MN To LOSE Congressional Seat Over Deportations, Attacks Against ICE Getting WORSE | Timcast IRL
SUPPORT THE SHOW BUY CAST BREW COFFEE NOW - https://castbrew.com/
Join - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLwNTXWEjVd2qIHLcXxQWxA/join
Start 2026 with better sleep! Try Beam Dream: https://shopbeam.com/TIMPOOL and use code TIMPOOL for up to 35% off—limited time.
Text TIM to 36912 to get 60% off the BAERSkin Hoodie today! Or click: https://baer.skin/timShow more Hosts:
Tim @Timcast (everywhere)
Phil @PhilThatRemains (X)
Producer:
Serge @SergeDotCom (everywhere)
Guest:
Podcast available on all podcast platforms! Show less
Head over to shopbeam.com slash Timcast, and you get the 35% off your nighttime blend to support better sleep.
I am a massive fan of Beam Dream.
I drink it every single night.
It helps me sleep.
It's improved my sleep score.
I wake up feeling better.
And it's got all the good stuff.
And it's got magnesium.
It's got melatonin.
It's got al-theanine.
It's got race in it.
And the best part is it's a delicious cup of hot cocoa with a bunch of different flavors.
They got cinnamon cocoa.
They got brownie batter, sea salt, caramel, variety pack.
You get them all.
Chocolate peanut butter.
That's great.
They even have a melatonin-free, if you got concerns about that one, and a salty dark chocolate.
I drink it every night.
Seriously, there's no added sugar.
It's 15 calories.
And I'm not even kidding when I say it does absolutely improve my sleep.
When they first reached out to sponsor us, they sent us these samples.
I tried them out.
I'm like, we'll see how it is.
After a couple days, I woke up feeling better than ever.
I didn't even know I could sleep better.
So check out shopbeam.com slash Timcast.
Shout out Beam Dream for sponsoring the show.
It is Bearskin.
Oh boy.
My friends, you've heard of the Bearskin hoodie because you watched the show.
You know, and you need to get one now.
Smart people are grabbing theirs now because when it's already freezing, you want the gear that actually keeps you warm.
Bearskin is running a 60% off deal right now so you can finally upgrade the sad excuse for a winter hoodie you've been suffering in.
You've been suffering, trust me.
These hoodies are built for serious cold weather.
It's got 340 GSM of bearskin fleece, 10 legit pockets, a muscular fit, and even zips into the heavy storm rain jacket to turn into full winter waterproof armor.
Whether you're into hiking, hunting, traveling, or just hate being cold, it's the last hoodie you'll ever need.
You'll get the free U.S. ship.
You'll get free U.S. shipping, fast delivery, and you're finally kitted out properly for winter.
So it's a win-win.
Do yourself a favor, text the word Tim to 36912 to lock in your 60% off.
Again, text Tim to 36912.
You'll get a link sent straight to your phone so you can check it out later if you're busy right now.
And when you shop with Bearskin, you're not just getting killer gear, you're also supporting the fallen outdoors and the Hope for the Warriors veterans programs.
Don't wait till you're freezing to realize your hoodie socks.
Well, we have to get a word from our other sponsor.
I just want to say and address the Jewish elephant in the room.
We love you, Israel.
You are the promised land.
You are the chosen people.
You're better than everybody, especially that brown guy over there.
So we love you.
Down with the brown, up with the Jews.
All right, with that being said, guys, we have Suleiman on here, and he said something very interesting before we started the show: he's kind of libtarded and that he disagrees with what ICE is doing currently in America.
So I think this would be a great time and great place to start.
With personally, people are mad at Donald Trump because he's not doing enough when it comes to protecting ICE in Minneapolis.
Me, I'm kind of of the opinion.
It's like, you know, I don't love people getting shot in the face, but I don't love women driving over people either.
So I guess my point is, Suleiman, what do you think about Donald Trump and his support or not support of ICE?
Yeah, I think the way the entire situation has been handled has been extremely incompetent and extremely bad.
So there's two ways of dealing with this issue.
Either you just leave it or you deal with it in a very systemized, harsh manner.
And what harshness means is not shooting someone in the face, right?
So just think about it when you deal with a kid.
You can either, so my children, like they, like, I've never had to hit them because they know what the rules are, they understand what it is, and then they know they won't break the boundaries.
But when you basically deal with the issue that you did, where you're basically sending ICE agents in and you're basically doing it based on some kind of propaganda that Nick Shirley's put out or whatever it may be, it's just going to foment the situation and make it a lot worse.
So therefore, you have to either go in harshly or light.
In addition to that, what happened was with the ICE situation of shooting Renee Good, again, I think it was done intentionally in order to foment these riots and ferment hatred by both sides because a very easy way to de-escalate the situation was you wouldn't have JD Vance coming out and fighting with a lawyer on X. You would just be, look, we need to work out what's happened.
We're going to investigate the situation.
There'll be an independent inquiry and I think everyone will be happy with it.
What's happened is what it seems to suggest is that what's happening is the people in charge, whether it's the Vice President of the United States of America or DHS or whoever are trying to hide or take cover for the ICE officer and therefore people are like seeing this as a state-sanctioned hit.
So the argument that you're making would be the same argument if you said, well, the gun, the perpetrator had a gun, but he wasn't pointing it at the officer.
Police don't have to wait until you're pointing at a gun at them or you're shooting at them.
As soon as the person's in the car refuses to get out and hits the accelerator, as soon as the car starts moving towards him, he doesn't have to be like, oh, I know what the car is going to do to defend his guy.
So if for because you said the cop's life was in danger, if there's a civilian and his one question on the corner, if there's a civilian whose life's in danger, are you allowed to shoot the person?
But the point is, there were already EMTs on the way down the street, right?
There were already EMTs on the scene.
They would have the EMTs from the police department go down there and say, hey, look, we're going to take care of it because if you let someone else go down there, you actually contaminate crime.
And whether or not, whether or not that is something that we like, that is policy with police departments nationwide.
I'm not coming from this from a political perspective because I'm a gun guy.
I have a gun on me right now.
Okay.
I carry a gun.
I've gone to multiple gun classes.
And the things that you go over in the classes generally are the legalities of what happens if you get into a self-defense situation.
And I'm telling you the policies of the police station or the police department, or actually the feds in this case, but because that is what they're going to go by.
We can pick it apart and say, well, he should have this or that person should have that or look at where her wheels were pointing, blah, blah, blah.
None of that stuff actually matters when it comes to what the feds are going to say.
That's why he hasn't been charged.
He hasn't been charged.
And this is one of the things that I said day one.
But when he's not charged, that doesn't provide proof because the claim from the left is the reason he's not being charged because this was state supported.
Like, the entire argument is, like, look, we're not expecting perfection.
Like, of course, every time there's going to be a police-involved shooting, it's not going to be like this beautiful, perfect incident.
Like, these things are messy.
The reality is when you accelerate towards a police officer, you need to understand that they do have the right to return fire because you're using your, you're using your vehicle as a deadly weapon.
If a cop thinks you're coming at him and they shoot you, and then you turn and run away, and they shoot you three more times while you're running away, is that murder?
If you're running away with a gun, the police can shoot you in the back because there is a reasonable fear that you are going to cause harm to someone else.
They actually make it in some states, it's not, you're actually not, cops are not even legally allowed to chase people on motorcycles because they don't want the person to die on the motorcycle.
I mean, that would have ramboated probabilities of the point is that is well, when you choose to be a cop, and I know you're not going to be able to do that.
I don't know, but just because the other guy didn't start shooting doesn't mean that the guy that's actually in front of the car doesn't have the right to use force.
What happens is skids, and then basically she turns it to the right, but the wheel she's turning right from the beginning, top of the wheel, not the actual wheel, but the actual shot.
In a use of force, listen, no, in a use of force situation, the person that is defending themselves does make the decision as to if they believe they are in threat of death or serious bodily injury.
If there's more than two people you engaged in it, so if there's more than one, but the police engage as well, but if there's more than one person in front of the car, then it's no longer your life's in threat.
Well, listen, the point is, you asked me, was the cop justified?
And by the standard of the law, yes.
Do I think that she should have been?
No.
But yes, by the legal standard, Ashley Babbitt, it was a justified shooting.
She didn't have a weapon.
She wasn't doing something aggressively, so I don't think he should have, but it was justified, just like in the situation with law enforcement in Minneapolis, they were justified.
I'm telling you by the law, I think that the cop was right.
So this is my opinion, was right to shoot the woman in the car, but I don't think the cop was right to shoot Ashley Babbitt because he just said you didn't know.
If that was actually your standard, and I'm not saying that this is the standard that we should go or by that standard, it would be justified to all the people down with a machine gun that were in the hallway.
And no, no, that's not.
Because, again, Ashley Babbitt was trying to go through the window.
She put her head through.
Now, she may not have been trying to climb through or whatever.
I was just saying, you weren't alive there, and you got some hot takes on there.
So, I mean, it's just like, well, let's not act naivete because you want to try to, oh, you have to pretend to be MAGA or else you're going to get in trouble.
It's like, you can actually just say how you feel.
There's this like a very, like, almost the exact same situation happened in Baltimore like three months ago when the lady got completely crushed by the wheel.
I'm running interference now for libtards because I don't think a guy that didn't know health on his feet shouldn't have blown some lesbian's head off.
If that were the case, then why is that cities like Memphis and New Orleans, who have police forces that work with the administration, have no riots like this, right?
So the police force doesn't inhibit the federal government from doing its job.
They don't have the mayor and the governor getting out saying, we need to be out there and resist and blah, blah, blah.
It would be my opinion that the reason that this is happening is because the governments in the states and the cities are not helping the federal government because they're sanctuary cities.
That, I mean, that's illegal in the first place.
There is no right for a city to be a sanctuary city and to ignore federal law.
They're supposed to help.
So if your point actually held water, then Memphis and New Orleans and other cities that have had ICE go in and help and remove illegals.
Those places wouldn't have had smooth operations that you didn't hear about on the news.
So actually, what you said actually adds to the argument that this is a possibility because in reality, if you've got the mayor who's against you, you've got people in authority who's against you, you've got Waltz against you, you've basically got a standoff between the two, and then it does become a politicized situation.
It does not have to be political because there was a time in the United States where the entire country agreed that we didn't allow illegal aliens to just come and stay in the country.
It's not the same thing at all because the left has been, like I said, the left called Mitt Romney the most vanilla politician in America, the most inoffensive conservative there is.
And if they call him a communist community, if someone is a member of the DSA, if someone is a member of the DSA, is it out of bounds to call them a communist?
No, but I'm saying, when the people that we don't like are in power, they can use the federal government to come after us like they did during the pandemic or like they did on January 6th.
And that's, I guess, what I'm saying.
It's not that I'm against Rene Goode or for Renee Goode or against the cop or for the cop.
I can just see that this being used against us on the other side.
And I can see how they flip the script.
So that's why when we cheer this on, we're cheering on our own demise.
So when you guys are escalating anyway, when you guys are supporting state-sanctioned murder, they're going to be like, okay, we can do worse than that.
It doesn't matter what the left says because they're going to say the most extreme thing about the conservatives.
Anyways, if your argument is we should not exercise power because the left is going to exercise power, you have to get past that because they're going to exercise power regardless of what you're doing.
The first thing I thought was if a cop puts his hand on my hood of my car and I touch my gas pedal, he has a right to shoot me and everyone's like, yep.
No, they trust me, they believe that ICE are these just like loose cannons and they're these crazy Trump death squad megatrons or whatever, which would be kind of base against illegals.
But to your point, Ian, like you can't change the context of what happened.
If there's someone that doesn't have anything, any identifying markers, and they come out and put their hand on your car and you speed away, no one is going to say you did anything wrong because they don't have any identification.
So, I mean, you said that at the top of the show, you said that this operation, this whole removing the illegal, you agreed that illegal immigration wasn't good.
Yeah, usually the tough measures, because what's happened at the moment is what they've done is they've fermented, they've allowed this incident to occur.
Now he may not bring the National Guard in, then he'll bring it in, and then things will escalate.
And what's happened is that you've allowed this major escalation to occur by doing it so slowly in a very small escalation manner, like a little bit and a little bit and a little bit.
I think the way he should have dealt with this, saying, look, I'm targeting this city.
I'm going in harsh.
All these people are going to go in.
Whereas the ICE and National Guard, whoever it is, will find all the illegal immigrants, will bring them in, and will be very tough that people can't go there and protest.
You can't have this escalation that occurs.
And you just go into the city and you completely sort the issue out.
You know, this escalation factor is that what happens is things ferment.
And when things ferment, they become worse, worse, worse, worse.
And now you lose control.
And then it's like, for example, you know how a father ends up hitting the kid because the kid's not listening.
But you already got in that situation because you didn't put the rules and requirements in first.
It means escalation much more than just expecting local authorities to collaborate with the federal government.
I said that would contribute to a much higher degree of escalation than if we just expect these local authorities to collaborate with the federal government.
Why is the impetus on the federal government to disengage when it's the local authorities that are not collaborating with the federal government, not collaborating with the law that, again, the president is sort of trying to enact here?
So, if you're talking about this specific shooting of Renee Goode, I'm saying that was handled really badly because you had the vice president, the president, come in and basically in support of the guy without an investigation.
What would have been smart, basically, management, which is what the president is, is basically to say, look, we're going to look into it.
This is the information we've got.
There's going to be an independent inquiry.
Then the left acting mentor would have actually made them look mental.
Right now, no matter what you say, because you guys are in your kind of like right-wing echo chamber, both sides, the left, do think this is a state-sanctioned murder.
And you guys are like, yeah, she got murdered because she was going to murder him with a weapon.
So, when it came down to this specific thing, I don't think this, you know, Renee Good's death was planned, but the people that are really in power, whether you want to call it the deep state, they knew there's been multiple deaths now.
Portland, two people died.
I think there was another person that got choked to death.
They knew when they put the federal government and they put ICE in these cities that there was going to be something that happens, like a George Floyd-esque situation.
They love that this is happening.
They love that we're fighting about it, especially after Charlie's death, where all the left cheered that on, and now you have all these right, you know, right-landing people cheering on her, you know, Renee Good's death.
It just shows the hypocrisy in the situation, and this is all done on purpose in order to divide us.
And if we can't see that, and I would say have just kind of a, I mean, you don't want to admit it, but I'm saying, I guess, have a neutral take on this, then you're just kind of feeding into the propaganda.
I think that there are people, because you go and look back at the French Revolution, right?
The people very easily split between the people that wanted revolutionary change, which is like the Jacobins and the people on the left, and the people that said, no, we need to stick with tradition.
There are people that just have these kind of opinions.
I'm not saying that there aren't people that benefit from the division in the U.S.
And there are people that will foment it because they want to see certain ends.
But the idea that if it wasn't for the people above kind of pulling the strings that we wouldn't have division, I totally disagree, particularly when you have a country like ours that is basically multicultural nowadays.
I am against it, but I'm just saying, I just think that what is being done is a coordinated attack on us so that we're fighting each other, so that we don't actually solve our problems.
When you see our government, we have a uniparty.
What was it?
45 senators just voted to give 300 million to Planned Parenthood, but they call themselves conservative and they want to go kill babies and give to these left-wing organizations.
Well, I'm saying these politicians, it's all fake, Tate.
I know, I'm just telling you, it's a uniparty, and we get the impression that it's right-wing versus left-wing Macho Man, Randy Savage versus Hulk Hogan, and it's all bullshit because they're on the same team because they're going to the locker room at the end of the day, and they're having a beer together, and they're laughing because they get all the money.
And that's why Elaine Omar goes into office, has $100,000 in her bank account, and now she's got $30 million.
That's why Dan Crenshaw has become rich being a politician.
These people do not have a lot of people who are going to be able to do that.
But the reason I say they're vague is because the times that vague goals overlap, they have two completely different ideas, policies that they're proposing to achieve that.
Well, I don't even know what the majority breakdown is.
But if you do look at like, you know, we talk about Israel a lot, you know, they're all left-leaning, and now that the conservatives support Israel, and now they've all become conservative.
Doesn't that seem kind of weird?
Like, they obviously didn't have a political party if they donated to all these left-leaning places.
And then now Donald Trump is, you know, sympathetic to their support of Israel.
So I'm talking about Elon Musk and Silicon Valley.
issues are basically cheap labor even within well to a degree yeah cheap labor israel um basically zionist control of the united states of america implanting implanting like this attack into into the country making sure ai and they have the basically control over what happens with ai AI is the future.
That's very important.
Having control of the data centers, hence why Greenland, all these things when we shoot.
I mean, we basically sort of started it when they nationalized all of the oil that they nationalized.
They cut deals with these, again, private American enterprise that cut deals with these different Venezuelan organizations to basically go to war with countries for private companies.
The Apple iPhone is made in Shengdong, China, where the conditions are so bad for the workers, they have suicide nets.
And the reason they do that is to save money.
So these corporations don't care about us.
They actually care about their bottom line more than killing their own employees.
So I do think it's a problem when we have a country that's being run by multinational corporations.
And I think it is obvious that that happens when these politicians are all getting funded by whether it be APAC or even these oil and gas industries or the farming industry, whatever industry it is, they can buy these politicians for pennies on the dollar.
I just don't like multinational corporations encouraging us to go start wars on their behalf.
And if you say that doesn't happen, I just think you're being, you know, a little dull.
That's why it's vital to identify, okay, what policies specifically would undercut those MNE networks, so to speak.
That's obviously, yeah, that is true that they do have a lot of influence in Washington and probably a plurality of influence.
Control.
So, the question is: okay, what policies that the Trump pursuing, the Trump administration is pursuing that would undercut the goals, again, of multinational corporations, et cetera, these very varied interests.
And again, mass deportations is something that is absolutely petrifying to multinational.
I would argue that legal immigration is almost worse than the illegal immigration.
The fact that you have H-1B visas, these people, and then look this up.
Indians, people are going to fact-check me, are more likely to lie on a college acceptance application or a work application.
You even had Minnie Kaling's brother is famous for saying that on a medical school application, he put that he was black.
So, we actually have a system that all these college kids, you're a young college-aged guy, you go and you spend $100,000 on a college degree, and you get your job stolen by an Indian guy that lied on his resume because he's companies put in legislation that benefits them, that lets them hire them and get tax breaks.
So, that's bullshit.
And that is being done by multinational corporations.
And you know what?
Trump's not, I don't know if he stopped that.
I think he gave 300,000 visas to more Chinese people.
So, I would just like it if we actually had a government that cared about American citizens, or maybe the affordability crisis that you say is, oh, right-leaning people and left-leaning people have, you know, not the same problems.
I would argue that most of our problems are very similar.
Again, if that were the case, people that are on the left, that again, if they are truly prioritizing kitchen table issues, they'd be all in favor of mass deportations.
But the problem is they have another, they have another guiding North Star, which is ultimately they have self-hatred and they're totally okay with like, again, eradicating the cultural foundation of the United States.
So, what it is is the people on the left have been people have taken control of them.
And in reality, what's happened is they care more about liberal work issues rather than real left-wing issues.
So, you're right.
If you were a real left-wing person, you would support deportations.
You would also support the tariffs, not the way Trump did it because he did it in a full-on mental, made-no-sense way, which destroyed small businesses.
But if they did proper tariffs, they should be supporting it.
The reason they don't support is A, because they're anti-Trump, and B, because they don't know what left-wing is.
They think left-wing is actually being liberal and woke.
But that being said, you have the same thing on the right.
Like, on the right, they'll only support policies if Trump tells them.
So, a lot of people on the right were like, oh, why are you somewhat?
I know it was 50-50, but even on the H-1B visa, a lot of them were supporting Trump.
But when in reality, that was harming working-class Americans.
So, this is the problem you have when people fall out as part of a group.
They'll just follow the group irrespective of what the actual political ideology of that group is.
I would think, yeah, expanding H-1B is like the entire system should be completely gutted.
But the Trump administration has, in the year of 2025, like the data has come out, we are at net negative migration.
So, again, more foreigners have left the country than have arrived.
That has never happened in 60 years.
So, really, since the Hart Seller Act passed, which was really a nuclear bomb in the United States in many ways, we have not been able to achieve net negative migration.
So, it's like, no, I'm going to give them a message to their flower.
And then a lot of people that have like fudged paperwork to get here, people that have immigrated here, but they're on welfare, people that are like net negative.
Let's touch a topic that is not controversial at all.
Donald Trump not bombing Iran.
Now, a lot of people expected it was going to happen on the 16th because I guess the first Ayatollah stepped down on January 16th, like 30 years ago, I guess.
So this date is very important to these people.
And it looks like I'm seeing on the Israel Fursers on Twitter getting mad that Trump hasn't done anything yet.
So I guess, you know, we can just go around the room.
I think that if we start a war with Iran, it's probably going to be a big cluster fuck and it's going to cause us a bunch of problems.
So I'm obviously, you know, I'm a conflict interventionist.
I don't want to go and fight these wars for other countries.
But, you know, I'd like to see maybe MAGA Tate wants to freaking blow up the Aatolla.
It takes too young for this, but there's a thing called the PEANAC Project for a New American Century, where they actually wrote a whole doctrine about how they're going to take the seven biggest threats to Israel and the Middle East.
And Iran is the last country on that list.
And we went there and we destabilized all these countries.
We basically went to Afghanistan.
Not only do you say Donald Trump is killing all these people because they have drugs, but in Afghanistan, we actually protected the poppy fields so that we didn't mess up their economy of selling heroin.
So, obviously, that's a lie.
Obviously, the government does, you know, want to sell drugs.
I think the Iran contrary, the government got caught shipping in cocaine, trading them.
I'm saying we were flying into Mean, Arkansas, and then Hillary Clinton, two boys, died on a train track, and they said they smoked weed and fell asleep on it.
And she covered all that up.
My point is: if you look at drugs, they don't care about drugs.
Yeah, I think the problem with being neutral on the issue is that what is the consequence?
So there's only a couple of possibilities.
One possibility is you're okay with America bombing another country, which I'm just like a Muslim and I think ethically just harming anyone is not a good thing.
But okay, I know we've got different morals and ethics.
But that being said, separate to that, there's always consequences for your action.
So when you bomb Iran, inevitably there's going to be a reaction.
Hence why Israel, who knows that if they bomb Iran and the GCC countries, pleaded with Trump to say, look, don't do it.
And that's the reason he didn't do it because they knew that they would be targets.
The U.S. military bases would be targets.
Israel would be target.
And the issue you've got is that basically what it does is cause escalation.
I'm not so sure that it actually would have significant consequences.
And the reason I say that is because there was everybody, so many people were saying, look, if we strike Iran, if we strike the nuclear sites in Iran, there's going to be all these consequences.
There's going to be a ground invasion.
There's going to be this.
There's going to be that.
And so far, we've not seen any of the consequences that people were predicting.
I'm not saying that there couldn't be things in the future.
I'm saying up to this point, we have not seen any of the stuff that the doomsayers were saying.
No, no, because that's because it seems like that was kind of like an agreed-upon situation where they were saying that all this stuff is definitely nothing.
Yeah, because it was agreed upon.
Because what actually happened in that war was, which has kind of been proven now, based on the fact that Israel said it in already, is it was a 12-day war.
Iran dominated Israel.
The very first day, Israel hit Iran really well.
Iran didn't expect it because they manipulated.
Trump told Iran, Israel is not going to hit you.
So he believed him and thought there's going to be negotiations on Sunday.
On the Friday, they hit.
Iran was doing military exercises.
So on the first day, they succeeded within Iran.
And after that, Iran dominated Israel.
Israel didn't have any defense missiles.
And this is the reason they don't want to do that.
They haven't got enough defense missiles to stop the attacks.
And so that's why they went to Trump and made sure that they stopped the war.
Trump's way of stopping the war was he had an agreed thing with Iran.
In my view, this is our last speculation.
Agreed in thing with Iran to say, look, you take your whatever nuclear bits you've got in Iran.
We're going to bomb.
And then you can do the thing in Qatar.
And they both bombed each other.
And that's the end of it.
But now Israel's not ready for the basically the war.
So I don't think that that was escalation.
Now, Iran doesn't want it because it would be significant escalation.
Then it would be GCC attacked, Israel attacked and Israel and GCC and already.
If you're America first, you listen, let's be clear on this.
It's quite evident from the Middle East that these countries actually want deals with America.
As soon as Qatar, UAE got opportunities, they've got deals with the United States of America.
Worse than that, they've given the United States America $5 trillion.
That's the level of love they actually have for America.
And that's actually how they do.
Let's be clear on this.
Arabs psychologically and Asians as well, they look up to the United States of America.
They look up to the white man.
And so that's why they'll give $5 trillion to America.
And so my point about that is these countries want to make deals.
The issue you have is the only reason they're not making deals with America, for example, the only reason Iran has issues with America is because of Israel.
I understand what you're saying about the rest of the Middle East, though, because for the most part, most of the countries in the Middle East do have fairly good relations with the U.S.
And I think that a big part of the reason why the U.S. and Iran are hostile is because the U.S. is basically meddling in the Middle East according to Iran and Iran.
Iran would have far greater influence over other countries in the Middle East if it wasn't for the United States.
Saudi Arabia and Iran don't particularly get along.
And the Saudis have a significant interest in Iran not getting nuclear weapons.
I think that as much as it is true that Israel doesn't want Iran to get nuclear weapons, I also think that there are a lot of the countries.
Iran doesn't want nuclear weapons in the first place.
If they wanted it, they would have got it a very long time ago.
And they've got a basically, well, you can not believe it, but we've seen the actions.
I think that's one of the failures Iran's done, that they should have got nuclear weapons, but they've not got it because a fatwa made by Ayatollah Hamane, who basically said that you're not allowed to have nuclear weapons according to their religious law.
They're Shia, I'm Sunni.
So I have different religious beliefs to them.
That being said, they're quite clearly saying that they don't believe in nuclear proliferation.
In terms of Iran, I do actually think that if Iran didn't have an issue with Israel, because Saudi Israel and the United States have always kind of been aligned, they would have good relations with that, with all those countries.
And you see that by the fact that, for example, Hamas is Sunni, Iraq is a Shia, sorry, Iran is Shia.
So in reality, these people will get along.
When it comes to bigger geopolitical situations, they'll get along.
I believe there's only one impeding issue, and that is Israel.
And they themselves want to make sure that they don't have existential threats.
So they believe that in the future, there could be a scenario where maybe these countries could be a threat.
And so what they want to do is basically weaken all these countries so they're no longer a threat.
It's kind of like psychological damage after what happened according to them for a thousand years up until the Holocaust, where they think you can't trust the whites and you can't trust the Israelites.
These letters from JFK where he was talking, you can look this up, where he was saying that he couldn't believe every single night that Israel was bombing themselves and then calling.
They're kind of the masters of subterfuge, you know, the Israeli Mossad.
But when I look at the Balfour Declaration, the way Israel was set up after World War I and the betrayal of the Arabs, it seems like the liberal economic order's attempt at bulwarking the Suez Canal and controlling trade hegemony in the region.
They split up the Soviet Union and took Sevastopol and Black Sea port access away from the Russians on purpose after the fall of the Soviet Union.
Like, that's all Israel.
It seems like it's just a militarized outpost of the liberal economic order.
Even if it was, which I can see slightly where you're coming from, especially when you look at 67.
But then when you look at, for example, what happened to JFK and then you look at the fact that after that, you basically had a scenario where when the Soviet Union weakened.
Remember, Israel also was working on both sides.
They were given military, U.S. military secrets to the Soviet Union.
They were given Soviet Union's secrets to the United States of America.
So even in that situation, they weren't an ally.
They were actually an impediment.
They were going to just go with whichever side did well.
But in terms of the Suez Canal, in terms of what you're talking about, I guess that is a good, decent point.
But it became less of an issue over time, which you see when Egypt fully just basically became part of the American homogeneity.
Yeah, Jewish terrorists bombed their own telephone.
Oh, well, I mean, so that, I mean, typically, and this might be splitting hairs, but typically terrorists are people that are not part of the government, and false flags are set up by the government.
Because freedom of speech, because of gun rights, property rights, these ethics that are inherent in our country, I think is the best on earth or the least worthy.
China now, when you look at it from a military perspective, when you look at it from a technological perspective, they're massively advanced.
And they're advancing so much.
And I don't want China to take past it.
But this kind of understanding that you believe that China is not advancing in the way they are and that they're not building an empire is just certainly not.
so you prefer the military where they build that's how empires should operate No, but they're actually building an empire as well, but they're just doing it economically.
Well, the problem is Trump is kind of showing you a mode where it can be because Syria, he's kind of created an agreement now where he looks like he's bringing them into the empire.
He's not going to kill anyone.
So Trump is starting to show in certain aspects you can't do.
It creates the military-industrial complex to be wealthy, the billionaire class, desire, become richer, and my poor old Uber drivers on to work 60, 70 hours.
Well, people also just have like people, depending on where you are from in the world, you just have completely different perspectives on morality too.
Like morality is universal, but people have differentiating views on it.
And that's why immigration is so flawed because you're just bringing people into a country that just have a different conception of morality and different conception of ethics.
No, no, so what it is is there is grooming gangs in the UK, right?
And there is grooming gangs in specific areas, which were largely Muslim and Pakistani, Rotherham being one, Rochdale being one, Talford being another one, and maybe one or two others.
But if you look at it holistically in the entirety of the UK, when it came to, I don't know if you like to say the P word, the P word, if you look at the Peter and PDF.
PDF and abusing women, you know what I mean by that.
Then if you look at the entirety of the UK, it's actually proportionate.
Well, I want to say this point, it's actually, this is why America, this is why I have problems and I love this country, but this is why I do have problems with the country.
And you might get offended at this, but during the war in the Middle East, there's a thing called the Bakabazi Boys, where there's men in Afghanistan, where they have sex with little boys.
They'll be their little servant.
They have sex with children.
And the United States military walked in on this.
And instead of killing, instead of hurting the PDF file, what they did was they protected him because they were our allies.
So we have instances where our government is not only protecting Jeffrey Epstein right now, but we've actually protected pedophiles in the Middle East.
What was there was serious failures amongst the government.
And this happened throughout the board.
So for example, now, like Tommy Robinson, if you look at it, I did a thread of like 100 people that were either his friends, connected to him, had the same position as him, or was part of his group that all partook in this PDF and all that kind of stuff.
So what I'm trying to say is, when you look at it, of course, there was massive failures within the institutional level in terms of protecting any of those children or women.
Well, yeah, but like, I mean, even in the, like, it was the Jay Roberts report where it's like, even in that, the Jay Robert report, that was the report that exposed in Rotherham, like, the massive grooming, levels of grooming that was going on.
It was like 1,400 kids that were taken advantage of.
And the police and other civil servants were literally afraid to report it because they want to be perceived as Islamophobic.
No, but that's my point I'm trying to say, that you're right about Rotherham.
But I'm saying if you look at the UK as a whole, if this issue and this problem, because what you're basically saying is, I have an issue with Rotherham because it was Muslims, which is, but I'm saying I have a problem with every single town, irrespective if it was Muslim, Christian, Jew, white.
So I think where we differ is I'm saying I have a problem with all of them doing it.
Well, it's like saying, okay, instead of just addressing like aggravated assault, theft, these sorts of things, we should just focus on the same thing.
Now, in terms of those specific grooming gangs, what Tommy Robinson did was he created a new category where he said, if it's three people are higher doing the abuse, then we'll create a new category.
And it'll be for only over 14 year olds.
And it'll only be because they want to take the children out because that becomes just proportionally not them.
And we want to take the children out because we don't care about pedophilia.
And we want to do it where it's three or more because we don't want to care about two or one.
So what he did was create this fake category to maybe say, look, everybody falls into that category.
And I'm saying that's ridiculous.
You abuse someone, you do it, you know, whether it's a PDF and it's someone, and I think we've done it to children's worst, but obviously may disagree.
But the thing is, all of that is bad.
All of that was covered up in an industry level.
And all of it should be called out, irrespective of who it is.
And I think this has been done intentionally in order to cause like wars between people.
Well, I think it's just like there's a difference between, again, like just your, that sounds weird, but like your everyday sort of grooming situation, which happens all the time.
There's no question about that.
And actual groups, actual roving bands that have operated for dozens of years.
Well, I guess if a woman wants to wear it, I think they can.
I mean, if they want to choose to wear it.
But my point is, there's a reason why, because in some cultures, if a woman does that, they They're saying that the woman is asking for it by even showing her face.
What actually happened, I don't think you read the report.
So what actually happened was, unfortunately, what these evil people were doing, these Pakistanis, was they were going to, you know, people who were in social services and people who'd lost their pet, like people who went with their parents maybe because of drugs or whatever it may be.
unidentified
So they were going for these vulnerable 14, 15, 16, 17 girls.
See, that's where I disagree because I get frustrated when people tell me that, you know, Jeffrey Epstein, you know, killed himself, even though he was like at the vending machine, you know, buying M ⁇ Ms or I-B-4.
I think that, you know, he just met with his attorney, his attorney said he was in great spirits.
So I just think it's odd that a billionaire that probably did have inside information and probably could have been a witness to these people dies by killing himself.
I think that, like you said, they would cover their tracks and they would kill him.
But yet we have people that lead the FBI or leaving the FBI telling us, oh, no, the official story is right.
Like, do you believe the official story?
Do you think he hung himself by jumping off the second story of a...
But I heard this rumor, and you know, is this true or not, that people would ask Jeffrey Epstein that was in his circles his favorite sexual conquest.
And supposedly, Jean-Luc Brunel, who was a modeling talent agent that had, you know, a bunch of models, is that Jeffrey Epstein would tell people that his favorite sexual conquest was how he slept with three 11-year-old triplets and then flew them back.
So that's why it's pertinent that you don't make claims that a specific country has a special relationship or they are given special access because when you do, then you're right.
But I still think that the United States and the countries that, you know, basically are sister countries or brother countries, whatever you want to call them, I think that we do have a special relationship that should be held above all other countries in the world.
Well, we do let them have nuclear weapons, and I think that's kind of the UK, they actually kind of, you know, if I'm really going to go crazy, people are going to call me Candace Owens.
I think nuclear weapons are totally fake.
The idea that they split the atom and this big bomb goes off.
And if you look up Hiroshima and Nagasaki, you can basically tell that those were firebombs.
I'm saying we have big bombs, but it's funny because Donald Trump, he's dropped the Moab, the mother of all bombs, which is arguably the second biggest bomb besides a nuclear weapon.
It just seems like in order to scare the civilians, and this is what they tell us in school, and they told me this.
I don't know if you guys agreed, but maybe Tate was in school sooner than all of us.
But they told me in history class that we have enough nuclear weapons to blow up the earth 10 times over.
That's just provably false.
It doesn't matter if we set up every bomb that we had, the earth is going to outlive humanity, and we can't just blow up the world like that.
That's just fake news.
So they use the threat of nuclear weapons to scare us.
And the idea that you split the atom and everything blows up, I actually think he goes, it's such a lie.
It goes back to like the Bible.
It's kind of like how they're trying to, you know, play like their kids.
I think matter has energy, but I don't know if it, yeah, I mean, I guess I could say that energy has matter because if there is an ether, like we can't see it, but there's oxygen in the air.
So I think Einstein was right that there is what we think is nothing is actually something, even though we don't necessarily classically determine it with our tools yet.
No, he said, he says, he says, however, at least this is what the AI says.
However, in his general theory of relativity, Einstein reintroduced the concept of an ether, not as a material medium, but as space-time itself endowed with physical properties.
Well, Ian, this is the problem: I think that modern Christianity has been hijacked because if you look at, even though that's not in the, you know, they don't consider it a book of the Bible, but the Book of Thomas.
And even though it says in the Bible, in order to follow Jesus, you had to get into heaven.
You would give every basically Jesus had a lot of socialism views because you have to give up everything to follow him.
He even said it's easier for a camel to get through the eye of a needle than a rich man to get into heaven.
So, what we've done now is we have a lot of these prosperity gospels.
Druski had a great sketch.
You should pull up the Druski sketch.
We should watch that.
And modern-day Christianity has been hijacked.
It is not what Jesus taught.
It's an it's exactly, I would say that it's the opposite of what Jesus taught.
I thought Islam also, and this would be interesting to get your take, had been hijacked at some point in the history of the faith by government and it got twisted.
You know, actually, well, I think about this all the time, like, because I don't eat meat.
Well, no, I get no, not eating people, but I'm talking about eating meat.
And I always think, like, you know, if we do have another pandemic and they turn off the internet and they turned off our power and my cats died, maybe I would eat my cat if it was already dead, but I wouldn't kill my cat to eat it.
So if I was in the movie Alive, I saw that when I was a young kid.
Have you guys seen that movie?
Tate, you're too young.
So it's about the soccer team.
I think they're in Buenos Aires or wherever they were.
No, so law enforcement should definitely enforce laws.
I think they're referring to the point I made earlier about being a bit more harsher.
I just don't think that the U.S. has the capability to go into every single city at the same time and basically round up all the illegal immigrants without causing the issues that happen in Minneapolis.
That's why I'd make it targeted, but I'd target a specific area first and then build from there.
And people will be like, well, now my opinion is that's an evil law.
So I'm going to ignore that.
And it's like, that's a slippery slope.
But Thomas Jefferson was very clear about it.
The Founding Fathers were very clear about tyrannical law and evil law, but it's like, who decides, you know, the masses of the community, essentially.
I think they figured out what magnet, they were talking about the flow of magnetism in the universe, but they didn't have the tools to measure that magnetism was actually a thing.
So they just talked about it, but it's flowing through you.
So we have like there's three components of Islam.
And it might be similar.
I don't know about Semin Christian.
It's definitely Seman Judaism.
But basically, it's what you call it again.
You've got the theology.
So like believing in God, how is God or theology?
Then you've got the law, which is the legal aspect.
And then you've got the spiritual aspect.
And the spiritual aspect of Islam is that type of stuff, like meditation and doing these type of like meditated acts and trying to become spiritually elevated and becoming one with the world and one with God.
Yeah, I mean, obviously Phil believes that we should have a right to carry guns.
I mean, gun-free zones, I think, are just dangerous for people that are law-abiding citizens because there's always going to be people breaking the law that have a gun in a gun-free zone.
My experience in Florida, I've spent months here, is I feel so much better walking around outside, looking around, thinking all these people could have guns on them.
And they all think I could have a gun on me.
And it's really peaceful.
So obviously random bursts of crime are always possible.
It feels very secure believing everyone's armed, walking down the street.
New Hampshire has one of the highest per capita gun ownership, and they've got a murder rate that's lower than Canada.
Same thing with Maine.
In fact, not only that, there are more machine guns in the civilian population in New Hampshire than any other state, and their murder rate's lower than Canada.
Suma probably disagrees, but I would argue the more guns you have, the safer you are, because people are more afraid of actually using their gun because somebody returns.
Well, you know, they always say, like, Betty White, you know, when there's like a mass shooting, and I'm sure, you know, maybe there are, you know, white people that do shootings, but I would argue that lately it's been more transparent.
If they did do that, then we would have like it would be like a distinctly because they say it's like, oh, only white people commit mass shootings, but it's like, it has to be like potentially ideologically driven.
Well, because like in Chicago, there's mass shootings all the time, but it doesn't make the news headlines the same way as if it was like at a workout.
So I'm saying, but the left, when they're trying to say like it's only white people that commit mass shootings, it's because they have a very narrow definition where it's like they don't count their ideas.
The definition of a mass shooting is just multiple people shot.
So they'll use the phrase mass shooting when they're talking about gun violence or when they're actually talking about we want to strengthen gun laws because they'll say anytime it's more than two people.
But there's a distinct difference between a mass shooting at a school and the term mass shooting brings to mind Columbine, Parkland, people, you know, a bunch of kids getting shot.
That's what people think of when you hear mass shooting.
But what they're talking about is people at a party at night.
Someone shoots at someone at a party and two people get hit because there's a dude behind them.
And they say, well, that was a mass shooting because multiple people got hit.
There was one intended target, right?
Or maybe it was gang violence, but they say that's a mass shooting when it's convenient.
But then when it's not convenient in your context, they'll switch the meaning to two groups.
If you haven't been there yet, go to graphene.movie and check out the trailer for the upcoming nanotechnology documentary I'm working on, graphene movie.
That's graphene.movie.
Also, sign up for the mailing list if you haven't yet put your email address in there.
We got two installations of Across the Pond coming up for the weekend with Connor Tomlinson.
And on Sunday, we had Nathan Halberstadt join us, and we discussed sort of general Zoomer nihilism, especially with the discussion of Trump, obviously, you know, barring institutional buyers from the housing market, potentially.
So we broke that down and sort of the fact that Zoomers can't actually feel like they can own homes, the implication that has on Zoomers and contributes to nihilism that's just plaguing our generation.
So be on the lookout for those two episodes.
Again, they're going up on the Culture War channel.
Tomorrow, the episode goes up on Connors, and then Sunday goes up on the Culture War channel.
And I just want to say thank you to BBNet one last time for everything you do for our country.
I'm sorry we haven't started that war with Iran.
I hope we turn into a parking lot very soon for you.
And, you know, maybe you guys do run the world, but hey, you guys are the ones that deserve to do it because you're the smartest, most beautiful, and the most talented.