May 25, 2023 • 60 mins
Kelly discusses the strange state of drugs and drug policy in Vancouver. Samurai poses fascinating questions about mitochondrial DNA and three-parent babies. Ancient Astronaut Chick dives behind the scenes of hotels. All this and more in this week’s listener mail.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn the stuff they don't want you to know. A
production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
Hello, welcome back to the show. My name is Matt,
my name is Noaul.
Speaker 3 (00:27):
They called me Ben. We're joined as always with our
super producer Ball, Mission Control decand most importantly, you are
here and that makes this the stuff they don't want
you to know, featuring the most important part of this show.
You specifically you, if you are Samurai, ancient astronaut, Chick
(00:48):
and Kelly or some other people, we may have some
surprises today. We want to thank as always everybody who
has contacted us via social media, through a wija board,
through a phone call, or an email. We read every
single email we get and it makes our day to
(01:08):
get correspondents from some of the absolute smartest people we know.
We're going to have a lot of follow ups in
this week's listener mail segment. We're going to learn about
drug policy, excited to hear about stuff hotels don't want
you to know. And before we do any of that,
I was thinking we kick off with a piece of
(01:29):
correspondence that will prompt an interesting discussion. I believe it's
from our long time recurring correspondent, none other than Samurai.
You guys remember Samurai, right? How could I forget? How
could I forget? Samurai writes a pretty in depth response
(01:50):
to our recent Strange News segment, and I'll read parts
of this and then we'll skip to a story that
specifically spoke to him in that segment, says Samurai, here,
this last Strange News segment had to be one of
your best. Though, I would suggest Matt not go into
career in sex ad for any school district. I think
he's kidding, Matt.
Speaker 2 (02:10):
I know lots about sex Samurai so much.
Speaker 3 (02:14):
Yes, our kids at Fairfax would eat him alive for
the way he presented his treatise on procreations. So that's
just by the way, we know Samurai well enough that
he can always, you know, give us a little ah
you guys, yeah, ribbed for our pleasure.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
I baby once.
Speaker 3 (02:35):
So so Samurai talks to us about some of the
dangers of drugs, which we may save for a future exploration.
That wanted to highlight what Samurai is saying in response
to three Parent News. You'll recall recently, folks that we
we talked about a beautiful, slash terrifying breakthrough in the
(02:59):
Uniting Kingdom whereby you can hack a child, basically hack
a fetus as such that you can remove the bad
mitochondrial DNA that can cause certain very tragic genetic conditions
and diseases. And the way you do this is by
sniping in just a little bit of DNA from a
(03:23):
third parent. This is Samurai's response. He says, I'm hit
and miss with this. I see the benefits, but I
also have to think that nature knows how to do
it better, so why screw with it. I'm also reminded
of the series The Expanse. If you have not seen it,
please do. I'm going to co sign Samurai. It's great
if you're a fan of science fiction. There are a
couple of spoilers here light spoilers for The Expanse. Spoiler
(03:46):
warning three two one. Here we go. The character James
Holden is from a genetic collective in Montana that has
eight parents, each of them donating genetic features that they
would hope would benefit him. Iologically it is possible, as
we saw with the baby in the UK. Theologically there
are arguments about the spirit and soul of such a child.
(04:08):
I was raised Jewish, and almost as I know I
have shared, became a Rabbi. As such, I was taught
that when a child is conceived, there is a shard,
a spark of God that is shared through the conception
into the child. Now, says Samurai, I am not a
religious person anymore, but I have learned over the years
that there's a lot out there that cannot always be
(04:29):
explained away by science. And I think many of us
in the audience today would agree with you there, sam
all right, More than likely that is simply because we
have not leveled up our science game to understand that part. Yet.
I accept that, and if you consider Akham's razor, that
makes the most sense. But what if, what if we
are messing around with things we should not, we might
(04:52):
not notice the changes. Now these children will reproduce and
carry that new genetic info down the road with them.
Will mean for the great great great grandkids. I don't know,
says Samurai. I just think that while I understand the
need to do some of these things, we need to
tread cautiously. Are we approaching a point where you can
(05:13):
go into a clinic. The man puts his of this
sh rubbi bits into a machine and takes his stuff,
then looks at the woman's stuff and comes up with
a menu of options. Remove this disease, add this characteristic,
make them taller, leaner, smarter. It reminds me of that
line from Syndrome in The Incredibles. When everyone is super,
(05:34):
no one will be. We will be novelties when we
are mundane and ordinary. He says. While I am not religious,
I am spiritual, if that makes sense. I believe that
there is a natural order to the universe. Things happen
for their own reasons. Nature is today what it is
because the process works, the weak things are naturally weeded out,
(05:55):
the strong things survive. What happens when we start tweaking things? Do?
We end up with a word old, full of orange skin, blonde,
too paid, fat politicians running the weeping masses. Who knows
at some point there will be a great correction and
things will set themselves right. So you're gonna pause there again.
There's a wonderful letter, really like the way Samurai writes,
(06:15):
And I think a lot of people listening today would
agree with you. You know, we were pretty pretty unanimous in
our previous discussion that it's a question of what would
you not do to save your child or ensure that
your child has the best quality of life possible. But
I wanted to ask you guys a couple of things
(06:38):
about this letter. First and most importantly, do you guys
like the description rubby bits as much as I do?
It's like right up there with calling it the Australia
or the Netherlands and dig it rubby bits. All right,
So we're gonna make that rubby rubby bits. Yeah, the
grubby rubby bits, the rubby grubby that we're going to
(07:00):
make that official stuff that I want you to know.
Lore well done, Thank you, samurai. Do you think it'll
happen within our collective lifetime that there will be this
sort of customizable catalog for some percentage of the population
when they're giving birth, Like, do you think it'll go
beyond disease prevention to more cosmetic stuff? Of course within
(07:24):
our lifetime, you think, yeah.
Speaker 2 (07:25):
Why would not?
Speaker 3 (07:26):
I don't.
Speaker 2 (07:27):
I just don't. I don't see a version where it
doesn't happen, at least for the upper echelon who can
already modify their own bodies in incredible ways that most
people will never be able to just because there's you
don't have a access from a monetary standpoint, Yeah, why
would you not have designer babies in geez fifteen twenty years.
Speaker 3 (07:50):
I feel like the recent well, the way I measure history,
the recent controversy surrounding stuff like stems therapy and even
stuff like vaccination, they are going to be nothing compared
to the controversy and violence that comes to the idea
(08:10):
of genetically modifying children en mass and normalizing it. I
think we're going to see offshoot populations that, for one
reason or another, perhaps a lack of trust in medicine
or perhaps theological spiritual reasons, they're going to go off
and become increasingly isolated and only do you know, natural
(08:31):
born children, Like the controversy with Christian science has nothing
on this, and I think it could could lead to violence.
But also at what point does it become a human
right versus just the the reserve of the very privileged
and wealthy.
Speaker 2 (08:50):
It does it feel like a human right to me?
Do you know what I mean? It's just like it's
extra it's just.
Speaker 4 (08:56):
Like human plus you know, I mean, we don't all
we can't all afford a tesla, you know, we can't
all afford a smart home, whatever it might be. We
don't all get to live in San Francisco, you know
what I mean. It's just the reality of life. And
if this is something that doesn't come stock in the system,
(09:19):
then it's extra and it requires paying for. But it
does open up a philosophical conversation of like, if something
exists that could prevent the horrible parts of being a human,
does that then be But we're not even entitled to
healthcare in this country, So it's like, yeah, it's a
philosophical question, but we already kind of know the answer,
(09:41):
at least in as much as our system works.
Speaker 3 (09:44):
Yeah, but I don't know if that means it's the
correct answer. It's certainly not. But it runs again the
large term, over the long, the large horizon. The big
worry is speciation, right, creating a new class of ubermen
(10:06):
human entities yet, but over men who are you know,
there is a world where eventually, if that stuff continues,
we may run into a thing where there's a new
kind of human and they can't interbreed successfully. That's very
far away. I don't know if that's within our lifetime.
Speaker 4 (10:26):
That's a really good point, but it also could just
widen the divide between the haves and the have not.
Speaker 3 (10:32):
That's the point, to the point where these over people, you.
Speaker 4 (10:36):
Know, for lack of whatever the hell we want to
call them, want to squash out the others because they
they they are now.
Speaker 3 (10:45):
Superfluous, you know, and I'm not you know.
Speaker 4 (10:47):
That sounds very grim, but with great power often comes corruption,
you know, And I could see whole countries being radic
collised by something like this, you know, I don't know.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
It is the dream of all oppressors, all human oppressors,
to encode a caste system, right like the feudalists, the
neo feudalists, they would all love this. If you are
if you are running, say a very race based dictatorship
(11:24):
like North Korea, then this helps you further homogenize your population.
You can breed out the recessive traits that you don't love,
that don't fit your kind of human Yukanuba idea of
what the breed should be. This goes eugenic in a
very bad way, very quickly. I'm also wondering, and this
(11:45):
is a question for geneticists in the audience I think
you will find this of interest to Samurai. I'm also
wondering whether someone could be genetically modified in an extreme
way after adulthood, right or in childhood? Like what is
the threshold? Could you inject something in someone or subject
(12:07):
them to a treatment regimen such that they start to
grow taller again in their like their forties. How does
it work? How do you create that without inevitably also
causing cancer? That's I think one of the one of
the big ones to search out. And I don't know,
I mean, it does feel, it does feel like this
(12:30):
is an inevitable direction. I'm wondering when certain modifications will
be outlawed.
Speaker 4 (12:37):
Right, what do you think about like the idea of
a feeding frenzy on a cure for cancer?
Speaker 2 (12:43):
Right?
Speaker 4 (12:44):
You know, we know that big pharma has a tendency
to not always make everything accessible to everybody, and something
with that high of a demand, are we entitled to
have that available to literally everyone who needs them? Entitled
is a strong word, I guess, speaking back to our
system and the way our country works, is it reasonable
(13:05):
to expect that something of that high demand would be
available to everybody?
Speaker 3 (13:10):
Now?
Speaker 4 (13:10):
I know they did make the COVID vaccine available to everybody,
but you'll remember at the beginning of it, it wasn't,
and there were people that were jumping the line and
you know, flexing their interests and pulling strings to get it,
you know, quicker, and we know that there were people
in the elite that were getting that sooner than others.
Speaker 3 (13:28):
I feel certain and you're onto something too. Like The
best way to answer that question regarding a feeding a
possible feeding frenzy for cancer treatments and whether that would
be a right in my mind, it hinges on the
path the research takes. If it is a vaccine, a
preventative treatment, if you could be for lack of killar
(13:49):
phrase inoculated against some sort of specific type of cancer,
then it seems like it would most logically be rolled
up into the typical vaccine nations people get in early childhood.
But if some guy have bespoke boot treatments. But if
it's something where let's say you are in your fifties
and you get the all to common nasty surprise of
(14:12):
something like prostate cancer, then if there is that treatment
plan that you would have to get to, then inevitably
what we're going to run into is a situation where
people engage in what's called medical tourism. The system in
the US is so broken right now that many people,
possibly some listening today, have looked at the math what
(14:35):
they could expect their insurance company to actually pay for,
and they've said, Hey, it's cheaper for me to buy
a ticket over to you know, Spain or Portugal, or
to just to head over to a country in South
America and receives the treatment there and then fly back.
Heck maybe first class. Why not when you did a
(14:57):
fancy steakhouse on the way home and still save money
versus what this again, very broken medical system which charge them.
And that's not a ding on the doctors. That's not
a ding on the nurses or the people who are
busting their butts around the clock to save people's lives
and improve their quality of life. It's the system that's
the problem. Or like organ transplants for example, right, yeah, right,
(15:21):
like growing an organ. There's another samurai you probably already
know this. There's another great debate that's going on in
Judaism about the origin of an organ. Right, can you
receive an organ that has come from you know, a
non Jewish person can you receive an organ from someone
(15:45):
who has violated typical precepts of belief?
Speaker 2 (15:49):
You know?
Speaker 3 (15:49):
And this could happen in any any belief system, right Like,
how how do the lines blur? How do we keep
ourselves spiritually on the right course in a time when
science is improving so quickly. As far as the nature
of a soul, I'm not really sure how to approach that.
I did read something really, really spooky recently from 've
(16:12):
all Noah Harari, who you guys know is a wonderful
writer for a wonderful writer of several books like Sapiens
and a couple other great things. He said that increasingly
the human mind and what we call the soul is
no longer a black box right now the technology is
(16:34):
here to monitor it. I would point to that conversation
with Harari as a good jumping off point for people
who are concerned about the nature of the soul and
the world of human genetic modification. I don't know the answer.
I don't know anyone who does.
Speaker 4 (16:52):
Do you think, given enough advancement in medical technology, that
the idea of something like a soul could literally be disproved?
Speaker 3 (17:01):
I don't think so. I don't because it's just so,
it's so philosophical. You know, the brain, the human brain
is at a great disadvantage. It is the only organ
that studies itself right, and it doesn't have the distance
or the perspective to really crack down on some questions.
We know very very little about the human brain other
(17:23):
than other than the basic mechanics of how it works.
But the genetic contraption that is the human being is
even more complicated. The scariest point, in my opinion, that
Samurai raises here is the domino effect across generations. Geneticists
correct me if I'm wrong here, but here's my layman's
(17:45):
understanding analogy of how this works. Imagine you walk into
a really nice, big house and it's one of those
houses where there's a bank of light switches. There's like
eight light switches, and you the first thing you do
you try to figure out which switch does what right.
But then you see that these switches might affect more
(18:06):
than one source of light, more than one system. Maybe
one also operates a ceiling van and then that changes
how the other bank of lights on the other side
of the it's a nice place, so atrium on the
other side of the atrium, the third light in that
bank of eight by the front door. Let's say it
turns on two or three different banks of lights right
(18:30):
a hallway, part of the atrium or in true way,
and then some other thing. And now when you go
across that, because that one switch has already been flipped,
the operation of the light, so that second bank change.
So like you could, it's conceivable that you could go
in and alter a genetic switch for one thing, deleitarious
(18:52):
medical condition, maybe something cosmetic, like for some reason, you
don't want your kid to have hanging ear lobes. You
want them to have recessive attached ear lobes. See you
flip that switch, and all of a sudden, now the
kid has a higher likelihood of another genetic issue, or
the kid has heterochromia, one of their eyes are inexplicably blue.
(19:15):
The thing is, humans just don't know. So if we
have something that is a transmissible genetic trait, then is
there a situation where three generations hence, two people meet,
they fall in love, they have a kid, and the
genetic bill comes due. Because we didn't understand how all
(19:36):
these modifications upon modifications affect each other. I hope that
doesn't happen. But I think it's distressingly plausible unless we
know more about the human genome and the way it
interacts with itself.
Speaker 2 (19:50):
I think that analogy works for all human endeavors over here,
flip and switches, screwing up the next bank of switches
and then going back.
Speaker 3 (19:59):
Yeah, maybe perhaps you are right, Matt. We're going to
end this one here with a appeal, a call for help.
Any geneticist in the crowd tonight, please let us know
your take on this one A three three std WYTK
conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com. And you don't have to
be a geneticist. Let us know what's on your mind.
(20:23):
Do you agree with us that something like this is inevitable?
Is that a good or a bad thing. We're going
to take a pause for a word from our sponsor,
and we will be back with more correspondence from you.
Speaker 4 (20:39):
And we're back with more messages from you, in this case,
a message from long time and delightfully frequent contributor Kelly
D responding to our strange news conversation around the drugs
store that opened and was quickly shut down in Vancouver,
(21:00):
British Columbia. Subject being of this email Vancouver Harm Reduction.
Just listening to your latest release and I want to
fill you in on some info and recommend a fantastic
podcast that is on the ground in the trenches of
the opioid crisis. Vancouver has been at the forefront of
so many drug enforcement and harm reduction initiatives. It was
the first place in North America to decriminalize opioids. It
(21:23):
was the first place to have needle exchanges and safe
injection sites. The only thing that criminalization of drugs causes
is an increase in potency and a decrease in safety.
Think back to Prohibition. Yeah, to this point, Ben, We've
talked about this on Articulous History on this show as well. Prohibition,
there were all these impurities that were put into the
(21:45):
bootleg alcohol, you know, and I think some of that
was even done by the government really really shamefully and
in a misguided fashion to I guess punish people for
trying to sneak their hoots or whatever. But again, you know,
when you have folks doing things off the books without
any kind of regulation or oversight, you are inevitably going
(22:06):
to have impurities and problems and whatever. The thing is,
So you know, outright abolition of certain substances always going
to lead to outright black market practices of juicing the
stuff up to make the most of your product and
cut it with whatever else you can to make it
seem like it's more potent than it actually is. In
(22:28):
the case of fentanyl, we know that requires a very
small amount to achieve an effect similar to heroin. To something,
you know, we mix it with a small amount of heroin,
and in fact, I believe in Vancouver and around the world,
is being found that heroin quote unquote is almost ninety percent,
if not one hundred percent fentanyl with other you know,
(22:49):
cutting agents as well. And as we know because of
the stories that we see every day, there are people
dying from this. So let's get back to this. Think
back to prohibition. Alcohol didn't disappear. It's simply went underground.
Thousands lost their lives to poisoned alcohol and spirits. Incentivizing
non drug use has never worked either because of the
(23:09):
medical nature of how it and the brain works.
Speaker 3 (23:13):
Kelly d goes.
Speaker 4 (23:14):
On to propose some actual solutions. How about building government
widespread housing, widespread government housing like we did in the eighties.
Notice how food banks only started after government affordable housing
wasn't being built. Build enough treatment centers to treat all
those who need and want to be treated. Provide a
safe supply to those who want it. People won't steal
(23:35):
from you to buy drugs with proceeds that they already
have those drugs from legal means and they're clean. Put
more mental health workers on the ground instead of police.
The province of British Columbia is losing twenty plus people
a month to drugs. Decriminalization is only a small step
(23:56):
in the right direction and has characteristics similar to the
portrait Gol model a Portugal model.
Speaker 3 (24:02):
Ben correct me if I'm wrong?
Speaker 4 (24:04):
Is I believe Portugal has decriminalized all drugs and diet
are made drugs basically legal if I'm not.
Speaker 3 (24:11):
Sing Portugal in July of two thousand and one, so
more than two decades ago, they decriminalize the personal use
and possession of all illicit drugs. And you know, as
we always have to note when we say that, remember,
decriminalized is not the same thing as legalized. Right. The
(24:34):
way it works in Portugal is if there is a
case of consumption, purchase, or possession of up to what
they reckon to be a ten day supply of any
illicit drug, they refer it to an administrative panel, and
that panel will make recommendations for treatment, fines, warnings, et cetera.
(24:54):
But if you are trafficking or cultivating illicit substances as
well as possess seeing enough weight to be more than
ten days worth, then it's still a criminal offense.
Speaker 4 (25:05):
So that's very similar ben to what's happening in Vancouver, because,
I mean, the whole point of the story was this
gentleman opened this drugs store in order to you know,
help people get a clean, tested supply of various illicit substances,
including you know, opioids, crack, cocaine, powder, cocaine, et cetera.
(25:25):
I believe MDMA maybe maybe it.
Speaker 3 (25:27):
Was one of them.
Speaker 4 (25:27):
But distribution and sale of these substances is still very
much illegal, which is why this man got scooped up
and his business got shut down. How's the Portugal model
different than that.
Speaker 3 (25:38):
The Portugal model is primarily meant to treat. I would
argue to treat addiction as a medical condition rather than
a crime. So you would still like if you were
this guy and you travel to Lisbon and you opened
a pop up shop similar to what he was doing
in Canada. You would still be arrested. That aspect of
(26:02):
it would not change because you would be you would
have more than a ten day supply, you would be
actively trafficking in illicit substances.
Speaker 4 (26:11):
Okay, So it sounds to me like what Kelly d
is saying is that the model in British Columbia is
still pretty similar to what's being done in Portugal. It
is emphasizing treatment over punitive measures, you know. But I
think Kelly is also saying this is just one step,
you know, and it really does require an understanding of
(26:34):
how addiction really works to keep people from dying. Because
British Columbia, you know, as mentioned here, is losing lots
of lives still despite these more progressive drug policies. So
you know, we're still not there yet, and I think
we're miles light years away.
Speaker 3 (26:53):
From anything like that in the United States.
Speaker 4 (26:55):
So there are some places that I believe are you know,
maybe inching towards more or more of this kind of thinking,
like you know Portland for example.
Speaker 3 (27:04):
Oh did you see Malaysia. This will interest Kelly as well,
Kelly Matt everybody Malaysia is aiming to introduce the law
to decriminalize the possession and use of small quantities of drugs.
And the reason they're doing it is because they have
to reduce prison overcrowding because so many people have been arrested.
(27:27):
And as you know, the Southeast Asian theater there is
incredibly strict us on every drug but alcohol and tobacco.
That's right.
Speaker 4 (27:39):
Have even heard of certain cases where folks are in
danger of being executed?
Speaker 3 (27:44):
Yeah, you're absolutely right. Several countries for a while had,
like Malaysia, had a death penalty on the books for
selling drugs. You can check out any number of lists
like Iran, Thailand, and Thailand recently decriminalized cannabis. I believe Dubai,
(28:05):
Saudi Arabia essentially check. We're not going to judge you, folks,
but whenever you travel somewhere, check in advance to see
what their policy is towards these substances. And keep in
mind that in some cases people can and have been
arrested for possession because they failed a drug test and
(28:27):
having a trace of something like cannabis or insert whatever
thing here in your system. Authorities counted that as possessing it.
That's pretty gnarly in my opinion.
Speaker 4 (28:38):
Sure, I mean, look at the case of Brittany Griner,
you know, the w NBA player who was detained in
Russia for having thc vape cartridges.
Speaker 3 (28:48):
Obviously there was a lot of political theater involved.
Speaker 4 (28:53):
In that entertainment, you know, because we don't play super
nice with Russia, and they wanted to make a big
you know, big to do of it and a big
splash of it and sort of flex on us. But yeah,
that's scary stuff. If you're in a country you're unfamiliar
with and you get caught with something like that, you
could be thrown in jail and subject to their laws.
Speaker 3 (29:14):
It's terrifying thought. And we'll have to be politically convenient
and expedient for your home government to make enough of
a stink to get you back.
Speaker 4 (29:25):
Right, you could just be left to rot and unless
you know enough people raise a fuss. Like you said, Ben,
that's just that's all she wrote. You know, it absolutely
could go that way. We teased a podcast recommendation Kelly
goes on, want to learn about the real situation from
people who have been on the ground and lived through
(29:45):
the past two medical crises. Crack Down podcast is the
recommendation that Kelly can't recommend enough.
Speaker 3 (29:54):
Ps. You should also look into Edison.
Speaker 4 (29:56):
Motors, who's developing a production semi truck that is a
play again hybrid. They're doing phenomenal work here in British
Columbia as well. I don't know it's all in there.
I think we kind of had the conversation as we went. Honestly,
Kelly d thank you for this from the ground insight.
I think we're all on the same page at the
very least that drug addiction should be treated as that,
(30:19):
you know, addiction as a mental health crisis and not
a punitive litigation based crisis. You know, and we also
know from our conversations with Jason Flahm and the Lava
for Good folks in that panel that we're looking forward
to releasing soon that a lot of the laws in
the United States that do exercise such draconian influence over
(30:41):
people's lives are racist inherently and designed to make people
powerless and basically capitalize on their mental health crises and
throw them into a system that they will be hard
pressed to ever.
Speaker 3 (30:56):
Find their way out of.
Speaker 4 (30:57):
For the purposes of free labor headshaking, going with them
with it, Matt, I mean, it sucks. It's like, we've
all known people that have struggled with addiction, and we've
all seen how it can have a horrible impact on
families and on you know, people's jobs and livelihoods and
people's health. But at the end of the day, these
(31:18):
are people who are struggling and suffering and often given
the options and the opportunity, would want to get past that.
I think, I don't know. I don't want to speak
for y'all. I just I think that's been my observation.
Speaker 3 (31:33):
Well, as soon as it becomes I mean, look at
the cannabis legislation, as soon as it becomes more profitable
to have a different drug policy, that will occur. However,
we have to remember that powerful forces, oftentimes the same
people making the laws, make money and do profit based
on the criminalization. It's kind of like the tobacco industry.
(31:57):
If you are dedicated to if you have ensconced yourself
in a system, and you're making money off of this,
no matter how much human misery it creates, then there
has to be a very powerful opposite force, or very
powerful enticing argument to get you to change, you know
what I mean, like you, you're a predator. Those forces
(32:19):
are predators in the human ecosystem, that's what they are
in many cases. And that's again there are a lot
of people who are doing excellent work with decriminalization. There
are a ton of people in law enforcement. They don't
want to jam somebody up and ruin their lives because
they were in possession of some small amount of an
(32:41):
ill advised drug. But if the laws force them to
do it, then they have to do it. That's right.
Speaker 4 (32:46):
And we also of course know that the opioid crisis,
or at least you know one of them of several
here in the United States were caused by corporations, caused
by the Sackler family, you know, and the permissive prescribing
a very very powerful opiates that then became street drugs themselves,
you know, from people selling their supply they're legally obtained supply.
(33:11):
So we know there's a lot of callousness and kind
of money changing hands when it comes to gambling with
people's mental health and when it comes to these kinds
of addictions. Certain people could take a drug and take
it or leave it, walk away from it.
Speaker 3 (33:25):
Never have an issue.
Speaker 4 (33:26):
But there are people, whether it be genetic or whatever
it might be, that are predisposed to really getting that
monkey on your back real quick and having a very
difficult time turning back.
Speaker 2 (33:38):
Well, guys, I've got one more crackpot idea that goes
against everything Kelly is saying. And I apologize what I've
just got to say it because if I was hold it,
then I feel bad.
Speaker 3 (33:47):
It's Matt's crackpot corner.
Speaker 2 (33:49):
Let's go, all right, Matt's crackpot corner. Let's massively inflate
the value of human blood, like somehow make it to
the point where human blood is crazy expensive to get,
which means donating it, like a normal amount that you
would maybe donate in a year's time equates to a
yearly salary. But it's got to be untainted by any
(34:10):
kind of substances. But you could just give blood and
that's all you gotta do and you just live.
Speaker 3 (34:17):
All right. How are you gonna do that? Man? How
we gonna do that? I don't know. I love it
all right that this has been Matt's crackpot corner.
Speaker 4 (34:28):
That's the That's the thing, though, Matt, I mean, there
are no simple answer there are no simple solutions. As
Kelly pointed out, incentivizing non drug use is very difficult
because of the medical nature of how drugs affect the brain.
You can get to a point in an addiction where
no amount of money is going to make you want
to stop doing the drug. You have to be tied down,
(34:53):
you know, and and and sweat it out there.
Speaker 3 (34:56):
You know.
Speaker 4 (34:56):
You this enslaves your brain and then slaves you mind.
And that's real.
Speaker 3 (35:02):
And we're talking about the drugs that if you have anybody.
Speaker 4 (35:05):
Watched the Opioid Crisis movie or series rather which is.
Speaker 3 (35:10):
What is it called dope sic I think is what
it was called.
Speaker 4 (35:12):
I mean you see astraumatized obviously, but like a character
who's prescribed oxy contin for a legitimate back injury that
she sustained working in like minds, you know, in very
difficult situation, and then just was one of those people
that just got a taste for it turned her into
a totally different person because they were fast and loose
(35:35):
with the types of doses they were prescribing to folks
like that without any thought into how it might affect
them psychologically in the long term, because it's all about profits. Sorry,
to soap box. This is just difficult stuff and there
is no easy answer. But anyway, thanks again Kelly D
for the insight. We're gonna take quick break and then
(35:56):
come back with one more piece of listener mail.
Speaker 2 (36:05):
We're back and we're going to ancient astronaut Chick for
a message about a hotel or lots of hotels. Ancient
astronaut Chick says, good evening, longtime listener here, and it
is not my first time writing to y'all. Anyways, I
was listening to the latest strange news and as a Knoxville,
Tennessee native and longtime Hilton employee. Hilton, that's the hotel
(36:27):
we were talking about just last week. I believe I
was horrified to hear what this guest experienced at the
Hilton downtown Nashville. That's the toesucker. Guys. Since you guys
said you wanted an episode on stuff hotels don't want
you to know, I thought I would.
Speaker 3 (36:42):
Share a few things awesome. Thank you.
Speaker 2 (36:44):
I've been employed by the Hilton franchise since twenty sixteen.
I have always been front desk and I am currently
running a front desk department in Denver. The first point
I would like to share is that it is no
surprise this night manager was able to access this room
because at most properties, the front desk controls all master
keys and can generally access these at any time. If
(37:07):
he was a manager, he probably even had his own
master key. Really, a hotel employee can enter your room
anytime without warning if there is not a dn D
on the door. That's the do not disturb sign or
light or switch or whatever you might find at your hotel.
If you have a dn D on, a staff member
(37:28):
must call your room prior to entering. Guys, just to
stop here really quickly. I didn't know that it actually
prevented any kind of action with host, with the hotel staff.
In my mind, even if you put that thing on
your door, let's say housekeeping or anybody else could still
walk up to your room and just knock and be like, hey,
(37:48):
what's going on in there at all.
Speaker 3 (37:51):
Yeah. I was a surprise to me as well, Matt,
because I mean to the point where I thought, and
maybe you can correct this on this AAC, but I
I thought it might be a Hilton specific policy. I
think it must be because we know that in cases
of emergency, law enforcement totally doesn't doesn't have to respect
(38:13):
the D and D sign.
Speaker 2 (38:15):
Oh totally. Well, let's continue here, building off this. Unless
you have the dead bolt on your room can be
unlocked by staff, any staff really. That being said, we
do have a tool to unlock a dead bolt door,
as we need this for when guests accidentally latch it
and lock themselves out. My question here, guys, do you
think that includes what's that special hotel lock, like the
(38:38):
one that folds over on itself.
Speaker 3 (38:40):
With Oh, is there a name for that? I want
to know.
Speaker 2 (38:44):
It's got the little ball, a little flipping boy. Yeah,
the flippy boy.
Speaker 3 (38:49):
I know.
Speaker 2 (38:49):
There's some other ones.
Speaker 3 (38:50):
That are a swing bar. You're called the swing bar
swing bar.
Speaker 2 (38:53):
But then there's other ones that are flatter, different flippy boys, Shane, Well.
Speaker 3 (39:01):
All of which can be opened by cell staff. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (39:04):
Just something that's really thin that can fit through that
door and push it open.
Speaker 3 (39:08):
Swift kick.
Speaker 2 (39:09):
Oh yeah, I guess that would work.
Speaker 3 (39:11):
I know it can happen because I was. You might
enjoy this saying as I check. I was. I one
time got locked on a balcony, locked out on a
balcony of a hotel. God and the the effect I
can't remember I think this was in the US, but
the front desk people I ended up having to thankfully
at a cell phone. So I called the front desk
(39:34):
from the cell phone and then got someone to. A
very nice guy came up and broke in right, opened
those locks and then opened the balcony door such that
I could I could get in. It was too far
up for me to jump down. And uh, and I still, dude,
(39:54):
if you're listening, I still think you were lying to
be nice. I don't think that happens all the time.
But I really appreciate you, and I think you're a
good person. And so in this case, maybe that confirms
what AAC is telling us, because in that case we
did have someone haul in advance and grant permission to enter.
Speaker 2 (40:14):
Was it at a Hilton?
Speaker 3 (40:16):
I don't believe so.
Speaker 2 (40:18):
Well, then we have no way to confirm.
Speaker 3 (40:22):
We have to start hauling all of the other hotels
in your world all.
Speaker 2 (40:26):
The four seasons? Which four seasons did Ben get locked
on a balcon.
Speaker 4 (40:34):
It's perfect, exclusively and his rider the only says of
the four seasons, I.
Speaker 3 (40:39):
Only get locked out at the four seasons.
Speaker 2 (40:41):
Yeah, redroof, totally fine.
Speaker 4 (40:45):
I prefer to stay in the third season myself, that
was a bad hotel joke. But well, Red Roof, what's
the one where they keep the light on for you
Motel six, Tom, I'm Tom Bodett with it. Yeah, with
Motel six, we will keep the light on for you.
Speaker 3 (41:00):
Really do those anymore? But they sure used to. Tumbledead
is now an NPR guy.
Speaker 4 (41:04):
Even that, I mean, it was always like, yeah, he's
always on those panel shows.
Speaker 3 (41:08):
I'm excited about this stuff. Hotels don't want you to
know episode I've been diving into some research here and
just I know we're continuing with your letter AAC just
to say thank you. It's it's tremendously helpful.
Speaker 2 (41:22):
Oh yeah, definitely thank you. Oh guys, I just want
to know about towels, like how clean are those towels? Really?
I want to talk about comforters, do Vey covers, right,
I want to talk.
Speaker 3 (41:34):
About also the yeah, the UV light thing. Some people
who are germophobes are quite particular, have a really difficult
time with hotels basically tried taking their own decontamination kits.
Speaker 4 (41:47):
And was it you that pointed out that the top
sheet is your worst enemy or the duvet that definitely
never lay on that top because they don't clean it
as much or something like that.
Speaker 3 (41:55):
Maybe it was you, I can't recall, maybe so, but
you know.
Speaker 4 (41:59):
The the underparts they definitely launder fully every time, but
apparently the cover always get rid of that.
Speaker 3 (42:06):
Yeah, and keeping books in the like I have left
copies of the stuff they don't want, you know, book
in hotels, like the Guinea Bible. You just replace that, right,
it's the Gideon Bible or the Book of Mormon. And
I don't I don't think that's a crime. Yeah, I'm
pretty sure it's not.
Speaker 4 (42:23):
I don't think leaving people free stuff in a drawers
ever a crime unless what it is, Yeah, or like
a virus or something.
Speaker 3 (42:31):
That's right, if you've got in a post it note
that says go nuts, then you're probably culpable in any
any untoward situation that would occur.
Speaker 2 (42:41):
But yeah, well, yeah, let's get back to the email.
And then there's just one or two other things I
want to talk about just on that in that vein
at the end. Guys, Uh, let's get back to the email.
The second point is going further into what you said
about Hilton not taking ownership of this issue because it
was a franchised property. Most hotels have three parties involved
(43:02):
with the establishment, one the building owner to the management company,
and three the parent franchise company at any given time.
If a property dips below quote brand standards for too long. Again,
these are Hilton brand standards we're talking about, it can
be stripped of its franchise name. Ooh, that would be
(43:23):
a mark on the hotel's character. As an employee of Hilton,
I'm actually not employed by them, but by the management
company that runs my property. So whoever hired this toe
sucking man is actually the management company that runs that property,
and Hilton would not have any say in it at all.
This can get tricky as some hotels are Hilton owned
(43:45):
and managed, But to get more confusing, Hilton owns their
own management company, which is what runs those properties managed
by Hilton Latrushka dolls.
Speaker 4 (43:56):
As you'd say, Ben, I mean it gives there's like
a firewall of of culpability, right, keeps the higher ups
insulated from any kind of faults.
Speaker 3 (44:06):
Oh.
Speaker 2 (44:07):
Absolutely, I think that's exactly what we're dealing with, guys.
And it takes me to just another thing that I
want to talk about in that stuff. Hotels don't want
you to know episode potential clandestine surveillance in places that
have a lot of diplomats maybe, or you know, places
right like especially the higher end hotels that are specifically
(44:28):
aimed at that kind of clientele. I always wonder about that.
Speaker 3 (44:32):
See, it's a real thing. Yeah, I mean really especially
during especially during the Cold War, but even now afterwards.
Of course, like there's standing orders in a lot of countries.
If you're traveling in the US. The private industry guys
get it too that you should just assume you are
being recorded in your hotel room, even in your bathroom.
(44:55):
Stuff like that.
Speaker 4 (44:56):
How they got a honeytrap you if they're not running
twenty four to seven surveill.
Speaker 2 (45:00):
Oh gosh, Oh it's creepy to think about.
Speaker 3 (45:03):
Yeah, I was. I was in a place in beautiful
place in Diplomatic or Tokyo. I think you we all
talked about this we're hanging out off air, and I
realized that this guy who worked at the restaurant easily
spoke six languages and was pretending to not be super
great at them, and could clearly clock what other people
(45:26):
who were working for embassies what they were talking about.
And it was creepy to see him just like flawlessly
slide into Dutch.
Speaker 2 (45:36):
Yeah, and just listening and you've got a tiny little
notepad and he's like.
Speaker 3 (45:42):
That.
Speaker 4 (45:42):
I can't help but think of a of a of
a story or I believe like it was a Pastebin
thing you found with another insider bit of information from
I believe JP Morgan Chase about insane levels of surveillance
happening to employees of that company, which I believe we're
going to roll into an episode that's coming, but.
Speaker 3 (46:04):
It's wild stuff, Like I was blown away by that.
Speaker 4 (46:08):
I mean, like borderline like retinal tracking, you know what
I mean, like like really micro level invasive surveillance, well
beyond the scope of what is appropriate for an employer
to be able to say, oh, it's all about productivity.
Speaker 3 (46:23):
Now, the good folks at the Hilton are not doing anything.
They're not. Our minds tend to go to the nth degree. Yeah,
you know, and it'd be very easy to it would
be very easy to put in uh, some small surveillance devices.
It's just a possibility. The real question is is it
worth going to that trouble? That's the question people are
(46:45):
going to answer, you know.
Speaker 2 (46:46):
Is it worth it. That sounds like a TV show.
Let's start. Let's make that TV show. It'll just be
really messed up things that companies and other organizations do.
That's guys, all right, just a few more things from
our email we need to cover. Here we go. The
third point is that most guests think they're getting back
at the hotel when they quote call corporate. But this
(47:10):
call actually just generates a case which comes right back
to the property management of which the guest was complaining about.
But I am yeah, exactly so the guy said when
he went took the toe out of his mouth. All right, sorry,
all right, thus giving the property full control of compensation
(47:34):
or no compensation of the complaint. If these cases are
not closed within twenty four hours by the management HRCC,
I guess that's Hilton Corporate does get the final say
of compensation and whether or not the hotel must pay.
Here are a couple more random facts. We can lock
anyone out of their room. We will not let police
(47:55):
in your room without warrants. That's helpful, Thank you very
much for that.
Speaker 3 (47:58):
I really appreciate that.
Speaker 2 (48:00):
We should never tell anyone you stayed with us unless
their name is on your room as well as you
or if you give permission specifically.
Speaker 4 (48:09):
So you're saying those scenes where someone just casually sunders
into the hotel and say, you got a.
Speaker 3 (48:14):
Guest so and so and so and so. Is that
what's their number?
Speaker 4 (48:18):
Like well, you know a tall woman, like are they
allowed if you if you have their full name, they
will call up to the room. But they're not supposed
to tell you the room number, right, or like give
you any inform.
Speaker 3 (48:31):
I mean again, this is a Hilton policies, right, They're
not supposed to though. I think you could get around
it with a little bit of tricky social engineering, which
is always going to be a vulnerability or a vector.
But it feels very reasonable. It feels like a security concern.
And then also a question for you, AAC, please write
and again have so many questions. Can you use a pseudonym?
(48:54):
How easy is it? Like, I know you probably have
to have your government name on a card that people
have to hold for incidentals or whatever, but can you
say I'm I'm still recently as you know bombazine Berry.
Speaker 4 (49:08):
I thought this came up maybe it was an out
of skout of podcast conversation, but like you you are
you pretty much are allowed to do that. Car From
my understanding, you just have to give obviously, give them
an ID and a card for incidentals and just let
them know that you're a real person. But but for
the intense and purposes of people interacting with them from
the outside world.
Speaker 3 (49:28):
They Yeah, I assumed name I think is legit.
Speaker 2 (49:32):
Do hotels take your ID or do they just take
a card like any card, just give me something I can.
Speaker 3 (49:36):
Typically, really, I think they take the ID in case
you're doing credit card theft.
Speaker 4 (49:43):
That's true usually, I mean, you know, hell, my local
record store of choice asks for your ID. If you're
using a debit card, you know what I mean. So
it's it's just different practices.
Speaker 3 (49:53):
If you're booking online, then there's not really a way
that they ask you for ID. Yeah, I've usually it
asked for ID.
Speaker 4 (50:01):
Now that I'm thinking about it, it's a good safeguard.
It makes sense because I could have literally stolen somebody's
ID or sold somebody's credit card and then exactly, you know,
but if.
Speaker 3 (50:13):
They don't ask for ID. Sleep with one eye open, man,
I kind of tend to agree.
Speaker 2 (50:17):
Ben, sleep with both eyes open, or just don't sleep
at all. Sleep is the cousin of death.
Speaker 3 (50:30):
And what do we say to death today?
Speaker 2 (50:33):
We say with death.
Speaker 3 (50:35):
Just this is such a terrible name for water. I
love it. People are crazy for the stuff. I guess
it's just like everybody should drink water. It just reminds
me of like the things where adults try to dress
up vegetables so you won't know they're eating vegetables. Yea
(50:56):
dangerous water calling celery death stalks.
Speaker 2 (51:00):
Now, let do it, got my armless palmer, and let's
go back to the email for one second.
Speaker 4 (51:04):
I'm sorry, armless palmer. Is that the flavor of liquid death?
Speaker 2 (51:08):
Yeah, it's it's I don't know, it's tea.
Speaker 3 (51:09):
And yeah it's called.
Speaker 2 (51:16):
All I know is that it's delicious. Okay, last couple
of points here. Yes, we do take your lost and
found items that are never claimed, of course you do.
We get hotel rooms under an employee rate starting at
forty five dollars a night, what even in Milan.
Speaker 3 (51:33):
Congratulations especially, and you know what you earned.
Speaker 2 (51:39):
It, that's right.
Speaker 4 (51:40):
That's that's no different than like airline employees though that's
pretty standard. You know, they either get a really good
rate or they get to fly standby for free. I mean,
you know, I get that that's a cool fringe benefit.
Speaker 2 (51:50):
That's awesome. I think it's great. Oh, here's the last
little point here. We can't charge you a smoking fee
unless we find physical evidence that you in the room.
So destroy the evidence everybody, or just.
Speaker 3 (52:04):
I saw that too, man, That one pinged for me.
I remember I remember being in Hawaii for the first time,
and they had one warning about not smoking tobacco, and
then they had another much larger warning that essentially equated to, Hey,
we know you're probably on vacation, please don't smoke weed
in here, okay. And I clearly could tell that multiple
(52:30):
people at this resort around me were very, very high
most of the time, and this is a nice place,
so I knew they weren't going to rock the boat.
They would just give them that fee at the end.
And my question to you, AAC is does physical evidence
count as like the lingering smell? I think that counts, right,
that is a physical remnant of the offense.
Speaker 4 (52:52):
Well, you got a wonder too, Is there a tool
that can detect, you know, the recent presence of tobacco smoke,
you know, and like say things like curtains.
Speaker 3 (53:03):
Yeah, it's called camera, mom's nose.
Speaker 4 (53:06):
It's called your mom's nose when you're a teenager.
Speaker 3 (53:09):
That's what it is.
Speaker 2 (53:11):
Yeah, Well, and is tobacco smoke the same as marijuana smoke?
Is it the exact same Does it interact with the
hotel in the same way?
Speaker 4 (53:21):
Does that have the same Well, I mean, marijuana smoke,
you know, typically is thought to not linger in the
same way. You know, it'll smell while you're actually smoking it,
so I've heard. But tobacco smoke, it stays. It just
has a way of sticking.
Speaker 3 (53:35):
Vaping it probably like uh, that disperses the cigarette or
a vabing thing that that would disperse pretty quickly. I
don't know. These are just interesting questions. I think we're
all very excited about the stuff hotels don't want you
to know, and we'd love we'd love additional answers to
these questions. War stories, you know, even the basic stuff
(53:56):
like if you work in the industry, you might be
surprised by how much stuff people outside of the industry
don't know, Like how does tipping work in the US?
What's the appropriate tip if you you know you're tipping
the house cleaner or so on?
Speaker 2 (54:10):
According to the little thing that make me sign, it's
like thirty percent.
Speaker 3 (54:13):
Now, what do you mean? What do you sign?
Speaker 2 (54:17):
Most of the places. I don't know if you guys
have gone out to eat anytime soon, but at most restaurants,
at this point they start, they hand it to you
and it's well, it starts at twenty is like the
lowest you can possibly give, and then it goes up
to twenty. I mean on most of them that I've
been to, and these aren't crazy high end restaurants.
Speaker 4 (54:35):
Right, And that's the thing too, is like, uh, if
you eat at a crazy high end restaurant but it
really doesn't take that much effort to serve you, but
your bill is like three hundred dollars. Are you really
supposed to tip thirty percent on three hundred dollars for
the person that literally brought your food out one time
and refilled your water.
Speaker 3 (54:54):
I don't think that's right personally, I don't know. Maybe
it's also it's compounded. That's another thing we could do,
maybe stuff the restaurant industry doesn't want you to know.
I say, we franchise this out and make it a
cereal because there's there's another issue that's happening across the
board in the United States, and I suspect in much
of the rest of the world as well. In the US,
(55:14):
in particular, folks, basic prices for food are skyrocketing, demands
for tips are also skyrocketing. We know the tip economy
can be divisive. We've got a lot of friends who
are in the industry, and the reality is that the
prevalence of tipping in the US is entirely happening because
(55:38):
large corporations are pushing the burden of a decent wage
onto the consumer. I have one last question.
Speaker 4 (55:47):
If there is evidence of illicit activity left behind reading
smoke in the room, but let's say they find like
a bunch of you know, white powder and razor blades,
like on a countertop or something. Are they required to
report that to LA enforcement questions.
Speaker 3 (56:05):
Company by company. It's a good question. We need the
answer because.
Speaker 4 (56:08):
You know, certain hotel franchise, especially higher end ones, they
want to have a reputation for discretion.
Speaker 3 (56:13):
Oh yeah, as long as you're a white lotus, they're
not gonna stitch.
Speaker 4 (56:16):
On you, right, I mean, as long as you're not
throwing TVs through windows and like, you know, leaving dead
bodies behind. I would argue it would not be in
their best interest to because then you won't stay there again.
Speaker 3 (56:26):
Yeah, it's it's really all about whether it exposes the
owners to liability or disrupts the affairs of other guests.
So I bet there's a lot. There's a lot that
you can sneak by if you're quiet and you're not
violating those things. This is not us saying do it, no,
just saying people probably do get a win.
Speaker 4 (56:47):
But at the end of the day, though, you know, again,
tip your service folks. You know the you know that
are cleaning the room. There are certain hotel situations they're
walking into basically like a crime scene.
Speaker 3 (57:01):
You know.
Speaker 2 (57:02):
Thanks Ancient Astronaut Chick for giving us this insight. This
person has offered to answer our questions. Further, So, why,
like ancient astronaut Chick, if you have insight to this stuff,
why not let us know.
Speaker 3 (57:15):
Yes, thanks to you, AAC, I feel like we're familiar
enough to use cool nicknames with each other now, thanks
of course to everybody else who wrote in. We got Kelly,
we got Samurai, and hopefully we have you on the
way join us on the show. We can't wait to
have you. We try to be easy to find online, boy, Julie.
Speaker 4 (57:36):
Ever, you can find us online at the handle Conspiracy Stuff,
where we exist on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, Conspiracy Stuff
Show on Instagram and TikTok, and.
Speaker 2 (57:46):
Hey, make sure you are following us on those social media,
especially the ones that have video. Ben. I don't mean
to call you out here, but I just got to
see a version of the mre videos that you've been shooting.
Speaker 3 (57:58):
All praise the west all praise to our buddy west
Over at Station sixteen.
Speaker 2 (58:02):
Well, it's really cool to watch one of those things
get opened to understand what's inside of it, in the
heating element that you have to put inside that bag.
I've never seen that before in my life.
Speaker 3 (58:13):
That's anything about that.
Speaker 4 (58:14):
I was not privy to the shoot, So I'm looking
forward to seeing it for the first time myself, as
should you, fair listener, be looking forward to seeing it
for the first time yourself. In addition to other various
and sundry social media videos we've been cooking up lately
that are genuinely a lot of fun if a little
dad on you know, TikTok kind of vibe.
Speaker 3 (58:33):
But you know what, we own it and we live
for it, and we will not be shamed by you.
Speaker 2 (58:38):
That's right.
Speaker 3 (58:38):
And if you don't sip the social needs, you can
always shout into the void and know that sometimes the
void answers back. In this case, void shouting will be
the following numbers. Say it with us one, eight, three, three,
sd d WYTK. I tried to do an echo on
that number a while back, and Matt, I don't know
(59:00):
why it didn't hit me, But echoing on the K
just sounds like we're saying KKK. So wh're trying to
do an echo for stuff you don't want you to know.
No no, So you call the number, you will hear
a familiar voice, will hear a beeplake, so beep. That
gives you three minutes? Three minutes? Are yours? Go nuts?
Get weird, tell us what's on your mind, give yourself
(59:22):
that cool acronym, that moniker you always wanted. Let us
know if we can use your name and or voice
on air, and most importantly, don't censor yourself. The best
way to get a lot of information over to us.
If you got pictures, you got links, you want to
take us to the edge of the rabbit hole, send
us an email. We read every single one we get
where we.
Speaker 2 (59:42):
Are conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com. Stuff they don't want
(01:00:04):
you to know is a production of iHeartRadio. For more
podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or
wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn the stuff they don't want you to know. A
production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
Hello, welcome back to the show. My name is Matt,
my name is Noaul.
Speaker 3 (00:27):
They called me Ben. We're joined as always with our
super producer Ball, Mission Control decand most importantly, you are
here and that makes this the stuff they don't want
you to know, featuring the most important part of this show.
You specifically you, if you are Samurai, ancient astronaut, Chick
(00:48):
and Kelly or some other people, we may have some
surprises today. We want to thank as always everybody who
has contacted us via social media, through a wija board,
through a phone call, or an email. We read every
single email we get and it makes our day to
(01:08):
get correspondents from some of the absolute smartest people we know.
We're going to have a lot of follow ups in
this week's listener mail segment. We're going to learn about
drug policy, excited to hear about stuff hotels don't want
you to know. And before we do any of that,
I was thinking we kick off with a piece of
(01:29):
correspondence that will prompt an interesting discussion. I believe it's
from our long time recurring correspondent, none other than Samurai.
You guys remember Samurai, right? How could I forget? How
could I forget? Samurai writes a pretty in depth response
(01:50):
to our recent Strange News segment, and I'll read parts
of this and then we'll skip to a story that
specifically spoke to him in that segment, says Samurai, here,
this last Strange News segment had to be one of
your best. Though, I would suggest Matt not go into
career in sex ad for any school district. I think
he's kidding, Matt.
Speaker 2 (02:10):
I know lots about sex Samurai so much.
Speaker 3 (02:14):
Yes, our kids at Fairfax would eat him alive for
the way he presented his treatise on procreations. So that's
just by the way, we know Samurai well enough that
he can always, you know, give us a little ah
you guys, yeah, ribbed for our pleasure.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
I baby once.
Speaker 3 (02:35):
So so Samurai talks to us about some of the
dangers of drugs, which we may save for a future exploration.
That wanted to highlight what Samurai is saying in response
to three Parent News. You'll recall recently, folks that we
we talked about a beautiful, slash terrifying breakthrough in the
(02:59):
Uniting Kingdom whereby you can hack a child, basically hack
a fetus as such that you can remove the bad
mitochondrial DNA that can cause certain very tragic genetic conditions
and diseases. And the way you do this is by
sniping in just a little bit of DNA from a
(03:23):
third parent. This is Samurai's response. He says, I'm hit
and miss with this. I see the benefits, but I
also have to think that nature knows how to do
it better, so why screw with it. I'm also reminded
of the series The Expanse. If you have not seen it,
please do. I'm going to co sign Samurai. It's great
if you're a fan of science fiction. There are a
couple of spoilers here light spoilers for The Expanse. Spoiler
(03:46):
warning three two one. Here we go. The character James
Holden is from a genetic collective in Montana that has
eight parents, each of them donating genetic features that they
would hope would benefit him. Iologically it is possible, as
we saw with the baby in the UK. Theologically there
are arguments about the spirit and soul of such a child.
(04:08):
I was raised Jewish, and almost as I know I
have shared, became a Rabbi. As such, I was taught
that when a child is conceived, there is a shard,
a spark of God that is shared through the conception
into the child. Now, says Samurai, I am not a
religious person anymore, but I have learned over the years
that there's a lot out there that cannot always be
(04:29):
explained away by science. And I think many of us
in the audience today would agree with you there, sam
all right, More than likely that is simply because we
have not leveled up our science game to understand that part. Yet.
I accept that, and if you consider Akham's razor, that
makes the most sense. But what if, what if we
are messing around with things we should not, we might
(04:52):
not notice the changes. Now these children will reproduce and
carry that new genetic info down the road with them.
Will mean for the great great great grandkids. I don't know,
says Samurai. I just think that while I understand the
need to do some of these things, we need to
tread cautiously. Are we approaching a point where you can
(05:13):
go into a clinic. The man puts his of this
sh rubbi bits into a machine and takes his stuff,
then looks at the woman's stuff and comes up with
a menu of options. Remove this disease, add this characteristic,
make them taller, leaner, smarter. It reminds me of that
line from Syndrome in The Incredibles. When everyone is super,
(05:34):
no one will be. We will be novelties when we
are mundane and ordinary. He says. While I am not religious,
I am spiritual, if that makes sense. I believe that
there is a natural order to the universe. Things happen
for their own reasons. Nature is today what it is
because the process works, the weak things are naturally weeded out,
(05:55):
the strong things survive. What happens when we start tweaking things? Do?
We end up with a word old, full of orange skin, blonde,
too paid, fat politicians running the weeping masses. Who knows
at some point there will be a great correction and
things will set themselves right. So you're gonna pause there again.
There's a wonderful letter, really like the way Samurai writes,
(06:15):
And I think a lot of people listening today would
agree with you. You know, we were pretty pretty unanimous in
our previous discussion that it's a question of what would
you not do to save your child or ensure that
your child has the best quality of life possible. But
I wanted to ask you guys a couple of things
(06:38):
about this letter. First and most importantly, do you guys
like the description rubby bits as much as I do?
It's like right up there with calling it the Australia
or the Netherlands and dig it rubby bits. All right,
So we're gonna make that rubby rubby bits. Yeah, the
grubby rubby bits, the rubby grubby that we're going to
(07:00):
make that official stuff that I want you to know.
Lore well done, Thank you, samurai. Do you think it'll
happen within our collective lifetime that there will be this
sort of customizable catalog for some percentage of the population
when they're giving birth, Like, do you think it'll go
beyond disease prevention to more cosmetic stuff? Of course within
(07:24):
our lifetime, you think, yeah.
Speaker 2 (07:25):
Why would not?
Speaker 3 (07:26):
I don't.
Speaker 2 (07:27):
I just don't. I don't see a version where it
doesn't happen, at least for the upper echelon who can
already modify their own bodies in incredible ways that most
people will never be able to just because there's you
don't have a access from a monetary standpoint, Yeah, why
would you not have designer babies in geez fifteen twenty years.
Speaker 3 (07:50):
I feel like the recent well, the way I measure history,
the recent controversy surrounding stuff like stems therapy and even
stuff like vaccination, they are going to be nothing compared
to the controversy and violence that comes to the idea
(08:10):
of genetically modifying children en mass and normalizing it. I
think we're going to see offshoot populations that, for one
reason or another, perhaps a lack of trust in medicine
or perhaps theological spiritual reasons, they're going to go off
and become increasingly isolated and only do you know, natural
(08:31):
born children, Like the controversy with Christian science has nothing
on this, and I think it could could lead to violence.
But also at what point does it become a human
right versus just the the reserve of the very privileged
and wealthy.
Speaker 2 (08:50):
It does it feel like a human right to me?
Do you know what I mean? It's just like it's
extra it's just.
Speaker 4 (08:56):
Like human plus you know, I mean, we don't all
we can't all afford a tesla, you know, we can't
all afford a smart home, whatever it might be. We
don't all get to live in San Francisco, you know
what I mean. It's just the reality of life. And
if this is something that doesn't come stock in the system,
(09:19):
then it's extra and it requires paying for. But it
does open up a philosophical conversation of like, if something
exists that could prevent the horrible parts of being a human,
does that then be But we're not even entitled to
healthcare in this country, So it's like, yeah, it's a
philosophical question, but we already kind of know the answer,
(09:41):
at least in as much as our system works.
Speaker 3 (09:44):
Yeah, but I don't know if that means it's the
correct answer. It's certainly not. But it runs again the
large term, over the long, the large horizon. The big
worry is speciation, right, creating a new class of ubermen
(10:06):
human entities yet, but over men who are you know,
there is a world where eventually, if that stuff continues,
we may run into a thing where there's a new
kind of human and they can't interbreed successfully. That's very
far away. I don't know if that's within our lifetime.
Speaker 4 (10:26):
That's a really good point, but it also could just
widen the divide between the haves and the have not.
Speaker 3 (10:32):
That's the point, to the point where these over people, you.
Speaker 4 (10:36):
Know, for lack of whatever the hell we want to
call them, want to squash out the others because they
they they are now.
Speaker 3 (10:45):
Superfluous, you know, and I'm not you know.
Speaker 4 (10:47):
That sounds very grim, but with great power often comes corruption,
you know, And I could see whole countries being radic
collised by something like this, you know, I don't know.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
It is the dream of all oppressors, all human oppressors,
to encode a caste system, right like the feudalists, the
neo feudalists, they would all love this. If you are
if you are running, say a very race based dictatorship
(11:24):
like North Korea, then this helps you further homogenize your population.
You can breed out the recessive traits that you don't love,
that don't fit your kind of human Yukanuba idea of
what the breed should be. This goes eugenic in a
very bad way, very quickly. I'm also wondering, and this
(11:45):
is a question for geneticists in the audience I think
you will find this of interest to Samurai. I'm also
wondering whether someone could be genetically modified in an extreme
way after adulthood, right or in childhood? Like what is
the threshold? Could you inject something in someone or subject
(12:07):
them to a treatment regimen such that they start to
grow taller again in their like their forties. How does
it work? How do you create that without inevitably also
causing cancer? That's I think one of the one of
the big ones to search out. And I don't know,
I mean, it does feel, it does feel like this
(12:30):
is an inevitable direction. I'm wondering when certain modifications will
be outlawed.
Speaker 4 (12:37):
Right, what do you think about like the idea of
a feeding frenzy on a cure for cancer?
Speaker 2 (12:43):
Right?
Speaker 4 (12:44):
You know, we know that big pharma has a tendency
to not always make everything accessible to everybody, and something
with that high of a demand, are we entitled to
have that available to literally everyone who needs them? Entitled
is a strong word, I guess, speaking back to our
system and the way our country works, is it reasonable
(13:05):
to expect that something of that high demand would be
available to everybody?
Speaker 3 (13:10):
Now?
Speaker 4 (13:10):
I know they did make the COVID vaccine available to everybody,
but you'll remember at the beginning of it, it wasn't,
and there were people that were jumping the line and
you know, flexing their interests and pulling strings to get it,
you know, quicker, and we know that there were people
in the elite that were getting that sooner than others.
Speaker 3 (13:28):
I feel certain and you're onto something too. Like The
best way to answer that question regarding a feeding a
possible feeding frenzy for cancer treatments and whether that would
be a right in my mind, it hinges on the
path the research takes. If it is a vaccine, a
preventative treatment, if you could be for lack of killar
(13:49):
phrase inoculated against some sort of specific type of cancer,
then it seems like it would most logically be rolled
up into the typical vaccine nations people get in early childhood.
But if some guy have bespoke boot treatments. But if
it's something where let's say you are in your fifties
and you get the all to common nasty surprise of
(14:12):
something like prostate cancer, then if there is that treatment
plan that you would have to get to, then inevitably
what we're going to run into is a situation where
people engage in what's called medical tourism. The system in
the US is so broken right now that many people,
possibly some listening today, have looked at the math what
(14:35):
they could expect their insurance company to actually pay for,
and they've said, Hey, it's cheaper for me to buy
a ticket over to you know, Spain or Portugal, or
to just to head over to a country in South
America and receives the treatment there and then fly back.
Heck maybe first class. Why not when you did a
(14:57):
fancy steakhouse on the way home and still save money
versus what this again, very broken medical system which charge them.
And that's not a ding on the doctors. That's not
a ding on the nurses or the people who are
busting their butts around the clock to save people's lives
and improve their quality of life. It's the system that's
the problem. Or like organ transplants for example, right, yeah, right,
(15:21):
like growing an organ. There's another samurai you probably already
know this. There's another great debate that's going on in
Judaism about the origin of an organ. Right, can you
receive an organ that has come from you know, a
non Jewish person can you receive an organ from someone
(15:45):
who has violated typical precepts of belief?
Speaker 2 (15:49):
You know?
Speaker 3 (15:49):
And this could happen in any any belief system, right Like,
how how do the lines blur? How do we keep
ourselves spiritually on the right course in a time when
science is improving so quickly. As far as the nature
of a soul, I'm not really sure how to approach that.
I did read something really, really spooky recently from 've
(16:12):
all Noah Harari, who you guys know is a wonderful
writer for a wonderful writer of several books like Sapiens
and a couple other great things. He said that increasingly
the human mind and what we call the soul is
no longer a black box right now the technology is
(16:34):
here to monitor it. I would point to that conversation
with Harari as a good jumping off point for people
who are concerned about the nature of the soul and
the world of human genetic modification. I don't know the answer.
I don't know anyone who does.
Speaker 4 (16:52):
Do you think, given enough advancement in medical technology, that
the idea of something like a soul could literally be disproved?
Speaker 3 (17:01):
I don't think so. I don't because it's just so,
it's so philosophical. You know, the brain, the human brain
is at a great disadvantage. It is the only organ
that studies itself right, and it doesn't have the distance
or the perspective to really crack down on some questions.
We know very very little about the human brain other
(17:23):
than other than the basic mechanics of how it works.
But the genetic contraption that is the human being is
even more complicated. The scariest point, in my opinion, that
Samurai raises here is the domino effect across generations. Geneticists
correct me if I'm wrong here, but here's my layman's
(17:45):
understanding analogy of how this works. Imagine you walk into
a really nice, big house and it's one of those
houses where there's a bank of light switches. There's like
eight light switches, and you the first thing you do
you try to figure out which switch does what right.
But then you see that these switches might affect more
(18:06):
than one source of light, more than one system. Maybe
one also operates a ceiling van and then that changes
how the other bank of lights on the other side
of the it's a nice place, so atrium on the
other side of the atrium, the third light in that
bank of eight by the front door. Let's say it
turns on two or three different banks of lights right
(18:30):
a hallway, part of the atrium or in true way,
and then some other thing. And now when you go
across that, because that one switch has already been flipped,
the operation of the light, so that second bank change.
So like you could, it's conceivable that you could go
in and alter a genetic switch for one thing, deleitarious
(18:52):
medical condition, maybe something cosmetic, like for some reason, you
don't want your kid to have hanging ear lobes. You
want them to have recessive attached ear lobes. See you
flip that switch, and all of a sudden, now the
kid has a higher likelihood of another genetic issue, or
the kid has heterochromia, one of their eyes are inexplicably blue.
(19:15):
The thing is, humans just don't know. So if we
have something that is a transmissible genetic trait, then is
there a situation where three generations hence, two people meet,
they fall in love, they have a kid, and the
genetic bill comes due. Because we didn't understand how all
(19:36):
these modifications upon modifications affect each other. I hope that
doesn't happen. But I think it's distressingly plausible unless we
know more about the human genome and the way it
interacts with itself.
Speaker 2 (19:50):
I think that analogy works for all human endeavors over here,
flip and switches, screwing up the next bank of switches
and then going back.
Speaker 3 (19:59):
Yeah, maybe perhaps you are right, Matt. We're going to
end this one here with a appeal, a call for help.
Any geneticist in the crowd tonight, please let us know
your take on this one A three three std WYTK
conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com. And you don't have to
be a geneticist. Let us know what's on your mind.
(20:23):
Do you agree with us that something like this is inevitable?
Is that a good or a bad thing. We're going
to take a pause for a word from our sponsor,
and we will be back with more correspondence from you.
Speaker 4 (20:39):
And we're back with more messages from you, in this case,
a message from long time and delightfully frequent contributor Kelly
D responding to our strange news conversation around the drugs
store that opened and was quickly shut down in Vancouver,
(21:00):
British Columbia. Subject being of this email Vancouver Harm Reduction.
Just listening to your latest release and I want to
fill you in on some info and recommend a fantastic
podcast that is on the ground in the trenches of
the opioid crisis. Vancouver has been at the forefront of
so many drug enforcement and harm reduction initiatives. It was
the first place in North America to decriminalize opioids. It
(21:23):
was the first place to have needle exchanges and safe
injection sites. The only thing that criminalization of drugs causes
is an increase in potency and a decrease in safety.
Think back to Prohibition. Yeah, to this point, Ben, We've
talked about this on Articulous History on this show as well. Prohibition,
there were all these impurities that were put into the
(21:45):
bootleg alcohol, you know, and I think some of that
was even done by the government really really shamefully and
in a misguided fashion to I guess punish people for
trying to sneak their hoots or whatever. But again, you know,
when you have folks doing things off the books without
any kind of regulation or oversight, you are inevitably going
(22:06):
to have impurities and problems and whatever. The thing is,
So you know, outright abolition of certain substances always going
to lead to outright black market practices of juicing the
stuff up to make the most of your product and
cut it with whatever else you can to make it
seem like it's more potent than it actually is. In
(22:28):
the case of fentanyl, we know that requires a very
small amount to achieve an effect similar to heroin. To something,
you know, we mix it with a small amount of heroin,
and in fact, I believe in Vancouver and around the world,
is being found that heroin quote unquote is almost ninety percent,
if not one hundred percent fentanyl with other you know,
(22:49):
cutting agents as well. And as we know because of
the stories that we see every day, there are people
dying from this. So let's get back to this. Think
back to prohibition. Alcohol didn't disappear. It's simply went underground.
Thousands lost their lives to poisoned alcohol and spirits. Incentivizing
non drug use has never worked either because of the
(23:09):
medical nature of how it and the brain works.
Speaker 3 (23:13):
Kelly d goes.
Speaker 4 (23:14):
On to propose some actual solutions. How about building government
widespread housing, widespread government housing like we did in the eighties.
Notice how food banks only started after government affordable housing
wasn't being built. Build enough treatment centers to treat all
those who need and want to be treated. Provide a
safe supply to those who want it. People won't steal
(23:35):
from you to buy drugs with proceeds that they already
have those drugs from legal means and they're clean. Put
more mental health workers on the ground instead of police.
The province of British Columbia is losing twenty plus people
a month to drugs. Decriminalization is only a small step
(23:56):
in the right direction and has characteristics similar to the
portrait Gol model a Portugal model.
Speaker 3 (24:02):
Ben correct me if I'm wrong?
Speaker 4 (24:04):
Is I believe Portugal has decriminalized all drugs and diet
are made drugs basically legal if I'm not.
Speaker 3 (24:11):
Sing Portugal in July of two thousand and one, so
more than two decades ago, they decriminalize the personal use
and possession of all illicit drugs. And you know, as
we always have to note when we say that, remember,
decriminalized is not the same thing as legalized. Right. The
(24:34):
way it works in Portugal is if there is a
case of consumption, purchase, or possession of up to what
they reckon to be a ten day supply of any
illicit drug, they refer it to an administrative panel, and
that panel will make recommendations for treatment, fines, warnings, et cetera.
(24:54):
But if you are trafficking or cultivating illicit substances as
well as possess seeing enough weight to be more than
ten days worth, then it's still a criminal offense.
Speaker 4 (25:05):
So that's very similar ben to what's happening in Vancouver, because,
I mean, the whole point of the story was this
gentleman opened this drugs store in order to you know,
help people get a clean, tested supply of various illicit substances,
including you know, opioids, crack, cocaine, powder, cocaine, et cetera.
(25:25):
I believe MDMA maybe maybe it.
Speaker 3 (25:27):
Was one of them.
Speaker 4 (25:27):
But distribution and sale of these substances is still very
much illegal, which is why this man got scooped up
and his business got shut down. How's the Portugal model
different than that.
Speaker 3 (25:38):
The Portugal model is primarily meant to treat. I would
argue to treat addiction as a medical condition rather than
a crime. So you would still like if you were
this guy and you travel to Lisbon and you opened
a pop up shop similar to what he was doing
in Canada. You would still be arrested. That aspect of
(26:02):
it would not change because you would be you would
have more than a ten day supply, you would be
actively trafficking in illicit substances.
Speaker 4 (26:11):
Okay, So it sounds to me like what Kelly d
is saying is that the model in British Columbia is
still pretty similar to what's being done in Portugal. It
is emphasizing treatment over punitive measures, you know. But I
think Kelly is also saying this is just one step,
you know, and it really does require an understanding of
(26:34):
how addiction really works to keep people from dying. Because
British Columbia, you know, as mentioned here, is losing lots
of lives still despite these more progressive drug policies. So
you know, we're still not there yet, and I think
we're miles light years away.
Speaker 3 (26:53):
From anything like that in the United States.
Speaker 4 (26:55):
So there are some places that I believe are you know,
maybe inching towards more or more of this kind of thinking,
like you know Portland for example.
Speaker 3 (27:04):
Oh did you see Malaysia. This will interest Kelly as well,
Kelly Matt everybody Malaysia is aiming to introduce the law
to decriminalize the possession and use of small quantities of drugs.
And the reason they're doing it is because they have
to reduce prison overcrowding because so many people have been arrested.
(27:27):
And as you know, the Southeast Asian theater there is
incredibly strict us on every drug but alcohol and tobacco.
That's right.
Speaker 4 (27:39):
Have even heard of certain cases where folks are in
danger of being executed?
Speaker 3 (27:44):
Yeah, you're absolutely right. Several countries for a while had,
like Malaysia, had a death penalty on the books for
selling drugs. You can check out any number of lists
like Iran, Thailand, and Thailand recently decriminalized cannabis. I believe Dubai,
(28:05):
Saudi Arabia essentially check. We're not going to judge you, folks,
but whenever you travel somewhere, check in advance to see
what their policy is towards these substances. And keep in
mind that in some cases people can and have been
arrested for possession because they failed a drug test and
(28:27):
having a trace of something like cannabis or insert whatever
thing here in your system. Authorities counted that as possessing it.
That's pretty gnarly in my opinion.
Speaker 4 (28:38):
Sure, I mean, look at the case of Brittany Griner,
you know, the w NBA player who was detained in
Russia for having thc vape cartridges.
Speaker 3 (28:48):
Obviously there was a lot of political theater involved.
Speaker 4 (28:53):
In that entertainment, you know, because we don't play super
nice with Russia, and they wanted to make a big
you know, big to do of it and a big
splash of it and sort of flex on us. But yeah,
that's scary stuff. If you're in a country you're unfamiliar
with and you get caught with something like that, you
could be thrown in jail and subject to their laws.
Speaker 3 (29:14):
It's terrifying thought. And we'll have to be politically convenient
and expedient for your home government to make enough of
a stink to get you back.
Speaker 4 (29:25):
Right, you could just be left to rot and unless
you know enough people raise a fuss. Like you said, Ben,
that's just that's all she wrote. You know, it absolutely
could go that way. We teased a podcast recommendation Kelly
goes on, want to learn about the real situation from
people who have been on the ground and lived through
(29:45):
the past two medical crises. Crack Down podcast is the
recommendation that Kelly can't recommend enough.
Speaker 3 (29:54):
Ps. You should also look into Edison.
Speaker 4 (29:56):
Motors, who's developing a production semi truck that is a
play again hybrid. They're doing phenomenal work here in British
Columbia as well. I don't know it's all in there.
I think we kind of had the conversation as we went. Honestly,
Kelly d thank you for this from the ground insight.
I think we're all on the same page at the
very least that drug addiction should be treated as that,
(30:19):
you know, addiction as a mental health crisis and not
a punitive litigation based crisis. You know, and we also
know from our conversations with Jason Flahm and the Lava
for Good folks in that panel that we're looking forward
to releasing soon that a lot of the laws in
the United States that do exercise such draconian influence over
(30:41):
people's lives are racist inherently and designed to make people
powerless and basically capitalize on their mental health crises and
throw them into a system that they will be hard
pressed to ever.
Speaker 3 (30:56):
Find their way out of.
Speaker 4 (30:57):
For the purposes of free labor headshaking, going with them
with it, Matt, I mean, it sucks. It's like, we've
all known people that have struggled with addiction, and we've
all seen how it can have a horrible impact on
families and on you know, people's jobs and livelihoods and
people's health. But at the end of the day, these
(31:18):
are people who are struggling and suffering and often given
the options and the opportunity, would want to get past that.
I think, I don't know. I don't want to speak
for y'all. I just I think that's been my observation.
Speaker 3 (31:33):
Well, as soon as it becomes I mean, look at
the cannabis legislation, as soon as it becomes more profitable
to have a different drug policy, that will occur. However,
we have to remember that powerful forces, oftentimes the same
people making the laws, make money and do profit based
on the criminalization. It's kind of like the tobacco industry.
(31:57):
If you are dedicated to if you have ensconced yourself
in a system, and you're making money off of this,
no matter how much human misery it creates, then there
has to be a very powerful opposite force, or very
powerful enticing argument to get you to change, you know
what I mean, like you, you're a predator. Those forces
(32:19):
are predators in the human ecosystem, that's what they are
in many cases. And that's again there are a lot
of people who are doing excellent work with decriminalization. There
are a ton of people in law enforcement. They don't
want to jam somebody up and ruin their lives because
they were in possession of some small amount of an
(32:41):
ill advised drug. But if the laws force them to
do it, then they have to do it. That's right.
Speaker 4 (32:46):
And we also of course know that the opioid crisis,
or at least you know one of them of several
here in the United States were caused by corporations, caused
by the Sackler family, you know, and the permissive prescribing
a very very powerful opiates that then became street drugs themselves,
you know, from people selling their supply they're legally obtained supply.
(33:11):
So we know there's a lot of callousness and kind
of money changing hands when it comes to gambling with
people's mental health and when it comes to these kinds
of addictions. Certain people could take a drug and take
it or leave it, walk away from it.
Speaker 3 (33:25):
Never have an issue.
Speaker 4 (33:26):
But there are people, whether it be genetic or whatever
it might be, that are predisposed to really getting that
monkey on your back real quick and having a very
difficult time turning back.
Speaker 2 (33:38):
Well, guys, I've got one more crackpot idea that goes
against everything Kelly is saying. And I apologize what I've
just got to say it because if I was hold it,
then I feel bad.
Speaker 3 (33:47):
It's Matt's crackpot corner.
Speaker 2 (33:49):
Let's go, all right, Matt's crackpot corner. Let's massively inflate
the value of human blood, like somehow make it to
the point where human blood is crazy expensive to get,
which means donating it, like a normal amount that you
would maybe donate in a year's time equates to a
yearly salary. But it's got to be untainted by any
(34:10):
kind of substances. But you could just give blood and
that's all you gotta do and you just live.
Speaker 3 (34:17):
All right. How are you gonna do that? Man? How
we gonna do that? I don't know. I love it
all right that this has been Matt's crackpot corner.
Speaker 4 (34:28):
That's the That's the thing, though, Matt, I mean, there
are no simple answer there are no simple solutions. As
Kelly pointed out, incentivizing non drug use is very difficult
because of the medical nature of how drugs affect the brain.
You can get to a point in an addiction where
no amount of money is going to make you want
to stop doing the drug. You have to be tied down,
(34:53):
you know, and and and sweat it out there.
Speaker 3 (34:56):
You know.
Speaker 4 (34:56):
You this enslaves your brain and then slaves you mind.
And that's real.
Speaker 3 (35:02):
And we're talking about the drugs that if you have anybody.
Speaker 4 (35:05):
Watched the Opioid Crisis movie or series rather which is.
Speaker 3 (35:10):
What is it called dope sic I think is what
it was called.
Speaker 4 (35:12):
I mean you see astraumatized obviously, but like a character
who's prescribed oxy contin for a legitimate back injury that
she sustained working in like minds, you know, in very
difficult situation, and then just was one of those people
that just got a taste for it turned her into
a totally different person because they were fast and loose
(35:35):
with the types of doses they were prescribing to folks
like that without any thought into how it might affect
them psychologically in the long term, because it's all about profits. Sorry,
to soap box. This is just difficult stuff and there
is no easy answer. But anyway, thanks again Kelly D
for the insight. We're gonna take quick break and then
(35:56):
come back with one more piece of listener mail.
Speaker 2 (36:05):
We're back and we're going to ancient astronaut Chick for
a message about a hotel or lots of hotels. Ancient
astronaut Chick says, good evening, longtime listener here, and it
is not my first time writing to y'all. Anyways, I
was listening to the latest strange news and as a Knoxville,
Tennessee native and longtime Hilton employee. Hilton, that's the hotel
(36:27):
we were talking about just last week. I believe I
was horrified to hear what this guest experienced at the
Hilton downtown Nashville. That's the toesucker. Guys. Since you guys
said you wanted an episode on stuff hotels don't want
you to know, I thought I would.
Speaker 3 (36:42):
Share a few things awesome. Thank you.
Speaker 2 (36:44):
I've been employed by the Hilton franchise since twenty sixteen.
I have always been front desk and I am currently
running a front desk department in Denver. The first point
I would like to share is that it is no
surprise this night manager was able to access this room
because at most properties, the front desk controls all master
keys and can generally access these at any time. If
(37:07):
he was a manager, he probably even had his own
master key. Really, a hotel employee can enter your room
anytime without warning if there is not a dn D
on the door. That's the do not disturb sign or
light or switch or whatever you might find at your hotel.
If you have a dn D on, a staff member
(37:28):
must call your room prior to entering. Guys, just to
stop here really quickly. I didn't know that it actually
prevented any kind of action with host, with the hotel staff.
In my mind, even if you put that thing on
your door, let's say housekeeping or anybody else could still
walk up to your room and just knock and be like, hey,
(37:48):
what's going on in there at all.
Speaker 3 (37:51):
Yeah. I was a surprise to me as well, Matt,
because I mean to the point where I thought, and
maybe you can correct this on this AAC, but I
I thought it might be a Hilton specific policy. I
think it must be because we know that in cases
of emergency, law enforcement totally doesn't doesn't have to respect
(38:13):
the D and D sign.
Speaker 2 (38:15):
Oh totally. Well, let's continue here, building off this. Unless
you have the dead bolt on your room can be
unlocked by staff, any staff really. That being said, we
do have a tool to unlock a dead bolt door,
as we need this for when guests accidentally latch it
and lock themselves out. My question here, guys, do you
think that includes what's that special hotel lock, like the
(38:38):
one that folds over on itself.
Speaker 3 (38:40):
With Oh, is there a name for that? I want
to know.
Speaker 2 (38:44):
It's got the little ball, a little flipping boy. Yeah,
the flippy boy.
Speaker 3 (38:49):
I know.
Speaker 2 (38:49):
There's some other ones.
Speaker 3 (38:50):
That are a swing bar. You're called the swing bar
swing bar.
Speaker 2 (38:53):
But then there's other ones that are flatter, different flippy boys, Shane, Well.
Speaker 3 (39:01):
All of which can be opened by cell staff. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (39:04):
Just something that's really thin that can fit through that
door and push it open.
Speaker 3 (39:08):
Swift kick.
Speaker 2 (39:09):
Oh yeah, I guess that would work.
Speaker 3 (39:11):
I know it can happen because I was. You might
enjoy this saying as I check. I was. I one
time got locked on a balcony, locked out on a
balcony of a hotel. God and the the effect I
can't remember I think this was in the US, but
the front desk people I ended up having to thankfully
at a cell phone. So I called the front desk
(39:34):
from the cell phone and then got someone to. A
very nice guy came up and broke in right, opened
those locks and then opened the balcony door such that
I could I could get in. It was too far
up for me to jump down. And uh, and I still, dude,
(39:54):
if you're listening, I still think you were lying to
be nice. I don't think that happens all the time.
But I really appreciate you, and I think you're a
good person. And so in this case, maybe that confirms
what AAC is telling us, because in that case we
did have someone haul in advance and grant permission to enter.
Speaker 2 (40:14):
Was it at a Hilton?
Speaker 3 (40:16):
I don't believe so.
Speaker 2 (40:18):
Well, then we have no way to confirm.
Speaker 3 (40:22):
We have to start hauling all of the other hotels
in your world all.
Speaker 2 (40:26):
The four seasons? Which four seasons did Ben get locked
on a balcon.
Speaker 4 (40:34):
It's perfect, exclusively and his rider the only says of
the four seasons, I.
Speaker 3 (40:39):
Only get locked out at the four seasons.
Speaker 2 (40:41):
Yeah, redroof, totally fine.
Speaker 4 (40:45):
I prefer to stay in the third season myself, that
was a bad hotel joke. But well, Red Roof, what's
the one where they keep the light on for you
Motel six, Tom, I'm Tom Bodett with it. Yeah, with
Motel six, we will keep the light on for you.
Speaker 3 (41:00):
Really do those anymore? But they sure used to. Tumbledead
is now an NPR guy.
Speaker 4 (41:04):
Even that, I mean, it was always like, yeah, he's
always on those panel shows.
Speaker 3 (41:08):
I'm excited about this stuff. Hotels don't want you to
know episode I've been diving into some research here and
just I know we're continuing with your letter AAC just
to say thank you. It's it's tremendously helpful.
Speaker 2 (41:22):
Oh yeah, definitely thank you. Oh guys, I just want
to know about towels, like how clean are those towels? Really?
I want to talk about comforters, do Vey covers, right,
I want to talk.
Speaker 3 (41:34):
About also the yeah, the UV light thing. Some people
who are germophobes are quite particular, have a really difficult
time with hotels basically tried taking their own decontamination kits.
Speaker 4 (41:47):
And was it you that pointed out that the top
sheet is your worst enemy or the duvet that definitely
never lay on that top because they don't clean it
as much or something like that.
Speaker 3 (41:55):
Maybe it was you, I can't recall, maybe so, but
you know.
Speaker 4 (41:59):
The the underparts they definitely launder fully every time, but
apparently the cover always get rid of that.
Speaker 3 (42:06):
Yeah, and keeping books in the like I have left
copies of the stuff they don't want, you know, book
in hotels, like the Guinea Bible. You just replace that, right,
it's the Gideon Bible or the Book of Mormon. And
I don't I don't think that's a crime. Yeah, I'm
pretty sure it's not.
Speaker 4 (42:23):
I don't think leaving people free stuff in a drawers
ever a crime unless what it is, Yeah, or like
a virus or something.
Speaker 3 (42:31):
That's right, if you've got in a post it note
that says go nuts, then you're probably culpable in any
any untoward situation that would occur.
Speaker 2 (42:41):
But yeah, well, yeah, let's get back to the email.
And then there's just one or two other things I
want to talk about just on that in that vein
at the end. Guys, Uh, let's get back to the email.
The second point is going further into what you said
about Hilton not taking ownership of this issue because it
was a franchised property. Most hotels have three parties involved
(43:02):
with the establishment, one the building owner to the management company,
and three the parent franchise company at any given time.
If a property dips below quote brand standards for too long. Again,
these are Hilton brand standards we're talking about, it can
be stripped of its franchise name. Ooh, that would be
(43:23):
a mark on the hotel's character. As an employee of Hilton,
I'm actually not employed by them, but by the management
company that runs my property. So whoever hired this toe
sucking man is actually the management company that runs that property,
and Hilton would not have any say in it at all.
This can get tricky as some hotels are Hilton owned
(43:45):
and managed, But to get more confusing, Hilton owns their
own management company, which is what runs those properties managed
by Hilton Latrushka dolls.
Speaker 4 (43:56):
As you'd say, Ben, I mean it gives there's like
a firewall of of culpability, right, keeps the higher ups
insulated from any kind of faults.
Speaker 3 (44:06):
Oh.
Speaker 2 (44:07):
Absolutely, I think that's exactly what we're dealing with, guys.
And it takes me to just another thing that I
want to talk about in that stuff. Hotels don't want
you to know episode potential clandestine surveillance in places that
have a lot of diplomats maybe, or you know, places
right like especially the higher end hotels that are specifically
(44:28):
aimed at that kind of clientele. I always wonder about that.
Speaker 3 (44:32):
See, it's a real thing. Yeah, I mean really especially
during especially during the Cold War, but even now afterwards.
Of course, like there's standing orders in a lot of countries.
If you're traveling in the US. The private industry guys
get it too that you should just assume you are
being recorded in your hotel room, even in your bathroom.
(44:55):
Stuff like that.
Speaker 4 (44:56):
How they got a honeytrap you if they're not running
twenty four to seven surveill.
Speaker 2 (45:00):
Oh gosh, Oh it's creepy to think about.
Speaker 3 (45:03):
Yeah, I was. I was in a place in beautiful
place in Diplomatic or Tokyo. I think you we all
talked about this we're hanging out off air, and I
realized that this guy who worked at the restaurant easily
spoke six languages and was pretending to not be super
great at them, and could clearly clock what other people
(45:26):
who were working for embassies what they were talking about.
And it was creepy to see him just like flawlessly
slide into Dutch.
Speaker 2 (45:36):
Yeah, and just listening and you've got a tiny little
notepad and he's like.
Speaker 3 (45:42):
That.
Speaker 4 (45:42):
I can't help but think of a of a of
a story or I believe like it was a Pastebin
thing you found with another insider bit of information from
I believe JP Morgan Chase about insane levels of surveillance
happening to employees of that company, which I believe we're
going to roll into an episode that's coming, but.
Speaker 3 (46:04):
It's wild stuff, Like I was blown away by that.
Speaker 4 (46:08):
I mean, like borderline like retinal tracking, you know what
I mean, like like really micro level invasive surveillance, well
beyond the scope of what is appropriate for an employer
to be able to say, oh, it's all about productivity.
Speaker 3 (46:23):
Now, the good folks at the Hilton are not doing anything.
They're not. Our minds tend to go to the nth degree. Yeah,
you know, and it'd be very easy to it would
be very easy to put in uh, some small surveillance devices.
It's just a possibility. The real question is is it
worth going to that trouble? That's the question people are
(46:45):
going to answer, you know.
Speaker 2 (46:46):
Is it worth it. That sounds like a TV show.
Let's start. Let's make that TV show. It'll just be
really messed up things that companies and other organizations do.
That's guys, all right, just a few more things from
our email we need to cover. Here we go. The
third point is that most guests think they're getting back
at the hotel when they quote call corporate. But this
(47:10):
call actually just generates a case which comes right back
to the property management of which the guest was complaining about.
But I am yeah, exactly so the guy said when
he went took the toe out of his mouth. All right, sorry,
all right, thus giving the property full control of compensation
(47:34):
or no compensation of the complaint. If these cases are
not closed within twenty four hours by the management HRCC,
I guess that's Hilton Corporate does get the final say
of compensation and whether or not the hotel must pay.
Here are a couple more random facts. We can lock
anyone out of their room. We will not let police
(47:55):
in your room without warrants. That's helpful, Thank you very
much for that.
Speaker 3 (47:58):
I really appreciate that.
Speaker 2 (48:00):
We should never tell anyone you stayed with us unless
their name is on your room as well as you
or if you give permission specifically.
Speaker 4 (48:09):
So you're saying those scenes where someone just casually sunders
into the hotel and say, you got a.
Speaker 3 (48:14):
Guest so and so and so and so. Is that
what's their number?
Speaker 4 (48:18):
Like well, you know a tall woman, like are they
allowed if you if you have their full name, they
will call up to the room. But they're not supposed
to tell you the room number, right, or like give
you any inform.
Speaker 3 (48:31):
I mean again, this is a Hilton policies, right, They're
not supposed to though. I think you could get around
it with a little bit of tricky social engineering, which
is always going to be a vulnerability or a vector.
But it feels very reasonable. It feels like a security concern.
And then also a question for you, AAC, please write
and again have so many questions. Can you use a pseudonym?
(48:54):
How easy is it? Like, I know you probably have
to have your government name on a card that people
have to hold for incidentals or whatever, but can you
say I'm I'm still recently as you know bombazine Berry.
Speaker 4 (49:08):
I thought this came up maybe it was an out
of skout of podcast conversation, but like you you are
you pretty much are allowed to do that. Car From
my understanding, you just have to give obviously, give them
an ID and a card for incidentals and just let
them know that you're a real person. But but for
the intense and purposes of people interacting with them from
the outside world.
Speaker 3 (49:28):
They Yeah, I assumed name I think is legit.
Speaker 2 (49:32):
Do hotels take your ID or do they just take
a card like any card, just give me something I can.
Speaker 3 (49:36):
Typically, really, I think they take the ID in case
you're doing credit card theft.
Speaker 4 (49:43):
That's true usually, I mean, you know, hell, my local
record store of choice asks for your ID. If you're
using a debit card, you know what I mean. So
it's it's just different practices.
Speaker 3 (49:53):
If you're booking online, then there's not really a way
that they ask you for ID. Yeah, I've usually it
asked for ID.
Speaker 4 (50:01):
Now that I'm thinking about it, it's a good safeguard.
It makes sense because I could have literally stolen somebody's
ID or sold somebody's credit card and then exactly, you know,
but if.
Speaker 3 (50:13):
They don't ask for ID. Sleep with one eye open, man,
I kind of tend to agree.
Speaker 2 (50:17):
Ben, sleep with both eyes open, or just don't sleep
at all. Sleep is the cousin of death.
Speaker 3 (50:30):
And what do we say to death today?
Speaker 2 (50:33):
We say with death.
Speaker 3 (50:35):
Just this is such a terrible name for water. I
love it. People are crazy for the stuff. I guess
it's just like everybody should drink water. It just reminds
me of like the things where adults try to dress
up vegetables so you won't know they're eating vegetables. Yea
(50:56):
dangerous water calling celery death stalks.
Speaker 2 (51:00):
Now, let do it, got my armless palmer, and let's
go back to the email for one second.
Speaker 4 (51:04):
I'm sorry, armless palmer. Is that the flavor of liquid death?
Speaker 2 (51:08):
Yeah, it's it's I don't know, it's tea.
Speaker 3 (51:09):
And yeah it's called.
Speaker 2 (51:16):
All I know is that it's delicious. Okay, last couple
of points here. Yes, we do take your lost and
found items that are never claimed, of course you do.
We get hotel rooms under an employee rate starting at
forty five dollars a night, what even in Milan.
Speaker 3 (51:33):
Congratulations especially, and you know what you earned.
Speaker 2 (51:39):
It, that's right.
Speaker 4 (51:40):
That's that's no different than like airline employees though that's
pretty standard. You know, they either get a really good
rate or they get to fly standby for free. I mean,
you know, I get that that's a cool fringe benefit.
Speaker 2 (51:50):
That's awesome. I think it's great. Oh, here's the last
little point here. We can't charge you a smoking fee
unless we find physical evidence that you in the room.
So destroy the evidence everybody, or just.
Speaker 3 (52:04):
I saw that too, man, That one pinged for me.
I remember I remember being in Hawaii for the first time,
and they had one warning about not smoking tobacco, and
then they had another much larger warning that essentially equated to, Hey,
we know you're probably on vacation, please don't smoke weed
in here, okay. And I clearly could tell that multiple
(52:30):
people at this resort around me were very, very high
most of the time, and this is a nice place,
so I knew they weren't going to rock the boat.
They would just give them that fee at the end.
And my question to you, AAC is does physical evidence
count as like the lingering smell? I think that counts, right,
that is a physical remnant of the offense.
Speaker 4 (52:52):
Well, you got a wonder too, Is there a tool
that can detect, you know, the recent presence of tobacco smoke,
you know, and like say things like curtains.
Speaker 3 (53:03):
Yeah, it's called camera, mom's nose.
Speaker 4 (53:06):
It's called your mom's nose when you're a teenager.
Speaker 3 (53:09):
That's what it is.
Speaker 2 (53:11):
Yeah, Well, and is tobacco smoke the same as marijuana smoke?
Is it the exact same Does it interact with the
hotel in the same way?
Speaker 4 (53:21):
Does that have the same Well, I mean, marijuana smoke,
you know, typically is thought to not linger in the
same way. You know, it'll smell while you're actually smoking it,
so I've heard. But tobacco smoke, it stays. It just
has a way of sticking.
Speaker 3 (53:35):
Vaping it probably like uh, that disperses the cigarette or
a vabing thing that that would disperse pretty quickly. I
don't know. These are just interesting questions. I think we're
all very excited about the stuff hotels don't want you
to know, and we'd love we'd love additional answers to
these questions. War stories, you know, even the basic stuff
(53:56):
like if you work in the industry, you might be
surprised by how much stuff people outside of the industry
don't know, Like how does tipping work in the US?
What's the appropriate tip if you you know you're tipping
the house cleaner or so on?
Speaker 2 (54:10):
According to the little thing that make me sign, it's
like thirty percent.
Speaker 3 (54:13):
Now, what do you mean? What do you sign?
Speaker 2 (54:17):
Most of the places. I don't know if you guys
have gone out to eat anytime soon, but at most restaurants,
at this point they start, they hand it to you
and it's well, it starts at twenty is like the
lowest you can possibly give, and then it goes up
to twenty. I mean on most of them that I've
been to, and these aren't crazy high end restaurants.
Speaker 4 (54:35):
Right, And that's the thing too, is like, uh, if
you eat at a crazy high end restaurant but it
really doesn't take that much effort to serve you, but
your bill is like three hundred dollars. Are you really
supposed to tip thirty percent on three hundred dollars for
the person that literally brought your food out one time
and refilled your water.
Speaker 3 (54:54):
I don't think that's right personally, I don't know. Maybe
it's also it's compounded. That's another thing we could do,
maybe stuff the restaurant industry doesn't want you to know.
I say, we franchise this out and make it a
cereal because there's there's another issue that's happening across the
board in the United States, and I suspect in much
of the rest of the world as well. In the US,
(55:14):
in particular, folks, basic prices for food are skyrocketing, demands
for tips are also skyrocketing. We know the tip economy
can be divisive. We've got a lot of friends who
are in the industry, and the reality is that the
prevalence of tipping in the US is entirely happening because
(55:38):
large corporations are pushing the burden of a decent wage
onto the consumer. I have one last question.
Speaker 4 (55:47):
If there is evidence of illicit activity left behind reading
smoke in the room, but let's say they find like
a bunch of you know, white powder and razor blades,
like on a countertop or something. Are they required to
report that to LA enforcement questions.
Speaker 3 (56:05):
Company by company. It's a good question. We need the
answer because.
Speaker 4 (56:08):
You know, certain hotel franchise, especially higher end ones, they
want to have a reputation for discretion.
Speaker 3 (56:13):
Oh yeah, as long as you're a white lotus, they're
not gonna stitch.
Speaker 4 (56:16):
On you, right, I mean, as long as you're not
throwing TVs through windows and like, you know, leaving dead
bodies behind. I would argue it would not be in
their best interest to because then you won't stay there again.
Speaker 3 (56:26):
Yeah, it's it's really all about whether it exposes the
owners to liability or disrupts the affairs of other guests.
So I bet there's a lot. There's a lot that
you can sneak by if you're quiet and you're not
violating those things. This is not us saying do it, no,
just saying people probably do get a win.
Speaker 4 (56:47):
But at the end of the day, though, you know, again,
tip your service folks. You know the you know that
are cleaning the room. There are certain hotel situations they're
walking into basically like a crime scene.
Speaker 3 (57:01):
You know.
Speaker 2 (57:02):
Thanks Ancient Astronaut Chick for giving us this insight. This
person has offered to answer our questions. Further, So, why,
like ancient astronaut Chick, if you have insight to this stuff,
why not let us know.
Speaker 3 (57:15):
Yes, thanks to you, AAC, I feel like we're familiar
enough to use cool nicknames with each other now, thanks
of course to everybody else who wrote in. We got Kelly,
we got Samurai, and hopefully we have you on the
way join us on the show. We can't wait to
have you. We try to be easy to find online, boy, Julie.
Speaker 4 (57:36):
Ever, you can find us online at the handle Conspiracy Stuff,
where we exist on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, Conspiracy Stuff
Show on Instagram and TikTok, and.
Speaker 2 (57:46):
Hey, make sure you are following us on those social media,
especially the ones that have video. Ben. I don't mean
to call you out here, but I just got to
see a version of the mre videos that you've been shooting.
Speaker 3 (57:58):
All praise the west all praise to our buddy west
Over at Station sixteen.
Speaker 2 (58:02):
Well, it's really cool to watch one of those things
get opened to understand what's inside of it, in the
heating element that you have to put inside that bag.
I've never seen that before in my life.
Speaker 3 (58:13):
That's anything about that.
Speaker 4 (58:14):
I was not privy to the shoot, So I'm looking
forward to seeing it for the first time myself, as
should you, fair listener, be looking forward to seeing it
for the first time yourself. In addition to other various
and sundry social media videos we've been cooking up lately
that are genuinely a lot of fun if a little
dad on you know, TikTok kind of vibe.
Speaker 3 (58:33):
But you know what, we own it and we live
for it, and we will not be shamed by you.
Speaker 2 (58:38):
That's right.
Speaker 3 (58:38):
And if you don't sip the social needs, you can
always shout into the void and know that sometimes the
void answers back. In this case, void shouting will be
the following numbers. Say it with us one, eight, three, three,
sd d WYTK. I tried to do an echo on
that number a while back, and Matt, I don't know
(59:00):
why it didn't hit me, But echoing on the K
just sounds like we're saying KKK. So wh're trying to
do an echo for stuff you don't want you to know.
No no, So you call the number, you will hear
a familiar voice, will hear a beeplake, so beep. That
gives you three minutes? Three minutes? Are yours? Go nuts?
Get weird, tell us what's on your mind, give yourself
(59:22):
that cool acronym, that moniker you always wanted. Let us
know if we can use your name and or voice
on air, and most importantly, don't censor yourself. The best
way to get a lot of information over to us.
If you got pictures, you got links, you want to
take us to the edge of the rabbit hole, send
us an email. We read every single one we get
where we.
Speaker 2 (59:42):
Are conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com. Stuff they don't want
(01:00:04):
you to know is a production of iHeartRadio. For more
podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or
wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Stuff They Don't Want You To Know News
Hosts And Creators
Matt Frederick
Ben Bowlin
Noel Brown
Show Links
RSSStoreAboutLive ShowsPopular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.