Hello and welcome, dear listener.

Episode 450 of the Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove podcast.

I'm Trevor, aka The Iron Fist.

With me at the moment is Joe the Tech Guy.

How are you, Joe?

I'm good.

Evening all.

We think Scott's going to be joining us, but he hasn't appeared yet.

But, uh, he'll hopefully pop his head in and, uh, and join us for this podcast.

450.

Heading towards that Magic 500.

I know I'll get to 500, I don't know if I'll get to 501, but,

eh,

probably.

Can't help myself.

Um, Joe, we've seen more of each other, it seems, in the last week than we normally

do, because we had the late podcast on Wednesday, which was because I had a knee

operation, dear listener, on the Monday.

I foolishly thought that I could undergo A arthroscopic surgery in the afternoon,

and I'd be fine to podcast that night.

Um, turned out not the case, that's why they got delayed to Wednesday.

And then we caught up on Sunday with Scott, uh, having a few

beers, which was very good.

A few other people, which was good.

And now, um, we're back on Monday night, so Joe, I've, I've seen

you three times in five days.

Haven't got

bored of you yet.

Only once in person though.

It was actually nice to see each other in person.

It was.

It's over the camera.

Yeah, it was.

Although at one point there with Scott and various other people, it was almost

like an episode of the podcast as we started arguing over different things.

So, um, so that was good.

Um, I'm getting hot.

I'm going to just put this air conditioning on.

Okay.

Right, um, what are we going to talk about, dear listener?

So, if you're in the chat room, say hello.

And, topics.

Um, um, just a little bit from some of the conversations we had on Sunday.

Um, that we'll talk about.

How different people voted, which surprised me.

Um, I've finished a book.

Biography on Vladimir Putin, talk about that.

Um, another topic that came up was about whether there are North Korean

soldiers in the, on the Russian side fighting in the Ukraine, talk about that.

Um, uh, US election, of course.

Let's talk about democracy.

What is it, um, is it just, if you're putting a ballot into a ballot box, I'm

saying that's not democracy, there's a lot more to it than that, uh, and a lot of

our so called democracies really aren't.

Um, Joe found some interesting stuff about donations, Hex Debt is in the news,

Guy Rundle's sacked bricks, a bunch of other things, dastardly Chinese have

been selling cheap cars, good heavens.

And, uh, so yeah, so that's all on the agenda.

Sounds like Scott's about to join us.

We will bring him in and uh, good day.

Scott, how are you?

Not too bad in yourself.

Very well.

I've done the introduction and, uh, sorry I'm

a little late.

Yeah,

that's fine.

So, um, it was good to see you, Scott, in person on Sunday.

Yes, it was a lot of fun, wasn't it?

Yes, I was saying to Joe, it was a bit like, almost an episode of

the podcast as we were arguing about

the things.

It got a little bit heated, but it wasn't too bad.

Yeah, it wasn't too bad.

I felt myself a bit outnumbered.

I don't know, as I started to defend Well, because you've got

an idiotic decision to make, you know.

As I started to defend Vladimir Putin, I suddenly found myself Surrounded

by people who wanted to disagree with me.

Absolutely.

Yeah,

so, um I would like to read that book though, once you've finished it.

Yeah, so, uh, the book is

Let's talk about that.

Um A Man for All Seasons.

Ah, His Life and Times, Putin, by Philip Short.

And, um Phillip Short has written biographies about Mao

and about Mitterrand and Pol Pot.

So, um, he's spent eight years He's a

dictator.

Yeah.

He just does biographies on bad guys.

He spent eight years researching it and it's heavily referenced.

And I think it's a It seems to me a fairly fair and honest account,

uh, not a biased one, like he, he tells it when it's bad and he tells

it when, perhaps, uh, it's okay, and so, interesting, highly recommend it.

I guess the thing that comes out of it for me, as I'm reading

it, uh, well, I finished reading it after speaking to you guys.

The Putin, you know how he sort of had to step down from the

presidency and Medvedev took over?

And they sort of swapped, and he went back to Prime Minister, and

then later came back as President?

Up until that point, I think his behaviour deteriorated after that.

When he came back in the second stint, a number of the things

that he did, were a lot worse than the stuff he did before then.

But um, I guess what you've got to consider is, is that he becomes

president in a Russia that has very little experience with democracy and

very little experience with capitalism.

And people just have to lower their expectations of what can be done when a

society is just not, um, at all adapted to changing over to those things.

It takes time, you can't do it overnight.

And things like corruption, for example, where you've got a country

that's been functioning on corruption for a hundred years, if you were just

to come in and just say, All that corruption stuff is over and done with.

It's a system and a culture that's been based on that for so long

that you just couldn't do it.

People wouldn't know how to do it, for starters, and you'd also get killed.

Like, you just, you could have all the good intentions of the world, but you

can't change everything in a culture.

Overnight or indeed in a decade.

Some of this stuff takes time.

And so, the picture that was painted was of a guy who, okay, like everybody,

took, uh, different bribes and things.

But it really wasn't, um, he was by no means one of the worst offenders.

His record was pretty good and that was quoting some CIA

people who were saying that.

The image that comes across, particularly in his first period,

is genuinely of a patriot, who is there because he's got ideas about

what he thinks is best for Russia, and it's not so much about acquiring

wealth or riches, uh, for himself, but

he had I'd heard he was a puppet for the real powers that be.

Um, and they, they thought he was a pliable puppet and they put him in power.

And it was later on that they discovered, actually, he wasn't quite

as pliable as they thought he was.

Because he'd been a minor functionary in the St.

Petersburg mayor office, wasn't he?

Yes, he was.

Yes.

And effectively doing deals for the Russian mafia.

Yes.

In, in the mayor's office?

Yes.

And they thought, well, if we stick him in as president, he'll

carry on doing deals on our behalf.

But, in, in order to get foreign investment and foreigners into St.

Petersburg, then you You had to deal with the mafia like that was, you

just couldn't operate without them.

So, uh, 'cause they already owned stuff, like a lot of the sell

off of public assets had, well,

I mean, that was, had occurred

under Yeltsin.

So a lot of that kleptocracy had occurred and he, according to this

book, was basically saying to the kleptocrats, okay, what you've got now.

You can keep, but we're not doing any more cheap sell offs of public

infrastructure like you've been enjoying.

So, um, apparently Yeltsin approached,

um,

Clinton, I think it was, and said, give us a billion dollars

to roll out democracy, to migrate.

Um, and Clinton went, why would I pay you money?

It's going to happen anyway.

Yeah.

And I think a properly funded transition.

would probably not have been quite so corrupt.

I'm not going to say it wouldn't have been corrupt, but I think there would

have been because, you know, the average Russian back in the 90s was starving

because the social safety net had just been pulled out from under them.

Yeah.

So they're relying on these kickbacks to support their families

and lifestyle and whatever.

So, um,

I wouldn't even say lifestyle, their life.

Yes.

Yeah.

Yep.

So, I don't know that any amount of money could have just transformed the

psyche of the Russian people quickly.

Um, that's, that's one of the problems I think is just recognising

an existing culture and that he had to work within that.

So, um, then of course, after he came back for his second stint as president, um, he

seemed to then, um, latch onto religion and culture stuff and started to attack,

um, his enemies even more and, um, Getting more sort of paranoid and it's a, it's

a darker picture painted at that point.

So, yeah,

mixed bag,

but, um

What about Navalny then?

Yeah, so he was, um You know, was, was he an enemy of Putin or not?

Um, he was underestimated at first and they let him run in an election and he

got more than they thought he would get.

Um, so, um So Navalny and a, you know, a bunch of political opponents,

particularly in his second term, because in his first term, he was a very popular,

so he didn't really have threats from these guys, they were only ever going

to get 5 or 10 percent or something, so he had such a, sort of a strong

popularity because of the way he dealt with things at that point, that he wasn't

too concerned about the opposition.

When he came back the second time, I think Um, the polls were a lot closer,

so more corruption, uh, and skullduggery required to subdue opposition members.

So, yeah.

Yeah.

It's

one of those things, I just, um, I know Navalny was no saint,

but he certainly appeared to accept democracy more than what Vladimir

Putin appears to have accepted it.

Yeah.

So, um, anyway, it was A good read and I thought it was important because

the author took maybe effort to help you empathise and put yourself in

the position of where he was and what is, what's potential, you know,

what can be done potentially and what's just way too far down the

track, um, in terms of expectations.

So, yeah, it's saying.

Um, So that was Putin, biography, recommend that one if you are interested.

What else did I want to say?

Just from our discussion, um, I won't mention names about one of the people

who was with us on Sunday, but a very pro green person in their, um,

attitudes to life and activities, um, who preferenced Labor over the Greens

because of the Israel Gaza policies.

I was just floored by that, Scott.

I just, uh Yeah,

I think I know who you're talking about, but once we go off air I'll

actually confirm that, but um, it's one of those things, I would have thought

that anyone that even just looked at the news with one eye open would

have actually preferenced the Greens ahead of the Labor Party if they were

really voting on Palestinian issues.

Yeah, so um, so

Well no, he was voting against Palestine, he wanted Israel to

have the right to defend itself.

Yes, he was

pro Israel, anti Palestine.

Oh, was he?

Yes.

Okay.

Goodness me.

Yeah, yeah.

So, and, and a very greeny person who, who put, then put the greens lower than

Labor, um, because of, of the position of the greens on Israel and Gaza in

a state election, where really, you know, foreign affairs isn't a state

election matter, but, uh, anyway, that just, um, That one surprised me.

So, but as part of that we were having a discussion and he said that the, um,

that the Palestinians in Israel can vote, and I said they can't, and it turns out

they can if they're in Israel proper, not part of the, um, Provided they're good.

Occupied territory, and provided they are a citizen.

Yeah.

So, that's the whole point.

If they can get citizenship,

they can

have an Israeli ID card, which means they can vote.

Yes.

Um, but, you know, in order to do that, you've got, um, lots of people

just don't do it because, um, there's a Hebrew language requirement.

And you've gotta acknowledge Israel's control of Jerusalem . So there's

a few things that are just gonna be unpalatable to most Palestinians as

a precondition to becoming a citizen.

And then of course, you are just a minority and the, um, Israeli

government is not gonna be making any laws that are favorable to you.

And lots of the villages and enclaves where the Palestinians live

get a lot less money than the um.

than the Jewish areas, and there is a lot of direct discrimination

against them, um, even when they are citizens with voting rights.

So, but it was true that they do get voting rights a small proportion who

are citizens, so don't want to mislead anybody, um, who was there on that one.

Um, what else have we got?

Oh, Scott, and the other one that came up in that topic was

that, um, you mentioned, I think.

about North Koreans fighting for the Russians against the Ukraine and

They haven't actually been deployed to Ukraine yet.

My understanding is they're just in the Kursk region.

Now, whether or not they're being trained up for it or what have you, I don't know.

Right.

But it does seem bizarre that

a country like North Korea that's paranoid about its southern border

would actually allow 10, 000 of its troops to move that far north.

And I said to you, how do you know that's the case?

I said to you, how do you know that's the case?

And you were like, I've just read it somewhere, or something.

Yeah, I read it somewhere.

Yeah,

yeah, yeah.

So, there was an article in the, um, John Menehue blog, and, um, it's a reproduction

of a piece from Moon Over Alabama.

You guys ever read that blog?

No.

Um, wasn't he one of the ones who was getting money from RT?

Don't

know.

Could have been.

Bye bye.

But, um, interesting article, which was in the John Menendee blog, Reproducing Moon

of Alabama, and, um, he makes the point.

Well, first of all, Scott, there is no evidence of any North

Koreans anywhere near the border.

So, um, uh, Hoover said that, um, I'll get to it, but, um, he was sort of saying

in this blog piece that, um, That this was a propaganda campaign, claiming

that thousands of North Korean soldiers will soon fight on the Russian side.

And he said that it would make little sense, uh, that the incursion at Kursk,

um, for one, is already mostly defeated.

Uh, and that the language and cultural problems would make the integration

of such forces into Russian military operations nearly impossible.

And he was sure that the Russian military would be strongly against it.

That would make sense to me.

Like it, there would be huge language difficulties with these

groups, um, and he was claiming that the whole thing was fake news.

And then he read, um, um, um, what did he read?

He didn't know that the idea for the campaign, or for this propaganda

campaign, he reckons comes from.

RAND, R A N D, the Pentagon's think tank.

So, it's been the Ukraine that's claiming that the North Koreans are there.

Three days before the start of Zelensky's campaign, a RAND analyst

wrote, What should the United States do?

Given the differences in the objectives of Russia, China and North Korea, the

United States should be mounting major information operations against these three

countries to highlight their differences and fuel distrust amongst them.

And so, the Rand Corporation three days beforehand is saying, hmm.

We should do a misinformation campaign.

And one of the suggestions was that the South Korean Defence Minister has

said that North Korea will likely send more of its troops to support Russia.

Um, given Russian attitudes, those troops might well serve as cannon fodder.

The North Korean elites need to hear what Kim may do to their sons.

So, the Rand Corporation published, um, a suggested piece of misinformation

that the South Koreans could do.

And then, of course, three days later The Ukrainian army, headed by General

Budenov, started to leak claims that there were North Korean troops in Russia.

Budenov was one of the members of Ukraine's intelligence

directorate, trained by the CIA, and initially it was 1, 500 North

Koreans, then there were 3, 000.

The latest is claiming 11, 000 North Koreans.

And, uh, South Korean news agency repeated the claim.

And, um, the New York Times jumped in and also repeated the claim.

And there's an entire New York Times article which I read, based

on the premise that North Korean troops are fighting in Ukraine.

And it goes on talking about how they're getting value, you know,

they're there because they're going to get valuable fighting experience.

It's not until the 15th paragraph does the reader learn that there

is no evidence for this whatsoever.

NATO General Secretary Mark Rutt.

So, NATO General Secretary said the Allies, quote, have no evidence that North

Korean soldiers are involved in the fight.

So, all we've got is a Ukrainian allegation.

And a couple of videos floating around Twitter, which are

dispelled for various reasons.

Soldiers have got the wrong uniforms, blah blah blah.

So, at this stage, the best guess would be that this is a misinformation

campaign by the Ukrainians, claiming North Korean involvement.

NATO says there's no evidence.

End.

It's just a bit of a beat up, Scott, it looks like.

Fair enough.

But this is where things, just a simple claim by the Ukrainians, also by the

South Koreans, and you just get news groups who repeat that claim, and you

read the headline, and the reason why the

North Koreans would be there, you know.

And you've got to delve deep into the article before you get to the factual

point that says, actually, there's no proof that there's any of them there.

And most people just won't do it.

Like, this is the sort of misinformation and propaganda

we get all the fucking time.

It's so frustrating.

Um, most people don't have the time for this.

Yeah, I know.

Well, I'm one of those that didn't have the time for it.

Yeah.

So look,

might turn out next week, a whole bunch of North Koreans rock up, but at

this point in time, there is no evidence.

So

yeah, in Al Jazeera have just reported what everybody is saying,

but said, we asked an international expert who said it was possible.

Hmm.

Just.

So, yeah, no direct evidence, but,

yeah.

Yeah, the other thing that I just, when I first heard the news and that sort

of stuff, I thought it was a little bit strange that they were talking about,

they were alleging that they were moved from North Korea to Vladivostok via ship.

Which, to move 10, 000 troops would take a hell of a lot of ships.

Why

wouldn't you put them on a train?

Exactly.

Now, I don't know.

Just the thought of

coordinating a foreign force with a different language, a different culture,

doesn't sound easy to

me.

Don't forget Russia borders North Korea.

They are very, very similar groups.

So Russians include people from the Far East who are not that

dissimilar from the North Koreans.

Probably speak a very similar language.

Would there be that many Russian generals at the Ukrainian

border who can speak North Korean?

And would there be that many North Koreans who could speak Russian?

I don't know.

And can you just

throw a foreign force in amongst your boys and say,

come on guys, figure it out?

That's why, if you were going to take them over there, you'd have them

trained up and everything like that to be their own individual fighting force.

So you'd send them, you'd send them on a particular mission, they'd go in and

they'd attack that particular area.

Yeah, John in the chat says, have you ever heard of

the Trans Siberian Railway?

Yeah, I know that, John, but But you were saying that the report was

they went by ship, is that right?

Yeah, that's what they were saying, though, that the report was they went

by ship to Vladivostok, and then they're going to grab on, and they're going

to jump on the Trans Siberian Railway.

To then

move over to the western part of Russia.

The longest rail journey in the world goes through Russia

and down into North Korea.

Oh, really?

Okay, well then it would make more sense that they're moving by train then.

Yeah,

you were talking about wanting to go on that, weren't you?

Yeah, yeah, me and Brian would like to go on the Trans

Siberian Railway at some point.

So, yeah, yeah, so, um, so, um, Smells like a bullshit story.

Let's see what happens.

Um.

I did look.

There's actually a road that goes all the way across the east.

I didn't think there was, but there is.

But um, I, I was talking to a Russian friend of mine who basically said back

in the good times before all the funds started drying up, there was a story about

a group of people traveling across the Trans Siberian Highway and the rains came

and they were stuck there for months.

Right.

Because, because this is Dirt Road.

And when the rains come, it just turns into mud, and they were literally

helicoptering out food supplies to them.

Right.

Really?

When the sort of permafrost wasn't permanent.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah, there we go.

Oh, John's going to bet me a schooner.

Okay.

What's the bet

on

for it?

The bet is, at this present time, there are 10, 000 North Korean troops

in the Russian Ukraine border region.

It really wouldn't surprise

me that Nobody's got a

good picture of it.

No, it really wouldn't surprise me that Kim Jong un could

have moved 10, 000 troops up there.

As to why, I'm not exactly certain.

It could be just trying, it could be just trying to scare the shit out

of the Ukrainians, you never know.

It could be just that sort of thing.

I would doubt that even an idiot like Kim Jong un would want to actually get

involved in a foreign war like that.

You know, um

Okay,

um, um, that's good John.

I'm looking forward to the schooner, the free schooner.

That'll be good.

So I'll remember that next time.

You're probably remembering, when I met John last, I took him to a place which

was like a, um, half price happy hour.

It was incredibly cheap drinks, so he knows it's not going to cost much.

Right.

Yeah, there we go.

So, um, Ah, well, it just reminded me of the classic CIA misinformation,

which was described by a former CIA agent, um, John Stockwell, in a video

that I've seen a few different times.

Where he said that, um, like a third of their payroll was

on propaganda and journalists.

And they would just pay off obscure journalists in, in third world countries.

In obscure newspapers like the Zanzibar Times or something.

Where they would say, here's a story, e.

g.

the North Koreans are in Russia.

And, um, Then they would tell their journalists who worked in mainstream

papers in, say, London, here's a story in Zanzibar, use that.

So the London paper would quote the Zanzibar paper saying

that there is, um, Report.

Whatever the information is.

And then that story would then explode around the world without anybody really

acknowledging that this was just a bullshit report from obscure Zanzibar.

It would just be sort of accepted as whatever was said was fact because it had

been reported by the British newspaper, re reporting what the other paper had said.

And this is a sort of a classic way that they would sort of

This time we've got named sources, don't we?

This time it is the Namesources is Zelensky and the head of the

propaganda arm of the Ukrainian army.

But nobody reads that bit.

But also

the South Korean.

Yes, and then the South Korean, yes.

But nobody reads that point and then goes, well hang on, have they got an agenda?

Have they got a bias?

Would they be saying that for any particular reason?

People don't get to that point.

Sorry.

And because it's buried down the back of the last few paragraphs of where

it came from, there's conjecture and reporting and, and musing over the

whole idea for the first 400 words.

Yeah, that's what AI does.

Yeah, yes.

And then the disclaimer tucked down the back.

So later on, when it turns out that there wasn't North Koreans in Russia,

And somebody says to the New York Times, you're a bunch of idiots.

They'll say, oh no no, look there, paragraph 15, we said that

there was no proof at the time.

So, um, this is the way it works.

Yeah.

Right, um

As opposed to the Russians who set up a website, clone existing news

articles using AI and then insert their own news articles in there to make it

look like this is a real news site.

Right.

Yep.

Yep.

Because apparently there's some Swedish website that's

been set up called election25.

com in Sweden, something, election.

com in Swedish.

Yeah.

Uh, and if you go back into where the funding comes from.

It all looks a little murky.

And it's almost certainly an FSB operation.

Yep.

You've just got to find sources and writers that you can trust.

And then if you haven't heard of them before, or you're not sure

about them, then you have to sort of double check what they say.

So that's where we're at when it comes to media literacy, dear listener.

I just want to put this one out because it was funny.

This is from Caitlin Johnson, um

Talking of dodgy sources

How do you think Caitlin Johnson's a dodgy source?

I, I think she has a particular, particular leaning and, um, everything

is filtered through that, yes.

I don't think she makes things up.

I think she's clearly got her own opinions and worldview, which

is very clearly stated, but she wouldn't make up She is very

anti American though, what she actually does come out with.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

But that doesn't, what was it, what was the description you gave it?

Was, how'd you describe

her?

Just a minute ago?

I just think she has a particular ideological bend.

Yeah, absolutely.

So, um, but most of what she says is opinion, but if she was to say

X number of Garzons are reported of being killed yesterday by the Israelis

or whatever, like she wouldn't be just making stuff, that stuff up.

If she was referring to a fact, she would have a, very often, a link to

wherever she Is reporting from so I think

yeah, I mean, I think it was more on the oh, well, you know Doesn't

really matter on the US election front who gets it because they're

both Palestine's Palestinians.

Yes

at which which is just no

Well, it depends on your priorities,

but exactly

And she is highlighting Gaza as the world's priority, um, and

highlighting that neither of them make a difference to that priority.

I would say only one has a particular area of the, um, Occupied

Territories, named after them.

Yeah, but,

but, Kamala Harris is part of an administration that's been

selling weapons to Israel and doesn't look like she's going to stop.

I think Trump will be considerably worse.

How could it be worse?

Well, because he wants some, some, some nice seafront property, doesn't he?

Well, if it keeps going the way it's going, he'll still get it.

He doesn't need to accelerate things for that to happen, does he?

Like.

How could it be worse?

Are American troops assisting?

They don't need them.

This is a downtrodden group of people who are just starving

in the streets, bloodied and

I think if, um, I think if Iran gets involved, then the Yanks could

actually get pulled into the whole thing.

Hmm completely, which would upset a lot of Arabs and that sort of stuff,

who are basically pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel, and they just

wouldn't know which side to be on.

Would they be on the Israel, would they be on the Iranian side against

the Americans and the Israelis, or would they, um, stay out of it?

I think a lot of them would be demanding that their governments

go to war with the Iranians.

against the Americans.

You lost me there.

Can you just say that again?

No, okay.

The Palestinians are very much loved throughout the Arab world.

And you've got countries that have gone into normalization with Israel.

They have

normalized their relationships with Israel.

Now, those countries, basically inhabited by Arabs, and if the only Arabs that

were actually raising their arms against the Israelis were the Iranians, there

would probably be a lot of pressure on those countries that had normalized

relationships with Israel to throw out those normalized relationships to get

on board with the fight with Israel,

which could actually

drag the Yanks into a very long, bloody war.

So

I think a normalization between Arab states and Israel sort of faltered

and decreased after October 7th.

Oh, I think so.

So

I think, I think Saudi was moving towards normalising.

Saudi was

more moving towards normalising.

But just the

events of themselves have turned that around.

So

Do you mean the events of Hamas or do you mean the events of Israel?

The

events of the genocide have turned that around.

Um, so I think whatever Positive relations were starting to happen

between some Arab states and Israel, but that all stopped and went

downhill, uh, you know, a year ago now.

Yeah,

probably.

But yeah, I mean, and there have been different attacks by Israel on Iran, and,

um, if the situation gets hotter, uh, by involving Iran, then we're all in trouble.

That's not going to be good.

There was, um, just quoting, now, back to quoting Caitlin Johnston, she says,

thinking about something that was said by an Iranian cleric named Shahab Maradi

after the US assassinated Iran's immensely popular general, Qasem Soleimani, in 2020.

Maradi, the Iranian guy, complained that Iran can't even really retaliate for

the assassination because the US doesn't have any real heroes of its own, like

Soleimani, saying, quote, Think about it.

Are we supposed to take out Spider Man and Spongebob?

I thought that was a funny line.

An Iranian said, What heroes are we going to kill?

I don't know.

Spider Man, Spongebob.

We can't get vengeance from these guys because they don't have heroes.

Half of America worships Trump.

That was You've got to admit, the Iranian wit is improving with lines like that.

Oh yeah, it is, for sure.

Yeah, so John in the chatroom says, she, I think referring to Caitlin Johnson,

gets on Fox News all the time, Trev.

A bit of a sad source.

What do you mean she gets on Fox News all the time?

I

presume she's brought on as a counterpoint.

I don't think she is.

For everybody to laugh at her.

Uh, they would quote her, but I don't think she personally

would appear on Fox News.

I can't imagine.

I'd love to see that if that's the case.

Um, so what do you mean a bit of a sad source?

Because I'm interested, John, can you expand on that comment please?

Right, um Uh, anyway, I thought that was funny.

Indictment of American culture by the Iranian guy, good line.

Um, um,

US election, any final thoughts before it happens, Scott?

Jester, this is getting bloody close, but there was that, uh, bright

bit of good news out of Ohio, was it?

The, um, that they reckon Kamala has pulled ahead of, of Trump?

Um, there was, uh, Seltzer, I think her name is.

Yeah, he's a very respected, um,

Pollster, because she actually predicted Trump would win in 2016

when everyone had Hillary winning.

So that is just one of those things that I think that you, you don't have to

take what she says with a grain of salt.

She's saying that older, older women, particularly white women, have been turned

off by Trump's latest antics, finally.

Well, that doesn't surprise me.

And also, I think a lot of the older women remember, remember

blood, blood covered Pre

Roe v.

Wade, yes.

Exactly.

Exactly.

They remember, they remember the backyard abortions and that type of thing, and

they remember the women that died.

And, you know, the ones who've died recently.

But the other thing is, um, apparently there's been an

uptick in people searching, Can my husband see who I voted for?

Right.

Realistic.

Yep.

And there's a big push at the moment in the democratic groups going,

remember, you can choose to vote how you want and your husband can't see.

I think they've

got that, they've got that.

Women are going to vote against Trump.

They're just worried that their husbands are going to find out.

Which means that a lot of those white women in the outer

suburbs and all that sort of stuff.

Their husband might be voting for Trump, but they reckon that their

wives will end up voting for Harris.

The other commentary I've seen is, I wouldn't tell a pollster that I

was voting for Harris because we know how, um, how he likes his retribution.

And if my name is on a bit of paper saying that I'm going to

vote for Harris, when the mob comes afterwards, my name is on a list.

Yeah.

So they're saying that the exact opposite of 2016, where the

Trump voters were going, I couldn't possibly say I'm going to vote for

Trump because I'll never live it down.

Uh, now they're saying, I can't say that I'm going to vote for Harris,

not because I'll never live it down, but because the mob will come for me.

Mm.

Interesting.

Yeah, it is very interesting.

Mm.

So, so one wonders how much these polls are out because people

are literally scared for their lives.

Mm.

It really wouldn't surprise me, because you know, there has been a hell

of a lot of shit that has been thrown.

It really wouldn't surprise me that people are actually

starting to fear for their lives.

Hmm.

Well, I reckon if Trump gets in, it's going to be because

of disenchantment with the economy.

Because people are, you know, you see lots of comments where people are

interviewed, where they're basically saying I was doing better under

Trump than I'm doing now, and he was therefore a better economic manager.

Without, of course

There's also the scapegoating of all the, um, illegal immigrants, and a

lot of people who are blaming, um, the illegal immigrants for all of their woes.

And

Trump is great at scapegoating

But feelings on an economy, uh such a strong driver of votes.

And I just think, um,

that potentially means that the, that the parties are going to change every

four years, because the American economy is just heading for a cliff.

And if people think things are bad now, um, hold on, because

it's, the fundamentals of that country are terrible, and It's not

going to get any easier at all.

Well, um, there have been a couple of bills recently that have

actually increased the number of jobs.

The CHIPS bill, and there was another one, I can't remember what it was.

The

IRA.

Mm.

Um.

The Inflation Reduction Act has actually resulted in more jobs.

Yeah.

So, um, there has been, you know, unlike Trump where he bought in his

tariffs and caused trade wars with other countries, um, there has actually

been some reduction in unemployment.

But, you know, if you pick up a low paying job when the cost of living

is increasing, then you're still unhappy.

So, they're heading for financial ruin in that country and it's just going

to get uglier and uglier over time.

So, of course, you know, whether the economy is up or down in a

particular presidency is all a matter of luck, to a large extent.

Ha ha ha!

Because it just depends on swings and roundabouts of different economies.

It's like the Titanic, turning it around and making adjustments.

You could make a whole bunch of great decisions in your first year that

just wouldn't show up for, for years.

Oh, they're also

saying that, um, the US's recovery from COVID has been

better than most of the rest of the

world.

Right.

No, double.

Health wise?

No, no, no,

no.

All right.

In terms of the economy, in terms of GDP.

Yep.

But the thing about 3 percent as opposed to 1.

5 percent for the most of

them.

But you know, every increase in, in healthcare costs is an increase in GDP.

Like it's just, they've got a crappy, you know, GDP sort of system as well.

So, uh, yeah.

Anyway you want to slice it, I think they're in trouble over the next decade.

There's some serious concerns.

He's already, Trump is already saying that, um.

There's been cheating going on.

There's already been a number of attempts to, apparently there's a federal job,

uh, judge who's proved to be very MAGA.

Uh, they've filed a whole bunch of cases in front of him, trying

to, um Allege, change rules, put, you know, basically start the,

the, the whinges, the complaints.

No matter which way this election, well, sorry, if Kamala wins, they will

be claiming that it has been stolen.

The difference is Trump's not the incumbent this time, uh, so

it's going to be a lot harder for him to get into the White House.

The problem is if it goes, if it's, if it's marginal and it goes up to

the Supreme Court, we know which way the Supreme Court's gonna rule.

So like the 2000 election with George Bush and

Al Gore?

Al Gore it was, wasn't it?

Where the Supreme Court basically gave it to Bush despite him having actually lost.

Yes, on the votes in Florida.

Yes.

Because of their sort of punch card ticket system and

all the arguments over all that.

Yeah, so, um, there's, there's a scary opportunity for Trump to get in

and if not for violence to break out.

Yeah.

Is it a democracy

when you're faced with

Voting between the two lizards?

Yes.

I mean, we're in a state of the world at the moment where When

the West wants to badmouth non Western countries, it no longer can

do it because they're communist.

Because, after all, Russia, capitalist.

China, a form of capitalism where they've retained control of finance

and infrastructure, but market capitalism operating with, you know,

innumerable billionaires being created.

So, they can't say Dirty Rotten Communists anymore, they have to

say Authoritarian Regime, whereas we are Freedom Democracies.

That's what, that's what the difference is.

That's what it's come down to these days.

You

can still slag off the government without being hauled

off in theoretical democracies.

Tell

Julian Assange that.

Julian Assange, Julian Assange has since been let go.

Oh, yeah,

but don't tell me you can slag off the government.

He didn't, he didn't just slag off the government though.

He did actually reveal secrets.

He did reveal secrets.

He did something the

government didn't like.

Well, yeah.

And it wasn't even his government.

Oh, I know.

And what do we do in Australia when we've got a whistleblower

who reports on Exactly.

on stuff done by our military in Afghanistan?

Do any of the soldiers or the brass get in trouble?

No, but the guy who exposed what was going on That's where he is, in prison.

And the lawyers, like, um, Bernard Collery, end up having to fight for

their lives in court as our, as our

parliament seeks to have, um, them put in jail or subject to charges.

Like,

you know, when you say, oh but at least we've got freedom of speech and, you

know, maybe they're journalists in.

The UK who are having their houses raided because of basically writing

pro Palestinian, um, articles.

And well known journalists.

Paid speech laws.

Yeah, but essentially just saying it how it is and getting, um, you know,

the houses raided and in trouble that way.

So when, when our governments.

want to intimidate, they can still do it.

Yeah, not to the same extent.

I'm not going to say they're perfect.

Yeah.

They're less shit.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Less shit.

I think I'd actually prefer to be in an Australian prison than

I would be in a Russian gulag.

Yeah.

I tell

you, Belmarsh didn't sound like a easy stay.

No, it wasn't.

The

toughest jail I had.

Sounded pretty rough, nearly killed him.

And,

um, he was in solitary, wasn't he?

Yeah.

And, and, you know, I don't think Guantanamo was a particularly happy

place either, you know, for the people that they disagreed with there.

So yeah.

Anyway.

Ah, um, yeah.

Democracy.

At least they don't shoot you and then send your family

an invoice for the bullet.

They don't, they just shoot you.

Yeah, exactly.

Yeah, yeah.

Ah, well they just shoot people in other countries, so.

But again, don't send an invoice for the bullet.

Yeah, yep.

Um, Have you seen John's comment?

What did he say?

Um, Pep, no?

6040 Dems, what's that mean?

Up,

up, up, up.

Oh, no?

I have freedom of speech at home, as long as Kay doesn't hear me.

Yeah, um, yeah.

Um, where were we?

How much time we got?

8.

20.

It's got you to go to bed early, I imagine.

You've had a big week.

Let me just say here, oh, well, just, there is an article in the show notes

for the patrons, which was written by a guy, Jerry Gray, who lives in China.

Um, and he was saying, In China, for example, where I live, people vote

regularly for local representation.

The West calls it autocracy, but I'm 100 percent certain, and this opinion is

borne out by institutions such as Harvard University, San Diego University, and

Eidelman Trust, Barometer and others, that given the choice in a general election,

Chinese people would overwhelmingly vote for the CPC to represent them.

Vote.

Who else are they going to vote for?

But they're quite happy with them.

If there was an opposition of some sort Maybe they'd be

happier with the opposition.

Yeah, but when people are asked, are you happy with your government?

You

get much higher levels of satisfaction in somewhere like

China than you get In a democracy of America or perhaps even Australia.

Because they've never had a choice and therefore they don't

know that they've got a choice.

Well, no, they're not living in a cave.

They know what's going on in the West.

They see our two party democracies.

They see what a mess it is, yes.

And they say, fuck that.

I don't want that.

And again, anecdotally, I had my homestay boys here talking to them about stuff.

They're viewing the Australian political scene.

I go, do you wish you had two party politics and a vote like this?

And they go, no.

It's

a different way of dealing.

I don't want to have to make a decision.

I want everything decided for me.

No, it's a different deal where the people are basically saying to

the Communist Party, If everything's great and we're feeling good about

the economy and our lifestyles, then keep doing what you're doing.

That's, that's the deal.

Like, can't, this is a, this is part of the cultural thing, like

I was talking earlier about Russia and what Putin had to deal with.

And you've got a, a, just because we view a democracy with a two

party system, as being the post enlightenment ideal that's led to

the marvellous western civilisation, other cultures don't see it that way.

And they would look at that system and go, no, we actually prefer our

system, we're not idiots, we're fully informed, and we prefer to have experts

in the government rather than dickheads like you all have as your ministers.

You've got Ministers for Science who barely got past grade 12.

They've got Ministers for Science with PhDs.

Like, they would look, this is the, the, um, hubris is it?

Is it the word?

Conceit, arrogance of the West to go, we have the system, and if only they knew how

good our system was, they would want it.

But they know, and they don't.

And this is working better.

And when you, when they're, when they're polled, there's no doubt

that they're happy with their system.

I've got no doubt that the average Chinese person is

quite happy with their system.

Yeah.

I've got no doubt about it.

However, just across the Taiwan Strait, you have got another China,

the Republic of China that has evolved into a liberal democracy,

and they do not want to go backwards.

They do not want the PRC to take them over.

Now, are you saying that that group of Chinese, exactly the same culturally

as the mainland Chinese, are dickheads?

No, I'm saying we here wouldn't want a communist party arrangement.

No, we're used to, culturally, the system we've got.

And it would be a massive change to us that we couldn't handle.

So it's horses for courses.

It's just a recognition that some people have.

Have a culture, lends them to one direction, which isn't bad, just

because it's different to the West.

It suits them and it works.

Why would the Taiwanese, who are exactly the same culturally

as the mainland Chinese, why would they accept and embrace a liberal

capitalist democracy, but those that are left on the mainland wouldn't?

Why did it happen?

No, why would they, why would they embrace it and be

quite proud of their democracy?

But those that are, those that are in the, in the mainland wouldn't want

the same sort of democratic rights and principles that they have in Taiwan.

Um, because of the history of what's happened in

Taiwan over the last 50 years.

We've got people who've grown up with that system.

Yeah.

They've, they've grown up with it,

you know, so that's, they didn't have,

they didn't have a democracy at first.

It wasn't military tape issue.

It was

imposed on them.

So it was, yeah.

You know, they weren't asked so.

But having been

imposed, their culture has now been changed, so that they are

now viewing that as option A for them, because of what's happened

over the last couple of generations.

Doesn't that make sense?

But it's just this glorification of the Western democracy.

Which, I'm not saying we should adopt a Chinese Communist Party philosophy here,

because we culturally are different, but we have to accept that for those

people, it works for them, and they're happy with it, and it shouldn't be

demonised just because it's different.

That's the point I'm trying to make.

Well, I don't think I'd demonize them.

You know, aside from Tiananmen Square, which is the biggest cock up that

they ever made, then I don't think the Chinese government actually wants to

invade anyone else or anything else.

You know, I think that they are actually probably stretching the friendship over

the South China Sea, but they are just basically taking back what is theirs, and

they've just got to actually come to some sort of arrangement with Taiwan So that

then they can negotiate a settlement and then they can accept that they won the

civil war and that they're going to leave Taiwan to be its own people, its own self.

Yeah, all right.

Just want to make that point about, um, democracy when we've got a

big American election coming up.

So, uh,

I don't think that, I don't think, I don't think you, right now you

can actually hold up the United States as a shining example of democracy.

And when people start banging on about democracy as opposed to these

authoritarian states like China, people just have to push back a bit and say,

hang on a minute, culturally it works for them, economically it works for them,

overwhelmingly the people are happy.

It may not work for us, because we're culturally different, but for them

it's working, so stop demonising it.

So, um, yeah.

Anyway, um, what was I going to say?

Joe, you found something about donations.

I did.

I was looking at the, uh, Queensland Electoral, well the ECQ, the

Electoral Commission of Queensland.

Just in your spare time, you were wandering around.

Well,

I was looking, I was seeing whether they've published the

actual, whether they've finished counting from last week's election.

Right.

Uh, Joe.

One of the links on the page was a donor's register.

I'm trawling around looking at who donated where.

I came across Cold Australia and thought, Oh, that looks interesting.

I wonder who they've donated to.

And there are eight donations over the last two months.

Australian Institute for Progress Australian Institute for Progress

who Don had asked me about because there was a letter drop, a leaflet

drop going on about how we couldn't afford another four years of labour.

Right.

And that surprised me because the Australian Institute in Canberra is

a very left leaning, uh, think tank.

Indeed.

And so I was going, who the hell are these Australian Institute for Progress?

Well, I don't know who they are, but they've received.

Uh, about five and a half hundred thousand dollars, somewhere between five and six

hundred thousand dollars from Australian coal, or Coal Australia I should say.

Yeah.

There's also, uh, Australians for Prosperity, half a million.

Hmm.

Uh, Jobs for Mining Communities, you'd expect that, that was

another three hundred thousand.

Hmm.

So, all in all, Coal Australia has donated somewhere around a million.

Yeah.

A million dollars in the last two months to various campaigns that

are anti labour, I would have said.

Yeah, it's only since the 16th of September to the 18th of October,

basically one month, And the groups are Australian Institute for Progress,

Australians for Prosperity, Jobs for Mining Communities, PDYLTD, uh,

that's it.

And, and the donations are 390, 000, 495, 000, 77, 000, 121,

000, 130, 000, 25, 000, 230, 000, 173, 000, so Let me guess, it'd be no

surprise if all of those organisations were very much pro coal mining.

And obviously, um, Labor have pissed off the coal miners.

And these guys aren't politi These guys aren't politi Political parties,

but they seem to be associated closely enough that they have to be, um, They are

political lobby groups, and so political lobby

groups need to be registered.

Yeah.

It's worth having a look on the ECQ website, uh, and if

you're not in Queensland, have a look in your local state.

Particularly in the lead up to an election and just see where the funds are going.

Who the large donations are coming from.

Because certainly the Queensland one you can sort by size of donation.

You can also search by donor, and you can search by recipient.

Hmm.

There's also, there was one where I looked, um, and I can't remember who

it was, I think it was going to Kata and there were 20 donations, at least

20 donations, one a day of $8,333.

So I'm curious as to whether there's a cap of some sort on political

donations that if it's above a certain amount, you have to declare it in a

different way or quite what it is.

But there's something weird anyway.

Might be into numerology, the donor, might be something

to do with that number.

Well, maybe,

maybe there's some weird, uh, thought process they have, but I

wondered if there was a political reason or a legal reason why these amounts.

Mm, mm.

Right, well I couldn't

tell you.

We've got to get going, um, what are we on?

Tuesday, so, no, tomorrow's Tuesday.

Wednesday will be when the results start to come in, in the

mornings, in the election, and

I

think, um, Planet Extra has got something happening on

the ABC radio Wednesday night or something like that, so, um.

I still think One America News is going to be the channel to watch.

One America.

Can anyone watch that?

Yeah, I believe it's streaming on the internet.

Okay, right, because that's a extreme, more right wing than Fox News.

That's more right wing than Fox News.

Yeah, apparently Fox News pissed the maggots off last time round because they

were saying that Trump had lost, whereas OAN wouldn't concede that Trump had lost.

So I think it would be fun to watch, if only for a few hours.

John, I think it's a circular argument.

If you're relatively happy with your life, why would you say you're unhappy

with whatever government you have?

Well, when people are asked, are you happy with the government?

People say, yes, I am happy with our system of government.

So, that doesn't seem circular to me.

And, there can be people in authoritarian regimes, Where there is no opposition, who

say, I'm not happy with the government, even though there's no opposition.

So, it doesn't look circular to me when somebody's asked, what do

you think of the way that, uh, the Communist Party's running the country?

And they go, I'm very happy with it, thank you very much.

Um,

I'm very happy with it, please don't take me out and shoot me.

Yeah.

No, Joe, these are not under threat.

Unlike an American election, where apparently people do feel threatened.

Well, yes.

You'd have to Google whether their husbands are going to

find out what they voted.

Yes.

Yeah.

Sorry.

Right.

Um, uh,

right.

Okay.

Daniel is new in the chat.

Have we had a Daniel in the chat room before?

Hmm.

Good on you, Daniel.

Looks like you're new to the chat room.

Good to see you joining in.

He says, because the Taiwanese feel abandoned by the Chinese in the past.

And so they embrace capitalism.

Well, I don't think they had much choice about it, Daniel.

I think they're pretty much told capitalism is the way to go.

Scott's gone, is he?

Scott's still in the waiting room.

He's just doing over, what's he doing over there?

Are you leaving us, Scott?

No, I couldn't tell you.

I just lost connection, so God knows why.

Right,

yeah.

And Daniel is new.

Hi, Daniel.

Good on you.

Hello, Daniel.

Yeah.

Alright, for those in the chat room, thank you.

Even when you disagree, which is like John, and I'm looking forward

to that free beer at some stage.

I'll be scouring the internet for proof there are no Russians.

Um, yeah, so, um, all right, and Essential Lord Don says, I will

watch the only service worth watching, Sky News, for a laugh.

Yeah, yes, yeah, all right,

watching the ABC.

Yeah, all right, um, if something extraordinary happens, we

could do an emergency podcast, so.

Subscribe to us on Facebook.

What would you call,

what would you call a, um, emergency?

Breakdown of violence or something like that?

Yeah,

something extraordinary happened, I don't know.

Yeah.

It's, it's, anything could happen.

Yeah, the insurrection won't be till January.

Yeah, so, um, anyway.

Um, subscribe on Facebook, that way you get notified if we decide to do anything.

Facebook,

Twitch or YouTube.

Yes, and I tried Rumble tonight.

I'm not sure if that's worked, but I'll go in and check.

So, I think it might have worked at Rumble.

So, see how we go.

All right, we've got to go.

Thanks for listening, everybody.

We'll be back next week, if not before.

Bye for now.

And it's a good night from me.

And it's a good night from him.

Good night.