March 2, 2026 • 61 mins
Robot exorcists. Waymo door gigs. Freedom dollars, Jeffrey Epstein, and more. Tune in as the guys explore this week's strange news.
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 Noah.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
They call me Ben. We're joyed as always with our
super producer Dylan the Tennessee pal Fagett. Most importantly, you
are you. You are here that makes this the stuff
they don't want you to know. Welcome back to our
weekly strange news program. If you are hearing this the
evening it publishes, it is Monday, March the second. Can
(00:52):
you guys believe it? February just came and went like.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
Boil? Boy? Did it ever? In like a lion, out
like a lamb? Or that's March. February has been weird though. Man.
I had a therapy session this morning, and I realized
that February bums me out. Do other people get bummed
out by February? I think it's just the cold in
the wet for.
Speaker 1 (01:11):
Me sure, and the various obligations in the West, you know.
First off, congrats to everybody who survived Valentine's Day, if
your partner told you they didn't want anything, they were
probably kind of lying. So kudos to all of us
for getting through that one.
Speaker 3 (01:31):
Congrats for having a partner. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (01:34):
Also right, Yeah, We've got so much weird stuff going on.
We're of course gearing up for the Epstein Files. We've
got some news about technology, We've got some news about
company script, We've got some worldwide and localized, very strange news.
(01:55):
Maybe we start with this one. Do you guys have
robot vacuum cleaners?
Speaker 3 (01:59):
It did? I put big googly eyes on it. My
ex partner did, uh, And we called him something like
Hubert or you know, anthropomorphized the little guy. He was
real dumb. I think I've mentioned it was not even
a proper roomba, and I have spoken and evangelized on
behalf of Shark. But let me tell you their robot
(02:19):
floor vacuums not so good, but their stick vacuums excellent.
Speaker 1 (02:23):
Oh, Matt, I have to tell you we recently on
Ridiculous History did a deep dive into the history of
vacuum cleaners.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
Oh that's fun. I remember doing that for Infamous Inventors
slash Stuff of Genius.
Speaker 3 (02:38):
It sucked. Oh, I know, I know, it was a
little longer nose, but it was begging for it. Ben,
what was the term that you coined for the international
cabal the vacuum cleaner cartels?
Speaker 1 (02:50):
Yet this was breaking news for us. I am probably
the first person to speak in public about a secret
society a corporations called Big.
Speaker 3 (03:01):
Suck, Big Suck. Yep.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
There's a lot of stuff going on in the world today,
so it's easy to miss those sorts of conspiracies. Luckily,
we have some breaking news from a guy named Sammy
Adoufol who recently was working with his robot vacuum cleaner,
and he wanted to make it possible for him to
(03:24):
operate this thing using a PlayStation controller. Pretty cool.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
Well, wait, now that's possible. They didn't. They operate that
many sub that imploded with a PlayStation controller? They did? Yeah,
maybe it was Xbox. But you guys also remember that
when we did our live show on sound at National Sawdust,
I whipped out a PlayStation controller and used it to
control some audio software. You can map those controls just
about anything, So I really hope he found success with
this endeavor.
Speaker 1 (03:48):
Sammy did find success. That's the thing he was working
with a brand of robot vacuum called the Dji Romo.
And he said, Okay, I'm going to figure out how
to use my PlayStation controller that I just have lying
around as as a tool of convenience. Low and behold.
(04:13):
When he tried to reverse engineer the protocol used by
Romo to communicate with its servers, it didn't just let
him access his own little vacuum bought. It gave him
access to around six thousand, seven hundred other robot vacuums
(04:34):
of the same brand across the United States, Europe, and China.
Speaker 2 (04:40):
So he could control them.
Speaker 1 (04:42):
He was able to get the information from them, so
he could get not just camera footage. These things are
camera enabled, but he could gain access to audio and
he could also see the map, the blueprint of the
house that the robot.
Speaker 3 (05:03):
Wait, say, and we haven't we talked about the issues too,
about those things uploading schematics or blueprints and layouts to
the cloud. Yes, against people's perhaps common knowledge.
Speaker 2 (05:14):
But what we're saying is anyone on the company side
or someone that wanted to get in could have audio
and video capabilities within your home.
Speaker 1 (05:27):
Yeah, let's go over to the verge. This is this
is what we call funny, terrifying, like candy cigarettes.
Speaker 3 (05:36):
Happy sad. Yeah, so romantic comedy, no way different.
Speaker 1 (05:41):
So Sean Hollister reports on this. He's a senior editor
founding member of the Verge, and what we what we
see is that he could access the information and to
your question, Matt, he could remotely control these if he win.
He tested this out by contacting a friend who also
(06:05):
owns one of these romos, and he could watch them
remotely map out each room of a house, ultimately generating
a complete two dimensional floor plan. And then he could
use any of these robots ip address to find their
approximate loading.
Speaker 2 (06:26):
Cool.
Speaker 3 (06:27):
Tragic comedy. Tragic comedy. That's what I was trying to
compart with. Man, Guys, are we.
Speaker 1 (06:33):
Cooked, Well, we're cooking for sure.
Speaker 3 (06:37):
We're cooking with grease as my partners.
Speaker 2 (06:42):
Ben. Every time we do an episode, a story about
a new thing that has some kind of spying capabilities,
if if you just happen to want them to have that.
As a bad actor, I just think about our phones
and our computers. It's just in our cars, our footwaight
hold on, and in our TVs crap.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
Yeah, oh and uh and your vacuum cleaners and your refrigerators. Uh,
maybe your dishwashers. Uh, probably some sex toys. At some point,
there's got.
Speaker 3 (07:12):
To be a new, modern, updated punchline to the old
is your refrigerator running joke? Is the refrigerator running? Well,
that is definitely spying on you. It's but spirited.
Speaker 1 (07:25):
Let's do this so we also have so much more
to get to.
Speaker 3 (07:29):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (07:30):
Not to sound too much like a luddite or knucklehead
shaking their fist at the sky.
Speaker 3 (07:36):
But we're shaking our heads right.
Speaker 1 (07:39):
We think everybody should be very careful with the so
called Internet of things. Check on your room, but make
sure that they still work for you.
Speaker 3 (07:50):
Talk to them. Nice to be on the right side
of the robot overlords. That's all we're saying. There was
spiced was cool, and you bought it like as toys
like Spikey spy tech, that's what it was, a little
walkie talkies and mirror shades, and it seemed like such
a cool, fun, adventurous thing to do. And now it's
(08:12):
just invasive and weird.
Speaker 1 (08:14):
And speaking of invasive and weird, we're gonna pause for
a word from our sponsors, and then what say we
get to some more strange news.
Speaker 3 (08:28):
And we're back to the shared techno healthscape that we
all occupy here in Atlanta, Georgia, which is turns out
to be one of the big testing grounds for a
little something called Weeimo. Have you guys seen the waimo
driverless vehicles toodling around our fair metropolis.
Speaker 2 (08:47):
No, I like it.
Speaker 3 (08:47):
You're out a little bit more out in the sticks, Matt.
But here here in the city, these guys everywhere I'm
messing with you. Matt. You're trust me, you're better off
for it. You've got a little bit of separation from
from this weird crap. I don't like it.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
I've seen some deliveries. I saw someone I won't say
get hit, but get bumped while a weimo was Because
you guys know, I look pretty deep in the city,
so I see a lot of waymo's. I saw one
making a left hand turn by a library, not with
not with any difficult traffic, but there was a person
(09:26):
jaywalking and the Weimo was slowly turning left and then
bumped them and the person, you know, understandably was upset.
Speaker 3 (09:37):
Not a fun robo fist bump kind of way.
Speaker 1 (09:40):
Like, No, not at like a high five cool HEGs
a fist bump way, but instead the person hit the ground, yelled,
ran away, and the weimo paused with other cars behind
it with human drivers, and then it just went on
its way. I think it was just recording video.
Speaker 3 (10:00):
Keep that. Why did they run? That's like a.
Speaker 2 (10:04):
You could get money out of that?
Speaker 1 (10:05):
Yeah, I guess they had. You know, everybody has their
own deep backstory.
Speaker 3 (10:10):
What's that the whole scenario, the trolley conundrum or whatever. Yeah,
it's sort of like what you know, this this AI
consciousness sentiment or whatever concept about what uh you know,
what what a robo car will do in order to like,
you know, save a human life. Right, It's it's that's
(10:31):
an interesting inverse of it though, Ben for sure and
I have not seen that particular thing go down, but
it does remind me of there's a story of ways
back about like all these waymos that were stuck in
a parking lot honking at each other and just like
you know, not seeing in Austin Powers where he's driving
the little truck thing and he's like stuck and keeps
backing up and pulling forward and back. Just that. I
(10:52):
love it. I think that's such good physical comedy. I
saw that at a little trailer at our one of
our local art house cinemas, uh for a you know
Austin Power our reducts series they were doing, and that
it cracked me up, very very funny. But we're seeing exactly.
We've certainly seen some issues regarding the technology behind Weimo.
Weimo being I think, the farthest ahead of the curve,
(11:15):
whatever the curve might be when it comes to robotaxis.
We know that Elon Musk has not had is way
behind in terms of rolling out his promised ROBOTAXI and
the Weaimo's got the R and D and the actual
trials in the wild to back up their technology, and
they are a thing that you can actually hail here
in Atlanta. Another thing that Weymo has done is partnered
(11:38):
with door Dash, which is I don't use DoorDash anymore.
I'm more of an uber eats guy, but DoorDash is
still very much a going concern for food and various
sundry deliveries, and they're now being delivered with Weaimo, which
seems problematic because I mean, geez, guys, there's a whole
piece I think in the new Yorker recently, or maybe
(11:58):
it was in the Times about just the gig economy
of everything and the gigification of everything, including apparently terrorism,
like there are like apps and like ways of doing
a single use like terrorist attack, like through telegram and
various things like that. I'm sorry, I'm getting way off topic,
but you know, if we can't deliver for Uber Eats
(12:22):
or door dash anymore because the robots are doing it, like,
what do we do to get ahead in a gig
economy type world where even things that once had a
future where you could retire, you know, are no longer
living really in that model or operating within that model.
So now the humans that work for door Dash, they've
(12:43):
got a new opportunity to make a little money, which
is to close the doors physically by hand of way
mos left open by lazy passengers because weirdly enough, I
don't know if you guys run into this with these
a lot of these minivans that you get picked up
in with Uber, you don't know if it's an electric
door or not, so you just kind of assume that
(13:05):
it is and just sort of pull on the thing
and then step back and see what happens. Because if
you pull too hard on those electric doors, it can
be bad and then the driver will get mad at you.
You would think that the Waymos would have built in
an automatic opening and closing door piece of technology into
a unmanned vehicle. Apparently not the case. So you make
twenty four bucks up to your thanks ben up to
(13:28):
twenty four bucks if a door is left open, because
the car will not continue on to its next fair
if the door is left open. And the sense you know,
DoorDash drivers are kind of on demand and they're now
in the system with these weaymo cars. They can be
hailed nearby physical you know drivers to pull up and
(13:50):
close the door and you can make up to twenty
four bucks. I've heard somewhere in the median would be
around eleven bucks per manual door closing. Is this not
to see per door? Well, oh right, not sure about that.
Let's just read a little bit from Fortune magazine. They
have a bit of a perspective on this. Some Waimo drivers,
(14:12):
they say in their headline, are so lazy that gig
workers are getting paid twenty four bucks to close the
door for them. Remember when a driver would get paid
to open the door for you you know, it was
like a whole like a chauffeur situation. What happened in
those days. The article is written by Catherina gian Gionio
(14:32):
Giino Giulino U and it starts like this, which I
love the reference to Back the Future in the hit
nineteen eighty five sci fi film Back in the Future,
we were promised flying cars and hoverboards. By twenty fifteen,
a decade later, however, we have automatic vehicles that crash
into polls and require a monthly subscription to adjust your seat. Oh,
(14:54):
Fortune is doing a very cute thing where it It
gives you the first paragraph and then has their it
like redacted. Be a bad boy and copy and paste
it into the old brave browser.
Speaker 1 (15:05):
Here.
Speaker 3 (15:05):
Let's just see how that goes. Is it gonna choke
on it? Does it like it? It likes it? It continues,
don't come at me, Fortune, Now, it might take two
cars to complete a trip, the robotaxi that drops you
off and another dispatch to close the door after you
step out. Some Robotaxi customers are so lazy. It turns
(15:25):
out that Weimo is teamed up with DoorDash to send
drivers to close the doors of automatic vehicles rendered immobile.
A reddit post in the r dash door dash dasher
subreddit shows a screenshot of a DoorDash offer in downtown
Atlanta to go close a Waimo door. The doordasher would
be paid an initial six twenty five to accept the
(15:45):
offer and an additional five dollars a punt completion of
the task. Techno Healthscape, y'all, is this the future we
were promised?
Speaker 2 (15:55):
Uhhh, it's the one that we've been warned again since
the nineteen sixties guys, since the students rose up and
began fully protesting. That's what, like the Mario Savios of
it all telling us to throw our bodies against the
gears and such, Right, that's what this is. We're literally
(16:16):
throwing our bodies against the doors of the machine, or.
Speaker 3 (16:20):
At least our hands, and that we then gently close
over the latch and push it so that they can
go on their way. Yeah, it's obviously a tech oversight
that they are now compensating for by doing this bizarre
ass around elbow workaround, which I just think is kind
(16:41):
of hilarious an and a real stark, you know, example
of this being not the future we were promised. And
then they haven't quite gotten it all figured out yet,
and then weirdly, we do still need humans to do
the oddest, most menial tasks. It was seem doesn't this
seem a little amp I don't know, not humiliating and
(17:01):
anybody that you know, I would not be grudge anybody
making a few bucks. But I mean, this is not
the only partnership with door Dash. It's my understanding that
that the original, the initial partnership is to automate DoorDash
deliveries with these weyms. So they're almost saying, Okay, well,
you don't have your Dasher job anymore, so we're going
to throw you the crumbs of pulling up to close
(17:25):
the door of your robot replacement.
Speaker 2 (17:28):
Yuck.
Speaker 3 (17:30):
I don't like it.
Speaker 2 (17:31):
Yeah, I don't even know. I just have lots of
opinions that I really do think we should just destroy
all the things there, all this, like the lud.
Speaker 3 (17:48):
I mean, there is something to that, you know, I mean,
it's I don't think it is being shortsighted to say
that this stuff is not good for humanity in the
long run.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
Yeah again, guys, society has to evolve in step with technology,
and that's not happening. Yet we're seeing a fluid situation
of booming, short lived economies and industries, right like the
folks who are closing waym doors and by the way,
(18:21):
thank you for that one. The folks who are doing
that remind me of something. You see a lot in
more cidified areas where you have all those e scooters
and e bikes, See them in thebed trucks, and people
are right now, humans are being paid to drive around
(18:42):
those things up and take them to a charging station.
Speaker 3 (18:45):
Or actually take them home and charge them themselves. I
think in some of those cases, Ben Yeah.
Speaker 1 (18:51):
Yeah, like some kind of charging station. And I wonder
how long that gig in particular will last. How far
away are we from an automated service replacing human labor
in recharging those bikes. I think it's going to happen
pretty soon.
Speaker 2 (19:10):
It's just so discouraging. Yeah, anyone on this planet that
is extremely good at a service, that is working in
a job that is generally looked down upon by folks
in c suites and you know, the upper echelons of society.
Someone who's a taxi driver, someone who's a really good
(19:31):
driver who really knows their way around a city around
an area, someone who's very courteous.
Speaker 3 (19:36):
Legency, the family ownership of a cab medallion for example, right,
pas who took the knowledge which is one of the
most difficult tests.
Speaker 2 (19:45):
For yeah, and can actually build a career on this
skill they have at being incredibly good at a service.
Like all of that stuff is going away and instead
of being replaced by similar things of you know, a
same caliber of service, we're getting automated things. And then
all the money it just goes up to a corporation
(20:06):
and ends up, you know, theoretically one day in the
pockets of investors on some market somewhere. Right. It's just,
it's just it's really discouraging from a humanity perspective.
Speaker 1 (20:20):
I'd also use the word non sustainable and untenable. I
don't think this is the long term, most successful path forward.
Speaker 3 (20:31):
For humans because they're selling us on this utopia or
they're trying to sell us on this like, you know,
what's the word common wage thing, what's the basic equality? Yes,
thank you, I don't buy that. I don't buy that
there's even a world where what and that's also called
communism kind of by the way, is it not where
(20:52):
we're all just paid a pool of money to exist
in the service of you know, some you know, we're
not individuals anymore, getting paid a universal living wage for
just existing.
Speaker 1 (21:05):
That's interesting because I was talking with one of my
old professors, and there is a surprisingly valid argument that
the United States is a communist country for the corporate class.
Speaker 3 (21:20):
Right. It's certainly an oligarchy, no question there, becoming more
and more so every day. And now we're getting into
this kind of techno mogul, sort of overlord kind of
of it all. And it just to remember, it seems
so quiet now, but remember when Uber and Lyft kind
of was becoming a thing and really supplanting those traditional
cab driver jobs that y'all were talking about, and there
(21:41):
was strikes and then there were scabs. I believe Uber
was scabbing in particular. Now we've got these way Mos
and these other attempts to do something similar, getting rid
of the human element of the thing that replaced the
first human element.
Speaker 2 (21:58):
You guys, remember when the human l element was in
advertising for a certain chemical company.
Speaker 3 (22:04):
Yes, shout out to daw what was it?
Speaker 2 (22:07):
What was the tags? I think it was Dow The
human element, that's what their little tagline for their entire
peration was for a while there interesting.
Speaker 1 (22:16):
And they make a lot of money off the human element,
just not in a helpful way to the humans.
Speaker 3 (22:21):
Is that a chemistry pun like the idea, like the
table of the elements, like we are yamming? Okay, got it?
Speaker 2 (22:27):
Well, it's also a nod to HDP and John Cena.
Speaker 3 (22:33):
Human But Matt just dmped his invisible cap there fully
behind that. I'm not trying to be doom and gloom here,
but it's hard not to be a Matt. You pointed
out this, or you put forth this idea of just
you know, revolt against the machines, and people are definitely
doing that the last little bit of this Fortune piece.
(22:53):
Autonomous vehicles often seem to be the target of vandalism
in recent events. In twenty twenty four, a man would
chase cruises avs with a hatchet in San Francisco. Employees
of General Motors short lived Robotaxi program told Fortune of
countless stories of people slashing tires and even stripping down
to moon the vehicles as they attempted to drive off.
(23:14):
More recently, in June of last year, demonstrators burned at
least six WAIMO vehicles to the ground in Los Angeles
during anti ice protests. Not quite sure what Weymo has
to do with ice, but I think it's it's just
a target of frustration. I think in general just about
the state of things doesn't feel great.
Speaker 2 (23:33):
Mm hmmm.
Speaker 3 (23:35):
That one went a little longer than I realized it would.
I thought it was just a little silly throwaway one.
But boy, oh boy, is there's some Does it have
some dystopian bones to it that I think was worth
sussing out. I'll just really quickly now I'm not going
to do The NHS contacted exorcist after staff reported seeing
ghosts in Norwich Hospice. I think the headline says it all.
(23:55):
The NHS is a British department, the National Health Survey
that maintains various aspects of the public health system there
in the UK. You know what, I think, like.
Speaker 2 (24:07):
The universal healthcare thing.
Speaker 3 (24:08):
Noel a little bit also involves ghosts and exorcists.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
Apparently, which have yet to be replaced by robots. Folks,
fellow conspiracy realists, this is one of my questions going
into this. When do we have our first automated Exorcist.
Has the time come? Should we text the Pope? I
think we must. I think we must do.
Speaker 2 (24:33):
You guys would put up with a couple of ghosts
if I could get universal health care.
Speaker 3 (24:37):
Being honest, bought me Marley, Jacob Marley, Ghost of Christmas Past,
all of.
Speaker 1 (24:43):
Them, as long as as long as the Haunting is
not a streaming or subscription service, I guess would be
a screaming service, now that I think about it.
Speaker 3 (24:54):
That's good. That's good. It's like a shutter subscription. Okay,
we're gonna our buddy Pete Hegg's geth hegg Zeth a
little bit, only because we've talked a good bit about
this whole pizza factor of like monitoring pizza delivery frequency
in the Washington, DC area. Much hay has been made
(25:15):
of that, and we have picked up on it and
run with it, and it's pretty interesting, kind of funny,
a little bit light, seems a little bit ridiculous, but
sure enough it's crossed the Secretary of War's desk, and recently,
I think last week, hegg Zeth told Fox News that
he is thinking of ordering random pizzas to throw everybody off,
(25:39):
referencing the pizza Pentagon Pizza Report, which of course uses
Google Maps to track popular times and flag surges at
four particular locations near the Pentagon. He said that US
war officials are aware of the open source monitoring that's
going on on a link that appears to tip their
hand a little bit as far as operating procedures and planning,
(26:03):
citing a CIA pizza order and a former franchise owner's observations.
We'll just leave that one there, and then I just
want to end my segment today. Also on hag Zeth,
have you guys seen this video that's making the rounds
as being a picked apart by eagle eyed weightlifting enthusiasts
and conspiracy theorists on the Internet of Pete Heggzeth supposedly
(26:25):
bench pressing three hundred and something odd pounds surrounded by
a bunch of dude bros clapping him on and giving
him the old you know, thumbs up and high fives
and all that, and you know, he does it. He
benches it, and he drops it down, he gets up
and pumps his fists and you know, gets fist pumps
all around the room. Well, a lot of these folks
that are kind of picking the video. Up part are
(26:47):
saying that there is no way in hell that that
was actually the amount of weight that he claimed it was,
for various reasons, one of which is the fact that
the bar. I don't know, if y'all have watched weightlifting videos,
you probably have benched yourselves. But if you've got a
lot of weight on that bar, the bar bends. It's
designed to do that. It is designed to flex a
(27:08):
little bit when you have that much weight on it,
and in the video of Hexath doing this feat of strength,
the bar does not bend. Number two. The thing that
gets pointed out a lot is there are clips on
the sides of the bar, and if you've spend any
time in the gym, you know that if you have
like a little bit of weight on the thing and
it can slide around, you want to put these little
(27:30):
clips on it to keep it from sliding off. But
if you have that much weight, adding even a little
bit of extra weight in the form of those clips
is kind of silly, and also so much weight, they're
not going to slide off, They're going to stay put,
So you don't do that. These things are clipped, which
is apparently a bit of a red flag. And third,
the rack. When he drops it on the rack. I've
(27:51):
seen ab videos of folks with this much weight dropping
in on the rack, the entire rack shakes, even if
it's bolted down to the ground. That much weight, when
you drop it back on the you know, the little shelf,
the hooks, whatever you call them, the entire rack shakes.
And speaking of shaking, another red flag was apparently when
you look at hegsth his arms and his weightlifting form,
(28:15):
which also has been kind of punked on a little bits,
they're not shaking when you're when you're bringing down that
much weight, and you see videos of seasoned weightlifters doing it,
you see this kind of tensing and shaking of the biceps,
and none of that is happening. So the the Internet
seems to think that heg Zeth actually faked this bench
(28:37):
press demonstration.
Speaker 2 (28:39):
Thoughts uh, I don't know if I'm watching the right
one or not. It is definitely Pete he in a
Camo shirt doing a bench press. There are three weights
on either side, a big.
Speaker 3 (28:53):
Fast boys, big leg like thick black ones.
Speaker 2 (28:55):
Right, yeah, you know, you imagine they're pretty heavy. He's
also got a spotter behind the bench that appears to
be a child, I'm not kidding. Appears to be a
young boy, like a high schooler maybe spotting him. And
I just wonder, when you're dealing with that kind of weight,
(29:16):
and a bench press in particular, it's just so dangerous
because things can happen, right, and you need somebody who's
spotting you that can actually handle that much weight, right.
And I don't know, maybe I'm watching the wrong one.
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (29:30):
Let's just I'm just look, there's just a lot of folks,
you know, taking this apart frame by frame, a lot
of very seasoned weight training, you know, enthusiasts and trainers
and jim rats that seem to be calling foul on this.
And I don't know. I wouldn't put it past him.
It's a little bit of an odd thing to lie about,
(29:52):
but I can't help it be a little bit convinced
by some of these critiques.
Speaker 2 (29:56):
Or maybe he's just swollen dude. Maybe the dude is
like super strong, maybe even huber strong.
Speaker 3 (30:04):
Cool enough, But I mean that's a lot, dude, three
point fifty or what's it supposed to be?
Speaker 2 (30:10):
Three fifteen three fifteen mm hmm.
Speaker 3 (30:15):
I don't even know. What my max bench presses. It's
not really something that I do a ton these days.
But I don't know, man, It's just I've seen videos
of much larger dudes than him trying this for this
much weight, and you see their arms kind of tensing
up and uh and shaking a little bit. Not to
mention the audio if it's you know, the real audio
from the room. When he plops that thing back down,
(30:38):
it barely makes a sound. And in other videos I've
seen it, people mentioned that much. It is a deafening
sound when it gets returned back to the rack. That's
all I got, guys, I don't know. I just thought
it was interesting. It's definitely a bit of a conspiracy
going on around the internet regarding, you know, potential weight
(30:58):
training fraud. Jo, why don't we take a quick break here,
a word from our sponsor, and then we'll come back.
We do have another slightly more important thing that's going
on with the Secretary of War that we'll get into
near the end of the show, but let's say quick break.
We're right back with more strange news.
Speaker 2 (31:19):
We have returned, just reminding everyone today is March second,
twenty twenty six, at least when this is ringing within
your ear holes. We are recording what you're hearing within
those ear holes. On February twenty fifth, twenty twenty six.
And guys, just to point this out here, as you know,
stamping history. Last night, the President of the United States
(31:41):
set a record for the longest State of the Union
address in history. We did it, uh you know Michigan. Yeah, yeah,
we've been is done.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
They figured it out in that speech State of the
Union ten ten No notes, good hustle.
Speaker 2 (32:00):
One of the most divisive when it comes to rhetoric
in the room being thrown at either side. It doesn't
matter who you support, just knowing when half of the
room is super angry and the other half is they
just couldn't get enough of it. It is weird to
see that kind of divide within the country and it
(32:20):
just doesn't feel very good. So you know what we need?
Speaker 1 (32:23):
What do we need?
Speaker 2 (32:24):
We need to bring everybody together and that is what
FCC Chairman Brendan Carr wants to do. So we're jumping
to a story from NPR. This was published on February
twenty first, twenty twenty six. FCC calls for more patriotic
pro America programming and run up to two hundred and
fiftieth anniversary. Got to read a tiny bit from this
(32:48):
just so we understand what that means. The Federal Communication
Commission is urging broadcasters to air more patriotic and pro
America content in honor of the two hundred fiftieth anniversary
of the of the Declaration of Independence. This is a
statement issued on Friday, February twentieth by that FCC Chairman
Brendan Carr, who described the quote Pledge America campaign as
(33:12):
a way for broadcasters to align themselves with the Salute
to America twenty fifty task force that was put together
by the executive branch of the government. Currently, Carr said
the country's broadcasters should use their national reach and ability
to inform and entertain audiences by upping programming that celebrates
(33:32):
the American journey and inspires its citizens by highlighting the
historic accomplishments of this great nation from our founding through
the Trump administration today.
Speaker 3 (33:43):
Sounds like the kind of space that would have usually
been occupied by a nice PBS series, you know, some
kind of documentary historical thing, you know, Ken Burns or
something like that. But ye, what they're describing sounds a
little more propagandastic to me.
Speaker 1 (33:57):
That it's interesting too, because if you go to Freedom
to Fifties website, which is cited in this NPR article,
then you're immediately taken to an official White House dot
gov site that has a countdown to the two hundred
and fiftieth anniversary. And guys, if you look at it,
(34:18):
when you when you first visit the site, you get
a pop up that says join the Golden Age or
Welcome to the Golden Age, and you can put your
email it.
Speaker 3 (34:27):
If you put on the special glasses, it turns into
a doomsday clock.
Speaker 2 (34:30):
Oh, don't put those on. Don't put those on there.
Speaker 1 (34:36):
Let me read it. Oh it says, oh, they consume
freedom is slavery. Okay, well I'm going to take these off.
Hush because a lot of people I thought looked human violation.
Speaker 2 (34:53):
Let's continue here, because the programming that you're talking about, nol.
I see both of you, guys, and I agree. In
the website, you can see the official release here from
the office of Chairman Brendan Carr. If you want to,
you could find it and the official stuff about the celebration.
But the programming you're talking about Noel is something that
is going to happen. This is one of those tent
(35:14):
pole things. Right before Brendan Carr said anything, before the
FCC did anything, before there was an official two fifty celebration,
you know that the government is saying that we're having broadcasters,
people who make podcasts, people make TV shows, Netflix shows,
all this stuff. They see this tent pole, oh, a
two hundred and fiftieth anniversary, they are going to make
programming without being told that's going to celebrate this because
(35:37):
people are we are all going to be interested in
watching that kind of thing.
Speaker 3 (35:41):
At the very least a new Netflix like collection.
Speaker 1 (35:43):
I love that point, Matt, because it's a thing that
would happen organically. It's the country's birthday. Why not celebrate.
We love birthdays here.
Speaker 2 (35:52):
And it's a big old birthday. We're getting up there
with the Roman birthdays right hold on it last.
Speaker 3 (36:00):
I'm just saying we check out our episode.
Speaker 1 (36:03):
Check out our old episode where we got super into
the theories of this one historian who proposes that empires
tend to have a lifespan of about two hundred to
two hundred and fifty years.
Speaker 2 (36:17):
It's cool, it's cool. It's fine, doesn't mean it's very chill.
Speaker 1 (36:19):
It doesn't have a lot of fun. Everything's great.
Speaker 2 (36:23):
So speaking of programming, though, let's get back to the
official statement, because car suggested that today's broadcasters, everybody, everyone
including us, also includes starting each day with the star
spangled banner or perhaps the pledge of allegiance. Now we've
spoken about this before, this concept of programming, someone programming
(36:44):
us to do something. Let's say every day when we
get into class and we sit down in our seats,
and then we look up at a symbol, and then
we say words that are meant to pledge our allegiance
to both that symbol and to God. It's an interesting concept.
Look up, whitest kids, you know, pledge of allegiance. That
is a hats off to all of you guys who
(37:07):
created that. But just think about that for a moment.
There are other concept here of potentially highlighting local sites
of significance, national and regional histories, maybe national park Service things, anything,
airworks of canonical US composers from back in the day.
Here's maybe the most important party. It sounds like I'm
(37:28):
saying that the FCC chairman is saying we have to
do this, he's not. According to the statement, radio and
TV organizations are under no obligation to participate in the
FCC's initiative. Quote, broadcasters can voluntarily choose to indicate their
commitment to the Pledge America campaign.
Speaker 3 (37:45):
Sign some kind of loyalty pledge. Like what are we
talking here? We know there's been a bit of a
fraud relationship with broadcasters and the current FCC.
Speaker 2 (37:54):
Well, hey, maybe this is an olive branch. Just just
sign sign your pledged to do this and we're cool. Well, hey, guys,
I say that we start signing, we sign this thing,
we start talking about stuff in America's history on our
strange news episodes. So if you don't mind, I'd like
to begin.
Speaker 1 (38:13):
Here's our first volunteer before we get conscripted.
Speaker 2 (38:16):
We are volunteering.
Speaker 3 (38:18):
Don't talk about the inconvenient bits though, Matt, don't go there.
Speaker 2 (38:21):
We are voluntarily choosing to indicate our commitment to the
Pledge America campaign. Here we go on this day in history,
March second, nineteen seventeen, a very significant day. That's when
the twenty eighth President of the United States, Woodrow Wilson,
signs the Puerto Rico Federal Relations Act of nineteen seventeen,
officially granting birthright US citizenship to anyone born in Puerto
(38:45):
Rico from April eighteen ninety nine onwards.
Speaker 3 (38:48):
Even that awful, bad bunny, I'm just kidding, yeah, bunny,
I'm just speaking, just putting car lands of our time.
Speaker 2 (38:57):
I think that's an amazing thing that happened in American history,
and we should just uh, well, don't don't look up
the full history of Puerto Rico in the United States
Relations and then all of that history, because you maybe
won't like that so much when it comes to celebrating
US history. But hey, that single act is something we
can celebrate.
Speaker 1 (39:19):
You gotta look for the wins.
Speaker 3 (39:21):
That's right. Well, we've been hearing a lot of talk
in terms of selective reporting of history that is sanctioned
and or you know, pushed forth by the current administration.
They're co opting of a lot of official timelines. For example,
even I believe the Smithsonian they encouraged to get rid
(39:43):
of the depressing slavery parts, you know, Like I mean,
there's been a lot of that kind of rhetoric. I
just see, is there some of that involvement in this
or is that just sort of implied, like paid the
image of America that best serves this level of pride,
and let's not dwell too much on any of the
nasty bits.
Speaker 2 (40:05):
I mean, who, I don't know, it feels as though
that's what it is. They cite Schoolhouse Rock as a
classic example of the type of programming they're looking for.
Schoolhouse Rock. We all remember that that was around the
two hundredth birthday of the United States. It was not
nobody was told to make Schoolhouse Rock. That was a celebration.
(40:26):
That was something that was chosen. There is stuff in
there within Schoolhouse Rock that would be considered very patriotic,
but there's also subversive stuff in there if you watch
it with a keen eye. I think that's that is
maybe the essence of the United States, right like that,
(40:46):
that concept of let's talk about this, but let's be
a little honest with ourselves. And that's that's of course,
maybe not the official governmental stance being honest with folks.
Sorry y'all, but you had.
Speaker 1 (40:59):
Good animators, and good animators are always going to be
good animators and good authors are always going to be
subversive to some level, right that they're allowed to. They're
pushing the Overton window of what can and cannot be
discussed publicly and to the point about propaganda, that's kind
(41:19):
of what we're dancing around. That's the ask from the FCC.
And congrats to everybody who has the eminem earworm in
their head every time you hear fcc 're right there
with you.
Speaker 3 (41:30):
Right.
Speaker 1 (41:31):
So, the most important, one of the most important points
that I hope we can all agree with, folks, is
that whether you are a country or an individual, you
ultimately are the story that you choose to tell yourself.
You are the author of that. So your question then
(41:52):
becomes an ethical or a moral crossroads. How to your point, Matt,
how honest do you wish to be about your story?
And what do you want people to come after you
to take from it? To what degree are you comfortable
embellishing and lying to that well?
Speaker 3 (42:11):
And in Germany, for example, it is an absolute point
of national pride and a sense of responsibility from the
government and from let say, museums, and a lot of
the support for the arts to highlight and own one
hundred percent the failings of the German government, you know.
Speaker 1 (42:32):
And also not seeing the first verse of the national anthem.
Speaker 3 (42:35):
Yeah, I didn't know about that then, but I wouldn't
be surprised. All I do know is that, you know,
in going to various museums that highlight certain cultural aspects
of the history of Germany, they like, there's one in
particular that the founder of was absolutely a mega, mega
Nazi sympathizer, and they there's a whole plaque in the
when you walk in describing that fact and how this
(42:58):
is problematic, and and they very much. I mean, there's
even a whole concept and a delightfully long German word.
I believe it's bevangen Heights, Bevautegung that refers to this
collective responsibility and appreciation and acknowledgment of the horrors of
the Holocaust and the mistakes that they made as a country.
(43:19):
It seems like the only way to be otherwise you're
doomed to kind of repeat those mistakes.
Speaker 1 (43:23):
Oh, and I want to I want to clarify there
the only the third Stanza of the National Anthem of
Germany is sung today. The first Stanza is discouraged due
to its association with the Nazi Party. And I think
that's cool and not a propagandistic issue at all. That's
(43:44):
just like, let's say we don't want to own that
in terms of like making it part of our national
identity in that respect, but that's different than acknowledging and
openly discussing and critiquing the failings of the past. That's
I wouldn't say, that's like varying something. That's just being respectful.
I think it's a good thing. It's exactly not illegal
(44:06):
to do so. They're saying this is part of history. However,
we're not going to dance to this salt.
Speaker 2 (44:14):
No.
Speaker 3 (44:14):
The function of the national anthem, as we also discussed
recently on an episode of Ridiculous History, is to is
meant to kind of put forth the spirit of what
the nation is and represents. Like I believe it was,
there was a divide between uh to Slavic countries, Czech
Republic and oh geez, I'm totally forgetting the other one,
(44:34):
but they once had a shared national anthem. When they split,
they sort of split the national anthem too, to represent
each of their individual perspectives and cultural identities. So to
your point, then, I think leaving that out it much
better represents the current reflection of that national identity, Whereas
what we're doing here seems to be a lot of
window dressing.
Speaker 1 (44:55):
This is also interesting because again it's a voluntary call
before conscription of media occurs. Right, And and I've got
to ask you, Matt, just to confirm for me, the
FCC is not paying people for this. They are paying
companies for this. They're asking them to or they're advocating
(45:20):
for a positive pro America set of content. But if
they did pay them, would they pay them in freedom dollars?
Speaker 3 (45:31):
Oh?
Speaker 2 (45:32):
Ben, freedom dollars? You are making a reference to a
brand new company script that the US military is rolling
out at Fort Hood with their new forty two bistro,
the exciting new campus style dining venue. This designed a
mirror a modern university dining experience. It's operated by the
Compass Group.
Speaker 3 (45:51):
It's a concept, Matt. It's it's a dining concept.
Speaker 1 (45:54):
It's a concept of a plan.
Speaker 2 (45:56):
Okay, that is correct, and we're going to talk about that.
But I just want to put this here really quickly
for people who just happen to hear this part. We're
talking a lot about the German military. There were referencing
back to the US military World War Two quite a bit.
If you want to look up the Guardian and then
ben Quinn qui n n look up a little title
(46:19):
something he wrote on February fifteenth, British and German military
chiefs press moral case for rearmament, and it's all about
how Britain and Germany need to be prepared for war
with Russia, so they need to spend billions and billions
of dollars building war machines and preparing troops and systems
to fight Russia. I would just say there's probably a
(46:42):
bigger thing that's gonna come our way pretty soon that
it does have to do with Russia, but there are
a lot more folks involved, and who's going to be
on what side. It's going to be crazy. It'll be
fun and horrifying.
Speaker 1 (46:55):
Spin it up.
Speaker 2 (46:55):
Neil Yeap, speaking of spinning up militaries, let's just jump
back over to Fort Hood. Check out Army dot Mill
and you'll find this Army launches revolutionary campus style dining
to modernize soldier fueling. This is just a it's not
even really a story. It's just it's almost a press
(47:17):
release putting out there that they're these new things called
freedom dollars that troops will be using. The equivalent of
around thirty nine US dollars per day where they can
walk into this place, they can order breakfast, use some
of their freedom dollars, swipe a little card, and then
go do all the stuff you're doing for that day.
(47:39):
They come back for lunch, swipe your card again, and
then come back for dinner, swipe it again, and you
can use it at any time throughout the day. You
have an allotment of thirty nine dollars US in freedom dollars,
which are not actual dollars.
Speaker 3 (47:51):
What are they tied to? What's the value of them
tied to? Is it like Tiether coin or something like what?
I don't understand.
Speaker 2 (47:57):
Well, it's tied to the soldier's pay. So the way
it functions, it's like just giving them money but not
having to actually deal in real money. It's very strange
because then the transaction comes basically when I guess Compass
Group and whoever's operating the whole system there takes money
(48:17):
out of each one of those individual soldiers pay just
through maybe the larger organization as one bulk sum.
Speaker 1 (48:24):
Yeah, let's talk about Compass Group, because Compass Group is
a big deal contractor a lot of US in the
audience will be familiar with them because they are what
you would call a food service support services company. So
kind of like how a lot of civilian restaurants use
Cisco to give you all their like staple products and
(48:48):
you know, the go to stuff. Pumpus Group is deep, deep,
deep in the cafeterias of the fighting forces and the messholes.
And it sounds like their big improvement here, or their
big innovation we could call it, is to change the
old system where you would swipe a card and you
(49:09):
would get a set, you know, lunch tray. You would
basically get a lunchible type thing. You didn't get to
choose and pick different stuff. You would just get your
steak and lobster and say beat me here, Dylan. Oh,
we're going to war with a rod. That's why they're
feeding us so well today. Now the thing is, which.
Speaker 3 (49:30):
Did come down recently. I believe a recent menu was
reflecting those options.
Speaker 1 (49:34):
Yeah, yes, yes, sir. Now the thing is, or it
appears to be, the innovation that you have. Essentially this
per dium right based on your rank, and you can
spend it on individual items. If you decide to skip breakfast,
that allotment rolls over to lunch. If you decide to
(49:56):
skip lunch, you can really go go nuts with your
freedom dollars at dinner, but it does not roll over
to the next day.
Speaker 3 (50:04):
I still don't understand. I'm sorry if I'm being a
bonehead about this. It's sort of like your your commissary
account in prison.
Speaker 1 (50:13):
A little bit not a bad comparison. The commissary accounts
would roll over.
Speaker 3 (50:18):
Has this real money and when your and your family
members can deposit money into that account on your behalf, yes,
so it's okay. So it's not like that. That's the
part that's confusing me, Like, I just don't understand where
this imaginary money is coming from and why what is
the value of of being this token rather than just
like a bank account, like a special bank account, like.
Speaker 2 (50:39):
My kid's lunch account at school. You know, it's making
the system more efficient. That's the same reason why your
kid has a lunch account. Just when your kid goes
up in orders food. When my kid goes up and
orders food, you just swipe thing. It takes the money
out of that specific account and your transaction is done.
It doesn't actually come out of a bank account or
anything like that. It's it's all enclosed in one system,
(50:59):
and it's kind of the same thing for this. It's
basically easier for the forty two b STRO to function
in that way. I think.
Speaker 1 (51:06):
Yeah. And also on a microcosmic scale, right you're let's
say you're in the armed forces, you go to forty
two b stroke. Before this innovation, if the if the
mess was serving Okra, you would still get it on
your trade even if you hated Okra. But now at
least the advertised appeal is now you can say, hey,
(51:29):
I don't like Okra, so I'll take my but dollar
thirty five worth of Okra and roll that over to
lunch and I'll get an extra potatoes.
Speaker 3 (51:39):
Yeah, quick is no for you'd be a case of
DA But I fully understand that. I think that that
choice is cool and obviously a positive future for you know,
uh service folks. But I don't understand who is it
benefiting that it is this this ephemeral token that isn't
like an actual dollar.
Speaker 2 (51:57):
It probably saves some kind of money somewhere within the
chain because rather than having that money transferred to you know,
each individual soldier's account or something to to then come
out of that account. And you know, if you think
about that loop that would occur now and basically anyone
(52:17):
who was there at Fort Hood who is going to
be a part of this program, they money from the
US government's allocated for those troops right for their pay
just goes directly into this account. I think that's honestly.
I think it's efficiency. I think that's all it is.
Speaker 1 (52:34):
Yeah, they're saving money on the accounting back end. Will
they lose money on food waste that remains.
Speaker 2 (52:41):
To be seen?
Speaker 3 (52:43):
Probably that's a little suspicious, is all. There's somewhere, there's
someone somewhere along the chain that's benefiting from this, and
I don't fully understand who it is, and doesn't seem
it's the Compass Group. Yeah, well okay, maybe that'd be obvious.
Speaker 2 (52:55):
Yeah, for sure, it's a giant contract involved. There lots
of money involved. You to read more about it if
you head on over to Army Dot Mill there. It's
also posting a lot of other places. They give you
some of the more detailed like in the back end,
why it's happening and how the contract is functioning. If
you are a super hungry soldier, you can pay real
(53:16):
dollars for more stuff, and if you find yourself as
a super hungry soldier, we hope that you find some
freedom dollars. Freedom isn't free, it's about thirty nine dollars
each day. We'll be right back afterward from our sponsors.
Speaker 1 (53:36):
And we have returned folks. Our weekly Strange News segment
is running a little long, which is a beautiful problem
to have because there's so much stuff we did not
get to. We do want to let you know that scientists, eggheads,
boffins have a bold new plan to catch three I
at lists, but you have to act fast. It takes
(53:58):
a lot of money, and we're not talking freedom dollars,
So please go over to LiveScience dot com to check
that out in full. Big thanks to Matthew Williams, the
journalist who wrote that on February twenty first, twenty twenty six.
One of the other big stories that we didn't get
to today is the story about the Department of Justice,
(54:20):
the continuing saga of Jeffrey Epstein. It turns out that
the my fellow Americans, the folks you pay to uphold
the law in the Department of Justice, might be in
a cover up.
Speaker 3 (54:36):
No no, just like.
Speaker 1 (54:39):
I know it's kirk. I know it's very on brand
and on the nose for me to propose a conspiracy.
But according to Steven Fowler, who just published a fascinating
exclusive on NPR, the US Justice Department has withheld, removed,
also known as destroyed, some of the Epstein files, specifically
(55:04):
related to the current president of the United States.
Speaker 3 (55:08):
We're not talking about just redacted. We're talking about these
exists in certain inventories of the pages, but the versions
that were released they've been omitted entirely. Yes.
Speaker 1 (55:18):
Yeah, some of these files, as we know, have not
been made public despite a law explicitly mandating their release.
MPR was able to look at multiple sets of the
kind of stuff we really dig into, folks think of it,
like the metadata of these documents. They found unique serial
(55:39):
numbers that appeared before and after these fifty missing pages
of FBI interviews. To be quite clear, this was the
FBI speaking with at multiple occasions. A woman who accused
current President Donald Trump of sexual abuse when she was
(56:01):
a minor said this happened multiple times. The FBI spoke
with her at least four times that we know of.
Speaker 2 (56:11):
It's reminded me of Gosh, Chrit I don't know, guys,
you have to chog my memory here. Isn't there a
court case about a certain executive branch leader who had
a bunch of documents and was handling classified documents?
Speaker 1 (56:32):
Sadly you're gonna have to narrow that down for us.
Speaker 2 (56:34):
Oh yeah, wait, that's been most of the Well, I
note there was one who was president before the last
one who had this whole thing. And then there's something
about a guy who died in prison when he was
I can't remember it all.
Speaker 1 (56:49):
Well, it's interesting that you say that. I still think
we should round up everybody named Jeff just to check in.
But we do have a response from the White House
from spokeswoman Abigail Jackson speaking to MPR in reply to
their investigation, which is pretty terrifying and you should look
(57:11):
it up. Jackson told MPR, quote, just as President Trump
has said he's been totally exonerated on anything related to Epstein,
and by releasing thousands of pages of documents, cooperating with
the House Oversight Committee subpoena request, signing the Epstein Files
Transparency Act, and calling for more investigations into Epstein's Democrat friends,
(57:36):
President Trump has done more for Epstein's victims than anyone
before him. The quote goes on, but I'll.
Speaker 3 (57:43):
End it there. Yeah, he definitely did stuff to Epstein's victims,
that's for sure.
Speaker 1 (57:49):
Yeah, is that too much?
Speaker 3 (57:51):
I mean, I just know, man, what a thing to say.
I don't know. I'm sorry. It's just hard to stomach
that level of obfuscation where it's like you're saying, you
accuse the other side of that with you yourself, you.
Speaker 1 (58:03):
Know, guilty of we changed the history, right. It reminds
me of that old joke from back in the Pentagon.
We don't lie, just sometimes the truth changes. Don't let
the wool get pulled over your eyes, Sheep and wolves alike.
I know we didn't. We haven't dug into this yet,
(58:25):
but we hope that you join us for our upcoming
episode on the continuing Epstein File revelations. There's a lot
going on. This will probably be a pretty disturbing deep
dive for all of us, and we.
Speaker 3 (58:43):
Have to do it.
Speaker 1 (58:44):
In the meantime, we would love to hear your take
on any of the stories that we discussed and the
stories we did not have time to get to. Please
find us online, call us on a phone. You can
always send us an email, but before you do, we
always went in with good news. We couldn't leave you
without a dope beat to step to Dylan Tennessee pal Fagan,
(59:07):
you posted a joke about vacuum cleaners.
Speaker 3 (59:11):
Yeah, go on back to the beginning of the episode.
I had a friend whose dad was a vacuum salesman,
And when you'd ask him how business is going, he'd say,
it sucks, but it's picking up dot dot.
Speaker 1 (59:25):
No, put in the drubs, put it lost you and
find us online.
Speaker 3 (59:30):
Indeed, find us at the handle conspiracy Stuff for Conspiracy
Stuff show, depending on your social media platform of choice.
Just just you know, throw them out there and see
what comes back. You can also reach us another way.
Speaker 2 (59:43):
Our phone number is one eight three three std WYTK.
Turn those letters into numbers and give it a call.
You got three minutes. Give yourself a cool nickname so
we can remember who you are next time you call.
If you want to send us an email, you can
do that too.
Speaker 1 (59:57):
We are the entities the read which piece of correspondence
we receive. Be well aware yet unafraid. Sometimes the void
rights back thanks to everybody hitting us up, giving us
random facts and requesting random facts, here's one for free.
In nineteen oh one, there was a huge vacuum cleaner
(01:00:18):
that was horse drawn. It was powered by petrol. It
was called the Puffy Billy and everyone was scared of it.
Conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 2 (01:00:47):
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 Noah.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
They call me Ben. We're joyed as always with our
super producer Dylan the Tennessee pal Fagett. Most importantly, you
are you. You are here that makes this the stuff
they don't want you to know. Welcome back to our
weekly strange news program. If you are hearing this the
evening it publishes, it is Monday, March the second. Can
(00:52):
you guys believe it? February just came and went like.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
Boil? Boy? Did it ever? In like a lion, out
like a lamb? Or that's March. February has been weird though. Man.
I had a therapy session this morning, and I realized
that February bums me out. Do other people get bummed
out by February? I think it's just the cold in
the wet for.
Speaker 1 (01:11):
Me sure, and the various obligations in the West, you know.
First off, congrats to everybody who survived Valentine's Day, if
your partner told you they didn't want anything, they were
probably kind of lying. So kudos to all of us
for getting through that one.
Speaker 3 (01:31):
Congrats for having a partner. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (01:34):
Also right, Yeah, We've got so much weird stuff going on.
We're of course gearing up for the Epstein Files. We've
got some news about technology, We've got some news about
company script, We've got some worldwide and localized, very strange news.
(01:55):
Maybe we start with this one. Do you guys have
robot vacuum cleaners?
Speaker 3 (01:59):
It did? I put big googly eyes on it. My
ex partner did, uh, And we called him something like
Hubert or you know, anthropomorphized the little guy. He was
real dumb. I think I've mentioned it was not even
a proper roomba, and I have spoken and evangelized on
behalf of Shark. But let me tell you their robot
(02:19):
floor vacuums not so good, but their stick vacuums excellent.
Speaker 1 (02:23):
Oh, Matt, I have to tell you we recently on
Ridiculous History did a deep dive into the history of
vacuum cleaners.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
Oh that's fun. I remember doing that for Infamous Inventors
slash Stuff of Genius.
Speaker 3 (02:38):
It sucked. Oh, I know, I know, it was a
little longer nose, but it was begging for it. Ben,
what was the term that you coined for the international
cabal the vacuum cleaner cartels?
Speaker 1 (02:50):
Yet this was breaking news for us. I am probably
the first person to speak in public about a secret
society a corporations called Big.
Speaker 3 (03:01):
Suck, Big Suck. Yep.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
There's a lot of stuff going on in the world today,
so it's easy to miss those sorts of conspiracies. Luckily,
we have some breaking news from a guy named Sammy
Adoufol who recently was working with his robot vacuum cleaner,
and he wanted to make it possible for him to
(03:24):
operate this thing using a PlayStation controller. Pretty cool.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
Well, wait, now that's possible. They didn't. They operate that
many sub that imploded with a PlayStation controller? They did? Yeah,
maybe it was Xbox. But you guys also remember that
when we did our live show on sound at National Sawdust,
I whipped out a PlayStation controller and used it to
control some audio software. You can map those controls just
about anything, So I really hope he found success with
this endeavor.
Speaker 1 (03:48):
Sammy did find success. That's the thing he was working
with a brand of robot vacuum called the Dji Romo.
And he said, Okay, I'm going to figure out how
to use my PlayStation controller that I just have lying
around as as a tool of convenience. Low and behold.
(04:13):
When he tried to reverse engineer the protocol used by
Romo to communicate with its servers, it didn't just let
him access his own little vacuum bought. It gave him
access to around six thousand, seven hundred other robot vacuums
(04:34):
of the same brand across the United States, Europe, and China.
Speaker 2 (04:40):
So he could control them.
Speaker 1 (04:42):
He was able to get the information from them, so
he could get not just camera footage. These things are
camera enabled, but he could gain access to audio and
he could also see the map, the blueprint of the
house that the robot.
Speaker 3 (05:03):
Wait, say, and we haven't we talked about the issues too,
about those things uploading schematics or blueprints and layouts to
the cloud. Yes, against people's perhaps common knowledge.
Speaker 2 (05:14):
But what we're saying is anyone on the company side
or someone that wanted to get in could have audio
and video capabilities within your home.
Speaker 1 (05:27):
Yeah, let's go over to the verge. This is this
is what we call funny, terrifying, like candy cigarettes.
Speaker 3 (05:36):
Happy sad. Yeah, so romantic comedy, no way different.
Speaker 1 (05:41):
So Sean Hollister reports on this. He's a senior editor
founding member of the Verge, and what we what we
see is that he could access the information and to
your question, Matt, he could remotely control these if he win.
He tested this out by contacting a friend who also
(06:05):
owns one of these romos, and he could watch them
remotely map out each room of a house, ultimately generating
a complete two dimensional floor plan. And then he could
use any of these robots ip address to find their
approximate loading.
Speaker 2 (06:26):
Cool.
Speaker 3 (06:27):
Tragic comedy. Tragic comedy. That's what I was trying to
compart with. Man, Guys, are we.
Speaker 1 (06:33):
Cooked, Well, we're cooking for sure.
Speaker 3 (06:37):
We're cooking with grease as my partners.
Speaker 2 (06:42):
Ben. Every time we do an episode, a story about
a new thing that has some kind of spying capabilities,
if if you just happen to want them to have that.
As a bad actor, I just think about our phones
and our computers. It's just in our cars, our footwaight
hold on, and in our TVs crap.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
Yeah, oh and uh and your vacuum cleaners and your refrigerators. Uh,
maybe your dishwashers. Uh, probably some sex toys. At some point,
there's got.
Speaker 3 (07:12):
To be a new, modern, updated punchline to the old
is your refrigerator running joke? Is the refrigerator running? Well,
that is definitely spying on you. It's but spirited.
Speaker 1 (07:25):
Let's do this so we also have so much more
to get to.
Speaker 3 (07:29):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (07:30):
Not to sound too much like a luddite or knucklehead
shaking their fist at the sky.
Speaker 3 (07:36):
But we're shaking our heads right.
Speaker 1 (07:39):
We think everybody should be very careful with the so
called Internet of things. Check on your room, but make
sure that they still work for you.
Speaker 3 (07:50):
Talk to them. Nice to be on the right side
of the robot overlords. That's all we're saying. There was
spiced was cool, and you bought it like as toys
like Spikey spy tech, that's what it was, a little
walkie talkies and mirror shades, and it seemed like such
a cool, fun, adventurous thing to do. And now it's
(08:12):
just invasive and weird.
Speaker 1 (08:14):
And speaking of invasive and weird, we're gonna pause for
a word from our sponsors, and then what say we
get to some more strange news.
Speaker 3 (08:28):
And we're back to the shared techno healthscape that we
all occupy here in Atlanta, Georgia, which is turns out
to be one of the big testing grounds for a
little something called Weeimo. Have you guys seen the waimo
driverless vehicles toodling around our fair metropolis.
Speaker 2 (08:47):
No, I like it.
Speaker 3 (08:47):
You're out a little bit more out in the sticks, Matt.
But here here in the city, these guys everywhere I'm
messing with you. Matt. You're trust me, you're better off
for it. You've got a little bit of separation from
from this weird crap. I don't like it.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
I've seen some deliveries. I saw someone I won't say
get hit, but get bumped while a weimo was Because
you guys know, I look pretty deep in the city,
so I see a lot of waymo's. I saw one
making a left hand turn by a library, not with
not with any difficult traffic, but there was a person
(09:26):
jaywalking and the Weimo was slowly turning left and then
bumped them and the person, you know, understandably was upset.
Speaker 3 (09:37):
Not a fun robo fist bump kind of way.
Speaker 1 (09:40):
Like, No, not at like a high five cool HEGs
a fist bump way, but instead the person hit the ground, yelled,
ran away, and the weimo paused with other cars behind
it with human drivers, and then it just went on
its way. I think it was just recording video.
Speaker 3 (10:00):
Keep that. Why did they run? That's like a.
Speaker 2 (10:04):
You could get money out of that?
Speaker 1 (10:05):
Yeah, I guess they had. You know, everybody has their
own deep backstory.
Speaker 3 (10:10):
What's that the whole scenario, the trolley conundrum or whatever. Yeah,
it's sort of like what you know, this this AI
consciousness sentiment or whatever concept about what uh you know,
what what a robo car will do in order to like,
you know, save a human life. Right, It's it's that's
(10:31):
an interesting inverse of it though, Ben for sure and
I have not seen that particular thing go down, but
it does remind me of there's a story of ways
back about like all these waymos that were stuck in
a parking lot honking at each other and just like
you know, not seeing in Austin Powers where he's driving
the little truck thing and he's like stuck and keeps
backing up and pulling forward and back. Just that. I
(10:52):
love it. I think that's such good physical comedy. I
saw that at a little trailer at our one of
our local art house cinemas, uh for a you know
Austin Power our reducts series they were doing, and that
it cracked me up, very very funny. But we're seeing exactly.
We've certainly seen some issues regarding the technology behind Weimo.
Weimo being I think, the farthest ahead of the curve,
(11:15):
whatever the curve might be when it comes to robotaxis.
We know that Elon Musk has not had is way
behind in terms of rolling out his promised ROBOTAXI and
the Weaimo's got the R and D and the actual
trials in the wild to back up their technology, and
they are a thing that you can actually hail here
in Atlanta. Another thing that Weymo has done is partnered
(11:38):
with door Dash, which is I don't use DoorDash anymore.
I'm more of an uber eats guy, but DoorDash is
still very much a going concern for food and various
sundry deliveries, and they're now being delivered with Weaimo, which
seems problematic because I mean, geez, guys, there's a whole
piece I think in the new Yorker recently, or maybe
(11:58):
it was in the Times about just the gig economy
of everything and the gigification of everything, including apparently terrorism,
like there are like apps and like ways of doing
a single use like terrorist attack, like through telegram and
various things like that. I'm sorry, I'm getting way off topic,
but you know, if we can't deliver for Uber Eats
(12:22):
or door dash anymore because the robots are doing it, like,
what do we do to get ahead in a gig
economy type world where even things that once had a
future where you could retire, you know, are no longer
living really in that model or operating within that model.
So now the humans that work for door Dash, they've
(12:43):
got a new opportunity to make a little money, which
is to close the doors physically by hand of way
mos left open by lazy passengers because weirdly enough, I
don't know if you guys run into this with these
a lot of these minivans that you get picked up
in with Uber, you don't know if it's an electric
door or not, so you just kind of assume that
(13:05):
it is and just sort of pull on the thing
and then step back and see what happens. Because if
you pull too hard on those electric doors, it can
be bad and then the driver will get mad at you.
You would think that the Waymos would have built in
an automatic opening and closing door piece of technology into
a unmanned vehicle. Apparently not the case. So you make
twenty four bucks up to your thanks ben up to
(13:28):
twenty four bucks if a door is left open, because
the car will not continue on to its next fair
if the door is left open. And the sense you know,
DoorDash drivers are kind of on demand and they're now
in the system with these weaymo cars. They can be
hailed nearby physical you know drivers to pull up and
(13:50):
close the door and you can make up to twenty
four bucks. I've heard somewhere in the median would be
around eleven bucks per manual door closing. Is this not
to see per door? Well, oh right, not sure about that.
Let's just read a little bit from Fortune magazine. They
have a bit of a perspective on this. Some Waimo drivers,
(14:12):
they say in their headline, are so lazy that gig
workers are getting paid twenty four bucks to close the
door for them. Remember when a driver would get paid
to open the door for you you know, it was
like a whole like a chauffeur situation. What happened in
those days. The article is written by Catherina gian Gionio
(14:32):
Giino Giulino U and it starts like this, which I
love the reference to Back the Future in the hit
nineteen eighty five sci fi film Back in the Future,
we were promised flying cars and hoverboards. By twenty fifteen,
a decade later, however, we have automatic vehicles that crash
into polls and require a monthly subscription to adjust your seat. Oh,
(14:54):
Fortune is doing a very cute thing where it It
gives you the first paragraph and then has their it
like redacted. Be a bad boy and copy and paste
it into the old brave browser.
Speaker 1 (15:05):
Here.
Speaker 3 (15:05):
Let's just see how that goes. Is it gonna choke
on it? Does it like it? It likes it? It continues,
don't come at me, Fortune, Now, it might take two
cars to complete a trip, the robotaxi that drops you
off and another dispatch to close the door after you
step out. Some Robotaxi customers are so lazy. It turns
(15:25):
out that Weimo is teamed up with DoorDash to send
drivers to close the doors of automatic vehicles rendered immobile.
A reddit post in the r dash door dash dasher
subreddit shows a screenshot of a DoorDash offer in downtown
Atlanta to go close a Waimo door. The doordasher would
be paid an initial six twenty five to accept the
(15:45):
offer and an additional five dollars a punt completion of
the task. Techno Healthscape, y'all, is this the future we
were promised?
Speaker 2 (15:55):
Uhhh, it's the one that we've been warned again since
the nineteen sixties guys, since the students rose up and
began fully protesting. That's what, like the Mario Savios of
it all telling us to throw our bodies against the
gears and such, Right, that's what this is. We're literally
(16:16):
throwing our bodies against the doors of the machine, or.
Speaker 3 (16:20):
At least our hands, and that we then gently close
over the latch and push it so that they can
go on their way. Yeah, it's obviously a tech oversight
that they are now compensating for by doing this bizarre
ass around elbow workaround, which I just think is kind
(16:41):
of hilarious an and a real stark, you know, example
of this being not the future we were promised. And
then they haven't quite gotten it all figured out yet,
and then weirdly, we do still need humans to do
the oddest, most menial tasks. It was seem doesn't this
seem a little amp I don't know, not humiliating and
(17:01):
anybody that you know, I would not be grudge anybody
making a few bucks. But I mean, this is not
the only partnership with door Dash. It's my understanding that
that the original, the initial partnership is to automate DoorDash
deliveries with these weyms. So they're almost saying, Okay, well,
you don't have your Dasher job anymore, so we're going
to throw you the crumbs of pulling up to close
(17:25):
the door of your robot replacement.
Speaker 2 (17:28):
Yuck.
Speaker 3 (17:30):
I don't like it.
Speaker 2 (17:31):
Yeah, I don't even know. I just have lots of
opinions that I really do think we should just destroy
all the things there, all this, like the lud.
Speaker 3 (17:48):
I mean, there is something to that, you know, I mean,
it's I don't think it is being shortsighted to say
that this stuff is not good for humanity in the
long run.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
Yeah again, guys, society has to evolve in step with technology,
and that's not happening. Yet we're seeing a fluid situation
of booming, short lived economies and industries, right like the
folks who are closing waym doors and by the way,
(18:21):
thank you for that one. The folks who are doing
that remind me of something. You see a lot in
more cidified areas where you have all those e scooters
and e bikes, See them in thebed trucks, and people
are right now, humans are being paid to drive around
(18:42):
those things up and take them to a charging station.
Speaker 3 (18:45):
Or actually take them home and charge them themselves. I
think in some of those cases, Ben Yeah.
Speaker 1 (18:51):
Yeah, like some kind of charging station. And I wonder
how long that gig in particular will last. How far
away are we from an automated service replacing human labor
in recharging those bikes. I think it's going to happen
pretty soon.
Speaker 2 (19:10):
It's just so discouraging. Yeah, anyone on this planet that
is extremely good at a service, that is working in
a job that is generally looked down upon by folks
in c suites and you know, the upper echelons of society.
Someone who's a taxi driver, someone who's a really good
(19:31):
driver who really knows their way around a city around
an area, someone who's very courteous.
Speaker 3 (19:36):
Legency, the family ownership of a cab medallion for example, right,
pas who took the knowledge which is one of the
most difficult tests.
Speaker 2 (19:45):
For yeah, and can actually build a career on this
skill they have at being incredibly good at a service.
Like all of that stuff is going away and instead
of being replaced by similar things of you know, a
same caliber of service, we're getting automated things. And then
all the money it just goes up to a corporation
(20:06):
and ends up, you know, theoretically one day in the
pockets of investors on some market somewhere. Right. It's just,
it's just it's really discouraging from a humanity perspective.
Speaker 1 (20:20):
I'd also use the word non sustainable and untenable. I
don't think this is the long term, most successful path forward.
Speaker 3 (20:31):
For humans because they're selling us on this utopia or
they're trying to sell us on this like, you know,
what's the word common wage thing, what's the basic equality? Yes,
thank you, I don't buy that. I don't buy that
there's even a world where what and that's also called
communism kind of by the way, is it not where
(20:52):
we're all just paid a pool of money to exist
in the service of you know, some you know, we're
not individuals anymore, getting paid a universal living wage for
just existing.
Speaker 1 (21:05):
That's interesting because I was talking with one of my
old professors, and there is a surprisingly valid argument that
the United States is a communist country for the corporate class.
Speaker 3 (21:20):
Right. It's certainly an oligarchy, no question there, becoming more
and more so every day. And now we're getting into
this kind of techno mogul, sort of overlord kind of
of it all. And it just to remember, it seems
so quiet now, but remember when Uber and Lyft kind
of was becoming a thing and really supplanting those traditional
cab driver jobs that y'all were talking about, and there
(21:41):
was strikes and then there were scabs. I believe Uber
was scabbing in particular. Now we've got these way Mos
and these other attempts to do something similar, getting rid
of the human element of the thing that replaced the
first human element.
Speaker 2 (21:58):
You guys, remember when the human l element was in
advertising for a certain chemical company.
Speaker 3 (22:04):
Yes, shout out to daw what was it?
Speaker 2 (22:07):
What was the tags? I think it was Dow The
human element, that's what their little tagline for their entire
peration was for a while there interesting.
Speaker 1 (22:16):
And they make a lot of money off the human element,
just not in a helpful way to the humans.
Speaker 3 (22:21):
Is that a chemistry pun like the idea, like the
table of the elements, like we are yamming? Okay, got it?
Speaker 2 (22:27):
Well, it's also a nod to HDP and John Cena.
Speaker 3 (22:33):
Human But Matt just dmped his invisible cap there fully
behind that. I'm not trying to be doom and gloom here,
but it's hard not to be a Matt. You pointed
out this, or you put forth this idea of just
you know, revolt against the machines, and people are definitely
doing that the last little bit of this Fortune piece.
(22:53):
Autonomous vehicles often seem to be the target of vandalism
in recent events. In twenty twenty four, a man would
chase cruises avs with a hatchet in San Francisco. Employees
of General Motors short lived Robotaxi program told Fortune of
countless stories of people slashing tires and even stripping down
to moon the vehicles as they attempted to drive off.
(23:14):
More recently, in June of last year, demonstrators burned at
least six WAIMO vehicles to the ground in Los Angeles
during anti ice protests. Not quite sure what Weymo has
to do with ice, but I think it's it's just
a target of frustration. I think in general just about
the state of things doesn't feel great.
Speaker 2 (23:33):
Mm hmmm.
Speaker 3 (23:35):
That one went a little longer than I realized it would.
I thought it was just a little silly throwaway one.
But boy, oh boy, is there's some Does it have
some dystopian bones to it that I think was worth
sussing out. I'll just really quickly now I'm not going
to do The NHS contacted exorcist after staff reported seeing
ghosts in Norwich Hospice. I think the headline says it all.
(23:55):
The NHS is a British department, the National Health Survey
that maintains various aspects of the public health system there
in the UK. You know what, I think, like.
Speaker 2 (24:07):
The universal healthcare thing.
Speaker 3 (24:08):
Noel a little bit also involves ghosts and exorcists.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
Apparently, which have yet to be replaced by robots. Folks,
fellow conspiracy realists, this is one of my questions going
into this. When do we have our first automated Exorcist.
Has the time come? Should we text the Pope? I
think we must. I think we must do.
Speaker 2 (24:33):
You guys would put up with a couple of ghosts
if I could get universal health care.
Speaker 3 (24:37):
Being honest, bought me Marley, Jacob Marley, Ghost of Christmas Past,
all of.
Speaker 1 (24:43):
Them, as long as as long as the Haunting is
not a streaming or subscription service, I guess would be
a screaming service, now that I think about it.
Speaker 3 (24:54):
That's good. That's good. It's like a shutter subscription. Okay,
we're gonna our buddy Pete Hegg's geth hegg Zeth a
little bit, only because we've talked a good bit about
this whole pizza factor of like monitoring pizza delivery frequency
in the Washington, DC area. Much hay has been made
(25:15):
of that, and we have picked up on it and
run with it, and it's pretty interesting, kind of funny,
a little bit light, seems a little bit ridiculous, but
sure enough it's crossed the Secretary of War's desk, and recently,
I think last week, hegg Zeth told Fox News that
he is thinking of ordering random pizzas to throw everybody off,
(25:39):
referencing the pizza Pentagon Pizza Report, which of course uses
Google Maps to track popular times and flag surges at
four particular locations near the Pentagon. He said that US
war officials are aware of the open source monitoring that's
going on on a link that appears to tip their
hand a little bit as far as operating procedures and planning,
(26:03):
citing a CIA pizza order and a former franchise owner's observations.
We'll just leave that one there, and then I just
want to end my segment today. Also on hag Zeth,
have you guys seen this video that's making the rounds
as being a picked apart by eagle eyed weightlifting enthusiasts
and conspiracy theorists on the Internet of Pete Heggzeth supposedly
(26:25):
bench pressing three hundred and something odd pounds surrounded by
a bunch of dude bros clapping him on and giving
him the old you know, thumbs up and high fives
and all that, and you know, he does it. He
benches it, and he drops it down, he gets up
and pumps his fists and you know, gets fist pumps
all around the room. Well, a lot of these folks
that are kind of picking the video. Up part are
(26:47):
saying that there is no way in hell that that
was actually the amount of weight that he claimed it was,
for various reasons, one of which is the fact that
the bar. I don't know, if y'all have watched weightlifting videos,
you probably have benched yourselves. But if you've got a
lot of weight on that bar, the bar bends. It's
designed to do that. It is designed to flex a
(27:08):
little bit when you have that much weight on it,
and in the video of Hexath doing this feat of strength,
the bar does not bend. Number two. The thing that
gets pointed out a lot is there are clips on
the sides of the bar, and if you've spend any
time in the gym, you know that if you have
like a little bit of weight on the thing and
it can slide around, you want to put these little
(27:30):
clips on it to keep it from sliding off. But
if you have that much weight, adding even a little
bit of extra weight in the form of those clips
is kind of silly, and also so much weight, they're
not going to slide off, They're going to stay put,
So you don't do that. These things are clipped, which
is apparently a bit of a red flag. And third,
the rack. When he drops it on the rack. I've
(27:51):
seen ab videos of folks with this much weight dropping
in on the rack, the entire rack shakes, even if
it's bolted down to the ground. That much weight, when
you drop it back on the you know, the little shelf,
the hooks, whatever you call them, the entire rack shakes.
And speaking of shaking, another red flag was apparently when
you look at hegsth his arms and his weightlifting form,
(28:15):
which also has been kind of punked on a little bits,
they're not shaking when you're when you're bringing down that
much weight, and you see videos of seasoned weightlifters doing it,
you see this kind of tensing and shaking of the biceps,
and none of that is happening. So the the Internet
seems to think that heg Zeth actually faked this bench
(28:37):
press demonstration.
Speaker 2 (28:39):
Thoughts uh, I don't know if I'm watching the right
one or not. It is definitely Pete he in a
Camo shirt doing a bench press. There are three weights
on either side, a big.
Speaker 3 (28:53):
Fast boys, big leg like thick black ones.
Speaker 2 (28:55):
Right, yeah, you know, you imagine they're pretty heavy. He's
also got a spotter behind the bench that appears to
be a child, I'm not kidding. Appears to be a
young boy, like a high schooler maybe spotting him. And
I just wonder, when you're dealing with that kind of weight,
(29:16):
and a bench press in particular, it's just so dangerous
because things can happen, right, and you need somebody who's
spotting you that can actually handle that much weight, right.
And I don't know, maybe I'm watching the wrong one.
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (29:30):
Let's just I'm just look, there's just a lot of folks,
you know, taking this apart frame by frame, a lot
of very seasoned weight training, you know, enthusiasts and trainers
and jim rats that seem to be calling foul on this.
And I don't know. I wouldn't put it past him.
It's a little bit of an odd thing to lie about,
(29:52):
but I can't help it be a little bit convinced
by some of these critiques.
Speaker 2 (29:56):
Or maybe he's just swollen dude. Maybe the dude is
like super strong, maybe even huber strong.
Speaker 3 (30:04):
Cool enough, But I mean that's a lot, dude, three
point fifty or what's it supposed to be?
Speaker 2 (30:10):
Three fifteen three fifteen mm hmm.
Speaker 3 (30:15):
I don't even know. What my max bench presses. It's
not really something that I do a ton these days.
But I don't know, man, It's just I've seen videos
of much larger dudes than him trying this for this
much weight, and you see their arms kind of tensing
up and uh and shaking a little bit. Not to
mention the audio if it's you know, the real audio
from the room. When he plops that thing back down,
(30:38):
it barely makes a sound. And in other videos I've
seen it, people mentioned that much. It is a deafening
sound when it gets returned back to the rack. That's
all I got, guys, I don't know. I just thought
it was interesting. It's definitely a bit of a conspiracy
going on around the internet regarding, you know, potential weight
(30:58):
training fraud. Jo, why don't we take a quick break here,
a word from our sponsor, and then we'll come back.
We do have another slightly more important thing that's going
on with the Secretary of War that we'll get into
near the end of the show, but let's say quick break.
We're right back with more strange news.
Speaker 2 (31:19):
We have returned, just reminding everyone today is March second,
twenty twenty six, at least when this is ringing within
your ear holes. We are recording what you're hearing within
those ear holes. On February twenty fifth, twenty twenty six.
And guys, just to point this out here, as you know,
stamping history. Last night, the President of the United States
(31:41):
set a record for the longest State of the Union
address in history. We did it, uh you know Michigan. Yeah, yeah,
we've been is done.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
They figured it out in that speech State of the
Union ten ten No notes, good hustle.
Speaker 2 (32:00):
One of the most divisive when it comes to rhetoric
in the room being thrown at either side. It doesn't
matter who you support, just knowing when half of the
room is super angry and the other half is they
just couldn't get enough of it. It is weird to
see that kind of divide within the country and it
(32:20):
just doesn't feel very good. So you know what we need?
Speaker 1 (32:23):
What do we need?
Speaker 2 (32:24):
We need to bring everybody together and that is what
FCC Chairman Brendan Carr wants to do. So we're jumping
to a story from NPR. This was published on February
twenty first, twenty twenty six. FCC calls for more patriotic
pro America programming and run up to two hundred and
fiftieth anniversary. Got to read a tiny bit from this
(32:48):
just so we understand what that means. The Federal Communication
Commission is urging broadcasters to air more patriotic and pro
America content in honor of the two hundred fiftieth anniversary
of the of the Declaration of Independence. This is a
statement issued on Friday, February twentieth by that FCC Chairman
Brendan Carr, who described the quote Pledge America campaign as
(33:12):
a way for broadcasters to align themselves with the Salute
to America twenty fifty task force that was put together
by the executive branch of the government. Currently, Carr said
the country's broadcasters should use their national reach and ability
to inform and entertain audiences by upping programming that celebrates
(33:32):
the American journey and inspires its citizens by highlighting the
historic accomplishments of this great nation from our founding through
the Trump administration today.
Speaker 3 (33:43):
Sounds like the kind of space that would have usually
been occupied by a nice PBS series, you know, some
kind of documentary historical thing, you know, Ken Burns or
something like that. But ye, what they're describing sounds a
little more propagandastic to me.
Speaker 1 (33:57):
That it's interesting too, because if you go to Freedom
to Fifties website, which is cited in this NPR article,
then you're immediately taken to an official White House dot
gov site that has a countdown to the two hundred
and fiftieth anniversary. And guys, if you look at it,
(34:18):
when you when you first visit the site, you get
a pop up that says join the Golden Age or
Welcome to the Golden Age, and you can put your
email it.
Speaker 3 (34:27):
If you put on the special glasses, it turns into
a doomsday clock.
Speaker 2 (34:30):
Oh, don't put those on. Don't put those on there.
Speaker 1 (34:36):
Let me read it. Oh it says, oh, they consume
freedom is slavery. Okay, well I'm going to take these off.
Hush because a lot of people I thought looked human violation.
Speaker 2 (34:53):
Let's continue here, because the programming that you're talking about, nol.
I see both of you, guys, and I agree. In
the website, you can see the official release here from
the office of Chairman Brendan Carr. If you want to,
you could find it and the official stuff about the celebration.
But the programming you're talking about Noel is something that
is going to happen. This is one of those tent
(35:14):
pole things. Right before Brendan Carr said anything, before the
FCC did anything, before there was an official two fifty celebration,
you know that the government is saying that we're having broadcasters,
people who make podcasts, people make TV shows, Netflix shows,
all this stuff. They see this tent pole, oh, a
two hundred and fiftieth anniversary, they are going to make
programming without being told that's going to celebrate this because
(35:37):
people are we are all going to be interested in
watching that kind of thing.
Speaker 3 (35:41):
At the very least a new Netflix like collection.
Speaker 1 (35:43):
I love that point, Matt, because it's a thing that
would happen organically. It's the country's birthday. Why not celebrate.
We love birthdays here.
Speaker 2 (35:52):
And it's a big old birthday. We're getting up there
with the Roman birthdays right hold on it last.
Speaker 3 (36:00):
I'm just saying we check out our episode.
Speaker 1 (36:03):
Check out our old episode where we got super into
the theories of this one historian who proposes that empires
tend to have a lifespan of about two hundred to
two hundred and fifty years.
Speaker 2 (36:17):
It's cool, it's cool. It's fine, doesn't mean it's very chill.
Speaker 1 (36:19):
It doesn't have a lot of fun. Everything's great.
Speaker 2 (36:23):
So speaking of programming, though, let's get back to the
official statement, because car suggested that today's broadcasters, everybody, everyone
including us, also includes starting each day with the star
spangled banner or perhaps the pledge of allegiance. Now we've
spoken about this before, this concept of programming, someone programming
(36:44):
us to do something. Let's say every day when we
get into class and we sit down in our seats,
and then we look up at a symbol, and then
we say words that are meant to pledge our allegiance
to both that symbol and to God. It's an interesting concept.
Look up, whitest kids, you know, pledge of allegiance. That
is a hats off to all of you guys who
(37:07):
created that. But just think about that for a moment.
There are other concept here of potentially highlighting local sites
of significance, national and regional histories, maybe national park Service things, anything,
airworks of canonical US composers from back in the day.
Here's maybe the most important party. It sounds like I'm
(37:28):
saying that the FCC chairman is saying we have to
do this, he's not. According to the statement, radio and
TV organizations are under no obligation to participate in the
FCC's initiative. Quote, broadcasters can voluntarily choose to indicate their
commitment to the Pledge America campaign.
Speaker 3 (37:45):
Sign some kind of loyalty pledge. Like what are we
talking here? We know there's been a bit of a
fraud relationship with broadcasters and the current FCC.
Speaker 2 (37:54):
Well, hey, maybe this is an olive branch. Just just
sign sign your pledged to do this and we're cool. Well, hey, guys,
I say that we start signing, we sign this thing,
we start talking about stuff in America's history on our
strange news episodes. So if you don't mind, I'd like
to begin.
Speaker 1 (38:13):
Here's our first volunteer before we get conscripted.
Speaker 2 (38:16):
We are volunteering.
Speaker 3 (38:18):
Don't talk about the inconvenient bits though, Matt, don't go there.
Speaker 2 (38:21):
We are voluntarily choosing to indicate our commitment to the
Pledge America campaign. Here we go on this day in history,
March second, nineteen seventeen, a very significant day. That's when
the twenty eighth President of the United States, Woodrow Wilson,
signs the Puerto Rico Federal Relations Act of nineteen seventeen,
officially granting birthright US citizenship to anyone born in Puerto
(38:45):
Rico from April eighteen ninety nine onwards.
Speaker 3 (38:48):
Even that awful, bad bunny, I'm just kidding, yeah, bunny,
I'm just speaking, just putting car lands of our time.
Speaker 2 (38:57):
I think that's an amazing thing that happened in American history,
and we should just uh, well, don't don't look up
the full history of Puerto Rico in the United States
Relations and then all of that history, because you maybe
won't like that so much when it comes to celebrating
US history. But hey, that single act is something we
can celebrate.
Speaker 1 (39:19):
You gotta look for the wins.
Speaker 3 (39:21):
That's right. Well, we've been hearing a lot of talk
in terms of selective reporting of history that is sanctioned
and or you know, pushed forth by the current administration.
They're co opting of a lot of official timelines. For example,
even I believe the Smithsonian they encouraged to get rid
(39:43):
of the depressing slavery parts, you know, Like I mean,
there's been a lot of that kind of rhetoric. I
just see, is there some of that involvement in this
or is that just sort of implied, like paid the
image of America that best serves this level of pride,
and let's not dwell too much on any of the
nasty bits.
Speaker 2 (40:05):
I mean, who, I don't know, it feels as though
that's what it is. They cite Schoolhouse Rock as a
classic example of the type of programming they're looking for.
Schoolhouse Rock. We all remember that that was around the
two hundredth birthday of the United States. It was not
nobody was told to make Schoolhouse Rock. That was a celebration.
(40:26):
That was something that was chosen. There is stuff in
there within Schoolhouse Rock that would be considered very patriotic,
but there's also subversive stuff in there if you watch
it with a keen eye. I think that's that is
maybe the essence of the United States, right like that,
(40:46):
that concept of let's talk about this, but let's be
a little honest with ourselves. And that's that's of course,
maybe not the official governmental stance being honest with folks.
Sorry y'all, but you had.
Speaker 1 (40:59):
Good animators, and good animators are always going to be
good animators and good authors are always going to be
subversive to some level, right that they're allowed to. They're
pushing the Overton window of what can and cannot be
discussed publicly and to the point about propaganda, that's kind
(41:19):
of what we're dancing around. That's the ask from the FCC.
And congrats to everybody who has the eminem earworm in
their head every time you hear fcc 're right there
with you.
Speaker 3 (41:30):
Right.
Speaker 1 (41:31):
So, the most important, one of the most important points
that I hope we can all agree with, folks, is
that whether you are a country or an individual, you
ultimately are the story that you choose to tell yourself.
You are the author of that. So your question then
(41:52):
becomes an ethical or a moral crossroads. How to your point, Matt,
how honest do you wish to be about your story?
And what do you want people to come after you
to take from it? To what degree are you comfortable
embellishing and lying to that well?
Speaker 3 (42:11):
And in Germany, for example, it is an absolute point
of national pride and a sense of responsibility from the
government and from let say, museums, and a lot of
the support for the arts to highlight and own one
hundred percent the failings of the German government, you know.
Speaker 1 (42:32):
And also not seeing the first verse of the national anthem.
Speaker 3 (42:35):
Yeah, I didn't know about that then, but I wouldn't
be surprised. All I do know is that, you know,
in going to various museums that highlight certain cultural aspects
of the history of Germany, they like, there's one in
particular that the founder of was absolutely a mega, mega
Nazi sympathizer, and they there's a whole plaque in the
when you walk in describing that fact and how this
(42:58):
is problematic, and and they very much. I mean, there's
even a whole concept and a delightfully long German word.
I believe it's bevangen Heights, Bevautegung that refers to this
collective responsibility and appreciation and acknowledgment of the horrors of
the Holocaust and the mistakes that they made as a country.
(43:19):
It seems like the only way to be otherwise you're
doomed to kind of repeat those mistakes.
Speaker 1 (43:23):
Oh, and I want to I want to clarify there
the only the third Stanza of the National Anthem of
Germany is sung today. The first Stanza is discouraged due
to its association with the Nazi Party. And I think
that's cool and not a propagandistic issue at all. That's
(43:44):
just like, let's say we don't want to own that
in terms of like making it part of our national
identity in that respect, but that's different than acknowledging and
openly discussing and critiquing the failings of the past. That's
I wouldn't say, that's like varying something. That's just being respectful.
I think it's a good thing. It's exactly not illegal
(44:06):
to do so. They're saying this is part of history. However,
we're not going to dance to this salt.
Speaker 2 (44:14):
No.
Speaker 3 (44:14):
The function of the national anthem, as we also discussed
recently on an episode of Ridiculous History, is to is
meant to kind of put forth the spirit of what
the nation is and represents. Like I believe it was,
there was a divide between uh to Slavic countries, Czech
Republic and oh geez, I'm totally forgetting the other one,
(44:34):
but they once had a shared national anthem. When they split,
they sort of split the national anthem too, to represent
each of their individual perspectives and cultural identities. So to
your point, then, I think leaving that out it much
better represents the current reflection of that national identity, Whereas
what we're doing here seems to be a lot of
window dressing.
Speaker 1 (44:55):
This is also interesting because again it's a voluntary call
before conscription of media occurs. Right, And and I've got
to ask you, Matt, just to confirm for me, the
FCC is not paying people for this. They are paying
companies for this. They're asking them to or they're advocating
(45:20):
for a positive pro America set of content. But if
they did pay them, would they pay them in freedom dollars?
Speaker 3 (45:31):
Oh?
Speaker 2 (45:32):
Ben, freedom dollars? You are making a reference to a
brand new company script that the US military is rolling
out at Fort Hood with their new forty two bistro,
the exciting new campus style dining venue. This designed a
mirror a modern university dining experience. It's operated by the
Compass Group.
Speaker 3 (45:51):
It's a concept, Matt. It's it's a dining concept.
Speaker 1 (45:54):
It's a concept of a plan.
Speaker 2 (45:56):
Okay, that is correct, and we're going to talk about that.
But I just want to put this here really quickly
for people who just happen to hear this part. We're
talking a lot about the German military. There were referencing
back to the US military World War Two quite a bit.
If you want to look up the Guardian and then
ben Quinn qui n n look up a little title
(46:19):
something he wrote on February fifteenth, British and German military
chiefs press moral case for rearmament, and it's all about
how Britain and Germany need to be prepared for war
with Russia, so they need to spend billions and billions
of dollars building war machines and preparing troops and systems
to fight Russia. I would just say there's probably a
(46:42):
bigger thing that's gonna come our way pretty soon that
it does have to do with Russia, but there are
a lot more folks involved, and who's going to be
on what side. It's going to be crazy. It'll be
fun and horrifying.
Speaker 1 (46:55):
Spin it up.
Speaker 2 (46:55):
Neil Yeap, speaking of spinning up militaries, let's just jump
back over to Fort Hood. Check out Army dot Mill
and you'll find this Army launches revolutionary campus style dining
to modernize soldier fueling. This is just a it's not
even really a story. It's just it's almost a press
(47:17):
release putting out there that they're these new things called
freedom dollars that troops will be using. The equivalent of
around thirty nine US dollars per day where they can
walk into this place, they can order breakfast, use some
of their freedom dollars, swipe a little card, and then
go do all the stuff you're doing for that day.
(47:39):
They come back for lunch, swipe your card again, and
then come back for dinner, swipe it again, and you
can use it at any time throughout the day. You
have an allotment of thirty nine dollars US in freedom dollars,
which are not actual dollars.
Speaker 3 (47:51):
What are they tied to? What's the value of them
tied to? Is it like Tiether coin or something like what?
I don't understand.
Speaker 2 (47:57):
Well, it's tied to the soldier's pay. So the way
it functions, it's like just giving them money but not
having to actually deal in real money. It's very strange
because then the transaction comes basically when I guess Compass
Group and whoever's operating the whole system there takes money
(48:17):
out of each one of those individual soldiers pay just
through maybe the larger organization as one bulk sum.
Speaker 1 (48:24):
Yeah, let's talk about Compass Group, because Compass Group is
a big deal contractor a lot of US in the
audience will be familiar with them because they are what
you would call a food service support services company. So
kind of like how a lot of civilian restaurants use
Cisco to give you all their like staple products and
(48:48):
you know, the go to stuff. Pumpus Group is deep, deep,
deep in the cafeterias of the fighting forces and the messholes.
And it sounds like their big improvement here, or their
big innovation we could call it, is to change the
old system where you would swipe a card and you
(49:09):
would get a set, you know, lunch tray. You would
basically get a lunchible type thing. You didn't get to
choose and pick different stuff. You would just get your
steak and lobster and say beat me here, Dylan. Oh,
we're going to war with a rod. That's why they're
feeding us so well today. Now the thing is, which.
Speaker 3 (49:30):
Did come down recently. I believe a recent menu was
reflecting those options.
Speaker 1 (49:34):
Yeah, yes, yes, sir. Now the thing is, or it
appears to be, the innovation that you have. Essentially this
per dium right based on your rank, and you can
spend it on individual items. If you decide to skip breakfast,
that allotment rolls over to lunch. If you decide to
(49:56):
skip lunch, you can really go go nuts with your
freedom dollars at dinner, but it does not roll over
to the next day.
Speaker 3 (50:04):
I still don't understand. I'm sorry if I'm being a
bonehead about this. It's sort of like your your commissary
account in prison.
Speaker 1 (50:13):
A little bit not a bad comparison. The commissary accounts
would roll over.
Speaker 3 (50:18):
Has this real money and when your and your family
members can deposit money into that account on your behalf, yes,
so it's okay. So it's not like that. That's the
part that's confusing me, Like, I just don't understand where
this imaginary money is coming from and why what is
the value of of being this token rather than just
like a bank account, like a special bank account, like.
Speaker 2 (50:39):
My kid's lunch account at school. You know, it's making
the system more efficient. That's the same reason why your
kid has a lunch account. Just when your kid goes
up in orders food. When my kid goes up and
orders food, you just swipe thing. It takes the money
out of that specific account and your transaction is done.
It doesn't actually come out of a bank account or
anything like that. It's it's all enclosed in one system,
(50:59):
and it's kind of the same thing for this. It's
basically easier for the forty two b STRO to function
in that way. I think.
Speaker 1 (51:06):
Yeah. And also on a microcosmic scale, right you're let's
say you're in the armed forces, you go to forty
two b stroke. Before this innovation, if the if the
mess was serving Okra, you would still get it on
your trade even if you hated Okra. But now at
least the advertised appeal is now you can say, hey,
(51:29):
I don't like Okra, so I'll take my but dollar
thirty five worth of Okra and roll that over to
lunch and I'll get an extra potatoes.
Speaker 3 (51:39):
Yeah, quick is no for you'd be a case of
DA But I fully understand that. I think that that
choice is cool and obviously a positive future for you know,
uh service folks. But I don't understand who is it
benefiting that it is this this ephemeral token that isn't
like an actual dollar.
Speaker 2 (51:57):
It probably saves some kind of money somewhere within the
chain because rather than having that money transferred to you know,
each individual soldier's account or something to to then come
out of that account. And you know, if you think
about that loop that would occur now and basically anyone
(52:17):
who was there at Fort Hood who is going to
be a part of this program, they money from the
US government's allocated for those troops right for their pay
just goes directly into this account. I think that's honestly.
I think it's efficiency. I think that's all it is.
Speaker 1 (52:34):
Yeah, they're saving money on the accounting back end. Will
they lose money on food waste that remains.
Speaker 2 (52:41):
To be seen?
Speaker 3 (52:43):
Probably that's a little suspicious, is all. There's somewhere, there's
someone somewhere along the chain that's benefiting from this, and
I don't fully understand who it is, and doesn't seem
it's the Compass Group. Yeah, well okay, maybe that'd be obvious.
Speaker 2 (52:55):
Yeah, for sure, it's a giant contract involved. There lots
of money involved. You to read more about it if
you head on over to Army Dot Mill there. It's
also posting a lot of other places. They give you
some of the more detailed like in the back end,
why it's happening and how the contract is functioning. If
you are a super hungry soldier, you can pay real
(53:16):
dollars for more stuff, and if you find yourself as
a super hungry soldier, we hope that you find some
freedom dollars. Freedom isn't free, it's about thirty nine dollars
each day. We'll be right back afterward from our sponsors.
Speaker 1 (53:36):
And we have returned folks. Our weekly Strange News segment
is running a little long, which is a beautiful problem
to have because there's so much stuff we did not
get to. We do want to let you know that scientists, eggheads,
boffins have a bold new plan to catch three I
at lists, but you have to act fast. It takes
(53:58):
a lot of money, and we're not talking freedom dollars,
So please go over to LiveScience dot com to check
that out in full. Big thanks to Matthew Williams, the
journalist who wrote that on February twenty first, twenty twenty six.
One of the other big stories that we didn't get
to today is the story about the Department of Justice,
(54:20):
the continuing saga of Jeffrey Epstein. It turns out that
the my fellow Americans, the folks you pay to uphold
the law in the Department of Justice, might be in
a cover up.
Speaker 3 (54:36):
No no, just like.
Speaker 1 (54:39):
I know it's kirk. I know it's very on brand
and on the nose for me to propose a conspiracy.
But according to Steven Fowler, who just published a fascinating
exclusive on NPR, the US Justice Department has withheld, removed,
also known as destroyed, some of the Epstein files, specifically
(55:04):
related to the current president of the United States.
Speaker 3 (55:08):
We're not talking about just redacted. We're talking about these
exists in certain inventories of the pages, but the versions
that were released they've been omitted entirely. Yes.
Speaker 1 (55:18):
Yeah, some of these files, as we know, have not
been made public despite a law explicitly mandating their release.
MPR was able to look at multiple sets of the
kind of stuff we really dig into, folks think of it,
like the metadata of these documents. They found unique serial
(55:39):
numbers that appeared before and after these fifty missing pages
of FBI interviews. To be quite clear, this was the
FBI speaking with at multiple occasions. A woman who accused
current President Donald Trump of sexual abuse when she was
(56:01):
a minor said this happened multiple times. The FBI spoke
with her at least four times that we know of.
Speaker 2 (56:11):
It's reminded me of Gosh, Chrit I don't know, guys,
you have to chog my memory here. Isn't there a
court case about a certain executive branch leader who had
a bunch of documents and was handling classified documents?
Speaker 1 (56:32):
Sadly you're gonna have to narrow that down for us.
Speaker 2 (56:34):
Oh yeah, wait, that's been most of the Well, I
note there was one who was president before the last
one who had this whole thing. And then there's something
about a guy who died in prison when he was
I can't remember it all.
Speaker 1 (56:49):
Well, it's interesting that you say that. I still think
we should round up everybody named Jeff just to check in.
But we do have a response from the White House
from spokeswoman Abigail Jackson speaking to MPR in reply to
their investigation, which is pretty terrifying and you should look
(57:11):
it up. Jackson told MPR, quote, just as President Trump
has said he's been totally exonerated on anything related to Epstein,
and by releasing thousands of pages of documents, cooperating with
the House Oversight Committee subpoena request, signing the Epstein Files
Transparency Act, and calling for more investigations into Epstein's Democrat friends,
(57:36):
President Trump has done more for Epstein's victims than anyone
before him. The quote goes on, but I'll.
Speaker 3 (57:43):
End it there. Yeah, he definitely did stuff to Epstein's victims,
that's for sure.
Speaker 1 (57:49):
Yeah, is that too much?
Speaker 3 (57:51):
I mean, I just know, man, what a thing to say.
I don't know. I'm sorry. It's just hard to stomach
that level of obfuscation where it's like you're saying, you
accuse the other side of that with you yourself, you.
Speaker 1 (58:03):
Know, guilty of we changed the history, right. It reminds
me of that old joke from back in the Pentagon.
We don't lie, just sometimes the truth changes. Don't let
the wool get pulled over your eyes, Sheep and wolves alike.
I know we didn't. We haven't dug into this yet,
(58:25):
but we hope that you join us for our upcoming
episode on the continuing Epstein File revelations. There's a lot
going on. This will probably be a pretty disturbing deep
dive for all of us, and we.
Speaker 3 (58:43):
Have to do it.
Speaker 1 (58:44):
In the meantime, we would love to hear your take
on any of the stories that we discussed and the
stories we did not have time to get to. Please
find us online, call us on a phone. You can
always send us an email, but before you do, we
always went in with good news. We couldn't leave you
without a dope beat to step to Dylan Tennessee pal Fagan,
(59:07):
you posted a joke about vacuum cleaners.
Speaker 3 (59:11):
Yeah, go on back to the beginning of the episode.
I had a friend whose dad was a vacuum salesman,
And when you'd ask him how business is going, he'd say,
it sucks, but it's picking up dot dot.
Speaker 1 (59:25):
No, put in the drubs, put it lost you and
find us online.
Speaker 3 (59:30):
Indeed, find us at the handle conspiracy Stuff for Conspiracy
Stuff show, depending on your social media platform of choice.
Just just you know, throw them out there and see
what comes back. You can also reach us another way.
Speaker 2 (59:43):
Our phone number is one eight three three std WYTK.
Turn those letters into numbers and give it a call.
You got three minutes. Give yourself a cool nickname so
we can remember who you are next time you call.
If you want to send us an email, you can
do that too.
Speaker 1 (59:57):
We are the entities the read which piece of correspondence
we receive. Be well aware yet unafraid. Sometimes the void
rights back thanks to everybody hitting us up, giving us
random facts and requesting random facts, here's one for free.
In nineteen oh one, there was a huge vacuum cleaner
(01:00:18):
that was horse drawn. It was powered by petrol. It
was called the Puffy Billy and everyone was scared of it.
Conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 2 (01:00:47):
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
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Betrayal Season 5
Saskia Inwood woke up one morning, knowing her life would never be the same. The night before, she learned the unimaginable – that the husband she knew in the light of day was a different person after dark. This season unpacks Saskia’s discovery of her husband’s secret life and her fight to bring him to justice. Along the way, we expose a crime that is just coming to light. This is also a story about the myth of the “perfect victim:” who gets believed, who gets doubted, and why. We follow Saskia as she works to reclaim her body, her voice, and her life. If you would like to reach out to the Betrayal Team, email us at betrayalpod@gmail.com. Follow us on Instagram @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.