Timcast IRL - Tim Pool - Timcast IRL - US Cancels ICBM Test Launch Amid Warnings Of Nuclear War w-Maajid Nawaz

00:00:00.000 Peace.

00:00:22.000 I think this shows the U.S.

00:00:24.000 is taking it seriously, and I think it's good news.

00:00:26.000 I think it shows that there is an interest in preventing it.

00:00:30.000 Right now we're hearing that Russia is... Well, their foreign minister has said World War III will be nuclear, it will be devastating, effectively telling NATO, if you interfere in Ukraine with what's going on, You're gonna start World War 3, it's gonna be nuclear, and I think the one thing we should all be focusing on is whatever we can to make sure something like that doesn't happen.

00:00:50.000 I don't believe in mutually assured destruction, though, and we'll get into that.

00:00:52.000 I do think a nuclear war would be devastating, but I don't think it would be like the movies.

00:00:56.000 So, I will just stress, it is good news that it's happening.

00:00:59.000 We have a bunch of really crazy news, though, coming out of what's happening with Ukraine.

00:01:03.000 EA Sports is going to be removing Russian teams from video games.

00:01:06.000 The Ironman is banning Russian and Belarusian athletes.

00:01:09.000 These are civilians.

00:01:11.000 They're talking about shutting... There was a call, I guess, someone in Ukraine wants Russia to be cut off from the Internet.

00:01:17.000 You know, everybody needs to calm down a little bit.

00:01:20.000 Certainly, I think Russia's invasion is wrong. 0.93

00:01:22.000 They're the aggressors.

00:01:24.000 But let's try and de-escalate things.

00:01:25.000 That's why I wanted to leave with this story about the U.S.

00:01:27.000 cancelling this Minuteman III ICBM test, because I think it's a good gesture so far.

00:01:34.000 It's just a test.

00:01:35.000 I don't think it means a whole lot, but, you know, I want to have some good news.

00:01:38.000 I don't want to just be like the apocalypse.

00:01:40.000 The world is ending.

00:01:40.000 So we're going to talk about this.

00:01:42.000 And then we got something that I think is absolutely fascinating.

00:01:45.000 Chile has passed an anti-discrimination bill For employment, where you cannot discriminate against someone who has altered their genetic material or have been mutated?

00:01:55.000 Now that is strange, and I think it'll be interesting to talk about, especially in the context of the Great Reset, the World Economic Forum, and just a lot of what's been going on with these strange international dealings.

00:02:07.000 Joining us to discuss all of this is Majid Nawaz.

00:02:11.000 Hey, it's Majid.

00:02:12.000 Majid.

00:02:13.000 What are you doing?

00:02:13.000 So who are you?

00:02:14.000 Good to be here.

00:02:17.000 I'm here to have a great conversation with all you guys.

00:02:19.000 I am based in the UK.

00:02:22.000 For your viewers and listeners, I have a... Up until recently, I used to have a show in the UK on the largest commercial radio group.

00:02:32.000 That ended Yeah, absolutely.

00:02:34.000 You were on LBC, right?

00:02:35.000 I was, yeah.

00:02:36.000 London Broadcasting?

00:02:37.000 Leading Britain's Conversation.

00:02:38.000 stand on my own feet and hopefully broadcast again from the UK. We've just

00:02:41.000 acquired a studio actually. Looking forward to it. You should come on my show when we're ready.

00:02:44.000 Yeah, yeah, yeah, absolutely. You were on LBC, right?

00:02:47.000 I was, yeah.

00:02:47.000 London Broadcasting?

00:02:49.000 Leading Britain's Conversation.

00:02:50.000 Oh, I'm way off.

00:02:52.000 Yeah, it started, no, you're right. It started as London's, I think it was London's biggest

00:02:58.000 conversation back in the old days, but then it very soon went national and then obviously via

00:03:03.000 online broadcast went global.

00:03:05.000 And if you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

00:03:06.000 I had a weekend show, it was doing quite well, but my views on opposing mandates, COVID mandates I call them, And calling out Klaus Schwab.

00:03:15.000 Yeah, they led to some difficulties and controversy.

00:03:20.000 That'll be interesting to talk about.

00:03:21.000 So we'll definitely get into that.

00:03:22.000 I think that absolutely has a role to play in, it plays a role in the conflict.

00:03:27.000 You were mentioning something that we'll get into.

00:03:29.000 That this journalist who is saying World War III has started and calling on Boris Johnson to trigger a no-fly zone.

00:03:35.000 You said that she was a young global leader for the World Economic Forum.

00:03:37.000 Yeah, I mean, do you want me to... We can pull that up, actually.

00:03:40.000 We'll pull it up.

00:03:41.000 Just as a preview, I'll mention that.

00:03:42.000 So we'll get into all that stuff.

00:03:44.000 That was in Poland?

00:03:45.000 Yes, in Warsaw.

00:03:46.000 It's a crazy, crazy story.

00:03:47.000 I didn't know that you brought it up.

00:03:49.000 So this is going to be a fascinating conversation.

00:03:51.000 So thanks for coming.

00:03:52.000 We also have Love Doctor.

00:03:53.000 Is that what you want me to say?

00:03:55.000 I am Seamus Coghlan, as they call me, host of ShimCast IRL.

00:03:58.000 You better introduce me as the Love Doctor.

00:03:59.000 I'm like, what?

00:04:00.000 We talked about this before.

00:04:01.000 I'm Love Doctor Coghlan.

00:04:02.000 People ask advice from me.

00:04:04.000 You were going to give me a show on your network.

00:04:06.000 Yeah, that's right.

00:04:06.000 I support it.

00:04:07.000 Tim has a very selective memory.

00:04:08.000 Yeah, sure.

00:04:09.000 But I am Seamus Coghlan, Love Doctor Coghlan, host of ShimCast, creator of Freedom Tunes.

00:04:14.000 I'm wearing a suit because it is Ash Wednesday and I was at Mass.

00:04:17.000 And as you know, when I wear a suit, I take over the show.

00:04:21.000 That's true.

00:04:21.000 So this is ShimCast.

00:04:23.000 I'm very glad you guys, Seamus and Majid.

00:04:24.000 You guys, Majid.

00:04:25.000 Is it Majid or Majid?

00:04:26.000 Both work.

00:04:27.000 Oh, cool.

00:04:28.000 Majid is the Urdu pronunciation and Majid is the Arabic pronunciation.

00:04:30.000 What was the first word?

00:04:31.000 Majid and Majid.

00:04:33.000 Is the what pronunciation?

00:04:33.000 The Urdu?

00:04:34.000 Urdu.

00:04:35.000 Yeah, which is the language in Pakistan and Hindi in India is the same language but different script.

00:04:39.000 Do you have a preference?

00:04:40.000 Uh, Magid works because that's, yeah, in the UK, that's pretty much from school age.

00:04:45.000 Okay.

00:04:45.000 I'm glad you're here.

00:04:46.000 You know, it's Ash Wednesday, like you said, and I'm big on like bringing Islam and Christianity together.

00:04:51.000 Maybe we'll do that today or at least work towards it.

00:04:53.000 We're going to fix that, man.

00:04:54.000 You think we're going to convert all of them to Christianity? 0.99

00:04:56.000 It's one step at a time, baby.

00:04:58.000 The journey is the destination.

00:04:59.000 We'll solve that one.

00:05:00.000 It's like 50 years later and there's like some kids in school and they're like, well, the unification happened when Seamus Coghlan and Magid Noir had a conversation.

00:05:08.000 All truths have been revealed.

00:05:12.000 Yes, I am also here very excited for, I think this is our first guest from the UK.

00:05:17.000 Hopefully we're doing more of them.

00:05:18.000 But I've been on before with the Tim Pool show.

00:05:21.000 That was before this show, right?

00:05:22.000 What happened to that show?

00:05:26.000 So that's, I still do it.

00:05:27.000 I just don't do interviews.

00:05:28.000 How many shows do you have, Ben?

00:05:29.000 Well, I have three YouTube channels.

00:05:31.000 Yeah.

00:05:31.000 And so two of them are very similar.

00:05:35.000 It's like me monologuing.

00:05:36.000 Yeah.

00:05:37.000 But the YouTube.com slash Timcast is talking at the biggest story of the day or whatever.

00:05:42.000 And then YouTube.com slash Timcast News is kind of like morning news and then some culture thing.

00:05:48.000 What did I come with you on?

00:05:50.000 My original YouTube channel.

00:05:52.000 Right.

00:05:52.000 So I interviewed you on there.

00:05:53.000 Oh gee.

00:05:54.000 And basically what happens is I decided to move interviews to a different format.

00:05:57.000 Yeah.

00:05:58.000 Instead of, because it was like, it didn't work.

00:05:59.000 If people like listening to just like me straight talking about news.

00:06:02.000 Yeah.

00:06:03.000 Very different from a conversation.

00:06:04.000 So we kind of split them off.

00:06:05.000 Yeah.

00:06:05.000 But yeah, yeah.

00:06:06.000 I interviewed you out and I'm pretty sure it was California.

00:06:09.000 All I remember is meeting you.

00:06:09.000 I can't remember.

00:06:10.000 We were in a room somewhere.

00:06:11.000 You had a little thing recording device.

00:06:12.000 Maybe it was London.

00:06:13.000 I think it was London, man.

00:06:14.000 I think so.

00:06:15.000 Been there a bunch.

00:06:16.000 It was a while back though.

00:06:17.000 It was a few years ago.

00:06:17.000 Is it still online?

00:06:19.000 Oh yeah, yeah.

00:06:19.000 You'll probably find it.

00:06:20.000 Right on.

00:06:21.000 Yeah, you were talking about the regressive left. 0.94

00:06:22.000 Yeah, that was early days, man.

00:06:23.000 Before that, yeah, before that phrase became popularized.

00:06:26.000 Somebody was like, you gotta talk to Magid.

00:06:27.000 He coined the term, regressive left.

00:06:29.000 Yeah, you know what?

00:06:30.000 It was before.

00:06:30.000 So I had this chat with Sam Harris in this, it eventually became this book that he and I co-authored together, Islam and the Future of Tolerance.

00:06:38.000 And I used it in that conversation with him and the phrase blew up.

00:06:42.000 But actually, it had already been used in my autobiography, Radical, which I think was 2012?

00:06:46.000 I was very upset with the left because they had adopted this kind of relative approach to morality that I found was... Seeds of tyranny.

00:06:55.000 Yeah, precisely.

00:06:56.000 Well, we'll get into that, too.

00:06:57.000 So before we get started, head over to TimCast.com, become a member, help support our work.

00:07:01.000 We're gonna have an absolutely fascinating members-only segment.

00:07:05.000 So if you go to TimCast.com, you will get access to segments from the TimCast IRL podcast, which go up around 11 p.m.

00:07:11.000 Monday through Thursday.

00:07:12.000 We didn't have one yesterday because it was a State of the Union and, you know, Lauren got drunk. 0.62

00:07:16.000 He's great.

00:07:17.000 On air?

00:07:19.000 Yeah.

00:07:21.000 We were drinking every time Biden did something, you know, like predictable.

00:07:25.000 She was just drinking the whole time.

00:07:26.000 She was just drinking the whole time.

00:07:28.000 But it was funny when Biden said we got to secure our borders, she just yells, based, laughing.

00:07:33.000 Like, I can't believe Biden would say that.

00:07:34.000 It was fun.

00:07:35.000 But we went long, and we didn't have a member segment.

00:07:38.000 We're going to have one tonight.

00:07:38.000 It's going to be really fascinating, so don't miss it.

00:07:41.000 As a member, you're helping keep all of our journalists employed, and you're helping us expand the website.

00:07:45.000 And things have been going pretty well, thanks to all of you who are supporting our work.

00:07:48.000 So don't forget to also smash the like button, subscribe to this channel, share the show wherever you can, and take the URL, post it on Facebook, Twitter, whatever you can do if you want to help out.

00:07:56.000 Spread the word.

00:07:57.000 And then let's get into this first story, which I think is It's small, but I think we got some good news here.

00:08:03.000 The Wall Street Journal reports U.S.

00:08:05.000 cancels ICBM test, a test launch amid Ukraine tensions.

00:08:10.000 The move follows Putin's threat to increase readiness of Russia's nuclear forces.

00:08:15.000 They say the Biden administration has canceled a routine test launch of an Air Force Minuteman

00:08:19.000 three missile to avoid escalating nuclear tensions with Russia. US officials said Wednesday,

00:08:25.000 the Air Force had planned to conduct the test launch from Vandenberg Air Force Base in the

00:08:29.000 early hours of Thursday, March 3. And Wednesday, however, the administration decided to postpone

00:08:33.000 the test launch amid tensions with Kremlin over Ukraine. So the news that was coming out is that

00:08:38.000 the foreign minister in Russia said World War Three will be nuclear.

00:08:43.000 It will be devastating.

00:08:45.000 Basically, some have called it a thinly-veiled threat to NATO. 0.96

00:08:49.000 You screw with us, we drop bombs.

00:08:52.000 Others have said it's kind of just a truth that it will come to nuclear war and that he's not trying to say, you know, we'll blow you up.

00:09:00.000 But I see this as maybe not the most important or impactful thing in the world, but I think it shows the U.S.

00:09:06.000 is not willing to push to bring us to that conflict, if even for just something as small as a routine test.

00:09:13.000 Rightly so.

00:09:14.000 But what do you think?

00:09:15.000 Do you think there's a real prospect for escalation outside of Ukraine?

00:09:20.000 Well, there is a danger of escalation if you look to What some of the politicians are pushing there.

00:09:27.000 You look at some of the voices and how they've been talking about this war and it's worrying.

00:09:32.000 I don't think it's going to happen, but I do worry about some of these voices.

00:09:36.000 It's interesting if you notice a pattern, right?

00:09:38.000 The same voices that wanted to impose COVID mandates on everybody else to protect themselves are the same voices that would want to send our sons and relatives to war to protect themselves.

00:09:54.000 Yep.

00:09:54.000 Well, I tell you, I got some applications for the Army for everybody who's in favor of U.S.

00:09:58.000 intervention.

00:09:59.000 By all means, sign on up and head on over.

00:10:00.000 And they won't.

00:10:01.000 Of course.

00:10:01.000 They'd rather we go.

00:10:03.000 They don't want to go.

00:10:04.000 They'd rather we go and serve their aims and their purposes.

00:10:08.000 Worse still, I think they'd rather your children go.

00:10:10.000 Exactly.

00:10:10.000 Horrifying.

00:10:11.000 And that's how it's always been, though.

00:10:13.000 You're still fighting age, though, Tim.

00:10:15.000 Me?

00:10:16.000 I'm 35.

00:10:16.000 I'm going to be 36 in seven days.

00:10:18.000 Yeah, you're still fighting age.

00:10:20.000 I suppose.

00:10:20.000 Don't say it.

00:10:21.000 He's gonna start walking around with a cane.

00:10:23.000 And I will brag, my resting heart rate, 48.

00:10:26.000 Alright, well you just got drafted, buddy.

00:10:29.000 Good job.

00:10:29.000 My goodness.

00:10:31.000 I've been, I got this health app and I've been, you know, blood pressure has improved dramatically.

00:10:35.000 I fixed my diet, I've been exercising.

00:10:38.000 You're a super soldier, is what you're saying.

00:10:40.000 Tim's like, I don't want to fight in the war, but I would be the best soldier.

00:10:42.000 I'd win it by myself.

00:10:44.000 I feel like it's a great accomplishment for myself to be getting healthy.

00:10:47.000 I feel like everybody should do that.

00:10:48.000 Absolutely.

00:10:49.000 I'm just going to brag about it.

00:10:50.000 Well, if the military's watching, I'm just in horrible shape.

00:10:54.000 Seamus's feet are so flat.

00:10:56.000 The flattest feet ever.

00:10:57.000 Yeah, exactly.

00:10:58.000 I'm going to say that's good news.

00:11:00.000 I'm happy they're doing this, because it is good to de-escalate.

00:11:03.000 But some of the rhetoric, I mean, we had the mayor of London.

00:11:06.000 Talk about, look, you know, if there is a nuclear attack on London, we're ready.

00:11:10.000 That kind of rhetoric is just unnecessary, I think, considering what's going on.

00:11:15.000 And what's going on is worrying.

00:11:16.000 I mean, look, Putin invaded a country, right?

00:11:19.000 Nobody can countenance or condone the invasion of any country.

00:11:24.000 I just find it strange that the voices that, some of the voices that, till this day, don't accept it was wrong to invade Iraq or Afghanistan, are now condemning Putin's invasion of a foreign country.

00:11:34.000 I seem to think of it as we're invading Iraq right now.

00:11:37.000 It's a constant invasion.

00:11:38.000 Well, we're still there.

00:11:39.000 We're occupation.

00:11:40.000 We are occupying and invading that country on a daily basis by being there.

00:11:44.000 It's not like it happened in the past.

00:11:46.000 It's happening right now.

00:11:46.000 The thing is, what I find amazing with this, and I think it's really interesting that we're, I believe we're in, George Orwell in 1984 split the world up.

00:11:55.000 into four different blocks, right?

00:12:00.000 Oceana, which was Landing Strip 1, which is the UK, and then America and its sphere of influence, which includes what we call the Five Eyes, so Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the Anglo-Saxon sphere.

00:12:12.000 The other block that Orwell used in 1984 was East Asia, and that just considered China in that area.

00:12:18.000 And then he had Eurasia, right?

00:12:20.000 Eurasia was Russia and Europe. 0.91

00:12:22.000 And then there was the disputed territory, which, if you think about today, it's very accurate. 0.97

00:12:28.000 It was the Muslim-majority lands that are the subject of the whims of the other three and still disputed, right? 0.88

00:12:35.000 So if you look at how Orwell divided the world, it's so curious to me today that when you look at these blocks emerging and you look at the current conflict, you can see a Eurasia, the Russian sphere of influence, emerging.

00:12:46.000 You can see post-Brexit Oceania emerging, which is the Anglo-Saxon world. 0.88

00:12:51.000 And you can see China already there with East Asia, and you can see that they are all fighting over the resources in the Middle East.

00:12:57.000 It's very curious to see how accurate Orwell's vision of the world was.

00:13:00.000 I wonder if it's a self-fulfilling prophecy, like Jules Verne would draw the submarine in 1820 or whenever, well before they ever created them.

00:13:07.000 And then, you know, art becomes a reality.

00:13:09.000 You had very primitive submarines prior to that, actually.

00:13:11.000 Yeah, very primitive ones.

00:13:12.000 In fact, there were plans for submarines drawn up as early as like the late 1500s.

00:13:16.000 Oh, interesting.

00:13:18.000 Da Vinci, for instance, would pen helicopters.

00:13:20.000 He would draw those well before they were ever invented.

00:13:22.000 I wonder if Orwell created a fantasy realm that is now being created.

00:13:26.000 Yeah, he got the date wrong.

00:13:29.000 We're in 2022.

00:13:30.000 However, I do think it was more than a coincidence.

00:13:33.000 The man served in wars abroad.

00:13:36.000 He kind of had quite a strong grip on world affairs.

00:13:39.000 But he was a man looking through a keyhole.

00:13:42.000 Yeah.

00:13:42.000 Trying to see the entirety of a ballroom.

00:13:44.000 Yeah.

00:13:44.000 And so if you look at Brave New World, I think we're seeing elements of that.

00:13:47.000 Absolutely.

00:13:48.000 Fahrenheit 451.

00:13:49.000 Yeah. 0.99

00:13:49.000 Prophetic. 0.99

00:13:50.000 And a V for Vendetta, even.

00:13:50.000 Indeed.

00:13:52.000 I mean, there's this... Great film.

00:13:53.000 Oh, graphic novel.

00:13:53.000 Yeah.

00:13:54.000 And graphic novel.

00:13:55.000 Yeah, that's right.

00:13:55.000 So, graphic novel is very, very different.

00:13:57.000 I've not read it, but it was very different.

00:13:59.000 Where I was going with this, though, is that we are unaware of how we are perceived in Oceania.

00:14:04.000 I'm going to use that phrase to refer to the Anglo-Saxon world today, just to continue with Orwell's kind of point there.

00:14:11.000 We're unaware how we're perceived.

00:14:13.000 So when we condemn, and we should condemn, Russia's invasion of Ukraine, what we don't realize is that the vast majority of the rest of the world, the vast majority of humanity, are laughing at us because we're still in Iraq.

00:14:26.000 We brought up earlier how valuable it is to know what the world was like before the internet.

00:14:29.000 If you know what the world was like before the invasion of Iraq, you know that it's not normal.

00:14:34.000 And it's the bastardization of truth and justice and honesty and leadership.

00:14:37.000 And we've completely lost any moral high ground to talk about this.

00:14:41.000 And that's part of the problem that, you know, the media is whipping up such a frenzy over this.

00:14:46.000 And then I remember just two years ago, I went on a five day hunger strike because of the Uyghur genocide in China.

00:14:51.000 I remember that. And the purpose was to get a hundred thousand signatures on a

00:14:54.000 petition because there's a parliamentary petition. If you get a hundred thousand signatures on that petition, you

00:15:00.000 force a debate in parliament.

00:15:01.000 Now we got that 100,000 within five days and then it went to parliament and

00:15:07.000 then they voted unanimously on the fact that there was a genocide in China, but it was

00:15:12.000 only a symbolic vote, which is why it got through.

00:15:15.000 It would not have got through if it wasn't a symbolic vote.

00:15:17.000 So you got these talking heads like the mayor of London and others like certain politicians, war hawks, who are talking about the need to impose a no-fly zone.

00:15:27.000 Over Ukraine, which would mean that we shoot down Russian jets, which is an act of war, right? 0.99

00:15:33.000 So these idiots don't realise that you end up declaring war on Russia if you do that. 0.99

00:15:36.000 Those same voices were not only quiet about the genocide in China, the Uighur genocide, but resisted any effort to hold China accountable for it. 1.00

00:15:46.000 Well, we had the Olympics there, and we still sent our athletes over.

00:15:46.000 Yeah, exactly.

00:15:49.000 And what were you mentioning earlier, Tim, with the Russians, that we were pulling their athletes, or can you refresh my memory?

00:15:55.000 Yeah, so several organizations have banned Russian and Belarusian athletes from competing, like Ironman did it, and there's a couple others.

00:16:03.000 Triathlon.

00:16:04.000 The spirit of the Olympics is that even if you're at war, you send your best athletes, you let them pass through your territory unhindered, and then they all compete, because it's the spirit of human competition.

00:16:12.000 It's beyond warfare.

00:16:14.000 I just find it so out of touch.

00:16:15.000 And then there are these calls... Look, again, I'm going to have to re-emphasise every time I say something on this topic, but again, Putin should not have gone into Ukraine.

00:16:25.000 But he's not hitler and there are these people saying he's the new hitler when you've got an active genocide going on

00:16:29.000 in china And the worst part of this is when you talk about hitler

00:16:33.000 and nazism in ukraine in 2014 There was a change of regime that we in the west encouraged

00:16:39.000 the maidan Uprising that putin would call a coup now, whatever word

00:16:43.000 you want to use there was regime change that we We meaning our intelligence agencies

00:16:48.000 Backed with full throttle wholeheartedly. We backed that regime change because the government in ukraine was pro-russia 0.78

00:16:55.000 It pulled out of the affiliation with the EU and we didn't like that.

00:16:59.000 We wanted it to be pro-West.

00:17:00.000 So we backed that regime change.

00:17:02.000 Who do we bring to power?

00:17:04.000 Nazis, actual Nazis.

00:17:06.000 You think Zelensky or?

00:17:07.000 No, no, he's not a Nazi, he's Jewish.

00:17:09.000 But you've got this thing called the Azov Brigade.

00:17:11.000 Yeah, yeah, the battalion, right?

00:17:14.000 Azov Battalion.

00:17:15.000 They are an armed Nazi battalion. 0.79

00:17:17.000 Now, the word Nazi, the problem is it's been so overused today

00:17:20.000 that nobody really believes the word Nazi or racist when it actually deserves to be used.

00:17:25.000 But let's just be very clear.

00:17:26.000 These guys have, uh, they are swastika raising actual neo-Nazis.

00:17:31.000 And I mean that in the literal sense of the word.

00:17:33.000 And even the word literal is no longer literally.

00:17:35.000 It's literally been changed.

00:17:38.000 We talked about those with Lauren Southern as well.

00:17:38.000 It means something else.

00:17:40.000 It is unbelievable, right?

00:17:41.000 And they are formally incorporated into the Ukrainian National Guard.

00:17:47.000 We funded them, by the way.

00:17:48.000 When I say we funded them, actually sent them money.

00:17:52.000 We trained them, we funded them.

00:17:54.000 Canada, the US and the UK were involved in backing this battalion.

00:17:59.000 And then they were incorporated into the Ukrainian National Guard.

00:18:02.000 And then once Putin attacked, The Ukrainian National Guard from their official and formal and verified Twitter account posted a video bragging that this was an Azov fighter dipping bullets in pig's lard saying that he was going to go and find the Muslims.

00:18:19.000 It's like that urban legend, that apocryphal story.

00:18:22.000 Are you familiar?

00:18:25.000 There's an American general in the Middle East, killed a bunch of Islamic soldiers, but kept one alive and put pig's blood on the corpses and said, go tell everyone what we did.

00:18:36.000 But I believe that story is not true.

00:18:37.000 Yeah, I don't think, but this one is a video that's been posted.

00:18:41.000 No, right, right, right.

00:18:42.000 I'm saying he probably saw that meme story on the internet.

00:18:46.000 Maybe, but the thing is, let's put aside the emotional reaction that some people may have to that video, right, and consider it strategically.

00:18:55.000 The mistake historically that Chamberlain made was to appease Nazism in Europe in the belief that they could be of use to defeat the Soviet Union.

00:19:03.000 So, we know how that ended.

00:19:05.000 What you've got at the moment is you've got a Nazi battalion as formally incorporated into the Ukrainian army, in their military, and neo-Nazis from around the world are now travelling there to train with them.

00:19:17.000 They are armed and they are part of the Ukrainian armed forces.

00:19:20.000 My question is, if they win, or if Ukraine is split to East and West and you've got the river in the middle, if Putin takes, from the upper river, if Putin takes Eastern Ukraine, And the Ukrainian regime that's there currently keeps the western part.

00:19:34.000 The Nazis that are serving in their National Guard, in their army, who are pretty much the most powerful faction in terms of grassroots mobilization.

00:19:42.000 I mean, guys, there are videos of children's summer camps in Ukraine making Nazi sleuths.

00:19:47.000 There's Nazi summer camps.

00:19:49.000 They've had mass rallies.

00:19:50.000 These are actual proper organized Nazis with swastikas, with insignia and everything.

00:19:55.000 Now imagine in whichever part they end up maintaining, they are now the government.

00:20:00.000 So you've got an actual Nazi government that we funded and backed.

00:20:03.000 Sounds a lot like ISIS. 0.99

00:20:05.000 Yeah, sounds like an easy target.

00:20:05.000 And why, how did Al-Qaeda get created?

00:20:08.000 The CIA were funding what they... The Mujahideen. 0.96

00:20:10.000 That's right, right?

00:20:11.000 To defeat the Soviets. 0.73

00:20:12.000 Now, if it's not okay to... They don't learn, do they?

00:20:15.000 No, it's the same thing over and over again.

00:20:16.000 It's intentional.

00:20:17.000 They did learn, and they... No, here's the thing.

00:20:20.000 They do study history.

00:20:21.000 It's just that World War II is the only thing that ever happened in all of history, so anytime anything happens, we...

00:20:26.000 We have to say, that guy is Hitler. 0.90

00:20:29.000 And so like you said, pointing to Putin and going, that guy's Hitler.

00:20:32.000 I mean, I don't know.

00:20:33.000 He's a tyrannical leader over Russia and now he's imposing himself on Ukrainians.

00:20:38.000 Is there anyone in history who that just sounds like a little bit more like besides Hitler? 0.72

00:20:43.000 Yeah.

00:20:44.000 I mean, he's an illiberal autocrat is the word to describe.

00:20:46.000 Illiberal?

00:20:47.000 Illiberal autocrat, right?

00:20:48.000 He's a dictator who's not, he's not really keen on elections, but he's not Hitler.

00:20:52.000 There's actual Nazis we're funding and backing.

00:20:55.000 This sounds like the overthrow of the Shah in Iran when we put the Ayatollah in power.

00:20:59.000 And it was like a radical, well, from what I've learned, and maybe you can enlighten me, a radical Islamic regime in power because we wanted it to fight and destabilize the region. 0.87

00:21:07.000 But then it ended up destabilizing the whole world from my perspective.

00:21:10.000 More modern, it's Syria. 0.99

00:21:11.000 That was 79, yeah.

00:21:12.000 It's the same M.O.

00:21:15.000 And some people say, look, your country's been invaded.

00:21:16.000 Everyone should fight.

00:21:17.000 We don't care if they're Nazis.

00:21:18.000 And my point is, look, every country has racists and every country has Nazis and every country has jihadist extremists.

00:21:24.000 But if you organize them into a formal battalion, that's the equivalent.

00:21:28.000 So the analogy is false there with saying every country has racists.

00:21:31.000 The equivalent analogy is the U.S.

00:21:33.000 armed forces having a formal KKK battalion with KKK flags as part of the army.

00:21:39.000 That's the analogy, right?

00:21:41.000 It's shocking.

00:21:42.000 If the U.S.

00:21:42.000 did that, if the U.K.

00:21:44.000 did that, people would be up in arms.

00:21:45.000 But we're funding it in Ukraine.

00:21:46.000 And how come many of these woke YouTubers and personalities who have no problem, in fact, monetize attacking Nazis are now very much in favor?

00:21:58.000 Of our support of these groups in Ukraine.

00:22:00.000 Right, so, listen, like, promoting a white man at work is deemed racist, but literally funding an actual Nazi armed battalion is fine.

00:22:11.000 The enemy of my enemy is my friend, so they say.

00:22:13.000 I'm not a fan of that ideology.

00:22:15.000 Well, if they're going to say that, then I'm going to hold them to their word and say, so why is it wrong to fund ISIS in Syria and go and join them?

00:22:20.000 We've got, we've got UK media calling for British citizen volunteers to go and join the Foreign Legion in Ukraine and join these people.

00:22:28.000 So hang on a minute.

00:22:29.000 So when young Muslim men went to join ISIS in Syria, that's terrorism, but you can go and join a Nazi brigade in Ukraine. 0.89

00:22:35.000 It's because public perception.

00:22:39.000 Look, ISIS somehow managed to get, I think the famous image was like a Detroit plumbing company pickup truck in Syria or whatever.

00:22:46.000 And everyone's like, how did they get this?

00:22:48.000 How were these weapons being given to many of these rebel groups ultimately then becoming ISIS?

00:22:53.000 And it's because, I think it's fair to say, and correct me if I'm wrong, if the US wants to destabilize a region, they provide material support to insurgent groups or extremist groups who then create problems.

00:23:03.000 Well, and so then that begs the question, what's going on in Ukraine, really?

00:23:07.000 Like, why have we been funding armed Nazi battalions who have now been incorporated into the Ukrainian regime?

00:23:14.000 What's going on?

00:23:14.000 I feel like it wouldn't be out of the question.

00:23:16.000 And far be it from me, I'm not an expert.

00:23:19.000 I think it's possible the country splits in half.

00:23:21.000 Yeah.

00:23:21.000 So I spent some time during my Dan.

00:23:24.000 I went to Ukraine and I got to meet people and talk to them.

00:23:28.000 Everybody down there was pro-EU.

00:23:30.000 They said getting access to the Schengen zone, getting access to the European Union means a better economy.

00:23:35.000 And Russia wants them to join the Trade Federation, which is similar, but much weaker and smaller, and it was a bad deal for Ukrainians.

00:23:42.000 Not to mention, a lot of people I talked to said, honestly, we're scared of what Russia would do if they're given power over us because we saw what happened last time they had power over us.

00:23:51.000 Holodomor. 0.58

00:23:52.000 So many of these people, especially in Kiev, were very much like, rather be with Europe.

00:23:56.000 Sorry.

00:23:57.000 It seems like the U.S.

00:23:58.000 has been using influence tactics, bribery, manipulation, like we saw with Joe Biden.

00:24:03.000 If you don't fire the prosecutor, you don't get the billion dollar guaranteed loans, which is criminal, and he admitted to it.

00:24:10.000 It was influence tactics.

00:24:11.000 But the bribes, the cash, the money, it works.

00:24:14.000 Putin didn't have that.

00:24:15.000 Apparently they didn't care enough.

00:24:16.000 But like you mentioned, the regime changed in 2014.

00:24:19.000 The President Yanukovych was effectively ousted, fled the country, went to Russia.

00:24:22.000 The new government comes in, very pro-West.

00:24:25.000 So Russia loses because of that protest.

00:24:28.000 And now it seems his only option, it seems to be a last resort physical invasion.

00:24:32.000 Well, why was that so important to him after he lost is really interesting.

00:24:39.000 Most of Germany's gas comes through Ukraine, yeah?

00:24:42.000 And that's why he was building Nord Stream 2 to go through the Black Sea to bypass, because if you think about it... Baltic?

00:24:48.000 Sorry, the Baltic Sea, yeah.

00:24:49.000 If you think about it, he had the access through Ukraine, he loses that, and so he tries to build Nord Stream 2 to go straight to Germany.

00:24:56.000 That gets thwarted.

00:24:58.000 Now he's got a problem.

00:24:59.000 By Trump.

00:25:00.000 Exactly.

00:25:01.000 Right?

00:25:01.000 Interesting, right?

00:25:02.000 Right.

00:25:02.000 Now he's got a problem.

00:25:04.000 He's lost the gas going through Ukraine because the regime's changed.

00:25:08.000 He can't build it through the sea.

00:25:10.000 But he's the second largest oil producer in the world.

00:25:14.000 Now, if you want to understand, if Americans want to understand how that feels, when Ukraine was lost, As in Putin lost Ukraine, it went into the American sphere of influence.

00:25:27.000 You end up with calls for it to join NATO.

00:25:30.000 And from 1997, the expansion of NATO eastwards has incorporated most of those countries.

00:25:37.000 But Ukraine is right on the border with Russia.

00:25:40.000 So if you go back to the Cuban Missile Crisis, and you remember what it felt like for Kennedy to have those missiles pointed at America from Cuba, just 100 or so miles away.

00:25:49.000 Putin's got to a point where he's saying, you're building bases on my border, you're asking for NATO membership, and this is my backyard, why could Ukraine not have stayed neutral?

00:25:59.000 That's the geopolitical conflict that's going on at the moment.

00:26:01.000 I think that's part of it, but Latvia and Estonia are NATO members, and they're on the border with Russia as well.

00:26:07.000 According to Scott Horton, who was just on Kennedy Nation, he was saying that it was Condoleezza Rice that got them into NATO and put long-range Tomahawk missile nuclear rockets.

00:26:14.000 Yeah, but they didn't have the gas going through them.

00:26:16.000 Exactly.

00:26:17.000 So, you know, one of the things I've been saying is there's the belief that a lot of people have a lot of people believe the conspiracy theory Vladimir Putin is fighting Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum and the New World Order.

00:26:28.000 You had that that Ukrainian member of parliament who said that we are fighting for a new world order.

00:26:34.000 And so there are people who believe that there's this great global battle and Putin is defying it.

00:26:38.000 And I'm like, Putin just wants to make sure he's getting the proper resources in exchange for the oil he produces so that he can fund his country.

00:26:43.000 I wonder, do you think he has some sort of issue with the World Economic Forum?

00:26:47.000 Well, he was on their website.

00:26:49.000 He was a member.

00:26:50.000 So I don't know if that holds up because he was a member himself and they've just taken his profile off the website.

00:26:55.000 Oh wow.

00:26:55.000 When Switzerland... They just removed him.

00:26:57.000 Switzerland is no longer neutral.

00:26:58.000 They finally declared non-neutrality in a war for the first time I've ever seen.

00:27:02.000 And that's where the Bank of International Settlements is, which is the central bank of central banks.

00:27:06.000 Yeah, well, what I can say is that when you cancel Russia from SWIFT and Visa and Mastercard, what you are doing is precipitating the need for Russia to develop its own financial system. 0.54

00:27:21.000 Now, when you kick Russia out of that, That could lead to a run on Russian banks, and if there's a run on Russian banks, if Germany as it is is dependent on Russian gas, that will have a knock-on effect on Germany's economy, and you could end up with Weimar-style hyperinflation.

00:27:38.000 That could lead to a... In Russia?

00:27:41.000 But not just Russia, outside of Russia, because Germany relies on Russian gas.

00:27:44.000 So energy prices spike, we're already seeing that.

00:27:47.000 Four bucks for gas out here.

00:27:49.000 So the huge spike in energy prices has a knock-on effect to the point where stagflation really pretty much ends up destroying the currency.

00:27:57.000 So it could end up being used regardless of whether it's planned or not.

00:28:00.000 I tend not to go into intentions.

00:28:02.000 I just look at reality and describe it and say this is what's happening.

00:28:06.000 So you could end up with a scenario where, because of stagflation, the dollar as a global reserve currency comes under intense pressure.

00:28:14.000 And it's that moment that is used as an opportunity to switch over to central banking digital currencies.

00:28:19.000 Well, so let me ask you, what is the relevance of Vladimir Putin being kicked out of, removed from the World Economic Forum website?

00:28:26.000 I mean, we're talking about financial currencies, we're talking about the World Economic Forum.

00:28:31.000 It feels like I've got a bunch of points that seem like they're connected.

00:28:34.000 The World Economic Forum, the International Monetary Fund, the SWIFT payment system, Russia being, you know, starting a war, then being booted.

00:28:40.000 What's the connection here?

00:28:41.000 I mean, was Russia involved in the liberal economic order?

00:28:44.000 Is he not involved in that?

00:28:45.000 I don't think Putin is, but I think that this will be an opportunity for the introduction of, it potentially could be, I should say, for the introduction of central banking digital currencies, which I describe as vouchers.

00:28:58.000 But it sounds like what Putin is doing is going to help make that a reality.

00:29:04.000 Yeah.

00:29:05.000 So it sounds like... That makes it sound like it's one big plot.

00:29:09.000 Well, you don't need to... See, this is the thing.

00:29:12.000 We don't need to worry about intentions just to understand what the consequences of these actions are.

00:29:17.000 Yeah, agreed.

00:29:17.000 And that's where people get stuck.

00:29:19.000 They get stuck on intentions.

00:29:20.000 And I'm like, well...

00:29:21.000 It doesn't matter what Putin intended, if the consequences of kicking Russia out of the SWIFT system mean that you end up with this financial money supply division on the planet, you then have got these blocks, Eurasia and Oceania.

00:29:36.000 And what that leads to is, if you can no longer trade with Russian banks, when you're buying Russian gas in your Germany, and you can no longer buy from Russia because you can't pay them, Bitcoin.

00:29:48.000 And already we see Bitcoin flooding into Ukraine to fund the opposition, right?

00:29:53.000 Now, how do you control that?

00:29:54.000 Because one thing we do know is Bitcoin isn't in the interests of the banking establishment.

00:30:00.000 Or is it?

00:30:02.000 Well, you tell me.

00:30:03.000 I think what they would want to do is introduce central banking digital currencies.

00:30:06.000 That's what they've told us they want.

00:30:09.000 I think there's a good possibility.

00:30:10.000 When you look at the prominence of Bitcoin over the past 10 years, it would not be hard for a nation to gain enough control over the network to create faux centralization.

00:30:23.000 A lot of people say, oh, that can't happen.

00:30:25.000 I don't believe it.

00:30:26.000 But what's the current market cap for Bitcoin?

00:30:29.000 Do you know?

00:30:29.000 Is it $1 trillion?

00:30:30.000 My guess is $2.1 trillion.

00:30:31.000 Let's find out.

00:30:32.000 No, it's gonna be less than that.

00:30:33.000 $1.9 trillion.

00:30:33.000 You could have market manipulation, right?

00:30:35.000 Yep.

00:30:36.000 You can manipulate the market there.

00:30:37.000 We absolutely do.

00:30:38.000 China's been doing it like crazy. 1.00

00:30:40.000 It's $1.93 trillion.

00:30:40.000 $1.93 trillion.

00:30:41.000 No, that's the global market cap of all crypto right now.

00:30:44.000 Of all crypto?

00:30:45.000 The Bitcoin market cap is $832 billion.

00:30:48.000 $832 billion.

00:30:49.000 So let's go back seven years.

00:30:51.000 The market cap of crypto was substantially less.

00:30:53.000 The U.S., NATO countries could have easily bought in and controlled more than 51% of the Bitcoin network, which would give them control over how it works, effectively.

00:31:05.000 It's a little bit more complicated than that.

00:31:06.000 I'm trying to simplify it.

00:31:07.000 The point is, It just requires immense managerial power, but from the early stages, we could see the true power of Bitcoin.

00:31:16.000 I've long speculated and even told all of my crazy anarchists and libertarian friends, I'm like, what if, you know, you're buying into Bitcoin?

00:31:24.000 What if that's the global currency?

00:31:26.000 It's public ledger.

00:31:28.000 Anyone can track.

00:31:29.000 The AI systems, their computers, they'll figure out what your address is in seconds.

00:31:36.000 And there's nothing you can do to stop them.

00:31:38.000 You know, I got to tell you, man, I have seen brilliant private investigatorial work from individuals.

00:31:44.000 There's an individual who has doxed in the UK.

00:31:48.000 He was posting on social media.

00:31:50.000 How did they find out who he was?

00:31:51.000 They knew the sound of his voice.

00:31:54.000 So they looked at the average, they took a bunch of his posts and found the average time of posting and they said, this shows the individual is in this region of the UK.

00:32:04.000 They then looked for a person who fit key details, background, age, interests, hobbies.

00:32:10.000 A human being did all of that work.

00:32:12.000 Imagine what a computer can do when you're doing transactions.

00:32:15.000 They'll instantly know what part of the world you're in.

00:32:17.000 From there, they break it down.

00:32:18.000 They know what you're buying because they know what everyone else is buying.

00:32:21.000 The Bitcoin ledger is publicly trackable.

00:32:25.000 And when they talk about Zcash and Monero, which are two cryptos which are supposedly secure, we learned that the FBI was able to track Monero payments when they arrested that woman, the Crocodile of Wall Street lady.

00:32:36.000 I think there's, I'm not saying, I'm a big fan of Bitcoin.

00:32:38.000 So you're talking about the privacy concerns on the ledger, but what you still can't do is control the supply.

00:32:46.000 I mean, you can manipulate the price.

00:32:48.000 You can control the supply.

00:32:49.000 Of Bitcoin.

00:32:50.000 It's called a 51% attack.

00:32:52.000 If you control more than... No, I mean the overall amount of Bitcoin in the world.

00:32:55.000 Once it's hit its maximum cap, right?

00:32:58.000 You can't just print more Bitcoin once that's done.

00:33:01.000 Right, right, right.

00:33:01.000 Bitcoin... Unlike fiat currency.

00:33:03.000 But with a 51% attack, you can effectively do anything you want.

00:33:06.000 Yeah.

00:33:07.000 So if you control more than half of the nodes, then you basically tell the fork what to do.

00:33:13.000 Now, of course, if you go too hard, you'll create a hard fork and it'll split the blockchain in half.

00:33:18.000 We've seen that happen on accident before.

00:33:21.000 What I'm saying is, I don't know if it's true.

00:33:22.000 A lot of people say, no, Tim, calm down, this can never happen.

00:33:25.000 But if the US and Western powers or even China and Russia bought in very very early on and

00:33:32.000 have maintained growth of their of their bitcoin nodes they could absolutely control more

00:33:36.000 than half the network which gives them control of the entirety of the system. So I think what

00:33:41.000 you're describing is the compared to what can be done with fiat money in a in a

00:33:48.000 sovereign nation is probably a less worse case scenario than what we currently have with the 0.99

00:33:53.000 control of the money supply.

00:33:54.000 Bitcoin's great.

00:33:55.000 It's horrible what's going on right now.

00:33:56.000 They can print 800 billion of fiat and then just buy all the Bitcoin.

00:33:59.000 Now there's also concerns about quantum computing being able to crack private keys, in which case the system is just a facade.

00:34:07.000 That, though, could be met.

00:34:08.000 So when we reach quantum power in that way, and it's sustainable, I think you also end up with quantum encryption that can actually... So the technology improves in its encryption capabilities, not just in its hacking capabilities.

00:34:21.000 Exactly.

00:34:21.000 Quantum resistance.

00:34:23.000 Right, yeah.

00:34:24.000 So the Bitcoin community, All the people involved could choose to hard fork on purpose with new resilience and new technology.

00:34:32.000 I will say this.

00:34:33.000 It is my personal opinion that Bitcoin will become a dominant global standard for exchange and store of value in some meaningful way.

00:34:41.000 I've long thought that was the case, and that's why I've said, how do you know this is not the global currency?

00:34:46.000 That's something they want.

00:34:47.000 But I'll put it very simply.

00:34:48.000 I've long said I believe one Bitcoin will become worth a million dollars, equivalent buying power.

00:34:53.000 I believe we're on track for that.

00:34:54.000 I don't know exactly when or how, but I do believe that, and I've certainly bought my share of Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies because I truly believe it.

00:35:01.000 I'm not telling anybody what to do, I'm just saying what I've done.

00:35:04.000 I believe there comes a time, we're watching what's happening in Russia, every incentive is being given to them to back their financial markets using Bitcoin as the facilitation mechanism.

00:35:13.000 Yeah, that's the consequence of what's happening.

00:35:15.000 Or a central bank token, which is worse than, well, it's different than a crypto because it's not on a blockchain.

00:35:20.000 It's just a central bank.

00:35:21.000 They have it on a ledger, but it's a digital currency that they can track.

00:35:24.000 It's less secure.

00:35:25.000 That's a disaster.

00:35:25.000 I know.

00:35:26.000 Because I could tell you from there, this is what I'm worried about, because I could say, right, You're not going to buy meat this week.

00:35:32.000 You've had your quota.

00:35:33.000 Which you can't, even if you can manipulate the Bitcoin price, if you control 51%, what you can't do is say, right, you can't use the tiny bit of Bitcoin that you own to buy that meat.

00:35:44.000 You have to buy bugs.

00:35:46.000 It depends on if they can gain control of the exchanges, which they mostly can.

00:35:52.000 So if people are, I'll put it this way, they can ban your address from sending or receiving through certain exchanges.

00:36:00.000 So they can say all of our financial institutions and mechanism, the companies that facilitate the exchange, we won't allow it.

00:36:06.000 The blockchain still exists, which means you could easily find someone who just says, I'll do a direct address transfer outside of an exchange.

00:36:12.000 They could do something like a centrally controlled economy could do something where if you have crypto, you have to buy NFTs as vouchers, and then you use those NFTs for specific things.

00:36:20.000 So you can only use those NFTs for food, for liquor, for cars.

00:36:25.000 The currency would need to be fungible, but they can control the system.

00:36:28.000 It doesn't need to be, you know, unique tokens specifically, right?

00:36:31.000 I think this is the, so we've got the Chancellor of Exchequer in the UK, Rishi Sunak, openly declaring this, that as the leader of the G7 they're going to introduce central banking digital currencies, right?

00:36:42.000 And this is what I'm calling as vouchers.

00:36:45.000 And so fiat money pretty much at some stage is going to come to an end.

00:36:50.000 And what you've described as the potential dangers and pitfalls of Bitcoin specifically or crypto generally, I still think is a least worst case scenario when you can consider what can happen with CBDC.

00:37:01.000 I agree.

00:37:01.000 I just want to say real quick, I'm sort of playing devil's advocate on the potential risks of Bitcoin.

00:37:07.000 I genuinely think it's better.

00:37:09.000 I think it's fantastic.

00:37:10.000 And I think it's going to become a million dollars per Bitcoin.

00:37:13.000 It's good that you're doing it because it's like, don't let a crisis go to waste.

00:37:15.000 And what's happening is the bankers are looking at Bitcoin as a crisis, and they're trying to make sure that they can turn it into an opportunity.

00:37:21.000 Just like Joe Biden encouraged us to do last night in his campaign speech.

00:37:27.000 They called it a State of the Union, but it was just a campaign speech.

00:37:30.000 At the very end he was like, and what, by the way, the State of the Union?

00:37:32.000 The State of the Union is strong.

00:37:34.000 The State of the Union is strong because the people are strong.

00:37:37.000 Strong, strong, strong!

00:37:37.000 And everyone's like, yeah!

00:37:39.000 We're strong!

00:37:39.000 And we're going to end cancer.

00:37:40.000 You see that joke where at the end he says, go get them!

00:37:44.000 And everyone's like, what?

00:37:46.000 Like, what does that mean?

00:37:47.000 Yeah, who?

00:37:47.000 Who?

00:37:48.000 Who's that?

00:37:48.000 He's inciting an insurrection.

00:37:50.000 That's during the standing ovation, wasn't it?

00:37:52.000 Yeah, and then someone I think from the Daily Wire said, that was just a part of the prompter that Biden wasn't supposed to read.

00:38:00.000 It was instructions to his handlers.

00:38:03.000 Go get him.

00:38:03.000 That's hilarious.

00:38:04.000 We were debating if he said, when he was saying the Ukrainian people, at one point he said the Uranian people.

00:38:09.000 He said Iranian.

00:38:12.000 The closest real word to the sound he made is Iranian, but it sounded like Uranian, so I was making fun of him like he was talking about Uranus.

00:38:19.000 I think Uranus.

00:38:20.000 That's how I say it.

00:38:21.000 He said Iranian.

00:38:22.000 Russia will never get the hearts and minds of the Iranian people. 0.97

00:38:26.000 Never say never.

00:38:28.000 But here's the important point here.

00:38:32.000 Why do we believe he meant to say Ukrainian?

00:38:36.000 Who is the person who gets to decide what Joe Biden really meant?

00:38:41.000 If Joe Biden, so he was meeting with the G7 and he said, you know, we got, you know, troops in Libya, we're going to be sending military.

00:38:47.000 He meant Syria. 0.65

00:38:49.000 Won't happen.

00:38:50.000 Won't happen.

00:38:51.000 If Joe Biden's in, you know, a Situation Room meeting and he's like, uh, we gotta send these weapons to the Iranian people!

00:38:58.000 And then someone was like, Mr. President, are you sure?

00:39:01.000 Yeah, we're gonna send 30 billion dollars, some fighter jets, to the Iranian people!

00:39:06.000 And they'll go...

00:39:07.000 Whatever you say, sir, I'll make it happen.

00:39:09.000 And then breaking news, Iran receives massive payload of cash from U.S.

00:39:13.000 government.

00:39:13.000 Dude, it's not even a joke.

00:39:14.000 But hold on.

00:39:15.000 Imagine the alternative.

00:39:17.000 Joe Biden says, we're going to send a pallet of cash to the Ukrainian people.

00:39:21.000 And someone goes, he meant Iranian people.

00:39:23.000 And then they decide for themselves.

00:39:24.000 Exactly.

00:39:25.000 When it's hitting the fan and it's wartime, make a decision now.

00:39:28.000 And he says the wrong word.

00:39:29.000 That's death. 0.98

00:39:30.000 But that's why it's so dangerous to have a president that effectively is mentally impaired. 0.85

00:39:34.000 No, and he actually, no, we were talking about this.

00:39:36.000 That's the most polite way I've ever heard somebody describe it.

00:39:38.000 It's a very polite way of putting it, and we were sort of joking about this the other day.

00:39:40.000 We were watching his State of the Union, poking fun at him.

00:39:42.000 It is actually genuinely sad, the fact that we were all talking about this after the show.

00:39:48.000 This is probably the best speech he's given in his entire presidency, and he's slurring every single word.

00:39:54.000 He sounds intoxicated.

00:39:56.000 Yeah.

00:39:57.000 And that's as good as it gets.

00:39:59.000 I mean, I remember when Trump would give speeches and make such mistakes, there would be viral videos.

00:40:04.000 Exactly.

00:40:04.000 And they were never even close to as bad as Biden's mistakes.

00:40:08.000 Like Biden's best, and I'm not saying Trump didn't have some gaffes, but like Biden's best day is what we saw yesterday.

00:40:13.000 And he sounded drunk.

00:40:14.000 He really did.

00:40:15.000 I'm not trying to be mean.

00:40:16.000 And if anyone's going to come at me and say that that's really insensitive to say about the president of the United States, you are acknowledging that he did sound like that.

00:40:23.000 Oh, that's a good point.

00:40:26.000 Realistically now, I want to just touch back on Ukraine really quick.

00:40:29.000 So you think that he's going to try and... I think I've been thinking almost every day he's going to split the country in half on that river, that reservoir.

00:40:35.000 Do you know what the name of the river is?

00:40:36.000 I can't figure it out.

00:40:37.000 It's referred to as the Upper River, but who knows?

00:40:40.000 But there's the East and the West, right?

00:40:42.000 So the side that's on the Russian side, That's the east of that river.

00:40:46.000 We'll probably go to, look, I say probably, let's hope there's no World War Three, right? 0.93

00:40:50.000 So if, look, ultimately Putin's gone in there now and he's not just going to leave that, right?

00:40:56.000 He's gone in there for a reason, for whatever reason.

00:40:58.000 So probably this is the outcome that it will end on, which is that you'd end up with a split Ukraine. 0.71

00:41:04.000 And Kiev, like the Kievan Rus.

00:41:05.000 I think that was the history of the Russians, was Kievan Rus.

00:41:08.000 And it's in his backyard, right?

00:41:10.000 So, you know, Bay of Pigs.

00:41:12.000 I mean, America's done all of this stuff.

00:41:15.000 Iran-Contra affair, you know?

00:41:17.000 I know.

00:41:18.000 I want to speak out against it, but like, to sit in silence while my brethren are conquering and kicking doors in in Iraq. 0.94

00:41:24.000 I don't know if they're still doing that, but they were. 0.85

00:41:26.000 If our president is, as you described it, mentally impaired. 0.60

00:41:30.000 Indeed, yes. 0.99

00:41:31.000 Can't speak straight.

00:41:33.000 How is he going to prevent Russia from doing whatever it is Russia intends to do?

00:41:37.000 Is it because someone else is in charge?

00:41:39.000 But he's not going to.

00:41:42.000 What has he done?

00:41:44.000 Well, they cancelled this ICBM test, which is in some ways good.

00:41:47.000 But that's not preventing Russia.

00:41:49.000 That's just not escalating a conflict.

00:41:51.000 Which is good, by the way.

00:41:51.000 I'm happy.

00:41:52.000 But no one's going to stop what Putin's decided to do unless you want war with Putin.

00:41:57.000 And this is the problem.

00:41:58.000 You've got an option right now.

00:41:59.000 Putin went in and called everybody's bluff.

00:42:01.000 Now, either we engage directly with Russia and that's World War Three, which I don't 0.94

00:42:05.000 think is a good idea, in particular because we don't have the moral high ground.

00:42:09.000 You know, our own countries have gone and invaded countries. 0.66

00:42:12.000 And when we went into Iraq and Afghanistan, the last thing we expected was for Russia

00:42:17.000 to attack us directly because we invaded Iraq or Afghanistan.

00:42:21.000 You know what narrative I really love?

00:42:22.000 Yeah.

00:42:23.000 There's a story coming out where it said Vladimir Putin believed the invasion would last only

00:42:26.000 15 days and the government would collapse and they would come in and it would be clean.

00:42:31.000 And I was like, yeah, yeah, yeah.

00:42:32.000 And we thought we'd be greeted as liberators.

00:42:35.000 The same same narrative.

00:42:36.000 This is it.

00:42:37.000 It's just people are very very out of touch and they they I find it amazing how um there is now almost it's expected that we take a line on this that is uh this word jingoism right it's a very jingoistic line that we're expected to take almost as if we must back direct action against Russia.

00:42:56.000 So that question on your point, that question that the journalist put to Boris Johnson

00:43:01.000 when he was in Poland, I say journalist,

00:43:04.000 it was somebody purporting to be a journalist who stood up.

00:43:07.000 Well, let's get into this.

00:43:08.000 Yeah, should I put it up?

00:43:10.000 So I have this here from the week.

00:43:12.000 Take a look at this story.

00:43:12.000 Yeah.

00:43:13.000 Ukrainian journalist confronts Boris Johnson.

00:43:16.000 NATO is afraid of World War III, but it has already started.

00:43:19.000 This was a Ukrainian journalist, Daria Kaleniuk, who had fled Ukraine and was calling on the UK to enforce a no-fly zone.

00:43:29.000 As soon as you announce a no-fly zone, you're declaring war.

00:43:33.000 You are literally declaring war.

00:43:34.000 Because you shoot down a plane.

00:43:34.000 Why though?

00:43:36.000 You're shooting down Russian jets. 0.99

00:43:38.000 But it's a declaration of war because you are saying to the other country, we're going to shoot you. 0.77

00:43:42.000 It's a figurative declaration of war.

00:43:44.000 We've got to get away from misusing the word literal.

00:43:46.000 Well, only Congress can declare war literally.

00:43:48.000 Legally.

00:43:48.000 No, no, no, no, no.

00:43:49.000 You're talking about legal.

00:43:50.000 I'm talking about literal.

00:43:52.000 I'm talking about a literal declaration of war, not a legal one.

00:43:55.000 Unless you don't enforce the no-fly zone.

00:43:56.000 If you're enforcing a no-fly zone, you have to shoot Russian jets down in Ukrainian airspace.

00:44:01.000 The minute you do that, it's an act of war.

00:44:03.000 It's an act of war.

00:44:05.000 But to put it this way, it would be like me saying, Seamus, If you take one step, you know, in that direction, I'm going to, you know, will hit you or push you or something.

00:44:16.000 I have declared my intent to attack him.

00:44:17.000 That's, that's, that's, that's not legal.

00:44:19.000 Yeah.

00:44:19.000 And you, right.

00:44:20.000 A declaration of war is a specific thing.

00:44:22.000 No, no, no, no.

00:44:23.000 In the United States, in the United States, there are certain statute, statutes about declaration of war.

00:44:28.000 Completely irrelevant to actual war.

00:44:32.000 People come out here and they talk about war crimes and all of this stuff, and I'm like, these are like rules put in place by European councils and conventions to be like, dare I say, we shouldn't use this kind of weapon.

00:44:42.000 Okay, that would be a crime.

00:44:43.000 You want to talk about real war? 1.00

00:44:45.000 Declaring war is me saying, I am going to shoot you if you do this. 0.98

00:44:49.000 No, we did that in Vietnam. 0.98

00:44:49.000 It wasn't war though. 0.98

00:44:50.000 It wasn't an official war.

00:44:52.000 It was just the military action.

00:44:53.000 It was conflict and combat, but it wasn't technically a war.

00:44:56.000 You guys, look it up!

00:44:58.000 I'm not lying about this stuff.

00:45:01.000 You don't understand.

00:45:02.000 You're talking about an American legal precedent.

00:45:04.000 I'm not.

00:45:05.000 I'm talking about literal reality.

00:45:08.000 That if you are a country of any type, regardless of your laws, and you say, I intend to shoot you out of the sky, you have declared war against them. 0.95

00:45:16.000 I think war is a specific term that's used in times of specific types of conflict.

00:45:23.000 Combat, destruction, and conflict doesn't have to be a war.

00:45:26.000 But can you see what he's saying?

00:45:27.000 That if you shot Russian jets down, for example, and then Russia shot your jets down in response, and then you started nuking each other, even if Congress didn't declare war, you're in, I was going to swear, You're in war!

00:45:40.000 You're in war, right?

00:45:42.000 The soldiers would call it that and they'd say war is hell.

00:45:45.000 But the legality is Congress is the only people they're supposed to be able to declare war on.

00:45:50.000 No, no, stop.

00:45:51.000 We're not talking about the United States.

00:45:54.000 The US has nothing to do with this.

00:45:55.000 Stop thinking about the US.

00:45:57.000 If the UK says to Russia, we intend to shoot you out of the sky, they have declared war against them.

00:46:04.000 I don't know about any legal parliamentary statutes.

00:46:07.000 It's irrelevant.

00:46:08.000 If my neighbor is next to me and I tell him, if you put a drone in the sky, you know, I'll throw a water balloon at it.

00:46:17.000 I have declared my intent to take action against him should he do something I don't like.

00:46:21.000 Now that's what the, I'm going to say journalist advisedly, this lady, Daria Kulinec, that you've referenced up there, she called on Boris Johnson when he was in Poland, the UK Prime Minister, to declare a no-fly zone over Ukraine, which would mean we would declare to Russia, we're going to shoot you down if you fly over Ukraine, right?

00:46:40.000 Which is an act of war.

00:46:41.000 Now it turns out that this person who called themselves a journalist, who stood up in this press conference, Is actually a member of the World Economic Forum.

00:46:49.000 This is their profile on the WEF website.

00:46:52.000 If you look up their name and WEF you can see it on your screen there.

00:46:55.000 There they are.

00:46:56.000 And actually the bio does not state journalist.

00:47:00.000 It doesn't state journalists, it states Daria is co-founder and executive director of the Anti-Corruption Action Center, a powerful national organization that has shaped Ukraine's anti-corruption legislation and efforts.

00:47:11.000 By the way, anti-corruption became an agenda because of course the Biden-affiliated, Biden-aligned, America-friendly regime there was accused of corruption, so they set up an anti-corruption unit to investigate themselves.

00:47:23.000 This was it.

00:47:25.000 Now, this person's called themselves a journalist and stood up.

00:47:29.000 Calling for Boris Johnson to enforce a no-fly zone over Ukraine.

00:47:34.000 To declare war.

00:47:36.000 Declaration of war.

00:47:37.000 It's very interesting to me that they are a member of the World Economic Forum.

00:47:42.000 Yeah, I have strong opinions on Ukraine and what Joe Biden did.

00:47:47.000 And Hunter.

00:47:49.000 And Hunter.

00:47:50.000 And it's all one big happy family tree, son, as they all collude to engage in a tree zone.

00:47:56.000 But, hmm, charity call.

00:47:58.000 Yeah, the World Economic Forum has plainly stated that they don't think nationalist governments are capable of governing the world in its current form, but we need some sort of hybrid corporate governance.

00:48:09.000 And I think that they're trying to get countries to blow themselves up so that they can show that, oh yeah, you do need our help to come in and save the day.

00:48:14.000 Build back better.

00:48:16.000 You gotta destroy it before you can build back.

00:48:18.000 That's the point.

00:48:19.000 What's a great reset?

00:48:20.000 You have to destroy everything first.

00:48:22.000 You have to reset it and then build back better.

00:48:24.000 So I wonder why certain voices in the media, and you see them openly encouraging war with Russia, and I wonder what do you want to build back from the ashes of this war once you've had your way?

00:48:36.000 And that's why it becomes so important to make sure they don't get their way.

00:48:39.000 There's a great meme.

00:48:40.000 Are you familiar with the political compass?

00:48:41.000 No.

00:48:42.000 So, uh, the political compass is you've got the authoritarian on top, the libertarian on the bottom.

00:48:46.000 Oh, yeah.

00:48:47.000 Yep.

00:48:47.000 Yeah.

00:48:47.000 Okay.

00:48:47.000 Yep.

00:48:48.000 So you have the authoritarian left, you know, communist... I thought you thought I banned or something.

00:48:48.000 I am familiar.

00:48:51.000 No, no.

00:48:53.000 You have the authoritarian right, you know, fascist, traditionalists.

00:48:56.000 Uh, the meme shows...

00:48:58.000 It's the Wojak meme. 0.95

00:48:59.000 You know, it's the paintbrush kind of guy with the squiggly face and like the evil eyes.

00:49:04.000 And each quadrant is looking towards the center.

00:49:07.000 The far left libertarian, the far right libertarian, the far left authoritarian, and far right authoritarian are all looking down at the story of World War III saying, I can't wait for the world to collapse so I can rebuild this world in my image.

00:49:19.000 Yeah.

00:49:20.000 They all believe it.

00:49:21.000 And look, there's a problem here, which is that some way or the other, whether it's by enforcing a no-fly zone in Ukraine or it's by directly arming and funding Nazis, I worry about the stability of Europe.

00:49:33.000 So I'm going to pull something up for you.

00:49:35.000 I wonder if, Lydia, you can look this up?

00:49:39.000 So there's a New York Times article.

00:49:41.000 Let me just find the headline for you so you can search for it.

00:49:43.000 Give me a second.

00:49:44.000 And while I'm looking for it, what it's basically, what it's talking about is that because of this as of battalion that has now been raised in Ukraine, already we know that internationally, so I've done a lot of work in counter radicalization and counter extremism.

00:50:00.000 Before being a broadcaster I founded an organization called Quilliam which was a counter-extremism organization seeking to help understand during the global war on terror how to navigate our way through that from a Muslim background especially because of course Muslims were central to that debate.

00:50:19.000 I come at this from that angle, when I look at radicalisation, understanding how radicalisation can work.

00:50:27.000 So if you've got an armed Nazi battalion that gains victory in Ukraine, what that does to radicalisation is incredibly dangerous.

00:50:35.000 And there's a New York Times article that actually addresses the fact that people now, neo-Nazis, have been travelling from around the world I'm pretty good at Google, I suppose.

00:50:45.000 to join them. Now once you have, so think ISIS and Al-Qaeda and how global jihadism,

00:50:52.000 if you had a battlefield, how foreign fighters would go, they'd fight with that jihadist

00:50:57.000 group and then they'd, hey you got it, I didn't even have to find it for you.

00:51:00.000 I'm pretty good at Google I suppose. Far-right militias in Europe plan to confront Russian

00:51:04.000 forces, a research group says.

00:51:06.000 Right, so they're flocking to join Azov, right?

00:51:08.000 Now, the problem here is, what does that do for radicalisation?

00:51:13.000 If you end up travelling across Europe to join the Azov battalion, you gain combat experience fighting the Russians and then you go back to your country of origin.

00:51:22.000 Right?

00:51:23.000 You're now the equivalent of the jihadi foreign fighter.

00:51:26.000 Now we know what effect that had with global jihadism.

00:51:29.000 Those that fought in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union when the Soviets occupied Afghanistan.

00:51:36.000 Al-Qaeda emerged from there.

00:51:37.000 Global jihadism spread from that combat experience in Afghanistan.

00:51:41.000 9-11 happened and the rest is history. 0.64

00:51:43.000 This is the powder keg we've currently got.

00:51:46.000 What happens though in Europe in particular is very interesting.

00:51:49.000 Combine this New York Times article with the fact that the video, in fact you could probably

00:51:52.000 still pull up the video of the official Ukrainian National Guard posting that video of the Azov

00:51:59.000 Battalion guy dipping bullets in pig's lard.

00:52:02.000 And the reason why that's important... 0.96

00:52:03.000 Pig's lard.

00:52:04.000 Is that what you're saying? 1.00

00:52:06.000 Pig fat. 0.95

00:52:07.000 So I'm gonna, if you can't find it, because it's on Twitter, you may not be able to find it, but I'll find it as well. 0.98

00:52:12.000 And then just at least what we can do is, because the audio, he actually uses the word in their language, he uses the word Muslims.

00:52:19.000 Why that's relevant is combine these two pieces of news together.

00:52:23.000 You've got the potential for foreign fighter radicalization This time with Nazism as opposed to Jihadism on European soil. 0.55

00:52:31.000 But Europe's never had more Muslim citizens in history than it currently has.

00:52:36.000 Think France, for example, 10% Muslim. 1.00

00:52:39.000 Also, Europe has a radicalization problem on the Muslim side.

00:52:43.000 Now, going back to the Great Reset and the destruction of the world order and Build Back Better, this is the perfect way to encourage civil war in Europe. 0.92

00:52:52.000 With these battle-hardened Nazi fighters going back to their countries of origin, you've got jihadis there already. 0.98

00:52:57.000 Keep in mind, the Chechens, who are in Ukraine at the behest of Putin, is who the Azov battalion was talking about when they said they were going to dip their bullets in pig's lard to shoot Chechen Muslims. 0.96

00:53:08.000 Now, the problem here you've got is, so they've gone to fight Chechen Muslims in Ukraine. 0.97

00:53:13.000 They come back to their countries of origin and they find Islamist Muslims in their own countries of origin. 0.98

00:53:19.000 What I worry about is this leading to reciprocal radicalization in European countries and that civil conflict emerging in continental Europe.

00:53:30.000 One of the most valuable things, any great reset, is a civil war.

00:53:34.000 Yeah, exactly, right?

00:53:36.000 And it's incredibly worrying because we've already had a genocide in Europe, in Bosnia, with Muslims, and you end up with this situation and, you know, we've been funding these. 1.00

00:53:45.000 We've been funding this Nazi battalion. 0.88

00:53:47.000 What was the Bosnian genocide?

00:53:49.000 It was a genocide against Bosnian Muslims.

00:53:51.000 When?

00:53:51.000 During the Bosnia war.

00:53:53.000 1990s, early 90s.

00:53:54.000 And how many people died?

00:53:56.000 So in Srebrenica, in the Srebrenica massacre, you had, I think it was 6,000 Bosnian Muslim men and boys.

00:54:01.000 Jeez, in one day?

00:54:02.000 In a mass grave, in one attack.

00:54:04.000 Yeah.

00:54:04.000 Wow.

00:54:05.000 And this was just the Bosnian government?

00:54:07.000 This is the Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian.

00:54:10.000 So there was, interestingly, the Olympics were also held there just before this happened.

00:54:18.000 The Olympics always get involved in these sorts of things.

00:54:20.000 Remember Hitler had the Olympic Games as well? 0.58

00:54:23.000 It's crazy.

00:54:24.000 And this is in living memory, by the way, right?

00:54:26.000 So when I was 15 and 14, this genocide was happening and it radicalized an entire generation of European Muslims.

00:54:35.000 This is when I was 12 and I remember Clinton, the Bosnian war, it was all about Serbia, Bosnia.

00:54:39.000 So he sent troops in to stop the genocide.

00:54:41.000 Was that the intent?

00:54:43.000 So Kosovo came immediately after that.

00:54:45.000 And so he sent troops in.

00:54:46.000 The ostensible declared intent was to stop it happening again in Kosovo, where Albanian Muslims were, just after the Bosnia genocide.

00:54:54.000 But the Dayton Accords is what emerged from that.

00:54:57.000 It's Clinton's Dayton Accords.

00:54:58.000 And did that turn him into NATO or something?

00:55:00.000 The Dayton Accords?

00:55:01.000 I don't know about this.

00:55:02.000 So the Dayton Accords was a deal that he struck with the Serbs involving the Kosovans to stop the war expanding into Kosovo, but the genocide had already happened by then.

00:55:13.000 I want to talk about manipulation and propaganda, if we can.

00:55:16.000 So I have this tweet from me.

00:55:19.000 You are being played.

00:55:20.000 They are manipulating your emotions to get you to support war.

00:55:23.000 In the first clip, you can see emotional moment.

00:55:26.000 German interpreter cries during Zelensky's speech.

00:55:29.000 Then you have this tweet.

00:55:31.000 CNN interpreter cries as he translates Zelensky's speech that mentions children killed by Russian strikes.

00:55:37.000 And then you have another story.

00:55:38.000 Translator breaks down during Vladimir Zelensky's speech to European Parliament.

00:55:42.000 I do believe it's not... I believe it's two interpreters, but I posted these three stories because they're the ones I just happen to have.

00:55:49.000 My intent to... what to explain here is...

00:55:52.000 Not so much that there are two different circumstances I found where translators began crying.

00:55:59.000 That is wholly inappropriate, in my opinion, and I believe it's propaganda and manipulation.

00:56:03.000 Not necessarily intentional or whatever, but I think they allow these things to happen.

00:56:08.000 They know these things are going to happen because what they want is when the president of Ukraine is giving a speech talking about the devastation and speaking literally about what's happening.

00:56:19.000 Children are dying.

00:56:20.000 We need to push back on this.

00:56:22.000 To drive the point home in terms of manipulating emotions, you have someone cry while saying it, which the president of Ukraine certainly was not doing.

00:56:30.000 This is a manipulation of your emotions.

00:56:32.000 To hear someone, he's killing children, and so you go, oh no, they're crying.

00:56:38.000 They want you to support ground war in Ukraine.

00:56:41.000 And why?

00:56:42.000 Why?

00:56:43.000 I mean, well... This comes back to what I'm saying, right?

00:56:46.000 Well, why would you want to do that?

00:56:48.000 Military-industrial complex profits.

00:56:49.000 No, but you know, it's gonna spark.

00:56:51.000 I guess who's the they in a major world region?

00:56:54.000 There's there I think for me it's always a simple solution of who benefits and it's um weapons manufacturers stocks skyrocketed the moment war was declared and you know it and And they actually did that article 10.

00:57:05.000 It was like digital security firms like Palantir.

00:57:09.000 There's an article that said, what was it?

00:57:11.000 Cutting Russia off from the swift payment system could result in major cyber attacks.

00:57:15.000 Here are some stocks that will greatly improve or, you know, will go up in value.

00:57:19.000 And it's like, basically saying invest in these companies.

00:57:22.000 So Lydia, what I've just done is I've just emailed you the video that I'm talking of, of the Azov fighters doing that.

00:57:29.000 I couldn't send you the tweet because Twitter has decided that this tweet violates their rules.

00:57:35.000 Is it on your Twitter?

00:57:36.000 No, it's still on Twitter, but you can't retweet it or send it to somebody.

00:57:40.000 But because I quote tweeted it, I've sent you my quote tweet.

00:57:44.000 Well, who posted it?

00:57:47.000 You quote tweeted it.

00:57:47.000 So the National Guard of Ukraine posted the video.

00:57:52.000 Oh, this is the pig's blood one? 0.56

00:57:53.000 Yeah, I'm looking at it now.

00:57:54.000 Yeah, and so because I quote tweeted, I can send you my quote tweet, which allows you, but I couldn't send the actual tweet.

00:57:59.000 When did you post it?

00:58:01.000 On the 27th of Feb.

00:58:04.000 They maybe can help because I'm not Muslim.

00:58:07.000 Let me do this.

00:58:08.000 What did you say in the quote tweet?

00:58:09.000 Do you want me to email it to you?

00:58:10.000 No, no, just tell me what it was so I can pull it up.

00:58:12.000 I've said, why does the National Guard of Ukraine think it acceptable to glorify the Nazi Azov Brigade while they grease bullets with lard to target Kadyrov's Chechen forces?

00:58:20.000 Got it.

00:58:21.000 Here we are.

00:58:21.000 Easiest way to pull it up.

00:58:22.000 I'm sorry your country was attacked, me, but armed Nazi units are not an answer, especially when pulling off this I gotta say, I don't know if YouTube would consider it a violation of the rules if we show that video. 0.68

00:58:33.000 But Twitter did.

00:58:34.000 Yeah, Twitter considers it a violation of the rules.

00:58:36.000 But if you clicked view, you can see, if you hit view the video will come up because it's not been banned.

00:58:41.000 My concern is that YouTube will delete the live stream.

00:58:43.000 We should definitely show this on the after show regardless.

00:58:45.000 We'll show it on the, in fact we'll have a conversation about religion and the implications.

00:58:49.000 But this is one of the problems of propaganda manipulation and censorship and it's why they need censorship.

00:58:55.000 I actually believe if we were to show that video, YouTube would probably just take the stream down, give us a strike, block us from streaming, because it's bad for the establishment narrative.

00:59:03.000 And yet it's newsworthy to know that that's what the formal Ukrainian army has tweeted out, with our funding and backing.

00:59:11.000 Hunter Biden's laptop was particularly newsworthy and they shut that down.

00:59:14.000 This is the first moment I've seen him turned into a religious war of any type.

00:59:17.000 They're going after their faith.

00:59:18.000 Right.

00:59:18.000 And then why am I raising?

00:59:19.000 That's the point.

00:59:20.000 Why I'm raising this is because those that New York Times article you pulled up, Tim.

00:59:23.000 Right.

00:59:24.000 So those fighters now, let's call them foreign fighters, a bit like we called foreign jihadi fighters, foreign fighters.

00:59:29.000 Right.

00:59:29.000 They go to join that battalion.

00:59:31.000 They've gone and they know they're targeting Chechen Muslims.

00:59:34.000 They get radicalized. 0.99

00:59:35.000 They're Nazis. 0.61

00:59:36.000 They go back to France. 0.98

00:59:37.000 Ten percent of France is Muslim.

00:59:39.000 Yeah.

00:59:40.000 And France has its own Muslim radicalization problem. 0.55

00:59:43.000 And France, as we know, and if you read any of Welbeck, for example, his book Submission, we know what could potentially happen with that tension.

00:59:50.000 And I worry that you end up with this perfect storm.

00:59:53.000 And you end up with a civil conflict in Europe.

00:59:55.000 And of course, if you need to build back better, you need a great reset.

00:59:59.000 You can't build back unless there's... Unless there's a great reset.

01:00:02.000 Both of those phrases happen to come from somewhere.

01:00:05.000 In the United States, there's an escalating concern of a civil conflict here as well.

01:00:09.000 And I certainly feel like it's coming.

01:00:13.000 I saw a story of Google Pay and Apple Pay banned Russia.

01:00:16.000 You can't use it in Russia to get on the subway anymore, so the lines are really long.

01:00:19.000 So I was thinking the cost.

01:00:21.000 The cost is not only fiscal, but it's time.

01:00:24.000 If you can't get to where you're going in time, then you can't get it done in time, which means it doesn't get done right, which is another kind of cost.

01:00:31.000 Let's push this a bit.

01:00:35.000 Why would you have a policy of divide and conquer in this way?

01:00:39.000 Why do you want me hating you guys?

01:00:42.000 Right? 1.00

01:00:43.000 Muslim hating non-Muslims. 1.00

01:00:45.000 If your system is under threat, as we know from the British Empire, the best way to make sure that all of us are not looking up is to make sure we're looking left and right. 0.98

01:00:56.000 That's critical race theory.

01:00:58.000 And that's why I believe, if you look at the situation with the money supply, if you look at, like, what's going on with this desire to have this great reset, the only thing that makes sense is to encourage everybody to turn on each other, and we witnessed that happening.

01:01:14.000 We witnessed that happening in our media narratives.

01:01:16.000 You know, there's a reason why the word racism is now being thrown around everywhere, not by you or me, but by big corporations.

01:01:24.000 Who, you know, you think about it, why have they suddenly become so interested in stoking these racial fires?

01:01:30.000 What's going on?

01:01:31.000 And these are some of the biggest profit-making corporations on the planet.

01:01:33.000 Why is it that the people who were supporting the rise of Black Lives Matter, who then became the vaccine mandate supporters, are now the flag? 0.70

01:01:41.000 They keep changing the emojis in their Twitter accounts.

01:01:43.000 It's almost like they're not independently thinking individuals.

01:01:48.000 Prioritizing profit over all else, maybe?

01:01:49.000 I don't know.

01:01:49.000 But if you follow the causes they've supported, one thing you can see from those causes is they all do end up dividing everybody from each other to a point where people are fighting each other.

01:02:00.000 Yeah.

01:02:01.000 Rage bait.

01:02:02.000 Why?

01:02:02.000 Hate clicks.

01:02:04.000 Emotions put people in a vulnerable place, and then you can get them to do what you want them to do, and they're emotionally erratic a little easier.

01:02:09.000 Push this button now! 1.00

01:02:10.000 You know, I wonder if some people are just not able to be independent thinkers.

01:02:10.000 You better!

01:02:17.000 That's what I should say.

01:02:18.000 Some people are leaders.

01:02:19.000 Some people are followers.

01:02:20.000 There's nothing wrong with being a follower.

01:02:21.000 Some people just want to, you know, get by and live an honest life and have someone else be more dedicated to the hard decisions.

01:02:27.000 I can understand that.

01:02:29.000 But if that's the case, that means there are a lot of people who are going to say something as absurd as, you know, you don't even got to do anything.

01:02:35.000 You just look it up on the CDC's website, just do whatever they tell you, which in my opinion is an absurd statement.

01:02:40.000 I mean, you have to take some responsibility for your own life.

01:02:42.000 Is when you get a follower in a leadership position, like when someone says that dumb follower mind, but they have 100,000 people listening to them, like they're leading follower leads the followers.

01:02:50.000 That's a good, it's a good example of, of, you know, like these, uh, these podcasters who have said, you don't even got to think about it.

01:02:57.000 Just do what the government tells you or who have, um, their followers who have been put in, you know, high up positions where all they're doing is telling their followers to follow other people to do as they're told basically, because they themselves are followers.

01:03:12.000 I think there's a the average person who's working 9 to 5 who's struggling Monday to Friday to put bread on the table for them and their family.

01:03:20.000 I can excuse them, right?

01:03:21.000 They don't have the time, luxury or privilege to think through some of these topics.

01:03:26.000 What I am particularly animated about is those people that do have the time, luxury and privilege to think through this stuff and still choose to do Or, well, I would say there's also something else on top of that.

01:03:46.000 I agree with you.

01:03:48.000 But I would argue that in most situations, it's just the fact that they don't want to think too hard about things because then they face social ostracism.

01:03:56.000 So if you're an academic and you're out of line with the other academics and question their orthodoxy, all of a sudden you're less likely to get a promotion, you're not getting invited out, and you're just not liked by your friends, which is really painful for us as human beings.

01:04:08.000 So I think oftentimes it isn't necessarily just a profit motive, it's about social status.

01:04:12.000 Yeah, yeah, true.

01:04:14.000 It's funny that the people who throw on the word grifter tend to be the grifters.

01:04:19.000 It's projection, isn't it?

01:04:20.000 Because the thief thinks everyone steals, yeah.

01:04:22.000 Well, let me elaborate on this.

01:04:26.000 People think everyone else thinks and behaves the way they do.

01:04:31.000 So what's interesting is, you know, I don't see you accusing left-wing personalities of being grifters.

01:04:37.000 I maybe periodically might say I believe someone's ingenuous or grifting, but for the most part, the politically homeless, the post-liberal, the freedom faction, whatever you want to call it, aren't going around saying this leftist personality is a grifter for money.

01:04:52.000 But the leftist personalities say it all day every day.

01:04:55.000 They make shows and segments just targeting people on the opposite side of the political spectrum and say they're grifting for money.

01:05:01.000 I think it's a genuine failure to understand human motivation in most cases.

01:05:06.000 I think if somebody believes something that They haven't really looked deeply enough into to have a fast bait fact-based opinion on it's not so much because they're trying to cynically exploit people for gain that can happen, but I really think oftentimes it's because they settled on a particular perspective.

01:05:22.000 They're afraid of looking into it more deeply.

01:05:24.000 They do believe that they're right and that they're telling the truth, but they're not responsible in their pursuit of it.

01:05:30.000 And so they end up promoting things they shouldn't be promoting and saying things that aren't true, and they do end up making money off of that.

01:05:36.000 But it's not as if they're twirling their mustache going, I'm actually a right-winger and I'm making money as a left-wing pundit or vice versa.

01:05:44.000 I've said something and we saw... Who was it who said this?

01:05:50.000 I can't remember the gentleman's name.

01:05:52.000 I'm forgetting.

01:05:53.000 Sorry.

01:05:53.000 Clifton Duncan.

01:05:55.000 I think it was Clifton.

01:05:56.000 I could be wrong.

01:05:58.000 But I said something to the effect of...

01:06:00.000 You know, the people who know what's going on, but they're unwilling to stand up and take responsibility and do anything about it, are part of the problem.

01:06:09.000 But I believe it was Clifton, I could be wrong if it wasn't, forgive me, who said that he's starting to have more contempt for those people.

01:06:16.000 Yeah, that was Clifton.

01:06:17.000 Then, it was Clifton, yeah.

01:06:19.000 Then which people?

01:06:20.000 Then the people who are just like mindless drones as a part of the woke.

01:06:22.000 So the more contempt is for the ones who know?

01:06:25.000 The ones who know, but won't do anything about it.

01:06:27.000 Yeah, well that's my point.

01:06:28.000 You can't, look, Look, you know, people living on minimum wage, people that are from, say for example, migrant communities whose first language is in English, who are petrified that they're going to get kicked out of the country if they step foot in the wrong direction, there are excuses and understandable reasons for why people may not be engaged with controversial political conversation.

01:06:48.000 But there are people that have the luxury and the privilege to engage in that, and either don't say the right thing, or are actively saying and doing the wrong thing.

01:06:56.000 And that's where I think the focus needs to be.

01:06:58.000 Go back to that example, and you've got governments, and by definition that means people in power, funding armed Nazi brigades. 0.55

01:07:06.000 Now, what that does immediately is undo the entire last 12 years.

01:07:11.000 We put our, we, when I say we now, I'm talking about Muslims have put their neck on the line to go and challenge a lot of the extremism and terrorism that was coming from our communities, right?

01:07:22.000 We put our neck on the line.

01:07:24.000 Me and the networks that I work with, one of them was meant to come here with me today, but paperwork and whatever, Usman, my brother Usman Raja, we do a lot of For example, intervention work in prisons with Muslims who are convicted of high-level terrorism, through mentoring, through martial arts to attempt to rehabilitate them.

01:07:42.000 Now, you put your neck on the line for that kind of work and you say to these people that there's never an excuse, for example, to leave your democratic, rights-based, civil law-based country to go and join, for example, a jihadi brigade in ISIS because you're upset with Assad, that dictator.

01:07:59.000 Right now, They're witnessing videos put out by British media encouraging British citizens to go to Ukraine and join that.

01:08:08.000 It's undone all of the last 10 to 12 years.

01:08:12.000 And the last point I'll make on this is that back to the Oceania discussion.

01:08:17.000 We are so unaware of how that's perceived outside of our media matrix.

01:08:22.000 The work that's been undone is to the point now where you're going to have a 16 year old Muslim based in France who's going to see those Nazis go and fight with other Nazis and say, you know what?

01:08:30.000 Why am I? 0.99

01:08:31.000 I'm going to go and join the Chechens and fight these guys because they're dipping bullets in pig's blood. 1.00

01:08:36.000 We've gone back to square one. 0.99

01:08:38.000 I was invited by YouTube to an anti-extremism event.

01:08:42.000 The concern was that jihadi groups were using YouTube to recruit.

01:08:47.000 They were showing videos, they were claiming it was injustice, that you had to fight for justice, and they were talking about strategies to stop this, and it was particularly in the UK.

01:08:57.000 They said that these groups were targeting kids in the UK to convince them to go fight in these wars.

01:09:01.000 I find it fascinating that you bring up now that it's effectively, essentially okay Well, what you've just said there, right, so I'm going to pull something else up if the Wi-Fi works.

01:09:11.000 So if you can pull that tweet back up of mine and go down, it's a thread.

01:09:17.000 So yeah, scroll down and there will be a Oh, you have to log in.

01:09:26.000 Okay, so there's an intercept article.

01:09:30.000 I can talk you through it.

01:09:30.000 There's an intercept article.

01:09:32.000 Basically, Facebook, on that point, yeah?

01:09:34.000 On radicalization.

01:09:36.000 Facebook has decided that it's prohibited to promote the Azov Brigade because they're neo-Nazis.

01:09:43.000 Unless you're promoting them to fight Russia in Ukraine.

01:09:45.000 That's right.

01:09:45.000 I saw that.

01:09:46.000 That's amazing, isn't it?

01:09:47.000 Now this is the... What I'm saying about the... Again, I'm trying not to swear, right?

01:09:51.000 I'm doing the work we've just done for 12 years on the Muslim side.

01:09:54.000 Imagine you're a young, you know, 16-year-old French Muslim, right? 0.91

01:09:58.000 And you see that.

01:09:59.000 Imagine you're Antifa.

01:10:00.000 You were there, man.

01:10:01.000 And you're screaming Nazi for five years.

01:10:04.000 And then you're like, finally, we're getting these people banned from Facebook.

01:10:08.000 And Facebook goes, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.

01:10:09.000 We're letting these guys back on.

01:10:10.000 I don't know if people even know your history.

01:10:12.000 Here it is.

01:10:14.000 You see that?

01:10:14.000 Facebook allows praise of neo-Nazi Ukrainian battalion if it fights Russian invasion.

01:10:19.000 Wow.

01:10:20.000 I mean, I can send it to you, Lydia, if you want to put it up.

01:10:23.000 That's amazing.

01:10:24.000 Was that on Twitter?

01:10:24.000 That's on Intercept.

01:10:25.000 If you look up The Intercept, Facebook allows praise of neo-Nazi Ukrainian, you'll get it on your screen.

01:10:30.000 I just want people to see this, Tim. 0.98

01:10:32.000 It's important because the hypocrisy, it stinks. 0.88

01:10:32.000 Forgive me. 0.88

01:10:37.000 Look at that.

01:10:37.000 That's incredible.

01:10:38.000 And the problem is whether you're Antifa or a young Islamist, right? 1.00

01:10:42.000 The problem now is how are you going to react to that?

01:10:44.000 Yeah.

01:10:45.000 Let's talk about... We're going to do a... It's not a complete hard segue.

01:10:50.000 Yeah.

01:10:51.000 This has a lot to do with the Great Reset, but it's very strange.

01:10:54.000 This is a story from TimCast.com.

01:10:55.000 Chile passes employment law prohibiting discrimination against mutations and alterations of genetic material.

01:11:03.000 Have you heard this?

01:11:04.000 Employers can only ask workers to undergo genetic testing if it's necessary for their safety.

01:11:09.000 They say...

01:11:11.000 The National Congress of Chile passed the policy on February 16th with 114 votes and no abstentions.

01:11:16.000 No employer may condition the hiring of workers, their permanence, or their renewal of their contract, or the promotion or mobility in their employment to the absence of mutations or alterations in their genome that can cause a predisposition or a high risk of pathology that may manifest itself during the course of the employment relationship.

01:11:33.000 Now are they saying, is this, let's just be calm for a second.

01:11:36.000 What is this?

01:11:37.000 Are they basically saying if you have like Down syndrome, Or a genetic disorder.

01:11:42.000 The question is alterations to the genome.

01:11:45.000 What I find interesting is this specific line here, a predisposition or high risk of a pathology.

01:11:52.000 So that's almost implying that an alteration to your gene or to your genome could end up with you gaining this pathology you would not have otherwise have had.

01:12:01.000 What pathology is that that they're saying that you could gain?

01:12:03.000 This is a very, very strange story.

01:12:06.000 What do we have right now that is in any way altering people's genomes?

01:12:11.000 Precisely.

01:12:12.000 Wi-Fi.

01:12:13.000 No, you're still right.

01:12:14.000 I don't know.

01:12:15.000 5G towers.

01:12:16.000 Well, no, no, but, but, and then everything.

01:12:19.000 Even that, even the vaccines, right?

01:12:21.000 Which is what you're reading.

01:12:22.000 How does that, how does that lead to a pathology?

01:12:26.000 Like this is what I've, what, what, like.

01:12:28.000 Unless they're saying that there is a connection between whatever gene therapy was in those vaccines to having developed a pathology.

01:12:36.000 So is that an admission that pathology is one of the side effects?

01:12:39.000 I don't know.

01:12:40.000 Look, nothing about this has anything to do with the vaccine.

01:12:42.000 I think what it means is if in case it leads to a pathology and it was genetic, they can't say you can't work here because you're going to fall down a lot because you have this gene or something.

01:12:51.000 No, but it says specifically, right?

01:12:53.000 Sorry to push this, guys.

01:12:54.000 No, I want this.

01:12:55.000 To the absence of mutations or alterations in their genome that cause a predisposition or a high risk of a pathology.

01:13:04.000 First of all, you're not going to talk about alterations to the gene in a vacuum or a void.

01:13:09.000 What is it that we've taken recently that causes an alteration?

01:13:12.000 Yeah, you gotta look at horizontal gene transfer at that point.

01:13:15.000 The environment.

01:13:16.000 No, no, no.

01:13:17.000 I think we're more looking at transhumanism in general.

01:13:20.000 Oh yeah, CRISPR.

01:13:21.000 They're going in there and altering genetics in babies and stuff.

01:13:24.000 But they're not doing that in Chile.

01:13:26.000 Chile is actually one of the most co-opted countries on earth right now.

01:13:29.000 I spent a couple months down there, six months, and I was learning, like, it's the highest, it's one of the most copper-rich countries in the world, so it's like military-industrial complex, it just owns it now.

01:13:38.000 Diet Coke is in there making people obese.

01:13:40.000 China absolutely is doing tons.

01:13:42.000 China did it, but Chile's not. 0.91

01:13:44.000 But what if you're one of these Chinese super, uber-mench, and you go and do work? 1.00

01:13:49.000 No, China's doing tons of exploration and development.

01:13:52.000 Why randomly in Chile?

01:13:54.000 Chile is a big business place right now.

01:13:56.000 I don't know if a lot of people realize.

01:13:57.000 No, no, no.

01:13:58.000 I don't think the country of origin matters so much as we know China's been, it's been reported by numerous outlets, been working on ubermensch, supermen, super soldiers.

01:14:08.000 And this seems like, I gotta be honest, it says alteration to the genome.

01:14:15.000 It sounds like they're preparing Because once you do that, you're born with the alteration, right?

01:14:20.000 Forever.

01:14:21.000 Well, there's this thing called... TimGuess.com says, some reporting of the bill's passage noted that Chile has been celebrated for its high vaccination rate.

01:14:26.000 But again... We don't know.

01:14:26.000 Right.

01:14:27.000 Whenever it comes to that stuff, just talk to a doctor.

01:14:29.000 We're not... I think... I don't want to be too myopic.

01:14:34.000 Or, you know, what I see here... It's just weird.

01:14:34.000 Right.

01:14:37.000 It's weird, though, you've got to admit.

01:14:38.000 That's why I wanted to talk about it.

01:14:38.000 Well, absolutely.

01:14:39.000 I just want to know why now.

01:14:41.000 Because I am not inclined to believe it is because of the vaccination, but I'm very curious.

01:14:45.000 It's a very strange place, and it is a strange time.

01:14:47.000 So I'm wondering, is it WES stuff?

01:14:49.000 I think it's transhumanists, Great Reset-oriented kind of stuff. 0.97

01:14:53.000 So why Chile?

01:14:57.000 Because, well, I mean, Ian can give you an example, as he said, it's a corrupted country, but who cares if it's Chile? 0.99

01:15:02.000 It doesn't matter if it's Chile.

01:15:03.000 What matters is there is a country doing it, and there are countries like China that do this kind of genetic modification and alteration. 0.91

01:15:10.000 And Chile's like right on the coast, right up for China to just land on. 0.78

01:15:14.000 But regardless, if any company is doing work in this country and they've passed this law, certainly something has occurred in this country to trigger the requirement of this law.

01:15:25.000 So my question is, who?

01:15:27.000 Well, we know China's doing it. 0.94

01:15:28.000 I want to get to the bottom of this.

01:15:29.000 What are they doing?

01:15:30.000 The one thing we know is the super soldier stuff.

01:15:33.000 But does this mean that in Chile, genetically engineered or modified or altered humans are employed at companies?

01:15:40.000 Maybe.

01:15:41.000 I mean, you wouldn't have that introduced if there wasn't that consideration.

01:15:44.000 Something had to have happened or they're preparing for something.

01:15:47.000 What's interesting is the difference between change to your genetic code and change to your genome.

01:15:52.000 I don't know.

01:15:53.000 Did you ask if there is or are you saying?

01:15:55.000 No, there's an interesting difference, right?

01:15:56.000 So the change to the genome, I believe, is permanent in your lineage forever.

01:16:01.000 Oh, right, right, right.

01:16:02.000 Whereas a change to your genetic code in you- It's just you.

01:16:05.000 That's interesting because- A change to your genome means your lineage forever has that altered gene.

01:16:05.000 It's just you.

01:16:09.000 There's lateral gene transfer, which is your lineage, and then there's horizontal gene transfer, which is your environment changing your genetics.

01:16:16.000 What if this is where Alex Jones' animal-human hybrids are- I'm kidding, by the way. 0.65

01:16:24.000 No, no, don't even joke.

01:16:25.000 They patented life, dude.

01:16:26.000 I remember a Supreme Court thing in 2011 where they finally decided you can patent life.

01:16:30.000 What if we've just gotten so progressive that we're trying to protect the rights of groups that don't even exist yet?

01:16:37.000 And now every single country is gonna try to out-progressive the last country by being like, yeah, well this group that doesn't even exist yet will be protected!

01:16:46.000 You can't discriminate against giant balloon gaseous orbs from outer space!

01:16:52.000 No, it has some grounding in reality.

01:16:54.000 Yes, it must.

01:16:55.000 You don't just introduce that law.

01:16:57.000 I hear you.

01:16:58.000 It's weird.

01:16:58.000 It is very fishy.

01:17:00.000 According to the World Health Organization, what does it say?

01:17:02.000 The South American nation has had over 3 million cases of COVID.

01:17:07.000 COVID-19.

01:17:08.000 See, they're linking it to COVID, man.

01:17:10.000 Well, this is TimCast.com.

01:17:13.000 I will absolutely criticize my own website.

01:17:21.000 Let's do that together.

01:17:23.000 Who wrote it?

01:17:24.000 It's Hannah Clare Brimelow.

01:17:25.000 Hannah Clare is actually really, really good.

01:17:27.000 She's great.

01:17:27.000 But I do think we have issues where I personally would be very careful about directly adding a framing device such as, hey, look at all the COVID cases in this country.

01:17:40.000 I don't see that as relevant to the passage of this law.

01:17:43.000 I mean, you speak to whoever the, I mean, I don't know the lady, but why would they have put that in there?

01:17:47.000 That's maybe a conversation you need to have.

01:17:49.000 Absolutely.

01:17:50.000 Oh, we do have these conversations rather.

01:17:52.000 Yeah, this is one that I just don't I'm not comfortable talking about on YouTube due to terms and conditions.

01:17:56.000 But you know, when you're working with genetic materials, then what were you gonna say?

01:18:01.000 No, it's just that it says it says similar in Switzerland and Austria, similar laws protecting the genetic characteristics of workers had already been passed in Switzerland and Austria.

01:18:12.000 But again, the question here is, are they referring to someone who might have Down syndrome?

01:18:17.000 Right.

01:18:17.000 Like you can't discriminate against someone with Down syndrome.

01:18:19.000 It sounds like they are.

01:18:19.000 No, but then you just say you don't discriminate against people that have disabilities.

01:18:24.000 Why would you need to introduce... It's such a weird thing to call a genetic mutation to if you're just talking disabilities.

01:18:29.000 It'd be a very weird thing to do.

01:18:30.000 Because in a progressive world, you can't call Down syndrome a disability.

01:18:34.000 But I think calling it a mutation sounds way worse.

01:18:37.000 And then in particular, you specify genome?

01:18:40.000 But the bill specifically says alterations, which is intentional after birth changes.

01:18:46.000 But also it indicates alterations, like I guess it was the way she wrote it, that alterations that aren't bad.

01:18:51.000 Like if you scroll up to the top again where it says the word alterations, wherever that was.

01:18:55.000 See, I'm not a fan of this article.

01:18:57.000 Could just be the way it was written.

01:18:59.000 I don't think it's relevant to include context, because what if I wrote the article and I put, in China, they've been, you know, working with... Is that the bill?

01:19:09.000 It appears to be.

01:19:10.000 It seems to indicate that if they're genetic superhumans, you also can't discriminate against them.

01:19:15.000 Well, superhumans don't have to worry about discrimination, all right?

01:19:18.000 So we think!

01:19:19.000 Well, let me tell you something.

01:19:20.000 They will overcome the issues.

01:19:21.000 Oh, you're right.

01:19:22.000 The more you do for them, the more they'll hate you.

01:19:25.000 They live among us, right?

01:19:27.000 We are superheroes.

01:19:29.000 God's energy is flowing through us, empowering us.

01:19:32.000 It is the future.

01:19:35.000 Let's see.

01:19:35.000 Well, I'm trying to find other sources on this one, too.

01:19:38.000 Do you know if it's reported anywhere else?

01:19:40.000 I'm sure it is.

01:19:41.000 I'd have to dig into it.

01:19:43.000 Yeah, I'm really curious about this.

01:19:44.000 But maybe we need a hard fact check on that one.

01:19:46.000 Majira, are you going to get the neural net and go into the metaverse?

01:19:51.000 You know, maybe, but I'm not so sure that I want to do it with meta as a company.

01:19:57.000 I'd like it to be free software so you can watch the algorithm.

01:19:59.000 Yeah.

01:20:00.000 And also I just, I just, yeah, it's just, uh, I'm not too keen on, on Facebook's and Meta's recent turn, you know?

01:20:07.000 Can you imagine?

01:20:08.000 No, I mean, it's a good point.

01:20:09.000 Look at the way Facebook influences people with their algorithms now and then say, you know what?

01:20:12.000 I really want to plug my brain into that.

01:20:15.000 I trust those people.

01:20:16.000 Zuckerberg was on a Lex Friedman's podcast and was like, I'm a, so I studied psychology.

01:20:21.000 I'm a psychologist.

01:20:22.000 So he's doing like a psychology experiment right now with that.

01:20:25.000 It's technically kind of unethical, you know?

01:20:27.000 They got in trouble for doing experiments on people without their knowledge and consent.

01:20:31.000 They chose to do things that they knew would depress people.

01:20:34.000 And it worked!

01:20:35.000 I would like to extirpate the, I think that's the way to say that word, the concept of the metaverse from meta.

01:20:40.000 I don't think they have, they're just a piece of sand in the heap that's gonna be the metaverse.

01:20:45.000 They'll have their own highway, or version of highway, but there's gonna be trillions of them.

01:20:47.000 Well it's unfortunate they've taken the name meta.

01:20:49.000 I know, it was really gross.

01:20:52.000 That's almost attempting to kind of like, you know like we say vacuum when we mean, when we say Hoover when we mean a vacuum cleaner.

01:20:59.000 Or Kleenex when you mean tissue.

01:21:01.000 Xerox when you mean copy.

01:21:03.000 So that's what they're trying to do.

01:21:05.000 They're trying to basically monopolize the brand.

01:21:08.000 I'm not convinced this story is real, to be completely honest.

01:21:11.000 It's on your website, man!

01:21:12.000 I know, I know.

01:21:13.000 Look how long we talked about that.

01:21:14.000 Copywriting in real time.

01:21:15.000 And I absolutely have the standards to see it and then come in and be like, something's not right here.

01:21:20.000 Something's not right here.

01:21:21.000 Well, someone should read the bill when they have time.

01:21:23.000 But I don't even know if this is a real document.

01:21:26.000 So hang on, your website may be publishing fake news?

01:21:29.000 Absolutely.

01:21:29.000 Good to know.

01:21:31.000 So I have very serious standards.

01:21:33.000 To be fair to the journalists involved, because we would want to be sensitive to the fact that you just may have outed one of your own people.

01:21:41.000 I have a correction to make too.

01:21:43.000 When we were talking about the bill, it said 70% of liberals think we should protect Ukraine's borders, it's more important than ours.

01:21:51.000 Cassandra was 100% correct.

01:21:53.000 I confused liberal and Democrat.

01:21:55.000 Among Democrats it was 57, among liberals it was 70.

01:21:59.000 And so I gotta be very careful about... But I'll put it this way, because when we pull up a story and I'm like, wait a minute, this seems to be off, the numbers seem to be wrong.

01:22:07.000 I got no problem being like, if you work for TimCast.com and I see something I don't think is right, I don't care if you're TimCast.com or otherwise, I'm gonna make sure.

01:22:14.000 Because I think the people who read the site have an expectation of standards here.

01:22:19.000 That's why people work for you anyway, because they like that.

01:22:21.000 Well, so I'm trying to real-time fact-check this because I have a high degree of trust for the people that work for us, but we make mistakes.

01:22:28.000 Sometimes something slips through.

01:22:30.000 Tomorrow you'll be able to come back on this thing.

01:22:32.000 It may be illegitimate.

01:22:33.000 The issue is right now in real time.

01:22:35.000 I don't know if I could fact-check this other than the sources that are writing about it seem desperate to link this to vaccination, which is ridiculous.

01:22:42.000 And it's kind of annoying.

01:22:43.000 Yeah.

01:22:44.000 Because if there was a bill talking about this, the immediate assumption is it has to do with... Even in this document it says physical or mental conditions, you know, on the job or whatever.

01:22:53.000 It sounds like they're talking about genetic diseases.

01:22:55.000 So the headline is misleading, then, if that's the case.

01:22:57.000 Right.

01:22:58.000 But it could be your environment could cause the genetic disease.

01:23:00.000 Like burn pits we were talking about last night, people coming back with, like, just traumatic injury and cancers and things like that.

01:23:05.000 What he's saying is that the use of the word alterations would seem to suggest a deliberate alteration to the gene, which is not disabilities.

01:23:12.000 Oh, otherwise it would be a mutation.

01:23:13.000 yeah uh and i think yeah it could be me too or you just use the word disabilities right if you were talking about that word's getting retconned is it becoming not pc to say disabled or disability for a while they were trying to say differently abled yeah that's an older one but there are pc equivalents to what we used to describe as disability And it's not the PC equivalent, isn't gene alteration.

01:23:33.000 Exactly.

01:23:34.000 It's interesting that they're going at the genes, that they're focusing on the genetics of it.

01:23:37.000 I do think it has to do with CRISPR.

01:23:38.000 It's been around for 20 years or something.

01:23:39.000 But his point is that he's saying it may not even be a real strain.

01:23:42.000 I don't believe it.

01:23:43.000 That's where you need to look into it.

01:23:45.000 I feel a bit bad for the writer because they're not here to defend themselves.

01:23:48.000 That's true.

01:23:49.000 Well, so typically what we do is we always want to have original sources.

01:23:53.000 There's no original source included in the article, which is why I'm immediately saying the bill could be fake.

01:23:57.000 It's not up to our standards 100% with no original sourcing.

01:24:00.000 There's a translated PDF from a website that is questionable at best.

01:24:05.000 Translated from Spanish to English.

01:24:07.000 Right.

01:24:07.000 So this is not an original document.

01:24:08.000 It's not an original source.

01:24:09.000 It's on a website that's questionable.

01:24:10.000 It sounds like a journalism lesson.

01:24:12.000 It's great.

01:24:12.000 Absolutely.

01:24:13.000 And it's also a standard lesson.

01:24:15.000 It's a lesson in standards I have.

01:24:17.000 I apologize to Cassandra, because she was like, you said that I got something wrong, then Ian said we need a fact checker, and I was right, and you were wrong, and I wasn't there, and I'm like, alright.

01:24:25.000 I love you, Cassandra.

01:24:26.000 Cassandra, you were right.

01:24:27.000 Is that the same?

01:24:28.000 No, no, no.

01:24:29.000 Oh, it's a different writer.

01:24:30.000 No, no, no.

01:24:30.000 Cassandra Fairbanks.

01:24:31.000 McDonald.

01:24:33.000 Oh yes, Cassandra McDonald!

01:24:34.000 Congratulations, guys!

01:24:35.000 To be fair, pencils have erasers.

01:24:39.000 When news outlets publish incorrect things, I just say, correct it.

01:24:43.000 And if they're willing to correct it, I say, well, we move on.

01:24:45.000 What are we going to do about it?

01:24:46.000 When they refuse to correct it, now that's the issue, like the New York Times and Project Veritas.

01:24:50.000 Yeah.

01:24:51.000 They want to smear, they want to lie, and cheat, and steal, and even admit it, but then not correct it on video.

01:24:55.000 Or CNN.

01:24:55.000 CNN with Rogan.

01:24:56.000 If you get called out for this, all you have to say is, the science changed.

01:24:59.000 That's right.

01:25:00.000 Exactly.

01:25:00.000 The science changed.

01:25:02.000 The science changed.

01:25:03.000 You can say, I am the science.

01:25:05.000 I am the journalist.

01:25:07.000 I'll just be like, I am the science.

01:25:09.000 I am the truth.

01:25:10.000 I am the science.

01:25:11.000 No, I am the truth.

01:25:12.000 I am the scientific method.

01:25:13.000 I get to write like a speech like a short paragraph of I am the science.

01:25:17.000 I am the method.

01:25:19.000 I am the actor in the acted.

01:25:21.000 I looked up radical antonyms because I'm like how can we how can we be de-radicalized without having to say be counterdependent on the word radical.

01:25:28.000 It came it gave me conservative.

01:25:32.000 It's interesting you did that because since being let's put it politely since having my show ended Yes.

01:25:40.000 Right.

01:25:40.000 There's a legal dispute so I have to put it politely.

01:25:43.000 Since having my show ended on the UK's largest commercial broadcaster I am starting a new show on Odyssey and it's called Radical because I believe that that word actually when I was young I used to skateboard.

01:25:52.000 Tim you remember this man.

01:25:53.000 Radical!

01:25:54.000 Radical!

01:25:56.000 Rad was a positive!

01:25:57.000 He still is!

01:25:59.000 So actually what it means is thinking out of the box.

01:26:01.000 So Radical with Majin Noir's will be available on Odyssey in about a month or so.

01:26:04.000 I guess Radical's neutral.

01:26:05.000 It's cyclical though, well because Radical was frowned upon and then it became a good thing and now it's frowned upon again.

01:26:13.000 Why is that?

01:26:14.000 Because they were trying to change the established order at that time so being Radical was good and now that their order is in place being Radical is bad because it's a threat to what they've built.

01:26:21.000 And I kind of feel like, you know, a bit like the N-word.

01:26:23.000 It's Muslims who have been labeled with this word radical, and I have been.

01:26:27.000 Interesting.

01:26:28.000 So I kind of feel like I'm going to reclaim that word.

01:26:30.000 I love it.

01:26:30.000 And my autobiography is called Radical as well.

01:26:32.000 So I kind of feel like ownership over that word.

01:26:34.000 You could say George Washington was a radical, that all the founding fathers were way radical.

01:26:38.000 Thinking out of the box is a good thing. 0.99

01:26:39.000 And you know, to be honest, even if you're wrong and you're thinking out of the box, I still respect you more than somebody who's just following the damn crowd. 0.80

01:26:46.000 I would argue that thinking outside the box is neutral. 0.97

01:26:48.000 If you do it for evil, it can be very bad.

01:26:51.000 Yeah.

01:26:51.000 I mean, look, that's a moral judgment on the actual ability to think out of the box, but the prerequisite to being able to change anything is it's a necessity, right?

01:26:59.000 Oh, yeah.

01:27:00.000 You got to see your own perspective from the outside.

01:27:03.000 Precisely.

01:27:04.000 You know, precisely.

01:27:05.000 Now you could, you could end up having that ability like any ability and do wrong with it and do bad with it.

01:27:09.000 It's just like saying you have a high IQ and you can use your high IQ to do evil.

01:27:13.000 So you think allowing yourself to speak radically and witnessing yourself doing it via video, it helps you put a check on yourself to not become too radical?

01:27:20.000 Well look, everybody evolves, right?

01:27:21.000 So here's the other thing.

01:27:23.000 So I wouldn't be the person I am today if, as the 16-year-old me, I didn't adopt ideas that I now vehemently disagree with.

01:27:31.000 But that's part of my evolution and I think everybody, every teenager It's a rite of passage, man.

01:27:38.000 Every teenager goes through that kind of phase where they rebel against everything, and to an extent where it's harmless, where it doesn't do too much damage, we've got to be able to manage that process.

01:27:52.000 Because what you don't want to do is discourage... Surely this is what Pink Floyd's brick-in-the-wall is about, right?

01:27:58.000 I don't need no education.

01:27:59.000 Are you raising kids?

01:28:00.000 Do you have children?

01:28:01.000 What you don't want to do is encourage robots.

01:28:03.000 So we've got to work out a way where innovative thinking, even where it's wrong, is accepted by us

01:28:09.000 as a right passage for young people to arrive at them wherever they end up.

01:28:14.000 Are you raising kids?

01:28:15.000 Do you have children?

01:28:15.000 Yeah, I've got a five-year-old and a 21-year-old.

01:28:17.000 Are you homeschooling?

01:28:19.000 No.

01:28:19.000 Are you considering it at all?

01:28:20.000 Yes, but at the moment I'm not doing it.

01:28:22.000 Yeah, I'm thinking about doing that too.

01:28:23.000 I don't have any kids yet, but that's my plan.

01:28:25.000 I just don't trust this robot forming public school system.

01:28:29.000 Yeah, I mean, what I don't understand is the same people that listen to, still to this day, would listen to say, we don't need no education, and yet everything they do is the opposite of the music.

01:28:42.000 I went to a liberal arts college and what they told me is that racism and white supremacy run amok in this country.

01:28:47.000 And it's just strange to me.

01:28:49.000 It's like all the cultural icons you respect, even if, you know, they are the exact opposite of what you're doing.

01:28:55.000 And the worst part is when those same voices, now thankfully Pink Floyd isn't one of these examples, but when those same voices themselves flip and start becoming really weirdly established.

01:29:05.000 When Neil Young was really mad at Rogan.

01:29:07.000 That's what I was referring to.

01:29:09.000 I don't think it's quite as ironic as we might believe at first glance.

01:29:14.000 They were trying to establish a new social order, that social order is here and now they're trying to protect it.

01:29:19.000 So yesterday's radicals become today's conservatives.

01:29:21.000 Exactly.

01:29:22.000 Yeah, I mean, yes, I get that point, but Neil Young, I mean, free speech.

01:29:28.000 Right.

01:29:29.000 I mean, well, yeah, well, and then, of course, that's a principle you're always going to defend.

01:29:32.000 He said, not necessarily.

01:29:34.000 If you're operating within a system that privileges free speech or believes it's a positive value and you want to change that system, you're going to use that tool.

01:29:43.000 And then as soon as you come to power, you're going to say, nope, don't like that.

01:29:45.000 But you see, that's what that demonstrates to me, that he wasn't really committed to free speech.

01:29:50.000 Or at the very least, because also we want to be charitable to some extent and say maybe he was at the time but isn't anymore.

01:29:55.000 Whereas Roger Waters, you find Roger Waters today still very radical.

01:30:02.000 You don't have to agree with him, but he's still very kind of anti-establishment, trying his best to think out of the box.

01:30:08.000 And I respect that, even though you don't agree, you know, or disagree.

01:30:11.000 I respect it.

01:30:12.000 In my radicalism, sometimes I found that sometimes it was better to stay in the box, but I'd still just do the radical thing because I thought it's better to be radical.

01:30:19.000 But it's better to just be right.

01:30:21.000 It's better to fit the process, whatever it stands for, radicalism or conservatism.

01:30:25.000 Seek the truth.

01:30:26.000 I like what I really like is Chesterton's gate.

01:30:29.000 And so it's the principle that when you find a gate, you try to figure out why it's there instead of just mindlessly tearing it down.

01:30:36.000 And if it turns out it's there for a bad reason or doesn't make sense, then you tear the gate down.

01:30:40.000 But you don't go about saying, we need to completely destroy the social boundary before you try to understand it, which I think is what a lot of people who are a radical attempt to do today and have in the past.

01:30:50.000 I think it requires a great deal of strength of character to hold on to your anti-establishmentarianism.

01:30:57.000 Most people don't have that and you'll see that when you look at the way people do things like raise their kids and do their work and they're looking for the shortcut, they're looking for the easy way out.

01:31:09.000 And this is because having strong moral character is hard.

01:31:13.000 It's very challenging, and it's something that you must hold yourself accountable with.

01:31:17.000 And it's something that people are afraid to do now, I think.

01:31:19.000 They're just looking for the quick out.

01:31:22.000 I don't know.

01:31:22.000 That's kind of what I came up with.

01:31:23.000 It's like the panacea of having enough money and the food, and they feel like if they get radical, they're going to lose access to that panacea, and then they're going to starve, or the kids are going to go hungry.

01:31:32.000 So they're like, Forced inside the box.

01:31:34.000 It's possible that we have it too good and we're afraid to lose it Well, no, so this is interesting you were mentioning earlier that there are some people who are really afraid of losing their livelihood and so they don't speak out on these issues and sometimes it's Understandable because they have a family to feed and the cost would be too high for them And then there are other people who aren't speaking out because they're afraid I would venture to guess though and maybe this is a little pessimistic on my part, but I really believe given the state of the people In America at the very least, if we were able to completely eliminate the risk of losing your job over your opinions, I think a lot of the same people still would not state them publicly because what they're most afraid of is social ostracism.

01:32:18.000 Which can lead to cultural ostracism and political ostracism.

01:32:22.000 No, you have to cultivate that.

01:32:23.000 You really do.

01:32:24.000 It's very important.

01:32:25.000 And to the people in chat, I did not go to the bathroom.

01:32:28.000 I can confirm.

01:32:29.000 They were like, Tim, stop talking so we go to the bathroom.

01:32:30.000 You know, yesterday we did this video thing during the live stream of the Biden's campaign speech where all our videos were on the screen.

01:32:38.000 We should do that when we show stories because it was so fun to watch all our faces at once.

01:32:44.000 Everybody got to see their favorite character.

01:32:45.000 Yeah, it was so fun, yeah.

01:32:47.000 Like, who's this person?

01:32:47.000 They're making faces.

01:32:49.000 Yeah, so in the downtime, I was conferring with our editor-in-chief, who agrees that story is probably bunk.

01:32:56.000 Unconfirmed.

01:32:57.000 The story is unconfirmed.

01:32:59.000 Nah, I'll come out and say it.

01:33:01.000 Sounds bunk.

01:33:02.000 Had typos in it, like someone just plastered it up and it slipped through.

01:33:05.000 Well, I'm still interested in Chase.

01:33:08.000 The buck stops with the editor-in-chief, though, there, surely.

01:33:10.000 I'm trying to defend the little journalist here just because they're not here to defend themselves.

01:33:14.000 I can only apologize and everyone else can apologize and say I'm pretty sure that story is not real.

01:33:19.000 Wow.

01:33:20.000 Normally I'm reading all the news every single day but that one went up right before we're doing the show and I saw it and I have faith in our news team.

01:33:26.000 Yeah.

01:33:27.000 While we were reading it I'm like wait a minute something doesn't make sense here and so I started looking at the sources which are dubious and then I reached out to the team.

01:33:37.000 Is somebody in trouble right now?

01:33:38.000 Yes.

01:33:40.000 But it is what it is, man.

01:33:42.000 You know, look, we try our best.

01:33:43.000 Pencils have erasers.

01:33:45.000 Sometimes things slip through and, you know, mistakes happen.

01:33:48.000 But, you know, we try our best.

01:33:50.000 We're not perfect.

01:33:52.000 I just looked up Chile genetic engineering laws and one of the links is world human cloning policies at Rice University.

01:34:01.000 Yeah, I mean, I suppose a story that significant, if your website's the only one breaking it, that's a bit of a red flag.

01:34:07.000 Yeah, I saw another website called Daily Expo Zeta UK, but it's dated tomorrow, the 3rd of March.

01:34:12.000 Is it on the Daily Expo?

01:34:13.000 Maybe it's from the future then.

01:34:14.000 Oh, the Daily Expo, is that what it is?

01:34:16.000 Is it on that website?

01:34:16.000 Yeah.

01:34:17.000 Yeah.

01:34:18.000 It is?

01:34:18.000 Yeah.

01:34:19.000 Is that where the source was?

01:34:20.000 One of them.

01:34:21.000 Is that a fake site?

01:34:22.000 No, no, no, no.

01:34:23.000 So they don't tend to publish fake news, I can tell you that.

01:34:26.000 But the link to the vaccines is just infuriating to me.

01:34:30.000 Is that what's on the Daily Exposed?

01:34:32.000 The Daily Exposed connects the article to vaccination.

01:34:36.000 And the problem I have with that is, there's very few things that make me legitimately angry, but one of it is when news sites falsely frame things by connecting them to things that are Well, I mean, you'd have to have a reason to make that connection.

01:34:51.000 For example, a legislator would have had to say, this is why we want to make this law.

01:34:55.000 Which is not the case.

01:34:56.000 And so the annoying thing is... As a journalist, you'd have to have that link, you know?

01:34:59.000 If we publish the article at TimCast.com and it outright said, some people have questioned China's super soldier program, In China, they're doing this.

01:35:06.000 I'd be like, why are you including that has nothing to do with the news?

01:35:10.000 So if there's a bill being passed that says we did X and we will now enforce X, you're done.

01:35:15.000 Nothing else.

01:35:16.000 That story is actually from the 25th.

01:35:17.000 It's the expose.

01:35:18.000 There's an accent on the last E. So it's pronounced expose.

01:35:22.000 I suppose the issue is there's no original sourcing in it, and that's a serious issue.

01:35:28.000 So it may be true.

01:35:29.000 My issue is the framing, and my issue is if you're gonna source a Chilean law, you need the Chilean document from the Chilean government, not another website's translation of a PDF that they've not sourced.

01:35:41.000 So I'm not a fan.

01:35:43.000 But hey, look, I got standards.

01:35:45.000 Not everybody is me, and I don't write every single story, but I'll absolutely call out, I don't care who it is, And we'll do better.

01:35:53.000 But, you know, my only real issue, like I was saying with a lot of mainstream news websites, is not when they get things wrong, it's when they don't correct them.

01:36:03.000 That's the main issue.

01:36:04.000 Issue of correction.

01:36:04.000 So the policy we have at TimCast.com is any change has to be logged and documented.

01:36:10.000 Yes.

01:36:10.000 So, like, if we change a single word for, like, even formatting reasons, we'll put a note, right?

01:36:19.000 After it's been published.

01:36:19.000 Editor's note.

01:36:21.000 Yes.

01:36:21.000 Oh, there's actually something called NeuroRightsFoundation.org slash Chile, NeuroRights in Chile, which the expose references immediately.

01:36:30.000 A bill to amend the constitution to protect brain rights or NeuroRights. 0.84

01:36:35.000 Okay.

01:36:35.000 It's not, it's not connected and it doesn't prove anything, but this is very interesting.

01:36:38.000 Chilean NeuroRights are on there.

01:36:40.000 The story is not complete.

01:36:41.000 So I'm hearing that there may be something here, but we would have to go and actually find the original sourcing documents.

01:36:47.000 So for now we're pulling the article.

01:36:48.000 Cool.

01:36:48.000 NeuroRights.

01:36:50.000 Real-time fact-checking from your own website.

01:36:53.000 They're talking about metaverse thoughts.

01:36:55.000 Do you own your thoughts?

01:36:56.000 Does someone else own your thoughts?

01:36:57.000 Well, that's what we end up with, right?

01:36:59.000 Does someone else own the shape of the neurons of your brain?

01:37:01.000 Can they patent the shape that the neurons make to produce the memory?

01:37:04.000 Let's go to Super Chats!

01:37:05.000 If you haven't already, smash the like button, subscribe to this channel, share the show with your friends, and if you still have faith in us, go to TimCast.com and become a member because I would love to Alright, let's read some superchats!

01:37:16.000 website in real time for all of you to watch so you know that we take it very

01:37:19.000 very seriously and if you agree with that your support means the world to us

01:37:22.000 but we are gonna have a members only segment coming up just after the show

01:37:26.000 it'll be around 11 p.m. and that should be a whole lot of fun we're gonna talk a

01:37:29.000 lot about spirituality and religion I believe among other stories

01:37:32.000 particularly the tweet that Magid has that YouTube would probably boot us for

01:37:37.000 if we showed but we'll put up on the site all right let's read some super

01:37:41.000 chats all right let's see trip sucks says Ian I ordered you a couple 20 sided

01:37:49.000 One of them has only 20s on each side and the other has only ones. 0.95

01:37:53.000 Use them wisely.

01:37:55.000 Check the mail in a couple weeks.

01:37:58.000 10% chance to roll a 20 then.

01:37:59.000 It's better than one.

01:38:00.000 10?

01:38:00.000 What do you mean?

01:38:01.000 Well, you got a 5% chance to hit every number on a 20-sided die.

01:38:04.000 So if there's two 20s, then I have a 10% chance to roll a 20.

01:38:07.000 Every side.

01:38:08.000 It's a two 20s and then everything else was a one.

01:38:11.000 No.

01:38:12.000 Ian, you're rolling a 1 right now, man.

01:38:13.000 There's too many of those dice.

01:38:15.000 20-sided dice.

01:38:17.000 One of them has nothing but 20s.

01:38:19.000 Oh, okay.

01:38:20.000 One of them has nothing but 1s.

01:38:21.000 There we go.

01:38:22.000 Ian, you rolled a 1 already.

01:38:23.000 I'm gonna have to roll a die to find out which die I have to roll.

01:38:27.000 There you go.

01:38:28.000 If it's greater than 10, you can roll it.

01:38:29.000 You get a 20.

01:38:32.000 All right.

01:38:32.000 Wired Night says, I really see World War III is right around the corner.

01:38:35.000 Putin isn't going to stop.

01:38:37.000 He is this era.

01:38:39.000 Oh, man.

01:38:40.000 He's saying this era is Hitler down with Putin.

01:38:42.000 Keep up the protest in Russia and hopefully they'll take him in custody.

01:38:45.000 I think they're being a bit sarcastic.

01:38:47.000 Yeah.

01:38:47.000 Well, he's not going to stop, but it won't trigger World War III.

01:38:50.000 I mean, do you really think so?

01:38:52.000 Well, because I don't think Biden and I don't think Boris Johnson are going to retaliate in that way.

01:38:58.000 He's already been asked to impose a no-fly zone.

01:39:00.000 They haven't done so and they won't do so.

01:39:03.000 And when we had a guest on the show who said Russia will not invade and they will not go anywhere near Kharkiv, they're not going to go to Kiev.

01:39:12.000 No, so we've already been asked to impose a no-fly zone and we've said no.

01:39:17.000 Well, my point is they could just do it.

01:39:21.000 Do what?

01:39:21.000 A no-fly zone.

01:39:22.000 Who?

01:39:23.000 NATO, the UK, or the US.

01:39:25.000 So why would they though?

01:39:26.000 Well, why did Russia invade Kiev?

01:39:29.000 But we know why Russia did it. 0.74

01:39:31.000 So we've had that discussion.

01:39:33.000 No, no, no.

01:39:34.000 Hold on.

01:39:34.000 A week ago, there was only speculation from U.S.

01:39:37.000 intelligence agencies that Russia would do this.

01:39:39.000 And as far as we knew Russia, Putin said, no, we're just recognizing Donbass as independent.

01:39:44.000 And then I said, I don't think they're going to invade it.

01:39:47.000 That's absurd.

01:39:48.000 I don't know what they'd accomplish.

01:39:49.000 You said that.

01:39:49.000 I went to Rogan and said they would.

01:39:51.000 And then he did.

01:39:52.000 And he did a couple of days after.

01:39:53.000 So maybe you're right on this one.

01:39:55.000 And I don't think we're going to impose a no-fly zone.

01:39:58.000 And I want to make this point too.

01:39:59.000 I don't believe mutually assured destruction is a real thing.

01:40:03.000 Okay, so if there's a mutual nuclear war, who stops?

01:40:08.000 What do you mean by who stops?

01:40:09.000 So mutually assured destruction, the whole point of it is that you don't stop, right?

01:40:12.000 You end up destroying each other.

01:40:13.000 Right, right, right.

01:40:14.000 So if I drop a nuke on you and you drop a nuke on me and I drop a nuke back on you, how does that stop?

01:40:18.000 Why would you nuke me?

01:40:22.000 So that's different to saying you don't think it's a mutually assured destruction.

01:40:25.000 I'm going to use a Socratic method.

01:40:27.000 Why would you?

01:40:27.000 No, I wouldn't.

01:40:28.000 No, no, no.

01:40:29.000 I'm saying I wouldn't.

01:40:29.000 Choose it.

01:40:30.000 No one would.

01:40:31.000 Putin wouldn't.

01:40:32.000 But mutually assured destruction is a doctrine that assumes somebody has in the first place.

01:40:36.000 And the only relevance of the doctrine is to say that they wouldn't because it would lead to mutually assured destruction.

01:40:41.000 No, no, no, no.

01:40:41.000 But it's not correct.

01:40:42.000 Why would someone nuke?

01:40:45.000 Why would one country nuke?

01:40:46.000 Why would Putin nuke another country?

01:40:48.000 So in theory, why you do it is because you're going to lose a war.

01:40:51.000 You don't have aerial superiority.

01:40:54.000 And the only trump card you have is a nuclear weapon.

01:40:56.000 And where do you send it?

01:40:58.000 And you're about to lose, right?

01:41:00.000 So where do you fire the nuclear weapon?

01:41:03.000 What's your target?

01:41:04.000 The country that's conquering you.

01:41:05.000 But what's the target in the country?

01:41:07.000 Say the capital city.

01:41:09.000 Why the civilian capital?

01:41:10.000 Is that where they have the weapons?

01:41:13.000 But that's where that so wherever their leadership and command and control is, is where you think it's based.

01:41:17.000 I mean, that was maybe true 70 years ago.

01:41:19.000 Yep.

01:41:19.000 But we know for a fact now that certainly the United States is government is decentralized to a point that DC is not relevant to the operation of the United States government.

01:41:30.000 So there's absolutely zero point in nuking civilians.

01:41:34.000 D.C.

01:41:35.000 Let's say, for example, you're Iran and you're Israel. 0.88

01:41:40.000 And imagine Iran develops its nuclear capability to a point where it has a weapon, right? 0.92

01:41:45.000 Israel isn't that large a country.

01:41:47.000 Iran is basically do or die. 0.97

01:41:49.000 They're about to lose the war and they say, listen, Either we lose and we all get killed or we launch this bomb because I'd rather we end the war in this way, right? 0.79

01:41:59.000 How would it end the war by killing civilians?

01:42:01.000 It doesn't inhibit the military.

01:42:04.000 But see, what I'm trying to say is mutually assured destruction is a doctrine that only applies once you've launched a nuclear weapon.

01:42:11.000 My point is... What you're asking is why would you launch one in the first place.

01:42:13.000 I don't think you would.

01:42:14.000 No, no, no, no, no, no.

01:42:15.000 My point is if a nuke was headed in your direction and I, as your military advisor, came to you and said, we can't stop it.

01:42:23.000 10 million civilians will die. 0.96

01:42:25.000 You have the option to kill 10 million civilians of your own, though. 0.99

01:42:28.000 It's not going to stop anything, but certainly you can kill a bunch of innocent people. 0.98

01:42:32.000 I don't believe that makes sense.

01:42:33.000 Now, when it comes to ideology like Iran, well, they want to wipe out Israel. 0.77

01:42:38.000 That's a different question. 0.99

01:42:40.000 Israel may say, we'll hit, I don't believe Israel would just be like, well then murder all of the Iranian people. 0.83

01:42:45.000 I don't believe that's true. 0.72

01:42:46.000 I believe that Iran might say, can we intercept? 0.71

01:42:50.000 Do we have strategic, you know, SDI defenses or things like that and try and stop nuclear weapons?

01:42:55.000 And they may respond by targeting key military infrastructure.

01:42:58.000 But the idea that one country fires nukes targeting a civilian base, which doesn't stop the war in any capacity, and then the other country responds by blowing up the other country's civilians, which doesn't stop the war in any capacity, makes no sense at all.

01:43:11.000 You're applying reason and rational thought processes to somebody that decides to launch a nuclear weapon.

01:43:16.000 Yep.

01:43:18.000 And so an ideologically driven nation may not decide to launch a nuclear weapon for the reasons that You deem rational.

01:43:26.000 Only if they're targeting another ideological nation do you get mutually assured destruction.

01:43:30.000 In the event of Russia, say... 0.92

01:43:32.000 So it could happen.

01:43:33.000 It could happen in limited capacities between small, smaller nations.

01:43:38.000 So North Korea and say... North Korea and... I don't believe North Korea.

01:43:44.000 Okay, so sufficiently ideological nation.

01:43:46.000 Iran and... So when you have like a desire to wipe out Israel for long-standing deep-seated issues, but I don't see Israel as the kind of nation that would respond by saying, let's just eradicate the Iranian people.

01:44:01.000 You don't see Israel as a kind of nation that would say- Do you think the people of Israel- Retaliation demands this.

01:44:06.000 I'll put it this way- Because I disagree with you there.

01:44:08.000 Do you think the people of Israel want to mass genocide the Iranians?

01:44:11.000 No, but- But do you think the people of- at least a large portion of Iran wants to wipe out the Jewish people?

01:44:15.000 And that's my point.

01:44:17.000 That if Iran were to launch it, I do see Israel saying, they've now taken out a city, we demand revenge. 0.99

01:44:23.000 Revenge isn't the same as wanting to wipe out a nation.

01:44:25.000 It's just revenge.

01:44:26.000 Is the revenge on the civilians?

01:44:29.000 That country struck us.

01:44:30.000 We need to strike back.

01:44:31.000 But I think that may have made sense 70 years ago.

01:44:35.000 I don't see that making sense today.

01:44:37.000 I'm not so sure they would be looking to make sense.

01:44:40.000 So, you also have to think about it from the individual.

01:44:44.000 When it comes to the West, I don't see an individual, on average at least, certainly there are some people who wouldn't care.

01:44:52.000 But if, again, someone came to, if you went to the average person and said, there's a bomb that's going to kill, you know, 10 million people, you can't stop it.

01:45:01.000 These 10 million people will die in two hours.

01:45:03.000 You can respond by killing 10 million people, press the button.

01:45:07.000 It's like, I just don't see a human emotional response. 0.96

01:45:14.000 Not a logical one. 0.99

01:45:15.000 I don't see a human emotional response being like, better kill a bunch of civilians. 0.93

01:45:18.000 It's more like that.

01:45:19.000 But I could also see somebody in a situation where nukes are heading towards their country saying, well, these people are clearly comfortable launching nukes, and if we don't launch something back, they could kill a bunch of other innocent people when they have gotten the message from us that you could just nuke someone without retaliation.

01:45:31.000 Keep in mind, the only time that nukes have been used, it was used twice, right?

01:45:35.000 For two cities.

01:45:36.000 So you drop one on Hiroshima, it doesn't end the war, you then drop one on Nagasaki. 0.79

01:45:41.000 So say Iran launches one, takes out one city, there's a rational thought process, which I even question would be the thought process, but let's follow that logic. 0.98

01:45:49.000 There's a rational thought process that could say, hey, they might target another city unless we retaliate as a deterrent.

01:45:55.000 But that's assuming they're thinking rationally.

01:45:57.000 I don't even think at that point people would.

01:45:58.000 Yeah, the thing about nuclear-assured destruction is that they've already... The country's not going to launch one.

01:46:02.000 They launch 80 at all the cities at once.

01:46:05.000 The assurance of destruction is that you have already decided we are going to be destroyed in 20 minutes, completely.

01:46:11.000 Now what are we going to do with our nuclear weapons?

01:46:12.000 And that's the whole bunch of civilians outside... Well, I don't know, like Seamus made a good point.

01:46:15.000 Why are you arguing for the doctrine here?

01:46:17.000 That is the doctrine.

01:46:20.000 It makes no sense.

01:46:21.000 That's the point of it.

01:46:22.000 That's why nobody would launch a nuclear war.

01:46:24.000 That's not... I believe that makes literally no sense.

01:46:27.000 Russia invaded Ukraine, and the West, you say, is going to do nothing.

01:46:30.000 They won't.

01:46:30.000 There is no mutual drive towards... Ukraine is getting flattened in many areas by Russia, and the US should, or these countries should be like, how dare Russia?

01:46:43.000 We have every reason, because we were trying to win over Ukraine, but they won't do it. 1.00

01:46:46.000 Because of mutually assured destruction.

01:46:49.000 Because they're all conquering countries themselves.

01:46:51.000 They took Libya, they took Iraq. 0.97

01:46:52.000 Russia is able to launch an attack and no one responds.

01:46:56.000 If they launch a nuke, no one will respond.

01:46:59.000 That's my point.

01:46:59.000 No, but they won't launch a nuke.

01:47:01.000 Russia did invade.

01:47:02.000 No one invaded back.

01:47:03.000 That's because we've been invading.

01:47:04.000 Because Russia knows we fear mutual destruction.

01:47:07.000 And they don't.

01:47:09.000 I think that the world's carving up the world right now.

01:47:11.000 The superpowers are taking.

01:47:12.000 We took Libya. 0.81

01:47:14.000 We took it.

01:47:14.000 I mean, that's like an American colony right now or like a puppet state or something.

01:47:18.000 I think you're arguing that that is the doctrine of mutually assured destruction.

01:47:22.000 That someone could launch a nuke and no one will do anything about it?

01:47:24.000 No, that nobody will for that reason.

01:47:26.000 Nobody will because it makes no sense.

01:47:28.000 And nobody has.

01:47:29.000 My point is, in any facet of war that involves civilian death, right now Russia has engaged in a campaign which has resulted in civilian death and no one is doing anything about it.

01:47:39.000 So Vladimir Putin knows if he were to launch strategic, tactical or nuclear artillery, no one will respond.

01:47:47.000 If the idea was that launching a nuclear weapon assured your own destruction, the US and NATO would go and flatten Russia's forces, at least in Ukraine. 0.58

01:47:55.000 That's the bit I'm not getting.

01:47:57.000 So Russia doesn't need to launch tactical nuclear weapons to do what they're doing in Ukraine because they're already doing it, right?

01:48:03.000 They would only go to that next level if there was an escalation.

01:48:06.000 Why does mutually shared destruction only apply to one type of warfare?

01:48:10.000 To nuclear warfare.

01:48:11.000 Oh yeah, it could be a digital war.

01:48:12.000 The nature of the weapon.

01:48:13.000 But what about cyber war infrastructure, destruction of water pipelines?

01:48:18.000 The U.S.

01:48:19.000 could use surreptitious methods to wipe out Russia.

01:48:22.000 They're not doing anything.

01:48:23.000 That we know of.

01:48:24.000 Yeah.

01:48:24.000 There's low-scale stuff like the train slowdown or something.

01:48:27.000 Funding.

01:48:28.000 Funding.

01:48:28.000 Are they funding it?

01:48:29.000 So I'm not sure a, say for example, let's say you hack the water supply.

01:48:35.000 I'm not sure it leads to that same the nature of immediate absolute and total destruction of a city is what we're talking of that would lead to that retaliation.

01:48:45.000 I still think there's that doctrine applies and I can see why it would be a deterrent because of that doctrine and it's held for so long why nobody has launched a nuclear war against anybody else because it would lead to that kind of situation where nobody wins and everyone loses.

01:49:01.000 I think the idea of mutual destruction is born out of a lack of understanding of human behavior in nature.

01:49:10.000 And I think certainly, you know, the chat is lighting up saying I'm wrong.

01:49:12.000 Yeah, I think you are.

01:49:13.000 But they don't know about... Because you're assuming human behavior is rational.

01:49:16.000 No, I'm absolutely not.

01:49:17.000 I'm absolutely not.

01:49:18.000 You're asking why it would make sense not, like, why you're destroying my city would mean I'd have to destroy your city back.

01:49:23.000 My question is... There's no reason at that point.

01:49:25.000 Why is it that Vladimir Putin can launch an invasion no one responds to?

01:49:30.000 That's the point, right?

01:49:32.000 He's not launching a nuclear invasion.

01:49:33.000 No, no, no, hold on, hold on.

01:49:36.000 So this idea, I've not been given a sufficient response as to why only nuclear weapons are the special category of we kill each other.

01:49:45.000 Because it's total destruction.

01:49:47.000 It's not, though.

01:49:49.000 That's the problem.

01:49:50.000 Bombing a city does not end the war.

01:49:52.000 It may have 70 years ago.

01:49:54.000 But today, when we had January 6th, these protesters thought by occupying a building they would have some impact on government, and that makes literally no sense in a digital age.

01:50:03.000 We know that through Directive 51, through what used to be the NORAD strategic defense in Denver, we had underground military bunkers.

01:50:13.000 I think you would be absolutely naive not to believe that we don't have... So you're a country.

01:50:17.000 Right.

01:50:17.000 You're a country.

01:50:18.000 And I decide for whatever reason I've had enough and I launch nuclear weapons.

01:50:22.000 I'm not going to launch one.

01:50:24.000 I'm going to launch, whatever, 80 to all of your cities, right?

01:50:28.000 They're now coming.

01:50:29.000 What are you going to do?

01:50:30.000 You're the country.

01:50:31.000 What do you do?

01:50:31.000 Nothing.

01:50:32.000 I've now launched them already.

01:50:33.000 Nothing.

01:50:34.000 Then I win.

01:50:35.000 I've won, if you don't do anything.

01:50:37.000 Just like Vladimir Putin has already done.

01:50:38.000 No, but he hasn't launched nuclear weapons.

01:50:40.000 I'm not talking about nukes.

01:50:41.000 That's what MAD is.

01:50:42.000 MAD applies only to nuclear war.

01:50:44.000 So it makes no sense.

01:50:45.000 That's why nobody will do it.

01:50:47.000 Vladimir Putin is of the idea that MAD doesn't exist, which is why he invaded Ukraine and is telling everybody, screw off, I got nukes.

01:50:55.000 And they all say, we're scared of this, so we'll do nothing.

01:50:58.000 But if this logic applies, Russia would have been scared of a retaliation they're not scared of, which shows an aggressor can attack and expect no retaliation.

01:51:08.000 It happens all the time.

01:51:09.000 I know what it is.

01:51:12.000 I'm not saying you don't know what it is.

01:51:15.000 I'm saying I'm not sure you're applying it in this context correctly.

01:51:23.000 When he says, I have nuclear weapons, he's saying, if you declare a war against me, then war by definition is a total war, which means it will become a nuclear war.

01:51:34.000 That is mad in effect.

01:51:36.000 That is mad literally being played out, right?

01:51:40.000 That's the whole point.

01:51:41.000 The reason why nobody's doing anything is because of the doctrine of mad.

01:51:45.000 It's a question of, will soldiers indiscriminately kill civilians?

01:51:49.000 I'm of the opinion the answer is mostly no, not always.

01:51:54.000 So when given the instruction to fire a nuke on a civilian target, explicitly a civilian target, I am of the opinion that people, like in Vietnam, the soldiers were firing over the heads of the Viet Cong, resulting in them getting killed, that most humans are too terrified to actually be the person to murder 10 million people.

01:52:13.000 Now, there are some people that would.

01:52:14.000 But this is a big problem, I believe, still persists within human behavior.

01:52:19.000 When there was a bank robbery.

01:52:21.000 This is a famous story.

01:52:22.000 It may be apocryphal, but there's a story, and try to fact check me on this one.

01:52:26.000 A bunch of guys go into a bank to rob it.

01:52:28.000 And the security guard stands there and does nothing.

01:52:30.000 They walk up to him, they point the gun at him, and say, give me your weapon.

01:52:32.000 And he does.

01:52:33.000 He was later asked, why didn't you do anything to stop him?

01:52:35.000 And he says, I didn't know.

01:52:38.000 I didn't know what was going on.

01:52:39.000 I didn't know what to do.

01:52:40.000 It's like well, you're the armed guard who's intention.

01:52:43.000 They don't want to kill anybody That people don't want to kill anybody. It takes a special

01:52:48.000 kind of conditioning to be I just I this idea There's no soldier is he but the idea that any person like

01:52:55.000 a soldier?

01:52:56.000 I'm imagining an american soldier. I don't believe in world of comic book villains

01:53:00.000 I don't believe that russian soldiers are all like mustache twirling villains like cobra command

01:53:05.000 To go to an 18 to 24 year old kid or maybe someone a little bit older who's got the keys to the nuclear 0.70

01:53:10.000 You know command And they're gonna be like I want you to execute 10 million

01:53:15.000 civilians and for the average human being be like you got it boss 0.99

01:53:19.000 Killing 10 million people right now. I don't think most people would agree to do it

01:53:23.000 No But that's not that the people that do it are the ones that

01:53:25.000 are trained to do it, right?

01:53:26.000 But the one instance we've had where we came close to it was a story that we talked about the other day with the

01:53:30.000 nuclear Submarine and the guy on the ship

01:53:32.000 There's two captains saying we should one guy said no and he stopped them from firing when they what was it?

01:53:38.000 Yeah, it was three officers, I don't know if they were all captains or whatever, but they thought they had gone and, that the US had destroyers in the area, and they were in a nuclear sub, and there was depth charges going off, and apparently there were practice depth charges, they didn't know, they thought that a shooting war had started, and they were like, we gotta fire Nuclear torpedoes and then the two officers were like yeah,

01:53:55.000 and then the third guy Alexei I believe is his name said no we need to wait for command

01:53:59.000 from Moscow before we fire and then eventually they surfaced and they

01:54:02.000 Communicated with the destroyers and found out there was no war and he basically

01:54:05.000 They say he prevented World War three in that moment by refusing to fire

01:54:09.000 I think there's some people who would do it, but I think well people did do it in history did do what?

01:54:14.000 Drop a nuke.

01:54:15.000 The United States did.

01:54:16.000 And we did it because if we did a ground invasion we would have lost more people.

01:54:19.000 That was the argument.

01:54:20.000 I'm not going into the justice, I'm saying people did it.

01:54:22.000 That's the point.

01:54:23.000 So some people are trained to do it.

01:54:25.000 But this is, you know, absolutely I agree.

01:54:27.000 I just think the idea that we see in movies where all the missiles are flying at each other is just, it's movie beliefs that people just think is true.

01:54:35.000 They're basing their ideology off of like war games with Matthew Broderick or G.I.

01:54:39.000 Well well I mean that's because it won't happen but that's the whole point of the doctrine that it won't happen.

01:54:39.000 Joe.

01:54:45.000 So what you see depicted in movies is what the doctrine says will not happen.

01:54:49.000 Mutually assured destruction is a doctrine that essentially argues that that scenario you've just depicted that is a very unrealistic scenario will not happen for that reason.

01:54:58.000 So the issue is I see what you're saying.

01:55:02.000 The problem, I think, especially people in the chat who are saying, one, the idea would be that Russia decides, I'm going to blow up Amsterdam.

01:55:12.000 Well, why would he?

01:55:13.000 He would target a military base or an airport first.

01:55:16.000 The use of a tactical nuclear device, nuclear artillery, gravity bombs or otherwise would be on strategic targets to help them win a conflict.

01:55:22.000 Yeah, so he wouldn't do that, right?

01:55:25.000 The only time the doctrine kicks in is because the only reason you could conceive of using a nuclear weapon is out of a necessity to defeat the enemy when you have no other option left otherwise it wouldn't make sense and the whole point of the doctrine is that by the time you get to that necessity you realize that it's going to lead to mutually assured destruction so the point of that um resort uh in necessity isn't really it doesn't make the difference but the mutual so so i guess to clarify the mutually assured destruction would be of military and not civilian targets

01:55:55.000 It's total war is everything.

01:55:56.000 Because if the civilians are making the steel that is being used, then they're military.

01:55:59.000 I think we've come to something- I think winning or losing the war, right? 0.85

01:56:02.000 I think we've come to a development on the idea, which is important.

01:56:07.000 It's the governments that lose.

01:56:09.000 The people would end up being mostly fine.

01:56:11.000 I don't think so.

01:56:11.000 If you did a full nuclear strike of the U.S., it would be mass migration towards the farms in the middle of the country.

01:56:16.000 People would be starving and going towards the suburbs, and it would be full chaos.

01:56:20.000 The economy would be shredded to zero.

01:56:22.000 No electricity, no water.

01:56:24.000 Yeah, but still, you'd have whatever.

01:56:26.000 Somebody living in, say, Indonesia would be fine, right? 1.00

01:56:28.000 Hopefully.

01:56:29.000 As in, well, I mean, there'd be a global economic disaster, but they wouldn't be dead.

01:56:33.000 For all I know, the US would nuke the entire planet in that moment, I don't know.

01:56:37.000 That'd be insane.

01:56:37.000 I think, you know, so what you're saying is... It's the governments that lose.

01:56:42.000 The mutually assured destruction is just, we have no choice but to do it if you do, to deter you from doing it in the first place.

01:56:49.000 And that's why I'd argue it hasn't happened and won't happen.

01:56:52.000 It doesn't make sense for it to happen, and that's what the doctrine states as well.

01:56:56.000 I think we'll see the use of tactical nukes.

01:56:59.000 People need to understand the... When?

01:57:02.000 Which conflict?

01:57:03.000 As in, not in this conflict, right?

01:57:05.000 Not with Russia in... I think it's possible, but I don't know if it's... No, it won't happen. 0.86

01:57:05.000 At some point. 0.86

01:57:09.000 But I'm not, I'm not talking about, I'm not talking about what I love to cite as, you know, MIRVs. 0.69

01:57:15.000 I'm not talking about, you know, I think it's possible we see, like, kiloton bombs, radioactive nuclear artillery, etc.

01:57:25.000 Look, dirty weapons, biological warfare, that's where we're at these days, right?

01:57:28.000 One of the reasons I don't think nukes are going to happen is in particular because what you've got is, for a long time, US military leadership has long recognized Russia's strategic national interest in eastern Ukraine on that eastern side of that river that we were speaking about earlier to the point where I posted this video on my feed actually.

01:57:47.000 Colonel McGregor from the US military was on Fox and he perfectly articulates as a US colonel perfectly articulates what Putin's desire is with eastern Ukraine and then acknowledges that they've been aware of this.

01:58:02.000 For a long time.

01:58:03.000 Now, keep in mind, of course, that if you're a serving U.S.

01:58:05.000 military officer, you don't get to set what U.S.

01:58:07.000 policy is in, for example, funding as a battalion or whatever.

01:58:10.000 That's not the military that sets that policy.

01:58:13.000 But the military being aware of this, it kind of indicates to me, and this has been around for years, this kind of idea that, you know, we can't keep pushing NATO eastwards.

01:58:20.000 U.S.

01:58:20.000 military been making these noises for a long time.

01:58:23.000 I think, to be honest, we're probably past the peak and the worst, I'd say, of Russia's assault in Ukraine.

01:58:30.000 If we operate under the assumption that mutually assured destruction is correct, that means Russia's going to win and they're going to keep advancing. 0.97

01:58:37.000 In Ukraine?

01:58:38.000 They will win in Ukraine, they will take it.

01:58:40.000 Putin will get exactly what he wants and he'll stop only when he decides.

01:58:43.000 He'll stop at the river?

01:58:45.000 Well, I think they're already past the river with Odessa, right?

01:58:48.000 But that's where he'll, for example, when he calls it quits... He splits the country and he'll stop.

01:58:52.000 Because it's not in his own interest to go any further.

01:58:55.000 Did you see the map that Belarus had that showed an attack into Moldova, Transnistria?

01:59:00.000 Yeah, I've been hearing about that.

01:59:02.000 Belarus showed a map that depicted four attack vectors that have happened, several that haven't.

01:59:07.000 Some have argued that they haven't happened yet.

01:59:11.000 I don't know the way of evidence to suggest it's predictive or just speculative, but it does show accurately four attacks from Russia.

01:59:17.000 Could be fake because they didn't get the enemy to put their troops in the wrong spot.

01:59:20.000 Well, Russia already occupies Transnistria with about a thousand soldiers.

01:59:23.000 So, if Russia is planning on moving into Moldova, into this disputed territory, to stage troops, that means they're planning a Western assault on Ukraine.

01:59:30.000 If that's the case... Then maybe they just want Moldova.

01:59:33.000 Or it could be fake, because if it gets NATO to put troops in Moldova when they're not needed, then it's good.

01:59:37.000 He doesn't need Western Ukraine, he needs Eastern Ukraine. 0.91

01:59:40.000 What he wants in Western Ukraine, as McGregor said in the interview, we can pull it up if you want, it's quite good actually, what he wants in Western Ukraine is a neutral Ukraine as it was pre-2014.

01:59:49.000 That's all he wants.

01:59:51.000 And if you understand it, this is where it really winds me up that we've banned Russia today and all these Russian Propaganda channels they are state-owned propaganda channels, but if I'm playing chess with you It helps me to know your strategy if I want to win now Why would I say if you're telling me your strategy?

02:00:08.000 Why would I silence your voice if I'm playing against you right?

02:00:10.000 So this is why it makes no sense to silence Russian media you want to understand what they're saying if you're competing against them, but so far what we know is that Comfortably we can say that Putin wants a neutral pre-2014 style neutral Ukraine now because he didn't get that He'll probably be happy with a Western Ukraine that's neutral and an Eastern Ukraine that's under his sphere of influence.

02:00:32.000 I think, I think that's where he's going to end.

02:00:34.000 We went a little long, but we'll read some Super Chats.

02:00:36.000 Go for it.

02:00:36.000 Yeah.

02:00:37.000 Is that where we were going to be?

02:00:39.000 It's Vassily Arkhipov is the Russian officer.

02:00:39.000 I got the guy's name.

02:00:42.000 So we have, Ryan says, Tim is just pissed because the Chile story didn't take, because the Chile story, don't take it out on your guests.

02:00:49.000 No, I'm not pissed about that.

02:00:52.000 So someone that might get disabled in the future from a current genetic thing.

02:00:54.000 is legit. It seeks to prevent discrimination against workers who may develop genetic pathologies

02:00:59.000 but are not yet disabled. Keep up the good work. Love from Santiago." So that's someone 0.86

02:01:03.000 saying...

02:01:04.000 So someone that might get disabled in the future from a current genetic thing. They

02:01:07.000 want to make sure they're protected.

02:01:09.000 So Ghost of Recon says, Tim, the purpose of mutually assured destruction is to ensure

02:01:14.000 that if a country were to launch a nuclear strike, the destruction would be ensured before

02:01:18.000 the first nuke lands.

02:01:19.000 This makes it completely unreasonable and unpalatable to fire nukes in the first place.

02:01:25.000 My response to that is, I think it's interesting that people are saying, I don't understand human nature when they're making assumptions about what humans would do in a situation that's never happened.

02:01:32.000 My point is, mutually assured destruction is predicting human behavior on a circumstance that's never happened, with no reason to believe and no evidence to suggest it would.

02:01:42.000 My belief is that humans are averse to killing, as much as they could be, and it's strange to me that people are adamant something that's never happened would happen, with no evidence to believe it would.

02:01:55.000 You've seen Alien 2?

02:01:57.000 Do you remember the guy goes in, the aliens are trying to kill the guy and he pulls out the grenade and blows everybody up?

02:02:00.000 The only thing I've ever seen is that nukes were dropped on Japan and it worked and we won. 1.00

02:02:05.000 They didn't have nukes though.

02:02:06.000 But it's not just Japan.

02:02:07.000 No one else did anything.

02:02:09.000 No other country said, whoa, they just wiped out hundreds of thousands of civilians. 0.97

02:02:13.000 They said, America wins!

02:02:14.000 To be fair, MAD only applies in the context of both countries having nukes.

02:02:18.000 I'm just saying that that's never happened before.

02:02:21.000 And so we have no evidence to suggest it would, just speculation.

02:02:24.000 And what has happened before is we've used devastating nuclear weapons with no retaliation at all in any capacity.

02:02:31.000 The evidence we do have in terms of human nature is that what we do know is that human behavior isn't always rational and that revenge is a powerful emotion.

02:02:39.000 And that if you shot at me, I know that a human reaction is to shoot back.

02:02:44.000 Now, whether that's not been done with nukes before, we don't need that to conclude that if you... arms races happen, right?

02:02:50.000 So if you escalate an arms race, I escalate back from emotion.

02:02:53.000 We know that happens.

02:02:54.000 So there is some evidence to indicate that it would escalate.

02:02:58.000 And that's the evidence based on existing human behavior with what happens in retaliation and revenge.

02:03:03.000 And Seamus brought up an interesting point, like, can you let that person win?

02:03:07.000 If there's, like, a dictatorship that launched nukes at your country, you can't let them... If you're... Okay, maybe you're just gonna let yourself get wiped out, but, like, are you gonna let them control the planet now?

02:03:16.000 And that emotion can be crazy.

02:03:17.000 It's a question remarkably complicated that I think I'm just surprised people are so definitive on.

02:03:22.000 Yeah.

02:03:23.000 I mean, martyrdom in the Iranian... You're right, though.

02:03:25.000 In the Iranian context, the ideological motive is also worth considering.

02:03:28.000 Martyrdom as a concept, insert there as well.

02:03:30.000 We have this from Dan Pitt.

02:03:31.000 He says, Tim, bro, like I said yesterday, if nukes were launched at the U.S., a retaliatory strike would be launched with no hesitation.

02:03:38.000 I was on submarines.

02:03:39.000 Trust me, the birds would fly.

02:03:41.000 The issue is people seem to have a very American perspective on how the response would be.

02:03:48.000 I'm talking about if Russia nuked any country on the planet. 0.77

02:03:53.000 Do you think if Russia nuked, you know, Sri Lanka, there would be a retaliatory strike?

02:03:56.000 Sri Lanka doesn't have nukes, but say Pakistan, right? 0.78

02:03:58.000 And India.

02:03:59.000 They'd destroy each other.

02:04:01.000 So they would destroy each other. 0.77

02:04:03.000 I can guarantee you that Pakistan... But there's ideology there. 1.00

02:04:05.000 Yeah, that's the point.

02:04:06.000 But most nuclear powers have ideology.

02:04:08.000 So I think the, I don't believe the U.S.

02:04:11.000 is, I think it's governed more by, I think this country has lost ideology for sure.

02:04:16.000 I think we're fractured and we're driven more by conquest and power of corporate elites and neolibs and neocons.

02:04:22.000 But I digress.

02:04:23.000 I think the issue is people who have nukes don't have the same ideologies.

02:04:27.000 They don't have the same beliefs.

02:04:28.000 They don't have the same intentions.

02:04:30.000 The U.S.

02:04:30.000 certainly might do this.

02:04:31.000 A lot of people seem to have an American perspective. 0.93

02:04:33.000 Yes, we will nuke you, don't you dare! 1.00

02:04:35.000 But what about other countries?

02:04:36.000 Would they do the same thing?

02:04:38.000 I don't believe there's a uniform response to this.

02:04:40.000 And the only evidence I've seen is that after the U.S.

02:04:43.000 dropped nukes, certainly other countries would have reason to declare war on the United States for such an egregious action.

02:04:49.000 Certainly, I mean, I suppose bombing two major cities in Japan, they just said, we give up, you know?

02:04:58.000 Yeah, I mean, look, you've got to consider why Iran's chasing nukes at the moment. 0.64

02:05:00.000 I think people, nations, consider it as a leveler.

02:05:03.000 Yeah.

02:05:04.000 And that's because they're subscribing to mutually assured destruction as a doctrine.

02:05:09.000 The reason Iran wants nukes is it knows it cannot defeat Israel in conventional military terms and wants to therefore level up with Israel. 0.70

02:05:15.000 And the only way it can do that is through nuclear weapons.

02:05:18.000 I wonder if this is like an Islamic allegory because I was trying to get into Islam and understand it and what it looked like is Muhammad was teaching them like peace at all costs unless you're backed into a corner and you have no choice then you fight like hell and so the US invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan put these people in the corner and now they're like well jihad or whatever you want to call it but and so that's kind of the mutually assured destruction thing like if you're gonna attack me and put me in a corner By faith dictates that I do this.

02:05:43.000 Well, I mean that's why I mentioned martyrdom.

02:05:46.000 If you've got a psychology in a nation that would prefer death over defeat, I would argue that's why nukes were dropped on Japan, because they wouldn't surrender.

02:05:56.000 Because the mindset prior to the end of that war In the Japanese imperial mindset, was very much, if you think in terms of samurai, dignity, honor, warrior mindset, was very much, that's why they would fall on their sword, which is where that idea comes from.

02:06:12.000 That they would prefer taking their own lives than defeat on the battlefield.

02:06:17.000 Now in the Muslim version of that, it's martyrdom over defeat. 0.80

02:06:20.000 So where you prefer death to defeat, that could be the Japanese version of falling on your own sword. 0.68

02:06:25.000 In the Islamic version of that, You wouldn't just kill yourself, you'd want to take out as many of the enemy with you as possible before you die, because you believe there's something after that. 1.00

02:06:34.000 So it's not irrational within the internal logic of that mindset.

02:06:38.000 You think you're taking out as many of your enemy as possible, and then you end up in some eternal paradise.

02:06:44.000 So you're not actually dying, you're going to an eternal life, and you've also killed the enemy in the process.

02:06:51.000 Yeah, there is something glorious about a hero that sacrifices him or herself to destroy the enemy.

02:06:56.000 But that's very, the important point I'm making here is it's very real for the person that believes that.

02:07:00.000 It's real.

02:07:01.000 It's more real for the person that believes it than any form of real is for somebody that doesn't believe anything.

02:07:08.000 Like it's hard to explain that mindset.

02:07:10.000 It's a hundred percent conviction that this is what's going to happen and it's done willingly and with honor and then is celebrated.

02:07:17.000 I would love to talk about that on the after show.

02:07:19.000 Maybe.

02:07:19.000 Well, so, so yeah, we have, uh, you know, I think we've, we, we might be getting a little

02:07:24.000 circular on the mad stuff and a lot of the super chats are just making similar points

02:07:27.000 and kind of just joining the argument.

02:07:28.000 So I don't want to just rehash all the same stuff.

02:07:30.000 But, uh, other than that, we have a bunch of people pointing out that the Chile story

02:07:35.000 is correct, but it's, it's poorly framed.

02:07:38.000 That the story in Chile was about non-discrimination for people with genetic disorders, like I'd assumed, and that we needlessly included information.

02:07:45.000 The original source was Daily Expose.

02:07:48.000 So, uh, let me see.

02:07:49.000 This is, uh, Marco Antonio Aravena says, Chilean here, alterations in this context means issue or problem.

02:07:56.000 If we were talking about modification, we'll be talking about gene therapy also is a work law against discrimination.

02:08:02.000 So it appears to be true, but when you translate it, it doesn't translate properly without someone from Chile explaining to you.

02:08:07.000 There was no need to connection to vaccinations in the article, if that's the case.

02:08:10.000 And that's what the daily expose had done.

02:08:12.000 Yeah.

02:08:12.000 They had said, you know, they'd linked them and we, we certainly should have done that.

02:08:17.000 But I've been explicit with the crew before.

02:08:19.000 Don't combine stories.

02:08:21.000 Because it's like nebulous connections.

02:08:23.000 Well, so here's what we're going to do.

02:08:24.000 We argued a bit too much and I don't want to go too late.

02:08:27.000 So we're going to go to the members-only discussion.

02:08:32.000 So head over to TimCast.com and become a member if you want to support our work.

02:08:36.000 If you appreciate the fact-checking and real-time corrections and scrutiny we have for even our own work, and you want to help support our journalists as we continue to do better and get it right, please become a member.

02:08:44.000 But also, we're going to record that members-only segment.

02:08:46.000 It'll be up around 11 or so p.m., so you don't want to miss it.

02:08:48.000 It's going to be fun.

02:08:49.000 I really appreciate your guys' support.

02:08:50.000 Everybody's helping make it possible.

02:08:52.000 You can follow the show at TimCast IRL.

02:08:54.000 You can follow me at TimCast Magic.

02:08:55.000 Do you want to shout anything out, your show, your socials?

02:08:57.000 Just watch out for Odyssey spelled O-D-Y-S-E-E.

02:09:00.000 Watch out for my new show that's going to appear on there.

02:09:03.000 Give it a couple of weeks to a month until we get ready.

02:09:05.000 Meanwhile, you can find me on Substack.

02:09:07.000 You can find me on Twitter and Getter at Majid Nawaz.

02:09:10.000 Right on.

02:09:11.000 Seamus.

02:09:12.000 What's up, homie? 1.00

02:09:13.000 I am Seamus Coghlan.

02:09:14.000 Love doctor.

02:09:15.000 The love doctor Coghlan.

02:09:17.000 Those are my credentials.

02:09:18.000 Trust the science.

02:09:19.000 Believe me on these issues.

02:09:21.000 I run a YouTube channel called Freedom Tunes.

02:09:22.000 We do cartoons.

02:09:23.000 We release a new one every single Thursday, which means we're going to have one out tomorrow about Obama's... I'm sorry, Biden's.

02:09:29.000 What's wrong with me now?

02:09:30.000 I'm not... Oh, Biden?

02:09:31.000 The gaps are contagious.

02:09:33.000 We're going to be releasing a cartoon tomorrow on Biden's State of the Union.

02:09:36.000 I think you guys will enjoy it.

02:09:38.000 I am Ian Crossland.

02:09:39.000 I'm looking forward to seeing you guys again.

02:09:40.000 You can follow me at iancrossland.net.

02:09:41.000 And if you want to see our multi-video camera thing at some point in the future, give me a solid 100 in the chat.

02:09:47.000 Catch you later.

02:09:48.000 Nice.

02:09:49.000 I was going to say that Chilean law actually does sound like a real thing because I have like a genetic disorder that somebody could technically fire me for.

02:09:56.000 So I'm kind of glad that it's a thing.

02:09:57.000 Really curious where it's coming from, whether it's the WEF or something and probably not vaccines.

02:10:01.000 But anyway, I digress now.

02:10:03.000 You guys can follow me on Twitter and Minds.com at Sour Patch Lids.

02:10:07.000 We will see all of you over at TimCast.com in that special members-only segment.

02:10:11.000 We are going to discuss religion and spirituality.

02:10:13.000 It should be a lot of fun.

02:10:14.000 And maybe we'll solve all the world's problems.

02:10:16.000 Thanks for hanging out.

Timcast IRL - Tim Pool - March 03, 2022

Timcast IRL - US Cancels ICBM Test Launch Amid Warnings Of Nuclear War w-Maajid Nawaz

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript