Well, hello and welcome back to you listener.

Episode 441 of the Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove podcast, where we talk about

news and politics and sex and religion.

I was all alone, solo last week, ranting about Venezuela.

Um, this time I'm joined by my two co hosts as we rant about other things.

Scott the Velvet Glove, are you ready for a good rant, Scott, about anything

in

particular?

Yeah, I suppose, you know, it's just one of those things, there's a

hell of a lot coming out of the US.

There's not so much coming out of the Australian, although Dutton is apparently

trying to channel, uh, trying to channel Trump, you know, he's trying to channel

him, so God knows whether or not that'll work, it'll probably blow up in his face.

We'll talk about that, uh, Joe the Tech Guy, how are you?

Evening all.

Yeah, Joe's good.

If you're in the chat room, my promise to you, actually there's nobody there

yet, if somebody turns up they can choose whatever they topic they like and we'll

talk about it because I was kind of looking at the list of topics and it was

all international geopolitics type stuff because it really just felt like the only

thing going on in Australia to talk about was AUKUS and foreign policy to do with

our defence and Just, it just seems like there's not a lot happening locally, um,

so it's all international foreign affairs.

It's just war and disaster, whether it's Gaza or crazy ideas or theories on Nord

Stream or all sorts of other things, so, look, uh, as people appear in the

chat, this'll be the one episode where they don't appear, because I've said

I'll let them run the show if they want to, um, but anyway, we'll see how we go.

Anything you want to get off your chest at all, Scott?

You mentioned Trump and you think Dutton is wanting to emulate

the Republican Party here?

Well, just some of the stuff he's already started to come out of

his mouth and that sort of thing.

Like, you know, the asking the government to deny visas from people

that are fleeing the war in Gaza.

That

was a ridiculous thing to say.

And, you know, it's, it just seems that he's prepared to blame anything

on security problems and all that type of thing, which sounds like it's coming

right out of, out of Trump's mouth.

You know, it's just, it's reminiscent of the Muslim ban that the Yanks had

when Trump was first elected, when they said, well, we're not going

to allow, we're not going to allow you to come into the country if you

come from a majority Muslim country.

It's because they're not big toe pairs.

Sorry?

I said it's because they're not French au pairs.

Okay, gotcha.

Um, it's one of those things, and I just think to myself, that is

probably where, that's probably what Dutton is trying to do.

The other thing too is, this was said to me only just recently, he says, well

A mate of mine up here, he says, well, if the way Dutton's carrying on anyone,

it's where it's the NLP, not the LNP.

He reckons, he reckons it was the National Party take over the Liberal

Party, rather than the Liberals taking over the National Party.

And you can actually see some of that in the way the Nationals are seeming to be

pointing the direction of the Coalition.

Like, the Nationals don't like their party.

Beautiful vistas and all that sort of stuff being taken up

by ugly overhead power lines.

So they said, well, we just got to build nuclear power stations where the, where

the coal fire power stations were, and then we can, then we don't have to,

then we don't have to build new power

lines.

And that is why Dutton seems to be so hell bent on nuclear

power as a, as a It's a generation.

It doesn't make any sense.

The Orcus thing doesn't make any sense at all.

And also, the other thing too is that, um,

If the ALP actually did come up and say, yes, we're going to have a total blanket

ban on gambling advertising entirely,

you

can bet your bottom dollar that Dutton will turn

around and say, no, that's wrong.

I mean, right now, right now, he's right now, he's pushing for a total

blanket ban on gambling advertising, but Albanese, he doesn't want to go that far.

So

is Dutton pushing for that, is he?

He is.

Yeah.

Oh, okay.

But, you know, That's one thing he's actually pushing for, but I just

think to myself, it's not gonna last.

No.

You know, as soon as they say, yeah, fair enough, we will actually go

for a blanket ban, he'll be actually saying, no, you can't do that.

That's ridiculous.

Yes.

He's

from the Tony Abbott School of Opposition Leadership.

Yeah,

Dr.

No.

I just find him a vacuous old windbag who's got nothing sensible to say.

You know, he just says no to everything.

And then, um, and occasionally when he does actually

And despite all that, Scott, he's doing okay in the polls.

Yeah, I know, because Albanese hasn't had the balls to

actually go in and do anything.

And this was a very easy kick that he could have actually said, It was a cross

party, um, committee that came in there, they came out with the unanimous report

saying we shouldn't allow advertising, we're going to stop advertising.

This is the gambling advertisement.

Yeah, that's

what they should have actually said.

And they should have also then taken it one step further on the whole religious

schools and everything else where they should have said, the Productivity

Commission has recommended that we disallow this as a tax deduction.

Therefore, we're going to disallow as a tax deduction,

you know,

they could have blamed someone else for those two things, but anyway,

they haven't, and had they have actually done that, then I think that they

would have actually found themselves, a lot more people would actually be

applauding them for doing stuff like that,

but instead

they're just being so cowardly.

You know how, sort of, um, racist, basically, Dutton's

been with the blanket ban on, on Palestinian refugees into Australia?

Yeah.

Um, the sad part is, online, when you look at, you know, as I do on your

behalf, dear listener, you know, Sky News, um, Twitter and Sky News Facebook

pages and places like that, when you look in the comments section, it's awful.

It's so mean spirited, goddamn awful in there where people are just basically

saying to the Palestinians, fuck them.

We don't want them.

And just, they're just awful.

So it's been a real,

you know, just, uh, misrepresentation, propaganda, manufacturing of consent, all

those things of just brainwashing people into holding some pretty nasty views.

And they're

genuinely hilled, and therefore, Peter Dutton.

Picks up quite a lot of that along the way, so.

For sure,

it's just like one of those things, I just think to myself that, um, he's

starting to emulate, um, Pauline Hanson.

You know, like, it's He doesn't actually say anything sensible, he just seems to

pick up a talking point and run with it.

You

know, he's just an imbecile.

Well, they're aiming

for the same sort of, uh, electorate, aren't they?

Really, that rural redneck.

Absolutely, that's what they're

trying to get.

He's sort of given

up on the inner city.

Oh, he has.

He has.

And that's one of the things that I just think to myself that was, um, I'm

very grateful that the Teals actually contested that election and won because,

um, that was a kick in the pants to the Liberal Party that they, and also the

other thing too, is like the sensible commentariat have already said, if

you don't get those Teal seats back, you're never going to form government.

Which is, they're doing everything to not win those seats.

Exactly.

If only we could get a Teal MP or a candidate standing here,

I'd be tempted,

just to get him out.

Yeah, it's one of those things, like, there was actually talk of the

Teals moving north and that sort of stuff.

They're thinking that, you know, I think that they might have picked up on the

fact that Ryan isn't really a green seat.

And that the Brisbane and Griffith aren't really green seats, but

they have fallen to the greens.

And I just think to myself, had they had a sensible teal candidate up here,

then those three seats would have probably gone teal more so than green.

Yeah, don't know.

There's two people in the chat room.

If you're in the chat room, say hello, and we will discuss any

topic that you want to raise, because I mean, that's kind of nude.

Sorry.

Um, we'll riff on anything if you want to put it forward as a topic.

I'll be careful

with your promises.

Yeah.

Anything within reason.

Right.

I've got a pretty broad feeling of reason at the moment.

So yeah, um, Scott, you mentioned Orcus in that little rant you had there.

That was nice.

Um, I'm seeing More pushback against Orcus, even amongst the Hawks.

I've seen people from Aspie are now complaining about this submarine deal.

I'm seeing articles in the Australian Financial Review, seeing

articles in Sydney Morning Herald.

Starting to see a pushback, because the people who want war, or want,

um, you know, are pro spending money on defence, can just see that we're

going to get nothing from this, and, and so, it's really the opposite.

Getting to the point where the only people who want this are going to be Albanesey

and Miles and Dutton and his crew.

Like it's just the politicians, oh, and the And the defence

people, perhaps, narrow that down to the naval defence people.

Yeah,

but even, even amongst them, you don't see a hell of a lot of

them coming out in support of it.

I, I actually watched, uh, an American YouTuber who's just spent

a week in Australia, and he was saying, I couldn't believe it, I was

sat in a restaurant and the waiter started talking to me about August.

Wanting to know what I felt about it.

It's like, how come the WAIS staff are involved in politics over here?

Really?

Yeah.

Well

that's

good.

Yeah, exactly.

Because we've got an engaged electorate because of our

compulsory ballot, that's why.

Well

exactly.

Wow, you reckon they're, well

We, we are not as engaged as engaged than other countries.

We are more engaged than other countries for sure.

We are not as engaged as you would want.

Yeah.

But we are more engaged than other countries.

Yeah.

So anyway, I can see a turning of the tide on the right where they're

basically acknowledging this is just a shitty deal and we won't get any

toys from this and we want our toys.

And so that's what I'm seeing as I'm reading stuff.

Um, um, yeah.

What else?

Forgot.

It's one of those things, I just think to myself that once you actually

look at Orcus in the cold light of day, when you realise that there is

nothing in there that guarantees they're actually going to hand any of that over

to us, then you've got to actually ask yourself the question, why the fuck

are we spending 400 billion dollars?

when there's no guarantee of any of these toys.

And even with that, the only other, the only reason you would want a

nuclear powered submarine is so that you can travel from wherever the

name of that port is over in WA.

So you can do it in a submarine, you can do it under the water's surface until you

actually surface just off the coast of China and you want to lob missiles up.

That's the only reason you'd want them.

They're not

going to be SSBNs, so they can't love missiles.

Well, by the time What's SSBNs, Trevor?

Well, Capable of Launching Nuclear Missiles.

In theory, at this point, they're not supposed to be.

Supposed to be hunter killers.

Yeah.

Perun, the YouTube channel, did a thing on submarines recently.

Okay.

What did he say?

I don't know.

Uh, just basically, he's doing his usual defence analyst money wise,

talking about, um, all the different, in fact, he only barely touched on

Australia, he was mostly talking about the US, China, and Japan.

Right.

And talking about, and Russia, talking about how many nukes, or how

many different submarines of each type, and their capabilities, and,

you know, why you'd want this type of submarine or that type of submarine.

So that was quite interesting.

Um, what was I going to say here?

So, yeah, I mentioned Australian Financial, or Sydney Morning Herald,

somebody from ASPE, the headline is, AUKUS is unhinged from reality.

So, um, and then we've got, um, we'll get on to Paul Keating shortly, but

Gareth Evans, Gareth Evans came out.

He said it's one of the worst foreign and defence policy

decisions our country has made.

Mm

hmm.

Um.

You do realise, though, that when we have our nuclear submarines, because they

are small modular reactors, then we'll be able to have small modular reactors

and we can plug them into Shoreside.

And power cities with them.

Yes, we'll be able to power a small neighbourhood with them.

That's, yeah.

So, um, but more, more information came out about the deal that we struck.

And, as if it wasn't bad enough, but David Shoebridge came

out and has done a summary.

In layman's terms about how the deal works.

So, oh, we've got, uh, Alison in the chat room and Don.

Open invitation, Alison and Don, pick a topic and throw it in the chat room.

We will talk about it momentarily.

But meanwhile, here's Shoebridge explaining this

deal that Miles signed up for.

By the way, in relation to Miles, um He's an uptrop.

Uh, Gareth Evans said about, this is what Gareth Evans said about Richard

Miles, he said, His love for the US is so dewy eyed as to defy parody.

From Labor guys, bagging the current punch.

But anyway, um, Green Senator Shoebridge sums up the deal here,

hopefully.

Made public the new AUKUS 2.

0 agreement and it must be the most one sided international agreement

Australia has ever put pen to.

There are so many problems that it's hard to wrap your head around

how anyone could have agreed to it.

So here's a little thought experiment.

Imagine I'm trying to buy like a second hand car or a second hand

truck from Uncle Sam's car dealership.

Well, before I can buy the car, I need to pay Uncle Sam billions and billions

of dollars to modernise and uplift his car yard and the car factories.

I also need to promise Uncle Sam that I'll only drive the car to places he

wants, and only use it in ways he approves of, otherwise he can take it back.

I will also not get this car for maybe another decade, at least.

And during that time, while they've got my money, if Uncle Sam's car dealership

decides doesn't have enough cars for themselves, they get to keep it.

And I have no way to claw back the money I've given them.

It's also a well known fact that Uncle Sam doesn't actually have enough cars to

sell to me and won't have enough for the foreseeable future for their own needs.

But, despite all this, let's say I do end up getting a car, and if in the process

of reversing it out of Uncle Sam's car dealership, the engine blows up because

I was sold a dud, I actually have to pay Uncle Sam for the costs and damages.

Oh, and Uncle Sam also gets to decide how much I pay for all the fuel for the car,

which he happens to also be selling to me.

Now, if you think that's a bad deal, you're right.

But that is exactly the Albanese government has signed us up to, with

support from Dutton's coalition, in this new August agreement.

Only it's not for a 40, 000 Ford Focus, it's for a multi billion dollar bunch

of second hand nuclear submarines.

The US and the UK have found a sucker in Australia and must be laughing all

the way to the bank with this deal.

We need to scrap the agreement.

The more we sink into this rigged deal The worst it'll get

for Australia and Australians.

We need to have a defence force that's focused on defending Australia,

not threatening our neighbours.

And we need a foreign policy that's actually made in Canberra, not Washington.

And to get there, the first step is ripping up AUKUS.

Well, Scott, first step would be voting Green, if for no other reason.

Yeah, I know, and I'm going to do that next time round, but anyway.

Okay.

Oh, we've got some topics in the chat room.

From Don, the new Deadpool and Wolverine movie, and what the multiverse

means to the future of comics.

Uh, no.

Um, can I just say, that when it, I haven't been to a cinema to watch a movie

in, I don't know, a decade or something?

Cause somewhere along the way, People decided that adults wanted

to watch superhero movies and that's all they made for about 15 years.

I'm not interested in superhero movies.

Well I just went to see The Trap on Saturday afternoon,

that's a very good movie actually.

Is it a superhero?

No, it's not a superhero.

It's sold as a, it's sold as a, it's sold as a horror movie, but

it's nothing horror in at all.

It's just a very dramatic sort of movie.

It's really good actually.

Yeah.

There's an

interesting twist in the end.

There's my riff, Don, on Deadpool and Wolverine movies.

Is Wolverine also the Australian actor?

What's his name?

Yeah.

Hugh Jackman, I believe.

Is he overrated?

Honestly?

He looks all right without a shirt on.

But, you know, but, um, in terms of acting ability,

it's one of those things.

He's, he's probably not bad.

Um, yeah.

Okay.

Um, so.

Then we've got Alison says, how about the New South Wales Liberals missing the

deadline for about 130 council candidates?

And I think they're now going to sue, they're proposing to sue or take the

electoral commission in New South Wales, whatever the body is, to court over it.

But yeah,

there was a deadline for nominating your candidates.

That's why that guy got sacked, because he didn't actually do it.

Yeah.

Too bad, so sad.

Too bad, so sad.

But, um, Wow, what a bumbling organization you've got if you haven't done that.

So, Scott, should special circumstances be given?

What about our democracy, Scott?

I'm going to play devil's advocate.

Okay, but no, I, I honestly believe that you've got rules for a reason.

And one of those rules is you had to have your, you had to have your

nominations in by a certain time.

Now, I'm sure that they, that they could actually do it.

But they've decided not to and I honestly believe that the

referee's decision is final.

The referee is the whatever you call it in New South Wales.

They've decided that you're not going to get the nominations through.

So you can't actually do that anyway.

Yeah.

So Alison says they managed to submit the rest of them, so she doesn't know how

they mucked up not getting 130 in there, but uh, that is a balls up for sure.

Absolutely.

In an organization like that, you had one job to do.

Yeah, and they

fucked it up.

Yeah.

Anyway, Don is still defending Hugh Jackman.

Yeah, I know,

but I haven't seen him actually act in a long time, and I couldn't

tell you about his acting ability.

He looks all right without a shirt on, but that's about it.

Just, and on actors generally, we just project onto these people.

Oh, we do far too much.

The characters that they play, and we just You know, they play a smart,

clever, all knowing person, and he's something I think that the actor is.

Yeah, exactly.

You see, like, I'm a freak of the 70s and that sort of stuff.

I was born in 73 and the first movie I actually remember watching was Star Wars.

I loved it.

And I still watch anything that's out, anything now that's Star Wars, I watch it.

And as a result, I started to follow some of the actors and that sort of stuff.

And

Luke Skywalker, what's his name?

Mark Hamill?

Mark Hamill.

That's it.

He's actually a real Democrat and everything else, and I thought, I

see him actually turning up to the Democratic National Congress and

convention and everything else.

And I just thought to myself.

Yeah, he's probably projecting just a little bit too much power there, but you

know, it's just, it's one of those things, I just think to myself, okay, they're

very good actors and that sort of stuff, but that's where their intelligence comes

to an end, is once you've been an actor.

Do you

see, um, when Margot Robbie was being interviewed for Barbie,

some American was going, why is she putting on that pretentious accent?

Why can't she speak in a proper American accent?

Yeah, um, yeah, we do project.

The other one was a guy from Star Trek, uh, who played Mr.

Sulu.

He, George Takai or whatever, he's, he's, he's big on Twitter, um, but

I think on the basis of his clever commentary along the way, I think.

But

yeah, I mean, also he's openly gay.

He was one of the first people who was openly gay, I think,

in, in that group of people.

Yeah.

Um, and he's become a big spokesman for gay rights, kind of like Stephen Fry.

Yeah.

Yeah.

So if you have eloquent people who are members of the community who are

eloquent, can speak, uh, and suggest why the bigotry is just being an

asshole, then I think fair play to them.

Yeah.

Why shouldn't they be?

I'm all for them commenting and for them to be judged on their commentary.

It's just when people fawn over these actors and actresses and really

they're just ordinary, sometimes very ordinary people, um, uh,

playing pretend in front of a camera.

They're not that special.

So yeah.

Hey, I actually, uh, well on the topic of movies, you can watch

on, uh, Netflix, I think it is.

Have you seen The Holdover?

Yes, it's a really good movie.

I saw it at the cinema.

It's really good.

It's a very good movie and I've seen it just recently again on Netflix and

it was really very powerful and I was really pissed off at the time because

they had the um, cinema at the, at my local cinema and everything like they

had the posters up for it and I saw a short for it when I was down in Brisbane.

I thought that looks good.

I'll watch that when I go back to Brisbane.

And then they never showed it in Mackay.

They just never actually showed it, which really gave me the shits.

So after that, I saw it when I was next time down, when I

was down in Brisbane again.

Yep.

Not a superhero in sight.

No.

Just good acting.

It was really

good.

Yeah, it was really good.

Highly recommend that one to you in the chat room, Don Toovey.

Um, try the holdover and tell me how it compares to a

Marvel superhero comic movie.

I'd be keen to know your thoughts.

Thanks.

I think if you're actually honest about it, you'd have to, you'd have to

be, you'd have to conclude it would be preferable to a Marvel superhero movie,

you know.

I don't think Don's going to agree with that,

but anyway.

No, Don will be going, he'll be out there defending it to the end of the world.

And

Alison recommends, uh, The Greatest Shaman.

The Greatest Shaman.

I think was a, um,

what's his name again?

Hugh Jackman.

Hugh Jackman.

Thank you, yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Okay.

Don's going to give it a go.

All right, we've diverted in the chat room.

It's open slather.

You can nominate the topics.

I will stop and jump into them, uh, in, in mid rant.

Um, if you want to keep, keep introducing topics.

I've

just gone back to, um, the Pelican brief.

Not that I would ever recommend, um, shooting members of the Supreme Court.

Right.

Is that what happens in the Pelican Brief?

Yes.

Right.

So, basically, there's some oil drilling that's wanting to go on and it's

been stopped because it's in the wetlands somewhere down the south, Louisiana maybe.

Hmm.

And, um, The Supreme Court is going to rule against them being able

to drill because of these pelicans in the wetlands and so they killed two key

members of the Supreme Court with the knowledge that the President will, um,

appoint a couple of pro business judges.

That will overtone this ruling and will allow them to draw for oil.

That's quite an old movie.

It is.

Back in the day when there was respect for the Supreme Court.

Yes.

Possibly, yeah.

Ah, and Alison says, Young Julia Roberts in the Pelican Brief.

Very good movie.

There you go.

Get extra votes for

that one from Alison.

Reverting back to where we were temporarily, um, So yeah, that was David

Shoebridge giving us, um, detail on.

Orcus and, um, what else did I have to say about Orcus was, um, well,

um, A little bit of background here.

Apparently, we've signed a forced posture agreement.

Have you guys ever heard of that?

No.

Hmm.

This was in the Michael West news blog.

And two authors, Michelle Fahey and Elizabeth Minter, explained the

forced posture agreement that we've already signed up to previously.

And so the argument in this article is that we're not.

AUKUS is just the continuation of the takeover by the US of our sovereignty

that has been going on for a long time.

So it's

the Marines base up in Darwin and things like that.

Yes, indeed.

Uh, it's been underway for more than a decade.

And, um, so, um, let me just see here.

When asked last year whether Australia would allow US aircraft operating out

of Tyndall Air Base in the Northern Territory to carry nuclear weapons,

Penny Wong said, We understand and respect the longstanding U.

S.

policy of neither confirming or denying.

So, that's about U.

S.

aircraft in the Northern Territory carrying nuclear weapons,

and Penny Wong says, Do they

have any air launched nuclear weapons?

Well, we're not even going to ask.

We're just going to respect their policy of neither confirming or denying.

Like, I mean, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were dropped from an

aircraft, weren't they, Joe?

Like, is it possible?

Yeah, but I mean, that

was in the

50s, and then they created ICBMs.

You know, you've got a missile that you, you know, the, um, the cruise missile,

you drop it out of an aircraft, and then the wing's out, and then it ignites,

then it ignites its engine and flies.

So that's why I honestly believe that's what they would have.

You know, if you've got any of those, um, B 52s and that sort of stuff, they

carry a few cruise missiles in them.

Then they drop them out of the bomb bay, they come down there, they

extend their wings, then their, then the engine ignites and it flies off.

Anyway, Petty Wong is happy for them to do it and to hold nuclear

weapons because she just respects the U.

S.

policy of neither confirming or denying

nuclear powered vessels.

What's

that,

Joe?

I thought nuclear powered, um, ships weren't allowed to visit?

No, they're not allowed to visit New Zealand, but

they could visit in Australia.

Yeah, because, um We've, we've had a, we've had a couple of their carriers

and all that sort of stuff come into Australia which are nuclear powered.

The writers of this article say, compare that with Malcolm

Fraser, then Prime Minister, stood up in Parliament and insisted no US

aircraft or ships carrying nuclear weapons could access Australian ports.

or operate over Australia without the permission of the Australian Government.

So we've gone from Malcolm Fraser saying no you can't to Penny Wong saying

yeah.

Are you aware that back in the 60s there were a number of aircraft

permanently on station loaded up with, um, nuclear weapons, nuclear bombs,

that were flying the Border Patrol on the edge of Russia, and there

were a number of broken arrows, i.

e.

lost nuclear weapons, including in Spain.

There's a frightening book, I can't recall the title of it,

but it outlines all the near misses of nuclear mishaps, and yes, it

talks about those planes, and how

they had to scrape up a large, it was like a kilometre square.

of, um, Spanish Desert because of the radioactive waste

that was scattered across it.

Yeah.

And just a series of near mishaps with those planes, which

invariably had flying problems and.

Scary how close they were to other sort of incidents.

But yes, they used to just fly around with nuclear weapons in a plane, just

on the off chance that you might want to turn left and drop it on somebody.

Yeah.

Probably still happening.

One would hope it's not happening.

Yeah.

As John Menendez said, this is our territory, it's our sovereignty.

Yet today we won't even ask the Americans operating out of Tyndall whether

they're carrying nuclear weapons.

So, we have this Force Posture Agreement with the FBA, with the United States,

which the Abbott government signed in 2014, building on agreements made

by the Gillard Labor government.

And the FBA provides the legal basis for the extensive militarisation

of Australia by the US.

And it permits the US to prepare for, launch and control its own military

operations from Australian territory.

In it, it says, quote, United States forces and United States contractors

shall have unimpeded access to and use of agreed facilities and

areas for activities undertaken in connection with this agreement.

And Minister Miles is effusive in his support of this.

And only last week he announced, American force posture now in

Australia involves every domain, land, sea, air, cyber and space.

This is Miles cheering this on, and um, two months after Labor won office, Miles

was in Washington announcing that Labor would continue the ambitious trajectory of

its force posture cooperation with the U.

S.

So, unimpeded access to our airfields and airports,

unimpeded access to our seaports,

construction of a U.

S.

Air Force center in Darwin, various other bits and pieces.

It's just.

So yeah, that's all part of the, um, uh, was already happening before AUKUS.

Let me just check, um, Alison asks, does the US have any other countries

with reciprocal military bases?

So, reciprocal would mean, um, as in Yeah, yeah, that we get to

build bases on American soil.

I don't think they do that.

Nobody

has the ability to do that.

Put their bases on American soil, do they?

Not that I'm aware of.

And why would you want to?

Well, false prediction.

Yeah.

Unless We wanted to attack Mexico, and we could start putting some of our

bases on the uh Oh no, no, no, I mean,

for instance, uh, U.

S.

Marshall Islands or Guam.

Yes, we might want to there.

Don't, I've never heard of it, good point.

Funny that, hey, says Alison.

Yeah.

John says, isn't that all just part of alliances?

No, John, we've had alliances in the past where we do military exercises

with them offshore or even onshore.

And at the end of the exercise we say, see ya, that was fun, now you go home with

your stuff and we've practiced together, but you don't keep your military base here

with

a written legal agreement that says you can do whatever

you want to while you're here.

That's not an alliance, that's a takeover.

Singapore

have access to Shoalwater Bay,

paid us a lot of money to build infrastructure up at Shoalwater in

return for, cause Singapore is um, short on land space, strangely enough.

Right.

So they are leasing Shoalwater Bay for a few weeks,

a year to run their exercises.

Well, that's to run an exercise, but not to, um, yeah.

But Singapore live launch a war.

Singapore is also a neutral country too.

It doesn't actually get involved with a.

Alliance or anything like that.

They are neutral and they have their own standing army and everything else that

is, um, that they would ever use should Malaysia ever decide to invade them,

which I don't think Malaysia ever would.

John says we can land on U.

S.

soil.

We

have to see permission each and every

time.

And we can't set up an autonomous base on U.

S.

soil.

And just do whatever the fuck we want to, John.

It's outrageous what we're giving up to the U.

S.

here.

You don't see that?

You think it's all okay?

It's one of those things.

I just think to myself that, you know, the country has got to have

a long, hard conversation with itself about, um, the whole alliance

agreement that we've got with the U.

S.

because it started off during the second world war when Curtin,

rightly so, said, you know, we look to America for our protection.

And because the British were, British had their hands full dealing with

Nazi Germany, they couldn't send any more troops down to Singapore.

So Singapore fell and everything else.

And that's when Curtin said, we look to America.

And I could understand in those first years for Post the post of Second

World War, wanting to always look to someone stronger and everything

like that for your own protection.

However, if you actually look at what the alliance has actually cost Australia,

and it has cost us a hell of a lot.

It has, you know, it's got us involved in at least Two or three wars that we should

not have been involved in, you know.

And it's going to make

us a target now, because we have these bases.

So, um, oh, John says he's just, uh, providing pushback.

So he doesn't say it's all He's playing devil's advocate.

Okay.

Fair enough.

I thought you were serious, John.

This is where we need a sarcasm font or a devil's advocate

font on, um, social media.

It's one of those things, I just think to myself that, you know, it's,

um, probably the first target for a Chinese ICBM would be, um, Pine Gap,

which would irradiate, um, Alice Springs.

Yes,

now people would say if there are worse places to bomb than there is Alice

Springs, but anyway, it is it is what it is So that's probably the first place

that would disappear under a mushroom cloud It's probably the only place that

would never disappear under a mushroom cloud cloud in Australia because the rest

of the country is pretty much useless

No,

they're not gonna bomb Darwin But they would actually look at you know

If they were gonna if they were gonna extinguish anything over here would be

pine gap because that would actually be

Well, certainly if there's a war between the U.

S.

and China, then the military bases here in Australia would be targets.

Yes.

Now, I would imagine that the military targets and everything in the Philippines

and Guam and Japan and everything would come under, uh, attack first, but

probably they would then start to look at the further away bases in Australia.

I

think Point Gap is really vital for communications.

Which is

why, which is why I'd say that would be the first place that would

go, disappear under a mushroom cloud.

Yeah, yeah.

So, um, So still on this topic, um, I'm going to be talking about

Paul Keating's interview on the 7.

30 report and, oh, who was that, uh, lady on the 7.

30 report who was interviewed?

Lee Sayles?

No, she's gone ages ago, um.

Oh, is

she?

Yeah, who is it?

It's Sarah Ferguson.

Mm

hmm.

So, at several times during this Sorry, Joe, did you say something?

Princess Sarah Ferguson.

No, different, um, different Sarah Ferguson.

Okay.

Yeah.

I'll just, I'll quote a bit from this interview.

She's quite

a good journalist, actually.

Oh, no, well, I thought she was, but, um, So she says she's

interviewing, um, Paul Keating.

Um, let me just get to the relevant bit.

She says, What's wrong with cooperating with an ally deemed

indispensable for Australia's security?

Keating responds is, What's wrong is we completely lose our strategic autonomy.

Let me amplify.

If we didn't have an aggressive ally like the United States, aggressive

to others in the region, there'd be nobody attacking Australia.

We are better left alone than we are being protected by an aggressive

power like the United States.

And she goes on, Well, the rationale for this has been, um, that That is

the rapid escalation, the rapid and undeniable escalation of Chinese military.

Why shouldn't Australia embrace an alliance that counterbalances that power?

Keating says because that power has no strategic designs upon Australia.

But just going back to the point here, um, he didn't take it up

with her but she claims that there's been a rapid and undeniable

escalation in the Chinese military.

And, um, Is that the case or not?

One way of measuring military expenditure would be as a percentage of GDP.

And, um, somewhere here I've got a picture.

Let me find it.

I'll put that up.

There's a picture.

Military spending as a percentage of GDP.

And, uh, and guess what?

Way out in front is the United States and Australia spends more as

a percentage of GDP than China does.

So okay, because China's got a large GDP, it's spending more than Australia.

But it's only doing, um, what people would expect any country to do,

as in spend a couple of percent per annum on military spending.

It's not, um, An exorbitant amount, and just quoting from this guy here

who says that, um, it's actually trending down, China's expenditure.

It's now 1.

6 percent of GDP, which means that if China was a member of NATO, it'd actually

be criticising, it'd be criticised for having overly low military budget, given

NATO member countries should aim to spend at least 2 percent of their GDP.

And the US spends 3.

5%, so it's just dishonest to be suggesting that there's

this incredible China build up.

When, given the size of the country, what they're doing is actually

fairly normal,

fairly normal, or even abnormally low Compared to other countries below

what NATO would be telling them to do if they were a member of NATO So this

is the sort of shitty journalism from people like Sarah Ferguson on on the

ABC If I get to it at another point, I'm going to talk about some shitty

journalism in the Guardian and Just in recent times, guys, I'm just getting

tired of, um, I expect shitty journalism from Murdoch Press and Fairfax, 9

Fairfax, but it's just getting worse and worse from the ABC and The Guardian,

the sort of people you have some sort of hope for, so, um, yeah, anyway, um.

Let me see in the chat room, because I've promised in this

episode I'm dealing with the chat.

Um, John, you would think if the US was hotting up for a war with China,

they would put a couple of Patriot systems on Pine Gap just because

she doesn't ask the questions you want doesn't make her a bad journo.

It's not her lack of asking a question, John, it was her statement that China

spending inordinate amounts on military when in the scheme of things they're not.

So it wasn't, I haven't criticised her for not asking a question, if that's clear.

Right, still back to the interview, um,

Keating says China's got no strategic interest in us.

Keating says Taiwan is not a vital Australian interest.

Um, um.

He says we're not threatened by the Chinese military.

Um,

oh, this is what I've been saying for years, dear listener.

For years I've been saying this exact point.

Australia is capable of defending itself.

Let's say, what is a threat?

And that is an invasion.

An invasion comes in an armada, in an armada.

With satellites today, you see the armada formed.

You would see it leave its harbour.

You would see it for 10 or 15 days come to Australia, and you would

sink every one of them on the way.

You don't need the United States to defend Australia.

Australia is quite capable of defending itself.

And we've made this point for years, dear listener.

When you are just on the water, you're a sitting duck for a whole

host of Uh, missiles that could be lobbed at you in any number of ways.

You'd be scared shitless as the captain of a Chinese troops ship, navigating

its way to Australia over 10 to 15 days, hoping to arrive unscathed.

That's where we should be spending our money on, is, is, uh, missiles

and whatnot, and defensive submarines, and alliances with Indonesia.

and people like that, so that we're intercepting these things along the way.

It's one of those

things, I was actually talking to a mate of mine the other day,

and I said, you know, that China's a long way away from Australia.

It's got to come down via Vietnam, the Philippines, Thailand, Indonesia.

It's going to sail past a number of Fairly friendly countries to Australia,

they're going to pick up the phone and say, Hey boys, you better watch yourself

because the Chinese are heading south.

It's so much easier just to buy it.

What are they, what would they be coming

for?

Whatever they want, it would be so much easier just to buy it.

Yeah.

Even with that, like, you know, even if, even if they did come here to

buy everything up, then we'd always just put in export controls and say,

well, you can't sell that anymore.

You know?

But from the Chinese point of view, rather than force a war to take

something from us, it'd just be easier to buy it, to pay above market price

for whatever it is that they wanted.

Exactly.

And work on alternatives in the meantime, so, um, Sarah Ferguson, I just want

to come back to what you said about Taiwan, because it sounds from what

you're saying, you'd be perfectly happy to give up any support for Taiwan.

And Keating says, Any military support?

Absolutely.

He says, I mean, does anyone want their kids to be shot to

death on a sandy beach in Taiwan?

This is the outcome of such a policy.

Like, that is the straight talking that we need.

It's a

sandy beach though.

It's a fairly rocky beach.

Indeed, on a sandy or a rocky or just a Taiwanese beach, um, you,

Sarah Ferguson, put your kid up in the front line if that's what you think

is a great idea, just, I'm so glad that he's bounced back and said that,

um, so, um, what else he's got, um,

well we support China.

Yes.

We just don't

say which China.

Yeah.

One China.

Exactly.

Um.

To rule them all.

He says, the only threat likely to come is because we have an

aggressive ally, because of Orcus.

And um, and Sarah Ferguson, great journo that she is, says.

Just to finish, is it your contention that faced with the rapid escalation of

Chinese military, which is a misleading description, Australia should do nothing?

And Keating says no.

Australia should have submarines, which protect the waters of Australia.

It should have attacking and bomber aircraft to sink ships.

It should have self propelled mines.

It should have all of the things, the modern things, that you can keep.

Look, there's no way another state can invade a country like Australia with an

armada of ships without it all failing.

I mean, Australia is quite capable of defending itself.

Here here.

There we go.

Good on you, Paul Keating.

There'll be emus on

them.

They've already won one war.

Say, say who won them?

Emus.

What's, what's emus?

Joe, you've lost me with that.

You're not aware of the emu war?

No.

Okay.

Scotty, you?

No.

Back in the 1920s, the WA farmers decided that the emus were

coming in and destroying their crops.

and agreed to hire the Australian army to go and shoot emus.

And apparently, emus are very bulletproof.

They zig and they zag, and they've got fairly thick hides, and apparently

they were impossible to kill.

An emu might have a thick hide, but it's not The board's

not going to bounce off it.

It must have been a pretty lightweight bullet.

Basically, the army were unable to kill very many emus.

It's known as the Great Emu War.

There's apparently two films out, either last year or this year, based on it.

It's worth looking up the Wikipedia article or just googling the Emu War.

In

the chat room, John says it's a bit harder to get a good

price for your coal when there is a figural battleship off the coast.

Well, John, if the battleship is stopping the transport of coal,

then the battleship ends up at the bottom of the ocean pretty quickly.

Because it's easy to shoot down.

That's the whole point.

It's a bit hard to stay put, uh, if you're going to start attacking merchant ships.

Navy, then at that point, uh, Australia would say, move out the

way, we'll see this missile here, it's going to land amid ships.

Just sail a couple of gunboats up Yankton.

Yeah,

it's, it's a bit harder to sit off the coast and do

that than you might think.

What else we got?

Um, Don says giant chickens are a menace, they can change direction, um, Joe is

right, Australia lost the Emu war, and.

When you're shooting at a pile of feathers, they're

very hard to hit from a Huey.

Thanks, Don.

All right, we'll be back to the chat in a second.

Part two of the Keating.

Um, so after Keating's interview, Prime Minister Albanese said the world

has changed between 1996 and 2024.

The world is different, implying that Paul Keating, you know, times have moved on.

Paul just doesn't understand.

And Paul Keating says, the relevant issue is our geography has not

changed, and geography is the primary factor in geostrategic settings.

And then, um, Nancy Pelosi came out and, um, and said that, uh, Paul Keating's.

Comments were not in the security interests of the Asia Pacific region for

people like Paul Keating to talk that way.

And, um, uh, he gave her a blast.

That was the Paul Keating stuff.

What else have I got?

Is there anything else on that?

It just, um,

You guys got any other comment on that?

Well, I'm still just not exactly sure what to do about Taiwan, because,

you know Did you watch that video I shared with you?

Not yet.

So it was the Perun video, that was an hour and a half long,

talking about How realistic, uh, Chinese invasion of Taiwan was.

What was this conclusion?

It wasn't Peron, it was, um, Lines on Maps guy.

Um, Game Theory 101 is the YouTube channel.

And, and what was the, uh, what was the Basically the conclusion was,

um, it's not an easy, just, uh, Get in there, boots on ground.

In terms of geography, it's really, really difficult to get on the shore.

They'd be shot to pieces, they don't have the manpower and basically, it

would be a slaughter and they just don't have enough young people.

To sustain that sort of slaughter.

Meaning

China would do it, do it, would win easily.

Is that what you're saying?

Or the opposite, right?

So, so they were saying basically, uh, Defender has a five to one advantage.

Um, there are high mountains around where you'd be landing unless you went

all the way around to the other side.

So you'd have to get over the mountains, you'd be, basically, your defenders

would be shooting down on you, you'd be shot to pieces, and, um, so, basically

the number of people you'd need to successfully have the beachhead.

He's more than the number of young people that China has.

Did he say anything about a siege?

Uh, no.

No, because that's what you do.

Yeah, probably.

You just maintain a siege until they gave in, because that's

You'd sit back and just stop.

I

heard the Russians tried it with Berlin, didn't they?

Well,

arguably it might be easier for China to conduct a siege on

an island territory like Taiwan.

If that was serious.

Yeah, but then you've also got the Yanks and the Japanese and all that

sort of stuff that could come in there and clean up the PLA navy, you know?

But with a siege, you don't even need to have your navy on the water.

You can just fire missiles.

From the Taiwanese mainland.

Yeah, in which case you've then got Patriot batteries that can be used

to intercept the, um, used to intercept the missiles that are fired from China.

Yeah, yeah, well.

It's one of those things, I just think.

And is America prepared to then enter a war on Taiwan's behalf?

Are they?

I don't know.

Donald Trump, certainly not.

Yeah,

you might say, leave it to him.

Yeah, exactly.

Or

just an economic siege.

Well, I don't know,

because the jungle hates China.

It's one of those things,

I've

actually been reading a fair bit of stuff on that, and there's um, I can't

even remember the name of the chip company in Taiwan, but they reckon that is the

one thing that's actually keeping Taiwan independent, because it sells chips all

around the world, and Although the Chinas are getting very good with their chips,

they can't actually sell the chips to the rest of the rest of the planet because

they don't trust China to actually sell.

Who doesn't complete chips that

maybe Western powers don't wanna buy the Chinese chip's, but

there's plenty, plenty of others.

Being created with backdoor chips on, which I think turned out to be a

furfee, but there was a big scare story in the press about it at the time.

Hmm.

You know, in terms of, um You know, countries like the BRICS countries, the

Global South, they'll all buy chips from

China.

I agree.

However, they're not Europe, they're not the United States, they're not

Australia, they are, you know, they're not the big economies of the world.

That's why Germany is building its own chip manufacturing plant in Germany

because they're getting ready for Taiwan being taken out, you know.

Yeah, Don says China is fine, I love their tucker.

Who loves their

taco?

In terms of the chip manufacturing, apparently one of the big things, um,

helping, um, the Democrats in this current political climate in the U.

S.

Is the whole, we're building our own chip fab on shore, we don't want to buy one,

uh, and so there's a big amount of, um, U.

S.

government investment in basically skilling up poor areas to go and work

in these factories of chip fabrication.

And so, large investment of cash in rural seats.

Mm hmm.

Mm.

Um, I'm just going to divert right to the top of my, um, notes here.

Did you guys hear about the change of government in Bangladesh?

Yeah, I did and I wasn't really sure what to believe on that because

there was stuff that you've already picked up on that you'd say, was it a

revolution or was it a coup, wasn't it?

Was it a popular uprising or was it a coup is the question and this

sort of come about in the last week since I did my episode on Venezuela

and the multiple attempts by the U.

S.

to conduct a coup.

And I did a bit of an examination of just how many coups the U.

S.

has been trying to do around the planet.

And the point I want to make about this is like, I know nothing

about the Bangladesh situation.

Um, but I started listening to a podcast.

It was the Guardian podcast.

How Bangladesh's long serving leader was toppled by student protests.

And, um, it's basically an interview with this guy, David Bergman, which he

essentially says, um, that the Bangladesh government used to be good guys, But,

um, but they went all authoritarian and undemocratic and this has been a genuine

student uprising and, um, thankfully a much better bomb have been installed.

And um, and that was, you know, this British journalist interviewing

this, uh, Bangladesh expert.

If you just listened to that episode of that podcast from The

Guardian, that was the story you got.

Plucky, plucky students, cause, uh, they changed, they made a law which said A

certain percentage of government jobs had to go to the descendants of people

involved in the War of Independence.

Yes.

And this was seen as being, um, you know, the people who weren't related

to somebody who was in the War of Independence were kind of pissed because

they were now second class citizens when it came to getting a good job.

A good example, dear listener, of why hereditary rights Not a good idea,

but we've talked about that before.

Um, yeah, so if you listen to the, the Guardian podcast, plucky, uh, university

students, um, uprising, um, previous, um, government in power for 15 years

just goes, whoops, nobody likes us anymore and scampers out of the country.

Thankfully, as a, as a new, less authoritarian regime moves in.

And I subscribe to a few podcasts, as you can imagine, and, um, for

example, the Duran and the Geopolitical Economy Report, both of them

absolutely convinced it's a US coup.

Now, I don't know, um, whether it was or not.

Like, they might be completely wrong, but Given the history of America's

plotting around the world, this Guardian journalist interviewing this guy

should have been alert enough to say, hey, any chance this was a US coup?

Can you give me the reasons why maybe it wasn't, if you're so convinced?

It wasn't.

Not a single mention of the possibility of a U.

S.

coup, if only to dismiss it.

Like, it was really pathetic, one sided journalism.

And then when you do a Google search on the journalist that she was interviewing,

this guy, David Bergman, you can find all sorts of Stuff about him that suggests

he is not an independent commentator on what's going on in Bangladesh.

It's a U.

S.

coup because all of the government infrastructure will be

sold off at a very cheap price to U.

S.

corporations in the next two or three years.

Well,

you'll really know when a U.

S.

base appears at some strategic point in, um, on Bangladesh territory, because

apparently it's a very important seaway nearby for transporting oil to China.

So, funnily enough, the group that's now installed, um,

has been applauded by the U.

S.

and, uh, are very pro U.

S.

and that's almost certainly going to happen.

So It just gave me the shits that The Guardian spent 20 minutes talking to

a guy who's related, is the son in law of one of the key opposition members,

and, uh, has a history of, of, of not being an independent observer.

Completely relayed everything he had to say and didn't even contemplate

the possibility of a US coup.

And I just thought, fuck.

Terrible.

Terrible, pathetic journalism that's just misleading people.

And I think it was only just before that that I'd seen the Sarah Ferguson one of,

Sarah Ferguson with Paul Keating saying, you know, China they're building up a

massive military, um, totally beyond what would normally be reasonable.

And I'm just, I'm giving up on, on, on these characters in mainstream media,

who you thought might be helpful, but they're not, you've, the only thing

left is small independent little podcasts like this one, little, Little

YouTubers like, I don't really like Perun, but you know, people like that.

The John Menardew blog, dear listener, if you are not subscribing to the John

Menardew blog, and you should be paying them some money, um, five bucks a month or

something like that, because, um, that's where genuine information is coming.

So, yeah, that's my little rant about that.

Um, what have we got, um,

What's in this chat?

Let me scroll through it a bit.

What does it say here?

Ah, John says, China holds the vast majority of rare metal deposits.

Joe, you said not so sure about that.

Yeah, I'm

fairly sure lithium is a fairly minor player.

It just happens to be the only country that's digging it up at the moment.

Yeah, um, Scott's gotta go.

You gotta go, Scott?

Yeah.

Okay, I'm just gonna go through a bit of this chat.

I'll only be another five minutes.

You go, and we, you won't have missed anything.

Thanks, Scott.

We'll see you next week.

Good night, all.

Actually, next week I may not be doing anything, because that's my birthday.

No worries.

Yeah, I'll let you know.

Happy birthday.

Thanks.

Okay, see you, Scott.

See ya.

Bye.

Okay, just running through this chat.

Um, China holds the vast majority of rare metal deposits.

Here

we go, apparently Lithium.

Australia is the largest producer of Lithium, accounting for nearly

half of global production in 2022.

There you go.

My understanding was that Venezuela had a lot of Lithium.

It may be Colombia or places like that.

Bolivia, Chile and Argentina have the largest estimated resources of nearly 50

million tons between the three countries.

Right.

Is Venezuela in that list?

It wasn't listed.

Okay.

It

was, hang on, uh, Bolivia, Chile and Argentina.

Okay.

Because I thought Venezuela was for, lithium's for batteries.

Yes.

There might be some other rare mineral that's important for

batteries because, you know, Elon Musk on Twitter has been applauding every

move to overthrow the Maduro government.

Right.

One of the theories being that if U.

S.

corporations can access some metal that's used in electric

cars, that will help him out.

Um, um But not if

Trump has his way.

Yeah.

Um Oh, what else we got here?

It's always more complicated than it seems.

Yes, it is.

I'm John and maybe the US helped it along a bit after it got going.

Don't know what that means.

Do you know

what that means?

That they didn't cause the coup, but once it was running that they provided support.

Yeah, maybe.

Who knows?

And as I say, I don't know whether it was a coup or not, but to run an

article, a podcast for 20 minutes and not mention the possibility

of it was just Poor journalism.

Misleading.

There

you go.

Mm-Hmm.

Um, apparently China is digging up most of the rare earth but not lithium.

Mm-Hmm.

, uh, but mostly because of, uh, low cost, high pollution

methods that are in use there.

Mm-Hmm.

enables them to dig them up cheaper than anywhere else.

Dig 'em up.

Where?

China.

Oh, okay.

So this is not lithium, this is other rare earth metals, right?

Yep, yep, yep.

Yeah.

So there are rare earth metals elsewhere.

And China can compete because it can use horrible chemicals and not worry about it.

Hmm.

Hmm.

Okay, um, let me just see if there's anything pressing in my

notes that I have to get off.

Um, uh, Joe, Nord Stream, The Washington Post came out with an article.

Yeah.

With a theory claiming that I

thought they were going to lay charges.

Who?

The

Germans.

Well, the Washington Post reported that Zelensky Yes.

The Ukrainian president ordered Zelensky, former commander in chief

of Ukraine, to bomb the Nord Stream and that the CIA tried to stop them.

Laughter.

But the Ukrainians went ahead and did it anyway.

This was the argument.

Yes.

Was Did they put this in the comedy?

Was this in the comics comedy section of the Washington Post?

Joe?

No, it just, you Sure.

I thought

you'd appreciate the, um, the article.

Ah, so the official story is now that Germany for the past two

and a half years has been sending.

Tens of billions of euros plus military machinery to the country that

committed the worst act of industrial terrorism against Germany in history.

And they're concerned that if this news came out that people would

withdraw their support for Ukraine.

Cameron Leckie who has been on this podcast says what an insult

the fact that they fly a fairytale narrative like this and expect adults

to take it seriously is symptomatic of the collapse of the West.

It is?

Yeah.

Um,

I think that's enough.

Joe, unless you've got something pressing you want to get off your chest.

No, just the usual, um, Project 2025 stuff.

I've been following quite a lot of those.

Yes.

Watching the adverts coming out, I have to say that, um, Kamala

seems to be on a good formula with just calling Trump weird.

And he really doesn't seem to know how to respond to

her.

He seems to be digging himself into a bigger and bigger hole.

He's pissed the unions off.

By saying that, um, Musk had it right by sacking his union workers.

Um, he's also pissed Musk off by saying that he wants to ban electric vehicles

or do something about electric vehicles.

He was slagging them off.

One second he's saying, oh, I suppose we're going to have to

do something because the man's giving me 45 million a month.

And then in the next breath, he's going, oh, well, but they're bad.

You know.

We're better off having oil guzzlers.

Do you know, I've got the exact clip right here.

I'll play that right now.

Trump on electric cars.

to be, you know, because Elon endorsed me very strongly, Elon.

So I have no choice.

But he knows.

No,

I am for him.

I'm for him for a small slice is a slice.

But you want to have gas propelled cars.

You want to have hybrids.

You want to have every kind of a car imaginable.

They want to go all electric.

And there's no way you can ever There's no way you can ever load them up.

They call them loading them.

You can't load them.

We're gonna have to spend nine trillion dollars in the middle west.

You saw they built chargers.

Now a charger is a gas pump with electricity come through.

Is that good?

So it's like a, for eight chargers, they spent nine billion.

Who would go out of their way to listen to that?

But so anyway, the first part, um, for electric vehicles, I have to, because

Elon endorsed me and everybody cheered.

So, just the concept that I'm for something because a billionaire is

going to pay me money, I've been bought off and everybody cheered.

So there was that part.

And then there was the technical term of loading.

Just, it's such crap.

And then,

however many billion dollars to build the charges, which I'm going, I

don't believe his figures are correct.

Oh, would you like another example of perhaps a

dodgy figure, Joe, from the past?

Donald Trump.

Here we go.

Here's a, see, uh, you know, you don't need to be an expert at math,

dear listener, to spot an error in this, in this, uh, thinking.

Here we go.

Virtually one job creation in the last year has gone to migrants.

You know that?

Most of the job creation has gone to migrants.

In fact, I've heard that substantially more than, uh, beyond, actually beyond

the number of a hundred percent.

It's a much higher number than that, but.

The, uh, government hasn't got,

there you go.

Joe.

Jobs created, have gone to migrants.

More than a hundred percent of 'em.

Yes.

That's 'cause migrants earn those guys.

They work two jobs.

Maybe that's how, that's,

oh, maybe.

Maybe that's how they've done

more than a hundred percent of new jobs.

Go to Migrants.

Yeah.

He's getting wacky, um, just losing it in terms of He's never had it.

Well, you're right, he never has, but Maybe they're picking on him more.

They are picking on him more.

Because Joe's not around him.

It's hilarious because, yeah, he built up this whole, oh my god,

you're too old to be a president.

And now that Biden has gone, all of that, oh my god, you're too old, is

just coming straight back at him now.

Yes, yeah.

Yeah.

Okay, John says, he just says whatever comes into his head

as it doesn't stay there long.

That's true?

No, I mean, he's a bullshitter.

He's not a

liar, because a liar knows what the truth is.

He's a bullshitter.

He doesn't care what the truth is.

The truth is whatever suits him at the time.

Yeah.

All right, dear listener, we're done and dusted.

That, uh, episode.

Don't know if there'll be one next week because, uh, it definitely won't

be live on a Monday evening because, uh, I'll be celebrating a birthday.

Might pre record something beforehand.

Not sure.

See what happens.

Might look at Bangladesh.

Not sure.

All right, we'll talk to you then.

Thanks for listening.

Talk to you next week.

How did you get my from him?

As you can see, we've had our eye on you for some time now, Mr.

Anderson.

It seems that you've been living two lives.

One of these lives has a future and one of them does not.

I'm going to be as forthcoming as I can be, Mr.

Anderson.

You're here because we need your help.

My colleagues believe that I'm wasting my time with you, but I believe

you wish to do the right thing.

We're willing to wipe the slate clean, give you a fresh start.

All that we're asking in return is your cooperation and

a simple donation of one dollar per episode

Wow, that sounds like a really good deal But I think I got a better

one how about I give you the finger

And you give me my

free podcast

Mr.

Anderson

You disappoint me.

You can't scare me with this Gestapo crap.

I know my rights.

I want my

free podcast.

Tell me, Mr.

Anderson, what good is a podcast if you're unable

to hear?