Find my Dilbert 2025 Calendar at: https://dilbert.com/
God's Debris: The Complete Works, Amazon https://tinyurl.com/GodsDebrisCompleteWorks
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Politics, Amazon Class Action Lawsuit, Amazon Counterfeit Products, NJ Drone Mystery, Chinese Drone Ban, X Censorship Appeal Process, President Biden's Destructive Policy List, VP Harris, Presidential Citizens Medal, Shawn Ryan, Sarah Adams, New Orleans Attack, Shamsud-Din Jabbar, Ken Dilanian, Las Vegas Cybertruck, Turo Car Rentals, Migrant Cluster Communities, Anti-Terrorism's Future, Trump Pre-Inauguration DC Rally, Biden Decline Journalist Coverup, Fake News Narratives Collusion, Government Engineered National Problems, Mike Cernovich, Demon Filter, DEI & White Guilt, 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
Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.
It's called Coffee with Scott Adams, and it's the best time you've ever had.
But if you'd like to take this experience up to levels that nobody can understand with their tiny, shiny human brains, all you need for that is a cup or a mug or a glass of tank or chalice or stein a canteen, jug or flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
Join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip.
It happens now.
Go.
Oh, so good.
Well, I'm a little bit on the warpath today against Amazon.com because I opened up and found out that they have more counterfeit fake products of mine than they have real ones.
That's right.
If you're looking for the Dilbert calendar, you'll see a wall of fake calendars that Amazon is selling, and somebody's keeping the money for it.
Now, you might say, that seems like a unique problem to you, Scott.
No.
This is a problem that all independent booksellers have, if they're using Amazon's process.
What happens is, the process for reporting it is that I have to have a copy of the offending product.
That's right.
In order to report it, I have to buy it, I have to wait for it to arrive, I have to examine it, take photographs of it, and then, only then, can I submit to Amazon and say, can you remove this?
In the time it takes me to do that, there will be three new sites offering three new of the same products.
So there is no mechanism for anybody to do anything about this.
I've decided that it's time for a lawsuit, class action, because it affects a lot of people.
And it's obvious that Amazon does not care.
About the people who are involved in this, because it looks like it'd be easy to solve.
It looks like it'd be easy to solve, honestly.
They got AI, they got a lot of people.
So, Jeff Bezos, I don't want to sue Amazon.
Like, it's literally the last thing in the whole world I want to do.
But you don't have a system that gives me another path.
I'm not going to let you steal my material over and over and over again because Amazon's making money from this.
You're making money from my intellectual property.
This has to stop.
So I'm going to see if I can get together a class action lawsuit.
I'd rather be part of it than leading it.
But if there's a lawyer out there that wants to make some serious money, I suspect that the entire class is probably $100 million.
Probably $100 million in revenue that's being affected by just the counterfeits that probably they could stop.
Now, what would it take to improve this system?
Easy.
All it would take is the person who's identified as definitely the author of the product to write a memo and say, here's a screenshot.
Here's the link to the offending product.
Here's my identifier that says I'm the real author.
It'd be good if I had some kind of identifier.
And then they say, oh, I've identified you as the real lawyer.
If you say this is yours, it's between you and the other person, but we'll take you off the site.
They need to take him off the site.
That needs to be the default.
We cannot go on like this.
Jeff Bezos, if you're listening to me, all I want is a solution.
I don't want a lawsuit, but I'm definitely fucking...
I don't want to break my New Year's resolution that easily.
I want to see if I can go at least a day.
I'm definitely going to see if I can organize a class action.
And it's going to be big, and I'm going to make as much noise as I possibly can.
But I just want a solution.
I don't want to do any of that.
It's just I'm pushed into a corner.
You wouldn't let somebody rob you over and over and over again without doing something.
I kind of let it go because I thought Amazon would fake her down on their own.
But it's just getting worse.
It's just a page of fake Dilbert calendars and fake books.
So, you've got to fix that.
On other news, maybe stuff that's less about me and more about you.
Well, according to Blaze Media, the FAA has expanded their Their ban on drones over New Jersey.
Four reasons that Blaze Media and Leon Wolf say are unclear.
Now, what would be all the potential reasons that they would increase their ban on drones over New Jersey?
In just New Jersey.
Not other places, but just New Jersey.
Maybe there are other places we don't know about.
So here's what I think.
I think they've eliminated the possibility that there's aliens, because the aliens probably don't put lights on their craft.
And I think we've eliminated the possibility that they know there's nothing to worry about.
So we can certainly say it's not aliens.
We can certainly say it's not something that's innocent and nothing to worry about.
So it could be that they're worried about hobbyists getting in the way.
But I doubt it.
It could be that they're worried about a terrorist attack that would involve drones.
To me, that seems the most likely possibility, which doesn't mean it's a risk, but it could be that they just sort of naturally go to that in our current environment.
They might just assume that that's a risk.
And I assume it's a risk, too.
So if they don't tell you why they're doing it, It's got to be terrorist-driven, don't you think?
It could be maybe some kind of espionage, but it seems like it'd be so easy to get aerial espionage of anything you wanted in the United States that it's hard for me to believe that the only way that one of our adversaries could get aerial surveillance is with lots and lots of drones all at the same time in the same place.
Does that make sense as an adversary?
It makes more sense that they're worried that even if everything that's happening now is legitimate, they might be worried that if they don't have a clearer sky, it'll be harder to find a bad guy, maybe.
I don't know.
But whatever this is, it feels terrorist-related to me.
That's just a speculation.
Meanwhile, according to Reuters, U.S. is considering rules to restrict additional Chinese drones.
So China makes most of the drones in the world.
And America buys a lot of them, but they'd already banned the two big companies, Chinese drone companies, DJI and Wattel Robotics.
But it looks like they want to ban it further.
Now, I saw some people online say that, hey, why would you ban them?
They're just drones.
But I think the problem is that the drones might have some kind of software tracking or some kind of mischief inside the drone.
I don't know.
But apparently the U.S. is worried about it.
In other news, I've not talked about this because I usually don't talk about the news in other countries.
But apparently it's come to our shore, at least in terms of the new sense.
Were you aware that there are, let's say, the best way...
I'm trying to figure out how to say this so I don't get banned on social media.
Because part of the story is that the story is banned on social media.
But specifically YouTube took down Michaela, or at least limited...
The reach of Michaela Peterson's video on the topic.
So we know that YouTube doesn't want to mix this topic, which I haven't fully explained to you yet.
They don't want to mix it with their advertisers.
Which is reasonably understandable.
Reasonably understandable.
And it's because it involves children and the worst crimes that you can do against them.
And I don't need to name it, you know what it is.
And the accusation is that it's huge, it's organized, the government was fully aware of it, but they didn't want to do as much as they should to stop it for years, because they thought it would make them look racist.
Now, that's the narrative I'm getting.
I mean, it doesn't even sound believable.
But in our world today, it's believable.
I feel like there should be more to the story.
But if that's all there is to the story, that the administration there was worthless because they were worried about being called racists, because it's the recent, mostly Pakistan is being blamed, the Pakistanian immigrants.
Now, I don't know if that's true.
That's just what's being reported.
See, I had to say that so I don't get accused of being a racist.
I had to act like I don't really know.
So that's how you do it.
Act like you, I don't know.
I don't know who's doing it.
Who's doing it?
Might be UFOs.
Are UFOs doing it?
It's probably UFOs.
So you're supposed to act a little bit dumb when you talk about this story.
Otherwise, I think you'd get blocked on all social media.
I don't know who's doing it.
I don't know.
I don't know what you can do about it.
I can't think of any solutions.
So, there's my mandatory stupidity on the topic.
Do you think that's coming to the United States?
Do you think the United States either already has a problem like this that we're ignoring?
How would you know?
If the story is that it's being ignored, how would you know if we have that problem here?
I don't know.
But it does seem like England is the canary in the coal mine for the United States.
They seem to be, let's say, ahead of us in the rate of some kinds of activities.
So we can see how they turn out.
And it turns out that if you let in too many people, From certain places, you're going to get a bad outcome.
Just like Trump has been trying to tell us for years.
It's as predictable as you think.
It's just totally predictable.
Well, but at the same time, there's accusations that the X platform is being overly censorious.
I guess a lot of people got banned or their accounts got limited recently.
But the ones that I've heard about would fall into the following category.
Now, I haven't heard of all the examples, and I'm totally open to learning that there are some people who got banned for the wrong reasons.
But the ones I've heard about are there's one case, in Laura Loomer's case, that she accidentally doxed someone, but then immediately You know, changed it and apologized because it was accidental.
There was an address as part of a larger document and she didn't notice it when she published it.
So, should you be banned for that?
We know that doxing is wrong, but there's actually no evidence of an intentional dox.
If there's no evidence that it was intentional and there's evidence that it wasn't, how do you handle that?
So all I think that is needed is some kind of an appeals process, but I don't think there is one.
So that's pretty bad if you're making your money this way and you step on a landmine that you didn't intentionally step on.
There are two examples of people who are, you know, over-the-top racists.
Is that the same as free speech?
You know, if it delves into just non-stop racism?
I don't know.
I don't want to be around that all the time because it's boring and useless.
So, I don't know.
I can't get up in arms about that because it's only the extreme cases.
It wasn't the ordinary people.
And then there was some child-related content that I'm not going to describe further that if you did hear the description, you might say, hmm, yeah, that's too far.
That's too far.
Now, all of these have a second side.
There's an argument on the other side of all of these, and that's why I think there needs to be some kind of a quick, quick place you can appeal to that's part of X that just puts some common sense on it.
That's all.
Some kind of a judge.
You know what would be a good idea?
To actually use a retired judge.
Oh, I like that idea.
I'm just coming up with it.
If X actually hired some retired actual judges, and then they said, okay, actual judge, here's our terms of service, and then here's the activity.
We banned it.
Do you agree that it didn't meet the terms of service and that it was some kind of an intentional act?
I think intention has to be part of it.
And then let the judge decide.
I'd feel much more comfortable if Elon Musk said, I'll tell you what, I'm going to hire three judges and just let them make the decisions.
Of course, he can always fire a judge if he didn't like their decisions, so nothing's perfect.
But it'd make you feel better if it was a judge.
Joe Biden once said...
Quote, the most dangerous terrorist threat to our homeland is white supremacy.
Now, that's at the same time that he had the borders open, and we now know, and it wasn't hard to predict, that terrorists have apparently been screaming over the border exactly like you assumed they would.
So at the same time he was telling that white supremacist militias or whatever were the big problem, which, by the way, so far have produced...
No problems since he mentioned it.
None that I'm aware of.
But here's my question.
Do you think history will ever record how destructive Biden was as a president?
And my answer is, I don't think so.
And the only reason I say that is because it would be impossible to capture.
It's so bad what he's done to our country.
It's so bad that I'm not sure you could put it in a history book, because it wouldn't even look real.
It would look like he made it up.
He opened the border to terrorists.
Let me just give you a highlight of just some of the things he's done.
First of all, he opened the borders intentionally.
So that caused all kinds of racial division.
There was inflation.
There was overspending.
Terrorists come in.
You know, he had COVID policies that you hated.
He's pushing DEI, which is destroying the country and making everything incompetent.
He blamed white supremacy, which was completely wrong so he could do all of his other bad stuff.
He drove up the national debt to ruinous levels.
He demonized Trump supporters and put them in jail for what I consider no reasons at all.
He law-fared Trump right in front of us.
He was in charge of the Afghan drawdown disaster.
And he is the biggest factor in Ukraine.
So that's the worst president by...
Maybe a hundred.
If you were to be objective and say, okay, you know, we thought Jimmy Carter wasn't good, or if you want to keep it non-political, a lot of people said George W. Bush was the worst president, and I think there's an argument for that because of Iraq.
But I think that both of them pale in comparison.
I think Biden might be something like 100x worse than the second worst president.
These are not close.
This is completely ruinous, destructive, inexplicable behavior.
And it gets worse because his DEI is what selected Kamala Harris.
She would have been a huge disaster if the fake media could have put her over the finish line.
But Steve Cortez found a video, he was publishing on X here, where Kamala Harris was talking about the insanity of building a southern border wall.
Now, it's not that she said it.
I have to do you an impression of what it sounded like.
Actually, if I can do this quickly, I'm going to play the audio for you.
Because you just have to hear...
I've got it all queued up here.
Bear with me.
Oh, damn it, it disappeared.
Alright, you've got to hear it though.
Here it is.
All right.
All right, I'm going to key this up and put the microphone up to it.
See if you can hear it from here.
To suggest that we have to build a wall across our southern border because there are terrorists who are trying to invade the country.
It couldn't be far from the truth.
It couldn't be far from the truth.
That we have to build a wall across our southern border.
We have to build a wall across our southern border.
If you saw the video, it really sells it.
Thank you.
I have to do the physical impression of her saying that it's ridiculous that terrorists would come across the border to suggest that we have to build a wall across the southern border because there are terrorists who are trying to invade the country.
That was almost the President of the United States.
That was almost the President of the United States.
And the fake news let that walk right up to the line.
The only thing that stopped it was Trump and many of you who helped support him.
Oh my goodness!
I don't think our brains can hold how bad this was.
I mean, it's bad on a level that I don't even know what to compare it to.
I've never seen anything like this.
It's amazing.
Anyway, so is there anything that could make this worse?
Is there any way that the stupidity and evil from the Biden administration can be taken to a higher level?
Is there any way it could be worse?
My next story is that Biden is giving the second highest civilian award to the leaders of the January 6th Congressional Panel, according to the Washington Times.
So that would include Liz Cheney and Benny Thompson, the two who led the congressional investigation into January 6th.
So he's giving the highest national award to two people that I think most of us would consider overt, obvious traitors.
Completely obvious traitors.
Why do I say that?
Because the January 6th committee was completely political lawfare, and it ended in the justification for trying to keep a president out of office, and it ended in the lawfare against all the citizens who were just protesting.
So these are two of the worst criminals in American history, because they did it right in front of you.
And they're currently torturing, what, over a thousand people?
If you put somebody in jail for something that's not a crime, in the country that they thought they loved, because they were patriots, imagine being so patriotic that you thought you had to go to the Capitol and protest.
And a patriotism.
And then the country that you love so much that you're willing to go protest for it, to make it better, puts you in jail for what is definitely Not worthy of a crime.
That's torture.
That's torture.
These two people who are getting the second highest civilian award are responsible for the torture of at least a thousand people.
Now, I wonder if Dick Cheney's ever been involved in torture.
Yeah, it looks like it runs in the family, doesn't it?
Looks like it runs in the family.
Well, if there's any way for Trump to remove those awards, I think he should do it.
If there's a way Congress can pass a law that says we disavow this award or that we don't count it anymore or something, it should be taken away.
Even if not technically taken away, there should be some kind of action by Republicans to disavow it.
And to say these are two criminals, and even if they haven't done something technically criminal, the level of evil which they intentionally put on the United States can never be forgiven.
This can never be forgiven.
Anyway...
We're going to talk about the terror, what looks like terror attacks, we're pretty sure.
You probably know by now that...
Podcaster Sean Ryan has had a number of guests telling us that this was coming.
Chief among them was Sarah Adams, ex-CIA, who describes Osama bin Laden's, one of his sons, seems to have taken over Al-Qaeda and is trying to consolidate control of all the various ISIS-like and different terrorist groups in the Middle East with the intention of We're good to
in a number of metropolitan places at somewhat the same time.
And this is all scheduled for this year.
And it seems to be related to the open border and the ability to bring in, we don't know, 1,000, 1,500, 2,000 people from Al-Qaeda who are literally trained and weaponized They apparently have explosive vests that can't be detected by our normal detection ability, so they can walk into any building and blow it up now.
And there's no doubt this is coming.
Now, did we see the beginning of it?
We don't know.
It could be that they're not related to the larger plot that's coming and it was just a coincidence.
But that would be a lot of coincidences.
So let's just talk about what we know.
So I don't want to do the thing where every single person you listen to today has to give you the whole background of everything.
But a number of you don't watch regular news.
You get all your news from me.
At least that's what people say.
So if you don't mind, I'll give you a little bit of the background you've heard before, right?
So you know that in New Orleans, there was one individual, an American, named Shamsuddin Jabbar.
He was in our American military, but apparently he became radicalized, we think, because he was living in a Muslim community where people didn't even speak English for the most part.
So it doesn't look like he was radicalized directly from somebody overseas, but rather he may have lived among a group of people who made what he was doing seem awesome and on target.
So it might have been locally, but I assume there's some overseas influence, either directly or indirectly.
So we don't know much about his intentions.
He had an ISIS flag.
I'm not 100% sure that Al-Qaeda and ISIS are so coordinated.
It feels like it'd be hard to coordinate terrorists because they'd want to run their own thing, but maybe.
So maybe he's part of that Al-Qaeda territory thing, or maybe just...
There's more to it than we think.
Apparently he pledged his loyalty to ISIS. He had an ISIS flag.
At first they said he had accomplices that may have been planting bombs, but now they say there are no accomplices.
That was a mistake.
But I don't know yet whether bombs existed.
Somehow I spent all morning looking at the news on this, and not once did I see, were the bombs real?
Because the report was they saw four people planting bombs, multiple pipe bombs.
And then now we see that those people were not terrorists.
They were just people who went to the event.
But does that mean the pipe bomb is not real?
Do they or do they not have in their possession a pipe bomb that was planted somewhere?
Can you give me a fact check on this while we're going?
I don't know why that very obvious question didn't pop into my...
Screen while I was looking at it.
Anyway, Ken Delanian was on MSNBC News, says the FBI has now ruled out the two people seen planting IEDs.
Now, remember I always tell you that if you know what happened, you don't know anything, unless you know the players.
What do you know about Ken Delanian and MSNBC News?
Have you heard anything about them?
Well, the accusations are that when Ken Delaney appears in a story like this, it's that you're hearing something from the CIA. So, I don't have personal knowledge that that's the case, but I monitor it.
I think it's Glenn Greenwald who points this out.
So, I don't trust that source, but I think he's just reporting what everybody else is reporting, that they're not going to be looking for any extra people.
Now, of course, there were two events.
The other event, besides New Orleans, was the Cybertruck parked in front of the Trump building in Las Vegas that blew up.
You had some kind of fireworks-related and gasoline, and it looks like it was clearly meant to end remote control.
So it was clearly meant to explode.
The good news is that the Cybertruck was built so strong that the walls of it protected the explosion from going sideways, and it mostly went up.
So it didn't even blow out the doors of the Trump building it was right in front of.
So that's a pretty big victory for the Cybertruck.
However, Tesla stock went down today.
I'll tell you, I don't make stock buying recommendations, and you shouldn't listen to me.
But do you think that the Tesla stock should have gone down?
When the Cybertruck, which is built largely to protect you in dangerous situations, that it actually did what it was supposed to do?
In other words, if you were in that truck and you were parked right next to a bomb that went off, you had a reasonable chance of surviving because the truck is so well built.
Anyway, so I imagine that whatever happened to the stock is probably temporary, unless people think that there's going to be larger actions against Musk, I suppose.
Now, the big question is, is the Cybertruck related to the New Orleans truck?
So they're both trucks.
They happen on the same day.
They appear to be, obviously, the type of acts that are done by terrorists.
So are they connected?
There's another connection.
Both of the vehicles were rented through an app that's Toro.
Toro or Taurus, I forget the name of it.
So there's an app where you can rent a private person's car.
And they just park the car somewhere where you can find it.
I think that's how it works.
And they meet you there.
And they just give you the keys.
And you're basically renting a private person's car instead of getting it through Hertz or Avis or something.
Now, some people said that means...
No, that's not the name of it.
It's Turo.
T-U-R-O. Turo.
Now, I'm going to add something to this story that I haven't seen anybody add.
Do you think I can do it?
Do you think there's anything I can add to this story that's useful?
Well, I'll try.
Here's the one thing I know about Turo.
The most criminal person that I know in the real world uses that.
And the reason is they don't check.
So apparently there's a little less rigor In checking to see if you're worthy of being a driver.
Now, I can't confirm that.
So I don't want to be sued by Turo.
I'm just telling you that the person who knows to work every system that I know uses that one.
And the other ones don't work.
So I suspect that if you are in the criminal underworld, you might be drawn to that one.
Because other people may have told you, you know, they don't check as much.
Now, I don't know that that's true.
I don't know that they don't do the same level of checking.
So I don't want to make that accusation.
I can tell you that people who live in that, the murky underground world, that name comes up a lot.
So that's the only thing I know.
So whether it's true or not true that using that app gives you any kind of, you know, less security, I have no idea if that's true.
But if they think it's true, then that would explain why two people with bad intentions would have rented vehicles through the same app.
Now, it's probably not a coincidence.
It does seem to me more likely that that's a signal that they might be coordinated by the same people or something.
But you can't rule out, in this specific case, this is all I'm adding, you can't rule out that the two of them would have had the same independent, completely separate idea That the way to rent that car would be through that app.
That would be a thing.
And again, I don't know if that app or that company does have lower checking or lower security or maybe lower connections to the government.
Could it be that the government makes the big rental companies tell them as soon as anything is rented?
That's a truck.
Right?
Because if you're a bad guy, And you came to this country, you wouldn't necessarily own a vehicle, but you might want to rent one.
If you're going to rent one and you rented a truck, Do you think that that would automatically go to the FBI? Do you think the FBI already has a back door to all the rental companies?
Because if somebody wants a panel truck, don't you want to know, okay, what's your name?
Can we run you through the terrorist watch list database?
But would every little app that doesn't do much business relative to the big ones, would they all have the same back door?
So I'm just speculating.
That bad people know where to go to avoid government scrutiny.
Just speculation.
So I'll just throw that in the mix.
All right.
What else do we know about this?
So the question is, do we have an unfixable problem already?
As someone who's watching this has pointed out the other day, so there's somebody watching this, I won't mention you, but pointed out that the rate that people are coming into the country is not the only thing you have to watch for.
The other thing you have to watch for is if a certain class of people come into the country Do they assimilate all over the country and they just become Americans by the second generation?
Or do they form their own enclaves and try to carve out their own nation first in one block, and then two blocks, and then pretty soon they've got power?
Because it looks like this Shemzud Din Jabbar As I said, was living in a Muslim trail park around other people who may have been radicalized.
So, is it possible That the biggest risk is not Islamic people coming into the country, but the biggest risk is that they settle in the same place and then essentially can try to control territory and get a foothold and then grow from there.
Now, I don't know, and I certainly would not be in favor of discriminating against Muslim Americans just because of that.
That wouldn't be a good enough reason.
But you have to ask yourself, is there something that needs to be looked at when you get enough people who have a counterculture to the one that we have here, meaning that it's in contrast to it?
I'm not saying better or worse.
It just doesn't fit.
You can't really make them compatible.
Is there something about not letting them get too much of a foothold?
Because I feel like that's part of the problem in England, is that once you reach a certain mass and they start operating as a group, that's the beginning of infinite war, isn't it?
Because if you never break up the group, and there's no legal way to do that, what would stop them from continuing to grow in power until they could take over your country?
At some point, you'd have to break them up as a group We don't have any domestic law that would allow you to do that.
When's the last time that happened?
Taking the Japanese-American citizens and putting them in an internment camp?
Here's one of those things I was wondering today.
I wonder to what extent America putting Japanese-American citizens in internment camps in World War II, to what extent does the memory of that Remove our options in the future, because we knew that was so evil and bad in retrospect.
Does it take away your options in the future to deal with things that you know are going to be a risk, but if you act as if it's the group, that's obviously discrimination, and we don't like that.
So I do wonder if we tie our hands with our guilt, even if the guilt is fully warranted.
Anyway, you might know that I wrote a book called The Religion War, which is now rolled into the book God's Debris, The Complete Works.
It's combined as part of a two-book plus a short story series.
And that just came out, if you haven't seen it.
But in it, The Religion War is about a time...
When drones become the...
And this was written over 20 years ago.
But over 20 years ago, I was writing that in the future, when drones were the common way of warfare and became the common way of terrorism, which hasn't yet happened, but obviously it's going to, that that would be the time that we would have this situation where the Middle East Would be doing terror attacks on American soil in a first individual way and then in a coordinated
way.
And their idea would be just to make sure they have pressure on the United States for whatever reasons, domestic or otherwise, but that they would try to make sure it never crossed a certain line.
Meaning that Al-Qaeda, knowing that we don't want to go to full war, we don't want to do another Iraq, we don't want to do another Afghanistan, They might try to push it right to the line where they weaken us as much as possible, but short of us starting another debilitating war because they know we don't want to do it.
Trump doesn't want to do it, for sure.
But what does that predict?
Well, my book is that prediction.
If you have a situation where the terrorism is pervasive and never stopping, eventually the West will reach a tipping point.
And what would they do if the only alternative is the worst alternative?
The worst alternative is that you just turn off the news access to whatever part of the Middle East this problem is coming from.
And once the news doesn't know what's happening, you do things so dark that you would never want history to know what happened.
That's kind of the only place this can go.
There's only one way it can go.
Because it's not like we're going to negotiate with Al-Qaeda and say, all right, you keep this, we'll keep that.
That's not going to happen, right?
It's not like Al-Qaeda is going to give up because they don't mind dying.
So they're going to grow.
If the number of terror attacks in this country reached five per year, sort of like this one, would we go to war?
Mm-hmm.
Maybe.
Maybe not.
If it reached 20 per year, would we go to war?
I don't know.
Maybe we'd get used to it.
If it kind of crept up to 20?
I don't know.
If it were 100 a year, or it was one big October 7th where 10 major cities were taken to their knees in the same day, would we go to war?
Yes.
Is there anything that's going to stop Al-Qaeda from continuing to get to the point where they can attack multiple countries at the same time like October 7th?
I don't think so.
So if you're going to game this forward, you could say there's nothing strong enough to stop Al-Qaeda from increasing the rate and the severity of attacks on the United States.
Nothing.
We're not doing anything.
And even if we tried hard, I don't know that we can do it.
Because what you would have to do is basically round everybody up and either kill them or put them in prison camps until they died.
And we're not going to do that, right?
So if there is no path, what do you do?
Well, if there's no path, that means there's no path that's acceptable, moral, ethical, affordable, just doable.
Once you get to the point where there's no practical, ethical, moral, affordable way to do anything, what do you do then?
Do you just say, well, I guess we'll just absorb this 100 attacks a day until our country is destroyed?
Because eventually the country would stop functioning.
Would we do that?
No, we wouldn't.
Here's where this is heading, and this is what the book is about.
At some point, The citizens of the United States are going to say to whoever our leader is, and this might be after Trump, whoever our leader is, they're going to say, stop this, and we put no restrictions on you.
Stop this, and we put no restrictions on you.
Would it be okay if we turned off the news for a year?
Yes.
Yes.
No news.
Just turn it off.
No news on this topic.
Certainly there'd be news, but none.
So the government is probably going to get permission at some point to stop telling us what they're doing because it will be far too horrible for us to accept.
In order to stop it, the United States would have to do something in a Hitler-like level.
Now, I'm not recommending it.
Of course, by tomorrow, the news will be tomorrow.
Cartoonist recommends a Holocaust.
No, I'm not recommending it.
I'm saying, can you think of what else could happen?
So are you saying that won't happen because we'll negotiate and Al-Qaeda will say, you know, we're going to lay down on our arms, we give up.
Is that what you think?
Do you think we'll be able to stop it with just sending over a few special forces and playing whack-a-mole?
Hasn't worked so far?
Why would it work in the future?
Do you think that we're going to let terrorist drones take out city after city without a response that's the right size?
I don't.
We, of course, there's some point at which massive military retaliation is guaranteed.
Wouldn't you agree?
It's guaranteed.
You could predict it.
So where does it end up?
If you can't negotiate and you can't live with it, and it's certainly going to reach a level where we can't live with it, it's not there yet.
But everything suggests it's going in that direction.
And the drones will make that especially hard because then they can attack anybody from anywhere and just keep doing it.
When we reach that, and it seems inevitable that we will, we're going to ask our government to take care of it like every government in history has taken care of things like this.
In the worst possible way.
And again, I'm not saying it's good or bad, or I'm not recommending it.
I'm saying that Al-Qaeda has created a situation where it almost guarantees the complete annihilation of their people.
It guarantees it.
So if you can come up with a prediction that would go some other direction...
I'd love to hear it, because then I would promote it.
You know, I'd help promote you.
Hey, let's go in this direction.
But I don't see another direction.
And I don't want it to go that way.
It would be the worst possible situation.
But if it comes to us or them, then I have no limits.
Remember what I always say?
That morality doesn't apply to self-defense.
If you're literally trying to do what you can to survive, you know, not just get ahead, but survive, there's no moral or ethical limit.
And I don't think Al-Qaeda quite understands that.
I don't think they quite understand that we're just doing a risk-benefit analysis, and they have not yet reached the point where we have to do the one and only thing that would stop this forever.
So please, if you have a better idea of how we get from here to a peaceful thing where everybody's happy, please tell me.
But history suggests there's only one solution, and nobody's going to like it.
You wouldn't like it, and the people it happens to aren't going to like it.
Right?
Nobody's going to like it, but it's going to happen.
Anyway...
There's a big controversy about all the remote workers who are federal workers, and apparently very few federal workers actually come to the office.
Now, this is considered something that must be reversed.
I think Musk and Trump are going to say, you've got to come to the office, and if you don't come to the office, you'll be the first ones we remove.
But I would add to that thinking.
Am I wrong that every employee who can do their job remotely will be replaced by AI within a year or so?
Because what kind of job that only involves being on the telephone or your computer can AI not do fairly quickly?
Now, I'll tell you what AI couldn't do.
It couldn't be a salesperson.
At least we haven't seen it yet.
Because sales is often about relationships.
So if the federal employees were all salespeople, I would say, oh, well, that's not something you can do over remote, so AI won't take that right away.
But if all they're doing is moving paper and approving things and following the government rules and responding in the one and only way the government says you can respond, shouldn't all of these people be replaced by AI within a year?
I don't know.
I'd be real worried if I had the kind of job where I didn't have to come in and interact with people, because that's almost the definition of a job that AI should replace.
We'll see.
Meanwhile, Trump says he's going to hold a mega victory rally in D.C. before the inauguration.
Does that seem like a good idea to you?
It's indoors, so that part I like.
But why would he do that?
Do you know why?
I don't know why.
It's hard for me to see a good reason for that.
Because once you win...
Even though you've got a mandate, aren't you supposed to pretend that we're all one big country and you're the president for everybody?
So after you win, holding a rally that's really oriented toward your own voters, is that the right look?
So unless he has something planned that we're not fully aware of, you know, some announcement or something, I don't know, I don't see the wisdom of this.
Do you?
It feels like all downside with no upside and it's going to be called a Nazi rally by the bad people, etc.
However, let's look at the other side.
The other side is if he has a rally and they don't call it a Nazi rally because the fake media is pretty beaten down.
They're not doing the same kind of attacks that they always did before.
So they might ignore it.
They might just ignore it and not cover it.
And then it's fine.
If he wants to do it, his base wants to go, that's fine.
But he's really making it easy for the fake news and the bad people to say, there it is, there's that divisiveness.
He seems to be only interested in MAGA. So mandate, yes, he definitely has a mandate.
But rally?
I don't know.
I don't like the optics of it.
New York Post is demanding that...
The journalist who helped cover up the Joe Biden mental decline should be held accountable.
Just the News is reporting about that.
I don't know about that.
Do you think that the reporters, journalists who covered up Biden's decline, do you think they need to be held accountable?
Because I think it's funnier to watch them pretend they were stupid instead of lying.
Because we keep seeing these journalists say, oh, I was so fooled by the administration.
You know, that terrible administration, the people around Biden, if only they hadn't hidden it from me, then I would have reported the truth.
But it was hidden from me.
So how could I tell you the truth?
So I guess it was the Biden staff that's the problem, right?
At the same time, you and I and tens of millions of Americans are saying, we all knew this before he even ran for election.
We knew this before the 2020 vote.
So, Mr. and Mrs. Reporter, if you're really going to claim that the reason you didn't see it is because they didn't tell you, you really have to admit you're stupid.
And that's kind of fun to watch, watching them to admit they didn't notice.
You know what they also didn't notice?
That Kamala Harris appears to be either an IQ of 70 or often drunk.
I didn't hear him report on that, did you?
Do you remember the same people who said Biden's fine?
They're still saying that Kamala Harris's brain is fine.
Now, Maybe she doesn't have dementia.
It doesn't look like that.
But clearly, there was something wrong.
If you couldn't see it, you're stupid.
I mean, we could all see it.
It was plain as day.
All right.
So, this might be a response to that, being wrong about everything.
On Morning Joe, MSNBC, They were highlighting a chart showing that Joe Biden did, in fact, completely fail on keeping the border closed.
This is MSNBC. It's Morning Joe.
And they're highlighting, they're not just mentioning it, it's like a whole segment on how Biden completely ruined the border and opened it up.
Have you ever seen that before?
And it didn't look like they were doing any hedging.
Like, well, you have to understand that he was innocent.
No, nothing like that.
They're basically just saying, flat out, Biden opened a border and it's a disaster.
Why are they telling us now, when it's too late?
Don't tell us now.
How about four years ago, this would have been a good conversation.
Anyway, but it's part of the same theme.
So if you were to watch that, you'd say to yourself, wow, Joe Biden is responsible for ruining our border.
That's the news they're telling you.
Is that what really happened?
No, that's not what happened.
Joe Biden did not ruin the border.
Because if the fake news had ever been attempting to tell the truth about what he did and what was happening, he would have had to stop.
The news is there so that people like Biden can't do this.
The news aided and abetted, but MSNBC is trying to throw Biden under the bus alone.
Look what Biden did.
Look at this chart.
Oh, that Biden.
They should be showing the chart of all the times they agreed with Biden and said he didn't do anything wrong and the border was fine.
This is all cover your ass.
That's why it looks unusual.
You're like, really?
Really?
They're throwing Biden completely under the bus with no caveats at all.
They're just throwing him under the bus.
For five years, they were keeping him in the bus driver's seat, telling us he could drive fine.
This is not Biden's problem.
This is the news.
The fake news created Biden.
They sold him to their base.
The news is the problem.
You couldn't have a Biden or a Kamala Harris if the news were real.
You couldn't have that.
There's no way they could have gotten one inch into the election if there had been any true news that their base saw.
Anyway, meanwhile, over on Zero Hedge, I saw an article by Josh Stileman.
Who's saying that there's a pattern we should notice, and I want to see if you think this is a pattern, that there always seems to be some kind of pre-planned or engineered national problem that happens at the same time that the government is doing some other things that you don't like in consolidating power.
And it kind of takes your eye off the ball.
Or the disaster or the emergency is the reason they can do these extra things that they wanted to do.
So if I'm understanding the article correctly, it suggests that this is not an accident, that your government intentionally creates...
Pandemics and wars and I don't know what else.
To use it as an excuse.
Yeah, like the bird flu.
To use it as an excuse to get other things they want.
Like control and jailing people and that sort of thing.
But here's the other way you could explain everything you see.
So, one filter would be that it's always planned, because indeed, it does seem like there's always some big emergency.
At the same time, you should be looking somewhere else.
But the other way to explain it is that governments are always trying to increase their control, and there's always a big problem.
So, I'm not sure the pattern's real.
Because I don't understand...
I mean, it asked me to believe too much about the capability of the bad people, that they're that clever.
If you lived in a world where governments are always looking for excuses to increase their power, that would be true, and there's always something big brewing, be it a pandemic or a war, that's probably always true, wouldn't it seem like there's a pattern Because they're always trying to get power.
They take opportunities.
There's always something big happening that they can abuse to get power.
So I feel like it's just...
Thank you, Crusher.
Yeah, I'm going to go a little short today because I've got something I have to do right after the live stream.
So the warning has been issued.
So...
The only other thing I had, a few other things, is there's a photo of some of the late-night TV hosts getting together, including John Oliver, Seth Meyers, Stephen Colbert, Jimmy Kimmel, and Jimmy Fallon.
So they all get together at some restaurant or something, and they're posing together with their arms around each other.
And you look at them, and they're all white men of a certain age.
They're all white men.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but Were these not exactly the same scolds who are telling us that Democrats are right about everything and that those darn Republicans are the racists?
They had no diversity in their own industry at the top, which is where it matters, right?
So, yeah, you can see on locals are putting the photo in the comment.
But to see the level of hypocrisy, it made me want to explain one thing about myself that I don't think I've said enough.
I don't think I've said this enough.
So, as you know, I got cancelled for saying things that people said were racist.
Did you know that I've never blamed black Americans for anything, at least in terms of racism against me?
To the best of my knowledge, no black American has ever directly discriminated against me.
Not that I know of.
White Americans...
Absolutely have discriminated against me.
First in employment, and certainly in getting cancelled.
So the cancellation is because of white Americans, not black Americans.
So I want to be really clear about that.
I don't really have a problem with black Americans.
I don't know I even would.
I don't have any personal issues.
And at a macro level, it's white Americans that are the problem.
It's the white Americans trying to protect their position by saying, if I help you fight those other low-paid, low-income white Americans, will you treat me like I'm on your side?
Yeah, we'd love that.
So, all right, I've got a minute or so of buffer.
I saw Mike Cernovich talking about what I will call the demon filter, which is he's got a filter on reality that I don't share, but I'm going to give you an alternate take on it.
Let me just read his words.
So Cerno says in two different posts, the FBI creates chaos so that it can aggregate more power for itself from the fear.
My religious beliefs, this is Cerno, tell me that they convene directly with demons.
You needn't believe this yourself and may dismiss it as superstition.
You cannot deny what you see the FBI doing, though, evil.
So we do see something that seems like evil.
Then he followed up with...
He said, the demons would have finished their work had Kamala won.
Now lacking institutional force, they have unleashed their sleeper cells.
Stay vigilant and remember they unleashed it.
Joe Biden, Alejandro, who did it?
Joe Biden, Alejandro, Mayorkas.
There are others.
Do not blame the system.
It was men who did this.
So, evil and demons.
And here's what I say about reality.
Reality is not something any of us have access to.
We just don't.
Your brains...
I'm watching the phone.
I'll be ready.
Your brains...
I'm watching the time.
Your brains were not designed to understand reality.
It's not even close to the level of equipment it would take to do that.
So instead, your brain comes up with the best story of reality.
And if that story works to predict, that's the best story.
So instead of saying that Mike Cernovich has a view of reality that's not accurate, well, I wouldn't know that.
Because I don't have access to base reality.
So his might be closer to base reality or not.
How would I know?
However, there's an alternative explanation for everything you see that I think doesn't require anything outside of the natural world and explains everything.
And that is that it's a DEI problem.
DEI plus white guilt, as I just explained, explains everything we see.
Now, it doesn't mean it is the reason, and legitimate people are saying, hey, you're over-applying that filter.
It just looks like it's racism.
I get that.
I get why you'd say that.
It does, however, explain everything you see.
Because it's been now years that I've said, if DEI is used to simply constrain the number of choices you have for who you hire and put in important positions, you're guaranteed, not just maybe, you're guaranteed to destroy the effectiveness of everything it touches.
What we're observing is that every institution seems to be defective and incompetent at a level we've never seen.
Not because of anybody's genes, Not because of anybody's culture, but because your hiring decisions have been artificially constrained, so not everybody's going to be able to pick who they want to pick.
They'll have to pick who they know they can get away with picking.
Under those conditions, every single thing that you're seeing going wrong with the country should be just like this and right now.
This is when you'd see it, and this is how it would look.
So, I would say you don't need the extra layer of demons.
Now, by the way, the demon filter could still be above that.
So in other words, the demon filter could be informing what caused the DEI problem in the first place.
So it doesn't negate the other filters.
All I'm saying is you should use the filter that predicts the best.
I wouldn't know how to use the demon filter to predict, other than there will always be evil.
But I know how to use the DEI filter because I did in fact predict that we would be in exactly this situation right about now.
So you choose.
Which filter do you want?
The one that predicted or the one that you don't know how to use to predict?
Anyway, we've learned that ChatGPT can make you doubt the news, according to SciPost.
AI will eventually have to agree with the fake news because humans will not let AI come up with its own opinions.
So in the long term, Search engines and the news and AI will all end up being the same because humans ultimately control all of them.
And they will make sure that you see the version that the people in power want you to see.
So no, AI will never help you.
AI will definitely not help you figure out what's real.
It definitely won't do that in the future.
And then my last story is, let's see...
Looks like the UN is going to make a massive mission to fight the climate-related disinformation.
This is according to the Climate Depot.
Mark Morano was writing about this.
So that's what we need.
We need the United Nations...
To really, really work hard to clamp down on what they call the disinformation about climate, which you and I call the accurate information about climate.
So now take this with your prior story.
So if you believe that the climate story is completely fake news with lots of true facts, I mean, a lot of it's true, but when you combine it into the narrative that it's an emergency and we have to spend all of our money on it, it becomes more of a hoax.
So this is a perfect example.
What is AI ever going to say about climate change?
AI will only be allowed to say that it's real, it's a panic, and we have to do something about it right away.
There's no way AI is going to have an independent opinion ever about anything that matters.
So that's obviously a problem.
All right, ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to just say two words to the locals people in a moment, privately, but for the rest of you, thanks for joining, and I will see you again tomorrow, same time, same place.
