Concerns rise over human relationships with sycophantic chatbots. A town in Türkiye burns confiscated cannabis, prompting controversy. Former US officials the country spent trillions of dollars off the books to create disaster-proof underground cities for the elite. UKR-US mineral deals prompt accusations of quid-pro-quo deals. There may be a genuine MYSTERY PLANET back in play. Shoutout to Nibiru and so much more in this week's strange news segment.
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 this stuff they don't want you to know. A
production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Hello, welcome back to the show. My name is Matt,
my name is Nol.
Speaker 3 (00:28):
They called me Ben.
Speaker 4 (00:29):
We're joined as always with our super producer Dylan the
Tennessee pal Fagan. Most importantly, you argue you are here.
That makes this the stuff they don't want you to know.
If you are tuning into our strange news program The
Evening it publishes Welcome Friends and Neighbors to May twelfth,
twenty twenty five. There's a lot of stuff going on.
(00:54):
Shout out to everybody's brand new AI fueled boyfriend or
girlfriend or what have you.
Speaker 3 (01:00):
Do you guys hear about this?
Speaker 4 (01:01):
No?
Speaker 5 (01:02):
I saw Mark Zuckerberg awkwardly defending it.
Speaker 6 (01:06):
That was about the span of it for me.
Speaker 4 (01:09):
It's weird because maybe the four of us are functioning
in a bit of an editorial or experiential bubble. Because
I personally was not I knew this was a trend,
but I was not aware about how concerned parts of
society have become about this. We won't spend too much
time on it. But if you go to an excellent
Rolling Stone article by Miles Klee, which was published May fourth,
(01:34):
just a few days before we record on May seventh,
right now, you will see this. You'll see this in
depth examination of a problem people are having. This is
the headline. People are losing loved ones to AI fueled
spiritual fantasies. It reminds me a little bit of the
(01:57):
oh gosh, the technical luminati or the tech luminary who
left Google under bad terms because he believed that they
had created sentient AI and that he was in conversations
with it. Do you guys remember that story for sure?
I still I can't remember where we all as a
(02:19):
group landed on, whether or not or I think we
got back to the old, the old bag of badgers.
How does one define sentience in the first place.
Speaker 5 (02:29):
To even define as a human? You know what it
means within our species. Results vary.
Speaker 4 (02:34):
Let's just say your mileage may very well put. The
quick skinny is this. Multiple people over the past few years,
perhaps exacerbated by the COVID lockdown, feel that they have
lost their significant others or lost some level of emotional
(02:56):
or even physical intimacy as their partner increasingly pays more
attention to an AI bought a large language model that
continually sort of big ups them and is sycophantic and
tells them what they want to hear.
Speaker 6 (03:11):
All our QAnon just saying.
Speaker 3 (03:14):
Similarly, we all have to make conspiracy.
Speaker 5 (03:17):
Yeah, No, I mean it just in terms of like
people being lonely and isolated and seeking something that they
are lacking, and sometimes they're being situations that exploit that.
And yeah, it's inevitable that we're going to have these
AI companions, but boy, oh boy, there's certain folks that
might go down a real dark rabbit hole. Have you
seen the movie Her? I actually haven't, and I have
been saving It's worth it. I know everyone loves it,
(03:38):
and I love the filmmaker obviously, just Spike Jones, but
I haven't seen that when I've been saving it, and
I think that's maybe it's a little less dystopian, but
I feel like it does get around to some stuff
about isolation and how this isn't a real relationship.
Speaker 6 (03:49):
But maybe I'm wrong.
Speaker 4 (03:50):
Correct, Yeah, I mean I think you're on the money there. No,
it's no police academy for but it deals with a
lot of the sameless spits.
Speaker 3 (03:58):
So we'll give oneline here.
Speaker 4 (04:00):
This article introduces the concept of something called chat GPT
induced psychosis.
Speaker 3 (04:08):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (04:09):
The idea is that especially people are in a vulnerable
emotional state. You know, there's a reason, yes, men are
such a common troop that they can be put in
a really bad psychological place by a large language model
that essentially worships them and talk to them.
Speaker 2 (04:31):
Look, I don't want to cast us versions at Miles
Klee and the folks over at Rolling Stone, but a
lot of the source material that they've got in this
article comes directly from Reddit threads. So just some random
Reddit comment er telling a big, long tale about how
their husband is being seduced by chat GPT. I only
worry that maybe the person writing on Reddit is exaggerating
(04:56):
a little bit or telling the.
Speaker 3 (04:57):
Story because it's anecdotal.
Speaker 2 (04:59):
Yeah, I mean, there's no way to prove any of
this stuff that.
Speaker 6 (05:02):
You said, though I'm anecdotal.
Speaker 5 (05:03):
Stuff in a properly researched piece or study is obviously valuable.
Speaker 6 (05:07):
But yeah, without any kind of.
Speaker 5 (05:09):
Barrier to entry for this kind of stuff in terms
of its validity, it is hard to take at full
phase value right, right, or a.
Speaker 4 (05:15):
Measured quantitative study over time. Right, that's what we would
ideally need, and I think that's an important point also, Matt,
for a hot second there, I thought you were going
to say, because these are anecdotal posts on Reddit informing
a significant piece of this article. Were those posts written
by chat gpt itself?
Speaker 3 (05:37):
You know what I mean?
Speaker 6 (05:38):
Oh yeah, how would you bias there?
Speaker 3 (05:40):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (05:42):
Yeah, it's just crazy. Anybody could make up anything at
any time, right, And if you can't confirm who said
what when and then follow all of those lines down
to what actually happened, then it didn't happen.
Speaker 4 (05:56):
The so called post truth environments, well, boy, at the
age of information.
Speaker 3 (06:00):
That's the thing.
Speaker 4 (06:01):
Yeah, we call it the age of information, but that's
kind of like again, the pursuit of happiness. No one
is called it the age of correct information, and they
haven't done that for some very good reasons. So be safe,
always treat things with a grain of salt until the
science is established. Going, we'd love to hear your thoughts
(06:23):
on that. If you are in love with what people
would call an AI bot, we want to hear your
anecdotes as well. We're going to get to so much stuff.
Here brews back in the conversation, Whoop whoop, And we're
going to talk about some rare earth stuff leading to
all too common chaos. There's a musical we're excited to
(06:45):
explore together with you. We're going to burn some trees,
and I am using that in the hip hop sense,
and we might journey to an underground city, but we'll
definitely talk about money before we do any of that.
Maybe we pause for word from our sponsors, and as
a bunch of lovers of musicals, dip our toes into
(07:05):
one of the hottest tickets in San Francisco.
Speaker 5 (07:13):
And we've returned, and we're about to burn some trees
till our eyes get holier than Swiss cheese.
Speaker 6 (07:20):
I didn't make that up, but as the Antipop Consortium,
but I think.
Speaker 5 (07:23):
It's an apt turn of phrase here talking about a
story out of turki A, how do you say it been?
Is that turky a turkey A? There you go, specifically
the Lice district of dr Bikir, where security forces apparently
burned twenty point seven tons of marrijauana cannabis in an
(07:45):
open field as part of the disposal stage of its
anti drug operations problem.
Speaker 6 (07:54):
There is the massive.
Speaker 5 (07:56):
Burn, which was done all at once, created a intoxicating
plume of smoke that drifted over to the nearby town
of Lice, which is of course inhabited by twenty five
thousand people, leaving many, according to reports, feeling high af
for days. It would seem there have been many critics
(08:20):
talking about how this is a pretty bone headed way
of going about this, to do it all at once
in such close proximity to the town and a lot
of the to your point in the beginning, Ben, there
are some really great comments on this on Reddit that
I'm going to read for a little color because I
(08:41):
think they're fantastic. But I also have found that most
of the articles I came across about this story were
kind of on like oddity type websites and then also
sort of translated Turkish media. So I just want to
make that clear and make sure all of this is
taken with a grain of salt.
Speaker 6 (08:58):
But here are kind of the facts as we have it.
Speaker 5 (08:59):
On April eighteenth, when officials burned as twenty tons or
seven hundred and sixty six kilograms six hundred and seventy
nine grams of seized cannabis worth roughly ten billion Turkish
lira or around two hundred and sixty one million US dollars.
This was this was stuff that they'd confiscated over the
(09:21):
span of a year around the area, from twenty twenty
three to twenty twenty four. And yes, this this plume
of smoke did drift reports from locals. This was just
rescribed as a local man coming from a report on
townflex dot com. The smell of drugs has been enveloping
the district for days. We cannot open our windows. Our
(09:44):
children got sick. We are constantly going to the hospital
five days. This was reported by families keeping their windows
shut and remaining indoors because of the THCHC saturated air.
A smag alert we might call it around here. Remember
it was it you, Matt, that was talking about the
(10:04):
orange smag alert and your kid thought it was a
monster called an orange smoggler?
Speaker 6 (10:08):
Did you? Was that you?
Speaker 3 (10:09):
Nope?
Speaker 5 (10:12):
Man, somebody told that story and it sounded like something
you would have said, but maybe not. Anyway, That'll always
stick with me, so in my mind it's credited to you.
Speaker 6 (10:20):
But uh, the thing that.
Speaker 5 (10:22):
Is insane to me and that I do think requires
looking out with a little bit of a grain of salt.
When I popped up this article and I'm seeing it
in a couple places, I'm seeing I see this.
Speaker 6 (10:31):
Thing that I swore was AI generated.
Speaker 5 (10:33):
It is these like burning bales of whatever you know,
flammable material, uh, taken from an aerial shot in a
in a field in the shape of the name of
the town. L I ce lice, Yeah yah yah. Ogre
who's the chairman of the Yes Sil Yielders Association, was
(10:55):
not into it.
Speaker 6 (10:56):
He had this to say.
Speaker 5 (10:57):
This was perhaps done as a preventative measure to deter
but the fact that it was destroyed in the city
center could cause serious discomfort to people due to the
smoke of burned hemp. He said, As you know, the
destruction or burning of such herbs can also cause serious intoxication,
just as tobacco harms passive smokers when used in a
(11:17):
closed area. Of the smoke released by such narcotic substances,
when disposed of, can cause serious discomfort. It can make
people drunk, dizzy, nauseated, and cause hallucinations.
Speaker 6 (11:30):
So that's yeah.
Speaker 5 (11:31):
And then I'm seeing another side shot of the of
the fire that does look like the same environment that
is pictured from above with the name of the town
spelled out.
Speaker 2 (11:41):
So I'm interested in there's a lot nol I know.
I found one that looks like an official news source
out of the country, and yeah, all it's saying is
that they burned twenty tons of the drug of drugs.
It doesn't say anything about anyone getting high, and it
(12:02):
feels like something that an Onion style article would write, right.
Speaker 5 (12:06):
I did want to mention that I know that the
numbers are correct. I've seen them repeated identically in multiple sources,
and I appreciate you finding that one, Matt.
Speaker 6 (12:17):
I'm with you, especially the spelled out thing. I mean that,
But it's.
Speaker 5 (12:20):
Also just such a niche story from like a part
of the country that doesn't make it a news for
this kind of thing a ton, you know.
Speaker 6 (12:28):
But I swear looking at.
Speaker 5 (12:29):
This life thing, it really has this the smack of
AI generated image.
Speaker 6 (12:33):
But I don't know, what do you think?
Speaker 4 (12:35):
Then there's also, you know, inevitably a bit of propaganda
here as part of the authorities. This has happened to
the United States on a smaller level.
Speaker 3 (12:44):
I remember a while back.
Speaker 4 (12:47):
Gosh a decade or so, something similar happened in Indonesia.
So as we're talking about this off air, as strange
as it may seem to have the you know, the
confiscated subs since is literally spell out the name of
the town, is it that different from the photo ops
that police and law enforcement take pictures up when they say,
(13:09):
you know, like we captured, yeah, we captured eight tons
of cocaine. Here's the picture of the seven tons of
cocaine that we confiscated.
Speaker 6 (13:18):
And called drugs on the table.
Speaker 5 (13:20):
Actually, I think is a term that you see in
cop shows a lot, where that's a big deal to
make sure you get drugs on the table so that
you can make a big show of it.
Speaker 6 (13:28):
So that's a really good point, bet.
Speaker 4 (13:30):
I mean that may be that almost certainly right seems
to be the case here. And also I love your
point about you know, it may sound silly to people
who are routine cannabis users to imagine folks having crazy
effects right from this exposure, but we have to remember
not everybody in this town is a regular cannabis and biber.
(13:54):
They didn't consent to this exposure.
Speaker 5 (13:56):
I can imagine that many of them older folks, particularly
maybe he had never touched the stuff in their life
by a choice. Perhaps it's a personal standard, you know,
and that's really messed up.
Speaker 6 (14:08):
Everything's wrong about that, no question.
Speaker 5 (14:10):
But yeah, reports of hallucinations and all of that, it
does sort of make you chuckle a little bit if you're,
you know, a weed smoker. That being said, though I
certainly have eaten the strong enough edible that can't actually
make you hallucinate a little bit if you're not careful.
And this was so dense and for such a long time,
I could imagine this could have some.
Speaker 4 (14:27):
Health effects in such a large amount too, you know
what I mean. It also would be interesting, this is overthinking,
but it would be interesting to see rates of air
conditioning in buildings, probably, I bet you will. I just
have a feeling, you know what I mean. I chat
that could play a factor there. And I want to
(14:48):
give a shout out to Dylan to your Orange small conversation.
Dylan points out that he always thought, presumably as a child, Dylan,
that the ocean undertow was a mod in the sea
named the undertoed.
Speaker 5 (15:02):
Yeah, amazing, it's exactly the same kind of thinking.
Speaker 6 (15:06):
Magical thinking. Children.
Speaker 4 (15:08):
We kicked your fused lastly for being sure when you
read the title of one of those things are mentioned
high AF. I recently read something that has shifted my
perspective on abbreviations for the better. I met someone who
said for years they thought AF didn't mean as beep,
(15:28):
but they thought it meant as foretold.
Speaker 6 (15:31):
Ah, so.
Speaker 3 (15:34):
Read every please do as a favorite.
Speaker 7 (15:36):
Folks, when you're reading stuff on the internet or text
messages and someone uses the abbreviation AF, just imagine how
much cooler it is if AF in your head stands
for as foretold.
Speaker 3 (15:47):
This taco is good as foretold, you know?
Speaker 6 (15:50):
And I learned a new one recently from the kid
and their friends.
Speaker 5 (15:53):
TS. TS is busting, TS is great. This you could
say that about a taco. TS is the best taco
I ever had. As for till a similar Yeah, no, no,
as it actually fills a similar role. I just want
to read a couple of the comments on this ridit
thread because.
Speaker 6 (16:11):
Some of them are really, really great.
Speaker 5 (16:13):
Let's see surefire Diddy says, did they not know what
happens when you light weed on fire? Here's one that
was a little more insight into it from a different
perspective to your point, Ben, Oh no, Matt, but whomever
like the idea of this being a propagandistic thing and
also being reported here in the States plenty. When I
was a little kid, my grandparents lived in central West Virginia.
(16:34):
As the story goes, someone did a little gorilla grow
in an unused field on the side of a hill.
It was at some point abandoned, so everything went to seed,
but it was still like two plus acres of cannabis
on the side of a mountain. So local law enforcement
decided to chop it all down with a thrasher, thresher
or whatever, put it.
Speaker 6 (16:50):
Into a big pile in the middle of the field,
and burn it.
Speaker 5 (16:52):
So, of course what happened is that while a lot
of seeds were destroyed, a great number of them were
lifted up into the air and spread all over the county.
My grandfather's place was a mile or two away from this,
and you would see the occasional weed plant sprouting on
the edges of his fields, and you would see them
growing on the side of the road.
Speaker 6 (17:08):
One of my favorites here.
Speaker 5 (17:10):
Is a little exchange between Rex tried decks, Rex the
trecks and pizza is Life says. I had a family
member who worked for customs, and he would tell us
about these burning events and how guys would get high,
to which Pizza's Life responded strange.
Speaker 6 (17:26):
That they only burn about one gram at.
Speaker 5 (17:28):
A time in a series of fires, aka, you know,
smoking weed.
Speaker 6 (17:34):
That's it for this one, y'all.
Speaker 5 (17:35):
If unless you have anything to add, thanks for pulling
those extra sources, Matt.
Speaker 2 (17:39):
Hey, yeah, dude, I'm still a guy. It says they
used two hundred liters the diesel fuels. Yeah, also crazy,
also insane. Well yeah, so but if you use that
much fuel to burn that.
Speaker 6 (17:50):
Much, wouldn't it just incinerate? Like well, and what is.
Speaker 2 (17:53):
Burning that fuel do to the smoke coming off of fire?
Speaker 6 (17:57):
It would make it worse.
Speaker 5 (17:59):
That's probably where the real health concerns pop in, is
this idea of these toxic chemicals being mixed in. So
not only are you getting high from the cannabis, you're
basically like huffing toxic fumes.
Speaker 2 (18:10):
Yeah, and tires that were involved as well. So it
reminds me of the burn pits that we discussed in
Iraq and Afghanistan from the military personnel.
Speaker 5 (18:21):
Well, real quickly, I'm just going to move on to
this other story. I think this is fun apparently, Luigi Mangioni.
Speaker 6 (18:29):
You know, new folk hero on trial for his life.
Speaker 5 (18:32):
I believe the state is seeking the death penalty in
his case of killing or assassinating the healthcare executive in
the streets of Manhattan is the subject now of a
satirical musical that is debuting at a small theater in
San Francisco and is already making some waves. It is
(18:53):
already sold out. And let's see Fox KTVU has you
guys gotta check this out.
Speaker 6 (19:03):
Let me just see if I can. How do I
drop an image or maybe just.
Speaker 5 (19:05):
Can you guys look at the KTVU link the image
of the courtroom scene.
Speaker 2 (19:12):
Oh that's an SNL.
Speaker 6 (19:14):
Oh that's an SNL sketch. Okay, my mistake. I haven't
seen this one. Okay, so I thought this is from
the musical.
Speaker 5 (19:18):
But it's just it's very funny, and I can see
this being rife for satire, as it has already been
the case with SNL, because it represents something big, something,
you know, larger beyond just this single event.
Speaker 6 (19:30):
There's like a cultural shift involved.
Speaker 5 (19:32):
In people out of how people view you know, healthcare,
the healthcare system and healthcare executives in such a way
that a person who literally did a murder is being
held up in this reverential way, which is is very interesting.
Speaker 6 (19:45):
So the creators of the musical, let's say it. I
was reading from the Toronto Star.
Speaker 5 (19:49):
Here first, Luigi Manjinni, the suspected healthcare CEO assassin turn
folk hero, is a subject of a new musical.
Speaker 6 (19:55):
Is that depraved or potentially brilliant? Okay? This is actually
a notpad.
Speaker 5 (19:58):
Musicals are more than just sing cats and dancing candlesticks,
rights Joshua Chong in a show like Luigi the Musical
is not unprecedented. Half a year ago, Luigimanjoni was a nobody.
Then on December ninth, twenty twenty four to the twenty
six year old Ivy League grad was thrust into the
spotlight when he was arrested at McDonald's in Pennsylvania inspective
murdering United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson days earlier in New
York City. Luigi the Musical is being described by his
(20:21):
creators as campy, surreal and funny, yet emotionally honest. It
imagines Mangione sharing a prison cell with the now convicted
tech entrepreneur Sam Benkman freed along with Sean Diddy Combs,
two people who were in fact housed in the same
his facility that Luigi was in when he was first arrested,
or maybe it was long term, I can't remember if
he got moved the American rapper accused of sex trafficking.
(20:43):
It's all predicated on the fact that, in real life,
all three men happen to be incarcerated the same facility.
Speaker 6 (20:49):
Here is a quick statement from the creators.
Speaker 5 (20:53):
Luigi the Musical is a comedy that imagines the surreal
scenario of Luigiman Janni, the man Acus of killing United
Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson, sharing a prison cell with real
life inmates. Blah blah blah, just said what I said,
same stuff. While the setup is absurd, it's also rooted
in a strange truth. These three men were indeed incarcerated
the same facility. That unlikely fact sparked our team's creative exploration.
(21:14):
The show is not a celebration of violence of any kind,
nor is it an attempt to pass judgment on an
ongoing legal matter. Our hearts go out to the family
of Brian Thompson, and we acknowledge the pain and complexity
surrounding this case. Instead, Luigi to the musical uses satire
to ask deeper cultural questions. Why did the case strike
such a chord with so many people? Why did a
figure like Luigi become a kind of folk hero in
(21:34):
certain corners of the internet. What does that say about
how we see institutions in America today? I'm on board.
If I were in San Francisco, I would love to
see this. I hope it does well. It's interesting. What
do you guys think is is it in poor taste
or does it have its hard in the right place.
Speaker 2 (21:52):
Well, it's three very interesting individuals. Yeah, simply because of
where they kind of fit inside. Yeah, what America is?
Speaker 3 (22:05):
Hm? I don't know.
Speaker 2 (22:06):
I think there's complexity there and if you've got smart
people making this thing, then I'm certainly interested.
Speaker 3 (22:12):
Yeah.
Speaker 5 (22:12):
I think the statement was very thoughtful and indicates that
they are. I don't know, Ben, what do you think?
Speaker 4 (22:16):
Yeah, fully agree, you can. I'm of the mind that
one can explore anything through art as long as it
is carried out, you know, thoughtfully and with truth at
the core of it. The thing about good satires we've
mentioned previously on this show and other appearances. Is that
(22:40):
good satire, great satire comes from a place of affection, right,
That's the reason some SNL works more, but it works
better than other sketches. But with this in mind, I
would be extremely hesitant to make any opinion of it
until I was able to actually see the play. Please
(23:00):
read the script, and you know again I'm a sucker
for a musical man, Like if you can, if you
can take the take the most boring concept possible, like
the history of beij Paint, and you hit me with
a couple of songs in a three acts structure that.
Speaker 3 (23:20):
I'm on board. You know what I mean.
Speaker 4 (23:22):
I don't even need to know who's in the cast,
just you know, keep it going with the music.
Speaker 6 (23:27):
Paint drying the musical. It can be done well.
Speaker 2 (23:30):
I think the book in the Book of Mormon is
the perfect example of that kind of thing, where it's like,
take a concept that is very complex, sounds boring a
little bit on the surface, and then you can write
some songs. As you said, Ben Boom.
Speaker 4 (23:44):
There's a musical entirely about corn and there's a c
O RN which is a bit of a missed opportunity,
but you can see selections from that musical at their
tiny Desk concert. Well, i'd say watch the tidy desk
before you pody up for the increasingly expensive tickets.
Speaker 6 (24:04):
It's true.
Speaker 5 (24:05):
I just want to end with just saying that I
have re gained my love of musicals over the past
handful of years, and every time, most times I get
to go to New York, I try to catch something,
and I've seen some really wonderful stuff lately.
Speaker 6 (24:18):
And I'm just I'm all in. So this is right
up my street.
Speaker 5 (24:21):
I just want to end with this last part of
the statement, which I think sums everything we've said up nicely.
Speaker 6 (24:25):
We do not condone violence from the.
Speaker 5 (24:27):
Creators, sexual assault, or pedophilia in any form. This musical
effect serves as a critique of these men and the
institutions that enabled them. Our characters reflect three institutions of
modern disillusionment, healthcare, tech, and Hollywood. Each represents a pillar
of American life where public trust has eroded and where
people increasingly feel betrayed, exploited, or abandoned. By placing these
(24:48):
forces in one absurd prison cell, we're offering a mirror
to our moment. Can't be surreal and funny, but also
emotionally honest, right in line with what you.
Speaker 6 (24:56):
Were saying, Matt, the zeitgeist of it all. I'm on
board the musical. Sign me up.
Speaker 5 (25:02):
Let's take a quick break here, a word from our sponsor,
and then we'll come back with more strange news.
Speaker 2 (25:12):
And we've returned. Guys, we are jumping to a concept
that we have hammered home so many times on this show. War.
What is it good for controlling the land above natural
resource deposits?
Speaker 6 (25:27):
Okay, I think that's why it, Matt, But I appreciate
the effort. No, okay, No, it's great, dude, give you
a hard time.
Speaker 2 (25:36):
We talked about it a lot. When you go to
war in ancient times, when you go to war, you
control territory, right, You control border lands and areas that
are easier or harder to cross to get into your territory.
And as especially as industrialization began, you control territory because
(25:57):
there's stuff in the ground underneath the border.
Speaker 6 (26:00):
Right.
Speaker 2 (26:00):
That's it, full stop. And the reason why big countries
go to war to control stuff, if it's not part
of some bigger ideological thing, it's probably because there's good
stuff in them lands and you got to get it out. Uh, well,
we got some news for you, comes to us from
Andrew Roth at the Guardian. On May first, US and
(26:22):
Ukraine signed minerals deal that solidifies investment in Kiev's defense
against Russia. So what does that mean?
Speaker 5 (26:30):
This is the thing that was the big kerfuffle in
that really bad meeting at the White House, well a series,
but the public one where like basically, you know, they've
shamed him very bad. What's his name, sorry, the presidency
ka Zelenski. It was you know, more or less humiliated
on public television.
Speaker 6 (26:47):
And it was about that.
Speaker 2 (26:49):
That was part of it. That was part of the
art of the deal, if you will, if you say,
it's a publicly humiliate guy into making him capitulate to
the ridiculous rules that are set out in the deal
that you initially slide across the table that they did
not compet relate to that. What came out of all
of that stuff post Vatican, you know, trip for both
(27:09):
Trump and the leader of Ukraine and you know, hanging
out at the funeral of the Pope and all of
the other stuff, there is now a new deal that
is officially signed by all parties. And here's here's why.
It's important. Ukraine holds around five percent of the world's
mineral resources and rare earth metals, but many of those
(27:30):
deposits have yet to be explored. So actually sending teams
out there to drill down a little bit to figure
out exactly how much of said resource is in that place,
you know, due to the scans that are done by
these large private companies to figure out where actual minerals are.
A ton of those resources haven't They haven't even been started,
(27:50):
right if you imagine a big mining operation or something
like that. They're just sitting out there in the land.
So this deal, this huge deal that has been signed
between the United States and Ukraine to quote share profits
and royalties from the quote future sale of Ukrainian minerals
and rare earths is a big deal. It means that
(28:11):
the US is going to start to get its money
back that it has been spending on, what do we say,
bolstering the defense that that Ukraine has against the invasion
of Russia, sure to the tune of one hundred and
seventy five billion dollars. Yeah, and allegedly this money is
(28:32):
going to be repaid basically on a fifty to fifty basis.
So for every dollar, let's say, of resources that's extracted,
the United States gets fifty cents of that, and then
Ukraine gets fifty cents of that. They also say that
the United States and Ukraine are going to share fifty
to fifty responsibility for this new fund that is being created.
(28:54):
It's a like it's called the US Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund,
which sounds lovely. And this is just this weird thing,
you guys of the United States providing support or any
country providing support for another country, right, and then eventually
somebody comes along and says, hey, we're gonna need you
(29:15):
to pay a little bit of that back. You know,
actually all of it, maybe with some interest. We did
help you out in a time of need. So how
about them resources.
Speaker 6 (29:25):
Let's get at them, let me at them.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
Well, I mean, it is because a country that is
at war can't just sit there and pay a bunch
of money back to somebody who's helping them out. But
what they can do is sign agreements for future repayment.
Something the United States.
Speaker 3 (29:42):
Did lend lease for instance.
Speaker 2 (29:44):
Mm hmm. It's something that every country has, well not
every country and that's been at war has done. But
many countries who find themselves in that state of active
war have done that, requested aid and then sign something
for future repayments.
Speaker 6 (29:57):
Of signing away your future as a country.
Speaker 3 (30:01):
In some ways.
Speaker 4 (30:02):
In other ways, it may not be a hard resource,
but it could be something like membership in a regional group.
It could also be things like other economic concessions, like
we will allow insert corporation here to act in the
following way. You know, that's a that's a snake that
(30:24):
can bite you back, because sometimes not all the time,
but sometimes those countries, those companies end up functioning like
state powers within those countries that had to open their door.
Speaker 5 (30:36):
Does it not seem like since this went down that
Trump softened his position a little bit on like you know,
the selective truth of Ukraine started the war, you know,
and he seems a little less outwardly pro putin, like
now that he's gotten what he wanted, does it maybe
seem like maybe a lot of that rhetoric was just
(30:57):
a bargaining tactic or like a way of applying pressure
like it once did he present them a bill I'm
just wanting like that's all I'm a going back, yeah,
going back to my other linguistic note, which I think
is apropos here.
Speaker 4 (31:10):
The art of the deal never promises the art of
the good deal. It's just like, here's the wack of
do stuff I say here. You know here, we've talked
about the strategy before. It's it's not unique to your
to your point, Nol, I think it is objective for
us to acknowledge that this quid pro quo kind of
(31:34):
stuff occurs, as Matt was saying, throughout history.
Speaker 3 (31:39):
It's not.
Speaker 4 (31:41):
Always maybe this blatant or this public. And there are
a ton of factors following into that. The idea of
softening the stance could come from any number of other
intervening variables. But I am fairly certain this plays some
sort of role. I think the more under the surface here,
(32:01):
but this plays some sort of role. And we can
see this even in little like light work stuff. The
map that from the Guardian article you shared there, Matt,
You'll will notice if you scroll down there's a bevy
of different precious minerals, rare earth, and then just you know,
cool stuff that it's nice for a country to have,
(32:24):
and some of the stuff that is mapped out, and
maybe part of this deal is technically controlled by Russia
right now.
Speaker 2 (32:31):
Yes, exactly exactly, and this investment would provide an economic
incentive for the US to continue investment in Ukraine's defense
and reconstruction. And the thought there, I believe that maybe
wouldn't be stated outwardly, is that hopefully we get control
of all of those resources and not just the ones
that Ukraine currently controls.
Speaker 4 (32:54):
Right, and then the idea also be I mean, it's inescapable.
We have to mention the badger in the bag here
as tensions rise with China, which has vast control over
a lot of very important minerals that are key to.
Speaker 3 (33:10):
Every industry.
Speaker 4 (33:11):
Right, as China and the US have these tensions rising,
the US desperately needs to find alternative sourcing for stuff
that will continue to keep the war machine rolling.
Speaker 2 (33:23):
Yep yup, yup, yup. And as Ukraine's first Deputy Prime
Minister sciri Enko excuse me said, it is quote the
Ukrainian state that determines where and what to extract at
all times. So Ukraine's feeling good about the partnership, the
US is feeling good, like great probably about the partnership.
(33:44):
And we'll see where this goes. But guys, we got
to move forward to Kentucky. Something very very important has
happened in Florida to a Kentucky man. Okay, a gentleman
at the cool age of fifty, mister James Farthing won
the dang powerball. You guys, holy crap. Nicely it was
(34:04):
at an estimated one hundred and sixty seven million dollars bail.
That's lovely, Come on, you won the lottery. Let's go.
But as we've talked about, the lottery is a fickle thing.
Strings right, the lottery is a strange thing. Your luck
is tremendous in one moment. What happens if it if
(34:25):
it pivots back the other way so rapidly that your
neck breaks. Well, on Monday, April twenty eighth, mister Jim,
mister James Farthing went and collected the money, or he
signed the paperwork to collect all of the money. And
he began his journey as a now one hundred and
sixty twelve let's say, one hundred millionaire, almost maybe around.
Speaker 6 (34:48):
That much after you take all all the taxes and everything.
Speaker 2 (34:52):
Then on Wednesday, April thirtieth, this this, this poor man
was arrested on charges of battery of a law enforcement officer.
Battery and resisting an officer without violence isn't that interesting
without violence? But he also battered an officer, but he
did it without violence somehow, just the thought that, well, no,
(35:15):
he got into a fight with somebody at this place
called Island Grand at Trade Winds in Saint Pete Beach, Florida,
and then as he was in this fight, several people
came to try and break it up. Some of them
were from the Panelas County Police Department or I guess, yeah,
they were deputies, so maybe it was a sheriff's department.
But he ended up kicking one of them in the
face as he was just having this little altercation with
(35:37):
another person. He tried to flee, but he got booked
into jail right after winning one hundred and sixty seven
million dollars. Damn, just to say luck can change, right?
What is luck? Is there?
Speaker 6 (35:50):
Luck?
Speaker 2 (35:51):
Who knows? And we're just talking about all this stuff
because it does feel as though you can be extremely
lucky in one moment and feel at the top of
the world, and youthing could come crashing down because of
one small decision and or you know, one small set
of circumstances, everything crashes down.
Speaker 6 (36:07):
It is possible.
Speaker 2 (36:08):
Right to our next story from The Independent. I'm not
going to read the title here because I feel like
every time you use the word Trump in a title
of something and you instead of saying the president or
President Trump or something like that, it puts in your
head a negative image of whatever is coming next, because
it is the term Trump is thrown around as a
(36:31):
pejorative itself, right in a weird way.
Speaker 4 (36:33):
Well, supporters also, I mean I would say it's divisive.
Speaker 2 (36:37):
Right yeah, because supporters be like, oh, Trump did this new.
But then if somebody reads that who supports the president,
they are like, ah, they just dang people, just dang
whoever writing about the president. So it's an interesting thing.
So let's just say the President to eliminate one thy
two hundred CIA positions within larger plan to shrink spy workforce.
According to a report this comes to us again from
(36:59):
The Independent. It is the concept that around five percent
of the CIA's staff will be laid out as a
part of a much larger set of cuts to the
intelligent services sector within the US. And this is all
coming down from the executive branch of the United States government.
It is only interesting to me because you know, five
(37:19):
percent of any workforce it's meaningful to the human beings
there is it truly meaningful to the overall operations of
a large behemoth, right, I.
Speaker 3 (37:30):
Mean at scales.
Speaker 4 (37:31):
Imagine if someone asked you to lose five percent of
your blood sure.
Speaker 2 (37:36):
I mean, but which wouldn't be that bad, would it?
Five percent? Yeah, we can handle five percent, let's go,
you know, but five percent of your family. Hey, we
got to take five percent of your family away, and
probably represents one human being. That would be like, oh, whoops,
we got to It would have to equate to at
least one human being or half of someone in your family.
Speaker 3 (37:56):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (37:56):
Neither of our analogies here are are I guess they're
not factoring in that the five percent is not the
department itself, the CIA itself, the agency. Not everybody has
the same job, right. So the argument for fans of
I guess cost cutting as this would be portrayed by supporters.
(38:18):
They would say, you know, look, we're cutting the fat.
We're not getting rid of anything important to your point, right,
We're firing or we're letting, we're causing redundancies for like
the three assistant accountants.
Speaker 2 (38:31):
Were right sizing. That's what we're doing. We're right sizing this.
Speaker 3 (38:34):
Putty and just truing up.
Speaker 6 (38:37):
We're truing up, yes here, but it.
Speaker 2 (38:39):
Is an interesting place to make cuts. The CIA, you know,
is looked at in a lot of different ways, but
by a lot of people in the in the national
security realms see them as a much necessary thing.
Speaker 3 (38:53):
Right.
Speaker 2 (38:54):
We need to know what others are doing outside the
US so we can know what to do from both
a public policy you know stance and you know, a
diplomatic stance, and a where do the tanks go? Since
seems pretty important. It's kind of weird. It's really weird
when you take into account the last story I'm going
to be talking about today, which is the concept of
(39:15):
reopening Alcatraz prison. This just came forward. CBS News reported
on it, a bunch of places reported on it. It's
just it seems as though it's a concept or an
idea that kind of sprung forth, I don't know, guys,
out of another thought or something, and then all of
a sudden it is supposed to happen the city. United
(39:39):
States President had the concept, Hey, we should reopen Alcatraz.
It is a symbol of law and order. We reopen
this baby. We put our most ruthless and violent people
back on Alcatraz, and the world we'll see that we
mean business when it comes to justice and law and
order and all of that stuff. The only thing is
(40:00):
have to think about this. It costs around three times
the amount of money to run Alcatraz as a prison
as it does any other What do we call those prisons, guys,
the ones that are extremely tough to get in and
out of max supermax. Yeah, like a super.
Speaker 5 (40:18):
Well, that is Alcatraz, but it is it is rock, yes,
of course, but it is just like a run like
a museum right now it says where people can take
tours to do.
Speaker 6 (40:27):
What he's asking is a tall order just for a
lot of books. And it has been into existence.
Speaker 2 (40:33):
It has been for a long time. It was a
disciplinary barracks for the US military for a long time.
Then it became a prison only until nineteen sixty three.
Then it was not a prison after that and it
hasn't been since then. We talked about it during the
time when it was occupied by what was the name
of that group, the Red Power Movement.
Speaker 4 (40:54):
There's a coalition from a Native people move Yes, yes, yes, yes,
American Indian movement.
Speaker 2 (41:00):
But that was literally a couple of years. Then after
that it's just been a place where people go and
revel in the concept that was Alcatraz and how crazy
was this? How weird is it that this was a
prison for a long time.
Speaker 5 (41:15):
You can take a pleasure cruise just past it too,
in the San Francisco Harmer Like, it's a really cool
thing to see lurking off in the distance amidst the
fog and all of that.
Speaker 4 (41:24):
Yeah, it's a big piece of history and culture as well.
And if you want to read the statement in full,
you can find excerpts of it in various media platforms
of choice. You can also, if you are so inclined,
just go to truth Social and read his statement in
full about it. Critics are saying that critics are accusing
(41:48):
the president of having watched a film and saying that
that is what informed his new decision, which seems to
to the public to have come out of the blue.
Speaker 3 (41:58):
Relatively speaking.
Speaker 5 (41:59):
I've certainly never been accused of watching a film, So
my heart goes out to the man.
Speaker 2 (42:04):
No. Well, but again, all in my mind, all that
matters is that it costs three times what it costs
to run any other prison because it's a dang islands,
because you've got to ship everything out there. It doesn't
have working water, it doesn't have working sewer as it
stands right now. Good luck to anybody who wants to
rebuild that thing. If you are gonna put that kind
(42:25):
of expense from a federal budget into you know, doing
that kind of thing. What does it say to all
of those spies, excuse me, a CIA personnel that you're
just firing, And how does that make them feel? And
we know that China, Russia and several other countries that
oppose the United States are looking for disaffected, specifically spies
(42:46):
to work with, So seems like a crazy.
Speaker 6 (42:49):
Plenty good pipeline for that.
Speaker 2 (42:50):
Seems like a dumb move to me. All right, that's
all for the segment. We'll be right back after a
word from our.
Speaker 3 (42:56):
Sponsor, and we have returned.
Speaker 4 (43:03):
We're going to move quickly through some things at the
last part of our weekly Strange News segment. Here first
to get in front of the communicates and the emails. Folks,
there's often a misconception about the CIA. When we said
not everybody does the same job in this gargantuan agency,
and it is pretty big. We have to remember that
(43:23):
the CIA provides a lot of analyst work that is
mission critical to many other agencies and not spoopy doup agencies,
not tradecraft folks. But you know, there's somebody's job to
keep track of up and coming politicians in the Philippines
or in Nepal, build a biography and a dossier on them.
(43:44):
The CIA World Factbook is not perfect, and it has
an angle, but it's one of the best go to
places for international information. Right you want to learn more
about a country, start there. And with that, the argument
is that hutting the CIA would essentially be cutting one's
(44:05):
nose despite one's face, you know what I mean with
knock on consequences. So there are a lot of questions
about money. We'd love to hear your thoughts in this regard.
There's something I think would serve as a follow up
to some episodes we've done in the past.
Speaker 1 (44:19):
Guys.
Speaker 4 (44:20):
Not too long ago, a former Bush official went public
and claimed that the US has built a twenty one
trillion dollar underground network only for the wealthy to hide
out during a near extinction event. Have you guys heard
about this sounds like fun? Do either have ping pong?
Speaker 3 (44:41):
I hope? So?
Speaker 4 (44:42):
I mean for twenty one trillion dollars, they better have
good being.
Speaker 2 (44:46):
Who said? Who said this?
Speaker 4 (44:48):
This is Catherine Austin Fitz, who worked under the first
Bush administration. You can find I think a good reputable
article on this comes from The Endependent on May fifth.
Now I was a little bit weirded out at first
because this statement was on the Tucker Carlson Show, which
(45:10):
I know is not everybody's slice the case India. But
looking into this stuff, it does seem that Fitz knows
what she's talking about. As the assistant sect of Housing
in Urban Development under H. W. Bush, she was following
money right and they It seems that with a little
(45:33):
bit of forensic accounting. If you go to a twenty
seventeen report by an economist at Michigan State University, Mark Skidmore,
you'll see Skidmore, you'll see that unauthorized spending to the
tune of twenty one trillion, largely untraceable dollars occur between
nineteen ninety eight and twenty fifteen, which means, adjusting for
(45:54):
radical inflation, that's more than twenty one trillion.
Speaker 5 (45:58):
Now mad money. It's imagine what even how do you
even quantify? I mean, I guess that's literally what you're doing,
but an amount like that, I cannot wrap my head
around it.
Speaker 4 (46:08):
Yeah, and fits claims quote we have built an extraordinary
number of underground bases and supposedly transportation systems end quote
including she claims bases beneath the ocean, so real like
Sequest stuff. If anybody remembers the show Sequest.
Speaker 2 (46:27):
China is currently building a giant under sea yes thing.
I can't find the thing I was we were going
to talk about it. It was from February, right, a
six thousand foot below the surface deep sea space station.
Speaker 5 (46:44):
Didn't we do an episode on undersea bunkers and facilities?
Or maybe it was Arctic like underneath the ice just
ringing a bell?
Speaker 3 (46:53):
You're right, you're right.
Speaker 4 (46:54):
Well we've done We've done some stuff on undersea structures
which are not as sci fi as they may sound
at first. Blush. We look to your point about Arctic structures,
hidden Arctic structures on both sides.
Speaker 6 (47:09):
Of the facilities potentially.
Speaker 3 (47:12):
Yeah, and we also know that.
Speaker 4 (47:16):
I think this is an episode in the future because
lest we be too dismissive of this story. It's important
to remember that there have been proven cases of the
government conspiring to build things like that, like the not Briarcliff.
That's a street here with its own weird history. But oh,
(47:36):
who was it we talked to, We talked to the
guy Garrett Graff, who wrote the book on perhaps so
it is called Greenbrier.
Speaker 3 (47:44):
But for a long time, this thing.
Speaker 4 (47:45):
That appeared to be just an okay, run in the
mill hotel was actually one of those hardened sites for
high level government officials and their families to survive a
nuclear event. So it's not evil that these things are
being built. And there's a real philosophical dilemma about you know,
(48:07):
the public, as taxpayers, what they do or do not
deserve to be aware of, right with how their money
is spent. But then also if they go if the
government goes public and says, yes, thank you for your
tax money, we're building these here, here, here, and here.
This is the latitude and longitude. By the way, this
is where the power in the water comes from. Let's
hope none of our enemies know how to use Wikipedia.
Speaker 3 (48:31):
You know what I mean, right too?
Speaker 6 (48:32):
Well, Okay, again long lines building. By the way, it
just keeps. I don't know, that is my quintessential.
Speaker 5 (48:37):
Like rich people bunker very like you know, high level
government officials bunker.
Speaker 2 (48:42):
When was George H.
Speaker 3 (48:44):
Choe Bush in office eighty nine to ninety three.
Speaker 2 (48:47):
Yeah, okay, he was the forty first before that, he
was CIA. That's right, So let's forget So theoretically, guys,
theoretically over thirty years of secret bunkers could have been
hanging out doing things or like as they're building them
over all of those years, right all the way up
to twenty fifteen that we talked about in that report.
(49:09):
I'm thinking if they did ever create some kind of
underwater secret places, it might account for the weird stuff
coming out of the water that the Navy keeps shooting
video of.
Speaker 6 (49:23):
Right, I don't think I know what you're talking about, Matt.
Speaker 3 (49:25):
Unidentified some merged objects or trans.
Speaker 5 (49:27):
Medium opts, of course, things that go from from flight
to under the water in like a very alarmingly fast
or just.
Speaker 3 (49:34):
Staying under the water.
Speaker 2 (49:36):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (49:36):
Such that people have all kinds of all kinds of instrumentation,
and the smartest people with the most sophisticated toys are
saying what is this.
Speaker 2 (49:47):
Well, yeah, and if that kind of tech and ability
to build under the water like that has been around
since then, you can only imagine what literally off the
books R and D is going on.
Speaker 6 (49:59):
You're totally wrong.
Speaker 4 (50:00):
Yeah, And speaking of off the books in R and D.
To get back to this, because I do think again
it's it's a good, good inspiration for an episode. The
report that Skidmore looks at, he's not, you know, he
is not, by any any measure means a wing nut.
He is an economist. He's doing forensic accounting. And his report,
(50:25):
which again looks through, looks through a lot of stuff.
He finds that the army had six point five trillion
just in twenty fifteen of something called quote unsupported adjustments,
which means money was spent and it went somewhere and
(50:46):
it was not accounting. It was not supported, means it
was not like allocated to a specific program.
Speaker 6 (50:54):
That sounds like cooking the books to me.
Speaker 3 (50:57):
It sure does.
Speaker 4 (50:58):
Given the uh this is another quote from the report.
Given the armies one hundred and twenty two billion dollar budget,
this means unsupported adjustments, we're fifty four times spending authorized
by Congress, which is insane. Yes, I think that is
the appropriate word here. So if you've been to one
(51:19):
of these underground or undersea bases, we want to hear
from you. And yes, the cool cheese cave in Missouri
counts right as you were in Timvere Pallas, right right, Yeah,
we'd love to hear that. We're not going to get
to everything today, but we are going to give a
few more teasers here. We can't leave you without a
(51:42):
dope beat to Step two, especially folks who have who
are Step two who are also super into astronomy. It
turns out caveat Asterisk maybe that astronomers may have spotted
a possible planet nine and they've done this usingta that
spans more than two decades.
Speaker 3 (52:04):
What is planet X nebrew?
Speaker 5 (52:06):
This is like it meant to be an inhabitable planet
potentially or just like a new planet.
Speaker 3 (52:10):
No, just like what the hell elliptical orbit is this
thing on?
Speaker 2 (52:15):
Well? Yeah, a planet that is tied to ag and
stuff like mind calendars.
Speaker 3 (52:24):
Astronomy.
Speaker 6 (52:25):
Wow. So okay, Yeah, if we.
Speaker 4 (52:27):
Go to tech Spot with the journalist Sky Jacobs from
just a few days ago May fifth, twenty twenty five. Again,
we're recording on the seventh, what we see is that
there's a newly identified object that has been spotted into
infrared sky surveys that may be the most significant evidence
(52:47):
ever for the elusive thing referred to as Planet nine.
Speaker 3 (52:51):
This would be.
Speaker 4 (52:54):
Object, a heavenly object about the size of Neptune, orbiting
hundreds of times further from farther excuse me, from the
Sun than from Earth.
Speaker 5 (53:04):
So how do you explain them it being recorded that
far back? Like is it a difference in the way
bodies are viewed, or like a change over time? Like
how would they have been able to see that? Are
you saying that the prediction of it was almost mystical.
Speaker 4 (53:21):
We're tying it, perhaps of a tongue in cheek to ancient,
ancient belief systems and thoughts.
Speaker 3 (53:30):
I mean it is it is technically.
Speaker 4 (53:31):
Possible that there could be some massive elliptical orbit, right
so that over time brings it brings this body, if
it exists, closer to Planet Earth and what humans could
observe in the sky at that time. But it's also
possible that it's not an elliptical orbit or not, you know,
radically elliptical, so it's just out there in a long circle. Yea,
(53:56):
and we only know about it because every so often
we a little on the infrared.
Speaker 2 (54:02):
Well, guys, I can't remember fully I remember Stitching. I
can't remembers Stitch. He's the guy that wrote the stuff
that we talked about in our video series A long
time ago. He in like the I want to say
seventies or eighties, came forward and said, Hey, there's this
(54:24):
other thing that these ancient peoples wrote about. It was
his translation though, right of the ancient writings that basically said, Hey,
this thing called Nibberu is out there and it spells
doom for.
Speaker 5 (54:36):
Earth, right because it's heading towards us or something like
The idea that Stitch it has is that, yeah, when
this thing returns, when it gets close enough, something about
its spiritual importance or something secular like just its mass
will create an extinction event.
Speaker 4 (54:55):
Sort of like how theoretically the right kind of fart
from the sign of coronal mass ejection could send humanity
back to the sarcase.
Speaker 5 (55:03):
It's because of the trajectory of that ellipse that like
at the end of it, when we catch it, it's
almost like an exponential curve that would like launch it
or something I'm sorry.
Speaker 4 (55:12):
I'm like, that's interesting, yeah, because that's similar to like
how comets have predictable point.
Speaker 6 (55:16):
And I'm wondering. It's just my mind is running wild
with this one. This is great, fascinating and terrifying.
Speaker 3 (55:21):
I love this.
Speaker 4 (55:21):
And here's here's what we'll end with. This is when
we say, when we say twenty three years of data,
what we're really looking at are too phenomenal or mission
critical gatherings that are separated by twenty.
Speaker 3 (55:39):
Three years each.
Speaker 4 (55:40):
So there are two observations that are for sure something
out there in the ink, and the fact that they
happen from two different things, from NASA's Iris Infrared Astronomical
satellite in launching in what eighty three, nineteen eighty three
and Japan's Akari satellite which was active from like two
(56:01):
thousand and six to twenty eleven. The fact that they
found this kind of stuff that they went back and
looked for the data from the NASA satellite. This is
what makes things really interesting. How strange, how fascinating would
it be if astronomers I'm sure hate to hear us
(56:23):
say this stuff just hypothetically, folks. How fascinating would it
be if some of those ancient predictions about this mysterious
other planet did have some sand to them.
Speaker 3 (56:38):
I think.
Speaker 6 (56:38):
I think it's amazing.
Speaker 3 (56:40):
I think it would be.
Speaker 4 (56:41):
So it's what we need right now as a civilization.
We also need to talk about the two hundred and
fifty federal investigations tied to the online network seven sixty four.
Speaker 3 (56:54):
Do not read that unless you have a strong stomach.
Speaker 5 (56:57):
That may be something that like unaliving, coercion kind of
ring with the rest satanic.
Speaker 4 (57:03):
Right, Yeah, yeah, using blackmail, sexual violent.
Speaker 6 (57:07):
Behavior, heinous. I remember when we talked about that originally.
Speaker 4 (57:12):
And we don't We don't have time to get into
it now, but perhaps that'll be a strange news program
in the future, maybe next week. We also want to
shout out Credit sweee for again getting fined in helping
wealthy Americans hide over four billion dollars US credit Sweeze. Yeah,
(57:33):
they got fined though, so it's okay, all right, they
did get fined less than four billion dollars, but they
did get fined.
Speaker 5 (57:40):
And they're still Sweeze and there's still Sweeze to their credit.
Speaker 4 (57:44):
Uh, So we are going to call it an evening tonight.
We're off to doctivigate. Thank you, as always so much
for tuning in. Friends and neighbors, fellow conspiracy realists, we
want to hear from you. You can find us online.
You can give us a call on the phone. You
can hit us at our good old fashioned email address.
Speaker 5 (58:00):
And also find us all over the social medias of
your choosing at the handle conspiracy Stuff where we exist
on xfka, Twitter, on YouTube with video content for your
perusing enjoyment, and on Facebook, or we have our Facebook
group Here's where it gets crazy, on Instagram and TikTok
're Conspiracy Stuff Show.
Speaker 2 (58:18):
We have a phone number. It is one eight three
three st d WYTK. When you call in, give yourself
a cool nickname and let us know within the voicemail
message if we can use your name and message on
the air. If you'd like to not use your voice
to talk to us, why not use your finger eats
send us a good old fashioned email.
Speaker 4 (58:35):
We are the entities that read every piece of correspondence
we receive. Be well aware, yet unafraid. Sometimes the void
writes back, join us here in the dark conspiracy at
iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 2 (59:04):
Stuff they Don't want 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 this stuff they don't want you to know. A
production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Hello, welcome back to the show. My name is Matt,
my name is Nol.
Speaker 3 (00:28):
They called me Ben.
Speaker 4 (00:29):
We're joined as always with our super producer Dylan the
Tennessee pal Fagan. Most importantly, you argue you are here.
That makes this the stuff they don't want you to know.
If you are tuning into our strange news program The
Evening it publishes Welcome Friends and Neighbors to May twelfth,
twenty twenty five. There's a lot of stuff going on.
(00:54):
Shout out to everybody's brand new AI fueled boyfriend or
girlfriend or what have you.
Speaker 3 (01:00):
Do you guys hear about this?
Speaker 4 (01:01):
No?
Speaker 5 (01:02):
I saw Mark Zuckerberg awkwardly defending it.
Speaker 6 (01:06):
That was about the span of it for me.
Speaker 4 (01:09):
It's weird because maybe the four of us are functioning
in a bit of an editorial or experiential bubble. Because
I personally was not I knew this was a trend,
but I was not aware about how concerned parts of
society have become about this. We won't spend too much
time on it. But if you go to an excellent
Rolling Stone article by Miles Klee, which was published May fourth,
(01:34):
just a few days before we record on May seventh,
right now, you will see this. You'll see this in
depth examination of a problem people are having. This is
the headline. People are losing loved ones to AI fueled
spiritual fantasies. It reminds me a little bit of the
(01:57):
oh gosh, the technical luminati or the tech luminary who
left Google under bad terms because he believed that they
had created sentient AI and that he was in conversations
with it. Do you guys remember that story for sure?
I still I can't remember where we all as a
(02:19):
group landed on, whether or not or I think we
got back to the old, the old bag of badgers.
How does one define sentience in the first place.
Speaker 5 (02:29):
To even define as a human? You know what it
means within our species. Results vary.
Speaker 4 (02:34):
Let's just say your mileage may very well put. The
quick skinny is this. Multiple people over the past few years,
perhaps exacerbated by the COVID lockdown, feel that they have
lost their significant others or lost some level of emotional
(02:56):
or even physical intimacy as their partner increasingly pays more
attention to an AI bought a large language model that
continually sort of big ups them and is sycophantic and
tells them what they want to hear.
Speaker 6 (03:11):
All our QAnon just saying.
Speaker 3 (03:14):
Similarly, we all have to make conspiracy.
Speaker 5 (03:17):
Yeah, No, I mean it just in terms of like
people being lonely and isolated and seeking something that they
are lacking, and sometimes they're being situations that exploit that.
And yeah, it's inevitable that we're going to have these
AI companions, but boy, oh boy, there's certain folks that
might go down a real dark rabbit hole. Have you
seen the movie Her? I actually haven't, and I have
been saving It's worth it. I know everyone loves it,
(03:38):
and I love the filmmaker obviously, just Spike Jones, but
I haven't seen that when I've been saving it, and
I think that's maybe it's a little less dystopian, but
I feel like it does get around to some stuff
about isolation and how this isn't a real relationship.
Speaker 6 (03:49):
But maybe I'm wrong.
Speaker 4 (03:50):
Correct, Yeah, I mean I think you're on the money there. No,
it's no police academy for but it deals with a
lot of the sameless spits.
Speaker 3 (03:58):
So we'll give oneline here.
Speaker 4 (04:00):
This article introduces the concept of something called chat GPT
induced psychosis.
Speaker 3 (04:08):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (04:09):
The idea is that especially people are in a vulnerable
emotional state. You know, there's a reason, yes, men are
such a common troop that they can be put in
a really bad psychological place by a large language model
that essentially worships them and talk to them.
Speaker 2 (04:31):
Look, I don't want to cast us versions at Miles
Klee and the folks over at Rolling Stone, but a
lot of the source material that they've got in this
article comes directly from Reddit threads. So just some random
Reddit comment er telling a big, long tale about how
their husband is being seduced by chat GPT. I only
worry that maybe the person writing on Reddit is exaggerating
(04:56):
a little bit or telling the.
Speaker 3 (04:57):
Story because it's anecdotal.
Speaker 2 (04:59):
Yeah, I mean, there's no way to prove any of
this stuff that.
Speaker 6 (05:02):
You said, though I'm anecdotal.
Speaker 5 (05:03):
Stuff in a properly researched piece or study is obviously valuable.
Speaker 6 (05:07):
But yeah, without any kind of.
Speaker 5 (05:09):
Barrier to entry for this kind of stuff in terms
of its validity, it is hard to take at full
phase value right, right, or a.
Speaker 4 (05:15):
Measured quantitative study over time. Right, that's what we would
ideally need, and I think that's an important point also, Matt,
for a hot second there, I thought you were going
to say, because these are anecdotal posts on Reddit informing
a significant piece of this article. Were those posts written
by chat gpt itself?
Speaker 3 (05:37):
You know what I mean?
Speaker 6 (05:38):
Oh yeah, how would you bias there?
Speaker 3 (05:40):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (05:42):
Yeah, it's just crazy. Anybody could make up anything at
any time, right, And if you can't confirm who said
what when and then follow all of those lines down
to what actually happened, then it didn't happen.
Speaker 4 (05:56):
The so called post truth environments, well, boy, at the
age of information.
Speaker 3 (06:00):
That's the thing.
Speaker 4 (06:01):
Yeah, we call it the age of information, but that's
kind of like again, the pursuit of happiness. No one
is called it the age of correct information, and they
haven't done that for some very good reasons. So be safe,
always treat things with a grain of salt until the
science is established. Going, we'd love to hear your thoughts
(06:23):
on that. If you are in love with what people
would call an AI bot, we want to hear your
anecdotes as well. We're going to get to so much stuff.
Here brews back in the conversation, Whoop whoop, And we're
going to talk about some rare earth stuff leading to
all too common chaos. There's a musical we're excited to
(06:45):
explore together with you. We're going to burn some trees,
and I am using that in the hip hop sense,
and we might journey to an underground city, but we'll
definitely talk about money before we do any of that.
Maybe we pause for word from our sponsors, and as
a bunch of lovers of musicals, dip our toes into
(07:05):
one of the hottest tickets in San Francisco.
Speaker 5 (07:13):
And we've returned, and we're about to burn some trees
till our eyes get holier than Swiss cheese.
Speaker 6 (07:20):
I didn't make that up, but as the Antipop Consortium,
but I think.
Speaker 5 (07:23):
It's an apt turn of phrase here talking about a
story out of turki A, how do you say it been?
Is that turky a turkey A? There you go, specifically
the Lice district of dr Bikir, where security forces apparently
burned twenty point seven tons of marrijauana cannabis in an
(07:45):
open field as part of the disposal stage of its
anti drug operations problem.
Speaker 6 (07:54):
There is the massive.
Speaker 5 (07:56):
Burn, which was done all at once, created a intoxicating
plume of smoke that drifted over to the nearby town
of Lice, which is of course inhabited by twenty five
thousand people, leaving many, according to reports, feeling high af
for days. It would seem there have been many critics
(08:20):
talking about how this is a pretty bone headed way
of going about this, to do it all at once
in such close proximity to the town and a lot
of the to your point in the beginning, Ben, there
are some really great comments on this on Reddit that
I'm going to read for a little color because I
(08:41):
think they're fantastic. But I also have found that most
of the articles I came across about this story were
kind of on like oddity type websites and then also
sort of translated Turkish media. So I just want to
make that clear and make sure all of this is
taken with a grain of salt.
Speaker 6 (08:58):
But here are kind of the facts as we have it.
Speaker 5 (08:59):
On April eighteenth, when officials burned as twenty tons or
seven hundred and sixty six kilograms six hundred and seventy
nine grams of seized cannabis worth roughly ten billion Turkish
lira or around two hundred and sixty one million US dollars.
This was this was stuff that they'd confiscated over the
(09:21):
span of a year around the area, from twenty twenty
three to twenty twenty four. And yes, this this plume
of smoke did drift reports from locals. This was just
rescribed as a local man coming from a report on
townflex dot com. The smell of drugs has been enveloping
the district for days. We cannot open our windows. Our
(09:44):
children got sick. We are constantly going to the hospital
five days. This was reported by families keeping their windows
shut and remaining indoors because of the THCHC saturated air.
A smag alert we might call it around here. Remember
it was it you, Matt, that was talking about the
(10:04):
orange smag alert and your kid thought it was a
monster called an orange smoggler?
Speaker 6 (10:08):
Did you? Was that you?
Speaker 3 (10:09):
Nope?
Speaker 5 (10:12):
Man, somebody told that story and it sounded like something
you would have said, but maybe not. Anyway, That'll always
stick with me, so in my mind it's credited to you.
Speaker 6 (10:20):
But uh, the thing that.
Speaker 5 (10:22):
Is insane to me and that I do think requires
looking out with a little bit of a grain of salt.
When I popped up this article and I'm seeing it
in a couple places, I'm seeing I see this.
Speaker 6 (10:31):
Thing that I swore was AI generated.
Speaker 5 (10:33):
It is these like burning bales of whatever you know,
flammable material, uh, taken from an aerial shot in a
in a field in the shape of the name of
the town. L I ce lice, Yeah yah yah. Ogre
who's the chairman of the Yes Sil Yielders Association, was
(10:55):
not into it.
Speaker 6 (10:56):
He had this to say.
Speaker 5 (10:57):
This was perhaps done as a preventative measure to deter
but the fact that it was destroyed in the city
center could cause serious discomfort to people due to the
smoke of burned hemp. He said, As you know, the
destruction or burning of such herbs can also cause serious intoxication,
just as tobacco harms passive smokers when used in a
(11:17):
closed area. Of the smoke released by such narcotic substances,
when disposed of, can cause serious discomfort. It can make
people drunk, dizzy, nauseated, and cause hallucinations.
Speaker 6 (11:30):
So that's yeah.
Speaker 5 (11:31):
And then I'm seeing another side shot of the of
the fire that does look like the same environment that
is pictured from above with the name of the town
spelled out.
Speaker 2 (11:41):
So I'm interested in there's a lot nol I know.
I found one that looks like an official news source
out of the country, and yeah, all it's saying is
that they burned twenty tons of the drug of drugs.
It doesn't say anything about anyone getting high, and it
(12:02):
feels like something that an Onion style article would write, right.
Speaker 5 (12:06):
I did want to mention that I know that the
numbers are correct. I've seen them repeated identically in multiple sources,
and I appreciate you finding that one, Matt.
Speaker 6 (12:17):
I'm with you, especially the spelled out thing. I mean that,
But it's.
Speaker 5 (12:20):
Also just such a niche story from like a part
of the country that doesn't make it a news for
this kind of thing a ton, you know.
Speaker 6 (12:28):
But I swear looking at.
Speaker 5 (12:29):
This life thing, it really has this the smack of
AI generated image.
Speaker 6 (12:33):
But I don't know, what do you think?
Speaker 4 (12:35):
Then there's also, you know, inevitably a bit of propaganda
here as part of the authorities. This has happened to
the United States on a smaller level.
Speaker 3 (12:44):
I remember a while back.
Speaker 4 (12:47):
Gosh a decade or so, something similar happened in Indonesia.
So as we're talking about this off air, as strange
as it may seem to have the you know, the
confiscated subs since is literally spell out the name of
the town, is it that different from the photo ops
that police and law enforcement take pictures up when they say,
(13:09):
you know, like we captured, yeah, we captured eight tons
of cocaine. Here's the picture of the seven tons of
cocaine that we confiscated.
Speaker 6 (13:18):
And called drugs on the table.
Speaker 5 (13:20):
Actually, I think is a term that you see in
cop shows a lot, where that's a big deal to
make sure you get drugs on the table so that
you can make a big show of it.
Speaker 6 (13:28):
So that's a really good point, bet.
Speaker 4 (13:30):
I mean that may be that almost certainly right seems
to be the case here. And also I love your
point about you know, it may sound silly to people
who are routine cannabis users to imagine folks having crazy
effects right from this exposure, but we have to remember
not everybody in this town is a regular cannabis and biber.
(13:54):
They didn't consent to this exposure.
Speaker 5 (13:56):
I can imagine that many of them older folks, particularly
maybe he had never touched the stuff in their life
by a choice. Perhaps it's a personal standard, you know,
and that's really messed up.
Speaker 6 (14:08):
Everything's wrong about that, no question.
Speaker 5 (14:10):
But yeah, reports of hallucinations and all of that, it
does sort of make you chuckle a little bit if you're,
you know, a weed smoker. That being said, though I
certainly have eaten the strong enough edible that can't actually
make you hallucinate a little bit if you're not careful.
And this was so dense and for such a long time,
I could imagine this could have some.
Speaker 4 (14:27):
Health effects in such a large amount too, you know
what I mean. It also would be interesting, this is overthinking,
but it would be interesting to see rates of air
conditioning in buildings, probably, I bet you will. I just
have a feeling, you know what I mean. I chat
that could play a factor there. And I want to
(14:48):
give a shout out to Dylan to your Orange small conversation.
Dylan points out that he always thought, presumably as a child, Dylan,
that the ocean undertow was a mod in the sea
named the undertoed.
Speaker 5 (15:02):
Yeah, amazing, it's exactly the same kind of thinking.
Speaker 6 (15:06):
Magical thinking. Children.
Speaker 4 (15:08):
We kicked your fused lastly for being sure when you
read the title of one of those things are mentioned
high AF. I recently read something that has shifted my
perspective on abbreviations for the better. I met someone who
said for years they thought AF didn't mean as beep,
(15:28):
but they thought it meant as foretold.
Speaker 6 (15:31):
Ah, so.
Speaker 3 (15:34):
Read every please do as a favorite.
Speaker 7 (15:36):
Folks, when you're reading stuff on the internet or text
messages and someone uses the abbreviation AF, just imagine how
much cooler it is if AF in your head stands
for as foretold.
Speaker 3 (15:47):
This taco is good as foretold, you know?
Speaker 6 (15:50):
And I learned a new one recently from the kid
and their friends.
Speaker 5 (15:53):
TS. TS is busting, TS is great. This you could
say that about a taco. TS is the best taco
I ever had. As for till a similar Yeah, no, no,
as it actually fills a similar role. I just want
to read a couple of the comments on this ridit
thread because.
Speaker 6 (16:11):
Some of them are really, really great.
Speaker 5 (16:13):
Let's see surefire Diddy says, did they not know what
happens when you light weed on fire? Here's one that
was a little more insight into it from a different
perspective to your point, Ben, Oh no, Matt, but whomever
like the idea of this being a propagandistic thing and
also being reported here in the States plenty. When I
was a little kid, my grandparents lived in central West Virginia.
(16:34):
As the story goes, someone did a little gorilla grow
in an unused field on the side of a hill.
It was at some point abandoned, so everything went to seed,
but it was still like two plus acres of cannabis
on the side of a mountain. So local law enforcement
decided to chop it all down with a thrasher, thresher
or whatever, put it.
Speaker 6 (16:50):
Into a big pile in the middle of the field,
and burn it.
Speaker 5 (16:52):
So, of course what happened is that while a lot
of seeds were destroyed, a great number of them were
lifted up into the air and spread all over the county.
My grandfather's place was a mile or two away from this,
and you would see the occasional weed plant sprouting on
the edges of his fields, and you would see them
growing on the side of the road.
Speaker 6 (17:08):
One of my favorites here.
Speaker 5 (17:10):
Is a little exchange between Rex tried decks, Rex the
trecks and pizza is Life says. I had a family
member who worked for customs, and he would tell us
about these burning events and how guys would get high,
to which Pizza's Life responded strange.
Speaker 6 (17:26):
That they only burn about one gram at.
Speaker 5 (17:28):
A time in a series of fires, aka, you know,
smoking weed.
Speaker 6 (17:34):
That's it for this one, y'all.
Speaker 5 (17:35):
If unless you have anything to add, thanks for pulling
those extra sources, Matt.
Speaker 2 (17:39):
Hey, yeah, dude, I'm still a guy. It says they
used two hundred liters the diesel fuels. Yeah, also crazy,
also insane. Well yeah, so but if you use that
much fuel to burn that.
Speaker 6 (17:50):
Much, wouldn't it just incinerate? Like well, and what is.
Speaker 2 (17:53):
Burning that fuel do to the smoke coming off of fire?
Speaker 6 (17:57):
It would make it worse.
Speaker 5 (17:59):
That's probably where the real health concerns pop in, is
this idea of these toxic chemicals being mixed in. So
not only are you getting high from the cannabis, you're
basically like huffing toxic fumes.
Speaker 2 (18:10):
Yeah, and tires that were involved as well. So it
reminds me of the burn pits that we discussed in
Iraq and Afghanistan from the military personnel.
Speaker 5 (18:21):
Well, real quickly, I'm just going to move on to
this other story. I think this is fun apparently, Luigi Mangioni.
Speaker 6 (18:29):
You know, new folk hero on trial for his life.
Speaker 5 (18:32):
I believe the state is seeking the death penalty in
his case of killing or assassinating the healthcare executive in
the streets of Manhattan is the subject now of a
satirical musical that is debuting at a small theater in
San Francisco and is already making some waves. It is
(18:53):
already sold out. And let's see Fox KTVU has you
guys gotta check this out.
Speaker 6 (19:03):
Let me just see if I can. How do I
drop an image or maybe just.
Speaker 5 (19:05):
Can you guys look at the KTVU link the image
of the courtroom scene.
Speaker 2 (19:12):
Oh that's an SNL.
Speaker 6 (19:14):
Oh that's an SNL sketch. Okay, my mistake. I haven't
seen this one. Okay, so I thought this is from
the musical.
Speaker 5 (19:18):
But it's just it's very funny, and I can see
this being rife for satire, as it has already been
the case with SNL, because it represents something big, something,
you know, larger beyond just this single event.
Speaker 6 (19:30):
There's like a cultural shift involved.
Speaker 5 (19:32):
In people out of how people view you know, healthcare,
the healthcare system and healthcare executives in such a way
that a person who literally did a murder is being
held up in this reverential way, which is is very interesting.
Speaker 6 (19:45):
So the creators of the musical, let's say it. I
was reading from the Toronto Star.
Speaker 5 (19:49):
Here first, Luigi Manjinni, the suspected healthcare CEO assassin turn
folk hero, is a subject of a new musical.
Speaker 6 (19:55):
Is that depraved or potentially brilliant? Okay? This is actually
a notpad.
Speaker 5 (19:58):
Musicals are more than just sing cats and dancing candlesticks,
rights Joshua Chong in a show like Luigi the Musical
is not unprecedented. Half a year ago, Luigimanjoni was a nobody.
Then on December ninth, twenty twenty four to the twenty
six year old Ivy League grad was thrust into the
spotlight when he was arrested at McDonald's in Pennsylvania inspective
murdering United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson days earlier in New
York City. Luigi the Musical is being described by his
(20:21):
creators as campy, surreal and funny, yet emotionally honest. It
imagines Mangione sharing a prison cell with the now convicted
tech entrepreneur Sam Benkman freed along with Sean Diddy Combs,
two people who were in fact housed in the same
his facility that Luigi was in when he was first arrested,
or maybe it was long term, I can't remember if
he got moved the American rapper accused of sex trafficking.
(20:43):
It's all predicated on the fact that, in real life,
all three men happen to be incarcerated the same facility.
Speaker 6 (20:49):
Here is a quick statement from the creators.
Speaker 5 (20:53):
Luigi the Musical is a comedy that imagines the surreal
scenario of Luigiman Janni, the man Acus of killing United
Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson, sharing a prison cell with real
life inmates. Blah blah blah, just said what I said,
same stuff. While the setup is absurd, it's also rooted
in a strange truth. These three men were indeed incarcerated
the same facility. That unlikely fact sparked our team's creative exploration.
(21:14):
The show is not a celebration of violence of any kind,
nor is it an attempt to pass judgment on an
ongoing legal matter. Our hearts go out to the family
of Brian Thompson, and we acknowledge the pain and complexity
surrounding this case. Instead, Luigi to the musical uses satire
to ask deeper cultural questions. Why did the case strike
such a chord with so many people? Why did a
figure like Luigi become a kind of folk hero in
(21:34):
certain corners of the internet. What does that say about
how we see institutions in America today? I'm on board.
If I were in San Francisco, I would love to
see this. I hope it does well. It's interesting. What
do you guys think is is it in poor taste
or does it have its hard in the right place.
Speaker 2 (21:52):
Well, it's three very interesting individuals. Yeah, simply because of
where they kind of fit inside. Yeah, what America is?
Speaker 3 (22:05):
Hm? I don't know.
Speaker 2 (22:06):
I think there's complexity there and if you've got smart
people making this thing, then I'm certainly interested.
Speaker 3 (22:12):
Yeah.
Speaker 5 (22:12):
I think the statement was very thoughtful and indicates that
they are. I don't know, Ben, what do you think?
Speaker 4 (22:16):
Yeah, fully agree, you can. I'm of the mind that
one can explore anything through art as long as it
is carried out, you know, thoughtfully and with truth at
the core of it. The thing about good satires we've
mentioned previously on this show and other appearances. Is that
(22:40):
good satire, great satire comes from a place of affection, right,
That's the reason some SNL works more, but it works
better than other sketches. But with this in mind, I
would be extremely hesitant to make any opinion of it
until I was able to actually see the play. Please
(23:00):
read the script, and you know again I'm a sucker
for a musical man, Like if you can, if you
can take the take the most boring concept possible, like
the history of beij Paint, and you hit me with
a couple of songs in a three acts structure that.
Speaker 3 (23:20):
I'm on board. You know what I mean.
Speaker 4 (23:22):
I don't even need to know who's in the cast,
just you know, keep it going with the music.
Speaker 6 (23:27):
Paint drying the musical. It can be done well.
Speaker 2 (23:30):
I think the book in the Book of Mormon is
the perfect example of that kind of thing, where it's like,
take a concept that is very complex, sounds boring a
little bit on the surface, and then you can write
some songs. As you said, Ben Boom.
Speaker 4 (23:44):
There's a musical entirely about corn and there's a c
O RN which is a bit of a missed opportunity,
but you can see selections from that musical at their
tiny Desk concert. Well, i'd say watch the tidy desk
before you pody up for the increasingly expensive tickets.
Speaker 6 (24:04):
It's true.
Speaker 5 (24:05):
I just want to end with just saying that I
have re gained my love of musicals over the past
handful of years, and every time, most times I get
to go to New York, I try to catch something,
and I've seen some really wonderful stuff lately.
Speaker 6 (24:18):
And I'm just I'm all in. So this is right
up my street.
Speaker 5 (24:21):
I just want to end with this last part of
the statement, which I think sums everything we've said up nicely.
Speaker 6 (24:25):
We do not condone violence from the.
Speaker 5 (24:27):
Creators, sexual assault, or pedophilia in any form. This musical
effect serves as a critique of these men and the
institutions that enabled them. Our characters reflect three institutions of
modern disillusionment, healthcare, tech, and Hollywood. Each represents a pillar
of American life where public trust has eroded and where
people increasingly feel betrayed, exploited, or abandoned. By placing these
(24:48):
forces in one absurd prison cell, we're offering a mirror
to our moment. Can't be surreal and funny, but also
emotionally honest, right in line with what you.
Speaker 6 (24:56):
Were saying, Matt, the zeitgeist of it all. I'm on
board the musical. Sign me up.
Speaker 5 (25:02):
Let's take a quick break here, a word from our sponsor,
and then we'll come back with more strange news.
Speaker 2 (25:12):
And we've returned. Guys, we are jumping to a concept
that we have hammered home so many times on this show. War.
What is it good for controlling the land above natural
resource deposits?
Speaker 6 (25:27):
Okay, I think that's why it, Matt, But I appreciate
the effort. No, okay, No, it's great, dude, give you
a hard time.
Speaker 2 (25:36):
We talked about it a lot. When you go to
war in ancient times, when you go to war, you
control territory, right, You control border lands and areas that
are easier or harder to cross to get into your territory.
And as especially as industrialization began, you control territory because
(25:57):
there's stuff in the ground underneath the border.
Speaker 6 (26:00):
Right.
Speaker 2 (26:00):
That's it, full stop. And the reason why big countries
go to war to control stuff, if it's not part
of some bigger ideological thing, it's probably because there's good
stuff in them lands and you got to get it out. Uh, well,
we got some news for you, comes to us from
Andrew Roth at the Guardian. On May first, US and
(26:22):
Ukraine signed minerals deal that solidifies investment in Kiev's defense
against Russia. So what does that mean?
Speaker 5 (26:30):
This is the thing that was the big kerfuffle in
that really bad meeting at the White House, well a series,
but the public one where like basically, you know, they've
shamed him very bad. What's his name, sorry, the presidency
ka Zelenski. It was you know, more or less humiliated
on public television.
Speaker 6 (26:47):
And it was about that.
Speaker 2 (26:49):
That was part of it. That was part of the
art of the deal, if you will, if you say,
it's a publicly humiliate guy into making him capitulate to
the ridiculous rules that are set out in the deal
that you initially slide across the table that they did
not compet relate to that. What came out of all
of that stuff post Vatican, you know, trip for both
(27:09):
Trump and the leader of Ukraine and you know, hanging
out at the funeral of the Pope and all of
the other stuff, there is now a new deal that
is officially signed by all parties. And here's here's why.
It's important. Ukraine holds around five percent of the world's
mineral resources and rare earth metals, but many of those
(27:30):
deposits have yet to be explored. So actually sending teams
out there to drill down a little bit to figure
out exactly how much of said resource is in that place,
you know, due to the scans that are done by
these large private companies to figure out where actual minerals are.
A ton of those resources haven't They haven't even been started,
(27:50):
right if you imagine a big mining operation or something
like that. They're just sitting out there in the land.
So this deal, this huge deal that has been signed
between the United States and Ukraine to quote share profits
and royalties from the quote future sale of Ukrainian minerals
and rare earths is a big deal. It means that
(28:11):
the US is going to start to get its money
back that it has been spending on, what do we say,
bolstering the defense that that Ukraine has against the invasion
of Russia, sure to the tune of one hundred and
seventy five billion dollars. Yeah, and allegedly this money is
(28:32):
going to be repaid basically on a fifty to fifty basis.
So for every dollar, let's say, of resources that's extracted,
the United States gets fifty cents of that, and then
Ukraine gets fifty cents of that. They also say that
the United States and Ukraine are going to share fifty
to fifty responsibility for this new fund that is being created.
(28:54):
It's a like it's called the US Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund,
which sounds lovely. And this is just this weird thing,
you guys of the United States providing support or any
country providing support for another country, right, and then eventually
somebody comes along and says, hey, we're gonna need you
(29:15):
to pay a little bit of that back. You know,
actually all of it, maybe with some interest. We did
help you out in a time of need. So how
about them resources.
Speaker 6 (29:25):
Let's get at them, let me at them.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
Well, I mean, it is because a country that is
at war can't just sit there and pay a bunch
of money back to somebody who's helping them out. But
what they can do is sign agreements for future repayment.
Something the United States.
Speaker 3 (29:42):
Did lend lease for instance.
Speaker 2 (29:44):
Mm hmm. It's something that every country has, well not
every country and that's been at war has done. But
many countries who find themselves in that state of active
war have done that, requested aid and then sign something
for future repayments.
Speaker 6 (29:57):
Of signing away your future as a country.
Speaker 3 (30:01):
In some ways.
Speaker 4 (30:02):
In other ways, it may not be a hard resource,
but it could be something like membership in a regional group.
It could also be things like other economic concessions, like
we will allow insert corporation here to act in the
following way. You know, that's a that's a snake that
(30:24):
can bite you back, because sometimes not all the time,
but sometimes those countries, those companies end up functioning like
state powers within those countries that had to open their door.
Speaker 5 (30:36):
Does it not seem like since this went down that
Trump softened his position a little bit on like you know,
the selective truth of Ukraine started the war, you know,
and he seems a little less outwardly pro putin, like
now that he's gotten what he wanted, does it maybe
seem like maybe a lot of that rhetoric was just
(30:57):
a bargaining tactic or like a way of applying pressure
like it once did he present them a bill I'm
just wanting like that's all I'm a going back, yeah,
going back to my other linguistic note, which I think
is apropos here.
Speaker 4 (31:10):
The art of the deal never promises the art of
the good deal. It's just like, here's the wack of
do stuff I say here. You know here, we've talked
about the strategy before. It's it's not unique to your
to your point, Nol, I think it is objective for
us to acknowledge that this quid pro quo kind of
(31:34):
stuff occurs, as Matt was saying, throughout history.
Speaker 3 (31:39):
It's not.
Speaker 4 (31:41):
Always maybe this blatant or this public. And there are
a ton of factors following into that. The idea of
softening the stance could come from any number of other
intervening variables. But I am fairly certain this plays some
sort of role. I think the more under the surface here,
(32:01):
but this plays some sort of role. And we can
see this even in little like light work stuff. The
map that from the Guardian article you shared there, Matt,
You'll will notice if you scroll down there's a bevy
of different precious minerals, rare earth, and then just you know,
cool stuff that it's nice for a country to have,
(32:24):
and some of the stuff that is mapped out, and
maybe part of this deal is technically controlled by Russia
right now.
Speaker 2 (32:31):
Yes, exactly exactly, and this investment would provide an economic
incentive for the US to continue investment in Ukraine's defense
and reconstruction. And the thought there, I believe that maybe
wouldn't be stated outwardly, is that hopefully we get control
of all of those resources and not just the ones
that Ukraine currently controls.
Speaker 4 (32:54):
Right, and then the idea also be I mean, it's inescapable.
We have to mention the badger in the bag here
as tensions rise with China, which has vast control over
a lot of very important minerals that are key to.
Speaker 3 (33:10):
Every industry.
Speaker 4 (33:11):
Right, as China and the US have these tensions rising,
the US desperately needs to find alternative sourcing for stuff
that will continue to keep the war machine rolling.
Speaker 2 (33:23):
Yep yup, yup, yup. And as Ukraine's first Deputy Prime
Minister sciri Enko excuse me said, it is quote the
Ukrainian state that determines where and what to extract at
all times. So Ukraine's feeling good about the partnership, the
US is feeling good, like great probably about the partnership.
(33:44):
And we'll see where this goes. But guys, we got
to move forward to Kentucky. Something very very important has
happened in Florida to a Kentucky man. Okay, a gentleman
at the cool age of fifty, mister James Farthing won
the dang powerball. You guys, holy crap. Nicely it was
(34:04):
at an estimated one hundred and sixty seven million dollars bail.
That's lovely, Come on, you won the lottery. Let's go.
But as we've talked about, the lottery is a fickle thing.
Strings right, the lottery is a strange thing. Your luck
is tremendous in one moment. What happens if it if
(34:25):
it pivots back the other way so rapidly that your
neck breaks. Well, on Monday, April twenty eighth, mister Jim,
mister James Farthing went and collected the money, or he
signed the paperwork to collect all of the money. And
he began his journey as a now one hundred and
sixty twelve let's say, one hundred millionaire, almost maybe around.
Speaker 6 (34:48):
That much after you take all all the taxes and everything.
Speaker 2 (34:52):
Then on Wednesday, April thirtieth, this this, this poor man
was arrested on charges of battery of a law enforcement officer.
Battery and resisting an officer without violence isn't that interesting
without violence? But he also battered an officer, but he
did it without violence somehow, just the thought that, well, no,
(35:15):
he got into a fight with somebody at this place
called Island Grand at Trade Winds in Saint Pete Beach, Florida,
and then as he was in this fight, several people
came to try and break it up. Some of them
were from the Panelas County Police Department or I guess, yeah,
they were deputies, so maybe it was a sheriff's department.
But he ended up kicking one of them in the
face as he was just having this little altercation with
(35:37):
another person. He tried to flee, but he got booked
into jail right after winning one hundred and sixty seven
million dollars. Damn, just to say luck can change, right?
What is luck? Is there?
Speaker 6 (35:50):
Luck?
Speaker 2 (35:51):
Who knows? And we're just talking about all this stuff
because it does feel as though you can be extremely
lucky in one moment and feel at the top of
the world, and youthing could come crashing down because of
one small decision and or you know, one small set
of circumstances, everything crashes down.
Speaker 6 (36:07):
It is possible.
Speaker 2 (36:08):
Right to our next story from The Independent. I'm not
going to read the title here because I feel like
every time you use the word Trump in a title
of something and you instead of saying the president or
President Trump or something like that, it puts in your
head a negative image of whatever is coming next, because
it is the term Trump is thrown around as a
(36:31):
pejorative itself, right in a weird way.
Speaker 4 (36:33):
Well, supporters also, I mean I would say it's divisive.
Speaker 2 (36:37):
Right yeah, because supporters be like, oh, Trump did this new.
But then if somebody reads that who supports the president,
they are like, ah, they just dang people, just dang
whoever writing about the president. So it's an interesting thing.
So let's just say the President to eliminate one thy
two hundred CIA positions within larger plan to shrink spy workforce.
According to a report this comes to us again from
(36:59):
The Independent. It is the concept that around five percent
of the CIA's staff will be laid out as a
part of a much larger set of cuts to the
intelligent services sector within the US. And this is all
coming down from the executive branch of the United States government.
It is only interesting to me because you know, five
(37:19):
percent of any workforce it's meaningful to the human beings
there is it truly meaningful to the overall operations of
a large behemoth, right, I.
Speaker 3 (37:30):
Mean at scales.
Speaker 4 (37:31):
Imagine if someone asked you to lose five percent of
your blood sure.
Speaker 2 (37:36):
I mean, but which wouldn't be that bad, would it?
Five percent? Yeah, we can handle five percent, let's go,
you know, but five percent of your family. Hey, we
got to take five percent of your family away, and
probably represents one human being. That would be like, oh, whoops,
we got to It would have to equate to at
least one human being or half of someone in your family.
Speaker 3 (37:56):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (37:56):
Neither of our analogies here are are I guess they're
not factoring in that the five percent is not the
department itself, the CIA itself, the agency. Not everybody has
the same job, right. So the argument for fans of
I guess cost cutting as this would be portrayed by supporters.
(38:18):
They would say, you know, look, we're cutting the fat.
We're not getting rid of anything important to your point, right,
We're firing or we're letting, we're causing redundancies for like
the three assistant accountants.
Speaker 2 (38:31):
Were right sizing. That's what we're doing. We're right sizing this.
Speaker 3 (38:34):
Putty and just truing up.
Speaker 6 (38:37):
We're truing up, yes here, but it.
Speaker 2 (38:39):
Is an interesting place to make cuts. The CIA, you know,
is looked at in a lot of different ways, but
by a lot of people in the in the national
security realms see them as a much necessary thing.
Speaker 3 (38:53):
Right.
Speaker 2 (38:54):
We need to know what others are doing outside the
US so we can know what to do from both
a public policy you know stance and you know, a
diplomatic stance, and a where do the tanks go? Since
seems pretty important. It's kind of weird. It's really weird
when you take into account the last story I'm going
to be talking about today, which is the concept of
(39:15):
reopening Alcatraz prison. This just came forward. CBS News reported
on it, a bunch of places reported on it. It's
just it seems as though it's a concept or an
idea that kind of sprung forth, I don't know, guys,
out of another thought or something, and then all of
a sudden it is supposed to happen the city. United
(39:39):
States President had the concept, Hey, we should reopen Alcatraz.
It is a symbol of law and order. We reopen
this baby. We put our most ruthless and violent people
back on Alcatraz, and the world we'll see that we
mean business when it comes to justice and law and
order and all of that stuff. The only thing is
(40:00):
have to think about this. It costs around three times
the amount of money to run Alcatraz as a prison
as it does any other What do we call those prisons, guys,
the ones that are extremely tough to get in and
out of max supermax. Yeah, like a super.
Speaker 5 (40:18):
Well, that is Alcatraz, but it is it is rock, yes,
of course, but it is just like a run like
a museum right now it says where people can take
tours to do.
Speaker 6 (40:27):
What he's asking is a tall order just for a
lot of books. And it has been into existence.
Speaker 2 (40:33):
It has been for a long time. It was a
disciplinary barracks for the US military for a long time.
Then it became a prison only until nineteen sixty three.
Then it was not a prison after that and it
hasn't been since then. We talked about it during the
time when it was occupied by what was the name
of that group, the Red Power Movement.
Speaker 4 (40:54):
There's a coalition from a Native people move Yes, yes, yes, yes,
American Indian movement.
Speaker 2 (41:00):
But that was literally a couple of years. Then after
that it's just been a place where people go and
revel in the concept that was Alcatraz and how crazy
was this? How weird is it that this was a
prison for a long time.
Speaker 5 (41:15):
You can take a pleasure cruise just past it too,
in the San Francisco Harmer Like, it's a really cool
thing to see lurking off in the distance amidst the
fog and all of that.
Speaker 4 (41:24):
Yeah, it's a big piece of history and culture as well.
And if you want to read the statement in full,
you can find excerpts of it in various media platforms
of choice. You can also, if you are so inclined,
just go to truth Social and read his statement in
full about it. Critics are saying that critics are accusing
(41:48):
the president of having watched a film and saying that
that is what informed his new decision, which seems to
to the public to have come out of the blue.
Speaker 3 (41:58):
Relatively speaking.
Speaker 5 (41:59):
I've certainly never been accused of watching a film, So
my heart goes out to the man.
Speaker 2 (42:04):
No. Well, but again, all in my mind, all that
matters is that it costs three times what it costs
to run any other prison because it's a dang islands,
because you've got to ship everything out there. It doesn't
have working water, it doesn't have working sewer as it
stands right now. Good luck to anybody who wants to
rebuild that thing. If you are gonna put that kind
(42:25):
of expense from a federal budget into you know, doing
that kind of thing. What does it say to all
of those spies, excuse me, a CIA personnel that you're
just firing, And how does that make them feel? And
we know that China, Russia and several other countries that
oppose the United States are looking for disaffected, specifically spies
(42:46):
to work with, So seems like a crazy.
Speaker 6 (42:49):
Plenty good pipeline for that.
Speaker 2 (42:50):
Seems like a dumb move to me. All right, that's
all for the segment. We'll be right back after a
word from our.
Speaker 3 (42:56):
Sponsor, and we have returned.
Speaker 4 (43:03):
We're going to move quickly through some things at the
last part of our weekly Strange News segment. Here first
to get in front of the communicates and the emails. Folks,
there's often a misconception about the CIA. When we said
not everybody does the same job in this gargantuan agency,
and it is pretty big. We have to remember that
(43:23):
the CIA provides a lot of analyst work that is
mission critical to many other agencies and not spoopy doup agencies,
not tradecraft folks. But you know, there's somebody's job to
keep track of up and coming politicians in the Philippines
or in Nepal, build a biography and a dossier on them.
(43:44):
The CIA World Factbook is not perfect, and it has
an angle, but it's one of the best go to
places for international information. Right you want to learn more
about a country, start there. And with that, the argument
is that hutting the CIA would essentially be cutting one's
(44:05):
nose despite one's face, you know what I mean with
knock on consequences. So there are a lot of questions
about money. We'd love to hear your thoughts in this regard.
There's something I think would serve as a follow up
to some episodes we've done in the past.
Speaker 1 (44:19):
Guys.
Speaker 4 (44:20):
Not too long ago, a former Bush official went public
and claimed that the US has built a twenty one
trillion dollar underground network only for the wealthy to hide
out during a near extinction event. Have you guys heard
about this sounds like fun? Do either have ping pong?
Speaker 3 (44:41):
I hope? So?
Speaker 4 (44:42):
I mean for twenty one trillion dollars, they better have
good being.
Speaker 2 (44:46):
Who said? Who said this?
Speaker 4 (44:48):
This is Catherine Austin Fitz, who worked under the first
Bush administration. You can find I think a good reputable
article on this comes from The Endependent on May fifth.
Now I was a little bit weirded out at first
because this statement was on the Tucker Carlson Show, which
(45:10):
I know is not everybody's slice the case India. But
looking into this stuff, it does seem that Fitz knows
what she's talking about. As the assistant sect of Housing
in Urban Development under H. W. Bush, she was following
money right and they It seems that with a little
(45:33):
bit of forensic accounting. If you go to a twenty
seventeen report by an economist at Michigan State University, Mark Skidmore,
you'll see Skidmore, you'll see that unauthorized spending to the
tune of twenty one trillion, largely untraceable dollars occur between
nineteen ninety eight and twenty fifteen, which means, adjusting for
(45:54):
radical inflation, that's more than twenty one trillion.
Speaker 5 (45:58):
Now mad money. It's imagine what even how do you
even quantify? I mean, I guess that's literally what you're doing,
but an amount like that, I cannot wrap my head
around it.
Speaker 4 (46:08):
Yeah, and fits claims quote we have built an extraordinary
number of underground bases and supposedly transportation systems end quote
including she claims bases beneath the ocean, so real like
Sequest stuff. If anybody remembers the show Sequest.
Speaker 2 (46:27):
China is currently building a giant under sea yes thing.
I can't find the thing I was we were going
to talk about it. It was from February, right, a
six thousand foot below the surface deep sea space station.
Speaker 5 (46:44):
Didn't we do an episode on undersea bunkers and facilities?
Or maybe it was Arctic like underneath the ice just
ringing a bell?
Speaker 3 (46:53):
You're right, you're right.
Speaker 4 (46:54):
Well we've done We've done some stuff on undersea structures
which are not as sci fi as they may sound
at first. Blush. We look to your point about Arctic structures,
hidden Arctic structures on both sides.
Speaker 6 (47:09):
Of the facilities potentially.
Speaker 3 (47:12):
Yeah, and we also know that.
Speaker 4 (47:16):
I think this is an episode in the future because
lest we be too dismissive of this story. It's important
to remember that there have been proven cases of the
government conspiring to build things like that, like the not Briarcliff.
That's a street here with its own weird history. But oh,
(47:36):
who was it we talked to, We talked to the
guy Garrett Graff, who wrote the book on perhaps so
it is called Greenbrier.
Speaker 3 (47:44):
But for a long time, this thing.
Speaker 4 (47:45):
That appeared to be just an okay, run in the
mill hotel was actually one of those hardened sites for
high level government officials and their families to survive a
nuclear event. So it's not evil that these things are
being built. And there's a real philosophical dilemma about you know,
(48:07):
the public, as taxpayers, what they do or do not
deserve to be aware of, right with how their money
is spent. But then also if they go if the
government goes public and says, yes, thank you for your
tax money, we're building these here, here, here, and here.
This is the latitude and longitude. By the way, this
is where the power in the water comes from. Let's
hope none of our enemies know how to use Wikipedia.
Speaker 3 (48:31):
You know what I mean, right too?
Speaker 6 (48:32):
Well, Okay, again long lines building. By the way, it
just keeps. I don't know, that is my quintessential.
Speaker 5 (48:37):
Like rich people bunker very like you know, high level
government officials bunker.
Speaker 2 (48:42):
When was George H.
Speaker 3 (48:44):
Choe Bush in office eighty nine to ninety three.
Speaker 2 (48:47):
Yeah, okay, he was the forty first before that, he
was CIA. That's right, So let's forget So theoretically, guys,
theoretically over thirty years of secret bunkers could have been
hanging out doing things or like as they're building them
over all of those years, right all the way up
to twenty fifteen that we talked about in that report.
(49:09):
I'm thinking if they did ever create some kind of
underwater secret places, it might account for the weird stuff
coming out of the water that the Navy keeps shooting
video of.
Speaker 6 (49:23):
Right, I don't think I know what you're talking about, Matt.
Speaker 3 (49:25):
Unidentified some merged objects or trans.
Speaker 5 (49:27):
Medium opts, of course, things that go from from flight
to under the water in like a very alarmingly fast
or just.
Speaker 3 (49:34):
Staying under the water.
Speaker 2 (49:36):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (49:36):
Such that people have all kinds of all kinds of instrumentation,
and the smartest people with the most sophisticated toys are
saying what is this.
Speaker 2 (49:47):
Well, yeah, and if that kind of tech and ability
to build under the water like that has been around
since then, you can only imagine what literally off the
books R and D is going on.
Speaker 6 (49:59):
You're totally wrong.
Speaker 4 (50:00):
Yeah, And speaking of off the books in R and D.
To get back to this, because I do think again
it's it's a good, good inspiration for an episode. The
report that Skidmore looks at, he's not, you know, he
is not, by any any measure means a wing nut.
He is an economist. He's doing forensic accounting. And his report,
(50:25):
which again looks through, looks through a lot of stuff.
He finds that the army had six point five trillion
just in twenty fifteen of something called quote unsupported adjustments,
which means money was spent and it went somewhere and
(50:46):
it was not accounting. It was not supported, means it
was not like allocated to a specific program.
Speaker 6 (50:54):
That sounds like cooking the books to me.
Speaker 3 (50:57):
It sure does.
Speaker 4 (50:58):
Given the uh this is another quote from the report.
Given the armies one hundred and twenty two billion dollar budget,
this means unsupported adjustments, we're fifty four times spending authorized
by Congress, which is insane. Yes, I think that is
the appropriate word here. So if you've been to one
(51:19):
of these underground or undersea bases, we want to hear
from you. And yes, the cool cheese cave in Missouri
counts right as you were in Timvere Pallas, right right, Yeah,
we'd love to hear that. We're not going to get
to everything today, but we are going to give a
few more teasers here. We can't leave you without a
(51:42):
dope beat to Step two, especially folks who have who
are Step two who are also super into astronomy. It
turns out caveat Asterisk maybe that astronomers may have spotted
a possible planet nine and they've done this usingta that
spans more than two decades.
Speaker 3 (52:04):
What is planet X nebrew?
Speaker 5 (52:06):
This is like it meant to be an inhabitable planet
potentially or just like a new planet.
Speaker 3 (52:10):
No, just like what the hell elliptical orbit is this
thing on?
Speaker 2 (52:15):
Well? Yeah, a planet that is tied to ag and
stuff like mind calendars.
Speaker 3 (52:24):
Astronomy.
Speaker 6 (52:25):
Wow. So okay, Yeah, if we.
Speaker 4 (52:27):
Go to tech Spot with the journalist Sky Jacobs from
just a few days ago May fifth, twenty twenty five. Again,
we're recording on the seventh, what we see is that
there's a newly identified object that has been spotted into
infrared sky surveys that may be the most significant evidence
(52:47):
ever for the elusive thing referred to as Planet nine.
Speaker 3 (52:51):
This would be.
Speaker 4 (52:54):
Object, a heavenly object about the size of Neptune, orbiting
hundreds of times further from farther excuse me, from the
Sun than from Earth.
Speaker 5 (53:04):
So how do you explain them it being recorded that
far back? Like is it a difference in the way
bodies are viewed, or like a change over time? Like
how would they have been able to see that? Are
you saying that the prediction of it was almost mystical.
Speaker 4 (53:21):
We're tying it, perhaps of a tongue in cheek to ancient,
ancient belief systems and thoughts.
Speaker 3 (53:30):
I mean it is it is technically.
Speaker 4 (53:31):
Possible that there could be some massive elliptical orbit, right
so that over time brings it brings this body, if
it exists, closer to Planet Earth and what humans could
observe in the sky at that time. But it's also
possible that it's not an elliptical orbit or not, you know,
radically elliptical, so it's just out there in a long circle. Yea,
(53:56):
and we only know about it because every so often
we a little on the infrared.
Speaker 2 (54:02):
Well, guys, I can't remember fully I remember Stitching. I
can't remembers Stitch. He's the guy that wrote the stuff
that we talked about in our video series A long
time ago. He in like the I want to say
seventies or eighties, came forward and said, Hey, there's this
(54:24):
other thing that these ancient peoples wrote about. It was
his translation though, right of the ancient writings that basically said, Hey,
this thing called Nibberu is out there and it spells
doom for.
Speaker 5 (54:36):
Earth, right because it's heading towards us or something like
The idea that Stitch it has is that, yeah, when
this thing returns, when it gets close enough, something about
its spiritual importance or something secular like just its mass
will create an extinction event.
Speaker 4 (54:55):
Sort of like how theoretically the right kind of fart
from the sign of coronal mass ejection could send humanity
back to the sarcase.
Speaker 5 (55:03):
It's because of the trajectory of that ellipse that like
at the end of it, when we catch it, it's
almost like an exponential curve that would like launch it
or something I'm sorry.
Speaker 4 (55:12):
I'm like, that's interesting, yeah, because that's similar to like
how comets have predictable point.
Speaker 6 (55:16):
And I'm wondering. It's just my mind is running wild
with this one. This is great, fascinating and terrifying.
Speaker 3 (55:21):
I love this.
Speaker 4 (55:21):
And here's here's what we'll end with. This is when
we say, when we say twenty three years of data,
what we're really looking at are too phenomenal or mission
critical gatherings that are separated by twenty.
Speaker 3 (55:39):
Three years each.
Speaker 4 (55:40):
So there are two observations that are for sure something
out there in the ink, and the fact that they
happen from two different things, from NASA's Iris Infrared Astronomical
satellite in launching in what eighty three, nineteen eighty three
and Japan's Akari satellite which was active from like two
(56:01):
thousand and six to twenty eleven. The fact that they
found this kind of stuff that they went back and
looked for the data from the NASA satellite. This is
what makes things really interesting. How strange, how fascinating would
it be if astronomers I'm sure hate to hear us
(56:23):
say this stuff just hypothetically, folks. How fascinating would it
be if some of those ancient predictions about this mysterious
other planet did have some sand to them.
Speaker 3 (56:38):
I think.
Speaker 6 (56:38):
I think it's amazing.
Speaker 3 (56:40):
I think it would be.
Speaker 4 (56:41):
So it's what we need right now as a civilization.
We also need to talk about the two hundred and
fifty federal investigations tied to the online network seven sixty four.
Speaker 3 (56:54):
Do not read that unless you have a strong stomach.
Speaker 5 (56:57):
That may be something that like unaliving, coercion kind of
ring with the rest satanic.
Speaker 4 (57:03):
Right, Yeah, yeah, using blackmail, sexual violent.
Speaker 6 (57:07):
Behavior, heinous. I remember when we talked about that originally.
Speaker 4 (57:12):
And we don't We don't have time to get into
it now, but perhaps that'll be a strange news program
in the future, maybe next week. We also want to
shout out Credit sweee for again getting fined in helping
wealthy Americans hide over four billion dollars US credit Sweeze. Yeah,
(57:33):
they got fined though, so it's okay, all right, they
did get fined less than four billion dollars, but they
did get fined.
Speaker 5 (57:40):
And they're still Sweeze and there's still Sweeze to their credit.
Speaker 4 (57:44):
Uh, So we are going to call it an evening tonight.
We're off to doctivigate. Thank you, as always so much
for tuning in. Friends and neighbors, fellow conspiracy realists, we
want to hear from you. You can find us online.
You can give us a call on the phone. You
can hit us at our good old fashioned email address.
Speaker 5 (58:00):
And also find us all over the social medias of
your choosing at the handle conspiracy Stuff where we exist
on xfka, Twitter, on YouTube with video content for your
perusing enjoyment, and on Facebook, or we have our Facebook
group Here's where it gets crazy, on Instagram and TikTok
're Conspiracy Stuff Show.
Speaker 2 (58:18):
We have a phone number. It is one eight three
three st d WYTK. When you call in, give yourself
a cool nickname and let us know within the voicemail
message if we can use your name and message on
the air. If you'd like to not use your voice
to talk to us, why not use your finger eats
send us a good old fashioned email.
Speaker 4 (58:35):
We are the entities that read every piece of correspondence
we receive. Be well aware, yet unafraid. Sometimes the void
writes back, join us here in the dark conspiracy at
iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 2 (59:04):
Stuff they Don't want 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
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.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.