🔴And now, a word from our recent history | HBR Talk 379🔴

We are still going to continue with our dig into UN women’s bovine excrement, but before we do, we’ve got to give a shoutout to us, from the past. We’ve talked about how USAID manipulated other nations'governments. Three guesses who else’s government they tried to manipulate and control, and the first 2 don’t count!

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Boss doesn't have to tell you to wear pants. If
you're a man, your boss does have to tell you
that your skirt can't show your underwear. If you're a woman,
your boss doesn't have to tell you that your areolas
can't show through your clothing or outside of your clothing
if you're a man. But in some instances women have
had to be told that at work. Your boss can't

(00:20):
tell you some things. It can't tell you not to
wear a skirt, but it doesn't have to listen to
your complaints about air conditioning. Maybe the air conditioning situation
exists because women don't have to dress like men. Men
don't complain about this either, like they never, there's never
a big to do about gosh, men aren't allowed to
wear things they like to wear at work. Only women

(00:41):
get to do that.

Speaker 2 (00:42):
Up on stage.

Speaker 3 (00:42):
Tanks now pressurized not report it feels good. Amount of
fifteen seconds. Guidance is internal well eleven ten nine ignition
sequence star sect five four three fools.

Speaker 1 (00:58):
This is Honeybudger Radio Radio with Hello and welcome to
HBr Talk three seventy nine. And now a word from
our recent history. We don't have sponsors because we do
have patrons, but we don't have sponsors that ask us
to give you a word, So you just got to
listen to us talk about something that we've already talked

(01:19):
about a little bit previously, quite a bit actually during
the past several months, and that is the us AIDS
infection that has gone around the world, the pandemic of
us AIDS that has infected the world under the Human
initiative Humanitarian Initiative veil. We have a new development that

(01:42):
I thought we had better bring to you as soon
as we learned about it, rather than waiting until later
so that we can finish bragging on you and women.
Although we will eventually get back to that because they
do want to finish that article. They do have a
bunch of bullshit for us to address there too. So
whenever I hear.

Speaker 4 (02:00):
The phrase new directions, my brain is nude erections. Whenever
I hear the phrase new developments, they hear nude envelopments.

Speaker 1 (02:09):
And there we do.

Speaker 4 (02:10):
Some of you may not know what I mean by that,
but I'm referring to It's the top of the show,
so we'll have to call it grape envelopment. Is is
is a word we don't use because it means female grape.
I just I just wanted to throw in that bit
of poetic license.

Speaker 1 (02:27):
Well it's kind of fitting here because US AIDS, the
us AIDS infection has been primarily spread in the name
of protecting women. So there you go. There's there's quite
a bit that they've done that has relied extensively on
ginocentrism historically. But as we talked about previously on several

(02:48):
other episodes, the current administration had done some digging into
what this this agency was involved in, what this organization
was involved in, and what your tax doll as US
citizens were being used to do in foreign nations and
two foreign nations by you and or not you and women,

(03:08):
but US AIDS, the US AID system, and so you know,
they defunded it, and of course the federal offices went
into a panic, right, the government offices went into a panic,
and they did everything that they could to try to
salvage whatever they could and so on. But there was
more to it than that. They really worked hard to

(03:30):
try to undermine US interests. So but before we get
into all of that, before we talk about what we're
going to talk about today, we do still have to
do what we got to do so, I'm your host,
Hannah Wallen here with nonsense annihilator Lauren Brooks, and you
just heard the personification of perceptivity Mike Stevenson. We also
have the doge in charge in the background. Huh. It

(03:51):
doesn't matter if we also have the dough in charge,
Brian Martinez working the background to make sure things go
smoothly and tonight. You already know what we're talking about,
so I don't have to introduce it. But before we
get into that, we do have to do it. We
gotta do as always, Honey, Badger Radio dishes out Ace
morgasboard of thought provoking discussions and as experiences both recent
and long pass have demonstrated the provoked thoughts are fighting back.

(04:14):
They've made it clear that for people like us, relying
on third party payment platforms like Patreon to fund our
work is treading on thin ice or building our house
in the path of a rapidly growing wildfire. In light
of this, we strongly encourage our supporters to switch at
least their support for us to feed the Badger dot
Com the most stable way to help us out, and
if you want to tip us directly instead of relying

(04:35):
on any social media platforms tip jar. The link for
that is feed the Badger dot com slash just the tip.
And as always, the same risk applies to our social
media platforms, which is why you should further provoke the
thought police by tracking our thought provoking discussions on Honeybadger
Brigade dot com, where you can find your way to
all of our content, as well as a link to
feed the Badger dot com in the drop down menu

(04:57):
at the top of the page. And with that we
do we have some people who decided to help feed
the Badger through feed the Badger dot com slash just
the tip, and I will read off two superchows. One
of them we missed on Tuesday, and so I'm reading
it tonight because we don't want to miss these. And

(05:18):
that is from Michael Emrick Windberg who gave us sorry, okay,
Michael Emrick Windberg, who gave us five dollars and said,
in response to something we talked about regarding protests, I
believe I am reminded of the woman in Iran who
was beaten to death by police because she wouldn't wear
the he job. She was killed because she didn't know

(05:38):
her place. Obviously, such a thing does not happen to men.
Because men know their place. They know better than to
wear beyond the approved attire, because no civil war will
be fought over them. This also touches something I have
mentioned to a friend. Mohammad's wife, Aisha, the woman to
whom he pledged to take responsibility, was six, and I've

(06:00):
been told she was nine. But it's still a child.
At what age were his soldiers, the boys he forced
to take responsibility for his life? Nobody tends to ask
this question. I'm afraid both of these are interesting things.
To stay the the bit about men knowing their place,
something that I'll point out, you know this is this
is true and not true, and that you know men know.

(06:22):
Men pick their battles right. They're not going to risk
bloodshed so that they do have to wear or don't
have to wear hats or do have the right to
wear hats or you know, cover up their hair, wear
a suit to work, well, you know, any any type
of you you must wear steel toad boots on the job. Whatever.
If you tell a man something like that, he's like, oh, okay,

(06:43):
I'll deal with that. That's that's not what men fight over.
Men fight over things like you are taking half my
money and using it to send my son to war
when I when I do my job, and then they
fight over that. Go protest their government and risk life
and limb in civil wars against stuff like that. You
are changing our whole way of life, or threatening to

(07:04):
change our whole way of life without a plan for
how our economic system is going to survive that. Men
will start a war over that. You are enslaving our people.
Men will start a war over that if they think
they can, they have a chance to win, or they
think it's worth being exterminated if they lose.

Speaker 4 (07:23):
Try going Try going into a bank as a man, right,
Try going into a bank dressed in a nikab, that's
the one with just the letterbox over the eyes. You'll
soon be arrested as some kind of bank rob, because
a man would only go into a bank in that
kind of mask if he intends to rob someone or
you know, fuck someone over in some way. Am I

(07:44):
talking about the West or the Middle East? Well, it's both.
In both of these societies, a man is not permitted
to do anything wearing a mask, especially not any situation
in which you are expected to show your face. This
is something the West and the Middle have in common.
It is only women who are allowed to shroud their
face from recognition. Could you be so misogynistic? No, yeah,

(08:08):
it's somehow misogynistic in both of these worlds.

Speaker 1 (08:12):
It's difficult, similarly, people.

Speaker 4 (08:14):
To understand that we have similarities in and in the
Middle East, and it's the women are allowed to shroud
their identities and men are not.

Speaker 1 (08:25):
Similarly, it's considered unprofessional for a man to go into
serious professional environment like an office or an institution of
education or anything of that nature, go into a business meeting,

(08:45):
work as a supervisor somewhere, or even as a salesperson
and have his chest showing down to the space between
his nipples. A man can't do that and be taken seriously.
Generally speaking, you don't see men with bare shoulders in
professional environments either, or having their legs show, you know,

(09:08):
especially not above the knee.

Speaker 4 (09:10):
Or below the knee or blow the ankle.

Speaker 1 (09:12):
Right, you don't see any skin aside from the neck
up the wrist down, and that's it. You know, you
don't see their toes or their heels or the tops
of their feet. You know, you don't see their back
all the way down to the waist. You know, if
a man showed up at work wearing a bra, you

(09:33):
wouldn't know because his clothing is never transparent enough for
you to notice that. But all of these things a women.
A woman can can make all of these things visible
to you and be considered professional in the West.

Speaker 4 (09:48):
Its extends to China and Japan. This is something that
travel vloggers like to inform us about, Like, if you
go to Japan and you're a man, you cannot show
your legs, like above the knee or below the n
or anything to the ankle. It's like in the West
when it comes to weddings and funerals, like men absolutely
cannot show their limbs, anything above the hand or any

(10:10):
part of the leg. And they tell us this as
though it's completely unfamiliar to us in the West. No,
this is almost a global rule that men's arms and
legs are offensive and cannot be shown in any polite situation.
People are like, yeah, well, this must be a way
of oppressing women somehow.

Speaker 1 (10:32):
And then women act like women are the only ones
that get a dress code. It's because men's dress code
is universal and largely unspoken. Your boss doesn't have to
tell you to wear pants. If you're a man, your
boss does have to tell you that your skirt can't
show your underwear. If you're a woman, your boss doesn't
have to tell you that your areolas show through your

(10:55):
clothing or outside of your clothing if you're a man.
But in some instances, women have had to be told
that at work. Your boss can't can't can't just tell
you that without someone in the room either, because they
get accused of sexual harassment. Your boss can't. Your boss
can't tell you some things. It can't tell you not
to wear a skirt, But it doesn't have to listen

(11:16):
to your complaints about air conditioning. Right, Maybe the air
conditioning situation exists because women don't have to dress like men.
So yeah, men men don't complain about this either, Like
they never, there's never a big to do about Gosh,
men aren't allowed to wear things they like to wear
at work. Only women get to do that, even on

(11:38):
casual days when women might show up, you know, wearing
wearing a mini skirt and flip flops. You know that
men don't for the most part, dress quite that casually. God,
I hope not.

Speaker 5 (11:51):
I that's not anything I want to seely in my
line of work, I don't want any of that. Oh,
thank you, sir and ma'am.

Speaker 1 (12:01):
I would prefer that nobody do that, although I will
admit I do like I do like legs, But the
workplace isn't the place to be scoping people out either. No,
it's not.

Speaker 4 (12:13):
And I'm not complaining about it either. I don't particularly
want to show my arms on my legs. I'm just
pointing out the double standard. Yeah, if women want to,
they're completely allowed to. And if any if anyone complains
about it, it's rucially men that they're just not You're
a misogonous how dare you?

Speaker 1 (12:29):
No? My soggy means the horror, and it is bad
because women will set the environmental temperature at work for
the styles of dress that they are allowed to wear,
and when men complain that they're too hot, they just
they just call it mansplaining, even though like dude is

(12:52):
wearing three layers of clothes, right, he has a T shirt,
a business shirt, a button down shirt, and a suit
jack and you're in a blouse and a skirt and
open toed shoes, which is why you're cold and he's not.
But as far as that goes, Like again, it's a
know your place thing. Nobody is allowed to criticize women

(13:16):
for that. Men aren't allowed to complain about their expectations,
and for the most part, you don't hear men getting
upset women. Well, you're a misogynist. You're a misogist. You're
a misogynist if you don't think the environment should be
set up to facilitate our clothing choices. If I have
to wear a sweater to be comfortable in an environment

(13:38):
where you're wearing three layers of clothing, you're a misogynist.
If I have to even in situations like factory work,
what do you mean I have to take off all
my bangles and dangles? I want to wear this necklace.
What's wrong with you? You mean the conveyor belt might
cut my half? Well, that's misogynistic. And I had a

(13:59):
coworker a plant that I worked at for a short
time lose a finger because she refused to take a
ring off when she was working with a conveyor belt
and it got caught on something. And the conveyor belt
doesn't forgive, and metal is stronger than every part of
your body, so it just ripped it off kind of slowly,
And I guess that's misogyny too, right, is.

Speaker 5 (14:20):
It misogyny if I actually want to see that happen.

Speaker 1 (14:23):
I didn't want to see that happen. I was sorry
that it happened to her, but I was really glad
that I was in a different part of the building
where I couldn't even hear it. But we all got
told about it, you know, because there were a lot
of women that were like, well, you know, I'm not
gonna take off my wedding ring. I kept my wedding
ring in my wallet while I was working because I
like my fingers. I used them for a lot of stuff,

(14:44):
and I don't want to lose even one. So it
makes it very hard to type when one of the
women's injured, you know, especially if it's gone altogether. But yeah, yeah,
And the worst part of it is that women will
like if you in more reasonable attire for the environment,

(15:05):
You're going into long pants, long skirt instead of a
short skirt, closed toed shoes, warm outfits, things like that.
Women who don't want to do that will accuse you
of making things hard for them. They get mad about
that too, And of course the fashion industry run by women.
The fashion media industry run by women, So women will

(15:29):
complain about women's stress codes that women impose, and then
women can violate without any further repercussion than other women
saying shitty things to you, which you know, okay, you
said something shitty to me. I will now get on
with my day bye, you know. But some women are
just completely devastated if another woman doesn't like their outfit

(15:51):
for some reason. I learned to get over that in
high school. But yeah, women will bitch about this as
though men have imposed it. In fact, men simply are
focused on doing their jobs. And yeah, when when men
are going to fight for something, they usually pick something
that is worth fighting and dying for because chances are

(16:14):
that's what's going to happen, and they know it, and
they don't take that risk unless something is so bad
that it's better to risk death than to continue tolerating it.
Richard Pierre gave us five dollars and said, Hannah, I
have to apologize to you. There is a twenty twenty
three documentary film in two parts that is called Pretty

(16:35):
Baby Brookshields, and it's about her early life as a
child actress. So when new Zealand. Dingbat was talking about
the documentary film Pretty Baby. She likely wasn't talking about
the nineteen seventy eight film, I hope, although she might
consider the Netflix aolescens to be a documentary too, especially

(16:56):
since Parliament was using that mini series as a foundation
to formulate public policy. Okay, well, that makes more sense
because the idea of referring Pretty Baby wasn't about a
situation that actually happened, and it didn't have anything in
it that examined prostitution or brothels or what life is
like in them. It just was gratuitously sexual and frankly,

(17:21):
I feel like it was abused to put Brookshields in
that movie was that she was way too young to
be doing something like that, and I think she was
aware of what she was portraying because at one point
she had to portray faking an orgasm and at another
a couple of points she had to portray making love
to a man, a grown man, as like a thirteen

(17:44):
year old, and I believe she was about the age
of the character when she did that movie. Hollywood likes
to shame adult men's predators, but they did that, and
they're the ones that the open Secret documentary, and a
open Secret documentary was about where not not just fun,

(18:06):
but many boys have talked about being sexually abused as
a result of a system Hollywood use to facilitate their
ability to work in movies and television shows. So there's
not really a place that's significantly more predatory toward children
in the United States than Hollywood. And yet guess who

(18:27):
gets the most criticism from Hollywood. It isn't Hollywood. It's you.
They don't like you, they think you're awful, especially if
you don't want your child's school teacher confusing your child
about his sexuality and his identity as a human being. Yeah,
both of these are excellent comments and important. But and

(18:49):
I'm glad to know. I thought there might be there
might have been a documentary about that movie, because I
remember seeing reference to it and at least one article
I read about that. And I remember seeing that movie
when I was kid, not a young kid, but like
high school, and thinking and did her mom agree to
her doing that? Because I know my mom would never

(19:10):
have let me do that. If I wanted to be
an actress, which I don't, she wouldn't have let me
act in a movie like that when I was a kid,
and that wasn't the only one. I don't know if
she was an adult or underage. I think she was
underage when she did The Blue Lagoon too, So yeah,
then we also have one from Meredith J just gave
us five dollars just now, said HBr Talk three seventy nine.

(19:33):
I've been working in an office environment since the nineteen nineties,
and there I remember how much problems we faced when
business was established. I worked in the financial services industry,
which is one of the most conservative dress codes around.
Oh yeah, if you're asking somebody to trust you making,

(19:54):
you know, for advice or any kind of handling of
their money, making their financial decisions anything, you better look respectable.
I'm certainly not going to trust somebody that doesn't look
and carry themselves in a respectable manner, and they seem
like they're not focused on the job right, So yeah,
particularly if you are client facing. Even when some places

(20:16):
went full business casual, the thermostat remained unchanged, not for
men's comfort, but because the computer equipment required attempts. I
remember that back in the day, even before the nineteen nineties,
there were a lot of places I worked at a
newspaper and the building was kept cool. They still were
using ad computers ranging from at the time the most

(20:40):
up to date Apple Macintosh, and back then PCs were
called IBM compatible. But they had all that and copy
machines and stuff, and then a huge printer that gave
off a lot of heat. But their equipment went all
the way back to There was a Commodore sixty four
that they relied on still for some things because they

(21:00):
hadn't updated the way they did those things. Hutter sixty
four did not have a cooling system. It didn't have
a fan, it didn't have anything. So if it was
allowed to get overheated, it burned itself out. Basically, it
damaged itself internally. Just just the little metal components on
the motherboard would would fry basically, and you would end

(21:23):
up with a useless motherboard. And that would be a problem,
especially since by that time it was difficult to get
another one that worked, you know, so then they were
gonna then they would have been in trouble. They would
have to update real quick. In any case, Yeah, you
did have to keep the temperature low. Any room that

(21:44):
had a lot of computers in it, you had to
keep the temperature low, because if you let them get
it get overheated, they're a bit fragile toward that. Even
when the computers. When the computers go down, productivity halts.
On a side note, if you have a menopausal woman
in the office and dare to touch the thermostat, expect
to lose a finger. Yeah, that's that's the other thing, right.
The women that are bitching about it being too cold

(22:05):
in their twenties and thirties and maybe their early fees,
and about the time you start getting pre pre menopausal
in your late fees, early fees. You know, unless you
have early menopause, when it hits a little earlier get
you get the exact opposite. You know, I'm the one
that gets overheated at home now if the thermostat's too high.

(22:26):
And you know, the other thing is it's more often
women who are slim. When you put on a little weight,
especially in combination with being older, you get you get
overheated more easily. And it's a lot easier to put
on a sweater if you're a little chilly than it is.
There's only so much clothing you can take off, even

(22:47):
at work, especially at work, but even at home. Even
if you're a female, there's still only so much clothing
you can take off before like there's nothing left to remove,
and you're still too hot. So nobody. Nobody wants to
see a menopausal fat woman do that either, not very
many people anyway. The ones that do are willing to
pay for it.

Speaker 4 (23:07):
But nobody even wants to see a physically fit man
show show his limbs. And I say that to someone
with beautifully thick calves, but I'm still not gonna My
calves are not for display in the general public. It's
just for me and.

Speaker 1 (23:21):
My dog, correct those. Yeah, see, I love that. My husband,
for years and years he wore shorts all year round,
like they were below the knee shorts, but they were
still shorts, and so I got to see his calf
muscles all the time and just absolutely love that. But yeah, now,
like I said, we're in the fifties. This is the

(23:44):
first year that, aside from when he has to wear
them to work, that he has consistently worn pants instead
of shorts. So we're at that age where we're starting
to flip the script. But in any case, there's another
thing too, By the way, if you're in a northern
part of the world or a southern part of the

(24:04):
world below the equator most of the year. Unless your
employer pays through the nose to change your work environment,
it's going to be chilly as opposed to warm. And
here in Ohio, I've worked in places where the heating
system basically creates an environment that fluctuates between too warm

(24:30):
and too cold all day, and you just learn to
deal with it, right, But it is significantly easier if
you're an asthmatic. It is significantly easier to breathe in
temperatures between sixty and seventy than it is upwards of seventy.
And so it's it's better if it's chiliy and you

(24:52):
wear warm clothes than if it's too warm. And it's
also a lot cheaper for your employer if they don't
have to maintain it temperature above seventy degrees fahrenheit, which
I don't know what that translates to celsius. Sorry, guys,
not something I can do in my head in the moment,
because we never have to use that here in the States,
women who are asking for a warmer environment in the

(25:16):
workplace outside of a narrow band around the center of
the earth. You're basically asking your employer to pay extra
money to make you comfortable so that you can expose
your skin to the air instead of covering it up
and holding the heat in. So crazy cat gentlemen says,
seventy degrees fahrenheit is twenty one degrees celsius. So there

(25:36):
you go. If your employer is having to keep it
higher than that in the workplace, you know, and for me,
that's actually too warm. But if your employer is keeping
it higher than that in the workplace to make women comfortable,
your employer is wasting money.

Speaker 5 (25:49):
I just keep a space heater at my desk because
it is always too cold for me. It's kind of
the opposite in my situation. They just keep well, they
keep like the door open, and you know when we
receive receive a delivery, and you know, those guys, they're
they're up there about they're working, they're moving around, and

(26:10):
while I'm sad at a desk all day.

Speaker 1 (26:12):
Oh yeah. Well, and you're dealing with a situation where
the employer cannot heat the building. If the bay door
is going to be open, the temperature is not going
to be controlled. Yeah, so it's.

Speaker 4 (26:22):
Difficult to heat a warehouse anyway, even though there's there's
there's cause sort of with some kind of local heat involved.
If it's surrounded by concrete, Yeah, there's a fairly high ceiling.
It's really difficult to keep it, you know, thermally regulated
anywhere near human body temperature.

Speaker 1 (26:40):
The thing I've always felt is funniest about this whole discussion, though,
is the women that mostly complain about this, right are
office workers. You don't usually hear women in my job.
They'll they'll say something here and there, but mostly they're
they're wearing a sweater, you know, or or focused on
the needs of the person under their care. Is that
individual cold? What can we do about that? Is that

(27:02):
individual too warm? What can we do about that? Because
you're providing care? Right, I worked. I worked out doors
when I was in high school and college, quite frequently
in heat and cold, not in a in a thing,
in a job where I was doing heavy labor, though,
like men do that. Men who do road construction, for instance,

(27:25):
or roofing, you know, housing construction, building construction, anything like that.
The men who go out and repair the power lines
after a big storm, including like we've been sort of
threatened with potential ice storms this year. By by the
weather people, they're saying the weather is going to be
weird in in in you know, the northern hemisphere this year.
I don't know what they're talking about for the southern

(27:47):
hemisphere because I usually don't get the weather for that,
But my area they're they're talking about. It could rain
a lot, it could snow a lot, It could be
unseasonably warm, but it could be unseasonably borderline enough that
we get. It starts out as rain, finishes as snow

(28:08):
and coats everything in ice basically on the way down.
And the problem with that is ice is heavy, so
tree branches fall, power lines get hit, power lines break,
utility poles, break, bits of people's buildings that are weak
come off. It does damage to your roof, It does
damage to your gutter system. Anything it gets inside and

(28:31):
expands gets damaged. It can actually damage parts of your
car that way too, if you have any like leaks
into places where you shouldn't have water going, and so
it does a lot of damage. And it also makes
it impossible to drive anywhere because you're essentially bamby on
ice right in your car, especially in states where you're
not allowed to have snow tires, like like Ohio, you're

(28:55):
not allowed to have snow tires. They can damage the roads,
I guess. But and the thing is when chains are
off the off limits too, we don't usually have ice
or snow that is heavy enough to merit them. You
can have tires that are more appropriate for winter. There
are winter tires that are not no tires, and they

(29:16):
do recommend that you not have old balding tires. But yeah,
it's it's it's not like driving in say New York,
where New York they're threatening New York with a nor'easter
this year. Yeah, yeah, it's just looking. I think I
sent you a thing about it because I saw that.
I was just like, oh god, you know, like they're

(29:39):
talking about places where it is going to snow more,
it's going to be heavier than usual. The men who
have to handle the damage that gets done and the
inconveniences that are caused. People don't have power, people don't
have gas, lines get get damaged, water lines break when

(30:00):
water freezes in them. One of the big problems that
happens in a lot of homes and apartments is that
the pipes going into or close to the building will
freeze the water and the pipes will freeze and it'll
it'll break the pipe and then you have a leak,
and then you have a serious issue. So the men
that have to do that, they don't get to turn

(30:21):
up the heat when they're working because they're outdoors most
of the time. But it's one way to prevent that
in your home. By the way, if you have like
a drafty home and you have heat problems and your
home is you know, your cupboards get cold on the inside,
and that's the risk. You just open them and leave
them open all night. So when you heat your house,
you're heating the inside of your cupboards, like under your

(30:42):
sink where your pipes are, and stuff that can prevent
some of it, but which can save you some serious cash.
Open the door to your basement so that there's some
air circulation is down there. Hey, spiders are beneficial. Yeah,
they eat those nasty little bloodsucking motherfucking benches. Because all
mosquitoes that bite you are female by the way, that

(31:03):
carry West Nile virus and zica or whatever it's called.
And yeah, spiders eat mosquitoes. They eat a lot of mosquitoes.
So do martins Like if you if you attract martins
to your like purple martins especially, you know, as one
I've seen in this area, if you attract martins to
your backyard, they'll eat mosquitoes. But yeah, if.

Speaker 4 (31:26):
You evolution had prepared us to be more more afraid
of flies than we are of spiders. It doesn't make
sense because there are spiders that can kill you, but
they're very rare. I suppose evolution has prepared us for
the existence of spiders that can kill you and there
aren't flies that can kill you.

Speaker 1 (31:43):
Yeah, well, spiders that can kill you are easier to
avoid than flies, and mosquitoes that can kill you.

Speaker 4 (31:51):
Mosquitoes can kill you, folks believe We covered this in
a recent after show. Half of the humans who have
ever lived have been killed by mosquitoes because of malaire
and various other things. And flies can do that as well,
to a lesser extent because they carry diseases and all
sorts of this shit. Yeah, no, I get over or
a rachnophobia people. I know it's easier said than done,

(32:13):
but you should be more afraid of flies than you
are of spiders, and way more afraid of mosquitoes than
you are of spiders.

Speaker 1 (32:20):
Besides, if you've ever seen close up pictures of spiders
with their little googly eyes, they are actually really goofy
looking and cute. They can they can be yeah, like
this big googly eyed little murder muppets that eat the
bugs that carry the nastiest germs on the planet. I

(32:41):
almost died from a mosquito bite, yito from virus from
a mosquito bite when I was twelve. I had We
don't even know what the virus was. We suspect but
don't know for sure, equine encephalitis or West Nile virus,
one of those if they're not the same virus, and
that it combined with my mosquito bite allergy, because of

(33:03):
course I would be allergic to mosquito bites.

Speaker 4 (33:05):
But mosquitoes look like the flying bits of lint, so
it's just a flying bit of lint. It can't possibly her,
you know, Yeah, they can, They can and will fucking
kill you. It's like it's like the difference between men
and women. People are naturally afraid of men, but when
they see women are like, oh, they're so harmless. No, No,

(33:26):
women are a great deal more harmful than men. What yet, Yeah, yeah, no.

Speaker 1 (33:32):
And they also look like little flying bits of fluff.

Speaker 4 (33:34):
Sometimes, indeed, women will instill you with diseases that will
absolutely fucking kill you, whereas spiders like you got it's
a fucking one percent chance of a spider killing you. Yeah, well,
even figure out, get over your evolutionary niches and any
us and brain.

Speaker 1 (33:51):
Most most of the spiders here don't even cause any
serious harm. We have two types of spiders that can
cause a lot of pain and suffering. One of them
can cause infection, and the infection can kill you if
you have a weakness to that. You can get septic
from it, and that's the brown recluse. But the bite
itself and the poison itself are not deadly. They're they're

(34:14):
very inconvenient. They can cause it's an neckritizing poison. There's
a cousin to that spider that lives like don't don't
walk in the tall grass around lakes and rivers without
cover on your legs, and you know like that that
there's a cousin of the brown recluse that lives there
that people don't know about. And I can't remember what
it's call. It starts with a nap. But in any case,

(34:34):
those are the only and they're not anything like you
know some spiders in Australia. People in Australia are listening
to us, going, you guys are crazy, because there are
spiders that just come right into your house that have bites.
They can be deadly, especially if you have a heart condition,
where like you have to be in really weak condition
to get killed by a black widow. It's it's a

(34:56):
horrible experience to go through the night of pain and
suffer in the hospital that you go through if you
get bit by a black widow. But for the most part,
they don't hang around in your house, don't They don't
try to be around people. Whereas the uh I said,
called the Huntsman spider or something like that in Australia

(35:16):
will come into your house because they eat mice, and
mice do try to be around people, so the spider
does too. But in any case, speaking of predatory insects,
so we're going to talk about this non government organization
that relies on government funding and for actually spiders aren't
insects either, but that's beside the point. So what we

(35:37):
want to talk about tonight here is this secret signal
chat and I've seen a little bit of argument that
this the person who discovered this is making a bigger
deal out of it than it and it is, And
I don't think that's the case because you don't hide,
you don't try to hide what you're doing. That isn't
a problem for the people that you're trying to hide

(35:59):
it from. You hide something if there's consequences for people
knowing about it. Red State, which is a right wing publication,
just so people know that the the perspective on this
is going to be conservative and so on, this publication

(36:20):
noted this x dot com thread. This is one of
the commenters. Actually, I think I follow this data Republican too.
I may have seen this because I followed data Republican
rather than because it was published in Red State, But
I think I found this article through Bongino dot com
so or the bonginoreport dot com or whatever it's called.

(36:44):
It's Van Bongino's answer to the Drudge Report, essentially, and
he doesn't run it anymore because of what he's doing now.
But in any case, it says one of the better
posters slash commenters on x is the aptly named at
Data Republican, who does some great work digging in data,
crunching numbers and taking big ness to snakes and laying
them all out straight and uncovering things that just generally

(37:06):
make the left uncomfortable. And that is true. That account
does a lot of exposing things that the left is
doing under the radar, and also analyzing and explaining things
that the left is using complexity to eclipse the meaning of,
or the implications of, or the nature of. So that's

(37:28):
a good description for that account. She's outdone herself on
this thread. And we go to the thread rather than
looking here in the article. So she says major breaking
international actors are involved in the State Department led Color Revolution,
and so you know the characterization color revolution refers to

(37:49):
a Marxist effort to overthrow a non Marxist system. X
US AID employees describe how before January twentieth they move
internal groups off government systems into encrypted signal chats, then
quickly linked with foreign partners and NGOs after the inauguration.

(38:10):
This attempt at creating a Color revolution isn't new news.
This was this part was already reported in notice earlier
this year. And so you know what notice is here?
Is there about page. This is a news organization that
is it's essentially a big news conglomerate, a paper that

(38:32):
I don't know if it publishes a paper newspaper anymore,
but a news site publication that has reporters that have
worked for other news organizations working with reporters that have
never been in the business. It covers a wide variety
of places, wide area, and is essentially it's it's designed

(38:52):
to garner a broad spectrum of perspectives and not just
approach from one one point of view. So if they're
reporting on something, you'll see more, you'll see more of
a broad outlook on it than from Red State. But
so notice exposed that earlier this year. But that's not

(39:15):
the international aspect. One participant explicitly frames it as a
global anti authoritarian movement, by which I will say they
mean a global effort to stop incoming authoritarians from cutting
or eliminating funding that outgoing authoritarians were giving them. Because
this is in the bottom line of this, it will

(39:36):
be about money. It'll be about the money laundering that
the USAID system was used to do. So they've coordinated
with JOHNS. Hopkins International Democracy and Conflict Mitigation spaces again,
when they say democracy, they're approaching it from the communist perspective,
not from the idea that you have a say in

(39:59):
whether or not a government imposes something on you. But
if they can persuade enough people to agree that it
should be imposed on you, you lose your say because democracy.
So at what point does this become treason? And here
is there's a five minute video here and we'll kind
of look into a little bit of this, So bear

(40:22):
with me. I want to make sure I think I
have a sound on this. On that's it. I have
it too low.

Speaker 2 (40:28):
It has been around for more than sixty years. It
has been earmarks in every budget. So this was a
well established agency of some ten to fourteen thousand staff,
of forty dollars in procurement.

Speaker 1 (40:43):
So I just want to I want to stop there.
When we talked about this, it's one of the things
that we pointed out. This isn't something that you know,
Obama came up with that the Trump administration eliminated. It's
not something Biden started that the trumpet administration eliminated. This
is exist did since gen X or Kids, and its exists.
It's actually existed since before many of us were even born,

(41:09):
and it's been using US taxpayer dollars the entire time.
I'm not sure if I can make this louder. I apologize.
I've got it, I think at the top volume here,
but it's not going to be particularly loud.

Speaker 2 (41:26):
Year we had all read Project twenty twenty five, we
were somewhat prepared for this administration, and mid of the inauguration,
some groups, such as our Office of Transition Initiatives, which
works specifically in countries and places that are transitioning from

(41:46):
perhaps authoritarian governments or wartime into more peaceful and structured,
hopefully democratic governments.

Speaker 1 (41:53):
Yeah, I'm going to go back over that. I could not.

Speaker 4 (41:56):
More peaceful slash hopefully democratic governments.

Speaker 1 (42:00):
Yeah, this is this is the thing, peaceful and structured,
hopefully democratic governments. Her oms are driving me nuts. I
know I do that all the time too. What she's
basically talking about here is the idea that if the
general public gets more of a say, that that automatically
makes things more peaceful. But the general public is what

(42:23):
they're telling us. Burnt down Kenosha, Wisconsin and took over
the entire neighborhood in Portland and one in Seattle. And
violently attacked anybody that came in. So even first responders
coming in to help people who had been injured in
conflicts were under threat. They couldn't even go like em EMTs,

(42:47):
who by the way, also work out doors and all
kinds of weather. So yeah, the peaceful public, right, it
didn't end.

Speaker 4 (42:54):
At the shores of the USA. By the way, this
is for all the the hatred that is pushed in
the American people's direction from European countries like the UK,
Like that all went on hold when the fucking BLM
riots bled through into the UK and into the rest
of Europe, and into Australia and the rest of the

(43:15):
anglosphere and presumably beyond. Like everyone who only complains about
about Americans suddenly like didn't give a shit anymore. They
were like a fucking criminal in Minnesota died from a
drug overdose. Now, well, now we all get to write
in the streets because because of something that happened in America.

(43:36):
These are the people who who it's it's such a
complicated phenomenon, like xenophobia is illegal in Europe. I don't
know if you've noticed this. Well, we will actually be
arrested for xenophobia for any social media post we make
that might seem in the least bit xenophobic, unless it's
xenophobic against Americans. Americans are the only people who we

(43:59):
are allowed to be zophobic about. In fact, we are
encouraged and rewarded to be xenophobic about Americans, except when
it comes to BLM, except when it comes to whatever
Marxist movements happened to have originated in the USA. And
then it's like, absolutely, well, yes, we should do what
the Americans are telling you, what the Democrat Americans are

(44:21):
telling us, what the fucking Marxist racist Americans are telling us.
They don't hate Americans, they don't hate America, and they
just don't want America putting America first, just like just
like they don't want British people put in Britain first.
For some reason, they shouldn't want this. There's a there's
a connection there, and I think it's because everyone knows
the cultural ethnic connection between between Europe and America. Like

(44:47):
it because because America is doing better than Europe is
at this point at at accentuating the success of the
European dream, which is which has been reconstructed as the
American dream of you know, of being wealthy through your
own blood, sweat and tears, through your own elbow grease.
That's that's that's that's why Europeans are encouraged to hate Americans.

(45:10):
That's why Americans are encouraged to hate Americans, because because
America is largely occupied by Europeans, and Europeans aren't allowed
to thrive even by their own blood, sweat and tears,
even by their own elbow grease.

Speaker 1 (45:24):
It's because there's great strength and economic independence. And economic
independence is the underlying scaffolding of the dream, whether you
call it European, British, or American or whatever the the
the dream itself is a dream of economic independence that

(45:44):
fosters economic security, and that fosters economic and industrial and
medicinal and scientific advancement that benefits the economic secure population
of the nation, and that really doesn't lend itself to
a cabal of wealthy individuals at the center of a

(46:08):
world government controlling the population through scarcity and threats from
the outside right through insecurity and unsurety of their future.
By saying, well, we will provide you with that security,
and therefore you have to do what we say, they
can't do that if you have economic independence that fosters

(46:33):
all of those things without their help. So they need
you to need their help. So they need your country
to fail. They need your economic system to fail. They
need your political system to be so contentious that your
people can't get along with their neighbors so that they
can come in and say, well, let us fix all
these problems, but you have to do what we say.
You have to give us control. Let us micro manage

(46:54):
your lives so that we can skim more money, more wealth,
more economic disparity between ourselves and you off of your labor,
which we will benefit from and you will not. In
a nutshell, that is essentially what the World Economic Forum
is about. It is not about benefiting you in any way,
shape or form. It is about using the illusion that

(47:14):
you need them to take away your freedom. And where
USAID fits then, So what we just heard her do
is claim that democracy, which is when they say democracy,
they essentially mean, you know, two wolves and a sheep
deciding what's for dinner, not the parliamentary system wherein people
get equal opportunity to exercise a check and a balance

(47:39):
on a system of government that could otherwise exercise abusive
authority to do exactly what the world economic forms trying
to do. She just suggested the worst system of government
in order to foster this change. And what we learned
in our previous examinations of you, besides the fact that

(48:01):
USAID was promoting violence against Women Act style, gendered discriminatory
and due process, attacking law federal law or national law,
criminal law in various countries, and also male genital mutilation
and abortion, they were also using the Humanitarian Initiative veil

(48:26):
as a cover to infect nations all over the world
with communist movements, communist efforts at you know, overthrowing the
existing system of government and way of life. So the
local culture was being attacked everywhere. USAID manifested everywhere that

(48:46):
the Humanitarian Initiative veil infection manifested into full blown us AIDS.
That's what was happening. They were pushing communism on people
that were not naturally and organically gravitating toward those ideas
and causing conflict in the process all over the world.
So what have they done here? And as she's talking

(49:08):
about this, you know, you know, you'll kind of get an.

Speaker 2 (49:12):
Idea previous Trump into our US democracy.

Speaker 1 (49:17):
Right, So what she just said there, okay, was that
this organization, this government funded organization, organized to oppose the government,
the democratically elected government that funded them. And they did
this in the name of democracy, in the name of democracy,
they were opposing democracy. Now, why would they do that

(49:39):
in the name of democracy. We're opposing democracy? Why? Well,
because they didn't do what we wanted. So, do you
believe in democracy or not?

Speaker 4 (49:46):
Reinvented colonialism? Like it used to be that uh, rich,
affluent countries would invade other countries and impose their nationality
on those countries. But now then con well, well, just
invade foreign countries and impose feminists and democracy and eventually
socialism and eventually communism on these countries. And that's different, right,

(50:11):
that's not colonialism. Like when you look at the sea
door map of how look at all these countries that
don't give women all all the rights that we give them.
We need to invade those countries, not not by military force,
but by bureaucratic force, like forcing them to take rights
away from men and siphon them into women. And that's

(50:34):
that's not the same thing. Don't to worry about it.
That's totally not the same thing. We're not imposing our
cultural values on these countries. It's just that these countries
have these horrible backward approaches to human rights where they
don't give women free gibbs forever, and they don't give
truons free gibbs forever. So we need to we need
to force them through cultural and financial means to do this.

(50:58):
And they're acting like this isn't colonialism, Like this is
even more sinister than military colonialism. Like you can fight
back against a military force. It's been proven in Vietnam
and Afghanistan that you can indeed fight back militarily against
these forces, but it's so much more difficult to fight
back against these cultural forces that are just are just

(51:20):
supplied by this endless funding supplied by the taxpayers, whether
they're like it or not. And just you're telling everyone
just be gay, just be gay, everyone, just be effeminate
and gay, and that'll fix all your problems. What problems
with your you're poor? You're poor, Yeah, you were a
bit poor. Well, just be gay and feminine and transactual

(51:43):
and that will solve all your problems, will it? How
many of your problems does it solved? Well, it's you
fucking your fucking racist foreigners just be gay and feminine
and transsexual. And yeah, it's the only reason that the
West is able to indulge in these gender cults is
because they can already afford it. This is it's it's

(52:05):
what happens with every empire that gets so rich and
so decadent they can that they can finally afford it.
And that's you know, fine, that's what happens to any
empire that becomes so decadent they can afford it. We're
here trying to sort of talk them down from the ledge,
but you know, these third world countries don't have so
many people who have the opportunity to opportunity to talk

(52:28):
them down from this ledge. As long as the USAID
is providing billions in funds to talk them to the
end of the plank, to talk them right to the
precipice of the building, like and like fucking forcing them
to jump off the end of it, like fucking lemmings
and like. And some of them are going, can we not? No, Yes,

(52:48):
you must, you absolutely must. We will force you to
adopt our culture. I don't know what fucking adjectives to
use about this that aren't euphemisms. Our liberal list cult,
our leftist cult.

Speaker 1 (53:03):
Well, the difficult thing is like you have to understand
what the goals are in order to understand what type
of cult it is, and it's what it really is.
It's ultimately a safety net addiction cult, yes, right, which
you can't make a pronounceable acronym for that. I'll have
to come up with something. But there's a there's a

(53:24):
to understand this. You have to kind of understand. You
actually have to kind of understand the history of the
parliamentary system in voting rights and what they're trying to
undo because prior to the parliamentary system, you had a
monarch system, which is essentially a dictator system that is
funded by the next layer down of smaller dictators. It

(53:45):
was based on a landlord system that came from the
Roman landlord system, and so what you had was your
king or your queen was the decision maker if the
nation was going to go to war by land sell
land change currency, you know, if there was going to
be a national policy of some sort where the law

(54:08):
of the land was you must do this, you cannot
do this, you must pay this, you know, and so on.
But then you had the barons paid into that system,
and they were confiscating part of what they paid into
that system from the people who lived on their land,
and that that would then go to smaller and smaller,

(54:29):
until you had the individual who lived on a small
patch of land and on paper had some degree of
ownership of it, but really belonged to the next level
up of government. And you found that out if you
didn't pay your taxes right, which is is pretty much
the same as we have now, except then you got

(54:49):
very little say in whether your government abused power against
you or not, how much the government decided to take
from you, whether the government decided that the men of
your household all had to go get into a fight
with the men of the households of France for a
stretch of land that the king shouldn't have given up
in the first place, you know, things like that. And

(55:11):
then King John did a bunch of stupid shit that
the barons didn't want to support anymore. They were losing money,
they were losing men, and they had a huge fight
about it, the First Barons War, and then they had
to have that same fight with the next administration, the
Second Barons War. And between those two fights, the parliamentary
system developed sort of proto parliament first and then an

(55:38):
actual parliament. Prior to parliament, there was a concept called
a common Council in which the king listened to the
people that were paying his bills and that were fighting
his wars. One of the dumb things that King John
did that pissed off Barons was he stopped listening. And
then I believe it was his son, not his grands

(56:00):
that did the same thing, and that was the Second
Baron's War. The parliamentary system that developed out of that
developed out of the bloodshed of men who did not
like having their labor exploited and ability to fight exploited,
their their deaths, their mutilation in war. If they survived

(56:20):
that and dying in battle back, then it wasn't the
same as it's horrible no matter what. But it wasn't
as quick of a death as if you step on
an explosive and it just completely obliterates you, or you
get shot and you're killed by the bullet going through

(56:41):
a part of you that you can't survive having punctured.
Men died from sepsis more than anything. If they didn't
bleed out slowly on the battlefield and so while those
things still happen, it was significantly more common where you
get a slash or a hack to your leg or
your arm that doesn't kill you. There weren't antibiotics, there

(57:03):
weren't hospitals, there was no first aid, didn't exist, none
of that like in terms of what we have today.
So the men's the blood of the men that formed this,
that influenced what voting was.

Speaker 4 (57:17):
Right.

Speaker 1 (57:18):
Voting wasn't I want XYZ from government, give me, give me,
give me. It was I want to say, I want
to decide who gets to influence in government to determine
whether or not I have to go do this horrible thing.
And so when men voted, they weren't voting to get
things from the government. They were voting to stop the

(57:40):
government from abusing power against them and taking things from them. Unfortunately,
after centuries of development of that system of men being
able to say, all right, you can have this concept
of government, but if you start using it to oppress

(58:01):
us and to oppress our wives and children, we are
going to shed blood to stop you. Yours and ours right,
and therefore you have to listen to us when we
say we don't want to do this or that when
we send somebody to tell you no, this is not okay.
It went from that to when women got the vote.

(58:22):
But we need to use government to regulate more and
more stuff. We need to use government to stop people
from being able to just freely do certain things, you know,
like consuming alcohol or marrying the wrong person. The regulation
became a much bigger, tolerated, publicly tolerated element of government

(58:42):
rather than a thing that the public rebelled against and
started wars because it was being too much by the government,
done too much by the government. And women not only
didn't understand the bloody history of how voting became a
thing in Western callsture, they also didn't understand it as

(59:03):
a check and a balance on that government abuse of power,
but rather as a means of exploiting government power to
get control over their neighbors and take from people who
had plenty and use that money for their own purposes,
often self aggrandizing purposes or self serving purposes. And as

(59:23):
a result, people have become so addicted to government as
a safety net that they've become complicit and complacent. And
the complacence is okay, well, that's not a bridge too far.
You know anytime the government takes another step over the
bounds of your independence and your individuality, your right to

(59:47):
retain the fruits of your labor and retain control of
the property that you own. And the complicity is that
they've become complicit in the reshaping of government into a
nanny state. And that's largely been female driven. There have

(01:00:11):
been men involved, but a lot of that is men
who have been taught by their mothers that this is
what the government is for. It's not. It isn't a
historic fact that government was for that, and it isn't
a fact today that government is for that. It didn't
even start to become for that until King Henry the

(01:00:33):
eighth wanted a divorce in the church said no, so
he decided to reshape the church and took over a
great deal of its finances, and suddenly the government became
responsible for the system that assisted the poor that the
church was running. Prior to that. In other words, people

(01:00:53):
voluntarily donating to the church, as opposed to people having
their money confiscated against their will and just handed over.
Welfare systems didn't exist really in Western culture prior to that.
It wasn't the government's job to feed you. So all
of that said, what usa'd then came along and did

(01:01:14):
was took advantage of that mentality and fostered in nations
all over the world the feminine idea that government is
your keeper, as opposed to government having limited functions and
the public being the government's overseer to prevent government power
from being abused to control the public. In doing that,

(01:01:38):
they did the same thing that the CIA was doing
in multiple nations, attempting to overthrow various government systems and
cultural systems, and the result of that type of interference
has always been war death. So this is an incredibly
dangerous organization and what we're hearing from them is how

(01:02:00):
they essentially did what Howell did in Space odysty that it's,
you know, this this idea of insulating themselves from being
shut down and undermining the people that were trying to
end their efforts to undermine peace in the world.

Speaker 4 (01:02:20):
Essentially, this phenomenon we call the culture war, and yeah,
I know that's a euphemism for whatever the fog else
it is, but it's not just a domestic issue where
we're trying to save the West from the forces that
would destroy the West that are pretty much explicitly trying
to destroy the West. Those same forces are trying to

(01:02:40):
destroy everything else. They're trying to destroy the East and
the Middle East, and that its southern Hemisphere and all
that shit. Now we're fighting back against, ironically enough, the West,
the forces in the West. The dare I say, the
communist forces in the West, And I'm not going to
blame anyone in particular, Well, I am, it's fucking Mars,

(01:03:02):
it's fucking it's. It's it's. It's the communist forces that
arose largely in Germany and then Russia and then the
rest of Europe, and then it's spread to China and
South America and Central America and all these places. The
culture war is not just East versus West is nothing.
There's nothing like as false, dichotomous as that is. The

(01:03:23):
culture war is well, I guess you could call it
conservatism versus the enemies of conservatism, because conservatism is something
that is different for every country, yet the same for
every country. It's it's it's every country should get to
define its own rules and its own traditions, as vastly

(01:03:44):
different as those rules might be for various other countries,
Like if the Middle East wants to be Islamic, fine, Like,
if that's what the majority of the public wants, fine
you do that. If the East wants to be whatever
it is, has this worship of ancestral roots, yeah, that's
fine too. That's like any anyone, anyone who wants to

(01:04:04):
pertain to their own ancient traditions. Absolutely by all means,
please please do. We don't want you invading us, and
we don't want us invading you. And when I say us,
I mean it quite wrongly because I'm referring to the government.
We don't want our government invading you with our I
say cultural norms. Dare I say any of the of

(01:04:25):
the of the archaphobic cultish behavior that has that has
invaded the West, like we Honeybadger radio and in in
various other avenues of of of speech, like, we don't
want our culture imposing our culture on you any more
than we want your culture imposing yourself on us. And

(01:04:47):
it would be so helpful if everyone could could draw
the lines between the people and the government. Just like
your governments do not represent the people, our governments do
not represent the peace. I mean, even even when it
appears as though our governments are ostensibly telling us that
they are putting our nation first. Usually they are not.

(01:05:10):
I mean, sometimes they're trying. I mean, I hold out
some hope for the Trump administration that they are indeed
putting America first. And I hope there's some political party
in the UK that has any hope of putting Britain first.
Good luck to But yeah, this is what us lot

(01:05:31):
in the space leper corner of the Internet are trying
to say, it's okay for any given nation, any given society,
any given civilization, to have their own rules, to have
their own customs, and we don't want to impose our
customs on you, and we don't want you to impose
our customs on us. And it's it's difficult to get

(01:05:51):
this across when we are all and I mean all
of us without exception, by having our ideals, our idealism.
I'm completely fucked in the face of globalism. And yeah,
in every country there's these globalists who are like, yeah, no,
we need a one world government. Wouldn't it be great
if all of these different customs, different countries, different civilizations,

(01:06:16):
it all came together in the same, one, glorious whole.
And I'm like, yeah, no, you already are one glorious whole,
namely one glorious asshole. No, this like and this is,
and this is really what it comes down to, between
the euphemism of progressivism and the euphemism of conservatism, like

(01:06:36):
that that it has to stop somewhere, like it would
be nice if we, well, I say it were nice
if that, if there were no common rules between any
given household, like if everything was just tribes, like it
was in Germany for most of its history before it
became Germany, it was it was just thousands of different

(01:06:58):
tribal regions. It was in pretty much the entire world
before countries were invented, Like for the longest time, it
was just empires and everything else was just this divided
region of thousands of different tribes. I'm not saying we
should go back to just everything is a tribe with
like a half square mile radius of its own rules. Yeah,

(01:07:21):
that had its disadvantages as well, but complete global domination
of the same administration is even worse than that. And yes,
there is a happy medium, whereas a place we can stop,
and that place is countries, that place is nations. You
stop at some point and it's at the border of nations.

(01:07:42):
This should be easy when it comes to nations like
Great Britain, which is a fucking island, it should be
easy to say, yeah, our nation stops at the fucking
shore where there's fucking sea around everyone count can we
stop it there? But our government is like, no, no,
we can't. We want to be part of Europe and
Europe to be part of euro Afro, Eurasia and all

(01:08:03):
this ship And that's yes, I believe all well on
one dispose like that, and yeah, I don't. I don't
know what the eventual answer is because at some point
you encounter arbitrary borders. There's like a thousand arbitrary borders
in Europe where one country ends and the other and
another country begins and I and you can ask, well,
why does that does that border end there? Well, but

(01:08:26):
it's this sorts itself out because there are different ethnicities
that have been there for thousands of years and this
is on the other side of that border. It's more
complicated for America because because yes, every every American nation,
North American and South American is they are all nations
of immigrants and yeah, I get it. So it's it's

(01:08:48):
a whole different kettle of fish over there. And this
is why, this is why we have this difference between
whether you're a citizen by blood or a citizen by
land soil. It's all about out blood and soil. And
you know it's, uh, we're gonna be arguing about this forever.
But it's better to be arguing about this forever as
to where borders should be rather than just destroy all

(01:09:11):
borders and see what happens if if the whole fucking
earth is one nation, good God, no like. And now
people should be pushing back against this idea of just
destroying all borders, because it's much like in corporate capitalism,
like if you have competition between corporations, like with your
internet service provider, like as many countries have seen, if

(01:09:36):
there's only one internet service provider throughout the entire region,
then they have no competition, and if you ever complain
to them, they can just go fuckut what you're gonna do?
You can't do shit. You only have one option. So
why should we bother being competitive when there's no competition.
You just have to do what we say and there's
nothing you can do about. And that's what's gonna happen

(01:09:59):
with countries, if the whole thing is is uh is
melded together into one gooey blob of what was once nations,
like like I say, yes, micro nations of just tribes
is not the ideal option, and a one world nation
is not the ideal option. So let's find a middle ground.
And we already found a middle ground. And you know

(01:10:23):
it is called nationalism. I'm sorry, I know that's a
dirty word. They know. The euphemism for it is patriotism
or whatever. But one way or another, like, we have
to draw the lines somewhere, because if we don't draw
the lines, we're fucked. And I and if we keep
drawing the lines smaller and smaller, we're fucked. But I
think we I think we already found a decent compromise.

(01:10:46):
And it starts with if you're an island nation, then
you already have your lines. It's it's more complicated if
if you don't. But most of the nations in the
world are not islands. So you have to draw the
fucking boundaries somewhere, and it's good that you do so
that if your country becomes a totalitarian healthscape, you at

(01:11:06):
least have the option of crossing a border to another nation.
And it's it's fucking ironic that we're not talking about
the UN for the first time in several months. Because
the UN, as you may know, is called the United Nations.
And I don't think it's much of a stretch to
say that the United Nations has h has always has

(01:11:28):
has always had part of its goal to be to
unite all the nations. And this is why so many
people think that the devil has manifested as the United Nations.
I know, I know that sounds over the top, but
it's really not like that's exactly what the devil would do,
and it would it takes the form in USAID, because

(01:11:50):
that's that's that's the way of spreading whatever globalist ideas.
One nation has two other nations, and if it is
left untrammeled in its desires, then that is what will happen. So, yeah,
we haven't stopped talking about the U n We're still
talking about it. In the USA and the UN are
the same globalist agenda. I always sound like Alex Jones

(01:12:12):
right now, But Alex Jones was right about many things, so.

Speaker 1 (01:12:17):
Many things, even the gay frogs, yes, the transfrogs, but no,
he said the thing he said gay frogs. So you know,
but and that's the thing. The ultimate reason why they're
trying to feminize boys and men is because they need
to overcome men's recognition that voting rights are a means

(01:12:40):
of preventing government from exploiting you, not a means of
providing you as as a way to exploit the government
and against your neighbors. It's and it's something that the
women haven't grasped, women haven't recognized women use the government

(01:13:08):
as a weapon of exploitation. And Mangatka ninety two actually
mentioned this in Our Life chat. Men view voting as
a tool to prevent exploitation, while women use it as
a weapon of exploitation. Right, So, if these people can

(01:13:30):
feminize men, and if they can create enough households without
fathers that are still masculine and still raise their children
as masculine men do, then they can create future generations
that don't recognize voting as a tool to prevent exploitation
and don't necessarily recognize taxation as a form of exploitation

(01:13:53):
and over regulation is a form of oppression, and they
will become more complicit in their own enslavement until they
have no framework upon which to base a fight against it,
and then suddenly, years and years down the road, ideas
of freedom and independence will become new again because nobody

(01:14:14):
will remember them. The people that come up with them
will probably be killed for it, you know, initially, so
you'll have a whole new fight again to bring about
that balance between having an administrative system within large populations

(01:14:39):
of humans and maintaining the individuality of all of the
humans within that population. That's the battle we've been fighting
for the last several centuries, in various forms, in various regimes,
in various empires throughout history. And every time we take

(01:14:59):
the balance too far in the direction that the administrators
are become responsible for the welfare of the people and
therefore entitled to control them, the empire begins to fail.
There's no way to run things like that, especially with
currency involved, centrally fund it and not essentially create the

(01:15:21):
same downfall that the mouse experiment creates, and people have
to struggle. You lose if you lose the ability to struggle,
you lose the ability to exercise your creativity. And when
you lose your ability to exercise your creativity, you stop progressing,
and you stop living, and you merely exist instead, and
it creates it creates the precursor for war, usually civil war,

(01:15:44):
and men get killed, men have to fight, men have
to kill, and all of those things are bad. We're
going to listen to a little bit more of this
and at nine o'clock we're going to end and go
into the after show. So let me let me go
ahead and hit play again.

Speaker 2 (01:16:01):
Also terribly organized that I'm proud about is our Gender
and Sexual Minorities Employee Resource WE community. We saw the
WRIT during the election cycle, and so we had already
moved our group away from the USA main systems into
signal chats to particularly.

Speaker 1 (01:16:19):
So again, like I said, the reason they're trying to
feminize men is because it is easier to control them,
just like it's easier to control women than it is
to control men. So these groups that she's talking about,
these alternative sexuality and sexual identity groups, that's what that's for.
They were tiding their activities from the government because their

(01:16:42):
opposition to the government comes.

Speaker 2 (01:16:44):
First January twenty halpens inauguration. One of the two hundred
executive orders was a ninety day pause on all funding.
In addition to that, I think we're well aware of
that there are other executive orders to stop DEI programming
affected a large number of our awards immediately. So in

(01:17:05):
that first week we experienced a lot of threatening emails
across the staff, the takeover of what it was, it
DEIA truth at opm dot gov, which was unusual to
have centralized emails sent to all government staff, and then
many staff who are under a particular hiring mechanism in

(01:17:27):
that first week were immediately put on furlough or laid off.

Speaker 1 (01:17:31):
That's the next complaint is that remember we've talked a
lot about DEI in these systems, right and how that
has contributed to bringing in more of the communist mentality,
and it's been an instrument essentially ideological takeover of the

(01:17:52):
government bureaucracy and the government adjacent bureaucracy such as these
government funded NGOs and so on that USAID was funding.
What's important about this is uh they're they're using, They're
they're essentially using hiding from the state, hiding their communications

(01:18:16):
from the state, and insulating themselves against being governed by
the government that they rely on for their funding and
actually being essentially overseen by their overseeing agencies that they're
they're essentially making themselves able to act against the nation

(01:18:37):
that is their host as being the parasite, and foreign
nations in our name. So it'd be like if you
had a an organization that you were contractually obligated to
pay for a service, and you found out that actually,
on the surface, they're they're tentatively providing a frame action

(01:19:00):
of that service, but an iceberg underneath that service was
full of them sabotaging you in various ways among your neighbors,
so that your neighbors now hate you because their households
are being corrupted and damaged in various ways by this organization.
So you're like, well, I'm going to stop paying them.

(01:19:20):
That's crazy, I'm not doing this anymore, right, I'm going
to just band my connection to this organization and I'm
going to stop all funding. So the USAID system was
funding a whole host of these types of organizations. So
imagine your bank that's the USAID system saying well, we're
going to figure out a way to surreptitiously still take

(01:19:44):
your money and give it to these organizations to continue
to poison the waters between you and your neighbors by
doing damage to their households in your name. We'll just
create other fees and other avenues of drawing from your
income behind your back bank fees, whatever, and hide it all.

(01:20:06):
And so what we're going to do is create a
set of communications within the system outside of the bank
that you're not privy to, so that you don't know
we're doing this. You'd be wanting to sue somebody for fraud,
right and theft, And that's what she's talking about doing here,
and that's what she's talking about. It's such a threat

(01:20:28):
that they eliminated DEI hires and eliminated DEI systems within
because those were some of the things that were sort
of used to insulate against that stoppage. You can't stop
them from doing this.

Speaker 2 (01:20:41):
Then within that at the very beginning of I think
over the weekend of that first week, our senior staff,
including our gen administratively, so we leave. So we had
decapitation of the agency leadership. But as I said, we
were responding quickly and immediately we had what's called the
USAID's Order Website and Signal group was stood up. This

(01:21:04):
was done by longtime implementing partner who are strategic communications
specialist and they went and moved immediately to start gathering people,
creating community and collecting information. This is also some of
the first lawsuits that I'll talk about. We'll get started
that second.

Speaker 1 (01:21:23):
There's the other thing that she said there, that's that's
a really and I'm sorry this is so quiet again.
This is it's the website, it's not me. And I
haven't found a way to change the volume for this
without changing the overall volume. And I don't know if
it would translate into changing anything as it is sent
in through I'm sharing on discord, and then Brian is

(01:21:46):
directing it through OBS, so it's it's a whole difficult thing.
But what she said there about lawsuits, I is where
I partly where I get the comparison to how this
is a government system. USAID system is a government system.
It is a government funding system. It's like having a

(01:22:08):
business account as opposed to your personal account, having an
account specifically for charitable activities in other countries incorporated, which
is what it's supposed to be. But it was intended
to according to what the federal government said when they
created it, it was intended to assist in funding organizations that

(01:22:30):
provide food to nations and a famine, and medical care
to nations that don't have the medical care they need,
and so on, not vote abortion and male genital mutilation
and communism in other countries, which it did ended up doing.
And so imagine if your bank sued you for saying, well,
my business is shutting down, we're going to stop running

(01:22:52):
charitable organizations in other nations incorporated, or charitable initiatives and
other nations incorporated. Therefore we don't need a bank account
for that company because that company is now defunct. And
your bank went, oh, you can't. You can't not have
that account. We're going to sue you and force you
to continue funding these charitable organizations in other countries. And

(01:23:14):
you have to maintain this bank account. You have to
keep putting money in it, even though you're closing the business.
That's that's what these lawsuits were.

Speaker 2 (01:23:20):
There were more signal groups stood up, like I said,
this is an agency of fifty thousand people.

Speaker 1 (01:23:27):
Fifty thousand people is the size of a city ten
to fourteen thousand people is bigger than the population of
the town where I grew up. So this government organization
employed more people than lived in the community that funded
the school system. I went to when I was growing up, and.

Speaker 2 (01:23:45):
So this community started really gathering in signal, especially as
we saw the disinformation about USAID coming out of x
as Elon Musk excalated attacks.

Speaker 1 (01:23:58):
I love how they blame Elon Musk, who is a
citizen who has the right to criticize what the government
is doing because he is a citizen. He can't run
for president because he is an immigrant, a legal immigrant,
by the way, but he can criticize you are taking
my money and doing bad things with it in other countries.
I want you to stop because he is a citizen

(01:24:20):
and he is a taxpayer. In fact, he pays a
huge amount of the taxes that go to fund this
type of thing. And by the way, they're not directly
funding anything the taxes that you pay today. They're going
to pay the interest on debt that your government has
accrued in your name to pay for this shit because

(01:24:41):
they're spending more than they're receiving.

Speaker 4 (01:24:45):
British government officials really don't like it when Ila Musk
says things that might sway the British people in the
direction of their own interests, like how dare this foreigner
interfere in our process? As a country. Are you going
to keep playing in millions of foreigners to suckle on
the government? He and and get paid to do nothing

(01:25:09):
from from the taxpayers pound what you're a racist? Elon
Musk is a foreigner and we should not be we
should not be pandering to foreigners. But the foreigners that
we keep paying from the sea. You get what I'm saying,
right fucking Madden, If a foreigner so much as says
anything that might that might make Britain great again, he's

(01:25:32):
an enemy of the state. But the fucking millions of
people who hate Britain and will outwardly, unashamedly fucking tell everyone, oh, yeah,
we're here to make We're here to make Britain Pakistan.
We've got to take over your country.

Speaker 3 (01:25:47):
Bro.

Speaker 4 (01:25:47):
We We've got We're gonna make your country Pakistan. Bro.
That's fine, is it?

Speaker 3 (01:25:52):
Yeah?

Speaker 4 (01:25:52):
There's yeah, the wall, there's so many.

Speaker 1 (01:25:57):
This is the tough thing about well, like we start
out the show reading our super chats, and we talked
our super chows, and we talked about the fact that
unlike women, men pick their battles and they pick what
they're going to shed their blood over and what they're
going to kill for right. Women do it over having
to wear a headscarf, and they make that the focus
of the battle when the thing that they're really objecting

(01:26:18):
to is not being allowed to go places without a
male chaperone, or not having recourse if they're in an
abusive relationship, not having recourse if they don't want to
get married, and their family says, you're gonna do it
anyway when they're nine, right, But no, it's all about
the headscarf, and you have to you have to make
that the focus and make that the symbol, because if

(01:26:41):
you talk about the other things too much, people are
so horrified they won't listen. Men, on the other hand,
they fight their own battles, so they're not looking for
symbols to get other people riled up to fight for them.
They're looking for causes to get other people riled up
to stand with them and fight side by side. And

(01:27:03):
it's a whole different thing. But because men will tolerate
so many cultural changes, so many impositions, so many requirements,
obligations and restrictions on themselves in the name of maintaining
peace and in the name of brotherhood right or in
the name of multicultural acceptance, of each other as you know, like, well,

(01:27:25):
these men are also men, we're men, they're men. We
can be men together. Because they will do that. It
is easy for people, under the pretense of trying to
escape tyranny, trying to simply have the same the men
of a country that they're invading in this manner, to
under the radar sneak in. Well, actually, we want to

(01:27:47):
completely undermine and change your entire culture and eliminate the
things that makes make it prosperous and foster your economic independence.
And it takes a culture clash that includes violence and
includes destruction of the local like the local culture and

(01:28:08):
the local peace and the local comfort, local cleanliness and
so on to get men riled up. And so now
you have protests going on in the UK. Now you
have protests going on in France and other nations where
this has been happening. But it was able to sneak
in because men picked their battles. So that's their weakness.
That's the weakness of men. The weakness of women is

(01:28:29):
that women don't pick their battles. And so when they
noticed that this is happening and they sound the alarm,
they have sounded the alarm over small, unimportant things that
aren't really infringements major infringements so often and for so
long that nobody listens to them. They have cried wolf

(01:28:50):
too many times, and their credibility is shit. And therefore
the entire alarm system that men would rely on to
tell them when there's a battle they're not fighting that
they should be has been eliminated. So that's part of
the goal of feminism.

Speaker 4 (01:29:07):
Pick their battles, by the way, and they tend to
gravitate towards what we call relational aggression. I'm sure I
don't need to explain it.

Speaker 1 (01:29:14):
Well, that's a fighting style, not what we're what they're
fighting over, But go ahead, well.

Speaker 4 (01:29:20):
No, it is. It is what they're fighting women. I mean,
there's there's a reason that in China they have one
symbol for grief or disruption, and it's the same symbol
as the symbol for women twice or three times. Like
when when women are put together, they argue amongst themselves,
and when a woman is put together with a bunch

(01:29:41):
of men, she will fight for herself. It shouldn't need
to be explained that women are evolutionarily, there say, designed
to fight over the domestic situation whereas men broaden out
their horizons and men looked. Men look to the horizons,
women look to the home. And it kind of works

(01:30:04):
to some extent that because women are largely in charge
of the domestic arena and and and men are in
charge of the of the outward arena. So it makes
sense that when you when you put women in charge,
they will focus their efforts on shaking up the domicile,
the inward margins of all they can even conceive of.

(01:30:28):
And if they want to change things, all they can
think of is changing the oikos, changing the family, changing
the internal structure of wherever they happen to exist, because
that's that's what they're built to do. Not all bloody
hashtag a ship. But you know what I mean, you
know the generalization that I'm going.

Speaker 1 (01:30:47):
For, Yeah, controlling their men. And a good example of this, though,
when you say women don't pick their battles, is that
it's fair for women to say, don't hit us if
we're not doing anything to you, if we're not hitting
you first, Right, that's a fair battle to fight for
women to make an equally big deal about some guy

(01:31:10):
whistling when they're walking down the street is ridiculous. The
nicest thing I can say about it is that it's ridiculous.
If a woman is upset by the way a man
expresses himself, he's in the wrong for expressing himself. When
in any other instance, women will support all forms of
freedom of expression, including obscenity and offensiveness, and pissing on

(01:31:33):
the symbol for somebody's religious faith and calling it art right.
They'll defend that, but not woo sexy legs. That's a
bridge too far, Women's So women's bridge too far is
often something that actually does no harm. There is no effect.
You decide how that affects you. You may get upset,

(01:31:57):
you may enjoy the fact that somebody thinks your legs
are sexy and hold your head up and go, my
legs are sexy. Huh. It's up to you how you
respond to that. So it's not somebody else doing damage
to you. That's not an effect. It's you doing damage
to yourself. If you decide that you have been victimized
because somebody has expressed that they think your legs are

(01:32:18):
sexy or that you have a nice ass, even if
they say something crude obnoxious, you can walk away from
that and until somebody does something violent, it is not
affecting you. It is simply annoying and you know, or
complimentary depending on how you decide to take it and
how it was expressed. And it can be a detriment

(01:32:39):
to the guy too, because if he's obnoxious and doesn't
endear himself to women, nobody will date him. They won't.
They won't respond by being like, well, here's my phone number.
You know, if he's if he's a fuck nut, then
then she's gonna walk away. So that's his punishment right there.
That there's nothing else needs to happen unless he starts

(01:33:02):
getting grabby, and then you can respond to a physical
assault with a physical self defense or calling the authorities.
But women fight that battle as if it is the
same battle at smallest percentage of domestic violence where the
only violent person in the house is the is the
man right where the rest of domestic vit that's thirteen percent.

(01:33:26):
By the way of domestic violence, the entire rest of
it is either two way or one way, and seventy
percent of one way domestic violence is female perpetrated. It's
the woman hitting just just for the record, So yeah,
that's what I mean when I say women don't fight
those battles, or women don't pick their battles, And the
result of that is that the system that men use

(01:33:48):
to help advise them on you know, well, these are
the battles that we need to fight if we want
to keep our wives and children safe from problems caused
by culture clashes or invasive criminals from other countries. That
system is destroyed by that because they can't trust it.

(01:34:09):
You know, if women are constantly accusing men of being
sexually predatory and doing harm to women through innocent actions
were impotent actions, because yelling something at someone in the
street is a completely impotent action. You can't actually do
anything to the person by yelling. They can hear you,

(01:34:31):
but they don't have to react to it the way
that you want, right, so it's an impotent action. If
women are forcing as an issue, men must respond to
this completely impotent action that we view as an attack
the same way that they would ask men to stop
somebody from raping them. Then men don't know when to

(01:34:54):
take them seriously. It sounds like they don't need to
be taken seriously ever, And of course you have years
and years, especially when you have feminists going, well, you know,
not these men. You can't criticize these men like just Phillips.
And in the long run, what you end up then
with is the current situation in UK where there's been

(01:35:18):
all this violence and it's no longer possible to hide it.
And you know, the men of the nation have been
doing what they're told and keeping their heads down for
so long, and the government has been going farther and
farther to the left and farther and farther to the
nanny state and doing nothing for the people that now
that it's all coming out and people are protesting, it

(01:35:39):
may be it may be too late, and it's probably
too late for a peaceful solution, and it's probably going
to get very ugly before it gets better, much uglier
than it is today. But in the meantime, it is
after nine o'clock and I do have to get us
into the after show. If this was a night when
I didn't have to go to work after the show,
I could, I could take us later, but I can't,

(01:36:02):
So we'll continue listening. Well, we'll go through the last
part of this, because there's some important information in the
last part of this, and then we'll read a little
more of this threat. Next week. We may not watch
all the videos. I haven't watched all the videos yet,
only this one, so I just know that there's more
in this one that we need to hear. But we'll
do that next week, and we'll continue a little bit
with this before we get back to you and women,

(01:36:25):
because the U and Women thing, as bad as it is,
it's they tried to do this and failed and went
a different route to do it. This. They didn't fail
at this. They're now in the process of getting caught
in what they actually did. And I think it has
a higher implication in terms of potential future civil violence,

(01:36:49):
like civil war type violence in various nations than what
You and Women has done You and women. The big
threat with you and women is more in terms of
family law and domestic violence law, which I.

Speaker 4 (01:37:03):
Just want to say before we finish. Women fight from
the bottom up and men fight from the top down. Now, yes,
sounds like an innuendo, and it is, but it's an
innuendo that relates metaphorically to the political That's not to
say that women are always victims. It's just that they
fight from the bottom. If you or indeed the legs

(01:37:24):
which are even further bottom from the bottom, and that
men fight from the top, which is not just the
shoulders but the Yeah, yeah, you know what I mean.
And that's and that's why socialism and communism always gravitated
towards the women, because because it gravitates towards those who
have the illusion of fighting from the grassroots, even if

(01:37:46):
they're not, whereas men fight from the top down. Even
though that might allude to the sky daddy, but it's
not because these are crossed metaphors. And I don't have
time to get into that. We'll perhaps get into it
later on.

Speaker 1 (01:38:00):
Yeah, yeah, I think a good way to Mangaka ninety
two is very very good at making salient summaries of
a lot of the points that we make. And here
he said men pick their battles, women pick men's battles.
And that is true because women don't fight their battles, right.
Men fight their battles by doing the fighting. Women fight

(01:38:25):
their battles fight in quotes, by appealing for help and
getting it from men. So that is an excellent way
of putting that. But but with that, make sure we
don't have any more the last rumble rant I read
uh not rumble rant. The last super chaw I read

(01:38:46):
is the last super chow we got. There aren't any
paid rumble rants, no super chats. So I will thank
everybody for listening. We're going to continue this next week
because this is a big deal. There's more to say
about how USAID, the connection between USAID and civil wars
all over the world, just like the connection it's just

(01:39:08):
like the connection between the CIA and civil wars all
over the world. It just hits from a different direction.
But it's something that we just can't cover entirely in
one show because we are talking about this from a
perspective of gender issues and not just politics in general.
So that's what you have to look forward to for
a little while. And I will maintain we will get

(01:39:31):
back to the unwomen when we get through with this,
and then we'll finished up with that, and eventually I
want to get back to talking about suffrage because this
issue of the difference between how men vote and how
women vote, I think is fundamental to both of these things.
The US wouldn't stay involved with the UN, and there

(01:39:53):
wouldn't be such a long term existence of government agencies
and government organizations like that if it weren't for the
way that women voted. So with that, thanks everybody for
listening to this, and thanks to my two co hosts
for going over it with me. Thanks to everybody who
works in the background to make HBr talk happen, especially
Ryan and Goodnight.

Speaker 3 (01:40:14):
All Men's Right activists are machines, dude. Okay, they are
literal machines. They are talking point machines.

Speaker 4 (01:40:22):
They are impossible to fucking.

Speaker 5 (01:40:23):
Deal with, especially if you have like especially if you have.

Speaker 4 (01:40:26):
Like a couple of dudes who have good memory.

Speaker 3 (01:40:28):
On top of that, too, holy shit, you're fucked