My new book Reframe Your Brain, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/3bwr9fm8
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Politics, Special Interest Aliens, Israel Hamas War, Gaza, Funding Ukraine, Iran 6 Billion Deal, President Trump, WWII Japanese Internment Camps, Nikki Haley "Finish Them", Vivek Ramaswamy, Sam Harris, MSNBC Anti-White People News, Sweden No-Go Zones, RFK Jr., COVID Excess Mortality, Scott Adams
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure.
---
Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scott-adams00/support
Can everybody hear me on your various platforms here today?
I don't see anybody complaining about the sound yet.
I think I upgraded the sound.
It should be better today.
All right.
How would you like to take your experience up to levels which have never been seen before?
Well, all you need is a cup or mug or a glass of tankard, chalice of stein, a canteen jug or flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine.
At the end of the day, the thing that makes everything better is called the simultaneous sip.
And it happens now.
Go.
Now, before we get into all the ugliness, because of course we're going to talk about Israel, I have a few topics before that, but I wanted to share with you something I shared in the man cave last night with my subscribers on Locals.
It's the difference between wanting something and deciding.
And you'll see this distinction in a lot of places, and it's really important to have.
When you want something, You can see the pluses and the minuses of going after it, but you're seeing the minuses pretty strongly.
And you say to yourself, ah, you know, I tried to do something, but it was hard.
So I gave up.
But when you decide to do something, it doesn't matter how hard it will be because you've already decided.
And I know that there was an example that as I'm playing with my technology here, I wanted to be able to, Livestream on multiple platforms using third-party software.
But the first several times I tried it, I probably tried it, I don't know, five to ten times and always I ran into some problem or a complication and I said, ugh, it's too much.
Too much work, too many problems, not going to do it.
So that's when I wanted to do it.
I kept running into a problem and quitting.
For years, actually.
Every now and then I just keep trying.
But, after YouTube did the last set of sketchy things, now I don't know what's real and what they're doing or what I just imagine they're doing, but whatever it was, it was sort of the, it was the too far level.
And then I decided.
And it's amazing how easy things are when you decide.
Because the problems don't look like problems anymore.
They look like something you're going to solve.
So as soon as I decided that no matter what it took, no matter how hard it was, no matter how embarrassing or frustrated it became, I was going to make it work on multiple platforms, which it is right now.
And it's just astonishing how easy it became.
As soon as I realized that there was no alternative, I had already decided.
And then I just knock up the problems or, you know, line up the problems and just knock them down.
So today I probably solved the sound problem.
I turned up my light a little bit.
I've got another camera ordered.
I've got a new laptop ordered.
So I'll have a better resolution of the camera.
So there's nothing that will stop me at this point.
And so my advice to you, is that when you find a situation and you're having trouble with it, ask yourself this.
Is it something you want or is it something you decided?
And then you'll know what's going to happen.
You can predict your own actions after that point.
All right, here's some fun stuff and we'll talk about Israel.
There's a new app that lets you see the Greek ruins like the Parthenon as they were before they were ruined.
So you hold your phone up, and with your eyes you're seeing behind it the real ruins, but whatever you're pointing at, the app will turn it into the original version.
How cool is that?
Imagine that being everywhere, where you can walk down any town, and you can just hold your phone up, and maybe dial it in to see what it looked like at any time in history.
It's like, what did this look like 500 years ago?
Oh, wow.
Cool.
Now that is a cool app.
I'm all about that.
Another application I saw that blew my mind, but I'm having trouble believing it.
So Brian Romelli took advantage of, and this is so clever, it just kills me.
I wish I thought of it.
Took AI, the large language model versions of AI, which is good at recognizing patterns of words.
And knowing what would come next in a certain pattern.
And he applied it to redacted confidential documents.
You know, the kind where half of the page is redacted, you know, it's covered up with black.
And the AI apparently can accurately tell what's covered up because of the pattern of the other words that are not covered up.
Apparently he's done numerous tests, and he says we're in an all-new world.
Now, there are two parts to this story.
Number one is that security and privacy may have been breached, so it might not be useful to have redacted things.
But there's a way bigger thing to this story.
How in the world does it know what those words are that are covered up by the other words that are not even in the same sentence, apparently?
Because I don't think you could tell from the sentence itself.
You probably have to tell from all the other words around it.
That says something about human intelligence that you're not going to want to think about for too long.
Because it certainly suggests that we're programmed and there's not much free will going on.
If you can tell from the words you can see what must have been the words that you can't see, then how much free will did you have?
It's just something to think about.
All right.
Governor Newsom declined or rejected a law that would have made psychedelics decriminalized.
So, are you surprised?
Governor Newsom of California Very progressive place.
And he turned down a new law that would have decriminalized psychedelics.
Now, I did not see his reason for why, but I'm going to speculate.
It was probably just the details.
There was probably something in the law that's not obvious.
That was unacceptable.
So I don't think he turned it down because he has a problem.
I'm just guessing.
This is just speculating.
I doubt he has a problem with the risk and benefits of psychedelics.
Because I'm sure he's pretty well informed.
And I believe that the support for it is something like 60%.
And in California, it's probably higher.
So it's weird that he would do that while we imagine he might want to be president.
Because the public likes that one.
They like it to be decriminalized.
So I'm gonna say it could be Big Pharma.
It's possible Big Pharma got to him.
But I think it's slightly more likely there was something wrong with the law.
There might have been a poison pill in there.
Something else that they wanted that he didn't think was cool.
So keep an open mind on that.
I just don't believe that Newsom would have said no to psychedelics given what we all know about them at this point.
It was not to be a trick.
All right.
China's Communist Party has expelled the former chairman of the state-owned Bank of China for being a big old criminal scumbag and doing lots of illegal things.
So that was the state-owned Bank of China.
They had a vote.
It was a crook.
And so they just kicked him out of the Communist Party.
How bad are things in China?
I feel like China is so corrupt that, I don't know, how can they possibly go forward?
I feel like corruption alone would just kill them.
I just don't know how they could compete with us.
Not that we don't have any corruption, but it seems more rampant there.
Now I've got a prediction, and this is also a test.
It's a prediction slash public test.
As you know, There were some prominent deaths recently in the United States of people who had criticized me on the X platform not long before they died.
One was murdered with guns, another murdered with knives.
Now, of course, I don't think there's any causality there, just a weird coincidence, but you never know, so let's test it.
So, I'm predicting that President Xi of China Is going to have a major health issue in the next six months.
Major health issue.
President Xi in the next six months.
Because I think the level of stress that President Xi is experiencing is probably unlike anything he's ever experienced.
And that's pretty predictive of bad health.
So we'll see.
Am I psychic?
Am I causing things to happen by my Mental telekinesis?
Well, let's find out if President Xi goes down in the next six months.
I'm not predicting his death.
I'm only predicting a major health problem.
So we'll see.
All right.
So, you know, our borders are basically open at the southern border.
Well, everywhere, I guess.
The borders are basically open.
And guess how many people that are categorized as special interest aliens.
No, not the kind from other planets, but the people illegally coming into the country.
How many are called special interest aliens, meaning they came from someplace that has such a high terrorism rate that we would not normally let them in the country at all.
People would be too dangerous to be let in the country.
86,000 of them in the last two years.
86,000 in the last two years.
How many fighters have attacked Israel in the last day or so?
About 1,000.
About 1,000.
So about 1,000 people are throwing Israel into chaos.
But 86,000 people, any one of them who could have been terrorists, have come across our border in the last two years.
Do you think they're organized?
Do you think that there's any large group of people who came here specifically to be sleepers until it was time to go?
How could they not, really?
It's really hard for me to imagine a scenario in which there are not at least a few thousand people who are here to destroy the country.
There's no way to know, but wouldn't it be weird if out of 86,000 people, Who all came from countries who are high likelihood of wanting to destroy the United States and you think that none of them are terrorists?
I would think it's thousands.
We may have thousands of people who are just waiting for the signal.
Now, how much damage could thousands of people do if they were among the public and they just wanted to go out and do whatever the worst terrorist thing, you know, an individual could do?
Pretty bad.
Pretty bad.
If they're smart and organized.
All right.
Mike Cernovich pointed out that in a tweet, he just said, I think it was today, and like that, no other social media platform is relevant.
Only X. You know, that's exactly what my experience was.
I looked at the news, but the news appears to be behind the social media platforms.
And so I could just stay on the social media, and if it pointed to a news thing I wanted to see, I could just go see it.
But you don't really get a sense of what's going on by looking at the news sites today.
You really would have to get, you know, the whole lay of the land from social media.
So this is a really, let's say, a clarifying day for our media enterprises.
Because we no longer have regular reporting like we used to.
The citizen reporting and the citizen videos are most of the story.
So basically, if you have what the government is telling you, press releases, and then you have video on the ground, you're 80% of the news right there.
The other 20%, I'm not even sure we'll see any other 20%.
It's going to be what the governments tell you, And then what the video shows you of the people who are actually there.
That's about all we'll know.
Well, anyway, the big shocking part of the Israel situation, now being attacked directly by Hamas, is that it's a pretty good preview of America.
So if you were to say, what's the root cause of why Israel's at war?
The root cause is that one group has been trained that another group has their stuff and they need to give it back at any cost.
Right?
One part of the population in that part of the world has been trained that the other part has their stuff and that the other part are not as worthy as you are because they're oppressors.
Now, Let me say, because I know there are going to be people on both sides of things, of course there's a story in the other direction.
I'm not going to do who's equivalent and who's worse than who.
I'm not going to do that.
I don't do that.
Let's just say there are some things that have happened in the Middle East in the last few thousand years.
They're not exactly what you wish would have happened, and maybe you wouldn't have done it that way.
But it is what it is at this point.
You know, we're starting from this point.
So there are two groups that have stories about each other.
But the more alarming story is that one has a story that they must go get their stuff back.
And specifically, their stuff is their land and whatever wealth they would have had if they'd stayed on their land.
That would be their version.
But of course, Israel has its own versions.
To me this looks exactly like what we're heading toward because CRT and ESG and DEI are teaching Americans that one group of Americans has the stuff that they stole from the other group of Americans.
What's the logical outcome of that?
It's Israel.
It's where one group gets militarized and tries to destroy the other group.
I don't know how it could go any other way.
Could it?
If one group is continually propagandized, that there's a group nearby, like walking distance, there's another group that's within walking distance, and they have all your stuff, and they're bad, and they're oppressors, and they stole it.
Right.
So you're going to watch Israel do, probably, the only thing you can do in that situation that makes sense.
You have to get away from those people who want bad things to happen to you.
Now that doesn't mean that every person who's, you know, not an Israeli citizen.
It doesn't mean that most or even any of them are bad.
It just means that it's a population you can't live next to because there's a very predictable outcome.
So my guess is that Gaza will have to be at least dominated and occupied forever.
And maybe even eliminated, not in terms of the people, but eliminated in terms of a real estate destination, place that people live.
So they might be expelled.
I think the whole thing will be turned into more of a prison camp than it already is.
You know, some have said there are only two exits from Gaza.
One of them is heavily guarded by Israel, apparently not as heavily guarded as it could be.
And the other is heavily guarded by Egypt, and neither of them are friendly in a complete way.
So some have said that Gaza is already a prison camp.
I think it'll become more of one.
So that would be the obvious way that Israel is going to go.
It will degrade the leadership there and their military assets, and then it will just take complete control.
And it will live with that, whatever that looks like.
Because there's no other choice.
I've heard some people who are angry today say that Israel should just basically wipe out all the people in Gaza.
But let me remind you, there is one country on earth that can't really do a holocaust on somebody else.
Right?
Israel is not going to perpetuate an actual holocaust They can't, right?
Now, maybe physically they could, but there's no way Israel would ever survive as a viable country if they invalidated the primary software upon which Israel was founded, which is, you know, never again, you can't have another Holocaust.
Now, obviously, they're trying to prevent a Holocaust on themselves.
That's the number one thing that they're fighting to prevent right now.
But they can't defend themselves by creating a holocaust on somebody else.
There's no way that's a survivable situation for anybody.
So they don't have that option.
And maybe that's good.
You know, some of you are going to argue with me, but it's not really an option.
But they do have an option of closing up Gaza forever and just saying, hey, we can't make this our problem.
You know, good luck.
So I think that's what's going to happen.
Here's the update.
I've heard some estimates of 600 dead in Israel.
Can we be perfectly matter of fact about the real world without the bullshit?
Let me give you some real world truth.
If all 600 of those people were adult males, it would look like a Tuesday.
Right?
600 adult males dying for anything, whether it's war or anything else.
We just don't get that worked up about, because we're used to it, and men are seemingly more expendable.
Like, just psychologically, we're used to sending young men to war and them not coming back.
However, that's not what's happening in this situation.
By now, have you all seen the video of the The Israeli woman who was either unconscious or dead and nearly naked in the back of a truck with the Hamas fighters.
Have you all seen that video?
Some say she's German.
Some say she's a German Jew, I'm saying here.
Well, regardless.
Regardless.
That video is going to have an effect.
And we've seen other videos that appear to show hostages being taken, which include women.
There might be some children, but I haven't seen any confirmed reports.
Now, first thing is, don't believe any videos you see coming out of this situation.
Don't believe any videos you see.
You know, we're definitely going to get pranked and hoaxed by a number of videos.
Some of them will be older ones.
Right now there's an older video of Iran chanting death to America, which yesterday I heard was them doing it right now.
And then today I find out, oh no, that's old video.
It was three years ago.
So just be careful.
There's going to be a video of other wars that people try to tell you is this one.
And there will be videos of very old stuff that they try to tell you is happening now.
But here's the point.
If the way that people come to think of this is that the Hamas came over and kidnapped and raped women and took them back as hostages, all the rules are gone.
So let me say this as clearly as possible.
I'm not telling you my preference.
This is not my preference.
I'm just telling you as a basic matter of human nature, that if you were killing a whole bunch of adult men, both sides might be able to work that out.
Like later they could maybe, potentially, maybe not these two sides, but as a general statement, if two sides have killed a bunch of men on each side, mostly men, you can get over it.
But if Hamas came in and took women, Whether they were citizens or soldiers or not.
We're not going to look at that the same.
That is now a whole different thing.
And when you reach that level of risk, and that level of evil, and self-defense is involved for Israel, here's what you need to know.
There are no rules in self-defense.
And what these latest videos and the actions of Hamas have done, have removed any reason for Israel to act morally or ethically based on somebody else's opinion of what is moral or ethical.
They have complete freedom now, except for a holocaust.
They can't do something that definitely looks like a holocaust.
There's no way they could do that.
They can do what they need to do, whatever that is, short of a Holocaust.
And it's not going to be pretty.
So I would say that, you know, of course, international law is a big factor, and if you violate it, you might have to pay.
But they're not going to have to worry about their moral or ethical standing anymore.
That question's been answered.
If your women and children are going to be dragged away to be raped, If you act in this way, and maybe less likely if you act in this way, you don't have to wonder which way it's going to go.
Right?
You don't have to wonder which way it's going to go.
Once Hamas brought women into the equation, there's only one way it goes, which is Israel's going to solve this, whatever it takes, short of the Holocaust.
They won't do that.
But I do think they'll turn Gaza into a permanent prison camp, basically.
You know, they won't present it that way, but that's basically what it's going to be.
And has to be.
I don't see any option, do you?
Does anybody see any alternative?
It's not like you can make peace.
So if making peace isn't one of the options, and a Holocaust isn't one of the options, there is only one thing that can and will happen.
Am I wrong?
If you're wondering where this will end up, why are you even wondering that?
It's not going to end up as a Holocaust.
They're not going to be able to really to bulldoze it, because there's no place for the people to go.
They might prefer to do that, but they're not going to do it.
So my guess is that Israel just got a lot bigger, and that's not a bad strategy for Israel.
If every time Israel is attacked, let's say a big serious attack, they simply take the land of the attackers, it's a pretty good national strategy for growth.
So there's that.
All right.
I did see that video from the leader of Iran saying that the sole death to America really only applies to the leaders.
Doesn't apply to the people.
They don't have a beef with the people, only the leaders.
Which is actually not that different than what we say here about the Iranian people.
Iranian people are awesome.
I don't know if you know any.
But if you ever want to meet some awesome people, the Persians slash Iranians, great people.
You'll be very happy if you make the acquaintance of any.
I recommend it.
So it's actually not about the people.
The people in America don't have any beef with the people in Iran, and maybe it's the same way back.
That's a very interesting situation.
All right.
But it does make me wonder if Israel has now a free shot at the president of Iran, whose name I'm trying to avoid saying, because I can never keep straight my Khomeini's and my Khamenei's Khamenei's?
How do you say his name?
The Ayatollahs?
Oh, well, they do have a president, but they also have an Ayatollah.
That's correct.
The Ayatollah's in charge.
What's a death conversion for infidels?
Yeah.
That's only Ali Khamenei.
Thank you.
Is that Khamenei?
Is that the pronunciation?
Or is it Khamenei?
It's Khamenei?
All right, we'll have to learn that in the next few days.
But would you say that Israel has a free pass to take out the leadership of Iran?
I think so.
Now, the only reason not to do it would be strategic.
Yeah, it would be strategic.
But let me be very clear.
If this were America, And we knew that there was an individual who was primarily involved in funding it, we would kill him.
You think we would care that he's the head of another country?
No, we'd kill him right away.
If there were boots on the ground on our homeland, like actually, you know, armed people running around, gunning down our citizens, and we knew where the person with the wallet was, no, we would kill him right away.
I hope so.
Don't you?
Do you think we would hesitate to kill him if we knew that he was the cause of boots on the ground?
Now, it's different if there's not boots on the ground, right?
If stuff is blowing up, you're like, uh, we'd sure like to kill this guy, but it's going to cause more trouble than it's worth.
But at the moment, what would be more trouble than a war on your territory, which is what Israel's experiencing?
It can't get worse.
Can it?
So I've got a feeling that Israel is going to first get rid of the immediate threat.
They're going to chase down the people in their country.
Then they're going to lock down Hamas after killing as many of them in place as they can.
They're going to put a wall around it.
And then I think they're going to take a run at Iran, the leadership.
Because if they don't, I don't understand why not, because they have they have moral and complete.
It's pronounced Khamenei.
Pronounced Khamenei?
Okay.
I'll go with that.
All right.
And again, don't assume you're seeing my opinions.
Okay.
I'm telling you what seems likely.
And I'm just describing it.
Basically, everything that's happening there is bad, and I'm not sure that there are a lot of good guys.
There's a lot of stuff I could criticize everywhere, so I'm just telling you what's going to happen.
Taking sides is kind of sketchy at this point, although obviously we're taking sides with Israel, but that doesn't mean we would necessarily agree with 100% of what they do.
So let me make a distinction.
While I might not agree with 100% of what Israel is about to do, I do agree that they have the ethical and moral free pass.
I might not agree with it, but I'm not going to say it's immoral or unethical.
They've got to do what they got to do.
When it comes to self-defense, you do what you got to do.
And that's the situation, right?
The chat?
You see a lot of crazy chat people?
Well, here's the first thing I would ask everybody to do.
Try to dial down your blood lust a little bit.
Because I feel like the blood lust isn't helping anybody.
So even if you think it's the only solution, just remember that word solution.
It's got two meanings.
So don't do the bad one.
All right, let's talk about the conspiracy theories.
Number one, do you think any of this was a diversion from Ukraine or a recognition that Ukraine wasn't going to be the big old wallet that it used to be for the military-industrial complex?
Do you think they're connected?
I'm going to say no.
They're connected because all the news is connected, but I don't think they're connected strategically or that anybody had a plan.
I'm not, I'm not seeing, I'm not seeing enough to suggest that these are connected, except that they're big events.
So one will distract from the other, et cetera.
But think about what happened since a week ago.
A week ago, Ukraine had this unlimited money flow from the United States which is now at least temporarily stopped because they don't have any ability.
Congress doesn't have the ability to do anything because they don't have a speaker.
So they don't have access to money and they were just pushed completely off the headlines in terms of attention.
So they just lost all of their attention and all of their money.
Now, who would have been able to Russia?
Russia could predict it.
Well, it seems like they should be doing that.
That would be an obvious play.
Russia is helping to start trouble in other places because it would help them in Ukraine.
Well, it seems like they should be doing that.
That would be an obvious play.
If they can get America's money and attention to go somewhere else, that'd be a good play.
But to me, it really looks like maybe it was just the time that they were going to do this thing anyway.
So I'm not sure that Russia was behind it, but I wouldn't be surprised if they had some encouragement about it.
I don't know.
But I need a fact check.
Isn't Israel good with Russia?
I thought Russia tried to play both sides in the Middle East.
Hey, we don't hate you Palestinians.
We don't hate you.
You know, Israelis?
So I don't see Russia as being an enemy to Israel.
I don't see Putin being an enemy to Israel.
So I don't know that Putin would want to start trouble in Israel because doesn't Putin have his own Jewish population he has to worry about?
That's the thing, right?
My understanding is that Putin has always said the right things when it comes to Jews and Israel.
Because he needs to not make any more enemies.
So I'm going to say that it probably wasn't Putin.
I don't think he was behind it.
Now let's talk about the $6 billion.
Now the smart people will tell you that even though the $6 billion was earmarked for something specific, Money is fungible, as we like to say.
So if they got $6 billion that they didn't know they were going to get, then that would free up $6 billion they were planning to spend on those same things.
So in theory, it creates $6 billion, even if they don't spend that $6 billion.
But do you think that $6 billion is the reason it happened now, or that it really made any difference at all?
My bet is it didn't make any difference at all, unless the point of it was to embarrass Biden.
If the point of it was to just stick a finger in Biden and say, la la la, you're such a bad leader, you negotiated a terrible deal, your own people should get rid of you.
But why would he do that?
He's going to end up with Trump.
So you wouldn't expect Iran to want to embarrass Biden because they can get what they want from him, and Trump would probably be worse.
Or whoever is the Republican.
So I'm going to say that the $6 billion did in fact give them more money for anything they wanted.
But probably it didn't make a difference.
The GDP of Iran is around $360 billion.
They got $6 billion that they weren't expecting.
It's around $360 billion.
Now that's the GDP, it's not how much cash they have to spend.
But it gives you a sense of scale.
The $6 billion is real money, but they could have done this without the extra $6 billion.
So, now how about the two-state solution?
The two-state idea was that someday, should peace ever be agreed, That Israelis and Palestinians could live side by side, having divided up the land that was in dispute.
I would say that's done.
So I think Israel comes out ahead.
Because their best situation is to not have a two-state deal if one of the states is trying to kill them actively.
You know, if they had a real peace, then a two-state solution would be ideal.
But there are too many people within the state Who want their demise and are willing to kill themselves to get it, you can't really live next to them.
So I think the idea of living next to them is over.
Would you agree?
I think that forever, the two-state solution of living side by side with any group that would support what is happening, which is the attack, it's just not going to happen anymore.
So there will be plenty of You know, Palestinians living in that area, but they just won't have their own country.
There's no way that can happen now.
And so some would say that Israel's new approach to this, because it's self-defense, it's not anything else, is sort of a get the fuck away from them.
Something like that.
Because it's a group of people who have been brainwashed into thinking That they must kill the Israelis.
So, if you can't defeat them, and you can't kill them all, and you can't brainwash them, and you can't, those options do not exist, your best option is to get the fuck away from them as far as you can.
So, I mean, there's not much they can do, but they can certainly make sure that they don't have their own country on their border.
So they will definitely make sure there's never a Palestinian country that shares a border with them.
I think they'll make sure that's happening.
Now, do you think Hezbollah will get involved?
I think they may have fired some missiles or something.
But is Hezbollah going to start storming across the border?
So if you're not familiar with the situation, Gaza's this little band of land that has Hamas in charge, but Hezbollah is up in Lebanon.
So they're kind of surrounding Israel.
And Hezbollah apparently is way more armed than Hamas.
And they always act like they're just building up their army for some eventual big wave.
What happens if it's now?
If Hamas is streaming over, allegedly a thousand fighters have gotten in.
A thousand!
That's a lot!
And if Hezbollah comes across, And then I saw some videos that have low credibility, but maybe that there were people in Jordan, the men, who were lining up to march and to help the Hamas attack.
So could it be that what will really happen is that it will inspire the others who wanted to attack but didn't quite have a plan to do it?
Would it inspire a three-pronged attack And could Israel be overrun?
Are there enough people all around them that even weapons won't help?
Is it going to turn into a zombie apocalypse?
Yeah, I don't think many Jordanians would do it, but you could always find some little group of people willing to do just about anything.
And then the next question is, is all of this just to make it harder for Israel to have the Abraham Accords and to make peace with Saudi Arabia?
Is all of this to keep Saudi Arabia from making peace?
You know, formal peace with Israel?
Could be.
Could be.
Possibly.
It would make sense.
So of all the conspiracy theories, that one makes the most sense.
Because the timing is suspicious.
It's like, oh, really?
Why now?
Well, this would be the perfect time to do it.
If you wanted Israel and Saudi Arabia to have a reason not to make peace.
But I feel like the Palestinians have not read the room correctly.
Or Hamas, at least.
Because here's how I read the room from a distance.
And obviously, I have no expertise in the Middle East.
But from a distance, it looks like Saudi Arabia is just done with the Palestinian problem.
I think they're just like, you're on your own guys.
I don't think Saudi Arabia is going to blink, because the crown prince, for whatever flaws you would like to attribute him for murdering his critic, that's a big one, but he seems completely rational, and he seems dedicated to making Saudi Arabia a place of peace, With their neighbors.
I think he's the real deal in terms of a leader who's trying to do what makes sense and is rational and is not crazy for Saudi Arabia.
So having a leader that rational at the same time as a Netanyahu is probably the best case scenario because Netanyahu is a very rational guy.
You could you could make a deal with Netanyahu and I think the Crown Prince is likewise a very rational person who just wants what's good for his country.
And what's good for the country is not a war.
It's just obvious.
So I think they are two people who can make peace.
Yeah, Egypt.
I don't know enough about Egypt to have an opinion.
But I don't think the Abraham Accords are going to fall apart because I think that this attack on Israel is so far above the line It's just all over the red line.
Nobody's going to be confused or not understand if Israel goes hard at it.
Everybody's going to understand that.
Like, how could Saudi Arabia ever have peace while the Palestinians are making problems left and right?
We could bribe by Egypt, maybe.
Well, this is also part of my larger point that Trump looks better every day he's not in office.
How many of you have had the thought, and I know this is racist, I know this is racist, but how many of you have had the thought that Trump was right to ban all Muslims until he could, quote, figure out what the problem was?
Now it's racist.
It's definitely racist.
But, do you remember my rule about self-defense?
If you're doing it for self-defense, you can be as racist as you want.
Can I say that directly?
Without being cancelled?
I am completely opposed to racism.
I oppose it.
Certainly at an individual level, I oppose it maximally.
You shouldn't be, you know, treating people by their race or their religion or their gender, all those things, religion, et cetera.
I said religion twice.
However, that would apply to normal times and that would apply to following the law, right?
So generally, if you break the law, you're going to have to pay for it.
That does not conflict with the fact that when it comes to self defense, there are no rules.
If it's self-defense, you do what you have to do, and then you deal with the fallout because of it.
Now, the fallout might be you broke the law.
And that's a pretty big fallout.
But there's no moral or ethical problem with being completely racist to protect yourself.
Now, you're going to say to me, Scott, what about the Japanese internment camps?
Totally evil.
Would you agree?
I do.
Yeah, I actually know people who were in the camps.
I know them personally.
Spent a lot of time with them.
Totally evil.
And in retrospect, in retrospect, was there any real risk?
Probably not.
There was probably, yeah, maybe some, but like trivial.
So the reason it looks so extra evil, the Japanese internment camps, is not just because it was racist, super racist, but because it wasn't necessary.
There was no indication it made anybody safer.
Now that's just a gigantic fuck up, right?
That's wrong on every level.
It did not make you safer.
It was super racist.
And, you know, It broke the law, broke the Constitution, broke everything.
Now, suppose it had kept us safer.
It didn't.
But suppose it had.
Well, that's where it gets complicated, doesn't it?
As far as I know, there was nobody in the American Japanese population Who were trained to want to take stuff from the white people or, you know, the Americans, let's say, of all races.
They were not educated to be our enemies.
They were never propagandized to be our enemies.
They wanted to be here.
They wanted to be American.
They were actually propagandized to be our friends.
And so they acted that way.
Right?
They wanted to be part of the melting pot.
Now that group of people who wants to be part of the melting pot and have not been propagandized to be your enemy, putting them in an internment camp is the height of evil.
It's the height of evil because you can't even imagine there's a positive element to it.
There's no argument for it at all.
They've been trained to be part of the melting pot.
You can't get worse than that in terms of national behavior.
However, In the Middle East, there are countries in which there are big pockets of people who have been propagandized, brainwashed into thinking that Americans, among others, are the enemy.
Under that situation, with no regard to people's religion or their genetic makeup, because that's not part of the question, Are they part of a class of people who have been propagandized, meaning that the only thing that's wrong with them is the lessons they've learned.
Nothing wrong with their skin color, nothing wrong with their DNA, nothing wrong with their chromosomes.
Right?
There's nothing wrong with their culture per se, except for this specific part.
Under those conditions, can you be completely racist?
The answer is yes.
Absolutely.
You can be completely racist if, at the same time, that's not the thing you're going after.
Let me say that more clearly.
You can be completely racist if that's not your intention.
If your intention is just self-defense, and it could be demonstrated that there's some large percentage of the population that has been trained, actually propagandized and trained, to be your mortal enemy, Yeah, you can block all of them.
You can block the whole country, even if they're all the same whatever ethnic group.
No problem with that at all.
Now, if there's no law against it in the United States, let's say, then you wouldn't be breaking the law.
You would be protecting the country.
You don't know how much, but some.
And it would be self-defense.
Completely morally and ethically defensible.
Where it goes wrong is if you say, it's all Muslim countries.
Because then you've got a problem.
Because I don't believe that all Muslim countries are so similar that they would have large populations of people trained to be our mortal enemies.
I mean, if I go to, you know, any one of X number of countries, am I going to find that everywhere?
Now you might have to say, well, there's always one or two, but yeah, well, You know, I know what the Qur'an says, but we also know that there are a zillion perfectly good American Muslim people who are not looking to kill anybody.
So it doesn't matter what the Qur'an says.
It matters what the people believe.
And if they believe that the Qur'an is a book of peace, fine.
That's all good.
So here's what Israel is going to teach us.
Israel is going to teach us that you should never discriminate against people for their race or ethnicity or religion.
And in fact, Israel does a real good job of being an open society in which if you're a low risk person, they're not going to care about your religion or your ethnicity.
You just have to be a low risk situation.
And they're going to teach you that if it's a high risk situation, that, um, Your ethnicity and your religion are going to be irrelevant, and it might look like discrimination, but that's not the intention.
The intention would be just self-defense.
Now, would a lot of innocent people get killed?
Yeah, in every war lots of innocent people get killed.
Nobody likes that.
But there's also not much you can do about it.
All right.
So I would say that Trump's view that in the early days after, certainly when there was a lot of terrorism going on, his view that we should at least close the border for everybody who might be in the category of a problem until we can figure out who really is a problem, was perfectly good commander-in-chiefing.
As commander-in-chief, That was exactly the right decision.
It was racist, but it was also allowable under that specific condition.
And by the way, just to clarify, I was completely against the rounding up of the Japanese Americans.
These are not comparable, right?
One group was not trained to be our enemies.
So that was pure racism.
And that's 100% unacceptable.
All right, Nikki Haley won the news cycle by being the toughest.
I think one of the things that Nikki Haley gets right is that if you're running as a woman for a job that's never had a woman, and it's commander-in-chief is the big part of the job, that you've got to make it look like you're the toughest person in the room.
So I think she cranks it up to 110.
You know, when maybe 95 was the right level.
But in terms of getting attention during the election cycle, she said this, among other things.
This is not just an attack on Israel, this was an attack on America.
So that's pretty extreme.
But then she says to Netanyahu directly, finish them.
Finish them.
She says it twice.
Finish them.
Finish them.
Now, what does that sound like?
It sounds like kill them all.
But that's presumably not what she means.
I think she means finish them as a political and military power.
But the way she delivered the line... She delivered the line like she was Arnold Schwarzenegger saying, I'll be back.
It was chilling.
And I said to myself, okay, you just sold me that you're not going to be soft.
Completely sold.
Because these are strong, strong words.
Finish them.
Because finish them is unambiguous, isn't it?
That doesn't mean give them a black eye.
That means we're now going to change the situation forever.
And by the way, Israel says that.
They're going to change the reality for 50 years.
which means probably longer.
All right.
So I would say she won on being the toughest there.
I think Vivek has a problem because although his opinion on Israel was reasonable and defendable, which is at some point we should wean them off of American aid.
I think it's more complicated because our aid is to help them buy our own military assets.
So it's not exactly like direct aid.
It's more like fascism on the American side.
It's more like fascism because the government is acting like a marketer for, you know, for the military or the military contractors.
But anyway, Vivek, Just because he said we should figure out a way to let Israel pay its own way because they're a big successful company, or they're a successful country economically, he's going to look like he is weak on this.
He's not.
But when you compare to finish them to, well, you know, maybe they should be on their own, you know, that they don't sound the same.
So regardless of what is the reality of their opinions, that never matters for politics, the reality is, how are we going to, how are we going to shortcut them?
If every time you talk about Nikki Haley from now on, you remind people she said finish them, she's the tough one, well then she wins.
And if every time they talk about Vivek, it's like, oh, but he wanted to reduce support, To Israel, which is not exactly what he's saying.
He's saying they don't need it, which is different than reduce, you know.
So it's going to be harder to defend.
But all that's going to matter is what Trump says, probably.
Biden just said the standard stuff presidents say.
Has Trump said something that's not obvious, like Israel has to head back, blah, blah, blah?
Has Trump done anything that wasn't You knew he was going to say exactly that?
I don't think so.
I think everybody's acting on model right now.
Sam Harris, there's an audio of him, I think he did it a while ago, in which he was comparing the morality of what Israel does with its power to the morality of what their enemies do with their power.
And I started to wonder, after listening to it, if Sam Harris has always been dumb and I just didn't realize it.
Maybe I just didn't realize it.
Because here was his argument.
He argues that you can tell how evil somebody is, I'm paraphrasing now, by if they had the power, if they had all the power, what would they do with it?
He suggests that if the Palestinians had all the power, at least the militant ones, that if they had all the power they would literally just kill everybody in Israel, at least all the Jews.
Now, I don't know that that's true, but they do talk like that, so I'm going to say he's not wrong about that, because that's the way they talk.
But, he points out that it's not the same on the other side.
That Israel has, you know, the military dominance, but they are not wiping out the Palestinians.
So therefore, you cannot make a moral equivalent, because if the Palestinians had the power, they would kill all the Israelis.
They say it kind of directly.
Israel does have that kind of power, that if they wanted to, they could, but they don't do it.
Therefore, that's more moral.
That's one of the stupid fucking things I've ever heard in my life.
Do I even have to give you an argument for that?
Or are you all just nodding your heads like that's pretty stupid?
It's just stupid.
Israel can't wipe out a civilization.
That's not one of the options.
You can't look at them and say, well, they haven't done a holocaust themselves.
Of course it's not an option.
So to act as if Israel has the option, and so because they didn't use that option, you can tell something about them?
It's not an option.
Now, I will say that if they had the option, I don't think they would use it.
But that's a separate argument.
I don't think they would.
But it is not true that one of them has the power and one does not.
Neither of them have the power To completely kill all the other people.
In a realistic sense.
They have the military power, but not realistically.
I've decided to call MSNBC the anti-white news.
Because that's all I see when I watch NBC.
MSNBC.
MSNBC is just a hundred different reasons to say white people suck.
It's just anti-white people news.
I feel like that's just what I'm going to call it from now on.
I did call it MSNPC, but it's funnier to just call it the Anti-White News because that's what it is.
Anyway, did you know that in Sweden there are 61 no-go zones because of the Islamic extremists who live there?
There are 61 places that unless you're Islamist you can't go there. 61.
And apparently there are a number of people in the city of Malmö in Sweden shooting off fireworks celebrating the Hamas terror attack.
So that's Sweden.
So Sweden went the opposite direction of Trump and said, hey, we're not a bunch of racists.
Come on in.
And now they have 61 no-go zones.
So they got what they wanted there.
Minneapolis and Detroit are no-go.
Yeah, we have our own no-go zones for different reasons, I guess.
RFK Jr.
looks like he's set to announce on Monday a third-party run.
And it's going to change everything.
For a while, you're not going to know who's the likely winner.
Now, all the smart people are saying he's going to take votes away from Trump.
Which makes me think that's not true.
Do you know why?
Because all the smart people say it's true.
Am I the only one who, as soon as all the smart people say it's true, immediately my brain says, well, I can eliminate that possibility.
Whatever it is, it's not that.
It's going to be something else besides that.
Because all the smart people like it.
Here's what I think they haven't factored in.
They haven't factored in people's real life choices.
I think people are saying, if you're a Democrat, let's just work through this.
If you're a Democrat, you want to win first, because you don't want Trump.
So you want to win, win, win.
Winning is all you care about, all right?
And you think that if RFK Jr.
gets in the race, You couldn't directly vote for him and win.
It would just let Trump win, right?
But what happens when it becomes obvious that Trump would beat Biden and that Biden has no chance?
Let's say even with RFK Jr.
in the mix.
Because I think there might be more regular Democrats than you think who would like to go to something less controversial.
How would you like to have a president that there's a strong crossover that the other party doesn't hate him completely?
At the moment, you could pick any Republican at random, and you could say, what do you think of President Biden?
And they're going to have something negative to say.
But could you ever imagine a president, and RFK Jr.
might be one, in which maybe only 80% of Republicans say he's terrible?
That would be a big improvement, because that would still give him a lot of operating room, right?
So I don't know, when's the last time we had that?
If abortion is a top issue, is RFK pro-abortion?
He is.
So RFK is pro-abortion, so he would certainly lose all Republicans who have that as a top issue, or anywhere near the top.
But it's also a state's issue.
So it could be that people will just say, ah, as long as he doesn't want to do a federal law, I think Republicans would say, well, we'll just leave it to the state.
We're good with that.
So he has a way to get there.
He does have a way to win.
He has a path to victory.
And if you don't believe that, I don't think you're paying attention.
He definitely has a path to victory.
But even more than that, he has a path to being the kingmaker, the person who could decide to stay in or to get out, and that might be the choice of who wins.
So that's pretty interesting.
Yeah, I do think that RFK Jr.
is such a threat to the Republican people in power that they would do everything they could to stop it.
But it's going to be interesting.
And you know what the funny thing is?
I keep hearing people criticizing RFK Jr.
because he's just going to screw up everything for Democrats, like he might just ruin the whole Democrat game.
And I thought to myself, there is nobody who has more legitimate moral and ethical right to screw up everything than he does.
Like, he's the guy, he has absolute right to just destroy the system and then, you know, maybe help rebuild it.
But I don't mind destroying our stuff because we're good at rebuilding.
Some of our stuff needs to get destroyed.
Demolition phase before rebuilding.
All right.
Is there even a Democrat Party anymore?
You know, I feel like the The Democrats have the most power have morphed into a criminal enterprise.
Which I don't see on the Republican side at all.
There are clearly individual Republicans who do bad things that are illegal.
But it doesn't look coordinated.
It looks like the Democrats have literally created a structure where their own people can have key jobs and then the corruption can be, you know, unchecked.
That's what it looks like.
So I would say that RFK Jr.
is going to look like the only Democratic party.
That could be the frame that we start hearing, is that RFK Jr.
is running as a third party.
It's called Democrat.
That would be strong.
I'm running as the only Democrat, but I can't call myself that.
I can't call myself the only Democrat because the party has this control and they're stopping people from competing.
But, I tell you, I'm not part of the criminal enterprise.
If you want a real Democrat, I'm going to offer you that option.
The rest of what they're calling Democrats are essentially a criminal organization and you should be destroying them, not voting for them, if you're a real Democrat.
I think he's got a killer argument.
So we'll see.
There's a report by the Nonprofit Society of Actuaries.
We've been waiting for this, right?
Trying to figure out about the excess deaths.
Don't you want to know if the insurance actuaries are going to charge people differently if they've been vaccinated versus unvaccinated?
Right?
Because they're the ultimate, I would say, the jurors on what was more dangerous than what.
Because the insurance companies In theory, they're just going to try to make money, right?
They're not making money from pharmaceuticals.
They're not making money from selling masks.
They just want to know for sure who is more likely to die.
That's all they need.
We just need to know who's more likely to die, and then we'll do the rest.
We'll just charge based on that.
And their current thinking is that there were 34% more Deaths, these would be the excess deaths above the expected baseline.
So 34% more in the ages 35 to 44, you know the core of life, in the last three months of 2022.
So around the time the vaccinations were rolling out, excess deaths started to climb.
Is that because of that?
Well, the problem is there are lots of reasons why there would be excess deaths.
We know there's more suicide.
We know there was more overdoses.
We know that people were less healthy.
They got much fatter.
So there's a whole bunch of reasons people should be dying.
And it would have started about the same time as the vaccinations, because the lockdown started before the vaccinations.
So we don't know that's the reason, but this is a test of your analytical abilities.
If the one thing you know for sure, and I don't know this for sure, but suppose the one thing you knew for sure is that right around the same time as the vaccinations, which as I remind you, Was also the same time we were getting fat and overdosing and committing suicide.
So we had several reasons that happened about the same time.
If you knew there was a substantial difference in the excess mortality, right around the time vaccinations were rolled out.
But as I said, those other things were happening too.
Could you conclude with a high degree of certainty that the vaccinations were the problem?
Yes or no?
With a high degree of certainty.
I see yeses.
I see noes.
Well, here, most of the noes are correct.
All right, the noes are correct.
Here's what you would want to study.
The vaccinated versus the unvaccinated.
And that's it.
You can't study the average people.
That will tell you nothing, because there are too many things going on.
But if you were to study separately, vaccinated versus unvaccinated, and by age group, because you want to separate that by age group, if that analysis caused the actuaries to say, oh, that's real, and we're going to charge based on whether you're vaccinated or not vaccinated, because remember, they can charge more if you smoke cigarettes.
Am I right?
They do, right?
If you smoke cigarettes, they'll charge you more, won't they?
For life insurance?
And it's not really easy to check up on that.
I mean, they could, but it's not easy.
So couldn't you also charge more for people who are either vaccinated or unvaccinated, depending what your actuarial numbers determined was more dangerous?
Yeah.
So the only thing I want to teach you is that looking at excess mortality, even if it started at the same time as the vaccinations, it doesn't tell you what you think it is.
It might.
It doesn't not tell you that.
It's just not, it's not something you should rely on.
But if you actually saw numbers that you could think were accurate about the vaccinated versus the unvaccinated, that would tell you everything.
I believe.
I mean, you'd probably want to control it for age and obesity and stuff.
But basically, just look at those two groups.
Now, has anybody done that analysis?
I haven't seen it.
Have you?
Why would nobody have done the one analysis that actually would make you confident you knew what was happening?
Why is it too hard?
You think it's too hard to study that?
I doubt it.
It's not too hard.
That info was reliable.
They didn't ask and assumed unvexed if unknown.
OK.
I don't know about that.
And the other thing I would teach you is don't compare the United States to any other country.
So as soon as you say compare to Sweden or compare to Africa or anything, none of that works.
None of that works.
We don't collect data the same way.
There's just nothing that's the same.
It's just too different in too many ways.
It won't tell you anything.
So that, ladies and gentlemen, concludes my comments for today.
I feel sorry for you, and feel sorry for Israel especially, and also the innocent people in Gaza who are going to pay a big price.
But you're going to hear the same arguments just over and over all day long today.
I hope I gave you something that was a little bit different, but it's going to be, it's going to feel like a lot of the same all day long.
I'll tell you one thing that, uh, the situation in Israel, let's call it the war.
Does this war have a name yet?
The Gaza war or something?
Um, it's going to get a name.
They're going to name it.
But I'll tell you one thing it did.
Yeah, let's not call it World War III.
One thing it did is it put our other problems in perspective, didn't it?
When you imagine, what would it be like to know that armed terrorists are on your border and running through your city just gunning people down?
And that they might be there for days.
It might last days.
I mean, how long does it take to catch a thousand people?
Some of them are going to go to hiding and then just come back out as soon as the heat goes down, right?
So it made a lot of my other problems seem completely unimportant.
In fact, when I was putting together my notes for today, you know, if you were here at the beginning, you know, I started with, you know, just some scientific things and things like that.
I didn't want to talk about those today.
Like, I did it to wait for people to get on the live stream, and I did it so you didn't hear just non-stop negativity today, but I wasn't interested.
I mean, normally I'm totally interested.
Oh, new scientific thing.
You know, new little study.
New poll.
They all interest me.
But in the context of watching Israel being overrun, or at least attempted to be overrun, none of it feels important.
Like, Israel feels important today.
Nothing else does.
Even Ukraine.
I barely thought about it.
Just changed everything.
No discussion about what leads to this.
Well, I think we all know what led to it.
Don't we?
Yeah.
I mean, there's no mystery about what led to it.
All right, ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to say Say goodbye on this platform.
I hope my sound and lighting were better than yesterday.
Thanks for joining and I will see all of you tomorrow.
