Another Side of Midnight With Lionel - The Breakdown of the Word Miracles and Beyond

On Todays Program on Other Side of Midnight With Lionel, Lionel engages in a philosophical and conversational exploration of human nature, critical thinking, and the definitions of complex concepts. Centering around distinction between miracles and random events happening in your life-time. Ultimately urging listeners to analyze the underlying architecture of reality rather than accepting conventional wisdom at face value.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
It's another side of Midnight with Lionel. Now to the
Banarn McGirk Studios.

Speaker 2 (00:13):
Here's Lionel.

Speaker 3 (00:25):
My loan. I know, I know, I know, I know,
I know, I know, I know know I know, I know,
I know, line I know, I know, I know, I know, I.

Speaker 4 (00:43):
Know I know already line up with you. And this
is another side of midnight, not the other, but another
or some other numbers eight hundred and eight four eight
nine two two two. Let me just right off the back.
I tell you that what I find the most fascinating
is your reaction, your thoughts, and your comments. There is

(01:05):
no there is no personal author no guests, no authority,
no one I could ever think of having I could
talk to who is more interesting than you. I'm not
saying that to be gratuitous. I mean it. I absolutely
mean it one hundred percent because, in my humble opinion,

(01:32):
I am ho as the kids say, the thing, the aspect,
the part, the glorious part of what we call proverbial
talk radio is the listener, but specifically the caller point
of view, and the caller and the listener not necessarily

(01:52):
the same, but kind of sort of the same. And
I can't say that enough. I can't say it enough.
You are it now. One of the aspects of this
thing that we do as a human being is to
be amazed, to be awe struck. A lot of times

(02:14):
kids today will use the term awesome. Everything's awesome, And
yet I don't think you understand what awesome really cannotes.
What does it really mean. Awesome means the idea that
you are in awe, where your jaw drops in awe,
where you are unable to even focus, you are just
so mesmerized, so taken by it. That's the part which

(02:40):
is the most important aspect, this idea where you see God,
or you see something about in the universe, something where
you are just wow. You don't know how to process it.
It's just one of those things where you just and
no other animal, as far as we know, no other
animal can feel this. No other animal can understand their

(03:02):
position in the world visa vis the rest of the world.
No nobody can. It's it's just it's well, as far
as we know now, one of the things that we
do too, and I don't I'm not going to ever
tell you what to do. I'm not going to say
you can or can't say something or believe something which
is just absurd. But many times we say something in

(03:23):
a very specific kind of an appodictic kind of way.
We say things in a way that is almost again,
for lack of a better word, it's just well, it
is because it is. I believe in this, because this
is the truth. I believe in this because the particular

(03:47):
book of so and so says it's true. That's ipsy Dixon,
that's true because I say it's true, or you consider
yourself it is so axiomatic, so obvious, then it will
be well, it will be just a complete waste of
time to even suggest that I have to prove anything. No,
you have to prove anything.

Speaker 5 (04:09):
Well.

Speaker 4 (04:10):
One of the things which I love for people to
always talk about is the word a miracle. It's a miracle,
It's miraculous. It's the thing which I find to be
again one of those terms that we use it. People
will say axiomatically, again appodictically, perhaps as a matter of fact, yes,

(04:33):
what is a miracle? Now, as you probably have figured out,
one of the things which I think is interesting and
I hope that people grasp this, and that is that
the idea is that we must apply some form of
critical thinking before we say what it is and isn't,

(04:54):
but also that implies to define it. The question of
what is a miracle has haunted philosophers and theologians and scienceists,
and and I hate to use the term ordinary people,
of which I am on, but ordinary people since the
beginning of human consciousness? Is a miracle merely an event

(05:20):
whose how would you say that? Whose cause we have
yet to understand? Well, that would be a lot of things.
Is it extraordinary luck? Is it an astonishing coincidence? Or
and improbable? And here's what you want, an improbable alignment

(05:44):
of circumstances? Or is this something altogether different, something that
how do I say this? Something that speaks of a
reality beyond matter itself? That's what I want to know.
You know, we casually use this word all the time.

(06:05):
A survivor who walks away from a catastrophe, if a
child recovers from an illness that medicine can't explain, a
chance meeting changing the course of history. You know, we
shrug and call it a miracle, But have we actually
defined the term? And we love a part of this,

(06:25):
We love to always attribute some type of connection to it,
and This is the part which I find fascinating. Whenever
something happens, we always talk about fate, something was meant
to be. It's kind of sort of in that same avenue,
that same direction. We always say, well, you know it

(06:47):
was meant to be. You know, the fates was a
cloth O, the Casis and atropole, the three fates. We
hate the idea of there being randomness. Everything has to
be for a reason, and it's a wonderful Sometimes it's
a it's a defense mechanism sometimes in which we will
say things happened in order to explain why. That's intellectualizing.

(07:10):
Sometimes we will change the facts in order to explain
what we're doing. That's called rationalizing. Luck is randomness, Entropy
is disorder, chance is probability that expresses itself across a
variety of different platforms, and you know, numbers of possibilities. Now,

(07:31):
none of these concepts really possess kind of an intention.
You know, none chooses, None loves luck. Randomness. We hate that.
I personally find it to be sometimes very very soothing
to think that, don't worry. This bad thing that happened
to you didn't happen for a bad reason. In fact,

(07:52):
we never think about it this way. What is the
opposite of luck? Well, bad luck? Luck always implies good.
Well it was, Hey, this is my lucky day. If
somebody contracts a rare disease, I always think of somebody
who this is terrible. But sometimes you hear it. You
know someone so he died of a heart attack. Well,
you know he didn't. He never took care of himself.

(08:13):
But if somebody contracts or develops a glioma or a glioblastoma,
or some dangerous brain tumor, it's not necessarily associated with
any kind of behavior that warranted that, that brought that on.
How do you explain that? Is that negative? Look? Is

(08:35):
it a negative miracle? Is it? And I don't want
to ever invoke the notion of religion or faith because
that defeats the purpose. There is nothing more antithetical to
critical discussion. I'm sorry, Please don't take this the wrong
way to somebody just saying, well, my religion says this,

(08:56):
and my holy book says this, and that's the end
of it. Let's move on. It's not a discussion. Well,
then does my holy book outweigh yours? Well, your holy
book is wrong, your religion is wrong. I don't want
to get into that. But there's something which is fascinating
all of us. Suggests that behind what appears to be
the ordinary machinery of existence, there still exists a will

(09:20):
or some force capable of intervening without violating the deeper
architecture of reality and free will. How does that work?
A miracle is not something that's unlikely. Every lottery winner
experiences something unlikely. Every improbable coincidence is statistically inevitable if

(09:45):
enough events occur. But probability alone cannot in any way
distinguish miracle from happenstance. How do you do it? Do
you hear what I'm saying? The defining character of a
miracle is not improbability, but intentionality. It's got to be intentional.

(10:08):
It is directed towards you, because of you, for a
good reason. It's in a sense, God or something intervening.
Now again I asked the question, what if something bad
happens to you, is it God intervening? And again I
don't want to. I don't want to get into God.
I use this sometimes, let's call it nature. I don't

(10:28):
want to get into God because I'm violently in my
own rule, my own rule regarding religion. But that's kind
of what this means when something intervenes, when a person,
as we speak today, there is an event which I'm
fascinated by which I understand nothing about. I mean, I
understand what it is. It's the World Cup, and it's

(10:52):
the world literally is going to be watching this about
a game which involves a lot of skill, but a
lot of things which are unnecessary and unimportant involve skill
as well. And people are going to be praying today
the miracle on Ice nineteen eighty, We're praying for God again.

(11:14):
I'm sorry to say that nature the something extra extraordinary
to intervene. Maybe not so much as a miracle, meaning
there's a certain degree of impossibility to it, but an
intervention to explain our life. Think about that for a moment.
By the way, as I speak about that, please do

(11:35):
a little research. I hope that when I speak with you,
I inspire your independence study. Can I tell you how
many people I've talked to where I've said, well, have
you looked that up? Nope? And whatever you want to
say about AI or A or AGI not yet, but Chat,
GPT or any of these wonderful programs. Your ability to

(11:55):
use the internet today for rudimentary just for instructional research.
Is beyond anything I could ever imagine and ask about
juvenile juv e n Al. The Roman poet Breton Circus
is pot them at cirkensis. This has been put into

(12:16):
the Offing sports competition. It is tribalism. It is human
behavior to me, so basic, so rudimentary, so fascinating, but
nonetheless so basic. It's like things that I don't understand.
How can you get excited over a game? Not the game,

(12:38):
it's what it represents, two Spanish speaking countries against each other,
so what so what look at us? No matter how
incredibly brilliant do you think humankind is, We're getting excited
and losing our minds over a game if I like
a ball, So anyway, But there are people who are
gonna be asking for a miracle, for intervention, for a

(13:02):
connection with something, some other force. For the daist, the
distinction between improbability and miracle is especially fascinating. Classical deism
envisions a creator who fashioned an elegant universe governed by

(13:26):
by dissertable laws, a kind of a clock, you know,
some cosmic clockwork. We love to use the word clockwork.
This is the whole notion of of this classical design theory,
where you find a pocket watch on the beach and
you imagine or some human put this together. But we

(13:46):
believe that the world runs by order of astonishing precision.
Yet even within such a universe, the deist believes this
intriguing possibility. What if the creator's intention, and they use
that word to call a nature instead, is not always
expressed by suspending natural law, but by orchestrating it. What

(14:09):
if the miracle that we speak about is not the
violation of nature, but it's perfect timing. This is what
separates us from a conquer spaniel, the ability to think
and to wonder and to muse. Never let that go away.

(14:32):
Sit back and just think. Don't answer the question, Listen
to the question, ask the question, marinate it, dissect it,
pull it apart, look at the layers. This is what
I love and this is what we're going to do
this eve, this morn, whatever you want to call this

(14:52):
on another side of midnight eight hundred eighty four eight
nine to two two? Are you ready? And now are
you ready for me to wax a tad socratic? When
I ask you sometimes to define your point, not out
of rudeness, but out of an intent to exhibit precision.
This is Linel with you on another side of midnight.

Speaker 1 (15:15):
It's another side of Midnight with Lionel. The other side
of Midnight with Lionel entertaining and informative on the Red
Apple Podcast Network. This is another side of Midnight with Lionel.

(15:44):
Now to the Vann McGirk studios.

Speaker 2 (15:46):
Here's Linel.

Speaker 4 (15:56):
I ask my friend miracles, let me say something Bill Lee.
Say one thing to him about something, use a word,
and he'll pull a song out of the blue. Why
because he's an example of human exceptionalism. I number it's
eight hundred and eighty four eight nine two, the great

(16:18):
Marty Balin. By the way, my friends, let's just jump
into it. Let's just think. The only thing I ask is,
please don't say I believe this because the Book of
Corinthians or the Book of Sayid or the Book of
it No. No, no, no, no, that's not that's it's not
that it's wrong. But that's not the type of intellectual

(16:40):
discourse I want to avail myself of in regarding Let's
go to Martin in Upstate New York. Martin, you're the
first caller on another side of midnight with oh I know.

Speaker 6 (16:52):
The old lionel man.

Speaker 4 (16:54):
So have a great day, my friend, have a great day.
Thank you next much. Now I want everybody to listen,
and I want our dear friend answering the phones to
remember that voice, because it will always be presented in
a different in a different style and a different framework,
with a different name, and I just want to remember it,

(17:16):
remember it. Just just keep that in mind. Think about
this recognition versus recall. There are very few people I mean,
and I mean this sincerely that I ever say no
now I don't want to talk to because some people
are absolutely wonderful. Sometimes a caller you think, you know,
this is really going anywhere, And sometimes a caller will inspire.
But then again, I understand the notion of intellectual redundancy,

(17:40):
and that my friend doesn't become any more redundant than
that Lucas Lucas is gone. How about May? Is it
Melvin or Mailvin in Minneapolis? You run another side of
interesting framework. The spelling is most unique? Is this Melvin?

Speaker 2 (18:00):
That you got it?

Speaker 4 (18:02):
That's a good morning, sir, Welcome sir.

Speaker 6 (18:04):
Well, I thought doctor Star was still on, but I
have a youth to see what they were talking about
the Russians with smiles. There was something called the.

Speaker 4 (18:15):
Well let's excuse me, you were you were excuse me,
you were you were thinking, this is doctor Scott. Is
that what you were thinking? Well, he was on just
before you.

Speaker 6 (18:24):
I didn't realize that.

Speaker 4 (18:25):
That is correct. You know what I want you to do.
Do me a favorite, sir. He will be back next week.
You call him and you pick up right where you
left off, because I'm sure he would love to hear
and entertain your discussion, and because nobody does it better
than he. It's an interesting concept. I didn't intend to
call you. I was calling someone else and oh, look
you're on. So let me throw the question that I

(18:47):
was going to ask someone else regarding a subject you're
not talking about, and runned by you. No, I think
for purposes of I keep using the word intellectual, intellectual
continuity that we get to the bottom of this. Anyway,
Let's go to Let's go to doctor Anthony. Doctor Anthony,
you're on another side of Midnight with Lionel.

Speaker 7 (19:09):
Yes, good morning Lionel. First that morning, say I want
to say I love your wife. I love her program
because it's based on protecting children. It's based on awakening
our sleepy parents and the general culture and protecting children,
the most vulnerable creatures in the world.

Speaker 4 (19:32):
Okay, that's correct. I agree with you one hundred percent, sir.

Speaker 7 (19:37):
Secondly, I don't understand why the public is not outraged
in the unholy alliance that our mayor has made with
the UFT President Mohoum in making sure that they stop
the reduction of class size that were supposed to go

(19:58):
into effect this September. And and you know, you scratch my back,
I'll scratch you a back terms the teachers.

Speaker 4 (20:08):
What do you think? What do you think? Okay, but
explain to you to me the theory, the mechanism behind it,
even though that's not what we're talking about. That's okay.
I like that we're not talking about. There's something that
This is not about miracles. This is not about the
synchronicity of probability versus improbability, which is my very thoroughly

(20:31):
dissected and pronounced pro am prolegomenon introduction. Nonetheless, there's something
to be said about this. What do you think is
a reason for that?

Speaker 3 (20:42):
Sir?

Speaker 7 (20:43):
I think that it all comes down to money that
you may is able to save a fortune in paying
off the teachers and the union and that reducing.

Speaker 4 (20:54):
Classic fascinating, fascinating, and I thank you so much for
that call, sir, question he forewhere the ege hundred A
four eight nine two to two two, Lucas in New Jersey, Lucas,
you're on another side of midnight wood, Lionel.

Speaker 8 (21:10):
Hey, Lionel. I had a question, what do you think
is is a broken clock ever right? Because this is
what I was thinking. A broken clock can never be
right because it's frozen, right if it doesn't tell time.
It doesn't tell time ever, not even twice a day.

Speaker 4 (21:29):
Well, that's I understand. What you're saying is you are
taking literally and actually the reference, if you will, of this,
you are you are taking this the you know a
broken clock is right twice a day. You're taking it
as literally true?

Speaker 6 (21:47):
Right?

Speaker 2 (21:49):
No?

Speaker 8 (21:49):
Not well, people say even a broken clock is right
twice a day, and I say, no, a broken clock
is never right because it never tells time.

Speaker 2 (21:56):
You know, you don't know what.

Speaker 4 (21:57):
I'm saying is now what you're doing is now what
you did was you repeated yourself. And what I said
was you were taking the notion of this aphorism, this apathem,
this bromide, this chestnut, and you are applying an absolute
literal translation to it. And what you did was you

(22:19):
repeated the literal translation. Years ago, there was a friend
of mine who used to say, you know, a lot
of people have been killed by an empty gun. And
the idea was that some people say, hey, don't worry,
this gun is empty. And sure enough there was a
there was a bullet around in the chamber, and I said, well,
it couldn't be empty if it killed somebody. And I,

(22:41):
of course did kind of what you did. I would
pretend I didn't understand the theory behind it. What do
you mean, No, no, it's six pence. Well you said
it was empty. Well that's an expression. Well it can't
it can't fire if there's if it's empty. So that's
kind of what you did. So on a bigger picture,

(23:03):
on a bigger on a bigger level, what is the
point the chestnut and bromide and apathem an aphorism you
would like to impart, give us the idea, let us
look into your mind.

Speaker 8 (23:17):
Yeah, well, you know I've I've worked tiles in many years,
and what I noticed, is that tiles tiling tiling?

Speaker 6 (23:25):
Sir?

Speaker 4 (23:26):
Okay, sure, sure.

Speaker 8 (23:29):
I actually it was. It was an apple Bee's I
once did, probably fifteen years ago. A huhon, I believe
North Jersey.

Speaker 4 (23:40):
Let's make sure we specify where it was, though, Can
you give us a better idea of where that apple
these was?

Speaker 7 (23:47):
Well?

Speaker 6 (23:47):
Maybe perhaps?

Speaker 4 (23:50):
Well, I think we already have. I think indeed we
already have. But but what is what do we want
to mean from this? No, I'll tell you, Lionel, sure.

Speaker 8 (24:01):
What I what I saw under those floorboards. I've chosen
to never discuss publicly, but I'm telling you that place
closed down two weeks after I left, still closed.

Speaker 4 (24:12):
Lucas, Lucas, Lucas, I gotta ask you a question. This
is fascinating. What was the intention of this call? Initially?
I'm fascinated. We're going from literal It's interesting, We're going
into a level of precision that I think is perhaps
some might say is not necessarily warranted. But what was

(24:34):
the purpose of this the design of your call and
your point today? I want to make sure I understand it.

Speaker 8 (24:40):
Well, it was I called about people making it. You know,
these kinds of sayings that are things that don't really
make sense. And I think it all comes back to you,
things that people don't want to talk about because in
fact interesting people.

Speaker 9 (24:53):
Do you know?

Speaker 6 (24:55):
Right?

Speaker 4 (24:55):
Do you know this? Sometimes the idea what is an expression?
Don't cry over built milk, a stitch in time?

Speaker 10 (25:02):
You know?

Speaker 4 (25:03):
One of the One of the tests, believe it or not,
of somebody who is psychotic or schizophrenic is the ability
to abstract. And when somebody, sometimes the psychiatrist will ask
somebody who has been brought in, let's say, what do
you mean when you say such and such? What? What?
What do you mean? When somebody says, you know, top

(25:28):
of mind, cat got your tongue. And people who are
psychotic are not able to to abstract, They'll say a cat,
I'm not talking about a cat. So what's interesting? How
phrases sometimes, through analogy and metaphor, explain a bigger process.
So was that the intention of this curious was just

(25:51):
to explain how phrases are not true or something bigger
that I'm apparently missing here?

Speaker 8 (25:58):
Well, some phrases are more true than other. And I'm
no psycho lionel, but I'm telling you that this phrase,
in particular, this phrase about the clock.

Speaker 4 (26:06):
It's Lucas. I thank you so much, my friend. This
is I appreciate this. This is perhaps either one of
the greatest bits ever or or we've we've hit paydirt
with that. And I don't mean to if I find
it interesting, I'm going to say something. And I know
this sounds heady, and I know this sounds sometimes a

(26:29):
bit it might be a little bit like well, but
I know it sounds rather haughty. But critical thinking we
always talk about that is something that we just don't
ever really involve ourselves with. You see, I always look
at something a little bit differently. I'm I look at

(26:51):
at human behavior and why we do things differently. Let
me give you an example in New York in many
of you or not fum they or you're not really
paying attention, but many people in New York have a
hard time with the notion with this, this abstract notion
of this fellow named zoron mom donnie. First point is

(27:16):
is a very simple thing. Three syllables mom like mom
and dad Donnie like donnie osman mom donnie, simple mom donnie.
You might even do mam dan if you want to
go more upstate, which is fine too. And yet since
he ran for office for the first time, there are

(27:37):
some people who have never even come close to approximating
his name in terms of pronouncing it correctly. I find
that fascinating. I mean it, How can people not say
a name correctly? How that doesn't matter? Some might say
he's not worthy of it. Okay, but forget it. So
that's that's step number one. Number two. They will attribute

(28:02):
to him everything from communism, socialism, Marxism, evil, you name it.
Yet there are other factions and contingents of our great
country who embrace him, love him. And if you look
at the front page, you're well, that's the front page
with the cover of Drudge. But the way Drudge is

(28:23):
a very interesting aggregation of stories he has become the
second Coming. He is a political force to be reckoned with.
He has been a trend that some people cannot figure out,
cannot in any way. How do I say this? Appreciate now? Irrespective,

(28:49):
irrespective of everything. My question to you is simply this,
how is it that people do not understand that politics
in particular we're talk about it is not who's right
or who's wrong, but who's in the majority? And why
do you think there are some people in the majority,
and why do you think people act this way? That's

(29:10):
the issue, not the usual story. But what about free busses,
what about free you know, grocery stores and yeah, yeah, yeah,
that's a that's kind of a symptom. It's a very
good issue. But the bigger issue is why do people
find something like this interesting? Like my particular question, this
question I want to know is why are people out

(29:31):
of their minds over soccer or football, depending upon where
you're from. I don't understand it. I understand liking it.
I understand it, but I don't understand why you're going
to everybody's telling me, do not hit Ruth three, do
not go near Jersey, to not go near I have
some plans, so there's some some pretty lofty ideas of
maybe maybe making my way towards my favorite Costco and

(29:53):
Jersey not even close. Why because the world will be
descending upon on the I still say the meatal lends.
But in any of it, why because of a game?
A game a seemingly actually meaningless artificial creation of something

(30:14):
that appears to be battle, I guess by analogy, and
people will cry like they've lost a family member over
a game. Why it is beyond fascinating. Also my list,
I don't understand tattooing and golf. Carl in New Jersey.

(30:35):
Let's give it a shot. Carl, you're on another side
of Midnight with lionel Oh.

Speaker 6 (30:40):
I know, calling through find out how you would define
superstition and causal relationship? How do you separate the two? Sometimes?

Speaker 11 (30:55):
Yeah?

Speaker 4 (30:56):
No, pleaseir, go ahead, No, I'm curious as to what
you think. How do you define the two?

Speaker 6 (31:03):
Well, my definition goes along with whatever very of Webster
talks about in terms of its definitions. And if we
do that, though, we're getting into linguistics and the idea
our culture defines things as opposed to any other cultures.

Speaker 4 (31:19):
But no, that's exactly right. No, no, no wait wait
wait stop stop stop. That is precisely bingo. You've hit
the nail on the head. Congratulations, you said right now,
We've got to be careful because that's kind of where
we are. No, no, no, that's it exactly How what
is superstition? What is superstition versus mythology versus faith? How

(31:40):
how do you if you look at it, this is
this is this is it? This is again the gravyment.
This is the essence of this superstition, is the belief,
at least this is what we're told that certain actions
or objects, or events or behaviors possess kind of a
mysterious power to influence outcomes without evidence. For example, if

(32:02):
I carry two dimes in my pocket, we have a
superstition in theater not to whistle. There's a reason behind that.
It's usually personal cultural That focus is on luck and
omens and curses and rituals and cause and effect, you know,
avoiding black cats and knocking on wood Friday the thirteenth. Now, mythology,

(32:26):
this is a body of This is traditional stories that explains,
among other things, the origins of the world and humanity
and stars and natural phenomenon and myths are narratives and
all of that. So again, you know, Greek, Norris, Egyptian,
Native Americans, that's considered mythology. So is there something inherently

(32:49):
human about us that comes up with this? Why do
we have superstitions mythology? Dare I say? Faith? Why do
we have so many people who believe so fundamentally differently
as to the creation of the universe and the creator?
Some don't even believe in a creator. That's a lot

(33:10):
I'm throwing at you.

Speaker 6 (33:11):
But what do you think, Well, different approaches are taken
in terms of natural phenomenon occurring around us, and I
guess we try to explain the natural phenomena different means. Yes,
we can't locate the cause of it in our minds
any way, that attributed to something beyond a cause of relationship.

Speaker 4 (33:34):
It's abs caused by bingo, kind.

Speaker 6 (33:37):
Of the divine sort of activity that takes place. And
it's okay, of course we believe in that natural phenomenon
itself is caused by the divine, because Divine made nature
as far as we're concerned. So it gets off into
a whole different area of I guess thinking about the world,

(34:00):
which is different than the material world. There's a separation
between the two precise minds of many people. And I suppose.

Speaker 4 (34:06):
Precisely precisely, what do you think is again, if I
could think of a word, what is the cause of this?
Is there something inherently?

Speaker 10 (34:18):
You know?

Speaker 4 (34:18):
There was a thing years ago they talked about the
Higgs boson. They call it the god particle, and there's
also the god gene. And do you think there's something
inherent in us that always looks for the origin of
something whenever there's I don't mean in terms of the
natural phenomenon, but I mean something bigger, something more, you know,

(34:41):
fate this was meant to be? What is it about us?

Speaker 11 (34:47):
Well?

Speaker 6 (34:47):
I think it spills over into the idea that that
many of us, if not most of us, believes in
a continuation of our existence after corporeal death, and as
a result we come up with the attachments to it
in terms of uh, there being a place or to
exist afterwards of some sort and in some right. Some

(35:08):
call it heaven and others call it a continuation of
our consciousness. So is that need to not want to
give up on our existence, our consciousness, our awareness, our activity,
that who we are? You know? Who are we? So

(35:29):
I think it's that idea we want to lose, that
you want to continue. I don't want to just come
to a stop like like under had to say, ad
a seizure, you know.

Speaker 4 (35:40):
But there's also something else I think, which is even
not not more interesting, but maybe perhaps equally as much.
Whenever there's nothing more problematic to a lot of us
than to think that something just happens by random give
an example I had, what is it this is like
Pascal's wager? I guess that says that it is it's

(36:00):
better to believe in God because what if you're wrong?
And I thought to myself, that's that's one of the
strangest things. And people say, up's a good point.

Speaker 6 (36:10):
You know.

Speaker 4 (36:10):
Somebody said one time, uh, And I talked to a
friend of mine and we were talking and in fact, no,
in fact years ago it was about it was a
death of a family. One of my relatives says, do
you believe in essence, in the hereafter, in a in
a in a heaven, in something post you know, post
as you say, corporeal, something post post material. And I

(36:33):
said no, because in order for me to believe is
somebody I don't believe in a lot of things. It's not.
I'm not saying it's not possible, because the word belief
is a whole other issue. Yeah, but don't you isn't
it soothing? Isn't it soothing? And not that ah, isn't
soothing to believe? So I asked, so, do you believe
in something that is the that is more soothing, irrespective

(36:54):
of whether it even makes sense or not. What if
I told you, Carl, you should you should marry that woman?
Why well, let's assume she's the love of your life,
and let's assume that she might be the only one
who wants to marry you. And let's assume isn't it
better to have you know, burdenhand worse? There's a bush

(37:15):
rubbers of what do you use? Think about how we do?
Because we're always trying to make things make sense. There's
nothing worse than randomness. There's nothing worse than this idea
of us being here. We're like a cork on the
ocean and things happen. Eh, doesn't mean anything? Do you

(37:36):
mean there's no there's no reason for us to be here,
There's no reason. I like when people look up into
the sky as doctor Sky does, hence the name, and
we say, do you think that this could have possibly
just been here? From Here's my favorite? My favorite? From nothing?
I love this. From nothing? I said, what is nothing

(38:00):
mean to you? And I don't even want to go
even more of But Carl, I'm sure you realize this
that whenever the notion of zero came, remember the big
story about zero as a number. I think it might
have been either the Persians or the I forget who
executive up with the idea of zero, and zero doesn't

(38:21):
mean nothing. That's the null set. Zero means no movement,
no change in position. Unless I don't want to get
too too much into this, but do you.

Speaker 6 (38:34):
Understand to zero at the beginning in termes of birth
our birthday?

Speaker 4 (38:39):
Yes, exactly. Well, but for example, if I said to you,
I said, if we were watching a football game, and
let's say the Jets, may you know, advance five yards
and then we're pushed back five yards, what's their gain?
It's zero. It didn't means they didn't move. It just

(39:01):
meant that the net change. My favorite also is if
I'm at a stop light and I'm not moving and
somebody zooms by me at one hundred miles an hour.
Our average speed is fifty even though neither of us
are doing fifty. So sometimes even the way we refer
to it doesn't make any sense. Now what I'm telling
you right, not life does?

Speaker 6 (39:22):
Mark said, you notice that it is supposed to have
the cust of speed no matter what, whether he's going
to hold or yes.

Speaker 4 (39:28):
And that's one of the things, by the way, which
absolutely one of my favorite things, is when you are
told something doesn't exist. How about when we I always
have this. Perhaps maybe it's a tad cartoonish, but I
imagine that God or what you would call God nature

(39:52):
looks at us and says, okay, watch this keep going.
I want to introduce to you called quantum mechanics. That
Einstein stuff is great for big stuff planets and you
know light. But let's talk about something something really really particle, uh, basic,
sub atomic. The idea of by location, where we don't

(40:14):
know where anything is where how can two things be
in the same place at the same time. Remember this, fellow,
padre Pio. You ever heard the story about Padre that
I can't believe that we are in this is this
is very weird. Padre Pio believes. And I remember one

(40:35):
time somebody said Padre Pio peop would see him in
different places. But I remember turning to somebody said yeah,
I was just going to say that. And so somebody
came up with the term by location. I said, do
you realize that giving it the name by location presumes
that it exists to have a name, You know what
I mean? It doesn't have.

Speaker 6 (40:55):
To have.

Speaker 4 (40:57):
To give things, yes, wage but certain things it elevates
it to us status. See if I say if like,
for example, I think one of the greatest words is weird.
But that's not going to help you. You don't want
to go to a doctor who says, hey, my rash
came back. That's weird. They like recurrence and uh anyway,

(41:20):
So all of our lives we're trying to make things.

Speaker 6 (41:24):
Pardon me, that's those connotations getting the ways.

Speaker 4 (41:29):
Yes, and what we're doing right now is as we see.
I think you're one of the few I knew i'd
find somebody by the way you were. As you know,
we're not for your call. Sometimes I would imagine I
throw in the keys and say, you know what, forget it.
I'm just wasting my time here. But you give me
hope to carry on. You lie in my life. I
think Debbie Boons are the best. But this is this

(41:49):
is this is this stuff that I find the most interesting,
and people a lot of times don't like this. This
is intellectually cumbersome. This is a wast of time. People say,
what are you talking about? Give me the appodictic, give
me the black and white, give me the give me
the give me the Manichean good versus evil, Right, versus wrong,

(42:11):
up verses down, don't give me this multiple simultaneous spins,
and and.

Speaker 6 (42:18):
Don't get technical.

Speaker 4 (42:20):
Yeah, right, exactly, I want technical. That's one of the things.
And also there are some things, and this really bothers
people that humans will never be able to truly understand.
We'll be able to explain, but we don't understand it.
There's a lot of times when I asked a friend

(42:41):
of mine one time, who who's a dermatologist, he says, Oh,
I'm very good at diagnosing, and I can and I
can explain things, but I don't understand why does this
happen in the first place? Why did you get acne rosation? Right?
But I can explain it, but that doesn't that doesn't
go intuitively why we do something? Hey, carl On behalf

(43:03):
of a greatful nation. I'm sorry, Okay, he's gone. Thank
you so much. My friend, I think he said anesthesia.
I think sometimes I don't know if it's not if
it's me I just don't hear well enough, or maybe
it's the phones, or maybe there's maybe some people do
not want us to speak at any event. My friends,

(43:24):
this is perfect. This is exactly the way I like
it because This is another side of Midnight with Lionel
all night long.

Speaker 1 (43:34):
This is another side of Midnight with Lionel. The other
side of Midnight with Lionel entertaining and informative on the
Red Apple Podcast Network. This is another side of Midnight

(44:04):
with Lionel. Now to the Van McGirk studios. Here's Lionel.

Speaker 4 (44:15):
Unbelievable, very superstitious. My friends, I loved, loved, and I
say this with such reverence. Growing up in the Catholic
Church parochial school in the sixties. I have a friend

(44:38):
of mine who recently converted to Catholicism, and I'm not
an expert on Catholicism, kind of a retired Catholic. But nonetheless,
the school and what we learn as a as a
child really affected me absolutely, permanently, permanent. And one of

(45:02):
the things which I loved was how the stories that
were presented to me were incredible, specifically regarding the saints
and the martyrs. And again this is not to argue
whether they make sense or not. That's not the point.
And one of the reasons why I thought is this
because of parable? Is this because of I don't know

(45:24):
what the reason for this was, but we were in
I went to a school. I went to a place
called Saint Lawrence. Originally went to a Sacred Heart. Accounting me,
by the way, there's loads of sacred heart. And why
the sacred heart is the sacred Heart versus the regular
picture of Jesus I never really understood. But anyway, what
does this space called Saint Lawrence? Now? Saint Lawrence was

(45:47):
named after Saint Lawrence of Rome. Saint Lawrence of Rome
was a martyr, and Saint Lawrence of Rome. And please,
I ask you to do this. Do not take my
word for it. Do not think I'm being huge or
cooy or funnier. No, no, no, no, I want you to
go and look this up. Saint Lawrence was was was

(46:11):
martyred on a gridiron on a grill kind of like
a barbecue grow, so to speak, or a grill like
a you know. And he was tortured that way and
died murdered martyred. And his famous line was, I got
ready for this, turn me over. I'm done on this
side now. I'm not kidding. I'm not making this up.

(46:31):
Please look this up. Please don't just say off Terry
goes again. No no, no, no, no, no, no, this is what
was told me. I don't know whether it's true or not.
I'm just saying this is this is the lord that
was presented. And I remember the time asking, in my
own inimitable child like way, I could see something. Isn't
it interesting that with your I forget one of the

(46:53):
nun sister Mary Agony or whoever it was, that that
in your attempt And I didn't say it like this,
but the essence was, in your effort to get me
to believe this. You're giving me examples not a famous
people who upon accepting this particular ideology or theology became
rich and famous and glorious. No, No, they were martyred,

(47:14):
killed because of this belief. And you want me to
believe it. Isn't it a bit ironic? And of course
you looked at me like, what are you talking about?
Alexi and Queen's Alexi? You're on another side of midnight
with Lionel.

Speaker 11 (47:28):
Yes, good evening, Lionel is suplicity.

Speaker 4 (47:31):
Yes, speak to you again.

Speaker 6 (47:32):
Yes, I question.

Speaker 11 (47:34):
You are familiar with the principle of law?

Speaker 4 (47:38):
You want to turn me huh, yes, correct.

Speaker 11 (47:43):
When say someone that's going in a criminal matter and
they are arrested in their charge and so on, and
they have to plead and they don't see guilty, but
they want to try. And the lawyer says, you will
have is dependent. You'll have a trial by your peers.

(48:07):
What come out of a peer in this case?

Speaker 2 (48:11):
Is it something?

Speaker 4 (48:12):
It's merely yah, It's merely an expression, right.

Speaker 11 (48:16):
Is It's like someone who is who is lifestyle is
a kin to the dependents anyone.

Speaker 4 (48:24):
I mean citizens, citizens who at least at least maintain
their requisite characteristics of that required to be a juror.
It's all it means. It doesn't mean, for example, if
you are a black defendant, does that mean black people?
If you're a poor defendant, that meaning poor people. Does
that mean if you're gay? No, does it mean somebody
who mirrors? You know? It's merely an expression, an anecdotal

(48:46):
expression to indicate civilians. By the way, the same thing,
the same theory is used. And by the way, I
thank you for your call. The same theory is used
when we try to discuss the grand jury. The idea
is that you want to have a neutral, detached group
of your quote peers, to distinguish and to separate you

(49:07):
from the sovereign. You from the King, You being this
intermeer in this intermediate this buffer group. Fascinating, is it not.
Eight hundred eighty four eight nine two two two. I
want to talk more about this thing called superstition and
mythology and miracles. Have you ever been the beneficiary of

(49:28):
a miracle? And what's the difference between a miracle and
something that happens positively that's random? And have you ever
had disaster fall upon you or your family? And is
that the opposite of the miracle or is that just randomness?
And do you select it by virtue of the way

(49:49):
you like to see the world as being. Eight hundred
eight four eight nine two two two our number two
coming up.

Speaker 1 (49:57):
The other side of Midnight with one entertaining and informative
on the Red Apple Podcast Network. It's another side of
Midnight with Lionel. Now to the Vann McGirk studios.

Speaker 2 (50:17):
Here's Linel, my long.

Speaker 3 (50:31):
I know, I known lo I know, I know, I know,
I know, I know, I know, I know, I know,
I know.

Speaker 4 (50:44):
I know already Linel with you, our number two of
this thing of hours. Eight hundred eight four eight nine
two two two. Eight hundred eighty four eight nine two
two two. This as another side of midnight and as
you have probably maybe be able to you might have

(51:06):
picked up I don't really care as much about the
theory behind particular action as opposed to what it means.
I know that's a bit of a problem because what

(51:26):
I'm telling you right now is one hundred so antithetical,
so absolutely antithetical to the way things work. People don't
like this. Why do you have to always complicate matters?

Speaker 9 (51:47):
Why?

Speaker 6 (51:48):
You know?

Speaker 4 (51:48):
One of the things which I found so interesting about
law school and legal training and all this is always
to change the discussions. Example, we have this crime people
talk about called burglary, and burglary to most people, they

(52:09):
think it's breaking into a house or like breaking in
and stealing something and that's it. And they will also
confuse it with robbery. They'll say that something is you
robbed a house, you robbed something, you robbed. Burglary means

(52:29):
the entering or the remaining in a home, structure, dwelling, conveyance, whatever,
with the intent of committee and defense there in. Let
me break that down. That's not what people think it is,
but that's what it is. Burglary says, yeah, you went
into that place, but The reason why you went into
that place is you intended to do something bad, now,

(52:52):
didn't you. It's not that you went in there, it's
not that you stole something. We don't even care whether
you actually stole something. You can go in there intending
to steal something but not actually doing it. You don't
have to take anything. If you wanted to enter a
place in order to kill somebody, think about that. What

(53:13):
if your idea was not to go in and steal something,
but to kill somebody. That's burglary. You see, you see
how this thing works. So somebody thought, we don't even
like it. It's almost like we we don't like what
you were thinking. And I thought that was interesting. Now,
at common law, where we derived our laws, it used

(53:34):
to be breaking and entering. You had to break somebody,
to break a lock, break a window to somebody to
forcibly enter, and it had to be at night. You
broken under at night, and you wanted to commit a felony,
not just an offensive. Then over time things kind of

(53:57):
sort of changed. So in a law school class you
can raise your hand, you can say, well, what happens
if you, at common law did this during the day,
Well doesn't count.

Speaker 6 (54:09):
What is it?

Speaker 4 (54:10):
Oh, maybe it's just trespassed. Oh I see, Well who
determines what's night? How dark is it? Sunset? Now what
I'm telling you? Some people would say this is the
most ridiculous, persnickety nonsense I've ever heard. Oh no, it's not.

Speaker 3 (54:29):
Oh no, no, no, no.

Speaker 4 (54:30):
This is asking questions, asking questions. Certain questions are really
are important. Some are accepted, some are not, some are allowed.
What's the difference between religion and superstition or mythology? I
think I say, whoa whoa, whoa, whoa whoa whoa whoa.
Wait wait, wait, that's wrong. Don't say that. What do

(54:55):
you mean, don't say that religion is superstition? Well, what
about somebody else's religion? Wow, that's story. Oh you mean
your religion. Who's right and who's wrong? Nobody wants to
hear this, nobody, nobody, absolutely not. I'm mean giving you
another example. We're asking questions to get you in trouble.

(55:15):
Look at prototypical cable news today. By the way, with
the exception of Newsmax. I heard something going the other
day on Newsmax. Couldn't believe it. I didn't, I don't
watch it, but it was online and there was some
people talking about how the whole notion is this insane
factual basis of Tyler Robinson who theoretically was the assassin

(55:37):
of Charlie Kirk. It makes no sense. And one was
a navy seal then a retired general. I think on
Newsmax they're daring to go against the narrative on Newsmax.
Does Chris Reddy know about this? I love that. It
was terrific.

Speaker 6 (55:54):
It was like wow.

Speaker 4 (55:56):
And what happens is when you go and when when
you're in a particular mindset, when you want to tell
people something, you use the words the great words of
I think one of the broadcast geniuses was Roger Ales
who said one time it's two things. Two things that
were interesting. One was they said do you think we
should you think, oh, do you think that we should

(56:18):
have a license to be a journalist? And Roger al says,
you only need a license to cut hair.

Speaker 6 (56:24):
I love that.

Speaker 4 (56:25):
And the second thing is he says, I don't want
to broadcast, I want a narrow cast. I want to
give people a world view that in essence he didn't
say it quite like this, but he pretty a worldview
that reinforces what you believe in what you think. I
don't want to give you a contrarian view. I want
you to know that your world is right, and I
want you to know that you can tune in and

(56:45):
hear things that will comport and jibe and jive, depending
up on where you're from, with what you believe. It's
like McDonald's. You can go into any McDonald's anywhere in
the country and it tastes exactly the same as it
does in Newark or Wilmington, Delaware. That's what it is.

(57:06):
So we start enough today with a notion of a miracle.
I've got a friend of mine who actually was. It's
a fascinating study. This is a fellow who had to
who basically lost his career because he came up with this,
this example of this terrible double vision, and his job
specifically required his ability to see correctly. And they went

(57:30):
away and he had to change mid course, and all
of a sudden, one day he woke up and it
reversed itself. This is a true story. And he's a physician,
by the way, And he said it's a miracle. And
I said, wait a minute, do you mean it was
intended by God? Again? I don't want this to be religion.
But I'm said, is that what you mean by by

(57:52):
a miracle? Or does it mean something that's very very positive,
something that you're glad occurred. He goes, well, I'm not
really sure, I said, but think about this. Did God
have a second thought? Because I love this I get
I use the word God in nature interchangeably, So did
nature have a second thought? You know, a second thought?

Speaker 9 (58:11):
Man?

Speaker 4 (58:11):
Maybe he shouldn't be blind. And when you ask questions,
people say, stop ruining my excitement with all of these questions.
Well that's what we do. On another side of midnight
eight hundred and eight four eight nine two too two,
Donna in South Dakota, you're on another side of midnight
with Lionel.

Speaker 12 (58:31):
Hello, lion I'm so thild to talk to you.

Speaker 6 (58:35):
Thank you.

Speaker 12 (58:35):
So I have I have two questions in a comment,
and it's all about the Charlie Kirk thing. The two
are about the trial. So I could do whatever you want,
you want one at a.

Speaker 4 (58:46):
Time, or whatever whatever makes you happy.

Speaker 12 (58:50):
Oh okay, So the prosecution after the witnesses representative and
just pressed on showing that video separately secretly just to
the courtroom. Then the prosecution attorneys pressed for that to
be pushed. Why did the defense not call them out

(59:13):
and say, who are you representing? Because you're pushing for
her for the witness protection or witness representative.

Speaker 4 (59:22):
Well, I can never, I can never necessarily come up
with strategy. But I will tell you one of the
things that is interesting the whole thing that we saw
regarding this case, and I watched it assiduously. As you
probably can tell, this was a preliminary hearing, and all
this wanted to do. All we wanted to do was

(59:43):
just determine whether there was enough evidence based upon the
standard of probable cause to just proceed forward. It's all.
It's all. Admit, it's no big deal. And as far
as strategy goes, who knows. I have no idea. But
if every you really want to see something, and let
me explain to you which I think is the most

(01:00:04):
interesting of all of this, not just this, but others
as well. Let me dovetailed into another subject. In September,
it will be the twenty fifth anniversary of nine to eleven,
the twenty fifth anniversary, twenty five years of an event
which to me was like yesterday, an event which absolutely

(01:00:27):
changed my life. It read tilled me. I can't believe
that what I saw and how people saw obvious physical
events happened, and in their own mind they were told no, no, no, no,
you did not see this, Hey, it was something else.

(01:00:47):
You don't want to be a quote conspiracy theorist. You don't.
Oh no, no, no, okay, we are so afraid of that.
Go ahead, please.

Speaker 12 (01:00:58):
Building seven and has Christine passport?

Speaker 4 (01:01:02):
Oh oh, listen. That's just one of many, many things.
But what happened was we had this word that kills skepticism,
and it's called you are a conspiracy theorist, and in
fact it's used all the time, and conspiracy theory has
become another way of saying something crazy, something baseless, something

(01:01:28):
that doesn't have anything to do with reality, when in
fact it was very interesting. A conspiracy merely means, as
you know, a confederation and agreement between two or more
people to bring about something which is negative, something which
is criminal, something which is condurary. And the word conspirare
means to breathe together. And what it does is it

(01:01:50):
merely talks about the organization of people meeting and arranging
something together. And it reminds me almost like going back
to my Catholic school brought upbringing which said, even if
you think something, you don't really have to necessarily go
through with it. We don't even like the fact that

(01:02:11):
you're thinking about this, which is what we're seeing right now.
So all of this goes to show you how we
have selective applications of truth in our country. And by
the way, what you just suggested you will never hear
on conventional cable news except for what I'm hearing on
this Newsmax section. I couldn't believe what I was hearing.

(01:02:33):
Isn't that fascinating? We don't want the truth, we have
this idea. And by the way, if you think the
Lee Harvey Oswald's story is crazy, this Tyler Robinson story
is ridiculous. And here's the best part. The people who
come forward who say to have such strong opinions know
nothing about the case, per usual. The people who have.

Speaker 12 (01:02:59):
The Mockingbird Press, Mockingbird Press.

Speaker 4 (01:03:04):
Oh you're a woman after my own heart. The Mockingbird
media operation mocking Bird. This was Phil Graham in particular
from the Washington Post. And this is the idea where
the CIA basically had operatives working in the newsrooms defining
and directing and and creating new I guess avenues of news.

(01:03:27):
And it was, it was, It's incredible and it's still
going on, and nobody seems to want to know this.
By the way, you seem to be rather I'm sorry,
go ahead please, but of course.

Speaker 12 (01:03:40):
Now because it's been captured by nit Yahoo, well you're
an entity. Let me go there. I'll just say, let
me say some media.

Speaker 4 (01:03:52):
I'm glad you're saying that. There are many many people
who were thinking this. While we talk about this, keep
in minds something very very important. And by the way,
thank you so much for your call. Please call me
again over the weekend. JD Van said, and this really
really mmm. He's starting to break away from the accepted

(01:04:14):
narrative regarding certain dare I say, Middle East perspectives. And
what you always have to do is to understand when
do the throngs and the hordes and the murmerations change.
To use a Gustav the bones theory, Remember when Vietnam

(01:04:35):
all of a sudden became negative. There was a time.
Support our troops America, love it or leave it. That's
the way it is. Don't be un American. These are
our troops, our boys, fighting for your fighting for your freedom.
Then one day, don't know when it was, might have
been a Tuesday, who knows. Somebody ranged the ball and said,

(01:04:55):
remember the way we used to think, Yeah, we don't
think that way anymore. Who determines the change? When does
it change? And why don't we accept and encourage people
from thinking new thoughts, even regarding subjects that are a
bit problematic eight hundred eight four eight nine two two
two more Coming up on another side of Midnight with Lionel.

Speaker 1 (01:05:18):
It's the other side of Midnight with Lionel, entertaining and
informative on the Red Apple Podcast Network. This is another
side of Midnight with Lionel. Now to the Narn McGirk studios.

Speaker 2 (01:05:40):
Here's Linel.

Speaker 4 (01:05:48):
Oh, yes, this sounds as a great Freereatha Franklin would say,
greasy good sense makes you wonder about black cats and superstitions.
One night, one day I was at Gallagher's fifty Sex

(01:06:12):
three of the Great State Place, And anyway, we're at
the bar years ago, and during the during the intermissions,
people would come from next door, you know, and booze
up and then go back, and it was kind of
funny in any event, So one day there was one
of them the bartenders, who I guess I don't even
know if he's even with us anymore. That's a nice
way of saying, I wonder if he's dead. I wonder

(01:06:32):
if he's with us. Maybe he passed. Who's you love
that this euphemism you mean died, no, no, pasted he
transitioned into something else. In any event, there was this
idea he told the story of how You'll brinner One
time came in and this bargender at the time was whistling,

(01:06:53):
and you were better accorded to him, said, you know
what's it's bad luck to whistle in the movie theater
in broad Broadway. He says, well, number one, we're not
on Broadway, we're not on stage. Number two, it's my bar.
And number three he shut up, I don't care who
you are. Well, as you can imagine, that didn't go
for very well. So anyway, so somehow the discussion when

(01:07:15):
he related the story was very interesting because somebody says.

Speaker 2 (01:07:19):
Do you know why.

Speaker 4 (01:07:21):
That came about? Why he was there? This quote superstition,
Because everything starts off, at least initially based on something
that may have had some merit to it, and what
happened was in the old days when you had stage

(01:07:42):
hands and you had to have scenery or big movies,
you had sandbags, big heavy sandbags that would be released
or dropped or lowered in order to allow certain scenes
or whatever different stage props to be moved. Way they
used to be signaling was with a whistle, just sort

(01:08:04):
of nobody the audience couldn't hear, but that you knew
you were signaled. Consequently, if you whistle, it could be
misinterpreted by somebody else as let me drop a scene.
So it kind of sort of maybe made sense at
least initially. And I like the idea of how we

(01:08:25):
will come up with these things. I am fascinated with
the time eleven eleven, Now eleven eleven has been attributed
to you name it. We were a friend of ours
in the family whose child was born at eleven eleven.
I mean, how exactly eleven I don't know, But anyway,

(01:08:47):
when are you born when you stick your head through
who knows? But I've always liked eleven eleven. And I
explained to somebody, I said, you do realize that eleven
eleven really didn't make sense. Un Two, we saw digital
time because we always We've had analog watches and clocks
for a long time, but you never it never became

(01:09:10):
as a parent by looking at the hands as you do.
Of course, the number numerologically was always important. So I
was trying to explain to somebody how digital clocks digital
really brought home, you know, the symmetry, the eleven to eleven,
you know, And again I got into this conversation I
never thought. I wish I never started, because people aren't

(01:09:32):
understanding the point of what I'm saying. And by the way,
on a tangential note, did you know that in many respects,
I have a friend of ours who's an elementary school
teacher said that the number of kids in her school
who cannot read an analog clock, they only know digital,
and how I cannot understand things the same if I'm

(01:09:53):
doing something, if you're reading, if you're reading something, let's
say you have in radio is called a hard break
or a hard out, and that means, especially if there's
a kind of a network something you have to go
to exactly at eleven, you know, eleven, eleven, thirteen. I mean,

(01:10:13):
it's really specific, and you've got to be out. You
normally in the studio have a couple of things. You
have an analog clock with a sweetpan, or you have
the digital. And for me, at least my understand my
understanding of how time transitions sometimes is better seen through
it analog, sometimes through digital, depending upon what I want

(01:10:36):
to see. If I'm in a hurry and I'm running late,
don't give me a digital clock. Don't tell me ten
twenty three, got to be there at ten thirty. I've
only got seven minutes. No, no, no, show me the hands.
I say, oh, look, I've got some time, because that's
the way I manifest, that's the way I recognize a

(01:10:57):
lapse time in time that is upcoming. So all of
the things that we do, sometimes based upon superstition, sometimes
based upon a variety of things, are all based in fact,
on our collection of reality. One more thing, you can't
hear a lot of these things because during your maybe

(01:11:19):
you do, but in your where you are in the
country of the world, you might hear local commercials or
what have you. But we hear a lot of these
Sometimes they're PSAs, or they're I don't want to say
they're filler, but there's just stuff that we just will
play and my I love them. They'll say, now a
moment of history, this moment in history, and I think,

(01:11:41):
here we go. Because people think history is appodictic, it's
black and white, it's not subject to debate. Its history
is history, you know what I mean. It's it's history.
Don't don't don't don't claim that there's any variation to it. Well,

(01:12:01):
listen to what Lincoln said about, for example, slavery, and
it will curl your hair. Listen to what people think
about history, because I forget what Tolstoi said, history would
be a wonderful thing if only were true. Or why
do I say this, Because whenever you inspect something, whether

(01:12:21):
it's religion, superstition, religion, love, faith, patriotism, history, medicine, miracles, luck, superstition, mythology, entropy, randomness.
To me, it's a welcoming place because I love the gradations.

(01:12:42):
To other people, it bothers them. There is a solace
in American history. I love the idea. There was the
notion of In fact, Billy and I were discussing and
laughing about this notion of American exceptionalism, the greatest country
in the world. Nobody is better than us, nobody has

(01:13:08):
what we have. No other country has free speech, No
other country has to process considerations. No other country can
you make money, enjoy free enterprise, none, no other country.
We're the only one. And of course that's somebody, but
that's kind of what people say. And then when you
ask people this question, they say, what are you getting at?

(01:13:31):
Which is my favorite subject, because there's a solace. We
want to be the best. The greatest American citizen is
a person was able to differentiate between the people and
the government. There was something recently, there was a there
was a tuck across that had on Roger Waters from
Pink Floyd and they were talking about nine to eleven

(01:13:53):
and Roger Waters was providing an idea and I don't
ascribe to it for reasons I'd brother and I go
went to because it's not what you think. But he
said that one of the reasons why we have not
had nine to eleven is that sometimes it's the it's
the old Malcolm X theary the chickens have come home
to roost that for years and years, American violence is

(01:14:16):
such that it's finally come back to bite us. And
it was an idea so Ted Cruz, who was of
course as absolutely I guess apodictic. He's almost like bumper sticker.
He says, why do people hate America? Why do people

(01:14:40):
hate America? Why is why does it especially this foreign guy?
And why does Tucker Carlson hate America? And of course
I know Ted Cruz knows better, but nobody hates America.
It's the American government. It's American foreign policy. I don't
know anybody who hates us. You hate America. You hate pizza.

(01:15:02):
I know it was for elsewhere, but not our pizza.
You hate Duke Ellington, you hate Mount Rushmore, you hate
stuff that we have football, you hate our music, you
hate country music and rad time and what you hate America.
You don't hate America. You love America. You love some

(01:15:24):
of us are crazy as a bed bug, but we
love her. No, it's the government. It's our foreign policy.
And you see, if you say it my way, if
you are punctilious, if you focus on actual use of
correct nomenclature, you miss the point exactly. You see, whenever

(01:15:46):
you speak publicly, whenever you're trying to convey a feeling,
you have to speak how do I say this? You
have to speak grand, grandiose terms. The only place where
this is not heard interestingly enough is sports. We have
a number of sports. I don't listen to sports radio,

(01:16:08):
but we had, you know, ESPN or a fan or
whatever it was. And if you call up a radio
station and you said the Yankee, No, the Mets are
the best, the America Mets sixty and I remember Tom
sever and by Piazza, and the Mets are great. And
if somebody says, excuse me, the Mets, I'm just saying

(01:16:30):
the Mets stink, they suck. This is the worst. How
dare you? You're unmet, like you're un American. And a
sports person would say, excuse me, have you read the numbers?
Have you read our standings? Have you seen we're out
of first place? Where? And a sports fan is encouraged
to know reality in our world, in our world speaking

(01:16:54):
in these kind of vague, hyperbolic terms about America and
American exceptionalism, and we're the greatest the city, sometimes we're
not so great. The government we're fine. So just remember
we say we don't don't include me in this talk
about the government. That's all why, Because this requires a

(01:17:18):
specific how do I say a specific attention? Okay, all right,
let's go to uh, let's go to Nate in the Bronx. Nate,
you're on another side of Midnight with Lionel.

Speaker 10 (01:17:32):
Well with regard to hyperbole and h the idea that,
you know, foreign policies detached from reality, I couldn't agree
more with regard to the idea of American exceptionalism. It's
this neo conservative idea that the United States.

Speaker 4 (01:17:48):
Oh no, it's not. Oh no, no, no, no no,
this is not neo conservative.

Speaker 9 (01:17:52):
Oh no, no, no.

Speaker 4 (01:17:53):
Ronald Reagan was a palaeo conservative. He had nothing to
do with Straussi and neo conservatism. This has been around
since my god sense Irving Berlin and oh no, no, no, no, no,
it's not neo conservatism at all. I respectfully disagree.

Speaker 10 (01:18:08):
Well, the neo conservatives have definitely exploited it. That's perhaps
that's what I should say.

Speaker 4 (01:18:13):
To find neo conservatism. What is a neo conservative?

Speaker 10 (01:18:16):
A neo conservative in the most basic sense of someone
who has a liberal view of social policy and a
jingoistic view of foreign policy. But it's much more complicated
than that, oh very much. It goes into the you know,
the Wolfowitz doctrine, the idea that posts the idea that
post collapse of the Soviet Union, that no other power

(01:18:39):
should arise to become a peer power to the United States.

Speaker 4 (01:18:43):
The United States, very very very good, by the way.
A little bit more though you write about this. It's
not just Leo Strauss but others. But it's the idea
that we we if we have this incredible uh, this
this geopolitical you know, political thunder, this ability to exact war,

(01:19:07):
and they're like, we don't have to necessarily wait to
be attacked. The biggest problem they have with the Vietnam War,
it was not that we stopped, it was that we
didn't finish it. And you brought this unique remember the
Scoop Jackson liberals, remember the durances and the UH and
the oh god, those those their lapsed Trotsky eyes. It's

(01:19:30):
a fascinating term. But you're very very correct. People oftentimes
think you'll agree with me. They confuse neo cons and
neo conservatism was somebody who's a warmonger, or somebody who's
a war profiteer, or somebody who's bellicos or somebody who's
just a hawk. That's not neo conservatism at all. Big
New Brazhinski was not a neo conservative, he hated the

(01:19:51):
Russians and everybody and Ronald Reagan and Pat Buchanan and
William F. Buckley. By the way, I never thought i'd
ever say that, but I miss the paleo conservative, the
one who who didn't believe in these ridiculous foreign theaters
and even I'm sorry it was off on a tangent Proceedesar.

Speaker 10 (01:20:10):
Okay, not a problem. But as always, you're very informative.

Speaker 6 (01:20:14):
So are you guard to Yeah?

Speaker 11 (01:20:17):
Thank you.

Speaker 6 (01:20:18):
So.

Speaker 10 (01:20:18):
With regard to the current debacle and unwinnable debacle engaging
in Iran, it's a continuation of these wars that have
been going on for the last twenty five years that
we've we've been at war almost NonStop in.

Speaker 2 (01:20:33):
The Middle East.

Speaker 10 (01:20:34):
Yes, nation, not to benefit the American national interest, but
rather to benefit the interest of a foreign country. Which
foreign country is that that's Israel?

Speaker 4 (01:20:46):
Well before before is With all due respect, though you're no, no, listen,
I'm not gonna I'm not gonna say. A lot of
people are saying this. Did you hear jd Vance's speech
recently on Joe Rogan? I couldn't believe what I was hearing.
I couldn't believe what I was here, I'm thinking to
myself here see up till now, By the way, there's
a very interesting thing right here. You have found out.

(01:21:08):
You have found that whenever anybody even utters this word,
my advice everybody is, do not ever even address this
subject in polite company, because unless you say something calibrated
within a particular framework, you're gonna be called anti Semitic,
even though you're saying I have nothing that there's nothing
to do with the Jewish Faith's not at all. The

(01:21:28):
same thing happens with how you called the racist. If
you attack certain subjects, you are going to an American.
And what I'm saying is simply this, do you notice
how things are changing? Like somebody told, like jd. Vance
is the point, man, go out there and address this.

Speaker 9 (01:21:45):
We are not.

Speaker 4 (01:21:46):
We are not making a point.

Speaker 12 (01:21:48):
Now.

Speaker 4 (01:21:48):
One more thing too. You mentioned Iran one of the
things which is the most fascinating, and maybe you agree,
maybe you don't, but there's one thing that we don't
seem to learn. When you decide to enter into some
type of bellicose activity, war whatever with the country, you
better be do not undersell them. Do not misunderstand where

(01:22:11):
you are in terms of is this geography, what time
of the year is it, What particular type of warfare
is this going to be? Is this going to be
air power? Is this gonna be from seas? Are you
going to land? Is this boots on the ground? How
committed are they to the fight? What is the end goal?
This is the old pottery barn rule kind of sort

(01:22:33):
of of column, Powell, Do you understand who are these people?
Why are you doing it? Does the American public have
a commitment behind it? Is there an identifiable, articulable reason
as to why you're doing this? And also how are
you planning on effectuating this? America still thinks air power

(01:22:56):
is available.

Speaker 2 (01:22:56):
No it's not not.

Speaker 6 (01:22:59):
No, no, no, no, no.

Speaker 4 (01:23:00):
So I find it incredibly fascinating. And how do you
expect people in the Pentagon who are trying to get
that fourth star or who want to retire and go
into let's say post service, you know, board of directors?
How do they maintain their integrity and their status without

(01:23:22):
rubber stamping whatever an administration wants to do. And we've
never we never learned Vietnam taught us nothing. Does that
sound roughly converse into or similar to your way of thinking?

Speaker 10 (01:23:37):
Oh, sure, very much so. I mean, you know, airpower
by itself is not a panacea for all military problems.
If you look back in Vietnam, as you mentioned, you
know you had Operation Rolling Thunder. Operation Rolling Thunder was
probably the biggest recruitment tools for the viet Cong.

Speaker 6 (01:23:52):
Yes, s war.

Speaker 4 (01:23:54):
Yes, in fact yes, yes. And also by the way,
one more thing, one more thing to just go back.
When you look at the people who you were involved
with during Vietnam, we had no idea think who are
these people?

Speaker 9 (01:24:10):
What is there?

Speaker 4 (01:24:11):
What is their mentality? And Ho Chi Minh was a
fellow who loved at least ostensibly, this was a guy
who was a fry cook or a dishwasher. I think
in Brooklyn he patterned remember how we used our constitution
as his? I mean he almost it was like almost plagiarism.
And for years they were fighting basically it was a

(01:24:33):
nationalist civil war, and they were this is from thousands
of years of imperialism against the Japanese and the French.
We never understood them.

Speaker 6 (01:24:41):
You know.

Speaker 4 (01:24:42):
One time years ago, I interviewed Robert McNamara on WABC,
the old or the original WABC, and I talked to
him and he had just come out with this, I
think it was the Fog of War, the Errol Morris
or whatever documentary. And I said to him, I said,
let me see if I understand this. You misunderstood what

(01:25:05):
was going on in Vietnam as some kind of a
of a metastatic encroachment of kind of communism, but in
fact it was a civil war. He was a nationalist
and he says, that's precisely. He was like very animated.
He goes, that's precisely right. And I said, well, why
didn't you know this?

Speaker 3 (01:25:24):
Then?

Speaker 4 (01:25:25):
Why didn't you How did you allow this? How did
we so smart? It's like you've ever heard when somebody
will say, in the old days, we believe that a
lobotomy was the best way to handle migraine, Like what
you know that? Well, well, we didn't know better. How
did we not know that during Vietnam? Why are we

(01:25:48):
still making the mistakes? And by the way, how do
you explain to people when we said to the Iranian people, listen,
we're sorry about Operation Ajax Kermit Roosevelt mosadk sorry about that.
We were That's the way our government was. But don't
hold that against us now. And what do you think

(01:26:09):
about people that a government. If I were, if somebody
were to take out our pope, what do you think
this would do to to as you would say recruiting
Catholics against whatever country took out our supreme or religious leader.
We never think about how other people feel vis a
these something that our government does. And unless you do that,

(01:26:33):
it's called empathy or being empathic. We'll never learn. But
when I just said, we'll be, I guarantee you construe
somehow as either an American or liberal or I don't
know what normally by people who don't understand the first
thing about history or strategy.

Speaker 10 (01:26:54):
Yes, and so far as that, you know, I'm glad
you mentioned, you know, conflating being critical of Israel and
critical of Zionism with being anti Semitic or hating Jews.
You know, it's absolute nonsense. It's it's a shield that
the Zionists put up to prevent people from being critical
of them. And you know, I'm glad you mentioned that

(01:27:16):
because there's a bill in Congress right now that is
tremendous support on both sides of the Aisle that would
criminalize that would criminalize criticism of Israel, not just on
college campuses, but in order to get a job with various.

Speaker 4 (01:27:31):
Well you know, also the Jews. It's funny that you
say that, because I have I always. I was reading
one time something from Haretz and it sounded like I
think what I think. Can you believe this? And somebody said,
where is that liberal rig who says that? Is it?
This is from Israel, this is what they think. See

(01:27:52):
the idea we always we love and by the way, Neda,
thank you so much for you call. Please call me again.
We love the idea of things being very simple. They
are not simple. Be very careful of anybody who tells
you don't go there. Shut up. You're an American, you're ed,

(01:28:14):
you submitted, you're racist, you're transphobic, your misogynistic. Shot up,
you're a conspiracy theorist. You are a conspiracy theorist. I
remember one time, right after nine to eleven, I mean
right well, pretty much soon I didn't know enough about
all of the working facts. I didn't understand a lot

(01:28:36):
of the the working portions of it, and flight ninety three,
I didn't know where I was Shanksville pends up and
I didn't know, and I went, I said, you know,
I'm looking here at Google Images, and I don't see
a plane crash. I just see this place called thing
called flight ninety three. And somebody said, somebody called up

(01:28:56):
and said, what are you getting at? I said, what
do you mean?

Speaker 11 (01:29:00):
So?

Speaker 4 (01:29:00):
What are you getting as? I'm not getting anything? I'm
talking about an observation. And they said, what are you suggesting?
This was an inside job? I never said anything of
the sort. You said that, But I don't believe there
was a plane crash where you said this was. Turns
out it was right later on. The crash was eight
miles away in this place called New Baltimore, an Indian lake.

(01:29:20):
Why because I knew about this. And the first thing
they were told was do not go there with this.
Accept the narrative. And if you want to go, if
you want to go far, if you want to do
in this particular realm, just repeat this now. If you

(01:29:41):
tried that way of thinking on let's say, certain Internet
platforms or digital platforms or streaming platforms, if you tried
that that same idea, put it this way. At one
time I heard recently, I don't really watch this, but
it was on somebody to clip from our friends at

(01:30:03):
Fox News, and they were saying something, and I thought
to myself, I don't know who's writing this script. If
you said that in certain you you would be buried
on digital platforms. If you said anything but that on
cable news platforms, you would be asked to leave immediately.
See this is what happens. I want to control your

(01:30:26):
not so much what you think, but what you say.
And if I say things long enough, you'll be able
to confuse and conflate that with what you think, with
that with what you say, or of what you say.
Mary in New Jersey, Mary, or on another side of
Midnight with Lionel.

Speaker 13 (01:30:45):
Oh, hie, Lionel. I'm listening to the conversation. I think
I'm out of my depth, but you were. But you
were mentioning the end of the Vietnam War, and I
have I have a memory, definitely of Walter Cronkite saying,
this war is lost.

Speaker 6 (01:31:07):
No, that was it.

Speaker 4 (01:31:08):
That was it during the tet offensive. That was not
at the end. Yeah.

Speaker 6 (01:31:11):
Right.

Speaker 4 (01:31:12):
In fact, Johnson purportedly said, if I've lost Concrete Cronkite,
I've lost mid America. Oh, yes, that was what I was.

Speaker 13 (01:31:21):
Just about to say. I remember him, I remember him
saying that that.

Speaker 4 (01:31:25):
Was after the tet offensive. Yep, yep, yep. Okay, I
thank you, Mary, please call me again, Walter Cronkite. People said, wow,
he was a liberal in this and that people don't
recognize the fact of how and you use this it's

(01:31:45):
become almost I don't know what the word is, almost
like a trite. But he was in fact trusted and
that wasn't just an expression. It wasn't just an expression.
But they believed him when and he he always made
it very clear what was his opinion and what was
his reportage or journalism or whatever you want to call it.

(01:32:10):
And when he realized, he recognized after the tet offensive,
this is it. It's over, it's done. That took so
much guts. But he was castigated. He was called a liberal,
a communist sympathizer. He was called and what do we
say today, You're a Putin apologist, You're a you know,
it's just it's it's the same theory utilized by different people.

(01:32:33):
And don't think for a moment, this is important. Don't
think for a moment that just because he was now
we call him respected. He was loathed. Don't forget also
how FDR was loathed asked Smedley Butler, who said war
as a racket, how there was a coup that was
being that was being organized. They despised FDR despised him.

(01:32:57):
One more thing. You know how people have loved Truman.
He was despised by certain factions. So remember, history would
be a wonderful thing if only it were true. This
is what Tolstoy said, and it's so true. And the
only way we're going to get to this, if this
thing called the truth, as I mentioned last night, is
to ask questions and never be afraid to opine. Never

(01:33:22):
be afraid to ask a question, especially if it is
politically incorrect or politically problematic or disconcerting, because remember this,
you only take flack when you're over the target. This
is another side of Midnight with Lionel.

Speaker 1 (01:33:40):
All night long. This is another side of Midnight with Lionel.
The other side of Midnight with Lionel entertaining and informative
on the Red Apple podcast net work. This is another

(01:34:10):
side of Midnight with Lionel. Now to the McGirk Studios, Heres, Lionel.

Speaker 9 (01:34:28):
Isn't it amazing the things I love?

Speaker 12 (01:34:35):
Oh?

Speaker 4 (01:34:35):
Absolutely?

Speaker 9 (01:34:38):
I think.

Speaker 4 (01:34:40):
Out of everything that we have ever done, but of
everything the human beings ever exhibit, it's not it's not war,
it's not hate, its any whatever. It's love. Romantic love
is a mental illness, absolutely positively. It is an obsessive,

(01:35:01):
compulsive mental illness. And it is something that unless you
get to the bottom, it's it's always it's always considered
very very nice and positive. And of course it is
for somebody for so many reasons. But when you think
about it, it's something that we never talk about, but
we love to use it. All that we always talk
about all I love this, I love that, I love that.

Speaker 9 (01:35:21):
I know you don't home.

Speaker 4 (01:35:22):
Look of my dog. He loves me, No, he doesn't.
Love is a different story. Love is not people. This
is anthropomorphism. We always said we look, he's why I
can his tail. That's not love. That's called association. Oh
look the bird. The dolphins are are Uh, they're their
own language. That's not a language. That's communication. A language

(01:35:45):
is tense and syntax and an expression and things are. Remember,
the closer you get to things, the closer you look,
the more you realize how imprecise the way we think.
Let me tell you something we'd own it. I shouldn't
say this, I should say, we're the only ones. Probably not,
but we're the only group of people that will say, hey, listen,

(01:36:09):
play off those big words. People don't understand them, well
that's their problem. No, no, no, no, no, we don't
do that. Lay off the big words. I love that
the big words. Don't do that. Don't say that, don't
think that. How many times do you ever do you

(01:36:30):
ever read? If you ever do read anything, or hear
people getting tenses wrong, you can't even speak English. It's
the most incredible thing in the world. How many times
have you heard things like gone and go and went,
I should have went and you and you hear this
and there's no there's no anger, there's no reference of this.

(01:36:54):
They're saying, Oh, that's that's being Don't be so pregish,
don't be so punctilious, don't be so persnickety regarding that.
We need to go in and we need to ask
people the question to actually to be able to express

(01:37:15):
ideas and thoughts, but to go into the reality, in
the in the morality. I have a friend of mine,
a good friend of mine, John Kiriako. You probably have
seen him. He is a retired and former CIA a
person who is everywhere. He is everywhere there is. He
has been on every show you name it, not not

(01:37:38):
on TV, but but in terms of the Internet.

Speaker 3 (01:37:42):
And he.

Speaker 4 (01:37:44):
Explains, you know, years and years of the CIA, and
one of the things he said, well, what do you
do what he goes, well, we do things theoretically for
our country. That's also as an open and it statement,
but that are against the law. I steal things. And
when there's somebody that we don't like, we kill them.
We go and we'll send a drone or will and

(01:38:05):
we will take somebody out and kill them, kill them. Why, well,
because we just don't. I've heard President Trump, and you've
heard him sometimes lament gloat, almost wax giddy over the
notion of killing who is like SOLEMONI or others, and
he speaks of it in terms of his almost Some

(01:38:30):
might say it's disturbing, but others say, no, no, that's charm,
that's a that's a that's a rough and tumble, that's
a okay. Now ask somebody, would you please tell me
how your religion, your god, your faith, or your law
prohibits murder the intentional bringing it to the end of

(01:38:54):
life somebody based upon you know, there's no you know,
with malice of fourth ought, there's no premited well with premitive.
But why is it that I can kill him but
I can't kill somebody here in this country? Why is
it that stealing is wrong unless it's a foreign country.
Why is and please forgive me for this. Why is
murder wrong unless it's an unborn fetus or unborn baby?

(01:39:20):
How do we make these gray days? Why can I
eat chicken and beef and even baby beef like veal,
but we can't eat cats? Why not? That's the feline?
That's I just so questions like this I love. But
if you try this on a regular basis, people would say,

(01:39:42):
stop asking these questions, stop making me think. Well, that's
exactly what we do here. On Another side of Midnight
with Lionel.

Speaker 1 (01:39:53):
The Other side of Midnight with Linel entertaining and informative
on the Red Apple Podcast Network. It's Another side of
Midnight with Lionel. Now to the Van McGirk studios.

Speaker 2 (01:40:14):
Here is Lionel.

Speaker 3 (01:40:27):
My loan, I know, I know, I know, I know,
I know, I know, I know, I know, I know,
I know, I know, I know, I know, I know I.

Speaker 6 (01:40:45):
Know.

Speaker 4 (01:40:46):
Writing Linel with you I remember three, the final hour
of this thing of ours. This is another side of midnight.
By the way, you can follow me always on YouTube
at linel Nation. Oh my god, I'm for those of
you who how do I say this, for those of
you who find true crime to be interesting. There was

(01:41:06):
a case now going on regarding this fellow named Tyler Robinson,
which is absolutely taken from me, a barn Burner. The
radio business is so interesting, especially when you look at
the radio industry and you see industry publications and people

(01:41:30):
who are trying to be the voice of radio. And
one of the things which they do from time to
time is to say what is the most popular in
terms of formats and types. And it may not be
the truth on radio, but in the but in the
world of of of streaming, it's true crime. There are

(01:41:57):
crime you know, we have comic con there are crime conventions.
People love the idea of true crime. And there's two
kinds of crime true crime. Number one is the actual
who done it and the other one there's the people
who actually explain to you what's going on in terms
of our due process, how are things working, how is
this trial going? And the two have nothing to do

(01:42:20):
with each other. For example, in the case of O. J. Simpson.

Speaker 6 (01:42:23):
O J.

Speaker 4 (01:42:23):
Simpson, everybody knew, anybody who watched killed his wife, and
Ron Goleman is absolutely, positively one percent no doubt about it,
and anybody who thinks there was didn't know enough about
the case. However, what happened in terms of the trial
is a different story. And what's happening right now involving

(01:42:46):
this case, involving Tyler Robinson and the Patsy is so
perfect and if you really want to see how behavior works,
look at that one. I also think of the following.
I have little thought experiments which I've always enjoyed, and
one of them is, as follows a person from another

(01:43:07):
planet or solar system, whatever it is, I don't care.
It's lands and this is this guy is a UFO
as people call them sometimes a UFO and ebe somebody
extra terrestrial biological entity, and they land, and we always
it's like, if you listen to people who talk the
most about UFOs and are like, it's the most ridiculous conversation.

(01:43:28):
We never really dare I say, hate to use upon
land on a subject, but because the implications of this
are so great, I don't think anybody really understands what
it means if we ever make acknowledged contact with these people.
But here's my thought experiment. I have been enlisted by

(01:43:49):
the government to drive around to be the tour guide
of a critter that lands, and we are able to
speak in communit k through telepathy. But I am providing
an insight into human behavior. And I say to this person,
let me show you some of the stuff that we

(01:44:10):
as humans do. Maybe you do it as well. I
don't know. I don't know your form of life. First
I would say, I'm gonna take you. We're gonna look
at an aerial shot of this. This is the World
Cup in New Jersey. This is the singular most watched
event on the planet today, the World Cup Spain and Argentina.

(01:44:40):
And if this person or entity says, well, what is that, say, well,
it's called sports. What is sports? Sports is a game,
It's not real. We we normally will take a particular
type of skill and we will construct rules around and

(01:45:01):
when somebody advances, they are given a point of some sort,
some way of keeping track of who the winner is.
And in this particular case, is taking that ball and
putting it in that net and that's it, and that's
the essence of it. There's always nuance. I'm not trying
to now. If the person says, why are people going

(01:45:25):
crazy over this? I said, ah, that's the issue. The
reason why is a number of things. Number One, tradition.
If you're raised in a part of the country, part
of the world, part of the planet where let's say,

(01:45:45):
cricket is watched, or hurling, or rugby or Gaelic football
or soccer or football baseball, that number one will determine
much of what you do as is real legit. Ten
to one. If you are born in the United States,

(01:46:06):
your religion most probably is Christian. Just statistically doesn't mean
Christian's right. If you're born in Damascus, maybe not so
much has something to do with who's correct, it's where
you're from. Also, there is something about this thing called tribalism.

(01:46:27):
We love to be a part of a team. Humans
enjoy this duality. Number one. They enjoy individual individuality. I'm
who I am. I'm an individual. I have no a
member of nothing. I am who I am. Then you

(01:46:49):
have people say, yes, I am who I am and
I'm an individual, but I'm a Republican I'm a Republican
to go to seapack, or I'm a liberal Democrat, or
I'm to the left, or I'm identified with this. I'm
a Yankees fan. I'm a Yankees fan. I live in Westchester.
I drive this, I drive a Tesla. I'm a member
of these groups. I'm college educated. I'm not. I am

(01:47:11):
a and we love to be a part of that group.
And normally we're a part of groups that we like.
We're very proud of them. Very rarely do we say,
by the way, I'm a group, a member of a
very large and growing group. These are people who are illiterate.
I'm illiterate. I'm also in a group of phobics. I
have weird phobias about pigeons. I'm also mentally ill. I

(01:47:36):
suffer from six kinds of depression, and I'm also highly
medicated at any given time. I'm also a roaring alcoholic
and drug addict. Nobody does that, Nobody ever ever says that.
But we love to be a part of this. And
I'm going to wear my shirt to show my team spirit,

(01:47:57):
and I'm going to leave my world. This is the
World Cup and I'm going to go and whether the
traffic or whatever, and I'm going to sit among all
these people and I'm going to feel myself connected to
a behavior where I am almost like a part of
a circuit board. I am a I am a part
of a group of people who are collectively involved in

(01:48:20):
this organic functionality function called sports or whatever whatever whatever
you want to call it. I don't even know the
name of it. But I am going to now jump
and yell and scream with my friends because we won

(01:48:41):
our side. It is tribalism. And I asked myself, do you,
mister or miss whatever it, critter of UFO whatever, do
you or et issues say? Are you do you have this?

Speaker 6 (01:48:58):
No?

Speaker 4 (01:49:00):
No, we gave up sports years ago. That's that's counterproductive.
It's just fun, but it serves no purpose. Okay, okay,
that's interesting. And by the way, I would say, mister requider, yes,
do you have pornography?

Speaker 6 (01:49:13):
What do you have?

Speaker 4 (01:49:14):
Pornography usually kind of a male thing in which human
sexual behavior is depicted and the person looks at you
and says, well, why would you do that? Well, because
we this is arousing to us, the seeing somebody else
do this. Yes. And by the way, some people who

(01:49:35):
are less visual, they will read about things. You people
are strange. Yes, I do know that. Then we'll also
do things to change our reality. We'll take drugs and
alcohol and a variety of different things in order to
change this is who we are. And then I would
take the person to a church, or to a mosque,

(01:49:55):
or to a synagogue. I would take them to walking
anywhere in the streets of Manhattan. These are tarot card readers,
these are these are spiritualists. Are you someone who actually
believes in astrology?

Speaker 3 (01:50:16):
Oh?

Speaker 4 (01:50:16):
This is this is one of the things which I want,
and please, I am not going to mock you. I'm
not going to call you daft. I want to know
why do you believe in the paranormal? Do you believe
in crystals? Do you believe in channeling? Do you believe
in Claire? Audience people? Do you go to a psychic?

(01:50:39):
Have you been to a psychic? Have you ever been
told something that to this day makes you you You're
shocked by it? I always thought faith healing fascinates me.
Like I told you this, I was. I was, And
by the way, I would tell this to my friend
from another planet as well. This is what we do

(01:51:02):
because we always want to see if we can find
out a way of tapping into what's happening, tell us
what the future is now. But a lot of times
I have found people who go to these folks and
they will be told things that you know. For example,
you're having a problem right now with your eldest child. Yes,

(01:51:25):
you're right, that's amazing. How did he know this?

Speaker 9 (01:51:30):
You did?

Speaker 4 (01:51:32):
You have somebody in your family by the name of Josephine.
Is there a Josephine? Yes, that's my grandmother's name. Wow,
how did you know this? Okay? I was asking, what
have you learned? You knew your grandmother's name was Josephine.
You know that you have a problem with your oldest daughter.

(01:51:53):
What are you learning? People think that somehow this is
a connection into some because somebody told you something that
you already knew, and in many respects that will suffice.
How does that work? Tell me how I win the lottery,
Tell me how I win the next the election. Tell

(01:52:18):
me something that's going to happen in the future. Don't
tell me something that's happening right now. So here's my
question to you, going back to my theory again, I
thought about what I would tell somebody from the planet.
Do you believe in what we call the paranormal? Do
you believe that the extant world, that the world that
believe in, that what we see is nothing but a

(01:52:41):
cursory kind of a first level, first layer through a
unique kind of concatenation, like a layer. But this one
little layer, what we see in here now, is part
of something which is far deeper, more complicated. Do you
believe that when you were born, when you were born,

(01:53:08):
not that you were born Andel's heart an extent, where
you were born, but the time of your birth is
connected by a series of control mechanisms based upon planets
and stars that will control and affect your fate, your future,

(01:53:29):
your success, your failures, merely based merely for no other reason,
something to do with your worth. If you're born in
the same day as Adolf Hitler or Albert Einstein, in
the same place, if you were born, if in the
same hospital, you've got Hitler, Einstein, Beethoven, Jimmy Stewart, everybody

(01:53:54):
born at the same place, at the same time, during
the same era. What does that mean? How similar will
their fates be? Will their futures be? And if they
are similar? Tell me why this matters? And tell me

(01:54:15):
do you believe this is antithetical to the tool belief
in God? Do you think God? And I'll use God
in nature? Would say, oh yes. In addition to my
own particular control mechanisms, I've I've designed this to provide
you with another trajectory, another success or failure path, an arc,

(01:54:38):
so to speak, based upon where and when you were born,
merely merely when and where you were born. Our number
is eight hundred and eighty four eight nine two two two.
I promise you, if you call, I will not mock you.
I want to know why. I am fascinated by what

(01:55:00):
you think and how you think. And this is another
side of Midnight with Lionel.

Speaker 1 (01:55:07):
It's another side of Midnight with Lionel. The other side
of Midnight with Lionel entertaining and informative on the Red
Apple podcast Network. This is another side of Midnight with Lionel.

(01:55:35):
Now to the Banar McGirk Studios, heres Linel.

Speaker 4 (01:55:49):
Oh Yes, Jews, Jesus, Jesus Christ superstar. I love that
Jesus Christ. Remember how great that was? What a great song.
My friends, I love the idea you have. My friends

(01:56:11):
think I don't believe in this. I love the idea
of you coming up with something that you believe in.
How many times have you ever thought of the notion
of deja vu? Then, of course I just said that
Bill le will of course get deja vu. Who is
it who oversight that?

Speaker 5 (01:56:32):
Not?

Speaker 4 (01:56:33):
Not Dionne Warwick? Well maybe anyway, because whenever you say something,
Bill will make a song. He will get something. You
can be in the most serious, heart wrenching, heartrending statement
and he'll find a song because why because he's exceptional.
But I love the idea of deja vu. Hey, as

(01:56:56):
Crosbys and I said, we have all been here before.
I've been here before for Hey, I recognize this. Hey
and I say that a lot, Hey, this is really something?
What is desia vou? What is this idea?

Speaker 6 (01:57:13):
Well?

Speaker 4 (01:57:14):
One of the greatest little thoughts experiments I ever heard,
but somebody who suggested that every now and then, a
random electrical charge, a random signal, something somewhere will hit
a portion of your brain, a portion of a particular
lobe where you have the artificial sensation of memory. Sometimes

(01:57:40):
in various neurological surgeries or yeah, you know, brain surgeries
in order sometimes to map out parts of your brain
that might let's say, be associated with motor or voice.

(01:58:01):
They will tap with certain little probes, tap the part
of your brain to make sure this is still working. Remember,
sometimes people would be wide away during brain surgery, and
every now and then somebody would hit something and somebody
would say, wait, man, I remember this, and he would
say no, no, no, you didn't remember this, because this
is me merely touching the part of your brain that

(01:58:22):
symbols and signals memory, just like a part of your
motor part of your brain, which signals or companies a
leg jiggling or moving. I'm just creating it. No, no, no,
I've been here. No, you've never had brain surgery before.
You've never this has never happened. So it's this idea

(01:58:43):
always of reading something into it to say, oh, this
is this is fascinating, this is this is so unique?
Well is it really?

Speaker 5 (01:58:51):
Now?

Speaker 4 (01:58:52):
What I was talking about with Bill and Jackson beforem
which is that you know Dejeva was like, that's one
of the vows, that's the scene part. What about Jamey
vu Huh isn't that Patti LaBelle je voulu vecave sysoir?

(01:59:13):
That of course is fo Merman doing Patti level, but
jamvu means never seen. This is the true psychological opposite.
This is where you encounter something that is actually familiar,
but it suddenly feels completely unfamiliar or strange. It's like
when meeting with program directors, it's like who are you?

(01:59:36):
Why are you seeing this? For example, you look at
your own signature and you think yourself, wait, man, that
doesn't even look like my handwriting.

Speaker 3 (01:59:43):
What what is this?

Speaker 4 (01:59:45):
Okay? How about pres gae vu prs q u e
and please my French pronunciation is non existent. This is
almost scene. This is the feeling that you're on the
verge of rem remembering something, but you can't quite retrieve it.
It's a classic tip of the tongue phenomenon. It's almost

(02:00:07):
like when you're trying to sneeze. How about vu Jah day?

Speaker 6 (02:00:13):
Now?

Speaker 4 (02:00:13):
Of course, as I just spoke, Billy would be going
and finding finding Shah Day, which that is as closes
as we're going to get. This is called already seen.
This is a humor. It's kind of a non uh
clinical term for becoming so accustomed to something that you
no longer notice it because it's overly familiar. I get

(02:00:37):
that a lot that's also called habituation. There we go. See,
demand's incredible. Let's saved, you know, least not for one seven.
Listen to this carefully. Wait, I'm not done.

Speaker 3 (02:00:54):
I listen.

Speaker 4 (02:00:55):
There's one line I want you to hear this. Give
me the coast to coast bark. This is critic and
see if you notice what I notice? All right, so
here we go. Here we go to western coast to coast,

(02:01:19):
LA to Chicago. You see a problem with that geographically
Coast to coast, not LA to New York or LA
to Atlantic City. No, no, LA to Chicago. It's Midwest.
I don't understand that. You think, oh, Shade or Sade
knows what she's saying. Probably not. So we have jam

(02:01:42):
vou never seen, preski vu almost seen, vu ja day,
already seen, and here we go deja the coup, which
means already lived. This is a more intense form of
deja vu, in which someone feels they've not only seen
an event, but they've actually lived through the entire experience.

(02:02:06):
It fascinates me and people will never say, well, I
kind of have a feeling that maybe this might be
the guy. He says, Oh no, no, no, no, this
this happened. This absolutely happened. And when I talk about
the paranormal and the like, I find this to be

(02:02:26):
incredible because whether it's astrology and the notion of a ghost.
Now somebody says, do you believe in a ghost? Well, again,
as you can see, I'm rather reluctant to say I
believe in something because that means I know something. But
I know too many people who have all said kind
of the same thing. And maybe it's the same simultaneous

(02:02:48):
form of or identical brain activity that gives you the
impression that you're seeing something. I don't know. UFOs, we've
talked about that. We have some of the most redeems
childish reference to UFOs. Have you ever heard UFO shows
on the internet? They say nothing. The illusion is that

(02:03:12):
you're learning something. The illusion is that you're very serious
about it. Nobody is let me ask you something, and
this is what we build might know. How about the
notion of a curse? Are the Kennedys cursed? There was
something recently where there was a story I heard where

(02:03:33):
somebody they were working someplace and if I call correctly
somebody from the coworker, this woman was pregnant and on
her desk or somewhere was something left that had chicken
bones and something. And the message was, we want you

(02:03:56):
to get the impression that you are cursed. Guardian angels,
not the Curtis Lee would type, but the guardian angels.
Do you believe in a guardian angel? And it's a
wonderful idea, isn't that a guardian Angel? I think I
had such a great idea when I was in I

(02:04:18):
think it was kindergarten. I can see the room now,
maybe I can't see it. Maybe I can't, maybe I can't.

Speaker 9 (02:04:25):
I don't know.

Speaker 4 (02:04:26):
But there was this wonderful picture in fourth of course,
at the Catholic school in the sixties had these wonderful
pictures that were great. The paintings were oh so great,
and this one was if you're if you were in
Catholic school, you probably saw this. But this was two
kids walking across a bridge during the worst torrential rain

(02:04:52):
you can imagine. I mean, it was horrible, lightning, dark,
just horrid, and they're walking on a bridge, like a
rope bridge that's about to break, and they're huddled together scared,
and I'm wondering. And I used to sit there and

(02:05:13):
daydream because the kindergarten, what the hell is a point?
But I'm looking up and I kept I just looked
at this picture, and I kept wondering the terror that
must have these two kids. How did they get there,
How did they get this lost? Why did they traverse
halfway across this rickety bridge? Anyway, I'm asking these questions,

(02:05:36):
and it was a picture of this beautiful angel behind it,
behind these children, beautiful angel. And I remember somebody said,
we each have a guardian angel, but there's only one
guardian angel in they grew up. In fact, if you
saw this, we would have double everybody would There would

(02:06:00):
be an angel for each what seven billion people on
the planet. It's a lot of angels, a lot of them.
And nobody was to do the math in any event.
So I raised my hand and I asked Sister Mike
Tyson or Sister Mary Ageny, whoever it was. I said,
do you notice here that we have two kids and

(02:06:22):
one guardian angel? Why don't they Why aren't there two
guardian angels in this painting? At which of these kids
buys the farm? And the nun that told me, the
nun said that at the time, stop asking questions that's
the part when I was born. The me that you

(02:06:42):
hear was born from people saying they don't ask that question.
So with all of these premonitions and couragious one thing
is certain human beings are pattern seeking creatures. Our brains
apparently seem to be. This is kind of a working hypothesis.

(02:07:03):
Seems to have evolved to connect dots even when the
dots may not even belong together. If you hear, for example,
let's say rustling in the bushes, that might mean a predator.
It was safer for our ancestors to assume danger than

(02:07:25):
to ignore it, and that instinct remains with us today.
Astrology fascinating offers something many people crave, meaning what is
this worth?

Speaker 6 (02:07:38):
Do you?

Speaker 4 (02:07:39):
You hear all the time? What do we here for?
Is there any reason for this?

Speaker 3 (02:07:43):
Do I?

Speaker 4 (02:07:43):
Is there any reason for my being here? It suggests
that the universe has a plan and that our lives
fit into a large kind of a cosmic design, whether
scientifically supported or not. Millions find it emotionally satisfied. Remember,
Sidney Omar was in the back of like every newspaper.

(02:08:05):
He said two or three lines about Sagittarius. Proceed with
your church good things in view for money, ask for
that raise. And the paranormal, which many many people years
ago suggests, at least when I was growing up in
the Catholic Church, people say no, no, no, stay away
from that, that's witchcraft. But the paranormal speaks to another need.

(02:08:27):
This is the hope, and this is the very very
critical hope that death is not the end. Ghost stories,
near death experiences, unexplained phenomena all reassure or ten hope
to reassure people that consciousness might survive physical death. We've
talked about this as well. And then there's this notion

(02:08:50):
called coincidence. There's a phrase in my neck of the
woods that said there was no such thing as a coincidence.
Who I think there is? There is also there's simultaneous synchronicity.
Some things kind of just come about. But there's this
idea that we remember the astonishing hits and forget the

(02:09:13):
countless misses. You see. Psychologists call this confirmation bias, but
critics of you know, skepticism also ask an important question,
what if some experiences genuinely resist conventional explanation. What if
we just can't understand things? And does everything have a meaning?

(02:09:37):
And science, which, by the way, science from the Latin
ski ends meaning knowledge. Science has explained, you know, countless
mysteries that one seemed kind of supernatural, But yet science
itself advances and us by investigating anomalies. So this is

(02:09:57):
the question I've always asked people, have you ever experienced
something there was really serious that you can't still explain?
And why are intelligent, educated people often drawn to astrology
or psychic greetings? And is belief in this thing called

(02:10:21):
paranormal evidence of irrationality or simply intellectual openness? Or is
this what sentient people do? And why do humans seem
hardwired to find meaning in patterns in random events? What
if we met people from other planets and star systems

(02:10:42):
who are theoretically our intellectual superior and none of them
believed in that, None of them believed in it. Let's
go to the phones right now at eight hundred and
eighty four eight ninety two to two two Bury in
New Jersey. You're on another side of midnight with Lionel.

Speaker 5 (02:11:00):
Good morning, Linel, how are you?

Speaker 4 (02:11:03):
Good morning, my friend? How are you?

Speaker 5 (02:11:05):
I'm doing great? I love your show today, and as
I do most of your shows, I'm a little bit
surprised that we are not getting more discussion on the
major issue in our country, which is voter fraud and
the necessary id to have this taken care of.

Speaker 4 (02:11:26):
Are you saying for this, You're saying for a show
called Another Side of Midnight, you're saying this would be
the perfect venue to discuss voter ID or you mean
just in general.

Speaker 5 (02:11:40):
No, the issue in our country that we are not
dealing with voter fraud to whatever aspect it is, whether
it's minor, major, but it needs to be taken care of.

Speaker 4 (02:11:55):
One of the reasons, by by the way, just one
of the reasons why there's a lot of subjects politically
that I'm not discussing. By virtue of the tenor and
the subject matter here, we're not talking about a lot
of things, and voter fraud does not necessarily go with
the theme of the more shall I say lofty, but
anyway proceed it's an extremely critical issue. And why it's

(02:12:18):
an issue at all.

Speaker 5 (02:12:20):
Well, I'm saying it's a critical issues when I discuss
it with people who don't agree with me, for instance,
and people for instance, we watched the President's speech a
few days ago, and the fact that he mentioned that
we had previous issues of voter ford. That is something
that he needs to take care of. When the governments

(02:12:42):
take care of I'm talking about moving forward, moving forward
to an election coming in a couple of months, an
election coming in a couple of years. Why aren't we
having a law where people cannot vote unless they have
properly donnification, proper documents, and a ruling that will prevent

(02:13:05):
voter fraud. I don't want to have my vote canceled
by someone that's voting illegally. That's not promis American citizen.

Speaker 4 (02:13:16):
Why do you think that is very Why?

Speaker 5 (02:13:20):
Well, I'll tell you why. Because one side doesn't want
voter ID and major changes where the other side does.

Speaker 3 (02:13:30):
And then one side and that.

Speaker 4 (02:13:33):
You mean the Democrats don't want there to be ways
or means of ensuring correct voting. Why do you think
that is what is their endgame?

Speaker 5 (02:13:43):
Well, obviously the only reason they do that is because
they want some votes done illegally to give them some
kind of gain, possibility of gain, and possibility of winning election.
And that is absolutely ridiculous.

Speaker 2 (02:14:01):
What is the reason what about people to do that?

Speaker 4 (02:14:05):
What about the reason? In addition to that is number
one they want there to be catastrophe who they like
or what you're talking about, which is many people have suggested,
and it's called the replacement theory, where the Democrats believe
their their goal ultimately is to get rid of the filibuster,

(02:14:25):
to make DC the fifty first state, to be a
permanent to be a permanent permanent Dare I say, uh
uh uh the Democratic majority and that this is precisely
why they're doing it. And Barry, whatever happened to all
of the illegals who came in? Remember when all they

(02:14:47):
had they had these these jets that were flying into
Teterborough and they were Whatever happened to those people? Where
where are they now? I don't understand this. What happened
to them?

Speaker 5 (02:15:00):
Well, that's a very good question. But the bottom line
is they definitely do not have a right to vote.
They don't have a right to vote. That's another issue
that we have to deal with, and that could be
dealt with. But it's two different issues. The fact that
there is today a possibility for having voter fraud where

(02:15:21):
people are don't have voter IDs, don't have proof of
citizenship to vote, and the issue of paper ballots and
the fact that I personally think that personal voting at
voting sessions in your town should be mandatory. And the

(02:15:43):
only way that you have paper votes is that if
you are ill, or if you are in the military,
or certain things that enable you to vote, that's fine,
we can deal with that, but the majority should be
done legally. I don't want my vote to be canceled
by someone that votes illegally to cancel my vote. That's

(02:16:06):
my right as an American citizen.

Speaker 4 (02:16:09):
Berry a most lucid thought, my friend. I'm so glad
that you shared that with us. I please hope you
enjoy continued help. You sound hail and in fighting trim,
and it's so great to hear you.

Speaker 5 (02:16:23):
Good sir, I'm really wonderful and continue your success and
these sections shows that you make even though I miss
I miss you more and I know you selected that
two days a week, but I want to wish you
continued success.

Speaker 6 (02:16:39):
You guys.

Speaker 4 (02:16:39):
Thank you, Thank you, my friend, thank you so much.
I appreciate that. I mentally thank you. I've known that
gentleman for so many years. I'm proud to say he's
just a wonderful man. But it goes to show you this,
this is one of those things which frankly, nobody really
wants to discuss. There was a fellow named Tucker Carlson,

(02:17:00):
and he is under a lot of fire right now
only when he says things that are correct. And a
while back he gave this idea of there as a
movement called the replacement doctrine, the replacement theory. Now, what
it did was it was a notion that said, by design,
there were people like Democrats and like who who believed

(02:17:25):
apparently that all of those things, those ideas which we
kind of hold true and makes sense. The notion of
being able to prove citizenship, to show some type of
eligibility to vote. Some people did not particularly care for that.
You know what's funny. I remember you remember a while
back during the snow storm or snow periods, mayor Mom Donnie?

(02:17:50):
Remember I said, Mom, isn't Mom? And Dad Donnie isn't
donnieanism mayor Mom Donnie said you shovelings. Remember that? Well
that's great, and they said show up and you can
shovel snow and we'll pay you X amount. I don't
know if the money was ever received or who knows.

(02:18:13):
What happened was when people showed up to shovel snow
they had to have some kind of an ID. They
needed verification of identity, And I thought to myself, isn't
this something to shovel snow? I need more of a
proof of belonging to do arduous physical labor, which we need,
but voting no problem.

Speaker 3 (02:18:36):
Now.

Speaker 4 (02:18:37):
If you sat down and said, mayor or Democrats, answer
answer this question for me, what's really behind this? What's
really behind Do you really think that people who are here,
who are present absolutely desert or should not be able
to explain any justification for this? Do you think that

(02:19:00):
everybody is eligible to enjoy the franchise? Why do we
have age requirements? Why don't we just give everybody their
right to vote?

Speaker 3 (02:19:08):
What?

Speaker 4 (02:19:09):
Anyway? I think what many of them will say is
some will say, first of all and people forget this.
There are significant factions we don't want to discuss this
who want to subvert and destroy our country, and the
reason why they want to do it, or how rather,
is to do everything in their power to destroy order instability.

(02:19:33):
They go after the family, They go after certain basic tenets, gender, birth, sexuality.
They go after the notion of the police doing their
best to stop crime, they want to remove the idea

(02:19:59):
of exceptionalism. We talked about this last night prox schools
of science and stypes in high school and other places,
especially when those people who tend to do better are
let's say Asian or what have you. They want to
destroy the idea of exceptionalism. They want to destroy this.
Why well, this is what I would do if I
wanted to destroy a culture. Somebody who comes in and

(02:20:20):
says I want them to vote. If all of a sudden,
I have a huge swath, huge cadres and coalitions in
consortia of people from another country who have no affiliation,
nothing at all to gain, or who come in and

(02:20:42):
say listen, They'll say, I'll make a deal with you.
We'll meet you at the border. We're going to take
a biometric scan of you. We want you in order
for you to maintain your stay here. We want you
to vote Democrat. And we also want you to be
able to move to certain places because we want to
be able to work with uh Census in order to

(02:21:05):
redistrict or remap districts. So you understand, yes, so you're
gonna vote Democrat. You're gonna vote this way, yes, And
we're gonna send you to Duluth, Minnesota, or God forbid
or wherever it is now. Does this make