Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

April 28, 2025 - Viva & Barnes

02:38:52

Live with Myron Gaines - from Global Politics to the "Manosphere" & Everything in Between

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	A frog straight up jumped on my dog right now.
	That frog is on my dog.
	It's still there.
	Don't move.
	There's a dog on my frog.
	There's a frog on my dog.
	Do not know there's a frog on you right now.
	Right there.
	It's barrowing.
	Dude.
	It's right there.
	Oh gosh darn it.
	That hurt.
	There's a frog on my dog.
	Stop coming towards me!
	What's he gonna do?
	What's the plan?
	Oh, did you lose him?
	The dog's blind, by the way.
	Does everybody know his dog?
	There it is.
	There it is.
	Okay, well, now it's off.
	The frog is off my dog.
	Yeah, it's gone.
	Let me know what happened.
	Don't even know what happened.
	He's blind, which makes you think he's stupid because he doesn't respond like a normal dog to external stimulus.
	Is it off?
	Is it off?
	It's off.
	You look very upset.
	Like this, like this right now.
	First of all, he looks like a Frenchman out of a cartoon.
	Frog on a dog, by the way.
	Copyright.
	Look at him.
	I had someone tell me, that's not a dog.
	Yeah, so that's the frog on the dog, people.
	Good afternoon.
	First of all, it doesn't exist yet, and it's been copyrighted.
	I have proof of creation.
	It was in a tweet earlier today.
	There's a frog on my dog, and it's going to be the next kid's book that I write after having written Louis the Lobster Returns to the Sea.
	And I'm sitting there saying, there's a frog on my dog, and all I can hear is Amber Heard saying, my dog stepped on a bee?
	And that was in my head all night.
	You imagine waking up in the middle of the night, hearing Amber Heard's voice in your head, my dog stepped on a bee.
	Good afternoon, everybody.
	We are going to have Myron Gaines on in a few seconds.
	He's getting to his computer, but I was going live so that we can absorb the sweet raids from both the quartering when they come and or Nick Ricada, who's covering the next trial of the century, the Karen Reid retrial.
	But I wanted to start off with something that's not going to make you want to puke because it is election day in Canada.
	And depending on the results of Election Day in Canada, you might want to puke.
	We haven't gotten there yet.
	I have been picking the brains of many, many Canadian podcasters, political analysts.
	I was just on a show, the Sean Newman podcast, with a bunch of other Canadians, and we had one political analyst saying she did not see the way forward to a Conservative victory, and that she was predicting either a Liberal minority or a Liberal majority.
	So help me goodness, for the love of all things holy.
	If it's a liberal majority, I will be devastated in the sense that I don't understand what it takes for people to say we should vote these sons of bitches out of office.
	But that being said, the precedent is very bad because I left Quebec because of their COVID tyranny, because of their...
	Two year-over-year curfews because of their unscientific vaccine passport, discriminatory proposals such as taxing the unvaxxed.
	I left that pee-pee-soaked heckhole.
	And then they held elections.
	And I said, if they don't oust that filthy tyrant, François Legault, the premier of Quebec, if they don't oust that son of a bitch from power, they will have not learned their lessons.
	They didn't oust him.
	They gave him more seats.
	Just, uh...
	We might have to get Myron in here so that I can explain to him how this works.
	Myron, if you're watching, there's no Zoom link.
	It's StreamYard.
	You have to send me the RTPM if we're going to co-stream, and otherwise we'll just do this on Rumble and VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com, which I have to make sure that we're live on.
	So not only did they not oust the son of a bitch from power, they gave the François Legault's party, now the name of it is escaping me, CAC, Le CAC, Coalition Avenir Québec, they gave them more seats.
	We've had 10 years of egregious outright abuse from the liberal government.
	Constitutional abuse, charter rights violations, tyranny, taxation, everything has gotten worse in Canada.
	And if they go to the polls and...
	Reward those sons of bitches with more seats.
	I don't know what it says about Canadians.
	And that's my biggest concern, is that Canadians will not only have not learned the lesson, they are going to reward their abusers.
	They're going to reward their beaters.
	And, you know, do a brief follow-up from the Vancouver...
	Some are saying it's a terror attack, whether or not it was motivated by whatever terrorism, whatever ideology.
	A mass casualty event targeting innocent civilians is terror by definition.
	They came out after this Vancouver attack.
	They've now identified the man who's an Asian man that we saw in the video who plowed his car into hundreds of people and killed now up to 11 people.
	They say it's not a terror attack because the man, and I'll show you the actual quote.
	Because the man was well known to authorities.
	They came out and they said, we know this is not a terrorist attack because we knew the guy.
	He was a mentally ill person that had multiple run-ins with authorities, as if that somehow excludes having been recruited, whatever.
	My purpose is not to point out that this is or is not a terrorist attack.
	My point is just to say, A, you don't know, and B, the fact that you knew this guy...
	Because of multiple run-ins with the law and mental health issues is not exactly the explanation that you think is going to be palatable to the general public.
	The Vancouver vehicle attack wasn't an act of terrorism, reading my tweet.
	It was an act by, quote, a man with a significant history of interactions with police and healthcare professionals related to mental health, end quote.
	And, quote, Canada faces a mental health crisis.
	It's not really an acceptable answer.
	And this is the mayor of Vancouver?
	But this is how they explained it away.
	It wasn't terrorism, people.
	Don't worry about it.
	It was just a man with a history of mental illness, multiple interactions with police and healthcare professionals, and then he got behind an Audi somehow?
	Got behind an 80-some-odd thousand, $100,000 car and plowed it into people killing 11 people celebrating the Lupa Lupa Filipino Festival?
	I mean, no, that's great.
	Don't worry, guys.
	It wasn't terrorism.
	It's just...
	Infrastructure that is inadequate to care for the mentally ill in Canada, and this despite multiple run-ins with the police.
	Yep.
	Totally cool.
	So that's what's going on in Canada.
	And it's...
	One thing after...
	It's not terrorism, so don't worry.
	It has nothing to do with the open borders, effectively, that's been going on in Canada.
	That, you know, the terrorism issue, that's America's problem because they're intercepting people on terror watch lists crossing into the States from Canada.
	Oh, but it's their border.
	So we can screw around and do whatever the hell we want in our country, but it's their border.
	So if they say there's a problem because they're catching people on terror watch lists crossing over in outrageous numbers from the Canadian side, well, that's America's problem.
	It's America's problem of Canada's creation.
	So it's not related to the immigration, lax immigration, handing out visas, student visas to India, Pakistan, China, Eritrea, countries that are not necessarily amenable to Western values,
	let alone Canadian values.
	That's not the problem, peeps.
	The problem is we got a mental health care crisis in Canada and we're unable to deal with it.
	That's wonderful.
	I made a meme, and it's a pretty damn good one.
	Elbows up, Canadians.
	Elbows up, get it?
	When you're being stuck up at gunpoint because the criminals have guns in Canada, but the law-abiding citizens don't.
	And they're not fake guns, people.
	They're guns with real bullets that can do real harm.
	Elbows up!
	The people who destroyed Canada are asking you to vote for them for a fourth time.
	Vote wisely.
	That's what's on the ballot today in Canada.
	And then the stats there are crime rates in Canada growing faster than in the United States.
	Oh, but that's Trump's fault.
	That's because of the tariffs.
	Trump imposes tariffs or threatens tariffs, and then crime goes up in Canada.
	You idiots.
	Go vote liberal.
	Give them a frickin' majority.
	Reward them for their incompetence, corruption, ethics-breaching scumbag of a blackface wearing Justin Trudeau.
	Go reward them.
	Oh, no, but it's not him anymore.
	It's Carney.
	Oh, yeah, the same Carney who had been advising Mr. McGropey blackface wearing two times ethics-breaching Trudeau for the last five years.
	Go reward them.
	Here's a story coming out of Ontario.
	Ontario man says 911 put him on hold three times as armed group broke into his home.
	That's a provincial issue.
	That's not a federal issue.
	No big deal.
	This is what's going on in Canada.
	One more news of the day.
	People, I might be going live this evening depending on how hard I'll be crying if it's Canadians actually saying, yep, we love our abusers.
	Because at least he's not Donald Trump.
	Yeah, sure, they locked us down, forced us to take an experimental medical procedure, fired us if we didn't.
	Sure, they talk about grooming our children, pronouns and kids.
	Sure, that's fine.
	But at least they're not Trump.
	Trump is the real problem to Canadians.
	He's the real threat to Canadians.
	And they think they have their news of the day here.
	Trump trolls Canada on election day.
	As Canadians vote, the president revives 51st state rhetoric.
	Here's an idea, you bunch of snowflakes.
	It's not because you're from the great white north that you get to act like snowflakes.
	Laugh it off.
	Oh, but it's a very serious thing.
	Canada's a very proud country.
	Yeah, the same Canada that Justin Trudeau's Liberal Party said lacks a core identity.
	Oh, now you sons of bitches are going to lecture me on taking a joke.
	No, now you're going to lecture me on patriotism?
	Oh, no.
	Here's an idea.
	Take a freaking joke like you're not a 12-year-old prepubescent teenager.
	I mean, 12. Prepubescent teen.
	You know what I'm getting at.
	President Donald Trump has an election day message for Canadians.
	The Canada-US border is artificial and you should become the 51st state.
	Well, if you'd asked Justin Trudeau about seven years ago, I'm sure he would have agreed with that.
	We are a post-national state with no core identity, I believe is pretty close to verbatim.
	But now, they've become the most patriotic people on Earth.
	And a patriotic people without a sense of humor.
	And also without a sense of political reality that, yes, Canada has been dependent on the beneficiary of American military protection?
	American market?
	Oh, my tariffs are terrible, eh?
	Tariffs are so terrible that Canada somehow has been imposing tariffs on American poultry?
	Eggs, milk, in order to preserve the Canadian industry.
	Two, three hundred percent.
	They've been doing that for years.
	That's fine, though.
	The second the bigger economy starts to say, well, why do we have to get exploited by you?
	Why do we have to basically do your military dirty work?
	Then they become a very proud nation that will stand up to the big bad bully that is America.
	They should go cozy up to China.
	See how that big brother relationship works.
	It'll be big brother, all right?
	Pun intended.
	Let me see where the truth post is.
	The Truth Post was in here.
	Oh, yeah, here.
	Trump's Monday morning post on Truth shredded any illusions that Trump was cutting Canada any slack.
	Elect the man who has the strength and wisdom to cut your taxes in half.
	Increase your military power for free to the highest level in the world.
	Have your car, steel, aluminum, lumber, energy, and other businesses quadruple in size with zero tariffs or taxes if Canada becomes the cherished 51st state of the United States of America, Trump wrote on Monday.
	Oh, my goodness!
	This is so offensive.
	We're a proud sovereign nation.
	Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Very proud.
	Very sovereign.
	Can't take a freaking joke?
	Or, even if he's serious, can't understand that maybe you should actually turn this into something of political pride?
	Why on earth would Trump want Canada as a 51st state if it were not a valuable asset?
	If it didn't have valuable resources?
	You could spin it, which is what you would do if you had a bit of a sense of humor and you weren't a bunch of haughty snowflakes.
	That's funny.
	Haughty snowflakes.
	It's terrible.
	It's insulting.
	It's flattering if you think about it.
	And yeah, is he trying to put some pressure on Canada to maybe fix up your shit in terms of the border?
	Don't allow people on terror watch lists, A, to enter your country, but then certainly to try to come into ours?
	Enough with your fentanyl superlabs?
	Oh no, we can't talk about that because that's criticizing Canada.
	And if you do that, you acknowledge Trump's grievances.
	And that somehow makes you a big bad boogeyman as well.
	So that's what's going on in Canada, people.
	And today you get to make the decision in Canada.
	Do you reward the people who did this to you?
	Everything that Trump has done with the tariffs discussion is not as a result of him being a bully.
	It's as a result of what the liberals have done to Canada.
	Nigga, what's his face?
	Pierre Poiliev had to come out because nobody's going to insult his woman, people.
	Pierre Poiliev comes out on Twitter.
	And replies to Trump, illustrating that he too lacks a sense of humor, at least when it comes to insults on Canada.
	Let me see where his reply was here.
	Yeah, Pierre Poiliev, here, this is what he has to say.
	Pierre Poiliev writes, President Trump, stay out of our election.
	The only people who will decide the future of Canada are Canadians at the ballot box.
	What in his post suggested otherwise?
	Canada will always be proud, sovereign, and independent, and we will never be the 51st state.
	Today, Canadians can vote for change so we can strengthen our economy, stand on our own two feet, and stand up to America from a position of strength.
	It's nice to say that you can stand up to America from a position of strength, but that needs to be based on something.
	You can say everything on Earth.
	Words are just words.
	You want to get into a position of strength or at least into a position of negotiation.
	You might want to have played your cards a little differently from the get-go.
	And you can't be in a position of strength that you cannot attain if you are incapable of attaining it.
	There's an old expression.
	I've mentioned it repeatedly.
	You've got to know how to negotiate from a position of weakness because you will not always be equal negotiating partners in negotiations.
	And sometimes you're going to be the smaller party in the negotiations.
	You've got to know how to negotiate from a position of weakness, and that doesn't mean puffing up your chest in a way that's going to look stupid because nobody's going to take it seriously.
	The other thing is, if you're going to threaten Trump and make these statements, you might want to read the art of the deal in order to understand how it is you get to negotiate from a position of strength.
	And there's all that to say, I don't really mind.
	I don't really mind Pierre's tweet.
	It's on election day.
	To some extent, from what I've been told, Viva, you don't understand the level of Trump derangement syndrome in Canada because you've been in the States for too long.
	I understand it.
	And I don't think catering to the illness is the way to cure the illness.
	TDS is an illness.
	And you don't cater to it, or you don't cure it, I should say, by catering to it.
	And it's very funny.
	I was telling Sean Newman when I was on their podcast earlier today that I was out.
	Fishing, as I typically do sometimes, and came across someone who overheard us discussing and heard me say I'm from Canada.
	And this person says I'm from part of Ontario.
	And then it became immediately clear that this was one of the people who apparently seems to suffer from Trump derangement syndrome.
	And it's very depressing because...
	You get to that level not as a result of thoughtful analysis of global geopolitics, but as a result of being brainwashed by state-funded media.
	How do you wake someone up from that slumber?
	You don't cater to that mental condition.
	Maybe I'm wrong in the method of doing it.
	Maybe I'm not going to convince anybody otherwise by calling them idiots if they vote for the Liberals.
	Maybe I don't have the best method.
	At some point, I don't care.
	I'm not the one running for office at this point asking people to vote for me.
	But if you vote for liberals, you're an idiot.
	Period.
	Full stop.
	I'm not sure that you can get those people to come on board with you if you just take an anti-Trump tweet and then say, yeah, sure, those liberals who think conservatives are racist boogeymen, who embarked on an Ottawa occupation, yeah, I'm going to go vote for them now because Pierre Poiliev said something interesting about criticizing Trump.
	That is...
	What's going on in Canada, people?
	The polls close tonight at, I don't know, 8 o 'clock, 9 o 'clock, depending on the time zone.
	Get out there and vote if you're in Canada.
	And for the love of all things holy, sweet, merciful hell, do not empower those liberals with not just even a minority government, but heaven forbid, I don't want to use the Lord's name in vain, a majority government.
	Thank you for the abuse.
	Can I have some more?
	Oh, but at least you're not as bad as what you tell me Trump is going to be.
	It's a classic abusive relationship that the liberals have with the population.
	It's the same abusive relationship that Francois Legault, the sunset thief, had with Quebecers.
	Beat them down.
	Beat them up.
	Demoralize them.
	Lock them up.
	Convince them that they cannot live without you.
	Go look up the criteria for being in an abusive relationship.
	It's all there.
	And tell you that someone else is worse than them.
	Oh, my God.
	I cheat you good.
	I'm not Trump.
	Trump wouldn't be as nice to you as I am.
	Now shut up and vote for me.
	Here's your $2,000 after we shut down your business.
	All right, that's it.
	I see Myron is in the backdrop and he's looking dapper.
	Is he looking ready?
	I see an American flag.
	Thumbs up, Myron.
	Let's see if you're coming in hot.
	Hello, what's up, man?
	How are you?
	Very good.
	How are you doing?
	I'm good.
	Can you hear me good and see me good?
	I'm going to hear.
	I can hear encrypt.
	Let me see.
	Hold on.
	Encrypt.
	You'll tell us if the audio is good.
	I'm going to zoom in on your face so that we maximize our reality.
	Myron, sir, are you following what's going on in Canada?
	No, I am not filming what's going on.
	We have our election.
	Canadians have their election today.
	Today is the day where they're going to decide to re-elect the Liberal Party or elect the Conservative Party.
	We've got a crazy parliamentary system, so there's like seven or eight different parties.
	It's a big day in Canada, but we'll see how it ends this evening.
	So the equivalent of like the American election pretty much in November for you guys.
	Yes, it is.
	It is our November election day today.
	And people have been drawing some analogies between how accurate or inaccurate the polls are versus the two candidates.
	Because everyone's like, oh, they said Kamala was going to win.
	They said Hillary was going to win and Trump beat them both times.
	But we don't really have a Trump up in Canada because apparently Canadians are so offended by any Trump-esque personality.
	Their populist conservative has to be pretty much a liberal Democrat.
	Wow.
	You know, Canada's very much different.
	You guys are a lot nicer than we are.
	Well, I make the joke.
	Nice until you disagree with them.
	Nice until they...
	Nice is in the sense of subservient.
	And then when you are no longer subservient to their subservience, that's when the subservient cease being nice and find the liberal tyrant in their heart.
	Myron, my crowd's going to know who you are, but just in case they don't...
	Tell them who you are, 30,000-foot overview.
	Yeah, sure.
	So, my name is Myron Gaines.
	Prior to this, I was a special agent with Homeland Security Investigations.
	I used to do criminal investigations on the southwest border.
	I started my career in Laredo, Texas, where we went after, you know, everything from Mexican cartel members, sicarios, drug traffickers, weapon smugglers, human traffickers, human smugglers, you know.
	I did that for four to five years.
	Then I went over to the Miami field office.
	I did that for two years.
	And I was doing a podcast.
	I was starting up the podcast as I was working in the Miami field office.
	And they basically brought me in and said, hey, man, you got to pick one.
	I ended up resigning from the government.
	And now I work doing the podcast.
	I do more of the political /cultural commentary.
	I go live Monday through Friday and on Sundays at 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.
	Then we just try to help guys out as much as we can with the male self-improvement.
	We talk about a lot of other crap things going on like feminism and all the other stuff people know us for.
	Well, you've been in the news for other reasons which we're going to get to.
	Okay, so hold on.
	Back it all the way up because when I heard, I was listening to a couple of podcasts that you were doing field work for which agency again?
	For Homeland Security Investigations or HSI.
	Basically, think of them as the...
	They're the biggest investigative arm of Homeland Security.
	So they're like the...
	They're like the FBI for DHS.
	Okay, and you weren't carrying a gun when you were doing that?
	No, I was.
	Have you ever shot anybody?
	No, I never shot anybody.
	Have you ever shot at anybody?
	No, I never shot at anybody.
	Came close a few times, but never actually did.
	But yeah, it's an 1811 position, which is basically a special agent.
	So it is a criminal investigator.
	You carry a gun.
	You're carrying cases.
	I had an AR-15 as well.
	I'll bring that out for the raids.
	But yeah.
	That's actually, it's wild, and I want to flesh it out a little bit more, but I like to go even before that.
	How many generations American are you?
	I was born here, so my parents are American citizens, but they naturalized, but I was the first gen born in the U.S. And where are your parents from originally?
	Sudan.
	Sudan.
	Both mother and father?
	Yeah, both of them.
	And did they get married before coming here or did they get married, meet each other here?
	They got married back in Sudan and then they came here after because my dad had already was like coming back and forth here so he brought her with him.
	Alright, and was your dad working for the American government as well in any capacity?
	No, no.
	My dad, man, we grew up poor.
	My dad was a cab driver in New York City in the 1980s and 70s.
	Shut up.
	Okay, so this is how many siblings do you have?
	I have a sister.
	She's a doctor right now doing her residency.
	And I got a little brother.
	He's like 21. And you're 36?
	35?
	35. So you have a brother who's 14 years younger than you from the same parents?
	Yeah, 12 years younger than me.
	He's like 23, I think.
	And the same parents.
	How old were your parents when they had your youngest brother?
	I don't know what my mom was smoking.
	She was probably...
	She had me when she was 21, so yeah, she was like 33 when she had him.
	Oh, that's still very young.
	I was looking for an excuse to knock up my wife again, but she's 43, so that probably wouldn't happen.
	Sudanese immigrant refugees?
	No, they were from North.
	Well, back then, Sudan used to be one country.
	Now it's North and South Sudan, but my parents are from the Arab North.
	Okay.
	I mean, it's going to be a stupid question because everybody wants to come to America.
	Well, I say, like, why did they come to America?
	Were they fleeing?
	I don't know if there was conflict at that time, but were they fleeing any conflict or just wanted to come to a better life?
	Yeah, yeah.
	No, there was definitely conflict.
	South Sudan and North Sudan were fighting.
	This is before they had the...
	Like, they were fighting.
	The countries weren't split.
	Yeah, I think they split in like the 2010 or 2011, 2012-ish.
	But there was definitely fighting going on even at that point, back then.
	I think there's...
	I mean, I say it's a silly question.
	We look at some parts of the world and there's always fighting.
	It's just a question of the degree to which there's a flare-up.
	So they come to America.
	Your dad goes to New York and becomes a cab driver in New York in the late 70s, early 80s.
	Yeah, he came here in the 70s, if I'm not mistaken, is when he first got here.
	And that is like, that's taxi driver levels of when New York was at its, I don't know if it was at its nastiness, but pretty close to.
	Yes, so 1990, if I'm not mistaken, was like the most, it was the, had the most murders ever, 1990.
	So it was a bad time.
	New York City in the 90s was horrible.
	Ended up coming in and cleaning it up.
	But it was very, very bad.
	I remember, like, I was there in 1996.
	It was the first time I ever saw Blue Man Group with high school.
	We had a field trip.
	And it was pretty gritty, but that was sort of on the up end of when it was gritty.
	But it's kind of amazing.
	Your dad becomes a cab driver.
	And the obvious question is, he raises, I don't know what your youngest brother's doing, but at the very least, I'll say successful.
	By every metric, children.
	I mean, how does that work?
	What work ethic is your dad?
	How many hours a day is he driving a cab?
	What is life like with a dad?
	Cab drivers, your mom at home?
	Yeah, no.
	My dad is a big part of the reason why I'm the way I am now.
	Like, my dad...
	So, he's the type of guy who works really hard.
	One thing I remember growing up as a kid, he refused to take welfare.
	He would never take it.
	He was like, I'm going to work for everything that I get.
	I'm not going to be one of these scammer immigrants that comes here and just abuses welfare or whatever.
	So he always worked.
	And I remember one story about him.
	And I actually had to tell Rudy Giuliani this thank you when I saw him.
	But what ended up happening was my dad was driving a cab.
	And he was no stranger to weirdos that would try to rob him or whatever.
	And New York City in the 90s, I said before, was really bad.
	And one day...
	He was there at a gas station filling up and he got hit.
	Basically, someone hit him and they ran away and ended up messing up his leg.
	He ended up breaking his leg.
	And instead of taking time off, what he did was he just drove a cab with a cast on.
	And my mom would go downstairs every day because we lived in this apartment building.
	She would go downstairs every day, pick him up and help him up the stairs.
	And that kind of, like, was a story that my mom told me way later on when I became an adult that my dad did that.
	But that was just, like, his resilience to, like, get stuff done and be a provider, right?
	He didn't want my mom to work.
	You know, that's just how he was.
	And he just really wouldn't take any excuses.
	So when I met Juliet at the RNC, I said thank you because he started going a lot harder on violent crime in New York City back then in the 90s because my dad had been robbed multiple times.
	He had been attacked being a cab driver.
	He had been put at gunpoint a few times.
	But yeah, when he got hit and the guy just ran away and broke his leg, he refused to take time off and he just drove a cab with a cast on.
	I'm going to ask the politically incorrect question and it'll come earlier.
	The majority of the incidents that your dad had held up at gunpoint, etc., demographically, was it white Americans, black Americans?
	No, it was black dudes every time.
	Don't worry.
	I talk shit about the black community all the time.
	That'll be, you know, when I say, like, some people get mad at the things you say about Jews in Israel.
	I was like, well, if it's fair game and he's critical of, but it's very important as well because it does explain, again, the genesis story of someone who comes from Sudan, a foreign country, comes here to work hard, bust his ass, and then has those types of experiences.
	Whether or not you would draw the same conclusions from those experiences, this would explain, at the very least, his experiences and how it brought you up to be the way you are.
	And not in a bad way, I'm saying it's...
	No, sure.
	But with him, yeah, he, you know, and this is why, yeah, it was 100% black people, man.
	And they're, you know, my thing is I'm critical of anybody, right?
	I don't just like, like I've talked shit about black people, Asians, Indians, you know, with H-1B visa.
	Actually, that got me in trouble on X when I talked about the H-1B visas.
	But yeah, no, 100%, they were all black, man, every single time, because they're fucking, a lot of them were crooks in the 90s, and even to this day, let's be honest, the majority of the violent crime in the United States is all perpetrated by a minority of the people, unfortunately, so that's kind of what it is.
	I presume your parents are Muslim?
	Yes.
	And were you brought up religious?
	Or were they religious?
	So they're religious.
	I was brought up fairly religiously.
	Obviously, I'm not as religious as they are.
	I still believe in a religion.
	I still think it solves a lot of the problems.
	But I'm not religious myself.
	I'd be lying if I sat here and said, oh yeah, I'm super religious.
	And again, I don't know if your dad watches your channel, but with some of the ladies on the show.
	We'll get into how that jives with them.
	With everything in terms of some of the guests.
	You're an athletic kid, right?
	You did very well in university and sports?
	Yeah.
	I was a Division I athlete in college.
	I was a rower, for those that are unaware.
	It's the sport of crew, which is like the...
	It's called crew or rowing.
	If you've ever been to Boston, you see the Harvard guys on the river rowing.
	I did that.
	I went to Northeastern.
	I graduated in 2013.
	So, you know, it was good because that kept me away from a lot of stupid stuff, right?
	Because when you're, you know, you go to college, people do drugs and do all that other stuff.
	Like me, I never did a drug in my life.
	I rarely drink.
	You know, we were always training because it was a year-round sport.
	Okay, that's very cool.
	And I guess, so you work for Homeland Security.
	How many years did you do that for?
	So, I was an intern in 2010.
	I was 20 years old.
	I came on as an intern.
	And then I became an agent at 23 years old when I graduated from school.
	So, that was in 2013.
	So, yeah, I was with the agency a total of 10 years.
	Seven as agent, three as intern.
	And I left in 2020.
	I left December 4, 2020.
	Because they basically made me pick one.
	They said, hey, you know, government or, you know, social media.
	And at that point...
	You know, I had employees, so I had to make the decision to, you know, what I was going to do.
	So it was difficult, but, you know, obviously I had to stick by my people because at that point people were depending on me, so I couldn't just let them down.
	But I didn't want to leave the government, man.
	I know a lot of people love to be, you know, I can't wait to leave my job and everything.
	I actually enjoyed working for the government quite a bit.
	It was a really fun job.
	You know, I had it since my 20s and, you know, I didn't want to leave.
	Well, the salary is decent, but I presume not comparable to what you're able to bring in on your own.
	If you work for yourself, you make a lot more money than working for someone else.
	Yeah, for the government, I'll be honest.
	I was making about $120,000 a year working for the government in the Miami field office, which compared to being an entrepreneur, that's nothing.
	But, you know, for me, I live way below my means.
	I'm a hardcore minimalist.
	I don't believe in, like, you know, flexing and, you know, all the other dumb stuff that idiots do when it comes to, like, buying jewelry and these extravagant things.
	Luxury.
	You know, you've been to my place.
	The nicest things I have is a studio.
	But other than that, man, like, my stuff is all relatively very low minimalist.
	You know, I don't believe in luxury items.
	As a matter of fact, I think luxury a lot of times is a scam.
	Luxury items, luxury cars.
	Luxury anything.
	Luxury fine dining.
	I think it's all a scam, to be honest with you.
	I know.
	I 1,000% agree.
	I just had my kid in Vegas for an event, and we're walking around and people spending stupid money on stupid things, and there's no value to this high-end, call it not jewelry, but design stuff.
	It is a big, fat waste of money, but it's just to show that you have the money.
	So you're 35 now, not married, no kids, right?
	No, not married, no kids.
	Nope.
	Is that on the horizon?
	I would say for sure in the future.
	I do think the nuclear family and kids are obviously the future.
	A lot of my political views, a lot of the times when I do say the things that I say, it's almost always based on preserving a good future for the kids.
	For example, a lot of my anti-trans and anti-open homosexuality worldviews, that comes from kids not having to see that.
	I don't think it's appropriate to have...
	But whether lesbian or men, people kissing out in public in front of kids, I think that's problematic.
	And for that matter, I don't like it when I see heterosexuals either doing public displays of affection.
	I think PDA is just inappropriate in general.
	But it's even worse when two gay guys are kissing.
	I mean, just to be honest, it's disgusting when gay guys kiss.
	Well, let me ask you the rhetorical question.
	How about when two attractive lesbian women kiss?
	Not as bad, but I still don't want kids seeing it.
	Well, see, I agree in the general rule about grotesque public displays of affection or just public displays of indecency.
	That being said, normal loving relationships.
	This is one thing where I don't have any of the problem that some people on what they call the right has with gay marriage.
	And I know there's a number of people who say a man and a woman is obviously the ideal circumstance.
	Does it mean that there's something sinful about the alternatives where if there are two functional, loving parents, be they both men or be they both women, that's still better than having a broken home or not having the kid to begin with?
	The question is this.
	Where is it, the slippery slope that you see or others see in terms of...
	I see in reality, people will say, well, it's gone from gay marriage to 2SLGBTQIA plus rights and transgender ideology and gender mutilation and gender mutilation on kids.
	Do you see that transition, pun intended, as necessary or evolution as necessary from supporting gay marriage or gay rights?
	So the question is, do you need to support the trans movement to support the gay rights movement?
	No, I guess the less convoluted way of asking it is, do you see as a necessary evolution from supporting gay rights and gay marriage the transgression into the 2SLGBTQIA trans movement?
	Do you see that as the inevitable outcome for supporting gay marriage?
	I think feminism started all these problems.
	Because feminism was the banner that brought all the other social justice topics to the fray.
	Whether it was, you know...
	General egalitarianism, gay rights, etc.
	It all came under the banner of feminism.
	But to go back to your specific question as far as do I think that supporting gay rights will inevitably lead to the alphabet community, I would say yes to a degree.
	But this is where I think, like me personally, I don't support...
	Gay marriage.
	And I'll explain what I mean.
	I'll break that down a little bit.
	I think gays should have the ability to have a civil union, but I think them being able to have a gay marriage is, well, number one, it bastardizes the sanctity of the institution, and it's a religious thing.
	And I'm not even a religious guy, but I still think that we need to have, if we're going to have religious institutions, they need to be protected.
	If gays want to be able to get the benefits and the rights of a marriage where they're getting the tax benefits and everything else like that, cool.
	But to call it a marriage, I think it bastardizes the movement or the sanctity of that union.
	So I think we should be giving them their own thing, but not necessarily under the umbrella of religion.
	So that's my take on it when it comes to gay marriage.
	Civil union is fine, but marriage, no.
	And then as far as supporting them, yes, I do think that, you know, if you support it to some degree fully, you're going to have to eventually get to the level of, you know, you're going to have to at least have the conversation about transgenderism and do you support it or whatever.
	And then some people say, I do support it, and then some people have common sense to say, no, this is problematic.
	But I do think that gay marriage was the slippery slope that brought us here when Obama kind of brought that into the fray roughly, what, 10 years ago now at this point?
	A little over 10 years ago?
	It is interesting because, again, you don't have to agree with the argument, but at least you have to make an attempt to understand it.
	In Quebec, we have something called civil union, and it's all of the legal recognition to same-sex couples, but you don't call it marriage.
	For people who think the definition of marriage is the holy union between a man and a woman, as per the Bible, I now appreciate how people are going to say, I'll give you all the rights in the world but not the word because of what the word means.
	And then you analogize that to them saying, recognize me as a transgender and call me a woman even though I'm not.
	And you say, I want the word, not just rights under the law.
	going even further back.
	Are you one of the people who would support repealing the 14th Amendment?
	The women right to vote.
	Oh, the 19th Amendment.
	Sorry, 14th is unlawful, what is it, unreasonable bail.
	I forget what the 14th is, but yeah, repealing the 19th.
	Are you someone who seriously believes in that?
	It's still impressive.
	You're Canadian and you
	I'm a firm believer in repealing the 19th Amendment.
	I don't think women should vote.
	I tie it mostly to the The draft, right?
	So in America, we have something called the Selective Service, where when you're 18 years old as a man, you have to register in.
	And if you don't, you know, you could deal with some serious consequences.
	You could get fined.
	You could go to jail.
	You won't be able to get a government job.
	You won't be able to get funding.
	It really impedes your ability to move in the United States.
	It's almost like being a convicted felon almost.
	So if you're not in the Selective Service as a man at 18 years old...
	There's going to be some problems, but women don't have to necessarily enroll in it.
	Now, I know some people might say, oh, well, Myron, you know, what's next time we're going to have a draft, right?
	You got to start being a little bit more realistic or whatever.
	Well, my thing is, I look at it like there needs to be skin in the game.
	Now, with that said, I do think that we should be having people take, you know, I think...
	Step one, you need to be in the civil service, and I think it should be men only.
	And then number two, I do think that we do have a lot of guys that are idiots that don't understand certain things.
	Maybe we need to put a test out there where they need to take this test, maybe a civil test or something like that, to give them the ability to vote.
	But in general, I don't think women should have the right to vote.
	And then there's a bunch of biological reasons as well.
	But just to keep it nice and simple, I think the Selective Service is a big reason why they shouldn't vote.
	I don't think them not having...
	I think the fact that they don't have skin in the game, yet they're able to elect the commander-in-chief that can send us to war, I think that's wild.
	And then let's be honest here, too.
	Women, a lot of times, are single-issue voters.
	They just want to vote for whoever's going to be able to let them kill babies, if we're going to be very candid here.
	The whole DNC, right, was based around abortion.
	Literally, it was based around abortion.
	And that's because that is a voting topic that they know women are going to be interested in, and they know that the Democrats are going to lean more towards.
	And that's really the only...
	The thing that they have on the left when it comes to getting voters is, you know, saying that we're going to let you go ahead and kill as many babies as you ladies want.
	And that's what they care about the most.
	How much flack do you take?
	I mean, I'll preface this by saying, again, don't agree with it only because I don't, you know, I say once you start getting into excluding demographics from voting and people are going to say to you, Myron, Especially as a son of Sudanese immigrants or as a black man in America, once upon a time,
	blacks weren't allowed to vote.
	And once you start excluding one demographic, well, then it's only going to be a matter of time before they take away your right to vote.
	And they'll say at least the criteria for your right to vote is rather arbitrary.
	Why not make it paying taxes?
	Then they have skin in the game type thing.
	But who gives you the most flack for this?
	Oh, man, everybody.
	You know, women obviously get very mad at me because I look at...
	When I say the things that I say a lot of the times, I do think that in a lot of cases, I had a tweet that went viral.
	I said that women need to go back to being second-class citizens.
	And what I mean by this is that we've given them so much power, so much privilege that...
	It's created problems, right?
	If we look at the birth rates being low, if we look at the problems that we have where they don't necessarily contribute to society to the same level where they're not necessarily in infrastructure jobs, they've completely taken over academia and led to the woke culture.
	A couple weeks ago, I was over at University of South Carolina, and I was talking about...
	I saw some of those highlights.
	I wouldn't do it.
	But it's even funny, even if you don't believe it, just to see the reactions of someone, an adult male, telling a woman to go back to the kitchen.
	They would call it crass juvenile insults and stupidity.
	The inability of people to laugh it off is what I find truly stunning about it.
	Sorry, now, please, go on.
	No, no, no worries.
	So, you know, I was having these debates and, you know, some of the stuff is, you know, just it's funny because, you know, people get so pissed off or whatever.
	But I truly do think that, you know, if we're going to run a great society, it's got to be a strict patriarchy.
	And all we've seen from, you know, female liberation and, you know, female sexualization and, you know, modernity in general and the growth of feminism is we've just seen the society kind of be degraded.
	You know, people sit there and say, oh, well, Myron, is it all the women, blah, blah?
	Well, look, I think when you put women in positions of leadership, a lot of the times it creates problems.
	You know, the society that we have now and a lot of the things that we enjoy was created by men, right?
	And a lot of times for women, by the way, if you look at like a lot of the inventions that allowed women to even enter the workforce, like sanitation tools, et cetera, like the tampon, whatever, all these things were made by men.
	So, you know, but...
	At some point, we also have to be able to say, okay, enough is enough.
	We need to push some of this stuff back because when women enter the workforce or when women are too involved, I think it creates a lot of problems.
	And then a big problem that I see is the over-sexualization of women and how it's been basically mainstream for women to be sex workers.
	That's a big problem, but that can only come in extreme times of feminism like we have now.
	So I think if we don't really start making some steps to reel some of this back in...
	We're going to have some serious problems.
	Now, this is not to fight and it's not to be antagonistic.
	Some people, you have to anticipate the arguments, are going to say what you do on your show with the...
	I don't know what the word is.
	What's the word for the ladies that come in after the late part of the show?
	Oh, it's called after hours.
	Okay.
	Some people are going to say that that's specifically contributing to the problem or at least exploiting of the problem.
	And so, you know, not speaking out of both sides of your mouth, but on the one hand, you're criticizing something while...
	Simultaneously capitalizing off of it.
	I'm really glad that you brought that up.
	So, okay.
	So the AFTRs, right?
	We actually keep numbers on all the girls that come on the show.
	Some girls are regular girls that have regular jobs.
	Some girls are OnlyFans girls, etc.
	Like the last show we had, we actually had a couple of college graduates.
	One of them was actually a master's graduate, right?
	So we do bring on a good amount of women that actually are educated that go to school.
	But what I've come to realize is, regardless of women's education levels or their intelligence or whatever, they still regress back to female traits, which is getting emotional when facts are presented, disliking certain worldviews, egalitarian mindset,
	thinking everybody is equal, the gross unawareness of meritocracies and hierarchies.
	It's actually fascinating to see how women, regardless of how educated they are, what their background is, etc., they're just not...
	Cognizant of these certain things that guys like me and you will understand immediately, like a meritocracy and hierarchies.
	Women don't understand this stuff.
	So when I'm having conversations with them about this, it's very difficult for them to understand.
	Now, that's one part.
	And then the other part, obviously, there are girls that come on that do OnlyFans or whatever.
	Now, I think it's important, right, to be able to engage with these individuals and show how their worldview is ridiculous.
	Now, you know, we all know.
	That people want to be entertained.
	So if you can entertain people while also teaching them, that's a fantastic way to build a great audience and also keep people retained onto the content.
	So now some of my critics might say, oh, well, you bring a lot of these thoughts on.
	Yeah, sometimes we do.
	That is true.
	But I think if we're bringing them on and we are challenging their worldview and showing how it's incorrect and a lot of these women are idiots.
	I think that does far more good than bad.
	There's been a few times where we've brought girls on where they thought about doing OnlyFans, or a girl watched this and thought about doing OnlyFans, and she saw the girls come on the show and how they behaved and how stupid they were, and she said, you know what, I don't want to do that, and she changed her mind.
	So we've been able to get girls to quit OnlyFans, stop doing it, or not go into sex work at all because they see...
	What ends up happening when they go into that world.
	Even if it's something like stripping, where you can relatively hide it and conceal that background.
	But girls have watched the show and said, you know what, I'm not going to do that.
	So I do think you have to engage with the opposition to some degree to show them how their worldview is wrong.
	And if people can watch that, I think it's a huge learning experience.
	You see, what I love about that is you didn't know I was going to ask that question.
	I didn't know I was going to ask that question.
	And there's nobody out there who could have listened to that answer.
	That's going to disagree with that answer.
	And just so I'm clear, I'll clarify for everybody.
	Thought is THOT, which stands for that hoe over there.
	You know what?
	I never knew what the acronym was, but now you taught me something.
	I didn't know that's what it stood for.
	I remember learning that.
	I was like, oh, I learned something new that is totally useless and totally stupid.
	I thought they were calling them thoughts because they had, I don't know, silly thoughts, but it was THOT.
	Okay, I mean, it's fascinating.
	It's very interesting whether people disagree with it or not.
	The issue about, well, they say, women becoming, as you put it, second-class citizens again.
	Is it not just a question of the freedom of choice?
	And if a woman wants to go and not have babies or be one of the lawyers, I literally knew a lawyer who broke her water at the office.
	If you want to be that, go ahead and be that.
	But is it not a question of just sensitizing people to traditional values of...
	Whether you like it or not, there are biological differences, physiological differences, brain differences, and historically women have occupied certain roles and men have occupied that of the warrior, whether that's a good thing or a bad thing.
	Is it about sensitizing them to it or trying to actually legislate it at some point in time?
	This is a good question.
	So my thing with this, and I say sunglasses, I'm being funny, right?
	But my thing is, I think we at least need to educate them and let them know, look.
	Go ahead and pursue your education.
	Go ahead and go to school.
	Sure.
	But understand that you are never going to get The same level of fulfillment as you will from a family.
	And I think the biggest thing is that we've lied to women.
	I think we need to start being very candid and honest with women and let them know, look, you want to go to school, you want to pursue a career, that's fine, but we're not going to sit here and lie and tell you, okay, you can have it all.
	You're going to get the family, you're going to get the money, you're going to get the career, you're going to be this badass lawyer and become partner and also have three loving children that want to be with you at all times and a husband.
	You're going to have to pick one.
	You're going to have to sacrifice.
	I think the biggest lie we've told women is that they can have it all.
	You know, the Sheryl Sandberg mantra of, you know, have your fun in your 20s and then in your 30s, go ahead, you'll find your dream man later on for you.
	And I would argue it's become even worse now because not only are we telling women to pursue their career, now we're telling them you can be a whore too.
	And there's going to be a guy waiting for you.
	It used to be before, hey, you could go and get your education and do what you want to do and find your guy at 30 years old.
	Now we're telling women, not only can you just go find your education, you can also have your fun and be a slut.
	And then your guy will be there as well.
	You can even do some OnlyFans.
	You can have a sugar daddy here or there.
	It's really bad how we're indoctrinating young women to kind of just tell them like, oh yeah, there's no consequences to your whoredom.
	I saw this in one of the...
	I don't know which episode it was.
	It might have been a clip where you said, you know, they become the sluts and the men who do this are the slut makers.
	And my initial reaction to that was, on the one hand, if you find something morally objectionable about being a slut, you would not find anything remotely proud in being the slut maker.
	You are partaking in...
	I'm not accusing you of it.
	I don't know what your sexual proclivities are and it's none of my business.
	But you would concede that it's...
	As immoral or potentially comparably immoral to both engage in that promiscuous behavior and be the male who turns the woman into that person living with that promiscuous behavior?
	Oh, no.
	So on this one, actually, I think for men, it's almost required nowadays.
	For women, no.
	So for men, when I say guys need to get out...
	So I have five things I tell guys I need to have in place before they decide to get married, especially in today's day and age.
	They got to be making six figures a year.
	Have six months to one year of savings, be in shape, 35 years old, and have had sex with 50 women.
	5-0.
	5-0.
	And I'll explain this.
	I know that's very shocking.
	A lot of the traditional conservatives get mad at me about this.
	Ben Shapiro did a whole video about this, about disagreeing with this.
	Now, the reason why I say this now, does it need to be an explicit 50?
	No.
	Doesn't need to be an explicit 50. But what I mean by this is it's not necessarily the number that matters as much as I want guys to get experience to deal with modern women.
	Now, I think it's very important that people understand that women, right, in today's day and age, the way women are now, especially women that are, like, being raised, right, women that are turning 18, 19, 20, 21 now, the girls that are desirable, I would say, right, because men look at women in a certain age group,
	they're growing up with a different set of rules than even...
	Just a generation past, the girls in my age group grew up with.
	They're growing up with an entire different worldview, different set of rules, etc.
	And I think men need to understand this and be keenly aware that the women that your mother told you about no longer exist, right?
	The nice girls that would save the virginity and not be whores or not be promiscuous, etc.
	That's effectively gone, right?
	I can't tell you how many times we brought girls on our show, you know, 18, 19 years old, and they already have 20 partners, right?
	This is where we are in society.
	Now, it's an ugly reality, but this is what feminism has done, this is what modernity has done, and this is what, you know, society has basically done, where we've told women that they could be like men.
	And if guys don't understand how modern women are, what's going to happen is...
	He's going to play by a set of rules.
	Let's say we take a religious guy, right?
	A religious guy that goes to church and he believes that I'm not going to have sex until marriage or whatever.
	That's great.
	That's noble.
	I respect that.
	But here's the problem.
	The woman that he ends up getting with or potentially marrying, right?
	She might go ahead and have been a 304, but decides to change her life around, doesn't tell him about it.
	He doesn't know.
	He can't look at the...
	A 304?
	Is a whore.
	Okay.
	Yeah, because if you put it in a graphing calculator, 304, it says ho.
	Okay.
	Okay, well, now I learned something.
	All right.
	I know boobies on the calculator.
	8-0-0-1-3-5 or something, whatever.
	Oh, yeah.
	Yeah, I see that too.
	Okay, so interesting.
	So he doesn't know, right?
	So he won't know these things.
	So what ends up happening is he gets with this girl, right?
	And he doesn't know about her past because he wasn't able to pick up on the red flags.
	He thinks that she was, you know, a girl that was saved by God and then winds up happening.
	You know, she reserves the right to always go back to herself, to what she used to be.
	I'll use an example.
	Look at Stephen Crowder.
	He had this wife, right, who was a devout Christian.
	And what did she do?
	She regressed back to the feminist ideals and tried to destroy his name in the process.
	And this is what I need guys to kind of understand is that regardless of how religious you are, regardless of how religious you think your wife is, women always reserve the right to use the feminist route to absolutely destroy her life.
	So I want guys to not just be...
	Red-pilled from a religious perspective, but I need you to be red-pilled from a female perspective and be able to identify these women early on in the relationship so you don't commit to these types of women and then put yourself in a bad spot because men take on far more risk when they get married nowadays, especially if they're the breadwinner than women do.
	So this is why I want guys.
	To ensure that they're able to identify and detect these types of women so that they don't commit to them.
	And you do that through sexual experience, unfortunately.
	Now, I wish we could go back to a day where both parties are virgins, they get married on their wedding night, and it's beautiful.
	But thanks to us being in what I call a deregulated sexual marketplace where women are the ones kind of choosing who fucks and who doesn't, this is kind of how we adapt to the new normal.
	Well, okay, I think four of your five points I think we all agree with and they're actually very good.
	I think...
	This is one of two things.
	It's either the man whores trying to justify their man whoredness, like I get to have my addiction while judging others for theirs, or flip side, it's just, okay, well, now I'm going to break myself because society's broken instead of just looking for that person who is not a 20-person...
	That, Myron, and putting your wee-wee in that many different people, you're going to find something that you don't want to discover, and that's going to be an STD at some point.
	I don't care how many condoms you use.
	So we'll agree to disagree on the number of 50. That, I think, breaks a man and makes it incapable to actually settle down, but I don't know that from experience, so maybe I'm totally wrong.
	Okay.
	Yeah, we don't have to agree with it if you don't want to.
	Like I said, my thing is it's more from a perspective of the guy being able to identify women that are worthy of committing to versus women that aren't, because my fear is that I don't want a guy, because here's the problem, right?
	When guys get laid, right, they end up making really bad decisions a lot of the times, and they might forego.
	Identifying red flags for sexual access.
	So they'll be like, oh, this girl's really hot.
	Wait, she has this really weird habit, but you know what?
	I just want to get laid.
	And they'll totally ignore red flags or blaring things that are potentially going to be problematic later on.
	They see the smoke, but they say, you know what?
	There's no fire.
	I'll be fine.
	And since men's need to mate and get sexual access is so powerful, they'll totally ignore that.
	A month?
	Years?
	And then when it does become a problem, it's too late.
	So I just want guys to be able to think with this head up top versus the head down there, and when guys are less sexually experienced, they're more likely to make really bad decisions from a mating standpoint with a woman that, quite frankly, never deserved an affair.
	Yeah, but you have sex with 50 different women.
	One of them, or at least two of them, are going to be psychotic, and you're going to have some big problems there as well in terms of having dip the company ink.
	That's why she's recreational use only, and now you know never to deal with girls like that.
	The other thing is this.
	You're right that I haven't dated since 1999, and I can't imagine what it's like today.
	What is it like?
	Where do you go to meet people?
	When I was a kid, we used to rock climb.
	We used to go to the rock climbing gym, biking, dog runs.
	Like, where do people meet these days?
	And what's it like trying to have a relationship?
	Yeah, no, it's really bad, man.
	So, basically, okay, so, and I've talked about this in detail, so I'll go through this.
	So, like, as technology has gotten better, right, and the internet has become a thing, what's ended up happening now, because you said you haven't dated since 1990, so...
	In the 1990s, women had to go outside, right, to find a man.
	They had to put effort into the way they dressed, the way they looked.
	They had to put themselves out there.
	They had to have real interactions.
	They had to be able to communicate with an individual, right?
	But make themselves available.
	Now, thanks to the internet, namely Instagram and dating apps especially, what's ended up happening where women are now able to basically have their pictures on the internet, have their Instagram profiles there, and men just approach them via the internet.
	Now, when it comes to Instagram and social media, What this has effectively done is a woman's phone is now like a box of cocks.
	They open up their phone and they got a bunch of dudes offering them all types of offers, whether it's I'll fly to Dubai, I'll give you money here, I'll be your sugar daddy, I'll simp on you, whatever.
	So what this has done is it's made women, a lot of the times, infucking sufferable.
	Entitled, rude, obnoxious, and stupid.
	Because they haven't had the...
	The need to prove themselves to be a good girlfriend, to be a good wife, or whatever.
	So what ends up happening is you have an entire generation of extremely entitled brats that now exist out in society.
	They're dumber.
	They're less intelligent.
	They're not interesting.
	They don't have any hobbies.
	And quite frankly, they think that they're better than a lot of guys.
	Any young man that's watching this right now probably knows what I'm talking about, where if you take an average woman...
	She thinks she is more important than an average man.
	She thinks I deserve a guy.
	I'm a five, even though she's going to look at herself as a nine or a ten.
	She's going to think I deserve a nine or a ten.
	And it's because of the internet and it's because of this constant attention that they get where no matter what, they just open up their phone and someone is hitting them up.
	Now, the problem with this is that since all the women think that they're tens, they all think that they're entitled to the top tier guys.
	And what's happening is the top tier guys.
	All the women are chasing them, so what ends up happening is these guys never settle.
	Meanwhile, the regular guys that maybe 20, 30 years ago that would have been able to get a good monogamous relationship, these guys are getting ghosted.
	These guys are struggling.
	These guys are having a very hard time finding girlfriends.
	So what ends up happening now is the marriage rates are plummeting.
	The divorce rates are skyrocketing.
	Women don't find a majority of men as attractive because women's needs have shifted because while this very...
	While this pernicious activity has been going on with the social media and women getting their fucking egos lit on this side, what also has been going on is women are becoming more educated.
	So not only are they getting it from the validation with the internet, now they're becoming more educated, they're making more money.
	We all know, thanks to hypergamy, when women make money and rise up the socioeconomic status, they want a guy that's better than them, if not at least bare minimum on their level.
	But on average, they want a guy making about 56% more money than they do.
	Are their egos out the fucking wooza because of the internet?
	Now their standards are going up alongside it.
	So what ends up happening is virtually no guy qualifies for a lot of these girls.
	And what ends up happening is when women are in their peak, in their 20s, etc., they don't want these guys.
	They want to go ahead and just kind of play the field, be single.
	If they do have a guy, they think that they could do better.
	And this was kind of led to this hookup culture that we have now and this situation where so many women are complaining and saying that they can't find a guy, they can't find a guy, not knowing that the reality is the reason why they can't find a guy is their standards are too goddamn high.
	But they don't want to hear that because women think that they're special and they all think that they're 11 out of 10s.
	So you have multiple things going on socially and culturally that have kind of led to this degradation of the relationships and it's because of the internet.
	Social media, dating apps, women being educated, women entering the workforce, etc.
	That's led to this overall degradation.
	And why so many guys are struggling now versus 20, 30 years ago where we saw more relationships.
	Well, I can't say that I didn't picture myself in there in terms of an average man today who would have gotten totally ghosted.
	And when I met my wife, we were at a house party.
	Of course, I met her when she was 17 and I was 19. So she had not yet met any better if there is.
	It is wild that you met, you know.
	The internet thing in terms of just having every axis on Earth and just flipping through and the right swipe or the left, I forget which one is which way.
	I wouldn't want to be dating today, but I mean, what is your...
	It's going to be a stupid question.
	What's your advice to men then?
	You give them the good advice, the four or the five points.
	Get a good, decent job.
	Get some decent savings.
	Be in shape.
	What was the fourth one that I agreed with?
	Exercise?
	Six digits?
	Yeah, so have a good amount of savings, like six months to one year of savings.
	Obviously, be in shape, go to the gym, you got to train.
	35 results, you have a little bit, you know, you're a bit more worldly, you understand things.
	Yeah, that was good.
	So, stuff like that.
	So, but yeah, I mean, that's just like entry level, just to be in a position where you'll be attractive to a good amount of women, where you can be in an authority position, because women, a lot of them make their own money, a lot of them are successful, a lot of them are educated.
	And then a lot of them, just to be honest, are very arrogant and cocky.
	Like, you know, they'll never admit this, but the reason why I speak about this in such a, in the manner that I do, because a lot of people might be watching, like, Myron, not all women think this way, blah, blah, blah.
	No, a lot of them do.
	And the thing is, is that they'll sit there and they'll try to play the humble card or whatever, but the reality is, their main practice is tell you guys everything you need to know.
	When women sit there and they say, oh, you know, I'm very picky or blah, blah, blah, that's based 100% on where they view themselves.
	I think guys need to understand, when a woman has high standards and says, I'm picky, blah, blah, blah, She's doing that based off of what she thinks she deserves.
	So that is a very easy way to see where a woman sees herself in the sexual marketplace.
	And most women have an overinflated sense of self-worth to the 10th degree.
	They'll be there and they'll say, I'm a 9 out of 10, I'm a 10 out of 10, I'm perfect.
	And they'll want a guy on their level, if not more.
	But the only reason why they believe that is because we live in this very kiss woman's ass, they are the prize, you know, gyneocracy.
	And guys need to wake up and understand that this is the world that we're in.
	And the only way that you're going to be able to really compete is, number one, you need to have your stuff together.
	Number two, you need to be able to kick her ego down a little bit and remind her that she's inferior to you.
	And then number three, be able to adapt to the new normal, which is a sexual marketplace that women, quite frankly, control.
	Well, you say kick her down to let her know that she's inferior to you.
	I think I know what you mean by it, but explain that to the people who are going to melt because they heard that.
	Yeah, so the key is you need to, the thing, okay, so this is why, so women will sit there and say, I want an equal partner.
	But that's not true.
	They don't want an equal partner.
	They want a superior.
	They want a guy that's better than them in every regard.
	They'll sit there and say, I want a partner or whatever.
	But if you actually end up becoming that partner, she's going to lose respect for you because being a partner infers equality.
	And that's something that women actually find reprehensible despite the fact that they try to sit there and say that they want an equal partner.
	They want a superior.
	They want a leader.
	They want to dominate, etc.
	And a perfect example of this is if you watch, if you...
	Look at the books they read.
	The books that women read, romantic novels, nine out of ten times what they're actually aroused by.
	Fifty Shades of Grey and these other romantic novels, it catalogs a man who is the dominant versus the woman being the submissive.
	This is what women are actually aroused by and super attracted to despite the fact they don't want to admit this because for them admitting this, it would basically infer that they're inferior, which they fucking are.
	And if you actually treat them like that, they're going to have far more respect for you.
	So that's number one is understanding that That they don't want a guy that's equal to them.
	And not only do you have to be better than them in every regard, you gotta be better than them strength-wise.
	You gotta be smarter than them.
	You gotta be taller than them.
	You gotta be fitter than them.
	You need to be able to basically be almost like in a mentor status.
	And I know a lot of people say, well, I don't want that, Myron.
	That seems like a lot of work.
	Well, guess what?
	That's what it takes nowadays to keep women.
	Truly attracted and aroused by you and be in a position where you always have the frame and you're the leader in the relationship and you're the boss because that's how women want it.
	Now, they'll never admit this for obvious reasons because it shows their female nature, shows how unfair they are and, you know, obviously they fought through feminism the past several decades to get equality.
	But the problem is that, as with everything, they imply the equality but they don't really want it.
	They just want the ability to be able to have the opportunity but they still want a guy that's better than them in every regard.
	And I think guys need to really...
	You know, take this and understand that this is the new normal, right?
	What they say versus what they respond to are two different things.
	And I know for a lot of guys like, oh my God, I can't believe this.
	This guy's radical.
	This guy's a misogynist, blah, blah, blah.
	This is the way it's always been.
	Women never wanted equals.
	They never did.
	The only reason, right, women fight for equality and egalitarianism and feminism, the only reason they fought for that...
	Well, so that they don't have to be with equals.
	I'm going to say that again.
	The only reason women have fought through feminism, egalitarianism, everything else like that, is so that they don't have to saddle themselves up with someone that is equal.
	They would rather work for their own stuff and be by themselves, right?
	And do everything by themselves than be with a man that they see as equal, okay?
	That's what they actually fought for, the feminism.
	So they don't have to saddle themselves up with a fucking loser.
	Now, if you're a winner, they will gladly throw all that feminism stuff by the wayside and be your woman, but they need you to be superior to them in order for them to do that.
	That's the truth with feminism.
	It was to get rid of the normal guys and remove them from the sexual marketplace so they don't have to saddle themselves up with that guy.
	They'd rather go to college and take on...
	Hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt, stress, work for someone that doesn't care about them, and put themselves in an early grave so they don't have to be with an average guy.
	That's how much women hate average men.
	It is.
	When you mention, like, women being, or people being picky, and, you know, when you say it like that, and I view that as sort of, like, a transactional view of human relationships.
	Like, how tall, how, you know, how strong, whatever.
	As opposed to just viewing the human.
	But the idea, what you're describing sounds a little bit like the innate desires of what made women, women and men, men throughout history versus the feminist promise, which is they want to be the, if you say the alpha of the relationships where it doesn't work when someone actually
	has to carry the babies and raise the babies.
	And that subconsciously they want something that they haven't been promised.
	They were told was the opposite by the modern feminist movement.
	If we can put it in more politically palatable terms.
	Yeah, um...
	You know, and I'm sorry about that.
	I was getting my guy to help me with some stuff.
	Because for some odd reason, I was supposed to be streaming this on YouTube, but it's only on Rumble.
	Yeah, no.
	So basically, the whole feminist movement, etc., a big part of it was to allow women, right, the same opportunities as men.
	Because this is what feminism really is about, right?
	Women want the ability to be able to do what men do, but at the same time be able to get off.
	That what I call the masculine journey whenever they feel like.
	Okay, you know what?
	I'm tired of working.
	That sucks.
	I just want a guy to take care of me now.
	And they can go ahead and kind of just get off that career trajectory and then have a man take care of them.
	Because regardless of a woman's success level, no matter how masculine she is or whatever, she still wants a man that can provide for her or get married and have kids one day.
	Almost always.
	So they want to be able to just be able to reserve that right to get off the totem pole whenever it suits them.
	It's funny.
	I was coming into this thinking like, oh, if I have a zinger, if I'm going to finally ask the question that I've always been wondering, is why the men in the, call it the manosphere, I don't know if that's a demeaning word, or they tend to be single without kids.
	And I've asked you, not as a judgmental question, men have a lot more time to do it, but I'm thinking like, okay, in the manosphere, the big names, Myron Gaines, you got the Tate brothers, you got, you have to give me another name.
	The ones that I've noticed...
	Rolo Tomasi, myself, you know, there's a bunch of us there.
	Yeah, you got guys like Donovan Sharp, Rolo Tomasi, myself, Andrew Tate, his brother.
	I'm not wrong.
	All unmarried and with no kids, right?
	Well, Andrew has a bunch of kids.
	He's talked about that.
	Tristan, too.
	Rolo has a wife.
	He's married.
	They don't have the traditional kids with different women is not going to be exactly what I guess they would.
	Rolo has a traditional family.
	Rolo does.
	Well, my question was going to be, like, why some of the younger, and I'm saying younger compared to me, don't have that traditional system?
	And now, when you describe this reality with which I am totally unfamiliar, I look at my wife and I, like, we got married after dating for eight years, monogamous dating relationship, kids and everything.
	And, like, maybe it's just not possible anymore in this day and age of dating and marriage and political expectations.
	I don't know.
	Is it simply not possible what I thought was pretty standard traditional stuff?
	From the late 90s, early 2000s, not feasible anymore.
	You know, that's a good question.
	I think we're at a point now where regular guys are going to have to work a lot harder because, unfortunately, thanks to the internet and thanks to how we've kind of what I call like a globalized sexual marketplace, it's made it where...
	It truly is far more competitive, right?
	A regular guy would have been able to, you know, find a girl before, right, in the golden era in the 50s, right?
	You could just have a factory job.
	You'd get a wife that was going to be submissive to you.
	She probably wasn't a 304.
	And you'd be fine, right?
	You could have your two family.
	You can have your two, three kids, your dog, white picket fence, the American dream.
	But I think nowadays, being an average guy and being able to find an attractive woman and be able to get her to submit to you, because it's not just about getting the woman anymore.
	Now it's about getting her where She's going to be in a position where she feels as though she wants to submit to you because, keep in mind, we've made it where we've socialized and we've made it completely socially acceptable for women to talk back to men.
	We've made it socially acceptable for women to be rude to men.
	We've made it socially acceptable for women to leave men if they're not happy.
	I say this saying all the time.
	Women will destroy their family if they're not happy.
	Men will destroy themselves for their family to be happy.
	So we live in this very You know, we call it a gynocentric social order where if the woman's not happy, happy wife, happy life.
	Like all these, like our entitled society is framed around female happiness and her being satisfied.
	So we have all these different institutions set up for women's benefit.
	So guys need to kind of go into this with their eyes wide open and understand that, hey, if you get married or, hey, you get in a long-term relationship or, hey, just the courtship process now.
	It's changed a lot.
	Now, luckily, you met your wife when you were young.
	You guys met in the 90s.
	You guys met in a time where social media was not a pernicious social thing that we have nowadays that's literally destroying our young women.
	But it's going to be a lot harder for the young guys because I don't think, you know, like even myself, like I have to get a lot of this stuff from looking at the internet, talking to my younger people.
	But social media has absolutely corrupted both men and women, both young men and young women.
	That much I can understand, especially the pornography side of it.
	We grew up and kids, we had access to nudie magazines and you'd have to go to a store and ask for the top shelf or go into the movie store and go behind the beaded things if you wanted to catch a glimpse.
	And now it's like the most hardcore at your fingertips.
	I can't imagine what that does to kids and we're going to have to figure this out because we've got three kids of our own.
	Yeah, totally ubiquitous.
	It's wild, right?
	Like, it used to be very hard to access.
	Now it's, I mean, thankfully, they got rid of it in Florida where you have to log in and show your age, which is good.
	But yeah, man, I mean, this is, like, all of the ubiquity of pornography, social media, etc., like, all of this has been extremely destructive, and I think it's going to have some serious consequences for the next generation.
	This is the question I had to ask.
	When you said, you know, like...
	I mean, I do believe...
	And I can only think of like the most extreme religious societies, which are not, you know, which I wouldn't want to emulate either.
	So there is something of a middle ground in there where, I mean, I do believe, so
	Spouses should talk back to each other, but they should fight in private, not in public.
	And I definitely understand the idea of the emasculating thing that goes on with being slapped by a woman, and that becomes somehow cute and acceptable, but God forbid the roles are reversed and it becomes quite literally criminal spousal abuse.
	I don't know what the middle ground is.
	When I say talk back, I mean as in, I'm not saying like, oh yeah, you know, Sean Connery, your girl.
	No, what I'm saying is that.
	And for those who don't know, Sean Connery talked about slapping a woman if she was rude to him.
	Yeah, yeah.
	So, no, what I mean by that is, like, she's constantly challenging your authority.
	Like, you say, hey, this is going to be the final decision, and she doesn't respect that, right?
	Because, you know, I think any relationship dynamic, the man needs to be the final decision maker.
	I'm not saying don't listen to what your girl has to say or to what your woman has to say.
	Obviously, her opinion matters.
	And what's going on, but you need to be the final decision maker.
	But when you make these final decisions or when you say something, she's constantly challenging your authority.
	And I say that because we live in a society now where it's amazing to me how many times I ask a woman, hey, what do you think men want?
	And she says, like girls literally think that challenging their guy or making him better through challenging him is something that men want.
	And it's actually alarming how many young women think that this is something that men find attractive.
	And it's like...
	No, that's not what we find attractive whatsoever.
	But they've been indoctrinated through feminism, through mainstream media, to think challenging their man is something that men want.
	No.
	The last thing a guy wants to do is work all day, challenge the world, then come home and have his wife challenge him.
	That's completely antithetical.
	But young women think that this is attractive.
	So that's what I mean by that.
	And I just happened to flip over to the Rumble and look at one chat.
	It just stuck up right now.
	It says, Christine Anderson, this guy's a real jerk.
	He hates women and thinks we are useless.
	I know what your response is going to be, but let me hear it.
	Yeah, so the majority, the reality is the majority of women are useless.
	And they don't like to hear that.
	But, you know, a big reason why so many women are useless is because they've never had to be useful, if we're going to be honest here.
	Because a lot of women, right?
	You know, especially if they're attractive, they just get everything given to them.
	Like, let's be very candid here.
	A man's life is significantly harder than a woman's life in every regard, right?
	Men have to earn their value, women don't.
	Now, if women do want to work hard and become successful, absolutely, there's a bunch of women out there that are extremely hardworking, right?
	I could give my sister as an example, but that's far and few between.
	Most women prefer not to enter the workforce or work a super hard job or have to go through ridiculous levels of education to reach that job.
	And if they do actually go through, they end up quitting or backing out because the reality is there's no real proclivity.
	For women to earn an abundance of money or resources because their sexual market value is not determined by that.
	A man is far more likely to work hard because if we don't work hard, we don't get laid.
	We don't get sexual access.
	We can't procreate.
	But for a woman, if she decides, I don't want to work hard, that's not going to affect her ability to find a suitor.
	And in many cases, it'll probably make it easier for her to find a suitor when she's not too successful.
	So when I say these things...
	Women get angry, but the reality is that there's a significant burden of performance on men versus women.
	The funny thing is, it's only the focus on sex that I think would piss some people off.
	This is pretty decent advice for everybody, is make yourself useful and don't rely on superficial elements of your being in order to get what you want.
	I'm not one of them, but I've seen plenty of men who are so good-looking, it's actually been a curse in their life.
	They get things that they don't necessarily have to work for or deserve and also become something of, like, people look at them and they don't see someone who worked hard and did whatever.
	They just see someone, like, painfully good-looking, chiseled and whatever.
	So, I mean, I think this applies to everybody, but materializes...
	Quick, I'll tell you, Viva.
	So notice how people get offended when I speak in generalities.
	This is something also that's a unique phenomenon that I see only with women.
	When I speak in generalities with men, no one bats an eye.
	If I were to say, yeah, most men are complete idiots and buffoons, no one in the chat would get angry at me for me saying that.
	They'd be like, yeah, a lot of guys are fucking idiots.
	I agree with you on that.
	But if I say most women are retards, whoa, what the hell?
	Like, women have an inability to understand that the world operates on generalizations and they will get offended and they will go ahead and make an argument for the exception to the rule.
	Well, I'm not an idiot.
	I'm smart.
	I have a 4.0 GPA.
	Even though the whole education system is literally...
	You know, made for women to be better slaves because they tell you to sit there and follow instructions.
	So, of course, little girls do better.
	That's a whole other conversation.
	The whole education system is scammed on women.
	But the point I'm trying to make is, like, men...
	When I talk in generalities, no problem, no one's going to bat an eye.
	Even if I say something bad about men.
	But when I speak in generalities about women and I say something negative, they get extremely offended and they're unable to think of things from a rationally sound, logically sound perspective and they get angry and offended and they get mad at me.
	It's a phenomenon that only women have this thing.
	Well, you might be right on a broader scale, but if you generalize about other demographics...
	I think you'll find those demographics or those broad groups will get angry at the generalizations and we're probably going to get there in one second.
	But just the thing about you said about school being designed for girls and any girl or anybody who's saying that's a sexist thing.
	We've got three kids, one boy.
	And we're homeschooling the boy now because school is quite clearly not made or at least today's schools are not made to deal with rambunctious boys because they are...
	I don't care what anybody says.
	Physiologically, psychologically different.
	And not necessarily better.
	Boys, I think, are bigger idiots for a longer period of time than girls.
	They don't sit still.
	And they're not just harder to deal with.
	They're more destructive also because they're like strong primates compared to girls that don't break shit all the time.
	And the teachers who happen to be at school happen to be young females by and large, like 90 some odd percent, who can't deal with young boys.
	It either leads to the emasculation of young boys, or the medication of young boys, or I should say the prescription of medication to young boys, or what we did, pull them out and we'll do it ourselves, despite it making us both go freaking crazy.
	It's a thousand percent true, or at least accurate.
	But it's funny, Myron.
	I can see people not liking the delivery, not liking some of the rhetoric, but...
	Yeah.
	It's very tough to disagree with thousands of years of human nature.
	This is what religion was predicated on.
	This is what the nuclear family was predicated on.
	And whether or not there are exceptions to the rule that, by and large, there's plenty of nuclear families where there's abuse and broken marriages and unhappiness.
	But you're talking about odds over a longer period of time.
	In poker, you know, an amateur can win every now and again, but over the life of years, the professionals will win just because all the odds tend to flip in their favor over a period of time.
	But what is the...
	I'm just saying what we all say in a locker room anyway, and also the other thing you were saying, right?
	Like, I find it interesting, right?
	If you look at ancient Islam, biblical times, etc., there was no cell phones.
	There was no...
	You know, emails.
	There was no text messaging.
	How is it that all these different ancient civilizations understood that men need to be in leadership roles in order for the civilization to progress, right?
	Like, whether it was Asian, Indians...
	Native Americans, whatever, they all were patriarchies and understood that men need to be at the helm for us to be able to progress as a society.
	And then even to this day, it wasn't until we have all this technology and all this modernity that now that we've pretty much civilized the world to an incredible degree, that we let women have some kind of power.
	And they still fuck shit up.
	So my thing is, I'm just saying the truth that quite frankly, when it comes to leading a society, prosperity, etc., men need to be at the helm.
	And if they don't, we're going to end up with women at the helm and that's going to lead us to problems.
	Let's be honest, man.
	Women suck at everything when it comes to competing with men.
	Men are better than women at every single endeavor when you actually compare the two genders.
	And for all the women that are probably losing their minds watching the stream right now, it's like, that's not true.
	We have kids.
	Well, you need us to have kids, you dumb bimbo.
	So the reality is, in every regard where humans can compete, you put a man against a woman, we are better than them.
	I'm trying to think now, because sports, it's an easy one, except they'll say gymnastics, women perform better than men.
	I was going to make the joke that there haven't been very many warrior societies that were led by women because I presume they would have been decimated by the other warriors that had the Maoris as their warriors and whatever.
	Okay, let me try to...
	There's nothing wrong telling you.
	We're better than...
	I'm going to feign outrage at what you just said.
	It's terrible.
	There have been very many good female chess players.
	There's been very many good...
	I can only think in sports.
	Literature, there have been some great thinkers.
	So, I mean, the question's going to be, you mean just by numbers, proportions, statistics?
	And then the argument's going to be, well, that was only because, you know, the A and Rands of the world had to break through the patriarchy.
	There are just as many great philosopher women as there were men, but men kept them down.
	That's going to be the retort.
	Yeah, they always say that.
	But then I say, well, women have more privilege and rights now than ever before, and they still, like, with affirmative action, they still can't beat men out.
	Well, excuse me.
	In the hip-hop industry, I'll say the women are doing very well with Cardi B. In the music industry, what's her face?
	Lady Gaga just went to space.
	No, it is interesting because people will say, you're wrong, there have been a great many female thinkers.
	And then you're going to say yes, but then statistically, you know, the ancient Greeks were by and large men.
	The argument's going to be, well, that's because the men prevented the women from reaching the tops, or they built their knowledge base off the backs of women.
	And then it's just going to be a question of statistics, and then it's going to be a self-fulfilling prophecy.
	Did the women not attain those peaks of intellect and physique because they were forced to raise families, or because they chose to raise families?
	And then is it a natural order of things to have that differentiation between the sexes?
	We're going to have to mull that over.
	The 43 correct part of me wants to get mad at you for what you just said, but now I'm going to have to actually think about it for a second.
	Yeah, because even when you think about it, right?
	Because women now, right, over the past, what, 60, 80 years, right, thanks to feminism, they pretty much have had all the same rights and privileges as men.
	Why do they still not dominate STEM?
	Why do they still not dominate infrastructure jobs?
	Why do they still not dominate certain fields where they can make quite a bit of impact?
	And the reality comes down to men and women are simply just different and women aren't interested in a lot of the things that men are interested that just tend to lead to civilization growth.
	Women just aren't interested in this stuff.
	I'm trying to think of STEM, industry, anything that's not based on strength as a general requirement.
	So take out athletics, take out oil rigging.
	I am trying to think of endeavors that are purely intellectual and then whether or not you reach something of a parity.
	But then you get into things like STEM engineering, which is purely intellectual.
	There's nothing physical required.
	And there'll be statistical over-representation at higher levels of men, I think, but statistical over-representation of women in education.
	And so what happens is they're filtered out for whatever the reasons.
	Is it because the brain is different or because they realize, yeah, you can't have a family and do this?
	But I don't think you can disagree with the stats overall.
	I'll be honest.
	I think women are just lazier than men in a lot of regards.
	And I'll explain what I mean by this, right?
	So I can't tell you how many times, right?
	I've met a guy.
	He had to sacrifice.
	And this is anecdotal, but I'll go somewhere further with this.
	Men will sacrifice a dream because they understand them.
	I can't be a musician and make a bunch of money.
	It's not going to happen.
	I got to go ahead and do a job that I hate doing because there's a burning performance on me to get out there and make money.
	I got to become an engineer because my family told me I need to do this or else whatever, right?
	They'll sacrifice doing what they do.
	But women, right?
	They'll go ahead and they'll also kind of sacrifice.
	Okay, my family told me I got to be a pharmacist because I can't be a singer.
	Whatever.
	But they're far more likely to quit.
	That job and pursue what they want to do or find a man that will allow them to take care of, you know, the provisioning and stuff, and then they'll go ahead and pursue their dream.
	So in other words, like, women have a backdoor that they can escape out a lot of the times where they don't necessarily have to be the provider.
	But for men, it's like, if you don't provide, you're not going to get sexual access, no one's going to respect you, etc.
	So we have to work.
	Women don't, right?
	That's the difference.
	I can't tell you how many times girls will have a degree, right, in a certain field.
	And they'll just quit.
	They'll say, I don't want to do it.
	And they just want to do it because they don't need to.
	Versus the guy, he doesn't want to do it, but he still has to get up every day and do it.
	There's a logical problem here is that on the one hand, you're saying that women should be the homemakers and not endeavor to do what the men do and become senior partner at law firms.
	Unless you're suggesting they're not quitting to raise a family, they're just quitting because they're lazy and not actually doing the other part of what you think that they should be doing is the natural order of things, which is...
	Yeah, I mean, it depends, right?
	So, you know, they might not see it through for different reasons.
	Maybe she wants to pursue something else.
	Maybe she wants to pursue a family.
	But the point I'm trying to make is that they always have that luxury of where if they could find a guy to take care of the provisioning side, and then they can focus on what they really want to do.
	Versus for us, we can't do that, right?
	Like, we have to, you know, I can't tell you many times, guys.
	You know, give up on their dreams or stop doing what they wanna do or don't pursue what they wanna do because it's just simply not gonna make enough money for them.
	And they understand that they gotta live in reality and earn money.
	Versus for women, they can go ahead and quit doing what they're doing or find a man to take care of them so they can pursue their dream and do what they wanna do.
	So with us, we're very rigid in our opportunities.
	Versus for them, they have a bunch of opportunities, right?
	And that's because, you know, women are the privileged gender.
	And my thing is people get mad at me for acknowledging this.
	And saying it out loud.
	They say, oh, well, that's sexist.
	Well, reality is sexist.
	I argue that sexism only benefits women.
	I really can't think of how sexism benefits men.
	The only way I could think of that sexism benefits men is like men are basically able to have sex with multiple partners without being judged.
	But maybe if you want to use that as an example.
	But in general, sexism wildly benefits women over men.
	Some would actually disagree now that I thought about a little bit more that the women that do dominate.
	Tend to also be men.
	I'm thinking of...
	That's the bada-bing, bada-boom joke.
	Myron, well, some people are going to say that the reason why you're not getting married is because you're not going to find a woman who's not going to be offended by what you're saying.
	You know what's amazing?
	A lot of girls actually privately agree with me a lot and say, yeah, no, everything that you're saying is 100%.
	And they agree because a lot of women respect guys that can just say it like it is, right?
	They want a guy that isn't afraid of what they're going to say, can tell them that this is what it is.
	As much as women sit there and say they want an equal, they really don't, man.
	They want a guy that's superior to them that can look at them and be like...
	Yeah, be quiet.
	We're going to do this.
	Oh my God, that's so hot.
	He's just telling me what to do.
	Because it's such a foreign concept now of men just standing up to women.
	Like, so many guys are so scared to tell a woman to shut up because they want to get laid so bad.
	Like, oh my God, I can't say anything that she's not going to like because then I won't get laid.
	But it's like, if you could just simply tell a girl, like, you're dumb.
	We're not doing that.
	We're going to do this.
	Like, so many girls would respect you and find that attractive because so few guys can do it.
	Right now, I know there's a bunch of women probably in the chat right now that are mad.
	It's not just...
	Shut up, bitch.
	You love guys like me that can tell you to go in the kitchen and make a sandwich.
	Women want guys to tell them to go back in the kitchen.
	You know what?
	For all you guys are watching the stream right now, it's okay.
	I got y 'all.
	If you guys are watching this with a woman, hey, go get them a sandwich.
	If she doesn't get up and get you a sandwich right now, guys, you might need to rethink what you're doing.
	Some people are going to get wildly offended.
	I would say, first of all, if you can't hear what someone says and you don't like it, and you're going to get offended, you're a bit of a baby.
	I'm looking at you, Myron, and I'm saying, this would lead to a divorce in my family, not because I'm a beta male, but because, first of all, maybe it's a different time.
	Maybe I'm just fortunate that I don't actually disagree with my wife, or we don't disagree on meaningful things.
	We don't have to have these...
	Critical arguments on issues that would otherwise drive a wedge in people's marriages.
	When we moved to Florida, we both agreed.
	It might have taken some persuasion on my part, but not this type of force or psychological force.
	When the kid came out of school, we both agreed.
	We're in simpatico, but some people say, if I told my wife to go make me a sandwich, I'd get fucking divorced.
	Some people are going to say, that's why people do get divorced.
	It's not a question of being dominant and the man who could defend them, but being...
	Verbally abusive and psychologically abusive.
	But I know that maybe most of what you're saying is sort of tongue-in-cheek.
	And also, you've got to have a bit of a spicy delivery to catch people's attention.
	Yeah, the reality is, right, there's a reason why women want a guy who's stronger than them, taller than them, and can tell them certain things.
	And there's a reason why they love books like Fifty Shades of Grey.
	They want that dominant sort of man.
	I'm not telling you to be walking in the house all the time.
	Like, I'm not saying I do that.
	But what I am saying is that women are very aroused by and attracted to men that can put them in their place when they get out of place.
	Because let's be honest here.
	There's plenty of times where women will sit there and try to test you and, you know, try to disrespect you and see how you respond.
	Sometimes you just got to be able to tell her, shut up.
	Okay?
	I'm watching the game.
	Shut the fuck up.
	Go make a sandwich and be quiet.
	And she might, like, pout like, no, that's so mean.
	But deep down, she's like, damn, like, that is hot.
	This guy could tell me what it is.
	A big part of being a man is being able to identify when you need to do that, right?
	Like, it's obviously, you can't do it every day.
	You can't be Sean Connery.
	But at the same time, you also can be a wimp where you're scared to do it.
	You need to be able to wield that authority and be able to do it when you need to.
	Now, of course, there's going to be women in the chat that are going to get mad and be like, that's not true, blah, blah, blah.
	Because...
	These are unflattering realities about female nature because, you know, they've been fighting for decades to be treated as equal.
	So you get this guy on the podcast that comes in and tells you, like, yeah, they're actually aroused by you telling them to shut the hell up.
	They're not going to like that, right?
	But the truth is, if you're the right guy, they will like it.
	But that might be good, and I'm putting it in quotes, that might be good advice for having sex and, you know, short-term dating, but not for a marriage.
	Because I view marriage more like a corporation, and you're working with...
	The vice president type thing, although who's the president?
	I view it as a corporation in terms of the relationship.
	That might be good advice for dating, but not good advice for marriage.
	Time will tell, and success leaves clues.
	But Myron, if people are offended by this, let's get into the one that's really going to piss them off.
	Israel and the Jews, Myron.
	We have to get into this.
	Tongue in cheek, you got in trouble recently for...
	I think I gave you a bit of a hard time, and I'll explain it, but people say, at some point, the people who take a trajectory like you in terms of what you talk about on the internet, eventually you find yourself in the rabbit hole of the Jews are behind everything, question everything,
	even, you know, I say basic historical facts.
	Did you get into the most trouble for some of the things you said, not questioning the Holocaust, but rather questioning certain elements of the history of the Holocaust?
	How much flack did that get you into?
	And did that have anything to do with whether or not you were at risk in terms of going to England?
	Yeah, so my thing is, look...
	I think we've been lied to about a lot of things, right?
	Not just World War II.
	We've been lied to about 9-11.
	We've been lied to about the Iraq War.
	We've been lied to about the conflicts in the Middle East in general.
	We've been lied to about the USS Liberty.
	Hell, we've been lied to even about October 7th in many regards, right?
	And that's in modern-day society.
	And many worse, right?
	So I think the important thing here, the bottom line is, I think people need to be able to look at what's going on and be able to question things in a healthy manner.
	Obviously, you don't want to get into the whole, you know, conspiracy theory rabbit hole and go deep down in there and just, you know, become an autist.
	But I think people need to be able to critically think and look at everything with another set of fresh eyes and be able to, you know, assess what we've been told the truth about and what we've been lied about.
	Because, I mean, there is an absolute trend here.
	Where, you know, many big historical events we've been lied to about.
	That's the...
	And full disclosure, people can accuse me of whatever.
	I've had this discussion with people where, you know, the term Holocaust denial has taken on such a broad meaning now where people come in and say, well, you know, let's talk about the numbers, talk about the extent, and that's Holocaust denialism.
	And it's illegal in certain countries, and I've always said, like...
	You need people to be able to discuss this, because if you don't allow them to, on the one hand, it will legitimize their views in their mind, and it'll actually legitimize the conspiracy theories in the eyes of others.
	The question becomes, however...
	Censorship never works, right?
	And I think this is what Israel is kind of losing a lot of support here, where they're trying to censor people with these anti-Semitism laws.
	And all they're doing is making people think, oh, well, they're hiding something.
	Oh, they're lying.
	Like, censorship simply doesn't work.
	I mean, The Daily Wire tried it with Candace Owens.
	It's hurt them significantly, even to the point where Brett Cooper, when she left, they thought it was because of censorship, when in reality it wasn't.
	But that's how much people hate censorship.
	So to censor people and tell them, oh, you can't talk about XYZ, all it does is empowers them to want to talk about it more.
	I think this is something where, you know, they're losing quite a bit of support in the main arena in the information war for trying to censor people from talking about certain things.
	Well, no, but the question is censorship in terms of talking about it is one thing.
	The other issue is that there's always going to be an underbelly or a niche.
	And people are going to say, like, there's going to be in the markets of the world, there's going to be a market for people who want to make that argument that, you know, the calculation as to how many bodies could have been cremated in the Holocaust.
	You tap into certain niches and then the question becomes whether or not the discussion is one about free speech or commercial exploitation of the niches that you know will exist.
	And when does...
	I mean, when do you distinguish sincere questioning versus when it descends into potential niche?
	Like, I don't like the word grifting, and I'm not going to use it, but getting into a niche where you know there's going to be people who are going to be interested in hearing it despite the fact that it's...
	Either been debunked or that the only use in entertaining it is to entertain that niche, if that question was clear.
	Yeah, no, I think my thing is, I think, you know, I'm pretty much a free speech absolutist slash maximalist.
	I think all a conversation needs to be entertained.
	And even the conversation that might be looked at as like, you know, potentially being grifting, I think it needs to come in and then people should be able to challenge it if they do think that it's grifting.
	I think...
	All discussion, you know, as long as it doesn't lead to imminent violence, needs to be had, right?
	So these laws that are in place about, you know, the certain event, I call it the cookie monster event when I'm on YouTube.
	But like, you know, this discussion in general, I think it needs to be allowed and I think people need to be able to question it because whenever you forbid people from questioning things, you create a market for it and then you almost like give energy and power to the thing that you're trying to avoid.
	I think all conversation should be able to be had.
	So that way people can come in and question and they can go ahead and have a debate.
	Because my thing is, I like the arena of ideas where we're able to kind of come in and then go ahead, bring in the people that don't believe the World War II narrative.
	Bring them in and let them talk to the people that believe in the World War II narrative and let them have a debate.
	And I love those discussions because then, now, we're letting them have the discussion and then the people can decide.
	What do they believe in?
	What do they agree with?
	Because you're letting both parties debate each other, and then the people can decide.
	It's going to be a very...
	I don't know if it's politically incorrect.
	Parents are Sudanese.
	You're black.
	The question is this.
	I mean, say black as in physically black skin.
	Depends on who you're asking.
	Well, that's the question now.
	Do you view...
	Do you consider yourself to be part of what they refer to as African-American, Black America?
	Or do you consider yourself coming from a different demographic that doesn't necessarily see eye to eye with what they typically refer to as Black America?
	Yeah, so me personally, I consider myself Black, right?
	I grew up in the United States.
	I'm very familiar with Black culture.
	My skin is Black.
	When I check the little box, I put Black.
	But Black people, interestingly enough, And it's only this one demographic of idiots called FBAs, foundationally black Americans, who basically, for those that are unaware, thank God that you're not aware.
	But yeah, basically they're like descendants of slaves.
	They look at me and say, you're not one of us because I'm not a descendant of a slave.
	And they consider anyone, for that matter, that is a descendant of a slave as not black.
	If you're Jamaican, if you're Haitian, if you're from anywhere from Africa, Nigeria, whatever, they don't consider you black, which I think is absolutely ludicrous.
	But this...
	Small demographic of idiots don't consider themselves black.
	I don't consider people that aren't FBAs black.
	But I consider myself black.
	I would argue most black people in the United States would consider me black, and they probably consider themselves black regardless of where they're from or whether they're related to a slave or not.
	But yeah, it's only that small demographic of people that don't think so.
	But I think I am.
	I think other individuals would probably identify me as that.
	Like, literally, I am the definition of African American.
	Like, my parents are from Sudan.
	I was born here.
	Like, I am African American to the T, quite literally.
	No, but I mean, like, in terms of culturally, between Sudanese immigrants who might come to America and have as much cultural collision with black America as you would imagine white America would.
	Like, do your parents have that experience with what is historically or traditionally regarded as black America?
	So, like, funny enough, like, my dad...
	He doesn't like being called Black.
	He likes being called African.
	And I've noticed this with a lot of people because being Black in America has such a bad connotation with being affiliated with crime and hip-hop and degeneracy.
	So growing up, my dad never wanted to be called Black himself.
	He was like, no, I'm African.
	I'm not one of them.
	And I think a lot of people that are first generation, their parents might have felt this way whether they came from the Caribbean or they came from Africa directly.
	They felt this way.
	But yeah, I mean, let's be honest.
	The black community does push out a lot of degeneracy, single mother households, drug trafficking, gang violence, violence in general to solve their problems, not being educated, drug use, alcohol.
	There's a lot of degeneracy.
	And as an adult, I can look back and be like, damn, yeah, this is stuff that isn't necessarily good for the community, but this is something that's pushed by this culture.
	So I can see why, now as an adult, I can look back and see why my parents didn't want to be affiliated with it.
	Okay, and then this ties back, goes back to the Jewish question.
	The cookie monster is the Holocaust, right?
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	Sorry, that one I've never...
	The cookie monster event.
	Whenever I'm on YouTube, I refer to it as the cookie monster event.
	I used to have code.
	We used to call it the My Sharona Cyrus instead of coronavirus, but I've given up on that.
	And the reason why I see the question about, you know, like, Sudanese versus Black America, and then the Holocaust question, where I say, I don't find anything you've ever said that offensive.
	Some of it, I'll disagree with it, and I think some of it's, I'll say juvenile, for lack of a better word, or shocking for the sake of being shocking.
	Underlying points, you know, there's a discussion to be had there.
	When it comes to the Holocaust and the number, and then, you know, I saw the video where, like, oh, you know, everyone, do the math.
	I saw someone say, do the math, you know.
	And I'll say, like, okay, I'll even entertain the question and just say, how many millions...
	And I say not exclusively Jews, because the whole irony, and I think I mentioned this in my reply to you, it's not like the Nazis were a little bit better to the blacks, but they weren't good to the blacks, they weren't good to the gypsies, the gays, the handicaps.
	I mean, how many...
	Do we agree that the Holocaust happened?
	And I don't know that anybody...
	Yeah, and I don't know who disagreed with that.
	And then you say, okay, well, if it wasn't 6 million, do you agree that it was many millions of Jews?
	And I don't think anybody's going to disagree with that, because the Nazis were kind of...
	Kept good records decent enough.
	So if you don't think it was six, if it was five, four, I know that that qualifies as Holocaust denialism.
	And I'm not sure that I agree with that because like, you know, four million versus six million, that's a genocide.
	Getting back to the, you know, the black America versus not.
	One of the historical, if I'm wrong, but like one of the historical gripes between the Jewish community of America and the black community is the success that the Jewish community had in recognizing the event, the Holocaust versus Black America, A, you know, not necessarily getting the recognition or the historical recognition for slavery,
	but also the reparations for slavery where, you know, Jews got something back from Germany and German companies.
	And, like, your dad's from Sudan.
	Is there any of that harboring that resentment for...
	I say success in quotes.
	Well, no, for the...
	Call it the successful...
	Acknowledgement of the Holocaust in particular.
	That's where I think a lot of the resentment of the black community comes in terms of the Jews were successful at turning it into Hollywood Oscar winner movies, although there's been a bunch of slavery movies that have been very widely recognized as well, but that there has been a successful campaign to single out the genocide that was the Holocaust and not,
	say, the Armenian genocide.
	Not, say, the Holodomor.
	I always get accepted if it's Holodomor.
	Yeah, so did your folks or did you have any of that resentment, if it even existed?
	I might be presuming it existed, but...
	No, not at all.
	My dad grew up, he told me, he never ever used any of the...
	He always told me that his thing was, he always used to yell at me and say, I brought you to the United States.
	It's the best country in the world.
	More opportunity here than ever before.
	I would be a doctor or a lawyer if I was raised here.
	You better be somebody, something.
	And then he smacked me if I was being a mess up.
	So that's how my dad, right?
	He never, ever used like the history of the United States to try to justify, you know, grievances.
	He always said, I brought you here, which is the best country in the world.
	You better be somebody.
	That's how he always framed it to me.
	Alright, and now the other question, the flip side to that question is, you talk about the cookie bones of the Holocaust, and people can get mad at you.
	You also, and I know it, you deal with the black community just as bluntly in terms of statistical over-representation.
	Does the black community ever look at you and say, well, you're the son of Sudanese, you're not part of the American black experience, and so what you're saying about us, we take offense to because there's historical reasons or...
	You know, you're picking on a small demographic to come to broader sweeping generalizations of black America at large.
	Yeah, no, that's 100% the reason they come at me.
	They always say, well, you're not one of us, so therefore you can't comment.
	That's their argument 99% of the time.
	But what I tell them is, actually, I tell them, like, not only have I dealt with a lot of the obstacles that you guys cry about, whether it's poverty or being labeled or being racist, getting stereotypes thrown at them, because, you know, people used to follow me around the store and think that I was a criminal as well.
	Um, you know, also I had to deal with the whole, uh, after 9 /11, I had to deal with the whole, um, I hate the term Islamophobia, but, um, you know, people, there was, there was distinction.
	Yeah, there was distinct stereotyping after 9-11.
	It went from the Russians being bad in every movie to Middle Easterners.
	Exactly.
	And I hate to even use this, but yeah, I got it on both ends.
	I got it from being black and I also got it from being Muslim.
	So I can sit here and put myself in a victim box too, but I refuse to do that.
	So when they say that and say, oh, you can't even come on this because you're not one of us, I'm like, well, I've dealt with a lot of stuff that you guys have.
	But that doesn't even matter because my thing is...
	I don't think you have to be a part of a group to be able to comment on said group.
	If you're able to identify, you know, patterns or you're able to see things, the truth is the truth regardless of who reports it, right?
	So I think this whole concept of you need to be a part of said group to be able to criticize group as well.
	But the only reason the FBAs use that is because it insulates them from valid criticism saying, well, you're not one of us, you can't comment.
	And that's what a lot of these low IQ individuals use to kind of curb criticism from themselves.
	Myron, what is the post that you've taken the most flack from?
	Man, so I get a lot because I'm critical of, you know, obviously I'm very critical of Zionism and Jewish power.
	I'm very critical of the black community.
	I'm very critical of, I got a lot of slack actually for the H-1B visa stuff.
	I talked about, you know, bringing in Indians to the United States to work these H-1B visa jobs.
	Elon Musk didn't like that.
	So, yeah, man, I get it from all angles.
	I've been critical of Islam even as well, even though I grew up in a Muslim household.
	I've said it a bunch of times where I don't think, you know, Sharia law is compatible with a first world democracy where freedom of speech is a paramount principle, because unfortunately, Sharia law doesn't allow you to engage really in freedom of speech.
	You know, you look at any of these, even the wealthy Arab countries, the monarchies and the dictatorships.
	If you criticize the government, you're getting killed.
	You're going to get Khashoggi'd in an embassy somewhere.
	So, you know, I am able to be critical even if it doesn't necessarily benefit me.
	I've even insulted the Arab world and the Muslim world.
	Well, they'll think of it as insult.
	But I've even criticized many of their fault points and they don't like it.
	Because my thing is, I will say something even if it doesn't benefit me or attacks the group that I'm aligned with because I think the truth is more important than how I feel.
	So there's many things I'm critical for.
	But yeah, people are obviously most aware of how I'm critical of the black community, critical of Israel quite a bit.
	But, you know, some other things that have got me in trouble.
	Definitely the HMB visa got me in a lot of trouble on Twitter.
	Which end were you on?
	You were on no more Indian immigrants to fill the visas or you should allow the immigrants in?
	No more Indians to fill the visas.
	You were disagreeing with Elon, who said that we, well, he attenuated his position over that debate.
	Him and Vivek agreed with the H-1B visas.
	I was anti-H-1B visa because there's a multitude of reasons why.
	But like, you know, I'm not for foreign labor and I'm also not for a foreign group of people coming in that have completely different cultural values to us coming here in swarms and not acclimating.
	Because the reality is a lot of these people that come from these countries like India, etc., they don't assimilate.
	They simply don't.
	Now, that's an uncomfortable truth that no one wants to hear, but they don't want to assimilate a lot of the times.
	They want to keep their...
	Hindu god, they want to keep their culture and stuff like that, which is cool, but that comes at the cost of infiltrating our culture.
	And I look at places like Toronto, I look at places like Western Europe, where they've allowed this mass immigration, and then these places have basically turned into, you know, shells of their former selves.
	Like, you go to London now, London is filled...
	With Muslims everywhere.
	And this is me as a Muslim guy, like, this doesn't feel like I'm in England.
	It doesn't feel like I'm in London.
	I just see a bunch of North African immigrants everywhere, and I'm worried about getting stabbed.
	Toronto now has basically turned into India, you know?
	So, mass immigration is problematic.
	You know, I was just saying, like, I went to Toronto recently, and I say, call it what you want.
	It felt like going into Bangladesh in the airport.
	And literally, like, the lineup for the immigration visa checkpoint was just Bangladeshis.
	But now this is a problem, though.
	Or a problem, this is the question.
	Your dad comes in, you're a Muslim family.
	What is the path for Islamic or Muslim assimilation?
	It has such a negative connotation, but what is your ideal in terms of assimilation in Western society for anyone in particular, but from your Muslim experience?
	So, I think, you know, especially these Western countries, whether it's United States, Canada, whatever, I think they need a statewide majority of Christian countries the way they were founded by, you know, Protestant white men.
	Because that's the way the country was founded.
	I do think that that's the best way for the country to continue.
	Having the rights and privileges and the structure that I had in the first place because what ends up happening when you import too many immigrants is they bring their way of thinking and what ends up happening as the culture slowly starts to change.
	And let's just be honest here.
	Muslim countries don't value free speech.
	They just don't.
	And there's a bunch of cultural and religious reasons for that.
	But if we want democracies, if we want freedom of speech to be paramount...
	We can't let them be the dominant force in this.
	And again, I'm going to get around the flagpole for saying this, but I'm calling it like it is.
	I think the countries need to stay a majority of what they were founded by in order to preserve those values, right?
	And I think disintegrating the way the country was founded for economic gain through H-1B visas or whatever is not worth the tradeoff.
	In our Encryptus, in our local community, it says, show us Myron, Rabbi Myron, but over on Rumble.
	May I ask who Rabbi Myron Gainestein is?
	I have like a hat that I put on every time I go into certain things.
	You mentioned Zionism, and I might be one of the very few people also who does not equate criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism, but I had on Natty Taub last week, and I asked him to define Zionism, and I think he gave a decent definition.
	What's your definition of Zionism?
	Zionism, man, I would say to be very, very clear about this, because I do think that, you know, given the fact that the Jewish people have been persecuted for a very long time, it makes sense that they would need their own homeland.
	But when I'm talking about Zionism, I'm talking about specifically the state of Israel, where it's located.
	And the preservation of Israel, particularly when it comes to what used to be British mandate mandatory about Palestine.
	That's what I'm referring to.
	So that's the existence of the state of Israel.
	So critical of Zionism.
	And I don't really care to get into it.
	It's not that I'm going to think less of you if you don't think Israel has the right to exist where it exists.
	So the Palestinians have the first claim to the land.
	When you're critical of Zionism, so in that sense, what?
	Critical of Israel's right to exist where it is, under the modalities that it exists, under the conditions that it exists?
	Yeah, precisely.
	You know, their right to exist over another group of people's right to exist that were there before.
	So, you know, I'm completely sensitive to the fact that, you know, they've been persecuted.
	Kicked out a lot of countries, had issues, and haven't had a homeland there.
	That's where people are very aware of that.
	But I think them having a homeland at the expense of another group of people is not acceptable.
	I think they should have a homeland, but displacing another group of people, I think that's problematic.
	Yeah, and then I want to say I'm not interested, because I know what the responses are going to be, and then I'll ask you the question, how far back do you go in terms of who was displaced from the land of Israel?
	And then you'll say 200 years, and someone will say 2,000 years, and that's why the Jews get to have it back.
	And this is where, like, it's just, there's an impact.
	It becomes a religious debate, and then it becomes a biblical thing, and I know exactly what you mean.
	It's like almost you go down this hole that no one's ever going to be satisfied with it.
	No, I completely understand why you might not want to get into that.
	And people ask me, are you a Zionist or are you pro-Israel?
	I was like, first of all, I can easily evade the answer because Israel exists whether I like it or not or whether you like it or not and I'm not there to say Israel should not exist.
	It's like, am I anti-Canadian?
	Canada exists.
	A lot of natives would say Canada shouldn't exist where it is because it displaced a lot of natives just a couple hundred years ago to which I'll say, well, Canada's there and I'm not advocating for the destruction of Canada and therefore...
	I respect the country of Canada's right to exist.
	I agree with you on that.
	At this point, Israel ain't going nowhere.
	I've said this a million times too as well for the fanatical pro-Palestinian people.
	I tell them, look, Israel's not going anywhere.
	We need to figure out a two-state solution.
	That's the only way that we're going to fix this because Israel ain't going nowhere.
	Obviously, the Palestinians aren't going to go anywhere.
	They're trying to get them to go somewhere, right?
	As we saw, we're going to take over Gaza, whatever.
	But I think the only way that Israel is going to be able to live in peace in the Middle East without constantly having to worry about being attacked is they're going to need to come with a two-state solution.
	Now, we can make the argument about, you know, who's been preventing this, whether it's Netanyahu or whatever.
	But I think at this point, the only way to move forward is we need to come up with a two-state solution.
	That's where I think the conversation needs to go.
	This whole of, you know, who has historical rights to land, whatever, that's irrelevant now at this point because we are where we are.
	So I do think the next path forward is a two-state.
	Yeah, and that's where I was also, but then the question becomes two-state under what modalities, and some people say two-state with the right of return, which is effectively a one-state, others say a two-state, and then two-state with one state that refuses to recognize the right to exist of the other.
	Eventually we'll get there.
	I mean, the Irish...
	The IRA or the Northern Southern Ireland, they resolved their differences after enough people got killed, but it looks like we're not yet there in the Middle East.
	Myron, if I may see if I have any questions in the chat for you, there's...
	Sure, man.
	Sure.
	Well, let me read this.
	It's not a sponsor, but Biltong, if you want to talk about healthy foods and healthy meat, Biltong has his own channel.
	He's a great guy.
	King of Biltong.
	Get some Biltong.
	Go to Biltong USA, Code Viva.
	And Guido240 says, Myron, you're wrong.
	Women were first class and now second class they were held on high and taken care of and they had it before making suffrage.
	The religious argument to this is that it's not sexist to say that the men and the women have separate roles.
	Some people consider it antiquated and if you consider it antiquated then go live out your wildest modern dreams and see how that works out for you.
	We can certainly see the way it's playing out to some extent in modern American society but then You compare it to other countries, and then you'll never find an ideal, or you'll find some better ideals than others.
	Myron, did I forget to ask you anything that I wanted to?
	The funny thing is, I don't think anybody really hates you, but I like this discussion because I know what the media portrays you as, and they'll take a few clips from here and say you're a total misogynist, anti-Semite, whatever.
	You're a reasonably thoughtful, thought-out guy, and I don't think many people are going to...
	Yeah, no, I appreciate that, man.
	Yeah, like, again, you know, all my worldviews, right, whether it's, you know, people say my views on, you know, Israel or Jewish people or, you know, or Islam or immigration, whatever, you know, I'm able to always explain how I came to that conclusion.
	Now, people might not necessarily like it, but what I've realized is when I'm able to, you know, get the opportunity to explain why I have the worldviews that I have.
	You know, people kind of say, okay, you know what?
	I see how you came to that conclusion.
	I might not agree with it, but I can see how you came to that conclusion.
	So...
	It is what it is.
	I understand that sometimes the way I put my ideas out might be crass or rude and people might not like it.
	It's deliberately provocative and some people might call it immature or whatever.
	First of all, if people don't like it, they can listen to someone with a British accent and say it in a much more polite manner and cloak the verbiage and whatever is more palatable.
	Myron, are you going to stay live on your channel afterwards or are you going to end this at the same time?
	Yeah, I'll probably still stay live.
	I'll cover some news and stuff like that.
	You know, we'll probably go until, I think, like 8 p.m. when we do Fresh and Fit.
	But yeah, I'll go on a little bit longer.
	Okay, Encryptus, this guy that you're looking at right now is the Viva Fry equivalent of the Jamie, Rogan's Jamie.
	Encryptus, what's up?
	You do have some other tip questions.
	A couple people in chat wanted me to remind you, and I just have to say this was freaking entertaining as hell.
	The chats are off the chain.
	You've got about 80%, 20% screaming hate.
	Yeah, no, we can talk about, you know, like I said, I'm still chilling, so any questions you guys have on anything, if you guys want to expound more on...
	Whatever you guys want.
	I know that we kind of went surface level and a lot of the stuff weren't able to go deep.
	But whatever you guys want.
	I think we went deep.
	We were good on some of this.
	Let me add this one over on Locals.
	Boops, he says, ask him, having many women makes you judge and compare each woman.
	That's my argument against that level of promiscuity environment.
	Because once you've done that, you've led a very exciting life.
	It becomes very difficult to settle down with.
	Well, I would argue, I would push back on that.
	It actually makes you appreciate girls that are good more, right?
	So what I've realized with men is when you've dealt with a lot of women that are annoying, because a lot of women are annoying and stupid and not really interesting, when you do find one that is, we tend to appreciate that more because men don't get the same level of options and volume when it comes to dealing with the opposite gender that women do.
	When men are in a position where we're getting, you know, attention for women or where we're getting treated well, we tend to appreciate that far more.
	This is why being a nice guy as a man doesn't work, but being a nice guy as a woman absolutely does work.
	And in Crypto says, there are women in the chat who do agree with him as well as women who do not agree with him.
	All in all, show and the chats are very entertaining.
	And then says, that's from Pants on the bottom, says, with Viva, W Viva, W Myron, W interview, which I think means win.
	Let me just go see.
	I'm going to take it out just so I can get...
	Yeah, the women in Donorville may tend to be fat and ugly a lot of the times.
	The idea, it is amazing that, like, I was talking to some younger kids, like, where do you meet people these days?
	And I'm old school dog run, but you go to the dog run now, and people are on their freaking phones, and nobody's making any human-to-human interactions.
	Censorship versus truth.
	Grift thrives in lack of knowledge.
	And there's Europa the Last Battle.
	There's a video there.
	Is the chatroom going crazy?
	My iPhone and even my PC joining chatroom and never getting there.
	I don't know if it was going that crazy.
	Okay, here.
	Rich987 says, 1360.
	When it comes to Afro-Americans, I'm not going to read that word.
	That'll get me canceled.
	You and Barnes are deranged as Ben Shapiro and Glenn Greenwald.
	I don't even know what that means.
	I know the 1350 is the idea that 13% of the population...
	Accounts for 50% of the violent crime murders, and that's the black population.
	It's like, because blacks make up about 15% of the U.S. population, about half of that, so 7-8% is men.
	And the age bracket, so it's probably maybe 1-2%.
	Again, the question is...
	Is the purpose of that to say there's something genetic within black America, or is it because they get convicted more because it's a racist institution, or they're prone to it because of poverty and historical inequalities?
	But the bottom line is...
	I think it's a multitude of things.
	It's obviously the culture, it's what they value versus what they don't value, the fatherless households, that's a big one.
	And then this is the one that's going to get me in trouble, but IQ as well.
	Blacks in general have lower IQs than other groups of people.
	Asians are number one, whites are second, Hispanics are third, and then blacks are fourth.
	Yeah, but they'll get mad at you and they say, well, the IQ test, I mean, you put patterns and whoever, who gives a shit about the IQ test?
	They're going to say that that is a culturally irrelevant and patriarchal or white patriarchal test in the first place.
	I'm not convinced, you know, the ability to predict patterns or detect patterns, which is what...
	Much of the IQ test is.
	But, you know, like, who composed whatever piece is purely cultural.
	But there was...
	Oh, I forget.
	I just lost the question.
	And there's been a bunch of meta-analysis that have, like, proved this.
	As much as they try to say, like, oh, this is, like, pseudoscience.
	It's not true.
	No, it's absolutely true.
	And they've been suppressing it for a very long time.
	But IQ is tied to race.
	Now, does this mean that anyone that's black has low IQ?
	Of course not.
	But what I'm saying is that when, in general, when races are tested, Certain races tend to score lower than others, and this is just what it is.
	Now, you know, sorry.
	That's just how it goes.
	And I remember what the comment was that I was looking at in Rumble.
	It said Jews per capita, which is where I wanted to go with this.
	Because some people say, well, good.
	IQ doesn't necessarily translate into criminality.
	It doesn't necessarily translate into being a good person.
	And then the flip side is...
	Well, the bottom line is you're talking about statistical over-representation.
	You said something earlier about Jewish dominance or Jewish...
	Influence?
	I forget what it was.
	It was talking about Zionism, Israel, and Jewish power.
	Sorry, that's what I think it was.
	Elaborate if we can all get ourselves into a lot more trouble today.
	Yeah, sure.
	Well, what that means is basically the over-representation and the influence in what I call trigger points in society that allow for basically the ability to Preserve Israel,
	right?
	And preserve Israel utilizing this network of different individuals in different places, different industries of different positions of power for the self-preservation of Israel.
	I'll give you an example.
	So, Donald Trump, right?
	Donald Trump was able to get into office.
	A lot of people don't want to admit this, but let's be honest.
	He was able to get into office because of the Zionist lobby.
	The Zionist lobby of someone like Amira Madelson who gave him $100 million.
	Who obviously her husband, Sheldon Adelson, made a bunch of money as a casino tycoon.
	Then someone like Bill Ackman, who made his money in a whole other different endeavor, who is a lifelong Democrat who came in and supported him.
	And then other individuals as well that are Zionists that, you know, all basically got together and said, you know what?
	We need the president's going to be more, you know, more pro-Israel.
	Let's make sure that we get them in, regardless of our political affiliation before, because right now what matters is getting Trump in to preserve Israel.
	So what I mean by this is utilizing that influence to push and get someone into office for their own means.
	And they're able to do this by having positions of power, influence, you know, obviously money.
	And that's basically why Trump is in power right now and why he's present.
	He understood that being extremely pro-Israel was going to be critical to him getting back into office.
	Yeah, I'm trying to think, not how to push back, but just to even steel man the rebuttal to that.
	The numbers are relatively accurate.
	There was $100 million through whatever that PAC was that Adelson gave to.
	The question is going to be being pro-Israel versus being anti-Israel.
	I'm just trying to think of how to ask the question of which it's going to be.
	The argument is that there's rich Jews who are Zionist or who are pro-Israel that you think have the determinate impact on the outcome of the election.
	And then others are going to say, well, okay, the 100 million, whatever, but there's 77 million people who voted for Trump.
	On the one hand, either they want that as well, or on the other hand, the 77 million who are not Zionists, maybe some of the big ones are, wanted Trump anyhow.
	So the question is then, What degree is the being pro-Israel related to his election if it actually got 77 million Americans to vote for him who seemingly exposed that policy?
	If the people didn't like it, he wouldn't be elected, is the point.
	No, sure, sure, sure.
	But I do think it's very important to understand that that money, right, that was given to him, that was donated to him, was used to run the ads, was used to run these rallies, was used to be able to create this enormous social media platform that he was able to do running these ads, etc.
	Because running a campaign is very expensive.
	And I do think that it's also important to note that, you know, the fact that, like, this crosses party lines, right?
	Like, whether you have someone—I'll give you an example.
	You got someone like a John the Greenblatt who's a leftist, and then you got someone like a Ben Shapiro who's a conservative.
	When it comes to Israel, they agree, right?
	And they both understood, look, Trump is going to be the better party for Israel.
	Let's get him in, right?
	Bill Ackman, etc.
	They will go ahead and change their voting philosophy or even their party lines, depending on who is going to be more beneficial to Israel.
	So that's just one example.
	There's other examples as well.
	But I do think that, you know, to not acknowledge that they have an enormous amount of influence and power in certain regards.
	I mean, hell, I mean, the fact that...
	You know, AIPAC is able to exist to this day with no fair registration compared to other lobby organizations is wild, right?
	Like Thomas Massey went on the Tucker Carlson podcast and literally said, yeah, everybody has AIPAC.
	I'm the only one that doesn't have one.
	And then the fact that he doesn't have the support that these other ones have, they tried to primary him.
	I do think that there's an enormous amount of power there where if you want to be a politician in the United States, you must bow down to the Israel lobby.
	Otherwise, you're not going to get elected or your ability to get elected is going to be significantly hindered.
	I do think that that's very important to note.
	Someone in the chat asked who were the biggest donors.
	And a quick, to Trump's campaign, and a quick grok overview is Timothy Mellon, who I don't know who that is, $150 million to make America great.
	Miriam Adelson, $100 million.
	Elon Musk, $118 million.
	Richard Wieline, who I don't know who that is, $84.1 million.
	Isaac and Laura...
	I'm just trying to see who looks like they have Jewish names.
	Because some people are going to say, well, look, you've got Elon Musk who's donating massive amounts.
	But then I see where you're going to go with that as well.
	And then the question is going to be the resentment.
	The resentment seems to be that it's...
	I know your answer is going to be it's not because it's Israel.
	It's just because it's another country.
	That we are seemingly...
	That election is...
	Loyalty to which is determinate of the outcome of elections.
	And it could be Madagascar.
	It would be just as offensive.
	Others are going to retort and say, yes, Jews...
	You can't disagree with the influence because on the one hand, some people will get offended at you and say you're an anti-Semite for noticing the Jewish influence.
	Flip side, how many times...
	Jewish community is very proud of the fact that...
	What is it, like 30% of Nobel laureates are Jewish or half-Jewish or Jewish descent?
	Yeah, I mean, my thing is, you know, they'll gladly take credit when it's positive, right?
	Like, for example, I've seen it many times where it's like, hey, you know, Jews led the civil rights movement.
	They led the, you know, the gay rights movement, right?
	They'll say that, like, but if you say anything negative, well, yeah, well, they also, you know, are involved in pornography.
	Oh, well, that's fucked up.
	You know, so my thing is I just kind of call a spade a spade.
	And, you know, it depends on what you do that you say.
	And then they'll go ahead and call you an anti-Semite.
	But my thing is I'm against all foreign aid.
	I was against giving aid to Ukraine years ago when the war first started.
	I'm a hardcore American nationalist.
	That's why a lot of the opinions I give might not necessarily be...
	I'm accepted by many when I say things like, yeah, we need to limit immigration.
	We need to have an immigration moratorium.
	I don't want the United States to be a Muslim-majority country because I understand what comes with that.
	Despite the fact that I grew up in a Muslim household, I'm able to take myself out of the situation and understand what's best for the United States, regardless of whether it benefits me personally or not.
	I think that's very difficult for a lot of people to say or admit, but I'm critical of everything.
	So yeah, I mean, when it comes to the Israeli conflict in Gaza, I think this is just another example of us giving
	Well, flip side,
	they've also been giving, ironically enough, giving funds to the...
	To Hamas as well, directly or indirectly.
	It's the meme.
	The bombs are going off on both sides.
	My tax dollars?
	Somehow also my tax dollars.
	The funny thing is, when you notice the statistical over-representation when it's a bad thing, people get offended when it's a good thing, they take pride.
	The funniest thing is when you notice it on the same thing.
	It's one thing.
	A statistical over-representation of Jews and porn, yes, and there's a historical reason for that.
	But the best is when you say, there's an influence in science or the arts or media.
	But don't dare say that Jews control the media because they don't control it.
	There's just statistical over-representation in it for which we're proud when we want to take credit for it, but which becomes anti-Semitic if it's a source of criticism because of the message being conveyed.
	So it's one thing to one screen, two films, and that's the best example.
	And this is why I can't really disagree with you.
	There is statistical over-representation for which the community is proud.
	But then you have to take the responsibility that comes with that statistical representation.
	And when you see the first impeachment and the disproportionate number of players who you might make an association with, you can't blame someone for coming to that conclusion and noticing it.
	Flip side, you look at the other side and say, well, there's enough overrepresentation as well there fighting the impeachment.
	And then you get some people saying, well, why are there just so many, in any event, in a Christian society like America that you have 1.6% of the population that has this And then it leads into all the other questions about IQ, culture, heritage, etc., etc.
	Yeah, and I'm glad that you're willing to have the conversation, Viva, because a lot of them would say, I'm not even going to entertain.
	This is an anti-Semitic conversation.
	The fact that you're even willing to have the conversation, you know, I think speaks volumes.
	And I know, you know, yourself, you're ethnically Jewish, but you're willing to have these talks.
	I think that's very important that we can have these discussions and be critical of our own people like I have been with Muslims and you have been with Jewish people or Zionists, whatever it may be.
	I was critical of Israel's response to October.
	I mean, I'm critical where I think it's warranted.
	And I hate the tribalist mentality that if Israel ceases to exist, so will you as a Jew.
	And I say the longer term existence means Being critical, if only out of love, you know, even assume that.
	Critical could be either because you want to destroy or because you want to build up.
	When I'm critical of Pierre Poilievre, some people say it's because I hate him.
	Others might say because I expect more from him.
	But, no, I had on a guy, Gadi Taub, last week, and he's a proud Zionist who does not any longer believe in a two-state solution.
	And I can understand his argument.
	But when I asked him the questions, you know, How did October 7 happen at the scale it did for the duration it did?
	And the answer was, I don't have a good answer for that.
	That's in and of itself kind of not a good answer when you're relying on the same people who are at the helm of that catastrophe to determine the proper response to that catastrophe.
	Yeah, I think Netanyahu let it happen.
	The conspiracy theory, I think Netanyahu let it happen, man.
	Honestly.
	So I asked him about that because there's two, depending on your political leanings in Israel, there's two conspiracy theories to that.
	The left would say, Netanyahu let it happen so that he could justify expanding.
	I'll say, the critical of Israel or the anti-Semites would say, Netanyahu let it happen on purpose to justify expansion.
	When I asked this to Gaddy Taub, he said, there's some people who think that the left allowed it to happen so they could blame it on Netanyahu.
	I was explaining, there are people who hate Netanyahu in Israel as much as Libs hate Trump here.
	I said, so then how do you know they didn't let the intelligence lapse?
	And then, you know, his argument is, for both sides, do you think anybody would let 1,000-plus people get slaughtered in the most horrendous manner possible?
	And, I mean, if you're thinking about humans as normal humans, that would be your response.
	But there's a bunch of libs out here that I would have no doubt would love to see something terrible like that happen to Republicans and Trump supporters, etc.
	Yeah, and I would say, too, just so that...
	I was going to say one more thing.
	I actually want to get Myron to take on number seven.
	Building number seven and killing people.
	Sure.
	I'll talk about building seven here in a second with 9-11.
	So, real quick, when it comes to October 7th, when it hit me that something was wrong...
	So the day after October 7th happened, a lot of people don't know this because they buried this story.
	Egyptian intelligence came out immediately and said, we warned the Israelis.
	We told them that Hamas was planning this attack.
	We had seen them on our intelligence services, had seen them planning this attack and staging it.
	We told them.
	Now, the reason why that's important is because Egypt has an agreement with the United States where...
	Our aid for Egypt, because it's a very poor country, they have a lot of debt.
	Our aid for Egypt is contingent upon them playing nice with Israel.
	Jordan as well.
	Jordan and Egypt are allies to Israel because we give them quite a bit of money to play nice with them.
	So when the Egyptians came out and said, hey, look, we told them about this, we warned them about this, that told me right then and there, I was like, oh, wow, they want to continue to get their aid.
	And they did warn the Israelis because they know that their aid is contingent upon this.
	So that's when I started to question, like...
	Okay, something's going on here.
	How the Israelis, who have the most advanced border, like that area, is one of the most secured areas in the world.
	They have an enormous amount of technology.
	How did they let these guys with paragliders and rudimentary bulldozers...
	I actually asked that to Gaddy as well.
	First of all, I remember that story about Egypt warning them.
	And I remember, I tweeted out about the time.
	I can go back and get my tweets.
	But one of the theories was that they didn't actually warn them.
	This was Egypt, again, trying to make Netanyahu look bad as though he didn't heed to the warning.
	And when I asked this historian how did it happen, he said they became too reliant on technology.
	And I'm like, okay, fine.
	All you're explaining to me is grotesque criminal negligence to have allowed this to happen under your watch in the first place.
	But how does it explain the amount of hours that it took for the military to respond to some of these villages?
	Israel's six hours across by drive, let alone jets and tanks and whatever.
	And again, no good response.
	And so it's either...
	The most catastrophic criminal negligence imaginable, in which case I wouldn't empower that catastrophically, critically negligent machine to wage the proper response or something far more nefarious.
	And after everything we've lived through, yeah, I mean, you can have very evil people out there who, you know, enough said on that.
	Building 7, Myron, what have you done?
	Building 7 obviously has blown up.
	Sure, sure.
	So everything when 9-11 is aligned, this comes back to like the whole, you know, where I question every narrative, whether it's World War II, we were discussing earlier, the Cookie Monster event, 9-11, U.S. Liberty, all this stuff.
	So when it comes to 9-11, right, I did a whole podcast on this with a guy named Ryan Dawson, really smart, one of the best 9-11 researchers.
	But long story short, I also brought Richard Gage on my show to talk about this.
	Building 7 was a controlled demolition.
	No ifs, ands, or buts about it.
	3,000 plus engineers agree.
	A plane did not hit Building 7, but yet it went down perfectly in a symmetrical fashion.
	And not only was it a controlled demolition, it was a controlled demolition to the degree where whoever put the bombs in there did it at a perfect level.
	Textbook controlled demolition.
	So, you know, which leads to more questions of 9-11.
	Like, how the hell is it that...
	You know, these random hijackers were able to hijack these planes, crash them into these buildings, and then the third building that goes down goes down in a perfect fashion alongside the Twin Towers, which also went down in a controlled demolition fashion.
	And there's a bunch of reasons for this.
	I mean, I can go on so many different ways, but I'll just, to answer it, controlled demolition 100%.
	Look, I'll be called crazy because everyone's excuse for the Twin Towers was jet fuel planes.
	And, okay, fine.
	What's Building 7 then?
	That it was burning and the fire, whatever they called them, the water sprinklers were not working and that melted the foundation.
	There has never been a skyscraper, a metal structure, a steel-framed skyscraper that has ever fallen, collapsed as a result of a fire, except 9-11.
	The excuse being, well, planes never flew into them.
	Neither did that happen with Building 7. And what was in Building 7?
	There was very important information being stored in that building.
	Government agencies were there.
	There were definitely government agencies there.
	I know that one for a fact.
	I think some private.
	The other thing that's also very important for people to understand, again, not to get into a Jewish conspiracy, but I do think it's important, worth noting, the person that purchased the World Trade Center was a guy named Larry Silverstein.
	Now, anyone that's familiar with commercial real estate in the United States, to get a loan...
	For commercial real estate, you need to be able to demonstrate that the property is profitable to be able to get a loan from the bank.
	Because Larry Silverstein got a loan from the bank and leveraged, and he put just a little bit of his money in, was able to procure the entire property.
	Now, the problem is that with the Twin Towers back then, they had a big asbestos problem.
	And a lot of the units, not the units, a lot of the office space that was there wasn't...
	Rented, right?
	For that problem.
	So this was a billion-dollar stake that needed to be done to basically get it all done.
	And it would have cost more to get this asbestos problem handled than it would have cost to just build a whole new structure.
	He got this, so not only was he able to get this loan to purchase this property, despite the fact that it wasn't cash flowing, but he also was able to get a very unique terrorism policy on the World Trade Center, which was also weird.
	Now, I know some people might say, well, Myron, he was able to get this terrorist policy because back in 1993, the World Trade Center had a bombing with the failed attempt by Ramsey Youssef.
	And I would agree with you on that and say, yeah, you're right.
	There was a failed terrorist attack.
	To bring the World Trade Center down back in 1993, who ended up, Ramzi Youssef is actually the nephew of Khalil Sheikh Mohammed, who planned a 9-11 attacks.
	But the point is, is that, you know, too many similarities there.
	And then not only that, he bought the properties, he bought the property literally like in July before 9-11, the same year that 9-11 happened.
	And there's even more to it there.
	I don't know where you want me to go with this.
	But there were people that were going into the World Trade Center that were Israeli intelligence assets.
	And this has been documented now at this point at a wide level.
	But just too many problems.
	And I think we focus so much on Al-Qaeda and that connection and the Saudi Arabians, which, yes, they were involved in 9-11.
	I'm not going to sit here and say Osama and them weren't involved.
	They were.
	But we almost always avoid...
	The Israeli intelligence angle that was very prevalent in 9-11.
	Encrypt us.
	Both of you guys who said you didn't know who the tenants were.
	I'd love to give you that information.
	Yeah, I was going to pull it up.
	Solomon Smith Barney, major investment bank, leased 37 floors.
	This is the World Trade Center 7. U.S. Secret Service, CIA, Department of Defense, IRS, SEC, Office of Emergency Management, other tenants.
	Encrypt us.
	Who else?
	My focus was CIA, SEC, US Secret Service, and IRS, and the financials.
	It's a government building.
	Yeah, it was.
	I don't think there's many people who actually think that that one fell down as a result of natural fire, because it makes no sense even based on the explanation of the time.
	Yeah, even NIST.
	NIST couldn't properly explain it.
	They were the ones that were tasked with covering how the buildings...
	What went down?
	And then on top of that, the person that designed the Twin Towers literally designed it so that if it gets hit by a plane, it won't go down.
	There's never been a steel structure that went down from fires.
	So it was 100% a controlled demolition.
	It is what it is.
	I think at this point, Americans are awake to the fact that 9-11 is something that we've been lied about.
	A guy named Kurt Weldon went on the Tucker Carlson show, and he even alluded to a lot of this stuff as well.
	I think people are waking up to the fact that 9-11 is probably one of the biggest lies.
	But, you know, if we were to tell them the truth that, hey, the U.S. government alongside Israeli intelligence, alongside the Saudi Arabians, alongside Al-Qaeda, all worked together to, you know, organize an event.
	And again, it might not have been organized the way they think.
	I think it was more on the long lines of terrorists were trying to attack us and then we just allowed it to happen, right?
	They thought they were successful, but we merely allowed it to happen to, you know, kind of create this.
	Police state, this terrorism-feared society that we have now, the Patriot Act, etc.
	I think if Americans knew that all these components were working together, it would make the American public have a deep level of distrust.
	And this is JFK.
	I think that's a big reason why they didn't want to disclose.
	The JFK stuff, we finally got what we've been looking for for the past 50 to 60 years, which discloses finally that Israeli intelligence was in fact involved with killing John F. Kennedy, which they've been trying to keep restricted for the past 60 years.
	I think that one might be factually incorrect.
	One of the documents that purportedly showed that the Jews have the money and machine guns is, from what I understand, fake.
	The Israeli intelligence level of involvement, I don't know that was involved in anything related to the actual assassination.
	I think what was revealed was that it's actually the American deep state LBJ with the CIA, not actual Israeli involvement, unless there's a document that you've got.
	Yeah, so no, I could go through this.
	So one that ended up happening was, on a lot of the different declassifications with JFK, What ended up happening was there was like a part that was redacted, right?
	And if you look at it on the document, it says CIA is okay with disclosing this, right?
	But except for the parts that are bracketed.
	And the part that was bracketed on this last new release said Israeli intelligence.
	Now, there were other countries as well that were bracketed in there too, but I do find it interesting that the one that they focused on bracketing or redacting the most was the Israeli intelligence.
	And then when you find out that James Jesus Angleton...
	Because they also redacted a lot of his hearings that he gave, which a lot of those hearings ended up where he was admitting that he was involved with helping them procure their nuclear program that they currently have now.
	And this was against John F. Kennedy's wishes, where he did not want Israel to be involved in nuclear proliferation for a multitude of different reasons, which we have this nuclear arms race going on in the Middle East right now with Iran and Israel.
	But that was a lot of the stuff that they wanted to...
	To not be shown in these documents.
	So, you know, people said all the time, oh, it's just a conspiracy theory to say that Israel was involved in JFK's assassination.
	They absolutely were involved.
	And then the bracket of stuff that they had kept redacted all this time finally was unredacted.
	And we saw that it said Israeli intelligence agencies.
	Now, with that said, I do think it's very important to state that, you know, I'm not one of these crazy people that are going to say, the Jews killed JFK.
	No, there was a group of people that wanted JFK gone.
	The Zionist lobby wanted them gone.
	Obviously, the mafia organized crime wanted him gone.
	The Cubans wanted him gone.
	They were mad about the Bay of Pigs.
	The intelligence agency wanted him gone because he threatened to smash the CIA into a million pieces.
	Alan Dulles had an axe to grind with him.
	There was a lot of people that wanted John F. Kennedy gone.
	So to put all the blame on the Israelis is disingenuous and intellectually disingenuous.
	But I do think that all of them had a shared interest in getting rid of him for different reasons.
	Well, I know the guy who I consider to be the brain of the JFK assassination, and he'll listen to this afterwards, and he'll be screaming at the screen.
	But Mark Robert, he would be very fun to talk to.
	I'll see if we can hook it up.
	I'll hook him up.
	All right.
	And his take, I mean, I think he is, you know, him and I know that he would say he knows more than Roger Stone.
	Roger Stone and...
	Hold on one second.
	Who's the director of...
	No, Oliver Stone is the director of JFK and Roger Stone.
	I want to make the same mistake one of those congresswomen made.
	I could debunk the Roger Stone movie right now.
	The problem with the Roger Stone movie, you know, JFK, the famous 1991 film that chronicles Harrison's, Jim Garrison's pursuit to find the killer.
	The problem with that movie is it doesn't cover the Israeli angle whatsoever.
	Some people are going to say...
	My understanding is that the Israeli angle never existed until very recently, where no one actually credibly or seriously thought Israel had anything to do with it.
	And my understanding is that the recent disclosures don't actually prove that.
	What they do prove...
	The Jewish element...
	I'll tell you why.
	The fascinating reason why.
	A lot of people don't know this.
	The reason why they didn't cover the Israeli angle is because the person that funded that movie was a guy named Arnon Milchan.
	Arnon Milchan is a Jewish billionaire Zionist who was...
	A spy.
	He literally admitted this on Israeli television.
	He was a spy.
	And not only was he a spy, he was a spy that worked as part of Israelis' unacknowledged nuclear program.
	So in other words, his job was to ensure that Israel's nuclear program stayed unacknowledged and stayed secret.
	And this guy funded the JFK movement.
	So when you actually look at it, you know, it makes perfect sense.
	The person that funded the JFK movie...
	Was a spy for Israel that was focused on making sure that the nuclear program never saw the light of day.
	And then when you find out that JFK's biggest issue with the Israelis was quite literally because of the nuclear program, it makes perfect sense why the JFK movie was funded by this guy and clearly omitted the nuclear angle with Israel.
	Because this had been known since like the 80s.
	There was, I forget the, maybe it was a Doug Valentine.
	I forget who the author was.
	That wrote about this.
	I mean, the book was banned everywhere, but he did go into this, Doug Valentine or something like that, that talked about the Israeli angle.
	It had been out for a very long time.
	So they knew it back in the 90s, even when they did this movie.
	It's just that Arnon Milchan made sure to never mention that part in the movie.
	And then what ended up happening was the JFK movie ended up becoming the most famous piece of media that documents the assassination of JFK.
	And this is why so many Americans are completely unaware of the Israeli angle.
	I'm reading a chat.
	Mark Hubert helped on that movie.
	He knows Oliver Stone and advised on this.
	And he's the one who says very clearly that that information is fake.
	And it would be a wonderful debate to have here.
	What information was fake?
	One of the new releases which mentioned Israel was apparently a falsified document.
	And I don't want to make a mistake as to which one it was now.
	That might be a fun discussion to have with Mark.
	And I won't get into it because I know I'm not the expert on this.
	Jen Moll over on Rumble says, Great guest and great show as always.
	Thank you.
	And TT Fulltime over in our local community says, You can like this or not.
	And with the population of the USA, 100 plus 70 divided by 2 equals 85. Why looky there.
	I'm going to have to figure that one out in a second.
	And Big Bad Bob.
	There are pictures of two so-called Israeli art students, for some reason, renting two entire floors of the Twin Towers, standing between a massive number of boxes on both sides, from floor to ceiling and wall to wall, with a company label on those boxes.
	And that particular company made nothing but demolition materials for the demolition of tall buildings.
	He's referring to Team E-11, if I'm not mistaken.
	And that's just one group.
	So here's the thing.
	With 9-11, and I'll go over this real quick.
	There was multiple Israeli spirings that were caught in the United States leading up to and or around the time of 9 /11.
	So that was one group that was actually living in the towers and doing an experiment.
	I think he's referring to Team E-11.
	Then there was another group that was actually caught by the DEA that were basically going around and taking pictures and doing...
	Surveillance on government buildings.
	The DA wrote an entire memorandum on this, on Israeli intelligence assets that were posing as students.
	And then on top of that, there was the urban moving systems cell that was basically following the hijackers around.
	So the cell, the urban moving systems guys, which is, you know, tied to the dancing Israelis.
	These guys were basically following the hijackers around because a lot of the hijackers actually lived in Hollywood, Florida when they were taking these flight classes.
	And these hijackers lived in Miami Beach and were surveilling these guys the whole time under the premise and the guise of a moving company.
	So what ended up happening when the attacks happened on September 11th, these Israelis were dancing on an apartment building and a woman saw this and called the police.
	So the police ends up...
	Catching up with these guys.
	And they're driving an urban moving systems van.
	And a lot of them, I think one or two of them had large sums of cash and plane tickets to leave the United States the day after.
	And, you know, obviously this was suspicious.
	So what they did was they ended up calling the FBI.
	FBI interviews these guys.
	Two of them, when they ran their names, came back to Israeli intelligence when they ran their databases.
	And then when they interviewed them under polygraph, hey, did you guys have four knowledge that the towers are going to be attacked?
	A couple of them failed the polygraph test.
	And then to make it even crazier, about 70 days later, when they're in immigration custody, they're deported back to Israel.
	They go on a talk show and they admit on the talk show that they were there to document the event and they knew what was going to happen.
	And the interesting thing is on September 11th, when the towers were hit around 9 a.m., they were there at about 8 a.m. waiting for the towers to hit.
	And they were taking pictures, dancing, celebrating, whatever.
	Then it gets crazier.
	The FBI executed a search warrant on Urban Movie Systems, the headquarters.
	When they went there, they found a bunch of hard drives and computers, which doesn't make sense for a movie company to be there, and that they were going to basically stop shop after September 11th.
	Then they looked at the financials, and they found that the movie company was funded by Israeli intelligence.
	And then on top of that, the guy that ran the company, a dude named Dominic Suter, right?
	And you guys can all look at the FBI 302s.
	They're all out there, by the way.
	You type in Dancing Israelis, FBI 302s.
	You can read all this yourselves.
	So, they look for this guy, Dominic Souter.
	He runs.
	He flees back to Israel.
	To this day, they still haven't caught him.
	He's hiding out in Israel, this guy, Dominic Souter.
	So, you know, look, when it comes to 9-11, you know, I'm not going to sit here and say, because a lot of people, again, they're lazy and intellectual dishonest.
	Oh, the Jews did 9-11.
	No.
	But what I will say is there was absolutely Israeli Zionist fingerprints all over 9-11 in tandem with other deep state assets, Al-Qaeda.
	And there's even more.
	There's another ring that was caught out of Tennessee that was in the towers months before the towers went down.
	I could go into crazy detail on this, but I don't want to bore your audience.
	But there's a lot of smoke and fire there when it comes to Israeli intelligence assets that were around and or involved with the towers leading up to the attacks.
	I noticed in the chat someone said, why is Viva suggesting the document was fake?
	I'm trying to find the one.
	I know Jeremy the Quartering published it.
	I shared it with Mark privately.
	And it's the one that refers to machine guns and the Jews have the money.
	And I'm not trying to be funny.
	That's not the one I'm referring to.
	No, that's why I just want people to be...
	I'm not saying...
	If we're not talking about the same document, I'm not...
	I am certain that Mark Robert...
	Is certain that the document that talked about the machine guns, I think, and the Cubans and Jews with the backing was fake.
	Because even though it had the CIA numbers on it, whatever it was.
	But, yeah, no, it's...
	Yeah, I mean, I could definitely set up a discussion with Corey Hughes and your guy if you want.
	They can debate it.
	But, yeah, no, I mean...
	The document I'm referring to, basically what it says is, CIA is okay to release, except for brackets.
	And then they finally removed those brackets.
	That I do remember.
	I do remember that, and then people were arguing that it doesn't really inculpate or implicate Israel in the actual plot itself, but that the idea they had to redact that it was even Israel in the first place was to save face for Israel.
	I remember that discussion happening when these files were released.
	That, as well as the James Jesus Angleton, Information is also critical because James Jesus Angleton, he was a high-ranking CIA operative.
	He worked very tightly with the Israeli intelligence agencies, and he was a big part of Israel being able to procure its nuclear weapon program, which obviously happened after John F. Kennedy was assassinated.
	First of all, Viva, I don't get scared for things like this.
	I only get scared for immediate events of potential violence, and that's the fight-or-flight syndrome.
	Viva will get the call after this live LMFA.
	That's funny.
	Just so you understand, with total independence comes certain limitations, but comes certain freedom.
	First of all, they don't have my number, but no, it's funny, just as a joke.
	We've already went over a bunch of different things that most people would never touch, so it's funny that they would say that about me.
	It's a beautiful thing.
	I know I think they mean it tongue-in-cheek, but because, you know, I won't get the call because they won't make it to me because there's no point in making it to me.
	Myron, we're going to do this again, and maybe sooner than later I'll come back down to Miami and we'll do another one, but this is...
	You're always welcome.
	Thank you very much, and ordinarily we'd say our proper goodbyes, but you continue doing your show.
	I'm going to maybe go to my locals after party just for a few minutes.
	Myron, it's fantastic.
	In as much as I disagree with certain things, it's one thing to talk in generalities while simultaneously acknowledging that you don't get to treat any one individual in any predetermined way because of whatever you might assume or say by way of generalities for a group.
	Unfortunately, the human brain works by making rules based on probabilities.
	The true, I would say, criticisable behavior comes when you treat an individual differently as a predetermined basis before even having any discussion with that individual.
	And I dare say, I like it.
	And I appreciate you.
	I appreciate you allowing me the ability to speak and kind of convey my ideas.
	And, you know, though you might not agree, you're open to hearing it out, which I think is something that's like kind of lacking in today's society where people are able to, you know, have a discussion, talk to people and say, you know what?
	Well, OK, you think this way.
	Can you tell me why you think that way?
	Right.
	And I really appreciate you affording me the platform to be able to give my worldviews and why I think the way I do.
	And what I love is that if you've said anything factually incorrect, the aggregate knowledge of the internet is going to figure it out on both of our ends.
	And then it'll make me revise, correct, and be better for the future.
	And the same for you.
	Yes, absolutely, man.
	And that's one of the beauties.
	So, no, it's always great talking about you, Viva.
	It really is.
	I always can, you know, I know I got to bring my A-game.
	Come prepared whenever I talk with you.
	It's always great.
	You're done good.
	I'm going to go back and listen, and I know our community is going to...
	It was never a question of just finding a gotcha.
	If some of the stuff is incorrect, I know that you would reassess as well.
	And that's what it means.
	Have opinions and be ready to be challenged on them.
	Myron, it's amazing.
	I'll DM you after this, and we'll meet up for coffee.
	All right, man.
	Absolutely.
	Take it easy.
	All right.
	Have a good one.
	All right.
	I'm going to go to the locals after party.
	Encrypt us.
	We're going to raid somebody.
	Oh, FYI.
	Let me bring this one up here.
	This little thing is getting worse as the show goes on.
	Yes, it definitely is.
	I noticed that earlier.
	Is it getting worse or is it as bad as it was before?
	No, it's getting worse.
	Oh, crap.
	It says, no, it's getting worse.
	Oh, that hurts.
	Share screen.
	I don't even care if it hurts.
	I'm aware.
	I'm a prepubescent 46-year-old man who picks his skin.
	Nifrandiel says, Viva!
	Salty Bannon Don Jr. livestreams not working for a lot of people.
	The last three days will only play from beginning, not live.
	I will let the team know this, because if you don't know, I...
	I know people.
	I'll send that over and make sure.
	But I'm sure, by the way, if Don Jr. and Bannon and Salty are not working properly, they know as well.
	But look at this crazy face here!
	Who is this guy?
	All right.
	We're going to go to vivabarneslaw.locals.com for the after party.
	It will not be supporters only because I use StreamYard and not Rumble Studio.
	So if you want to come, you don't even have to be a supporter.
	Just be a member.
	You've got to give an email address.
	And we'll have a party there.
	I've got to relieve myself.
	And Viva is going to have some of us.
	Okay.
	I'm not reading those.
	We do have a raid.
	Oh, yeah.
	Who are we raiding?
	Raiding.
	Red Pill News.
	Talking about Virginia's youth raid today.
	Good.
	And you might want to go find out.
	I don't think she killed herself.
	Call me crazy.
	Raid them.
	Let them know from where you came.
	If you're inclined to come over to Locals, come over because it's not financially dependent.
	You can just become a member.
	We've got like 120-some-odd thousand members, I think.
	I have to check what our number's up to.
	But ordinarily, it's for supporters, but not today.
	So do that.
	Encryptus, have we initiated the raid?
	Raid starts now.
	Okay, I see it.
	Let's see what happens if I go.
	I'm going to say the raid.
	Has come.
	Okay, there we go.
	I'm going to put it on pause.
	And that was fantastic.
	I've got to say, this was an amazing show.
	It was one of the longest you've done in a while.
	And it was just entertaining from beginning to end.
	I can appreciate why people don't like what he says.
	And like you say, be second class citizen or be subservient.
	And the flip side way of describing it is, Be the prince to the princess who wakes.
	But then some of them don't even like that.
	And then see what happens if you don't like Disney things anymore.
	Okay, so let's just do this.
	I'm going to end this on Rumble, which I think I've got to go into Rumble to do.
	And everybody, go raid.
	If I end the stream, is it going to end the raid?
	We're going to find out right now.
	I'm going to go to live stream.
	I'm ending the stream.
	Okay, so I'm going to end it on Rumble, and locals, I'll be here in 30 seconds.
	We're going to see what's going on in Canada.
	End stream now.
	I find it really odd.
	Do I have to add myself to the video to talk?
	Yeah, it's weird when you pop one.
	I keep thinking Jack Dorsey's popping up in the back.

▲