it and they roll their eyes.
	Oh, brother, who cares?
	Anyway, Mar, for sure, has had a vasectomy.
	Think about it.
	Good point.
	All he does is bitch about kids and population.
	There you go.
	He's one of those guys who got the vasectomy probably early.
	Yeah.
	Fool.
	Fool.
	Talked into it because, oh, you know, population growth, we're all going to die.
	Uh-huh.
	Well, I'm going to do my part and I'm going to have a vasectomy.
	Save the earth.
	Save the Earth.
	Save the Earth.
	Never get laid again.
	Obviously, too.
	Oh, really?
	Yeah, I think so.
	I didn't think about it until he was sitting next to me.
	It just came to me.
	I'm watching these two guys go back and forth.
	And then Margo's on his bigoted thing about transgender.
	Well, can we play it now?
	Yes, let's play it.
	Good setup.
	That's so wrong, because I feel like with this Caitlyn Jenner thing, which, you know, again, we're all, like, struggling a little bit to understand it completely.
	We're for it.
	Whatever makes a man happy.
	But, I mean, a woman happy.
	But that's the thing.
	He says he wants to date women, but he has a penis.
	But he's dressed like Betty Grable on the cover of the...
	Is he a lesbian?
	Gay seems so simple now.
	Gay's easy.
	Gay's the new straight.
	Yeah.
	It's not even hip anymore.
	They just want to get married.
	What Caitlyn's doing, that's tits and dick and social security.
	That's where the cutting edge is.
	So let me ask you.
	No, I was about Caitlyn Jenner.
	Because you're a Northeast Republican, which, you know, those are the same ones.
	There's been an awful lot of pushback.
	against Caitlyn Jenner this week from Mike Huckabee and Rush Limbaugh, the usual suspects.
	What do you think?
	No, he's a Republican.
	Caitlyn Jenner.
	She is.
	Yes.
	You're a screw-up.
	You're a screw-up.
	I know.
	Yeah, she's a Republican.
	Republican Party should welcome her to the fold.
	Really?
	Yes, absolutely.
	Yeah, you know, and so we're still arguing about the pronouns, which is just another big part of the cultural Marxism that we identified on the last show.
	Here's my question.
	I have a question for you.
	Sure.
	With the being politically correct and now saying she, do we also use she in the past tense as in she won all those Olympic medals?
	Sure.
	That's a good question.
	That's an excellent question.
	Thank you.
	And does that mean that she was indeed the first woman to win that amount of Olympic medals?
	Well, a couple of things here.
	One, the medal should be taken away if that's true.
	Stripped!
	Stripped!
	You cheated!
	You cheated!
	And I don't know.
	I don't care.
	But I guarantee you this will be the conversation moving forward.
	Oh, wait a minute.
	I'm so sick of it.
	Now, what I find even more offensive than the regular bigotry that he exhibits...
	They jump the chasm with a...
	There's a black woman, not a classic stereotypical...
	I think you cross the chasm or you jump the shark?
	You jump the chasm.
	Okay.
	Because it seems that this was the kind of crap that you hear on this show that really is irksome.
	Play Bigot 2.
	Hold on a second.
	Yeah, she's a Republican.
	Republican Party should welcome her to the fold.
	Really?
	Yes, absolutely.
	At the convention?
	Those Republicans that you quoted, they are not the ones running for office.
	I mean, I would love to see the RNC is going to be held in Cleveland.
	And they need to allow Caitlyn Jenner there to speak right there in good old Cleveland, Ohio.
	But you know what?
	We'll take her.
	I want her to become a Democrat.
	Caitlyn, call her sister if you want to run for office.
	I got your back.
	Oh, a freak show.
	We're in a freak show.
	The gall to say, oh, well, if she's a Republican, why don't they have her speak at the convention?
	How does this even make sense?
	In other words, this is the bigotry of it.
	It's, oh, if that's true, then she should be speaking at the convention.
	How does that make any sense?
	I can't speak at the convention.
	It's just to rile everybody up, to make sure we all know the Republican Party hates anything out of the ordinary.
	Right, when apparently Mar is the one who hates anything out of the ordinary.
	Yes.
	Now, just a one and more Mar clip, which has nothing to do with Caitlyn Jenner, it just, this has to do with a bogus...
	From now on, I want you to address me as she.
	I want all pronouns to be female for me on this show, otherwise you are a bigot.
	Now, there's a clip, I have trouble...
	Well, I never call you he...
	I'm going to call you it.
	Thank you.
	So this is second.
	This is the Mar on ISIS. And this story was in the Daily Mail.
	It is an obvious bullcrap story.
	It's obviously bullcrap.
	Because there's no way, unless we who are running ISIS, the challenges community, put this out there as a joke, It's a ridiculous thing and he's all in on it like it's like a hoax that he's just hook, line, and sinker.
	I thought it was just the guy is clueless.
	He must be clueless about everything.
	Do you know that ISIS this week banned pigeon flying?
	I'm not joking.
	Did you see this?
	I saw this.
	Pigeons.
	How good is their eyesight, by the way?
	Because ISIS fans pigeon breeding punishable by public flothing because seeing birds' genitals overhead offends Islam.
	I've seen lots of pigeons flying.
	I've never noticed their balls once.
	Are you right?
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	Well, but, you know, ISIS, I don't know if you saw the other news about ISIS. A couple things.
	One, finally, they've listened to my advice.
	They're throwing gay guys off buildings again.
	Which, it's not exactly...
	We've been doing that continually.
	We just haven't been picking it up.
	Right.
	Well, it wasn't actually my advice.
	This is why I'm disturbed.
	Right.
	Adam at Curry.com.
	That's Adam at Curry.com.
	People clearly don't care about people being killed.
	They care about artifacts being destroyed.
	Oh, think of the humanity and the arts.
	And if you kill some gay guys...
	Look at this art.
	Yeah, right.
	I've continuously said, if you want attention, you've got to kill some gay guys.
	But they make the mistake of throwing them off buildings.
	This is dumb.
	What's wrong with that?
	What?
	Well, I mean, what's wrong with that?
	Are you going to kill them?
	No, but that gets no attention, throwing them off buildings.
	I would think it would.
	No, you've got to cut their nuts off and stick it in their mouth like the Mexicans.
	Three cameras, you'd be better.
	You've got the guy on the top of the building with the camera one.
	Camera two is outside, long shot, showing the guy falling off the building.
	Super slow-mo.
	Super slow-mo.
	Camera three would be showing the pavement.
	Splat.
	Perfect.
	Splat.
	But then we also got the news that ISIS tweets helped the United States to bomb a command center.
	Oh yeah, I almost had a clip of this.
	Oh, I have no...
	I wish I had a clip.
	Well, the clip is dumb.
	I mean, the whole thing is stupid.
	The best clip was on Lou Dobbs.
	I'm trying to think of it.
	I could clip it quickly, but I can't.
	Lou Dobbs, and they talk about the moron who did a selfie in front of ISIS headquarters.
	Yes, exactly.
	The problem I have with this is that we had a note from somebody that lived in the area, and I guess...
	It was a known fact where ISIS headquarters was.
	It's not like a secret.
	It is in Syria, in one of the towns, and they had the street address.
	This was like a year ago.
	Somebody had told us about this anomaly, which is everyone knows where ISIS headquarters is.
	So now they bomb it finally, and then they blame it on this selfie.
	I think this whole story is bullcrap.
	Yes, of course it is.
	But even logically, why are we trying...
	If we can now...
	Just thinking from this...
	Story's point of view.
	This is from the Times, I think.
	If it is possible to target command centers, and wow, we really need to do that, then why would we try to kick ISIS off of social media?
	Why would we be removing accounts?
	No!
	You want more!
	This is a question we've been asking for years!
	You want more of this!
	You've got NSA out there.
	They know everything.
	Although they don't seem to know a lot.
	Well, they know everything about your personal sex life.
	I don't know.
	These are all honeypots.
	It's all bullcrap.
	None of these guys are really ISIS guys.
	Who knows?
	I'm sure there's a couple that come on and they track them carefully.
	But these accounts, I've looked at these accounts.
	Most of them, of course, you have to cut and paste in an Arab translator.
	But they're idiotic.
	They're idiotic.
	The comments they make are stupid.
	What they have to say is dumb.
	Taking a selfie in front of HQ. What's the point?
	Well, the problem is, again, it's just people being mind-controlled into this.
	It really is stupidity to believe in any of this.
	But it works.
	It works.
	It works.
	Meanwhile, we have a real war going on here on the home front, John.
	The War on Chicken.
	Yeah, baby, it's back!
	War on Chicken is better than it's ever been before.
	Rise and shine to higher egg prices?
	It's all thanks to cases of bird flu that have paralyzed chicken farms across the country.
	Once farmers detect bird flu...
	Was that on the clip?
	Yes!
	Try the flock.
	And that means higher prices will stick around until chicken farms are able to repopulate with healthy birds.
	Doesn't it take like two days to jam some chickens out?
	The latest data from the Department of Agriculture shows egg prices are up anywhere from 33 cents to 57 and a half cents since the last week in May.
	And it all depends on where you live.
	The bird flu has hit the Midwest the worst.
	Iowa, Indiana, and Ohio are the top three egg-producing states in the country.
	But since those eggs are shipped everywhere else, the price spike is happening nationwide.
	Experts say watch out for those processed foods made with eggs.
	And that means you can expect to pay more for things like baked goods, ice cream, and mayonnaise.
	Okay, quiz for you.
	How long before you get a chick?
	How many years, months, days before they can lay an egg and get to work?
	I told you, three days and they're pooping on eggs.
	Seriously, it's not three days.
	Six weeks.
	Six months.
	Six months?
	Really?
	That long?
	Okay.
	Well, this really leads me to...
	I'm sorry, I take it back.
	Those are the heritage chickens.
	Yeah, free range, running around happy.
	Yeah, normal chickens.
	And they produce delicious eggs.
	Yeah, not the ones in the factory.
	Well, this brings me to something else.
	And something that I... Our post-show conversation, sometimes I write something down.
	I have had the pleasure in the past six or seven months of going to dinner with many different people.
	Many women.
	And I have noticed that women in particular have food issues.
	And so egg is one of them.
	Someone said to me, I hate eggs so much that I just start to gag when I see those egg chunks in potato salad.
	I know, exactly.
	Potato salad doesn't necessarily have to have eggs.
	It doesn't have to have eggs.
	Mine doesn't.
	Well, of course not.
	But I don't think men have this.
	Women have issues with textures of things.
	So it's not so much the taste or the smell.
	It's the texture.
	And I don't really understand this.
	You know, like, oh, bananas.
	The texture of bananas makes me feel ill.
	Or I love mango, but papaya.
	Texture.
	What is going on with that?
	Has someone actually said that to you?
	Yes!
	Yes!
	It's almost damn near the exact same texture.
	Well, no.
	Tomatoes, grapes, all these...
	Grapes?
	Yes.
	Who doesn't like grapes?
	Well, I'm not going to tell you who, but it's...
	What is...
	She's listening now.
	She knows who she is.
	They all know who she is.
	Oh, there's a group of them.
	Yes, I told you.
	I've had the pleasure of dining with many women.
	And they're all in the same clique.
	No, they're not.
	They're not in the same country or the same state.
	That's not the point.
	Come on, you've never noticed this?
	You, John C. stands for Casanova Dvorak, have never noticed women's texture issue?
	I've noticed it to a small degree, but I've noticed that they also have other kinds of food issues, including the, oh, don't let the, I mean, this is mostly with kids, though.
	But this is just weird, it's not men.
	Men don't have this.
	Men don't like the food to touch is a good example.
	Ooh, to touch?
	See, now you're Mr.
	Adam C. Casanova.
	Yeah, there's plenty of people, women mostly, and kids in particular, that don't like their food to touch.
	Oh, no!
	The carrots are touching!
	Oh, yes!
	I know what you mean!
	They can't touch because it contaminates each other.
	Wow, where does this come from?
	That's never made sense to me.
	Because they're touching when they're in your stomach.
	I know it doesn't make sense, but okay, just back to my original premise, and I'm not necessarily looking for an answer from you, but I am intrigued by this.
	What is it with food textures, and can we help these women?
	Can we reprogram them?
	Well, there's a lot of jokes that you can lead right into.
	I'm not looking for a joke.
	I'm seriously...
	There's lots of jokes I can think of.
	I am just looking for some help on this.
	It's baffling to me.
	What difference does it make to you?
	No, it's...
	Well, isn't this...
	Seriously, I'm asking seriously.
	Why do you care if some woman likes mango and not papaya?
	Because of the texture.
	I just want to know what it is with texture that ruins things.
	My daughter has this too.
	She has texture issues.
	Oh, I don't like the texture of it.
	Huh?
	And she's actually said that verbally.
	All these examples I gave you are all verbal.
	I said verbally.
	These are all verbal.
	I don't like this texture.
	Yes, I don't like...
	No, not like that.
	But I don't like the texture of it.
	I like my version.
	It's specifically the word texture.
	I don't like the texture of it.
	Huh.
	Do you follow up?
	Do you follow up with the question, what's specifically about the texture?
	Of course.
	Of course.
	Okay, and what kind of answers have you received?
	No answer.
	I don't like the texture.
	I don't like how it feels, the texture.
	Would you go on and say, well, if it was pureed, would that make a difference?
	No, I haven't done that.
	That's okay.
	I'm sure I will get a lot of feedback for this question, which is kind of my point.
	I just want to get some feedback.
	I want to understand it.
	Send an email to adamccurry.com if you have an answer.
	Yeah, I would like to understand it.
	It's not that strange.
	Well, it seems pretty strange to me.
	Okay, onward.
	I have written down here two things.
	Dot Science and JCDFake TV show.
	We're going to do Tech News on Sunday.
	Is that for Dot Science?
	Yeah.
	Okay, well, hold on a second.
	I didn't realize it was Tech News.
	Well, it doesn't have to be Tech News.
	Eh, screw it.
	Let's do Tech News.
	It'll be worth it.
	Wait, wait.
	Do you have any other tech news?
	I just wanted to do one item.
	I don't know.
	That's questionable.
	Oh, screw it.
	Come on.
	iPhone, my phone.
	All right.
	Tech news.
	One item today.
	John C. Dvorak.
	All right.
	I've come to the conclusion that.science, which is a TLD. A top-level domain.
	And it is the number one repository and arena for spam.
	.science?
	Yeah, if you go look up, do a search, and people should do this so they can search their inboxes for...
	So is it.science the whole word, or.science?
	Yeah, yeah.
	Who gets that?
	Who would want a.science address?
	I don't.
	I don't want one.
	But you do a.science search on your inbox, anybody out there, and you're going to discover every message, and it could be into the thousands.
	Or all spam.
	Let me see.
	I'm going to do this right now.
	Nobody uses it for email.
	Wake up your brain.
	Here's the simple secret to a sharp mind.
	Yeah, that's a.science.
	Original Copperware Knee.
	Halt Memory Loss.
	Track R Bra...
	Oh, I hate that one.
	The Track R Bra...
	Did you lose your stuff?
	I get that one a lot.
	Yeah, it's from.science.
	.science, healthy living.
	So this is a spam domain.
	Oh, I'm just going to block the whole thing, just block.science.
	Well, that's the joke.
	You can't necessarily block a TLD. You can block a domain.
	I can block a TLD. I can block it.
	I can block it.
	Okay, well, if you can block it, I would recommend anybody out there who can block.science to block it, and you'll never get your spam numbers to go way down.
	What?
	The only good phone is a landline, and the phone should be made out of Bakelite.
	That's right, everybody.
	Your tech news for today.
	And with that, I'd like to thank you for your courage in saying the morning to you, John C. Well, you know what the C stands for.
	Dvorak!
	Oh, you lost?
	No, it's Casanova, but I didn't want to use it again.
	Well, you did Casanova.
	I did Casanova.
	Well, in the morning, you, Adam Curry.
	In the morning, all ships and sea boots on the ground, feet in the air, subs in the water, and all the dames and knights out there.
	In the morning, everyone in the chat room, noagendastream.com.
	Good to see you.
	Human resources there, all present.
	And thank you to our artists, Martin J.J., again, crushing it with the artwork for episode 727.
	Which was, what was the title of that show?
	Which was Thursday.
	It's a short-term memory loss.
	That's what I bitched about the other day.
	Yeah, I know.
	It was, oh yeah, win by losing.
	Oh yeah, this was nice.
	It was the Caitlyn Jenner subtle background with man transitioning to it.
	It was a nice piece.
	It was a nice piece of art.
	Yeah.
	We need more.
	We need more original art.
	We need more entries.
	Yeah, it comes and goes.
	It's unusual.
	I think it depends on...
	It's like when I take notes for the show titles as we go along, and sometimes the show is so compelling that I don't take any notes because I'm too into the show.
	And I think this happens with our artists.
	Yeah.
	I think they listen and they go, oh, wait a minute.
	I don't know what I even heard.
	That's how it happens.
	It's my theory.
	Well, we do have some people to thank, including Sir Mark Workman from Dayton, Ohio, who came in with 78910.
	Nice sequential number.
	Yes, very good.
	I like to see that more often.
	He sent a very short note in.
	I'd like to be...
	This makes him a baron, by the way.
	He's got three knights, knighthoods.
	And he wants to be the baron of Galt's Gulch.
	Galt's Gulch, nice.
	You know what that calls for.
	By Ayn Rand.
	I've tried twice before only to be rejected for non-sufficient funds.
	On the PayPal?
	Yeah.
	Oops.
	My last jingle request, this actually came in here as a handwritten check.
	He wants a hillbilly delicious, hillbillery delicious.
	In other words, delicious.
	That's too delicious to believe, my friend.
	Then little girl, do not eat me, Hillary.
	And then karma for all.
	Little girl, don't eat me.
	And karma for all.
	I think we can do that.
	It's almost too delicious to believe, my friend.
	Don't eat me, Hillary Clinton!
	You've got karma.
	There we go.
	Thank you very much for being the big exec today.
	That's great.
	Yeah, that was great.
	Brad Doherty in Brooklyn, New York.
	38888.
	By my calculations, this completes my barony.
	I'd like to be the Jersey Shore.
	Baron of the Jersey Shore, I guess.
	Oh, wait a minute.
	It's one of these things I'm...
	I always have to remember to stretch this thing because it comes in.
	All right, here we go again.
	My barony, I'd like to humbly request my territory to be the Jersey Shore, making me Sir Brad Baron of the Jersey Shore.
	Can I get a trains good, planes bad?
	You can take that to the bank and karma.
	Absolutely.
	That's Daugherty.
	Oh, sorry.
	Here we go.
	All aboard trains good, planes bad.
	You can take that to the bank.
	You've got karma.
	Now I got it.
	I think he sent you an email to Douglas Chick.
	Yeah, this is the one you used in the newsletter, I believe.
	Right.
	Let me get it, because it's a little longer than the one I used in the newsletter.
	It was not effective in the newsletter, by the way.
	I noticed that.
	I'll read it.
	Let's get it.
	I got it right here.
	364 donation from Hank.
	Here we go.
	In the morning from FEMA Region North, I've been listening since show 698, and this is the first time I've donated.
	I've been a D-bag for too long.
	First time donation.
	Nice one.
	Time for a D-douching and an intrepid first visit toward knighthood.
	The analysis and deconstruction of the MSN you both provide is consistent and humorous.
	It has a highly significant value in this ass-backward world.
	My apologies for not contributing earlier.
	It took about 33 or so times of hearing.
	A wonderfully unique service could fade away.
	It was a front-counter bell being rung in my head somewhere.
	Where's my bell?
	Therefore, I had to act.
	I would have done so sooner, but my wife and I just welcomed our first child, Amelia, into the world, sorting out financing while it took a while.
	Alas, I was never punched in the mouth.
	I stumbled onto your show through a reference to another podcast, which I have an eerie suspicion that Mr. Fletcher listens to.
	No matter, for I'm swinging and hitting whomever I can.
	So he's going to be punching people in the mouth, even though he never got punched in the mouth.
	May I please have some newborn karma?
	And if it's not too much to ask, I'd like a hello, citizen.
	Then shut up, slave.
	Followed by a two to the head, and her head is gone.
	Okay.
	Hello, citizen.
	Shut up, slave.
	Two to the head.
	Head is gone.
	Hello, citizen.
	Shut up, slave.
	Let me see if I can do this.
	Should be able to do it.
	Hey, citizen.
	Shut up, slave.
	And her head is gone.
	You've got karma.
	And there you have it.
	Sir Haggis in Brandington, Florida.
	Stomach stew, I guess.
	$250.
	Sir Haggis, Ewan is still a wanker douchebag.
	Douchebag!
	He liked a chemtrail LGY jingle.
	With a karma, I'm sure.
	Cam Trails!
	Yay!
	You've got karma.
	That's something perverse about it.
	Cam Trails, yay!
	He came to me with $2.50.
	Mark McEvoy in Fountain Valley, California.
	$200.01.
	Simple note.
	Keep up the good work, gentlemen.
	Thank you very much.
	Vrolijk.
	Almost vrolijk.
	Vrolijk.
	Vrolijk, which means happy.
	Vrolijk means happy.
	Like joyous.
	Vrolijk.
	Yes, vrolijk.
	Interesting.
	In Dordrecht.
	Dordrecht.
	Dordrecht.
	Oh, he's in the next list.
	That's all we got.
	He's not even counting.
	This is how we got down.
	We respect him more.
	Yeah, that worked out great.
	Anyway, we'll talk about Irwin in the second half.
	I just need to thank Sir D.H. Slammer and Dame Bang Bang.
	From Student 33 at the P.O. Box, I got the Ready for Hillary poster.
	He sent me a bottle of wine and a Glenn Fittich, single malt, 12-year Scotch whiskey.
	Well, I'll give you something to drink tonight.
	Yeah.
	To get rid of the scores.
	Save it for after the show.
	But it was cool.
	He put his ceiling wax on with his night ring imprint right on.
	I don't want to open it now.
	It looks too beautiful.
	It's nice.
	I appreciate that very much.
	Pass.
	All right.
	Okay, we'll be thanking the rest of us.
	What bottle of wine did he send you?
	Oh, it's one that was a...
	I'd have to get it from the kitchen.
	It's a bottle that has like some benefit, something for kids.
	Okay, never mind.
	I'm sorry I asked.
	Yes.
	Yeah, you are.
	We'll be thanking the rest of our donors later on the program, $50 or above.
	These are the people who we call executive producers and associate executive producers, because just like Hollywood, it's how it works.
	When you financially support anything in the arts...
	Financially, certainly, you get these credits.
	You can see them on television all the time.
	These people aren't doing anything other than helping out financially.
	And of course, on television, you get all kinds of drugs and you get to hang out with the actresses.
	You get red carpet stuff.
	So we don't have that.
	Yeah, but they're dropping like...
	Like flies?
	Yeah, that's it.
	Dvorak.org slash N-A. You heard it.
	Our execs are out there doing it.
	You too can go out and propagate our formula.
	Our formula is this.
	We go out, we hit people in the mouth.
	Order!
	Order!
	Shut up, slave!
	Shut up, slave!
	I did a fair amount of work yesterday on this new report about the glitch.
	You know, I love me a good glitch.
	Which glitch?
	Oh, the global warming pause caused by glitch in data.
	I have an introductory clip if you want.
	Very good.
	I love a clip.
	Let me see that.
	Yes, Rich, the new NOAA report contradicts warming pause.
	A new study rejects the theory of a pause on global warming over the past 15 years.
	The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration says an apparent hiatus in rising temperatures likely comes from limits on data from previous eras.
	And that warming quote has in fact been as fast or faster than that scene over the last half of the 20th century.
	This is so fantastic.
	Don't believe your lying eyes.
	So let's just summarize for a second.
	All scientists, we're all 97% of them, We're all in on...
	Yeah, well, they were all of the same bogated number.
	We're all in on...
	You know, we can't really explain why we see this pause in the global warming, but, you know, it's not atypical.
	These things do happen, you know.
	But it was annoying because it was being thrown in their face continuously.
	Constantly.
	So now NOAA, the National Oceanographic...
	What is this?
	Atmospheric agency.
	Administration.
	Administration.
	Thank you.
	They went back and they changed a number of things in the way...
	Let's go back and change history.
	They did.
	They changed the data.
	And this is not really largely discussed.
	There's no one really diving into it.
	So I went and I... First of all, it was hard to get the actual report because you have to purchase it and you have to be a member of some scientific...
	Bill Nye, the science guy, can get it, but I can't.
	So you have to be a clown and then you can get the information.
	So they published in Science Magazine the general article...
	Under the title Lost and Found, Earth's Missing Heat, a reanalysis of surface temperatures suggests there was never a global warming hiatus.
	Now, this is interesting because, once again, they're using all of these kind of, you know, fudge words.
	And if you look at the scientific article itself published in Science Express...
	The headline there, of course all of this is in PDF marked up in the show notes at 728.noagendanotes.com.
	Possible artifacts of data biases in the recent global surface warming hiatus.
	And then the opening paragraph.
	Much study has been devoted to the possible causes of an apparent decrease in the upward trend of global surface temperature since 1998, a phenomenon that has been dubbed the global warming hiatus.
	Here we present an updated global surface temperature analysis that reveals the global trends are higher than reported by the IPCC, especially in recent decades, and that the central estimate for the rate of warming during the first 15 years of the 21st century is at least as great and that the central estimate for the rate of warming during the first 15 years of the 21st These results do not support the notion of a slowdown in the increase of global surface temperature.
	And we're talking the difference of 0.03 degrees centigrade.
	Well, let's stop before you continue, and let me just ask a quick question.
	Sure.
	After all this global warming stuff, they got it wrong, and then they got it right?
	This is the obvious problem that you can't say, we're right, we're right, we're right, and then say, yeah, but we were wrong on this.
	We were even more right than we knew.
	That doesn't work.
	Isn't science, the whole idea is that it's reproducible?
	And it was not.
	Yes, well, it is if you change things.
	And so I found...
	The methodology they used to change this data in the supplementary material for the report, Possible Artifacts of Data Biases in the Recent Global Surface Warming Hiatus.
	Again, I marked a few things up here, but the main...
	And this thing is filled with...
	I mean, you think it's like, oh, we just measure everything, and then we put it together, and we average it out, or we look at the graph.
	We have the data points, you put it into Excel, and it poops out.
	No.
	They have the formulas that are in this document.
	To me, nothing I've ever seen before is Einstein-type writing stuff.
	And the things they've changed, that's what it looks like, like Einstein formulas.
	The main things they've changed is they've taken different data sets from the buoys in the ocean.
	They've taken different pieces of data from engine temperature monitoring systems.
	And then when you read...
	Of course, I'm way out of my depth here, but under the data and analysis method...
	Maybe you can help, John.
	The new analyses presented here are based on foundational data sets and processing procedures for land surface air temperature and sea surface temperature.
	The data sets are publicly available, so we could put this into our own spreadsheet.
	I'm sure it wouldn't work as well.
	And so the bias corrections are applied to the station's They give a number for a databank as described by Mena and Williams.
	So, first of all, can you explain to me a bias correction?
	How do I interpret a bias correction?
	I'm guessing.
	Don't forget, I was kind of trained as a chemist, not as a physicist.
	I can tell you what, Whitesnake was number one in the top 20.
	Whitesnake.
	It would be a...
	I would call it loosely a fudge factor.
	In other words, you know what the results are.
	You got the result, right?
	Here's the result.
	And here's the initial formula that would make this result...
	Exactly what it is.
	But it doesn't quite come out right.
	So you bias it.
	But you know this is the result.
	You're absolutely positive.
	You're totally convinced that this is what it is.
	And so then you throw in a little thing in there.
	Now it all works.
	Here's how they did it.
	I think it's cheating, personally.
	Listen to how they did it.
	This is followed by computation of temperature anomalies for the station in the databank.
	So the way I understand it is there are anomalies in this temperature reading, probably to the low side.
	The anomalies are then averaged.
	You think?
	Listen, the anomalies are then averaged within 5x5 degree boxes.
	So anything that was outside of the 5x5, it may be 0.05 degrees.
	Oh, that's interesting.
	So they close it in.
	From the gridded anomalies, a global analysis is performed for each year month using, and here it comes, empirical orthogonal teleconnections.
	And this is throughout this document, they're talking about the bias correction.
	We use bias correction and empirical orthogonal teleconnection methodologies.
	So I look this up.
	And I found a paper going back to 1981, titled Sampling Errors in the Estimation of Empirical Orthogonal Functions.
	And this is a way to draw out climate in graphs.
	I mean, if you read this whole introduction, it's, you know, climate may be defined as the multivariate, multiple-time probability distribution of states of the ocean-ice atmosphere system.
	And a primary goal in modern climatology is the measurement and understanding of the parameters describing the stationary probability distribution.
	My brain's freezing.
	But now, we cannot know the exact EOFs, that's the, you know, they just use EOF for empirical orthogonal functions, for climate, but must be satisfied with estimates of them based on a finite number of independent realizations of the instantaneous state of the field.
	The purpose of this paper is to provide an estimate of the sampling errors encountered in some common climatological applications.
	While much of the underlying theory exists in statistical literature, it is usually not a form convenient to the climatologist.
	Aha, you see, it's not convenient.
	So, they have to bias things to make it fit into these EOF models.
	And again, so this paper goes through all kinds of things way above my head.
	But they really do conclude by saying that using EOFs, you really can't...
	In this paper, we have reviewed some properties EOFs, shown how they may be computed from grid point information, and use standard linear analysis to estimate sampling errors.
	The discussion is focused on the applications, the climatology, and then a whole bunch of theoretical crap.
	They're saying...
	I'm going to paraphrase.
	It is not a great way to show the actual climate as it is happening.
	It is a good way to get to a point where you want to be in your presentation of climatological data.
	That is not as important as who wrote this report.
	This was the piece that got me excited because it's more in my wheelhouse.
	You look at...
	The authors of the 81 report?
	No, the authors of this new...
	Of the new report.
	Yes, of the new sampling data.
	The new data.
	Yeah.
	And I'm going to bring it up here.
	The fudge factor report.
	Yes.
	So the head author...
	I've been, by the way, wanting to look into NOAA for a while because...
	Well, there's another outfit that we have to look into.
	This is the piece that I liked.
	Okay, so if you bring up this sciencemag.org, you bring up the report, and you can see there's a number of people who worked on it.
	The head author, though, hold on a second, it's loading here, or the lead author, of course this website's loading slowly, here we go, is this guy Carl...
	I'm sorry.
	I'm losing it here for a second.
	Where was it?
	Carl...
	No, let me switch to the other thing here.
	Damn it.
	Here we go.
	Thomas R. Carl.
	And he's the lead author, and they have to disclose their affiliations.
	And along with Carl...
	Is it with a K or a C? A K. K-A. Thomas R. Carl.
	K-A-R-L. And then there is all the authors on this.
	Carl is the lead.
	Anthony Arguez, Boyin Huang, J.H. Lorimer.
	And then there's James R. McMahon.
	And he has an affiliation with LMI. And I don't know if we've ever looked at LMI. No.
	The LMI Consulting Group is a huge non-governmental organization.
	They actually call it something else.
	It's a research, you know, a federally funded research and development organization.
	And they are very proud here saying, LMI advisor co-authors science article refuting global warming hiatus.
	And then they talk about this here, the LMI.
	I thought it was a NOAA that did this.
	No.
	NOAA did this, but they were advised by LMI. Okay.
	And LMI, this is the outfit you've got to look into, LMI.org.
	A new article published in Science and co-authored by LMI climate analytics expert James McMahon refutes the notion that climate change is on hiatus, finding that global surface temperatures in fact continue to increase.
	The research was led by NOAA, and the new outfit, NCEI, the National Centers for Environmental Information, whose entire job is to make this kind of stuff up in Asheville, addresses the global warming hiatus.
	They're very proud of the work that LMI has done.
	And if you go back and look at LMI's history, which really started as a...
	Who brought this?
	This is Eisenhower or someone, I think.
	He had the history of LMI. And you should look at the board of directors while we're at it, John.
	I'm looking at them now.
	Yeah.
	The history of LMI was logistics.
	They helped government departments with logistics, and now they have expanded into climate change, defense, all of these different things.
	And so I, of course, go and look up the 990, the tax form for LMI.
	Now, I'm okay.
	We have a lot of non-governmental organizations, not-for-profit, that help the government, but you always have to be on the lookout for where's their funding coming from.
	Oh, did I mention in 2013 they received $223 million?
	Mainly from, oh, you know, USAID, Department of Defense, Department of State, Department of Health and Human Services.
	The biggest one being Department of Defense, 132 million.
	Department of Health and Human Services, 25 million.
	Department of State, 12 million.
	I don't see EPA anywhere on there, but that may be for 2014.
	We just haven't seen it yet.
	Even that, even with these huge numbers we've seen, you know, Rand Corporation.
	But then when you get into the nitty-gritty and you look at the salaries of the people running this non-profit, government-funded research and development center who help us We've determined that the climate numbers needed to be changed in order to fit the lie.
	What do you think the president and CEO, Nelson M. Ford, makes over there?
	Base salary and bonuses, because they get bonuses in this non-profit, from our tax dollars.
	I would say what he should make is about $450,000 to $650,000 a year.
	I think $6,000 would be a little on the high side.
	It's big, this operation.
	How about $1.4 million?
	Seems a little steep.
	How about the executive vice president?
	Well, he should be making no more than a half a million.
	Yeah, $1 million.
	How about the senior vice president, Jeffrey Bennett?
	I don't know, probably a mil.
	$839,000.
	The corporate secretary, $784,000.
	Their salary, they have over $12 million in salaries just for management alone.
	We should be so lucky.
	Other salaries and wages...
	Throughout the course of the year, so outside of the executive compensation, current officers, directors, trustees, $105 million.
	This is the freaking gravy train, baby!
	Well, they do what they're told.
	So, I think that this needs to be...
	Have you looked at the board?
	Have you seen who's...
	I'm looking at them.
	I think this has to be called into question that LMI was a part of this with these very large executive compensation packages.
	If they help to create the data that was requested, everyone's pretty much getting paid handsomely.
	Yeah, no, well, now that you got the, you tried to do these guys, now that the whole thing's in.
	So, Noah is like, I don't know if they're just, do what they're told, or who's telling who, you know, I still stick with my thesis that this is a giant mind control experiment.
	Because we did go from global cooling in the 70s.
	With the same people, John P. Holdren.
	With the same people.
	Now the advisor to President Obama was all in on global cooling.
	And now we've switched over to this.
	And people get into arguments.
	Bring up things like this.
	They tell us that it's never going to snow in England.
	It snows in England constantly.
	Let me correct you.
	Let me correct you.
	Ten years ago, it was said, poor children in the UK, the only snow they will ever know in the future is in snow globes.
	And it's been snowing ever since.
	They openly fudged their numbers in climate change.
	The first time.
	Which I think, by the way, is what really put people still think about that.
	No.
	Everyone says, oh, these numbers aren't coming out the way we want.
	Well, let's just change the numbers.
	Let's just fudge it.
	Let's just make changes so everything works out for us.
	Yeah, but now they put that under the heading of empirical orthogonal trans connections.
	Well, that's what they can do now.
	Mm-hmm.
	But that's not what the memo said.
	And that was a problem.
	I think when Hurricane Katrina hit, oh, we're going to have these every year, worse and worse.
	We haven't had a major hurricane ever since.
	It's one thing after another.
	It's one open lie after After another, but they persist and persist and persist, and everybody's lockstep in.
	I mean, there's a few people that are skeptics, and there's 30,000 scientists who are skeptics that nobody's going to pay any attention to, because all scientists are not skeptics.
	You know, the 30,000, they don't count.
	And it's one thing after another, and the only explanation to me is that this is a fantastic...
	Probably valuable mind control study that is going on right beneath us, right under our noses, and we just watch.
	We can't do anything about it.
	We have made no changes.
	The two of us, and everybody else who bitches about this, have changed nobody's mind.
	Yeah, you're right.
	We still have listeners who love this show, but they think we're full of crap about this.
	Yeah.
	No matter what we say, no matter what we uncover, the 97% thing is a hoax.
	And we did a whole show about it.
	A complete hoax.
	I should look up the show number.
	People can go back and listen to that.
	That's one of the best things you've ever done.
	Summarizing the 97% is only 97% of the, what was it?
	30%?
	Reports that were favorable or something.
	You're going to have to go back and look at that.
	No, it was 97% of the 30% who had published a paper positively, with positive inclinations, or strong inclinations towards it.
	97% of 30%, you're right.
	And so now the problem is, well, maybe this will help the problem.
	In Paris, of course, we have coming up the big summit.
	This is the big one.
	This is coming up in December, I think, somewhere around the end of the year.
	And this is where we're going to have to, finally, we have to do something, people, because we have carbon credits to exchange and we've got money to send to corporations and U.S. corporations in poor countries.
	Money's got to flow.
	But they have to come up with a path to the two degree centigrade or Celsius increase.
	And this is how sick it is.
	Instead of saying, because we know the parts per million hasn't worked.
	It was the 350.org, 350 parts per million of carbon dioxide.
	We blew past that.
	Has the climate gone up by an equal amount?
	The temperature gone up by an equal amount?
	No.
	So now we're at, what, 400, 425 parts per million?
	Some over four.
	Yeah, wherever you want to measure this.
	But it's so sick that now that they can get away with...
	Because make no mistake, they're getting away with changing this data consistently.
	They're going to make the two degree number centigrade.
	That's going to be the standard.
	That's going to be the mark.
	It's not going to be in carbon dioxide parts per million.
	It's going to be the temperature.
	And so...
	They need to get it as close to two degrees as possible with all these fudge factors by Paris so we can show that, oh my God, if we get one-tenth of a degree closer and we're all going to die, the oceans will rise, the ice will melt, the polar bears will not be able to swim, all of these things.
	And I'm curious to see, they will have to do another round of fudging of the numbers, you can put it in the book, Because of this ludicrous idea of saying the entire Earth average is up by two degrees.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	You're probably right.
	Now the question for you.
	When you say this is a giant mind control program, obviously...
	Experiment.
	Not a program.
	Experiment.
	Where would this have originated from?
	Obviously, when you have a conspiracy theory like that, which is a true conspiracy theory, what you're propagating here.
	I don't know if it is, but maybe.
	Okay, let's just go with that.
	That way we can just be marginalized.
	How is it possible that all these thousands of scientists are all in and no one has blown the whistle?
	Well, you know that a lot of scientists will not jump in because they get the way it works, the way they've been doing it, the way the experiments have been working is that it kind of all works very beautifully during the social media era because you shout down everybody.
	In fact, there's a bunch of news stories about all these operations going on in Russia where they have...
	Propaganda units.
	Propaganda units, and they have like hundreds of people online going into forums and saying this and that.
	And they do it constantly.
	They're working 12 hours a day, long shifts, doing this.
	It's very easy to do.
	And most people, especially newbies who haven't been in the online era, let's say from the 80s, But newbies, people who just came in, let's say, in the last 15 years, they're very susceptible to being condemned online.
	Whether it's on Facebook, and of course everybody wants to be on Facebook, so Facebook's a great place to promote stuff.
	And everybody's on Facebook, with a few exceptions.
	And you can get condemned, and people can shout you down, and shout you down in every which way, and they write these papers, and the papers that people can point to.
	It's...
	I don't know.
	I think that's why it's a mind-control experiment, because there's so many...
	I think that they're experimenting with how to make this work, and everything they do seems to be working out, but it does involve shouting people down, so the whole scientific principles with people, oh, it's about science, science, the science is in.
	When science should be debating...
	Things like this constantly, especially when you're using computer models.
	But they've shouted that down.
	They use phony baloney information like 97%, which is 97% of 30% of something, which is bullcrap.
	And then you get celebrities, and all the celebrities are all in.
	I've heard that 97% things said by all kinds of people, including...
	Angelina Jolie.
	And the guy, the...
	Clooney.
	Titanic Kid, what's his name?
	Yeah, Titanic Kid, his name.
	Yeah, Titanic kid.
	Wall Street Titanic kid guy.
	The Titanic Wall Street wolf guy.
	He said it.
	I saw him say it.
	And those are influencers.
	You use the dumb actors and actresses as influencers because they are influencers.
	Like somebody said, you get Kim Kardashian to wear an Apple Watch or gold.
	Yeah, or you do a...
	You've got something going on And you need a distraction Call Clooney Call Clooney Clooney's always good And then the Wall Street Wolf Titanic kid guy.
	He's good.
	Especially when he has his beard on, then he's in climate mode.
	Matt Damon.
	Matt Damon is a good one.
	Matt Damon's another one.
	So you still haven't answered who would have originated this and who's behind it.
	Well, yeah.
	You kind of gave me two questions.
	Who?
	Who specifically?
	Well, the people that are...
	Like to do these experiments is the Defense Department, the DIA, the CIA loves doing these sorts of things.
	I don't think the NSA does.
	They don't care.
	I don't think they're experimental.
	It has to be the CIA, the DIA, the intelligence community, a group of people.
	The purpose of which I think is just a dry run for something bigger.
	Well, we can go back to the Church Commission when this all came out.
	Not this specifically, but where their admission was, yes, we have CIA agents at Newsweek, at CBS. We have them everywhere.
	Right, and they're still there.
	We've documented a number of them, and most of them are easy to identify.
	So, you mentioned earlier about Russia, you know, coming up with their propaganda unit.
	There's two more that have surfaced just in this week.
	The first one is the EU, the European Union, and they released it.
	I love it.
	They just do a press.
	They do not give a crap.
	They just put a press release out.
	And their outfit is called...
	Hold on a second.
	Because I look it up and they have a website.
	Here it is.
	The European Union set up a special unit to counter what it says is propaganda coordinated by Russia amid the Ukraine crisis.
	The Brussels-based unit is tasked with monitoring Russian media and promoting activity of EU institutions.
	The team was created in the framework of, here it comes, the European External Action Service, EEAS, and you can look that up at eeas.eu, and consists of five leading individuals who will all be in charge of the following...
	Let's see.
	There will be a European channel broadcasting in Russian.
	Russian language programming to be launched this month, 2015.
	What was it again?
	It wasn't EEA. What was it?
	It's the EEAS, European External Action Service.
	It's just a great name, too.
	Yeah.
	And so if you go there, you can see all the things that they're working on.
	And luckily, these...
	These outfits all have RSS feeds, so I can follow these.
	But here is the many roles.
	Let's see.
	Oh, first I have to accept cookies.
	Or should I refuse cookies?
	No, they will block if you refuse cookies.
	I'm going to hit I refuse cookies.
	If you run some of these, I use Spy Hunter 4.
	If you run this on, well, you've got a Mac.
	You can't use any of these things.
	They wipe them out and they reset them all the time.
	is the way to go.
	So the EEAS is the European Union's diplomatic service.
	It helps the EU's foreign affairs chief, the high representative of foreign affairs and security policy, that used to be the no-neck monster, she's out now, carry out the Union's common foreign and security policy.
	So they're part of the European Union State Department, very much like the techno-experts that Hillary Clinton gave birth to during her reign at the State Department.
	The actual website is E-E-A-S dot Europa dot EU.
	Otherwise you run into some real estate company.
	Sorry about that.
	Now, so that is the European Union.
	That is well-funded.
	But there is another outfit, which is called the UN... Hold on a second.
	The UN Foundation.
	Not to be confused with the United Nations.
	This is the UN Foundation, heavily funded mainly by Ted Turner's $1 billion gift.
	So look at unfoundation.org.
	This is the board you want to be on.
	And here's what they've said.
	United Nations Foundation, created by billionaire Ted Turner, along with a branch of media giant Thomson Reuters, is starting to train a squadron What's a squadron?
	How many in a squadron?
	You can look that up.
	A squadron of journalists and subsidized media content in 33 countries, including the U.S. and Britain.
	A squadron is 12 to 24.
	Well, it should be more if they're being 33 countries.
	In an effort to popularize the bulky and sweeping UN-sponsored Sustainable Development Goals, prior to the Global UN Summit this September, where UN organizers hope they will be endorsed by world leaders.
	This is...
	Wow.
	Yes, wow.
	This is a good one.
	I'll give you a full hundred points for this.
	Listen to their promo reel.
	What kind of world do we want to live in?
	One where I'm a slave, please!
	A world of inequality, poverty, and pollution?
	Or a world of peace, prosperity, and opportunity for all?
	The choice is clear.
	The decision is ours.
	We can make a better world a reality, but we have to act now.
	The United Nations is where the world comes together to advance peace and progress.
	It's where all of us have a voice in the world we want.
	The United Nations Foundation connects people, ideas and resources to support the UN's life-saving and life-changing work.
	Together, we are a powerful constituency for change.
	Together our voices and our actions are helping create a world where children don't die from preventable diseases.
	A world where the rights and needs of girls and women are recognized.
	Yay!
	A world where we spark economic growth by rising to meet the challenge of climate change.
	Yay!
	And a world where a strong U.S.-U.N. relationship promotes global peace and security.
	Hell yeah!
	How could we...
	We're making progress, but we can't stop now.
	No, no, no.
	Every community, every country, every person has a role to play.
	That's right.
	Join us in helping the U.N. build a better world.
	I continue to read about this journalist and media program.
	Quote, very often the problem of the United Nations is that the speech is long full of acronyms and the jargon is difficult to understand, says Monique Villa, head of the Thomson Reuters Foundation.
	Making the jargon of the UN understandable is quite important.
	Under the plan, Villa's foundation, that's Thomson Reuters non-profit arm, so we're already a layer down, will carry out the training under contract from the UN Foundation.
	So they're taking money from Ted Turner to train journalists to communicate the message properly and simple, simple to understand language.
	Journalists from Australia to Peru, from Britain to Zimbabwe, will be given five-day training programs by instructors drawn largely from the ranks of former Reuters journalists.
	The material will include, will encompass among other things, how to better understand and explain UN opaque concepts of sustainability, with at least one section devoted to financial and economic concepts.
	Training sessions for the journalists, whose parent organizations are as of yet unnamed, are slated to run through August.
	US training sessions will take place in New York and Los Angeles.
	Who will be given instructions and whose editorial platforms will be subsidized has not yet been announced.
	Overall subsidies are expected to range between $25,000 and $100,000 for each trainee for the subsidy.
	The subsidy approach of the UN Foundation, according to the officials, is not dissimilar to the funding that the Mill and Belinda Gates Foundation has provided for several years to The Guardian.
	To help explain, you know, AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, etc.
	Charter schools.
	Yeah.
	Private prisons.
	Does anyone see the danger in all this?
	What could possibly go wrong?
	It's all tied in together.
	That's why the global warming thing is so dangerous, because it's obviously just one of the keystones to whatever scheme is afoot to create that.
	You know, this is all the elite thing again.
	Did you look at the board of the United Nations Foundation?
	Yeah.
	Oh, no.
	Let's just review.
	Ted Turner, of course.
	Kathy Calvin.
	I don't know.
	She doesn't ring a bell.
	But then you got to have a hottie.
	Her Majesty Queen Reina from Jordan.
	Get the hottie on board right below her, so to speak.
	Kofi Annan.
	Then, let's see.
	Wang Ming, the Chinese representative.
	The CEO of the Abril Group out of Brazil, Fabio.
	By the way, Abril is the biggest publisher in South America.
	There you go.
	This is the collusion with the media right in front of us.
	Right in front.
	Paying for it.
	Paying to train.
	Emma Rothschild.
	Well, hello.
	Hello.
	You know the Jews are involved somewhere, John.
	Andrew Young.
	There's an interesting cross-section of people.
	Muhammad Yunus from Bangladesh.
	Let's see who's on climate and energy.
	Bankers.
	Yeah, oh yeah.
	This is a good group.
	This is a great drinking club.
	Yeah.
	And Ted Turner knows this business.
	He knows news.
	He knows how to make news.
	How to put together news organizations.
	Exactly.
	How to put together news organizations.
	So we need to keep our eye on the United Nations Foundation.
	We're doomed!
	Well, there's that.
	To the gate, to the gate, to the climate gate.
	And they were in the data with the same.
	This is all part of the, again, mind control experiment.
	They will be out there saying what they were taught to say.
	Unknowingly, most of them, they go, yeah, okay.
	It reminds me of this clip.
	Let's play, I don't know if you want to stay on this topic, but I do want to play a little clip because of this scam that That was presented and shown on Newsnight.
	And let's play it.
	This is, since we're talking about journalism and the corruption of everything, let's play Chocolate One.
	Chocolata.
	Does chocolate help you lose weight?
	You might have read reports recently of some German research claiming that it can.
	Very sadly, it was all a hoax.
	The deliberately flawed study was designed to show how easily the media will swallow bad science.
	Here's Evan Davis.
	Science journalist John Bohannon made up a false identity, Johannes Bohannon PhD, he set up a bogus research institute, simply a crude website, and he conducted a real study, based on a tiny sample of seven men and eleven women, split into different groups.
	In tiny samples, randomness can generate results, and that's what happened here.
	One showed that the people who ate a bar of chocolate today lost more weight than the others.
	Bingo!
	On the back of this dodgy conclusion, the study made headlines around the world.
	It was accepted for publication in one journal.
	Mr Bohannon found himself doing media interviews, with no one taking much trouble to check out the thoroughness of his work.
	It's real!
	And then when he comes on and they interview him later, he makes the comment that I think kind of summarizes journalism in the modern world.
	John, it was interesting that no one had even taken the trouble to Google your fictitious name and find that you didn't exist.
	Yeah, well, journalists are lazy.
	You and I both know that.
	It's your hoax exercise.
	What does it say about the reporting of science and of diet science in particular?
	It seems to be amateur hour.
	And there we go.
	We're all gonna die!
	I'm gonna show my salute by donating to No Agenda.
	Imagine all the people who could do that.
	Oh yeah, that'd be fab.
	Yeah, on No Agenda.
	And we do have a few people to thank for show.
	728.
	8.
	728.
	Including Erwin...
	Froelich.
	Froelich.
	I wanted to mention something.
	728.
	Douglas Chick mentioned that his donation was...
	I believe he's the one, yeah.
	It was half of 728.
	It was a half number.
	I like that idea.
	Yeah, which was an interesting idea.
	So 728, and he did half of 7...
	364.
	364.
	I like that.
	That's a good idea.
	So you can do that with every even number.
	We've got 790 coming up, so we're just encouraging people.
	Anyway, Erwin came in from the Netherlands at 16514.
	He wanted a de-douching.
	He says he's not donated since show 464.
	It's a long ways.
	You've been de-douched.
	He says you've been consistently providing value, making my commute bearable.
	We try.
	He's going to try to keep people from...
	He wants to shorten the show by 30.
	We got the show down to 245, and I think that's going to be where we're going to try to keep it.
	David Villeux in Concord, California.
	12345.
	Eric B. Elone in Murfreesboro, Tennessee.
	And he did send a small note somewhere, just a little bitty one, saying he loves the show.
	And of course, I misplaced the note immediately.
	I don't know why I do this.
	It happens.
	It's crazy.
	It happens.
	Anyway, he...
	Check out the pile of books.
	Eric Asbury.
	No books up here.
	Well, there's books up here too, yeah.
	Eric Asbury in Brandon, Florida, 8910.
	Sir Quiston.
	He says, resist me much.
	I will obey.
	Hail Apple.
	Hail Apple!
	Hail Apple.
	Sir Quiston in Blight.
	You have to hold your arm up.
	I did.
	Did you show the watch?
	You have to show a watch.
	I don't have a watch.
	Well, then that's not a true Hail Apple.
	$75 in Blyton, Lincolnshire, UK. BuyRAR.com, which I assume is the decompressor.
	$72.80 from Omaha, Nebraska.
	Sorry he says slipped into douchiness.
	That's all right, man.
	And he's back on track.
	His father passed.
	His father died, which I think probably is a good excuse.
	No, he says lousy excuse.
	No, it's a good excuse.
	It's a good excuse.
	I don't know about that.
	We'll take it.
	Jonathan Diggle in Winnipeg, Manitoba, 6969.
	John Hamilton, 6961, from Carlsbad, California.
	He needs a dedouching.
	He says, especially after listening to our analysis religiously over the past five years and never getting around to showing my appreciation.
	Then he uses the usage, which I detest, by the way.
	I'm going to call you out, John, because Adams used it once.
	My bad.
	What does that even mean?
	It means I am bad?
	It was my bad move, my bad mistake.
	I regret it.
	I'm sad.
	Sorry.
	It will never happen again.
	My bad.
	He needs a dedouching.
	Let me give him the dedouching.
	You've been dedouched.
	And I will say that you've called me out on using that privately, I believe, and I really have refrained from using it.
	No, I want to stop the thing right for a second.
	You are a lot better than I am when it comes to killing people.
	A usage that we don't want to use.
	We have a bunch of rules on the show about it.
	Rules?
	Because we're rule followers.
	We're rule followers.
	We like saying, at the end of the day, or what was the one?
	The one I was listening to, I was listening to one guy, one of the right-wingers, and he keeps saying, what is it?
	There's another.
	I've lost.
	I can't remember.
	It's not when all is said and done.
	It's...
	You use Out of the Blue.
	It's been Yeah No.
	Yeah No.
	Some guys use something else.
	I don't remember.
	I don't know.
	It's one of the ones we've banned, and I don't know that we've said it much.
	Wendy Packer, 6933 out of Parts Unknown.
	She went to the beer circus in Lagunitas in Chicago, and our group was the Robber Baronets.
	And I'm like, I want to be a baronet.
	I got to be a dame first.
	Okay.
	Zachary Gilbreck.
	In Cordova, Tennessee, $56.78.
	We run out of steam on today's show, by the way, pretty quickly.
	Sir Taylor in Los Angeles, Nevada, $56.78.
	Sam Leung in Toronto, Ontario.
	I think it's Sir Sam Leung.
	Sir Sam, exactly.
	Sir Sam, 55.
	He may be a baronet by now.
	Whoops.
	Sir Sam, and for some reason the thing went down a mile.
	Steve Edwards, double nickels on the dime from Ohio.
	Jeffrey Schwab in Olympia, Washington, 55.10 also.
	Job Karma Works, he says.
	Alexander Sokovy in Moscow.
	Hey, hey.
	Corey McDonald.
	And the rest of these are $50 and it will be done.
	Corey McDonald, Richfield, Minnesota.
	Brian Scozaro in Chattanooga.
	It was basically and essentially were the other words we've banned from the show.
	Yeah, we've done well, yeah.
	But, no, this was a phrase.
	It's one of those phrases, like, not at the end of the day when all is said and done.
	The question is, John, what is the phrase of the page?
	Whee!
	Onward with the $50 donors.
	Brian Matthews in...
	By the way, Chattanooga, Tennessee just beat out Port Angeles, Washington in outside magazine voting.
	That's because they have a choo-choo.
	Brian Matthews in Balbrigan, Dublin, Ireland, 50.
	The fact of the matter.
	Fact of the matter.
	Was it fact of the matter?
	Yeah, I think it was fact of the matter.
	He just used it and used it and used it.
	Fact of the matter.
	The fact of the matter.
	You used it.
	Christopher Walker, De Pere, Wisconsin, 50.
	Kevin Johnson, Phoenix, Arizona, 50.
	Carol Garrett in Eureka, Kansas, 50.
	Eric Mann in Spring Hill, somewhere or other, Florida.
	Bill Hudek in who dare.
	Hudek, who dare, baby?
	I don't know.
	Timonium, which I think is a great name for a town, and an element.
	Timonium, Maryland.
	And Sir Brett Farrell in Oklahoma somewhere.
	Jason Deluzio in Chadsford, Pennsylvania.
	And finally, last but not least, he comes in, I don't know, every show, Sir Mark Tanner, who's probably a baron, in Whittier, California.
	And that's all we got for show 728.
	Not a lot, but it was something.
	We get a lot of low donations.
	That's the other thing that's kind of unusual.
	Well, all of these monthly...
	It's a small spreadsheet, let's put it that way.
	Yeah.
	You determine it by file size.
	Yes.
	We really appreciate all the support we get.
	It keeps us going.
	It actually does keep us going.
	So thank everybody who came in with 3333.
	We've got, I see, a 1313, some 1212s, 1111s, our 5s, of course, our 4s.
	Those are left, and some 2s.
	Well, the 4s, no.
	Most of the 4s are weeklies.
	Oh, they're weekly 4s.
	Oh, that's nice.
	Nice.
	Yeah.
	Excellent.
	And of course, with the work that John and I are doing, we've taken this path, which makes me happy.
	I don't work for anyone but the people who actually support the program.
	Yeah, the producers.
	Yeah, they are producers, and this product is for you.
	It's not for advertisers by selling on the vast numbers of listeners to the program.
	Right.
	Well, we have probably a lot.
	Yeah, exactly.
	We don't even know how many we have.
	We don't sell them to any advertiser.
	We don't say, hey, look at these guys.
	They're all, you know, they think a certain...
	Normally, you'd take a group that we have listening to the show and you could make claims.
	We'd study you, of course.
	We'd study you.
	Yeah.
	And then we'd get the results back in the study.
	We'd find out what you think, how old you are, what you're good for, what you do your work, do you not work, all this sort of thing.
	And then we'd package that up, and that would be the product.
	And then we'd say to an average, look, we've got these guys.
	They listen to our show.
	They're going to sell them to you.
	Now, that would be one way.
	We could also be taking money from...
	You know, to promote death to the planet.
	Still waiting for the Koch brothers check.
	Koch brothers, if they were producers.
	Yeah, death to the planet.
	Anyone else.
	Or, we have provided analysis that people have used for investment tips, investment strategies, I should say, that have paid off for them.
	A little irksome is that we are so good.
	Yeah, no.
	Right?
	Yeah, no.
	I had really not...
	We've never heard of this Yano phenomenon until you and I started talking about it, our own use of Yano.
	Yeah.
	No.
	It would...
	Was it any...
	Had you heard about it anywhere else?
	No.
	Yeah, no.
	Yeah, no.
	But...
	No, no.
	Our show is so good and so trending and so ahead of the times that it is now even being used in advertising.
	This is the Samsung Galaxy S6 Edge.
	It comes with built-in wireless charging capabilities.
	The iPhone 6.
	Yeah, no.
	Not so much.
	See what I mean?
	We could be doing so many different things in real life.
	Wow.
	I actually have seen that ad and didn't pick that up.
	I'm going to give everybody a jobs karma.
	Thank you all for supporting the best podcast in the universe.
	Jobs, jobs, jobs, and jobs.
	Let's vote for jobs!
	And very short list today.
	As far as I can tell, we only have one.
	John Hamilton will turn 54 on June 9th.
	We say happy birthday to you from all your friends here at the best podcast in the universe.
	It's your birthday, yeah!
	Two Barons we welcome today.
	Sir Mark Workman becomes the Baron of Galt's Gulch.
	And Sir Brad Doherty becomes Baron of the Jersey Shore.
	And we welcome both of them to the peerage map, itm.im slash peerage.
	And we'd like to invite Jeremy Cooper and Ken Gross up to the stage.
	Just be careful of my blade, John, yours.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, no.
	Yeah.
	Jeremy Cooper and Ken Gross.
	Both of you have contributed to the best podcast in the universe.
	We're about $1,000 or more.
	We are happy to bring you into the table of the Knights and the Dames of the Notre Dame.
	I'm hereby pronouncing the K-D. Sir Cooper, Black Knight Sir Cooper, and Sir Ken of Pencil Tucky.
	For you, gentlemen, we have Hookers and Blow, Red Boys and Chardonnay.
	We've got Ass Cream and Bear Fillings.
	We've got...
	Girlfriend experience and good bourbon, porn stars and pop, raspberry pies and breakfast burritos, hot pants and booze, mutton and mead is the last one, but maybe some breast milk and pablum if you're into that kind of thing.
	Go to knowageinthenation.com slash rings.
	Again, I saw two or three tweets in the past two days.
	I hadn't read our...
	I can't remember who it was who tweeted a picture of their certificate in the ring and the sealing wax.
	That's a pretty good certificate.
	Oh, yeah.
	It gives you a lot of power.
	Eric enjoys it.
	We hand over a lot of power.
	So he's the scribe.
	He's the official scribe.
	Does he do that by hand?
	Does he do that with a...
	Do you think he does it by hand?
	I don't know.
	He's got a really cool font that he uses.
	Oh.
	But it's good.
	It was Macho.
	Macho Haley.
	It's very cool.
	You know, Pennsylvania does not touch Kentucky, so when he's...
	A pencil-tucky would be West Virginia.
	Well, that's maybe what he meant.
	Oh, I was reminded, and we need to do this more often now that we're in our eighth year, and some people are very puzzled by some of the things that we just take for granted.
	One of them is when I played the president, our president Obama, sitting down with King Willem-Alexander of the Netherlands.
	I was reminded by several producers, hey, you know, it's time to roll out that clip where we hear the president tell every representative of every country that they are our number one ally.
	And they're all punching above their weight.
	It's fairly typical of the way that Danes have punched above their weight in international affairs.
	I've said this before, but I want to repeat.
	Norway punches above its weight.
	We have...
	No stronger ally than the Netherlands.
	They consistently punch above their weight.
	Ireland punches above its weight.
	It's a small country.
	The Philippines is not the largest of countries.
	In using a phrase from boxing, punches above its weight.
	No stronger ally than the Netherlands.
	We have no stronger ally than Australia.
	Poland is one of our closest and strongest allies.
	Great Britain is one of our closest, strongest allies.
	As I said earlier, Germany is one of our strongest allies.
	This state visit reflects the fact that the Republic of Korea is one of our strongest allies.
	Israel is one of our strongest allies.
	France is our oldest ally.
	And continues to be one of our closest allies.
	Italy is one of our strongest allies.
	Japan is, of course, one of our strongest and closest allies.
	There's a need for a rescue mission.
	When the world is threatened, the world needs help, it calls on America.
	And that's the story.
	We're big Indian givers is what we are.
	Which brings us to another international story.
	An incident?
	USA beats Netherlands.
	Yes, this was interesting.
	Networks going full throttle with women's soccer as the World Cup commences this weekend in Canada.
	Meanwhile, the U.S. men played a friendly today in the Netherlands, and what a game it was.
	Down 3-1, second half.
	They tie it at three, and then in the 90th minute, Michael Bradley to Jordan Morris, who plays at Stanford, to Bobby Wood.
	To Bobby Wood!
	It's bonkers on the unbelievable...
	It is unbelievable.
	They scored four to win the game.
	Down 3-1.
	They win 4-3.
	The U.S., a nice victory.
	First ever win against the Netherlands.
	Yeah, the Netherlands are good.
	Yes, they are.
	Sixth in the world.
	Thanks.
	Thank you, Scott.
	They're good.
	Christina was there with Juan.
	Juan came over.
	That's what I was going to say.
	I was going to say, oh, we beat the Netherlands.
	Who cares?
	Why is this on the news?
	It was not even a real game.
	It was an exhibition game.
	It was sold out.
	Who cares?
	Who cares?
	Well, this is part of your mind-control experiment.
	Just to get us all so we're thinking like Europeans so we can have one world government.
	One world sport.
	And now they want us to be in on this.
	And oh, of course, the great international game, which you can use to manipulate the public, is soccer.
	Because you can have countries playing countries if they have a dispute.
	You can take it out on the field.
	Well, it's either that or the Eurovision Song Contest.
	They can take it out in song.
	Oh, look.
	It's a European Song Contest.
	Eurovision.
	That's Australian.
	No, no.
	It's Eurovision.
	We've been through this.
	It's not European.
	It's Eurovision.
	Japan can be a member of Europe.
	Well, I say maybe.
	Maybe.
	Say what?
	That's what I said.
	In Eurovision, our dude wears a dress better than your dude.
	I mean, this is where the world is going.
	Now, police state.
	Police state.
	United Nations of Gitmo police state.
	Jade Helm 15 has kicked off, but it has not kicked off in Texas.
	It's a number of states, which I don't think a lot of people knew.
	It goes up to Ohio, and there's like four or five different states that are now going to be part of this large exercise.
	And it really is the largesse of the exercise that is interesting.
	And I did see a Blackhawk hovering over downtown Austin yesterday in what is truly a whisper mode.
	It's a reduction in...
	Blade flap and energy from the engines.
	I think it might even be labeled whisper mode in the helicopter, believe it or not.
	But this kicked off in Flint, Michigan, which is a great place to blow some crap up.
	It was a peaceful afternoon, and then it turned hostile.
	I was standing there, and all of a sudden I said, boom, big, huge explosion.
	I mean, it was loud.
	Explosions you'd expect in a war zone echoed through Flint, and people's homes shook, and those inside were caught off guard.
	It all went down at the shuttered Lowell Junior High on the east side, and we've learned the blasts are just an army exercise.
	There's older people.
	I mean, they'll probably get a heart attack.
	Spokesman Jason Lorenz says Flint has been in talks with the Army for months now about using parts of the city.
	It's an exercise to help their personnel do training with urban environments.
	That training includes aircraft and simulated ammunition, and it will continue for the next 10 days.
	I think they should have gave us a warning to let us know that there was an Army thing going on.
	I really do.
	Just after 11.30 this morning, the city sent out a release informing the public about the exercises.
	People say the explosions went off right around 2 o'clock this afternoon.
	What gives?
	Tonight, we're asking the tough questions.
	City residents may say, hey, why don't we get a better heads up on when these training operations are going to be held, where?
	And this guy, the spokeshole for the city, is standing there chewing gum.
	Tsk, tsk, tsk.
	While he's listening to the question, I'm sorry, the tough questions.
	What's your answer to that?
	Well, obviously I can't speak for the Army on that, but we try to give people a heads up when we can.
	We can't go into too much detail.
	We don't want people just coming to these things and sightseeing.
	So we have to be careful with it, and we obviously have to respect the Army's wishes.
	Oh, we have to respect the Army's wishes.
	Yes, sir!
	Hail Apple!
	You have residents and the military.
	They're trying to keep things under wraps.
	Now the city plans to have police officers in the areas where they will train to make sure that residents know exactly what's going on.
	And in the release sent out today, the Army says that doing this type of training will give their personnel an upper hand when they have to go into urban combat.
	Uh-huh, nice, nice.
	They will be wearing armbands.
	Not in this report, but in the written reports, no photos, no video of the personnel training for fear that ISIS will go after them.
	It's crazy.
	Then we have the, this is a great, from Denver.
	There was a shoplifter.
	What ISIS? ISIS in America.
	Don't you listen to Pamela Geller?
	They're here.
	They're going to chop off your head next.
	In Denver, there was a shoplifter.
	I have the clip.
	I have the clip.
	Well, it's a clip showdown.
	It's a clip-off.
	Yes, a shoplifter.
	I have a 44-second clip.
	It was actually in Greenwood, a village.
	It's a little place right in it.
	It's a suburb.
	And if you look at the picture of the chief of police, the guy looks like an idiot.
	A-hole.
	No, he looks like a hyped up, roided out a-hole.
	Yeah, he's a total a-hole.
	Which is not typical for all police.
	And so they got a bunch of gear from the government, so they decided to use it on some guy's house to just literally destroy the house trying to get some shoplifting.
	With a tank!
	With a tank, yes.
	I got the tank.
	Well, I don't know.
	Should we play them both at the same time?
	Simultaneously.
	The Greenwood Village home looks like something out of a war zone.
	It's now off limits, and you can see why there are gaping holes on the front, on the sides, even in the back of the house, on South Alton Street.
	The homeowner's mad at police for this.
	That's kind of interesting, actually.
	Yeah.
	Now that house is where a 20-hour standoff took place between a man with a gun who busted in, wanted for shoplifting, and a police force led by Greenwood Village PD. The house is now condemned, and the homeowner calling police.
	Wow, it even goes to the same sound bar.
	Wait a minute, wait a minute.
	Yours wins.
	I heard Osama bin Laden.
	Hold on.
	...who busted in, wanted for shoplifting, and a police force led by Greenwood Village PD. The house is now condemned, and the homeowner calling police thugs.
	If you go online and look at the Osama Bin Laden compound, I would say that this may even look a little worse.
	Leolet can't believe what's happened to his house.
	This is an abomination.
	This is an atrocity.
	Together we walk around the home he bought and rented out to his son's family.
	This was a bathroom.
	This was a master bedroom.
	This was a kitchen.
	A little boy's artwork and just about all their belongings visible for all to see.
	Damaged by police firing from the outside trying to get the man out.
	Inside, it's still a crime scene.
	You have a whole life worth of memories in there, okay?
	And that's all gone.
	Leck knows his part.
	The structure is covered.
	His insurance agent has already told him that.
	It's police who have him fuming.
	They drove their tank right through all of our fences here.
	A tank.
	A tank.
	This is for one gunman.
	This is paramilitary force, okay?
	In any civilized nation, okay?
	This is the act of paramilitary thugs, is what this is.
	This is for one gunman.
	And while he waits and watches from the outside of a fence, he can't help but think there had to be another way.
	Fire some tear gas through the windows.
	If that didn't work, you have 50 SWAT officers with body armor break down the door.
	And you have $10,000 of damage, maybe, versus a quarter of a million dollars.
	Now, the question immediately came to mind, why didn't they use tear gas and just roust him?
	What's the fun of that?
	That's exactly it.
	That's not fun.
	Dopey cops in Greenwood Village are dumb.
	Why else could you be a cop in the town like that?
	So you go and you got all this gear that Homeland Security gave you as part of their grand experiment.
	Now you load up, you get to play army, and you get to wreck some poor bastard's house.
	Thank you very much.
	You know what's next.
	The town should be sued out of existence.
	The problem is you can't do anything about this sort of thing because you sue the town.
	Yeah, you get a couple million bucks out of the deal.
	The town just passes the cost on to the taxpayers or takes out a loan and makes the taxpayers pay more.
	These people have got to be eliminated from office.
	They've got to be voted out.
	There was a ray of light in the police state known as the United States of Gitmo Nation in New York City.
	Finally, this is just a pinprick of light, but it's a ray of light.
	A mugger takedown in the middle of Midtown.
	Several people forced an alleged thief to the ground near 35th and 8th Avenue and made sure the cash got back to the victim.
	As I looked further down, there were seven or eight guys just tackling this guy.
	Bryant Jackson was walking out of his office building here when he saw the commotion and started shooting this video.
	Someone did call 911 and the police responded.
	In the video, they're ripping money out of his hand.
	He had her money in his hand and they ripped the money out and they get it back to her and she's, you know, she's bawling.
	I mean, she was really shaken up and she had a bloody lip and she had a scraped up leg.
	The woman got her purse and money back, and the alleged mugger learned a New York lesson.
	I feel like New York is always so busy.
	So does this give New Yorkers a bit of a better name?
	Yeah!
	I mean, someone help!
	Yeah!
	Someone help!
	Can you believe it?
	This is the murk I grew up in.
	It was a cool video.
	Five guys on him, one foot on his head, and other guys are choking him, and they're grabbing the purse and the money out of his hand.
	Go!
	Yay!
	Yay!
	Nice.
	I like that.
	I like it.
	Like all the attempted bombings of airplanes by guys with shoe bombs.
	It's all the public.
	The public who stops.
	These officials don't do anything.
	Oh, they'll blow up some bastard's house.
	No, they didn't blow it up.
	They rammed the tank through it.
	Well, they also shot up the second floor and took the walls down.
	It was unbelievable.
	People should search this thing and get it out.
	Well, you don't have to search it.
	It's in the show notes, which can be found at search.nashownotes.com.
	Also, noagendaplayer.com is really handy if you just want to send someone a little clip or something from the show.
	It helps you tweet it out.
	It helps you send an email link right into the segment of the show.
	So, while you're watching CNN, I'm watching Democracy Now.
	I know.
	It's a tough beat, but you're on.
	Now, it is.
	And then, they always show, they have some guests on, and Amy Goodman will be there with her mouth kind of just slightly open, like...
	With a little trickle of drool.
	So, I've got this.
	I don't remember...
	On the last show, we did the Red Cross thing, but this little version of the story is a little different.
	She presents it slightly differently with a little punchline.
	I'm wondering now why PBS didn't tell us this.
	A new report says the Red Cross has squandered millions of dollars in donations for Haiti after the 2010 earthquake.
	According to Pro Republica and NPR, the Red Cross raised about $500 million, but managed to build just six permanent homes.
	The group had falsely claimed to have provided homes to 130,000 people.
	Some of the money was diverted to boost employees' salaries and may have been used to wipe off tens of millions of dollars in Red Cross debt.
	Yay!
	Hey, we got all this money.
	What are we going to do with it?
	I don't know.
	You're going to send it to Haiti.
	No, no, no.
	Hey, have a bonus.
	Take some money home.
	We must reiterate, they don't actually hide how they operate.
	People seem to be flabbergasted every single time.
	They take in money and they do not directly reappropriate that money.
	Yeah, they do not direct.
	And, you know, screw it.
	I, in particular, have been on this Haiti bull crap since it happened in 2012.
	Yeah.
	But again, it's this big ProPublica and NPR. This is to obfuscate the billions that the Clinton Foundation squandered.
	Let's just use their word.
	Squandered.
	Yeah, I'm sure that's a smokescreen.
	Now, people who listen to this program know a lot of things way ahead of anybody else.
	This was the most frequently retweeted TED Talk of the week.
	It was presented, I believe, at TEDCandinavia.
	Was it TED or TEDx?
	No, it was a TED. You sure?
	Yes, yes.
	I specifically looked, and I thought, wow, I didn't know there was a TED... I know there's a TED outside the USA. No.
	TED, Scandinavia.
	Trevor Aronson, who has written a book about it, and it's a six or seven minute talk, two quick clips, his intro, and then I'll do his outro.
	The FBI is responsible for more terrorism plots in the United States than any other organization.
	More than Al-Qaeda, more than Al-Shabaab, more than the Islamic State.
	More than all of them combined.
	This isn't likely how you think about the FBI. You probably think of FBI agents gunning down bad guys like John Dillinger or arresting corrupt politicians.
	And sending Martha Stewart to jail.
	After the 9-11 terrorist attacks, the FBI became less concerned with gangsters and crooked elected officials.
	The new target became terrorists.
	And the pursuit of terrorists has consumed the FBI. Every year the Bureau spends $3.3 billion on domestic counterterrorism activities.
	Compare that to just $2.6 billion combined for organized crime, financial fraud, public corruption, and all other types of traditional criminal activity.
	I've spent years pouring through the case files of terrorism prosecutions in the United States, and I've come to the conclusion that the FBI is much better at creating terrorists than it is at catching terrorists.
	In the 14 years since 9-11, you can count about six real terrorist attacks in the United States.
	These include the Boston Marathon bombings in 2013, as well as failed attacks, such as the time a man named Fajal Shahzad tried to deliver a car bomb to Times Square.
	In those same 14 years, the Bureau, however, has bragged about how it's foiled dozens of terrorism plots.
	The FBI has arrested more than 175 people in aggressive undercover counterterrorism stings.
	These operations, which are usually led by an informant, provide the means and opportunity, and sometimes even the idea, for mentally ill and economically desperate people to become what we now term terrorists.
	The thing that bothers me about this TED Talk is that you or I could have done this TED Talk. haha Is it my attitude?
	We're doing this TED Talk right now.
	Is it my attitude, John?
	Is that why I don't get invited to do the TED Talk on the FBI creating more terrorists with retards?
	You know, this is not the first guy who who's noticed this and we're not the first podcasters who's noticed this.
	This is a very kind.
	This is well known.
	I'm surprised.
	He's the only guy that comes on a TED talk to do it.
	That's my point.
	So he, well, you know, you got to be in the, you know, he's got a book or something.
	Yes, he does.
	Here's his wrap-up.
	U.S. government officials call this the war on terror.
	It's really just theater.
	A national security theater.
	With mentally ill men like Sammy Osmakos, unwitting actors, in a carefully choreographed production brought to you by the FBI. That's right.
	Brought to you by the FBI. I'm glad somebody...
	...formularized the whole thing and put it on TED. Oh, and now everyone's going to be...
	Oh, that's interesting.
	The FBI, who have made a...
	...a pretty good...
	I'm going to stop you right here.
	Something came up in that talk.
	It was you.
	I'm going to tell you this, but I'm going to tell you not to stop.
	But I'm going to tell you that I noticed this.
	You have stolen from me my common complaint about Martha Stewart.
	Now, I believe you did this, because I used to say it all the time.
	And you also, you roll your eyes one way or another every time I did it.
	But ever since Comey got in, you've decided that it's now your property.
	Oh, no.
	No, that's not my property.
	Well, that's okay.
	Like I said, I'm not dissuading you.
	Is it not communal?
	I just want to let you know that I was bitching about Martha Stewart five years ago.
	Yes.
	All credit.
	All credit, sir.
	I'm just saying this so you know that I know.
	Well, it's interesting you bring this up.
	And you're the one, you did, you're the one, by the way, I will give you credit for this, that noticed that Comey was the part of that.
	I didn't notice that.
	When he got in, it's just beyond me that he had anything to do with Martha Stewart.
	But yet I stole your thing.
	Okay.
	No, you stole the line...
	Well, I'm sorry.
	It's okay.
	It's fine.
	I give you the line freely for yours to use as you wish, which is a very common thing that people will do.
	Every once in a while, somebody says something cute, and I say, can I have that?
	Can I use that in a column?
	Can I have it?
	And they usually say, yes, you can have it.
	Now it's yours.
	Comedians do this.
	I was about to say, all comedians steal from each other.
	Well, they don't steal.
	They many times give each other the joke.
	Okay, it's yours to have.
	You never asked me for it.
	That's the problem.
	I give it to you freely, but you never requested it.
	I was hoping you would.
	I've been very hurt by this.
	Yeah, no.
	Well, I will bring something up, and I request your permission to speak about Sarbanes-Oxley.
	Okay.
	Do I have permission to talk about Sarbanes-Oxley?
	No, you have.
	That was never a one-line thing.
	Sarbanes-Oxley was your thing.
	It was.
	I used a harp on it.
	But I stopped it, so it's like, you know, it's like...
	Well, Sarbanes-Oxley is being used by the FBI to convict terrorists.
	Yes.
	So, the guy who was a friend of the Boston bomber, Matanov is his last name.
	I think he called the FBI when he noticed that they were looking for the brothers, and he said, hey man, I had dinner with them two days ago.
	Yeah, he was trying to be helpful, apparently.
	Yeah, he was trying to be helpful, but now...
	It's not Benny, but the other guy that was one of the CIA whistleblowers early on about the torture program.
	It wasn't Benny.
	It was another one of them.
	And he came out.
	We had the clip.
	The guy is finally released from all this misery.
	He's the guy who had the gun pointed in his face while he was taking a shower.
	He says, do not talk to the FBI. Yeah.
	So Matinoff has been charged for destroying records under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which sounds crazy, but this is happening all the time.
	Apparently, they figured out a way.
	If you know that government officials or law enforcement officials are looking for digital information, records, and you knowingly destroy them, and I'll tell you what he did in a moment, then, under this rather broad interpretation of Sarbanes-Oxley, You can be sent...
	This guy's going to jail for 30 months, and do you know what he did?
	Do you know what his crime was?
	What records he destroyed?
	No.
	His browser history.
	What?
	Yes, sir.
	Well, I'm not an officer.
	You don't have to call me sir.
	Well, I have to ask you permission for everything else.
	No.
	Just the one thing.
	So he entered into a plea agreement because he faced up the 20 years.
	Wait, you're kidding me!
	No, no, no.
	Supreme Court has not answered this pressing question of how broadly federal prosecutors are allowed to use Sarbanes-Oxley in the digital age, but yes, for clearing your browser history, which he did, to remove evidence of videos that they'd looked at, the three of them, That was one count in his indictment.
	He also threw Sarnev's backpack full of fireworks into a dumpster, which is also destroying evidence.
	But the browser history thing is new.
	So Sarbanes-Oxley is your beat.
	Well, I guess I'll have to get back on it.
	Yeah.
	Get back on the beat.
	I feel bad now.
	I feel like I'm a thief.
	Well, this is why I prefaced it.
	What I was about to say was, you know, I didn't want to discourage you in any way.
	You're a stranger.
	Play this clip.
	Here's a clip.
	John C. DeWarek, you're a strange man.
	Okay.
	You're a strange man.
	Here's a clip.
	This has got a question.
	This is like an Ask Adam.
	Just one more thing I want to say.
	Did any of the bankers who have been involved...
	Charbanes actually...
	Yeah, you know, like laundering money, rigging LIBOR. Oh, we might want to mention that both the co-CEOs of Deutsche Bank resigned as the LIBOR scandal is coming to a head.
	Browser history.
	Yeah, maybe.
	Have any of those guys...
	No, some schmuck who tried to be helpful.
	Some schmuck who tried to be helpful.
	Who did delete his browser history.
	Loser.
	Well, I guess they're telling you...
	This reminds me...
	The FBI doesn't want your help.
	And I'm going to say...
	And here's why I say that.
	There's a...
	PayPal...
	This would have been in tech news earlier.
	PayPal.
	If you're getting bullcrap messages supposedly from PayPal that are scams and phishing expeditions and whatever they are.
	Don't be helpful.
	You can take it.
	PayPal has a spot.
	You can just do a screenshot or forward it to a PayPal address.
	I think it's called scam at paypal.com.
	They have a special place.
	You just send it to them.
	Mm-hmm.
	You're done.
	Boom.
	And now they've got it.
	They can go do whatever, you know, they want to do.
	And you're out of the picture.
	If you have an FBI Nigerian scam letter, which I've gotten a couple.
	You've probably gotten a couple.
	They're very funny.
	They're from the director of the FBI, and they want you to...
	The FBI's got a bunch of money they want to give me, you know, to the tune of $5 million if I give them 200 bucks or something.
	Right, right, right.
	It's just this classic scam.
	Do you think the FBI would want to put a stop to this?
	Yeah, they don't seem to give a crap about it.
	So what?
	It's like it's impersonating an officer.
	It's got all these illegal things.
	There's no, like, address you can send this stuff to.
	You've got to fill out a million forms.
	They've got to call you.
	They don't want your help.
	That's all I can say.
	Never talk to the FBI. So, don't talk to the FBI. They don't want you to talk to them.
	That's the only thing I can think of.
	Now, here, I'm asking you a question about this.
	This is the new Snowden docs.
	Play this.
	Oh, yes.
	Okay.
	New documents from Edward Snowden show the NSA's warrantless spying expanded under President Obama in 2012.
	The Justice Department authorized the NSA to tap internet cables without a warrant to seek out foreign hackers.
	What new documents?
	I didn't see any.
	I mean, where's the new?
	The guy's been in Russia for the last three years.
	Oh, well.
	Maybe it was on that WordPress blog.
	The $250 million WordPress blog.
	Well, Snowden did write...
	Snowden, air quotes, wrote an op-ed in the New York Times.
	This guy is so multi-talented.
	And it was pretty much spiking the football, which I think is peculiar.
	He's saying, well, this is great.
	Everyone wanted to stop the bulk collection of data.
	Good work, everybody.
	Good work to Apple for putting in encryption.
	And a dude named Ben, and I didn't put it on the tech news because I really don't know what I'm talking about.
	One of our dudes named Ben, who wishes to remain anonymous, Says he is running iOS 8.4 Beta 4 on an iPad Air 2.
	Then he said, I found a number of root certificates that he thought were interesting.
	Now, if anyone has a root certificate that has access to it, they can pretty much do anything they want, I think.
	You can be man in the middle with a SSL connection.
	Yeah, I think you're going to own the machine if you want it.
	The root certificates he's found in this Beta 4 of iOS 8.4.
	And I may be off base.
	He may be off base.
	At least report it.
	Federal Common Policy.
	The Government Root Certification Authority.
	The Chamber of Commerce Root.
	The Department of Defense Root.
	China Network Information Center EV Root.
	He's not putting you on.
	No, I'm not sure.
	I believe him, to be honest.
	Department of Defense Class 3 Root.
	Chamber of Commerce Root.
	VRK Gov Root.
	And he says he's finding more and more as he digs around.
	It must be on the phones too, wouldn't it?
	Yeah, it's iOS.
	It's the iPad and iPhone.
	Yeah, OS. So what is the Department of Defense route doing on there?
	I don't know.
	I wouldn't hold the phone too close to my ear.
	It's maybe a blow up.
	Well, we'll see what comes back from our intelligence network on that.
	Well, that's a scandal.
	Yeah, I don't know.
	If we can confirm this, I'll write it up someplace.
	Good, good, good, good.
	Hey, then I have a couple more things.
	Well, let me take a break and do one first.
	Even though we just did one of yours.
	I thought...
	That one of the...
	People are misinterpreting.
	Clinton's got this new thing she's doing about, oh, everyone should be automatically registered to vote.
	When you're born, you're registered to vote in this country, aren't you?
	You have to still go to the registrar and then put your address and stuff in.
	So you just can't wander in.
	A lot of people actually do in some spots.
	I mean, I think locally here, people who wander in.
	In New Jersey, you could just wander in.
	Yeah, I think it's in most cases.
	But they rarely make a big stink.
	The Republicans don't want that.
	So listen to Clinton on voting here.
	And I have an interpretation which nobody has thought to bring up, and I'm going to bring it up.
	Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton has criticized Republicans for voter suppression efforts nationwide.
	Speaking in Texas, Clinton called for reforms to make it easier for young people and people of color to cast their ballots.
	Today, Republicans are systematically and deliberately trying to stop millions of American citizens from voting.
	What part of democracy are they afraid of?
	I believe every citizen has the right to vote, and I believe we should do everything we can to make it easier for every citizen to vote.
	Ooh.
	Ooh.
	Wow, that would be bad.
	That would be bad.
	That would be very, very bad.
	Nah, it'll never happen.
	Oh yeah.
	If you talk to the 9 out of 10 technologists, let's say you go to one of these...
	Oh, they're all in on it, for sure.
	They're all in on it.
	And they're very convincing.
	They don't have a clue about corruption or why the ballot was designed the way it was.
	And there are places, I think, in the world where they do allow online voting.
	And, for example, in Washington State, they don't have online voting, but all voting is by mail.
	There are no places to go vote.
	And I think that's just corrupt.
	I think it's corrupt.
	Well, she also was talking about, if I recall correctly, early voting.
	You should be able to vote.
	You should have a bigger, wider...
	But internet voting solves all these problems.
	I don't think...
	But I have a problem with early voting.
	I don't think that's a good idea.
	I've never liked early voting.
	Just have one day where everyone votes.
	That's what we do.
	Well, she's calling for early voting.
	Yes.
	Oh, some people can't get home in time.
	Who are these people?
	The EPA released a report which I think was miscategorized by pretty much all alternative media.
	Did you hear about the report?
	The fracking report?
	Yeah, I have a clip.
	My clip first.
	Go away with your clips.
	The New York Times says a report by the Environmental Protection Agency finds there is no evidence hydraulic fracturing or fracking has a widespread effect on the nation's water supply.
	But the report does say the techniques used for oil and gas extraction have the potential to contaminate drinking water.
	OK, now we'll play your clip.
	The Environmental Protection Agency has concluded the drilling practice of hydraulic fracturing is mostly safe for the nation's water supply.
	A multi-year study says there's no evidence fracking has had systemic impacts on drinking water resources nationwide.
	But the EPA does say fracking techniques have contaminated water in some cases and has, quote, the potential to impact drinking water resources.
	Environmental groups say the study overly relied on energy companies' data.
	Concerns over contamination have led to fracking bans in Maryland and New York.
	This is all a lie.
	This is a lie.
	This is not...
	Gee, I did something that neither Charlie Rose or...
	What's Droolface?
	What's her name?
	What's her name?
	Amy Goodman.
	Amy Goodman, Droolface.
	Rule face.
	Yeah.
	We're terrible.
	Yes.
	You guys are making fun of physical characteristics.
	I have Tourette's.
	I have Tourette's.
	I'm allowed.
	I've been making fun of my entire life.
	I'm an asshole, so I can do it.
	There you go.
	It's Tourette's an asshole, everybody.
	This is a lie.
	I read the report.
	Gee, I'm so sorry I did that.
	Ugh.
	Alright, give it to us.
	Well, I'm going to give it to you.
	This report does not discuss the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on other water uses, such as agriculture or industry, other aspects of the environment, seismic air quality, ecosystems, worker health safety, or communities.
	Furthermore, this report is not a human health risk assessment.
	It does not identify populations that are exposed to chemicals, estimate the extent of exposure, or estimate the incidence of human health impacts.
	That is not in this study.
	That is not what this study is.
	This study is purely about the use of water...
	Taking water out of areas and then using it for fracturing.
	And so it specifically says there is a small number of places, like in Texas, where water that people can then not drink because it is taken away.
	It's like a million gallons an hour or something.
	That is the impact.
	They have nothing in this report about poisoning of the water.
	Nothing at all!
	They didn't read the report!
	Well, they apparently read some press release.
	Possibly.
	I mean, what were they reading?
	They didn't dream this up.
	Here's the line.
	High fracturing water use or consumption alone does not necessarily result in impacts to drinking water resources.
	Rather, impacts result from the combination of water use or consumption and water availability at local sales.
	They misinterpreted it then.
	Well, that's...
	This is democracy now!
	Drool face!
	Well...
	That was Charlie Rose, CBS. He owns the place.
	He works day and night, that guy.
	And we all know that people can light their sinks on fire because of fracking, but that's not the point.
	That is not what the report says.
	I'm just stunned.
	That turns out to be something of misleading.
	There are parts of the country where it's always been possible to light your sinks on fire.
	And the way I understand it is it's the gas traveling along with the water that a little bubble can pop in.
	It's not necessarily that your water is completely contaminated, but gas is moving along with the water.
	None of it's really great.
	But fracking has been going on since the 50s.
	This is not new.
	The thing that's annoying is they won't tell us about the over 1,000 chemicals they're using.
	That's the annoying part.
	I've always been convinced that the whole thing is a scam to ditch toxic chemicals.
	Push away.
	You've got a bunch of toxic chemicals.
	There's a bunch of dumps that take toxic chemicals.
	Well, that's why fluoride is in our water.
	We produce a lot of toxic chemicals in this country.
	What are you going to do with them?
	You can't throw them in the dump.
	You can't do this.
	You can't do that.
	Mix them in as a secret ingredient.
	In a special secret sauce.
	And then pump it under there and just blow out some oil or some gas while you're at it.
	Yum.
	And leave it down there and you're done.
	You've got it done.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	It's the only thing that makes sense to me.
	Why would they keep it a secret?
	Yeah.
	Well, isn't that one of the main theories about fluoride in the water?
	Is it a byproduct of aluminum production?
	I've heard that.
	It's a byproduct of something.
	Yeah.
	So I'm all in on that.
	I think that's right.
	Okay, what I have left, I have a couple things.
	I have Bloomberg interviewed Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov, who I like because his English is just, it's good.
	It's high English, but he pronounces it with a funny Russian accent, so sometimes it's kind of funny things.
	Would you like to hear a sequence of Lavrov with Bloomberg?
	I'd love to.
	Okay.
	First, we'll talk about the economic sanctions.
	Now, this is still warfare that we, the United States, are committing against Russia.
	When you put economic sanctions on a country so they can't move, and Russia now just announcing they are evaluating the possibility of issuing Russian debt in Chinese yuan, which would be...
	Interesting.
	It may not have a huge impact, but it's a start.
	And of course, this on the heels of the IMF still not allowing the Chinese currency into the SDR basket, even though all other countries in IMF want it.
	This is the 2010 reforms that Fifi Lagarde keeps talking about that we have not ratified because the United States doesn't want China in the basket.
	So now Russia is evaluating, writing, creating their debt in Chinese currency.
	And that is part of the strategy.
	Here is Lavrov talking about what the sanctions have done and how they're handling them.
	Economic sanctions against Russia, the prevailing view is that the European Union will extend them when they meet to decide the decision.
	Do you see any chance of that not happening?
	We're not thinking about this.
	We are concentrating on how we must use this To diversify our economy.
	And we are basically thinking of working in this regime for a very long period of time, knowing how the American sanctions work.
	Remember Jackson Venick?
	They were introduced for one reason, and they were kept for three decades, I believe, after this reason disappeared.
	So define very long time for me.
	How long do you think these sanctions will be around?
	We're not thinking about this.
	Well, you are, because you just compared it to Jackson-Venick.
	No, no, no.
	I said we learned from Jackson-Venick that this could be for decades, so we just concentrate on restructuring our economy and living in the circumstance when we have more partners from Latin America, from Asia, than we have from Europe and from the West.
	Yeah, and so they're proving that by issuing their debt in, or supposedly issuing their debt in Chinese yuan.
	And I like that.
	Like we say, hey, we know you guys.
	You put the Jackson-Varnick sanctions in place, which disallowed a number of Russians traveling to the United States, and you left it there for 30 years.
	So we know this shit will not come off.
	We're no fools.
	Next, FIFA. FIFA. What is the conventional thinking that Putin immediately stood up and said, ah, this is to screw us!
	Right?
	We said it first on the No Agenda show.
	Well, here's what actually was said.
	Let me ask you about FIFA. The Russian president has said that the accusations that we've heard against FIFA are really aimed at taking down Sepp Blatter as president of FIFA and derailing Russia's hosting campaign.
	Of the World Cup in 2018.
	Is that what you think this is about?
	Is this about targeting Russia?
	He said a slightly different thing.
	He said that he cannot speak on the substance of the accusations.
	Things might happen.
	But the timing of the action undertaken in Switzerland...
	He said he couldn't know about these accusations.
	And whether they are true or not, it's up to the investigation and the court to decide.
	But what he did say was the timing of this show was certainly scheduled the way to derail the electoral process in FIFA.
	And I don't think that anyone thinks of targeting the World Cup in Russia, no.
	You don't think that.
	A lot of people talk about Qatar.
	Do you think that that's what this is about?
	My question is, do you think this is spilt milk?
	I don't know.
	I'm thinking about World Cup in Russia, not in Qatar.
	It's not my business, what happens in Qatar.
	Well, I guess Russia has more of a chance of hosting the World Cup than winning the World Cup.
	I guess that's a fair thing to say.
	Yes, I have to agree with you.
	But unless you try, you never know.
	Exactly.
	He should have a uniform on.
	What is that cornball question at the end?
	Oh, just to be an asshole.
	And now Lavrov is going to lay back into this guy, which was just my favorite clip of Lavrov.
	Everybody right now is talking about Greece in Western Europe.
	Is it an issue for Russia, what's happening in Greece right now?
	Well, Greeks are a very long-standing spiritual, cultural, historical friend of Russia.
	We got our religion, Orthodox Christianity, from Byzantium.
	A thousand years later, by the way, we recognized the modern Greek state.
	So we have a very long common history, and of course we wish the Greek people all the best.
	And your advice to the Greek people today would be to stay in the European Union or not?
	Your advice to the Greek people would be to stay in the European Union or not?
	You're contaminated by the American philosophy.
	You always want to tell people what to do.
	No, no, no.
	You don't see it in Russia's role.
	Do you think that Greece would be better served?
	What might be your advice to the Ukrainian people?
	To get to the European Union and to NATO to stay out?
	Well, there's a lot less talk about that, presumably.
	No, no, no.
	There's a lot less talk about Ukraine joining the European Union and joining NATO. Presumably, you see that as one of your successes.
	No, no, no.
	This American way of telling people what they have to do, that's what I had in mind.
	Russia has no advice to Greece.
	It's up to the Greeks, you know, to decide.
	And I wish them all the best in their negotiations with the IMF and the European Central Bank and, of course, with Germany and France.
	Mr.
	Foreign Minister, thank you very much for your time.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	I like it.
	You Americans always telling people what to do.
	And as he said that, I thought, yeah.
	Yeah.
	That's what we do.
	We tell everybody.
	We tell us.
	So what's the big deal?
	That's what he should have come back.
	Yeah.
	So what?
	Yeah.
	We tell Assad what to do.
	Hey, go away.
	Get out of your presidency.
	We tell the Greeks, get out of Europe.
	Stay in.
	We tell everybody what to do.
	We're bullies.
	It's fine.
	We're big ass bullies.
	I like law.
	Here's how many.
	I've got two clips I left that I want to play.
	Well, actually three.
	I'll put the other one of them off.
	Let's go with this one.
	I think this could develop.
	We're so suppressive right now in terms of protesters and trying to keep anything from getting out of control.
	Unlike the 60s, let's say.
	But this, I think, could have legs.
	This is the student loan strike.
	Yes.
	Hold on a second.
	Oops.
	Sorry.
	Misfire.
	Organizers say the nation's first student debt strike has grown.
	Almost 200 students here in the United States have refused to pay back loans they took out to attend schools in the for-profit Corinthian colleges system, which has been sued by the federal government for its predatory lending.
	Now more than 1,200 students have threatened to join the strike unless the Department of Education orders the cancellation of the strikers' debts.
	Yes, this has been going on for a couple weeks, I think.
	This particular one.
	I just want to make sure we put it out there so everyone knows this could be something big.
	I hope so.
	I get the sense it won't be because they're going to shut it down.
	It's the students who always, in the 60s, it was the students.
	Yeah, well these students have a bone to pick, that's for sure.
	They've been screwed.
	They've been sold to Billy Goods and screwed.
	Now there's another story that I want to mention because our friend Catherine Herridge Oh, the pixie girl?
	Right, the pixie CIA chick.
	She had a report on this, and this is like an item.
	You know, she was brought in to do this, and nobody picked it up.
	Nobody wanted to run with it.
	It ended up on Lou Dobbs' show, who's become a tub thumper for the fascist state.
	And it's just a story that's got no legs.
	We're never going to hear about it again.
	I thought I'd mention it because it was put out there for a reason.
	I'm not sure what the reason was, but we're never going to find out, I'm sure.
	But this is a Taliban Five story.
	Fox News has learned that a government attempt to recruit five former Guantanamo detainees, the Taliban Five, as double agents was, in one official's words, a total failure.
	Why do we even know about this?
	Fox News Chief Intelligence Correspondent Catherine Herridge with our report.
	Fox News has learned that there was an effort by the U.S. government to recruit members of the Taliban 5 as assets to gather intelligence and to influence their future actions once restrictions were lifted.
	The men who were swapped for Sergeant Beau Bergdahl in May 2014 are former Taliban commanders.
	The option to flip them was pursued to strengthen the Obama administration's ability to prevent them from returning to terrorism.
	But the effort was described by a source familiar with the strategy as a quote, total failure.
	The White House today offered little.
	Even as a general matter, this is an intelligence matter that I won't be able to discuss from here.
	The Taliban Five were held at the Guantanamo Bay detention camps for 12 years, where these military reviews concluded they were bad actors and had, quote, high intelligence value.
	For those reasons, seasoned military officers believe the Taliban Five were obvious recruitment targets.
	We would definitely have tried to work that with these people because of who they are.
	Well, I don't want to take your line.
	I'm afraid to say anything.
	I'd be stealing your lines.
	Go ahead.
	You can steal my lines.
	There's only the one line.
	You keep generalizing.
	You keep generalizing.
	You shouldn't generalize.
	But let's ask a couple questions of you.
	One, they start off with, this is like some intelligence, you know, an intelligence source, sources, all the sources have told them this was an utter failure and all the rest.
	They go to Jake, well, not Jake, but whoever it is, Josh Ernest, and he says, well, we can't talk about it because it's an intelligence thing.
	Is this is this an example of some intelligence guy spilling the beans illegally against whatever the rules he signed up for?
	He can't talk to anybody about this stuff.
	But yet Catherine Herridge gets it somehow.
	Why don't they go find that guy and arrest him and throw him in the slammer as a traitor?
	Well, they might do that if the story gets legs, but even a snappy name like the Taliban 5 is not working.
	No.
	Hmm.
	Hmm.
	But wasn't one of those guys the source familiar with the strategy?
	Yeah, wasn't one of those Taliban guys the big drug guy that needed?
	Yeah, we're the only ones who ever pointed this out.
	I have one.
	The big drug lord.
	They brought him in in case we have to get kicked out of there.
	We need somebody that knows what they're doing.
	Yeah, you know, even the name Taliban doesn't register anymore.
	No, Taliban 5 is no good.
	Sounds like an Enid Blyton book.
	Doesn't flow well.
	Sorry.
	And when they were released, they were never called the Taliban 5.
	This was just made up recently.
	Well, it's Pixie Girl.
	She doesn't always win.
	I think she got the short stick or something because she's on Fox.
	Yeah.
	A couple of these other women are NBC News.
	Oh, yeah.
	She messed it up.
	Don't you remember?
	She messed something up a couple of years ago.
	She blew it.
	Right.
	Yeah.
	She blew something.
	Gloria Steinem.
	Was Gloria Steinem, was she the Florida orange juice lady?
	Ha ha.
	No!
	That was someone else?
	Gloria Steinem's the one who started, you know, she's an early feminist.
	Yes, but wasn't she originally the spokesman?
	No.
	I can think of who that name is if you just give me a minute.
	No, that was some, that was a bathing beauty.
	Gloria Steinem was a feminist from the get-go.
	Right.
	Well, there were feminist awards given out recently, and I do not know who they chose as their public relations company to come up with a strategy for feminism and, you know, to all things women.
	Someone messed it up in multiple ways.
	One, Gloria Steinem winds up on MSNBC. Pfft!
	I mean, that's not the place you want to go to for anyone to be watching you.
	Anita Bryant.
	Anita Bryant, thank you.
	So Gloria Steinem.
	And she is on with Miss Diaz Ballart, who I did not know previously.
	She's a young, kind of multiculti girl of the future, as you would call it.
	And you'll never guess who received a feminism award this year.
	Uh, let me, uh, Caitlyn Jenner.
	Uh, no.
	No, Caitlyn's winning an award at the ESPYs, which is another outrage.
	But no.
	This is an outrage.
	This is an outrage.
	Miss Piggy received a feminism award.
	Oh, yeah.
	Oh, yeah.
	And, uh, so they, uh, had a little Q&A, which I've, uh, spliced together for you.
	I sat down with Miss Piggy and fellow feminist icon Gloria Steinem.
	What's the definition of feminism to you?
	Oh, well, I think you're looking at it.
	Are you pro-choice?
	I am pro!
	I am pro everything!
	She totally understands that you can bat your eyelashes and also do karate.
	People think being a feminist is maybe being male imitative.
	And it's not.
	It's being totally human.
	Or Pig.
	Why not Ms.
	Piggy?
	I could, I could, but you know, I've spent so much money marketing myself as Ms.
	Piggy.
	I think it would be an unwise investment.
	Please, next time.
	Are you kidding me?
	No.
	Next time, please hire the Curry Dvorak Consulting Group.
	Frank Oz or somebody who does the voice.
	Not even a female voice.
	That was so bad.
	That was ridiculous.
	Yes.
	Borderline clip of the day, though, I'll give you that.
	I tried, I tried, but there we go.
	Okie dokie.
	I would say that's it.
	I think that's it.
	For today.
	All right.
	Thanks, John.
	I'm sorry.
	Do I have your permission to use the Martha Stewart line going forward?
	No.
	Again, you're acting like a baby.
	A child.
	It's a child.
	It's a baby.
	A damn baby, I tell you.
	I already gave you the whole bit.
	It is now your property.
	If I use it, you can call me out.
	Okay.
	You gave that to me.
	Why are you using it?
	Yes.
	See, that's the opposite of it.
	I got it.
	I got it.
	You're right.
	I got it.
	Thank you very much.
	All right, everybody, please remember us at Dvorak.org slash NA. We will be back on Thursday within a program full of deconstruction stuff that makes you go, hey, that's a scam!
	Here in FEMA Region 6, the capital of the drone star state.
	In the morning, everybody, my name is Adam Curry.
	And from northern Silicon Valley, where our weather sucks, I'm John C. Dvorak.
	We'll be back on Thursday right here on No Agenda.
	All right, judge number one, Manny Pacquiao, your question, please.
	Thank you.
	If you were given 30 seconds to deliver a message to a global terrorist, what would you say?
	We need to kill them.
	We need to kill them.
	Are we morons?
	We need to bomb them, bomb them, and bomb them again.
	Thank you, USA. We'll send you back over there.
	Yes, the beaches are back open.
	Woo-hoo!
	- Woo, yeah!
	Get up in the morning, hit the ground running, it's a meteor assassination.
	Pick up the pieces and tear on the farm.
	Send it out to every nation.
	I wanna step back, I wanna shut up, and let the puppets call the show.
	No more mainstream, pull me out the new means, tell me where I should go.
	It's a little bit of crack by a tiny bit of buzz, can I get you right in the We're
	It's a little bit cracked by a tiny dip, but it's gonna hit you right in the mouth.
	It's hard to do it now in the morning.
	I want to do it now in the morning.
	There's nothing better when it's in the morning.
	In the morning.
	In the morning.
	It's hard to do it now in the morning.
	I want to do it now in the morning.
	There's nothing better when it's in the morning.
	In the morning.
	In the morning.
	Yeah!
	I want to do it now in the morning.
	I want to do it now in the morning.
	There's nothing better when it's in the morning.
	In the morning.
	In the morning.
	I want to do it now in the morning.
	In the morning.
	There's nothing to do it now.
	In the morning.
	I have no agenda.
	In the morning.
	I want to do it now.
	I want to do it now in the morning.
	The best podcast in the universe.
	Adios, mofo.

▲