She seems to like going in there She comes in around the back Don't worry. I don't lock her in Yeah, so a different style of video today. It was Valentine's Day yesterday or it may still be today for some of you and Yeah, I mean I've been doing some videos recently to Help men to become better and to more effectively interact with women and You know, I haven't really given much advice to women who are looking to date and Be involved with men again so Yeah, I'd like to do that today and I do hope that it's gonna be helpful for a lot of you and this isn't just for women to watch this can be for men as well who maybe you could learn something from this and Also, I'd like the man out there to tell me if you agree With my perspective on this So do let me know down in the comments below, but I can understand for a lot of you a Lot of the ladies Lot of the girls who are watching this after coming out of a relationship with a narcissist You may have difficulty trusting people and this may affect your relationships in The future it may make it difficult for you to Form connections with men. You may just prefer to be alone to yourself Rather than talking to new men and that will make it difficult for you to find a good man Because of course that is what men want. They want women who Make an effort with them. I'm just gonna turn This light down here I think it is Interrupting the video a bit. Yeah, maybe that should help but yeah That's really one of the main things that men want is a woman who makes an effort Especially these days a lot of men feel like women are not making an effort So Yeah, that's what a lot of men are looking for is a woman who is conscientious woman who cares and Wants to do the best that she can for her man a woman who is trying to accomplish Something and Yeah, that's really how to make a guy fall for you is by knowing What men want? And if we look at most men today They work very hard They spend hours each day working And for what I mean, of course it could be to take care of their woman Their children, but not only that it's about status Men care a lot about status They care a lot about their social and professional Position within the world and if you look at it, that is the reason my men do everything that they do It all comes down to status It's the reason why they buy a big house It's why they drive a fast car. It's why they go to the gym That's why they work hard is why they went on a better job It's why they always want more money and it's why they want respect This all comes back to status So if you want a guy to fall for you You need to give him status You need to improve his social and professional position within the world and To do that Yes, you could be beautiful You can focus on your physical appearance but Other than that what men really want is a Woman who wants to take care of her man and that may be Something as small As just giving him a little back-back massage now and again Even if it's only for 10 or 20 minutes, it's something that shows you care and men love that and Even just cooking him a dinner when he gets home from work Men really appreciate that and it shows Conscientiousness shows that you are aware of him. You have consideration for him And it gives him that status that he's looking for it makes him look important to his friends his co-workers Because everyone's looking and thinking wow He's got a good woman. He's got a woman who loves him and takes care of him. That's what men want We want to look good to other people Hey, Erica Happy Valentine's Day Yeah, men want to look good to other people. That's where they work so hard That's where they want to find a good woman That's why They don't want to be with someone who makes them look bad That's the last thing any man wants They want someone who takes care of them and makes them look good. So yeah despite But the media and society may tell you it's not all about sex Men do want other things as well They want a woman who is conscientious and also a woman who is loyal a Woman who is exclusive only to him a Woman who no other man can get Because that is another thing that gives the man status It makes us look good it makes us feel important Which is why you do need to take extra care to avoid making your man jealous Be careful with your interactions with other men Before you do it you need to think about Is this going to make my man look better? Or is it going to make him look worse? another way to Make a guy fall for you Is by your openness to experience Now this is very important Because a man wants you to experience things and Seething see things through him and for that to happen You kind of need to not have too much knowledge or experience of particular things that he may be interested in Because just imagine you're going to give someone a Christmas present and then You're aware that they've already been given 10 presents before you That were better than yours You probably wouldn't want to give them anything after that Because you know they're not going to appreciate it They're not going to be open to experiencing it. So what's the point? Which is why? Man actually don't prefer women who are too sexually experienced Women who only reserve themselves for certain men women who are selective contrary to Common belief men are not actually Going after women who are in Bentley's and Rolls Royce's On super yards and private jets Yeah, they may want to have sex with a woman like that But they're not going to fall in love with her They're not going to have a serious relationship or marriage They would prefer a woman who is more shy and inexperienced Because then they can lead and they can give the woman those experiences And isn't that a beautiful thing? You know despite all of these things we hear about men today and about toxic masculinity and all of that yes there are men out there who still want to lead and They want to give you Experiences They want to show you things and they want it to be special They want it to mean something so Yeah, that's definitely an important thing is the The openness to experience because men want to feel wanted They want to be appreciated that's why we do a lot of the things that we do and Men also want women who share their values and beliefs Women who are agreeable women who Will listen to what they say women who they can teach This is important too because You know, this is another Beautiful trait that men have is that they want to be a role model to you They want you to admire and respect them. They want you to see them as a good example something that you can emulate and Yeah, this is why Men don't really like women who have too much experience in life and relationships Because then it's quite difficult for them to be that role model in your life It's difficult for them to be someone who you would admire and respect Because if you've had a lot of experiences in life Your mind may be made up already You may think that you already know everything that you need to know I think it's difficult for him to teach you and to give you those new experiences Which is why as I said before it's important to be selective as that Those hand-in-hand with the agreeableness That is what will make the man fall for you and want to protect you This is what makes men be good men There's nothing that a man really wants more than a woman who is loyal and exclusive to him a Man would do anything for that type of woman When the woman fulfills her responses her responsibilities as a woman Trust and believe that the man will fulfill his duty and responsibilities as a man But these days with social media You know he's going on to some woman's Facebook or Instagram and He sees all of these experiences. She's already traveled the world. She's being in all of these cars And he just sees it as though there's nothing new that he can bring to your life And then he's not gonna feel the same way Because he knows anything he does with you it's not gonna be special if you've already done it before And that is why Men do prefer women who haven't had too many experiences who haven't done too many things We don't know too much about life because they want to be that role model in your life They want to lead they want to teach they want to give you all of these wonderful experiences and Yeah, this is just the way we're wired Biologically it's always been this way up until the last maybe 20 or 30 years and then things have changed but it is different for men and I Think a lot of the women who are watching this will agree That women are naturally attracted to experience men Men who have already done and accomplished Everything in life, but it's different with a woman Men don't tend to be attracted to that in women They prefer women who haven't experienced too much because they want it to be special They want you to experience everything through them. You know men don't want to come along and Feel like their second place They don't want to come along and feel like they're not as good as they were the man before They don't want to feel like that It's difficult for a guy to fall for you when he knows in your mind. You're not the best. He's not the best He's not the most special so yeah, that's something to keep in mind, you know every man More than anything what every man wants is To know that what he's bringing to the table What he's bringing to your life is valued and appreciated Because if it's not that will hurt him that will destroy his self-esteem That will make him feel unimportant irrelevant It will destroy him inside and will break his heart To know that you've already experienced everything you wanted to with someone else Because then he already knows he's not going to be anything special to you and that's what men want They want to be special to someone they want to feel important they want to look good they want status and Yeah, another way To make a man fall for you It's just submit I Know a lot of women might not want to hear this But the truth is men do work hard. They deal with a lot of stress.  And that's not going to win his heart That's not gonna make him like you and I know this may seem quite trivial and Yes, I understand. It's quite a small thing, but these small things They add up to create the dynamic in the relationship The fact is that Men want women who are agreeable and submissive men Who will follow their lead and absorb their views of the world? And that's is how to make a guy fall for you That's really all it is. I mean You know, I could sum it up in this 20-minute video It really is that easy And I think it's just that a lot of women didn't have this information.  It's not your fault it is really a society and this This modern view of the world and relationships That's being fair to us And it's been affecting us men too You know, we we've had a hard time as well and You know, even in my own life I have met a few narcissists and I know many of you who are watching this have too and Yeah, it's hard to get tricked It's not fair. I know But you know once you come out of that and you're looking to date again just know that these are the traits that real men high-value men are looking for and It's important to To not be afraid, you know to be willing to trust again Really, there's nothing more than a narcissist once Than to see you leave them and just go through a bunch of failed relationships and never be happy Or to just not even want to date again Yeah, that's exactly what they want to see and that's why I have to put this information out there to help you to Go out again and date meet new people Because We can't let we can't let these narcissists win. We can't let them have that but yeah, happy Valentine's Day everyone. I Hope you've all been having a great day and Yeah, let me know what you think about this different style of video. I know I don't Talk about these kinds of things much But let me know your views. Let me know if you agree or disagree Love to free. I'd love to hear from you Please let me know down in the comments and Give this video a thumbs up if you enjoyed it. I Will talk to you in another one very soon


August is hot and so are the savings at Appalachian Wireless, where all smartphones are 50% off. Even the 64, 128, and 256-gig models, 2-year agreement required. Better service, bigger savings, that's today's Appalachian Wireless and East Kentucky Network Company. Two weeks ago, we brought you the tragic story of a fatal car crash that took the life of 8-year-old Brianna Hall. Now, although Bri, as her family and friends know her, has been laid to rest this week, we celebrate the life of Bri and her passion for dance. Bri had been a student here at Dance, etc., in Prestonsburg since she was 3 years old. And although she was at the age when many children grow weary of dance, her instructors say her love for dance continued to grow. She loved to dance. Most kids that age are asking, how much longer is class? Can I go to the bathroom? Can I drink water? Never. I don't think the child ever asked, what time is it or when is class over? She would have danced all day. I mean, she truly just loved it and was so good at it. Her grandmother told me today that she said, Mammy, I feel the music and she did. And she really did. And I mean, it just brought you joy to watch her dance. It really did. Shepherd says everyone who met Bri loved her. You can look on Facebook and see dancers from probably eight different counties that knew and loved her because she had met so many, you know, friends through dance.  And she had just been here for a rehearsal, you know, on Tuesday, a couple of days before we lost her.  If you would like to help Bree's family with funeral cost, a GoFundMe page has been set up under the name listed on your screen. Reporting from Prestonsburg, I'm Shawn Allen for EKB News.


One of the least helpful ways of understanding the world, in my view, is asking, like, which people has the moral right to a particular part of land? I don't think it helps you understand reality. More important question to ask is, you know, which people have the will and the ability to fight to seize a particular spot of land for their people and then defend it? I don't look at the world in terms of, oh, Israel belongs to the Jews and Japan belongs to the Japanese, right? Land belongs to those who can seize it and take it. And a great deal of nation-states are created precisely through violence. The United States of America was created through violence. Americans had to fight for their freedom to emancipate themselves from the British. And at the end of the American Revolutionary War, there was effectively an ethnic cleansing. Right? Supporters of England, right? Supporters of the Tory approach to life, they up and left the United States. They were strongly encouraged, if not forcefully expelled, to leave the United States of America. And they moved instead to Canada or they went back to England or they might have, you know, ended up elsewhere. But the United States of America was no longer a safe place for them. Israel was created through violence. It was protected by violence. And Israel was created in large part through ethnic cleansing. And historian Jonathan Otto Paul has often been on this show pointed out that Israel's founders in large part emulated the ethnic cleansing strategies of Joseph Stalin. After World War II, Germans were ethnically cleansed from all sorts of parts of Eastern Europe and forcefully repatriated back to Germany in the process. About two million of them died, which is obviously horrible. On the other hand, it did pave the way for a tremendous amount of peace. So if you give me a choice between mass genocide and relatively low levels of violence accompanying ethnic cleansing, I would support ethnic cleansing over genocide, right? It's better to move people than to kill them. So I got stuck into it with some people on Twitter today. And I like this tweet by HistorySpeaks. So Matthew, he's a PhD student at London School of Economics. He's been on the show several times. And he is commenting on Jeff Jacobi, a conservative columnist for the Boston Globe. And Jeff Jacobi says, the plight of innocent civilians and guards are suffering in this war course by their leaders is terrible. So why aren't Arab nations offering to evacuate refugees? During Syria Civil War, millions of them fled the country. They were admitted by Turkey, Germany and other countries. Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians are found haven in Poland, Hungary and elsewhere. Why don't Arab nations, Muslim nations want Palestinians? And HistorySpeaks has a good rejoinder because they know this is a trek to permanently enable ethnic cleansing by a country, meaning the Jewish State, Israel, the Nakba, the expulsion of Palestinians with the creation of the Jewish State in 1947-48. In the 1950 law on property expropriating homes of ethnically national myths that Palestinians aren't indigenous, present-day reality, settlements on occupied territory, which are war crimes.  If that's a war crime, then war crime has no meaning. But I think this is a good point. Arab Muslim nations in part don't want to take Palestinian refugees because they want to keep them as a permanently explosive threat to the Jewish State of Israel. On the other hand, if these nation states saw they would be enriched by the presence of Palestinians, if Palestinians had so many valuable skills and gifts to their host nations, then I am pretty sure that host nations would act in their own best interests and invite them in. No nation wants to take in large numbers of Palestinians because there's no rational reason, as I understand the world in 2023, why would any host nation want to take in Palestinians? What exactly have Palestinians contributed to the world? What are their unique skills that host nations could not get elsewhere? So it says something about the Palestinian people that nobody wants to take them in. Now, you may have a great rejoinder. Look, what about the Jews, 1930s Jews trying to flee Europe, and nobody wanted to take them in? Does that not tell us something about Jews? Yes, it does. In that time of place that says something about Jews, particularly in the 1930s, there were very high rates of unemployment in the United States, in England, in Australia, in all sorts of First World nations. And so they were not looking to take in refugees, period. And they particularly did not want to take in Jews because they feared it would lead to an ethnic cleavage in society, that their societies would become more divided. That just as Jews will sometimes choose to exclude Gentiles to enjoy their own in-group preferences. So too, Gentiles at times will choose to exclude Jews. Right, I was getting stuck into it on Twitter, right? Yeah, it's just amazing that no nation wants to admit Palestinian refugees because they don't see it rationally in terms of their own best interests. Another perspective on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, right? Another example of diversity plus proximity creates tragedy.  Now, you also, again and again, have examples of diversity plus proximity equal prosperity. So sometimes the diversity in some times in some places creates tragedy, not other times in other places and other types of diversity. It creates tragedy. You get tragedy, you get prosperity. So not all diversity is created equal. You get different results from different combinations at different places. So ethnic cleansing, right? Sounds horrible, but you have to ask in the particular situation, what is the alternative? And you forced me to face an alternative between ethnic cleansing and mass slaughter, I would prefer ethnic cleansing. And Israel would prefer like the Gazans to move to Egypt would prefer the Palestinians to move to some surrounding Arab Muslim nation. And so that they can be done with this threat. Now, a lot of horrible sounding things such as ethnic cleansing often lead to relatively great things such as peace, while beautiful sounding things like diversity often lead to horrible things like slaughter. So you can't judge a policy just by its term and just because someone says, oh, that's a war crime or a violation of human rights. So when I just pointed out that ethnic cleansing frequently leads to peace, while nice sounding things like diversity frequently lead to slaughter, Ricardo snapback on Twitter, genocidal, dignitary, eliminationist rhetoric for me, but not for thee. I didn't say anything about any particular group there. So he's just very quick to read this through his own particular lens on life. And I don't recognize how noting that sometimes ethnic cleansing is preferable to the other alternatives such as mass slaughter. I don't see exactly how that's eliminationist rhetoric. In fact, it's the opposite of eliminationist rhetoric and saying that there are better alternatives than mass slaughter. And dignitary. That's a new term just started hearing this week. And it refers to the violent cause for retribution coming from many Jews in reaction to the Hamas slaughter of over 1300 Israelis in southern Israel nine days ago. So Ricardo, I snap back to him.  So sometimes if your group is going to keep living, it's going to have to take very stern measures with regard to outgroups that are slaughtering it. And Ricardo says, I have compassion for murder people of all backgrounds, but the ethnic cleansing you propose is as a least bad option could go either way and lead to the same results. Would Jews evacuating to Europe or America be just as acceptable to you as the evacuation of Muslims from Gaza? So I don't propose ethnic cleansing here. I simply noted that in certain times, certain places it's better than some other options. So would Jews evacuating to Europe and America be just as acceptable to me as the evacuation of Muslims from Gaza? What do you think? I'm a Jew. You think, oh, let's give up 3,000 years of historic claims to the land of Israel and that's just as acceptable to me as expelling Palestinians to another Arab Muslim nation where they get to speak the same language, have a pretty similar culture, practice the same religion? No. I don't want Jews to give up their ties to the land of Israel. And as Israel has the strongest military in the Middle East, it is going to largely set the terms of this conflict. It's good to be strong. Ryan says, Christian nationalism is the biggest threat to the Jewish people. Perhaps one day, no signs of it right now. Israel poisoned hundreds of wells so Palestinians could not return to their homes. I'm not aware of that, but I do know that Israel tried to expel and in rare cases like Yerdesin, they slaughtered Arabs, women, children, just slaughtered them in a village. I think something like 50 during the War of Independence. But Israel did try to cleanse the land of Arabs. It was stopped by an international al-Qarai. So certain parts of the land of Israel, Israel had to accept the presence of Arabs because of an international al-Qarai. If there had not been an international al-Qarai at the Israel War of Independence, they would have effectively cleansed the what is now the land of Israel from all Arabs and Muslims. Which would be completely in their best interest. Why would they want the presence of people who hate them and want them dead? Palestinians are not exactly a tremendous reservoir of elite human capital. America will bribe Egypt, then they will all go to Europe thanks Israel. If Europe takes Middle East refugees, that's not primarily because of Israel. That's because Europeans have lost the will to defend themselves and their land.   He's just so persuasive in his rhetoric. I'm the victim here.  European nations are responsible for their own welfare. It's not the fault of Israel that Germany decided to take in two million refugees from the Middle East. Goyi countries are not intended to be a dumping ground for the Israelis. Right. And Israel is not intended to be a dumping ground for other countries either. Why would any country want to be a dumping ground? You should only take in those people who are in your best interests. Does the West exist as a dumping ground for Middle Eastern wars, largely caused by the presence of Israel? Right, because without Israel, people in the Middle East, they would just live together in peace and harmony. The region would just flourish. Where on earth you come up with this fantasy that without Israel, Iraq would not go to war with Iran, that Sunni and Shia would not be at each other's throats. Where do you get this idea that the Middle East without a Jewish state in its midst would just be a flourishing site of peace and prosperity? You have absolutely zero empirical rational reason to believe that, but you believe that because it's a magic key to believe that the Jews are responsible for most of the world's problems. That Israel's responsible for the low level of Arab-Islamic civilization in the Middle East and how they're constantly at each other's throats and they can't seem to produce much to the world that is of benefit. That's somehow, I don't think that's really Israel's fault. I can't stand the center-right slavish worship of the Israeli cause. Well, I agree with that. I mean, I primarily had Fox News on in the background over the past week and I haven't seen one spokesman for the Palestinian cause or for the Hamas cause or for the people of Gaza. I mean, they probably had them, but I just haven't seen it. That the courage has just been completely one-sided on Fox. Obviously, different groups have different interests. Why don't they just implement a final solution for Palestine? They could. If they wanted to, they could slaughter every Palestinian. Israel shared a remarkable restraint. They don't have the stomach for it, try to send them elsewhere. People don't want outsiders forced on them. So, yeah, Israel is currently stuck for the problem. Now, why do people not want outsiders forced on them? Because they didn't see the outsiders as being in their best interests. There are occasions when people want to invite outsiders to come live among them and that's when they see those particular outsiders as being in their best interests. It's good to have valuable skills. How will the world react if Israel cuts Gaza in half? There will probably be vociferous condemnations at the United Nations.  Where on earth you get the idea that Israel is not forced to live with people who hate them? Israel contains two million Arabs who hate it. Israel contains tens of thousands of illegal African immigrants, invaders, who don't have a high opinion of it. So Israel is forced by the same set of circumstances to house millions of people who hate it just like the United States and Europe. And it's in the final analysis, it's a lack of wealth by the people of Israel, by the people of America, by the people of Europe to defend and maintain their own civilizations. If Germany, the United States, England, France, Sweden, Spain, Poland won't defend their own civilizations. How exactly is that the Jews' fault? Luke, you are deluded to think that Israel can win the war on two fronts. Yes, totally deluded. I mean, when has Israel ever won a war on two fronts? Oh, wait, there was the 1973 Yom Kippur War. Oh, there was a 1967 war. There was the 1948 war. So yeah, Israel has repeatedly won wars on two fronts. But maybe this time will be different. All right. Overwhelmingly has the strongest military in the Middle East, but maybe this time will be different. Israel may not be able to pull it off against the formidable fighting forces of Hezbollah and Hamas. Remember, the average IQ of the nations that surround Israel is by and large in the low 80s. The average Mexican American IQ is something like 88. No, it's something like 90. The average African American IQ is 85. The average IQ of the nations that surround Israel is lower than 85. They are not exactly formidable. Now, there are tens of millions of them, so there are some smart people, but overall, not exactly formidable people. Based at the Middle East would be a lot more peaceful if Israel had not come into existence. And your evidence for that is what? Where do you see Sunni and Shia living peacefully side by side? I mean, you don't have any empirical basis for saying that, but I realize it meets an emotional need in you because you got that magic key that the Jews are responsible for most of the problems in the world. Look forward. That's a gambler's mindset. Yeah, I'm sure Israel would rather not fight a two-front war, but if you don't think that they're capable of both dealing with Hamas and dealing with Hezbollah at the same time, I think you're wrong. Israel would be devastated if Hezbollah sets off all its rockets. Hezbollah has rockets that can reach all of Israel. They would kill if they wanted to. Thousands of Israelis on the first day of attacks. But then when it was over, they would be out of rockets and Israel would slaughter them. And it would take them many, many years to accumulate such an arsenal and such power again. And Hezbollah is just barely hanging on in Lebanon. Does it really want to risk its standing in Lebanon? The Lebanese people certainly don't want war with Israel. Israel's IQ is declining. Yes, it does, but it's nowhere near the low 80s that is the average in the countries that surround Israel. So have you guys seen the 1966 movie, The Battle of Algiers? Great movie. The French colonel, Colonel Mathieu, who takes over the French operation in Algiers, is asked a difficult question in a press conference. And here is his response. Should we remain in Algeria? If you answer yes, then you must accept all the necessary consequences. So do Jews want to live? If you answer yes, then you, Jews have to accept all the necessary consequences. Do, does the Jewish state want to survive? If Israelis answer yes, then they have to accept all the necessary consequences, including going to war, right? If a people wants to live, they have to accept the necessary consequences of you're often going to be in a fight for survival and you'll be strongly incentivized to be as strong as possible, which will then create incentives for your neighbors to be as strong as possible. And so as we never know what other people are going to do, tensions would just ratchet up, right? This is the inherent tragedy of life on earth, the power politics of if you want to survive, you want to become as strong as possible, which will then threaten other peoples, who will then try to become as strong as possible. So I'm wondering, why did Hamas seemingly take attractive Israeli women hostage? This is a disturbing part of their assault. They took the attractive Israeli women hostage and they slaughtered the less attractive. Isn't that a violation of international law?  I mean, isn't that against human rights, international law, some protocol in the United Nations?  Do religious Jews serve in the military? Modern Orthodox Jews do. They are religious Jews, by and large, Haredi Jews for an increasing proportion of Israeli's population and of Israel's government do not serve in the armed forces. They lack secular education.  The Haredim in Israel, by and large, are not productive citizens. They act as leeches and parasites on the welfare state. So if they provided for their own, instead of sucking down government welfare, that would be one thing.  They don't put their lives on the line to fight for Israel.  So as the number of Haredim proportionally grow in Israel, it engages the Israeli state. They have corrupted the Israeli government. They have produced the most incompetent Israeli government in memory. Not a good sign. One, how do you really not know? Israel supposedly is the gold standard for intelligence. And there aren't a lot of things in the area that honestly they need to worry about all that much. If you look at the big picture, Lebanon is a known quantity. Yes, Hezbollah there is a problem, but Hezbollah is a political party in Beirut. And so there are lines of communications, there's phones you can tap. And while they're always worried about fighters in the hills of southern Lebanon launching attacks, whether rockets or missiles or artillery across the border, it's kind of a known quantity and there are avenues to gather information. So it's an issue, but it's not a critical one. Syria is in civil war. There hasn't been a problem on the Syrian border in over a decade. Actually, honestly, it's been a problem on the Syrian border in three decades, especially since the Israelis literally control the high ground in the Golan Heights. So that's an issue. Jordan's a satellite state that is dependent upon Israel for economic support. So that goes away. Egypt is functionally an ally and the bulk of the Egyptian population is on the other side of the Suez Peninsula. So there's just not people there that can theoretically cause problems. That just leaves the Palestinians and there is no one thing for the Palestinians. Palestinian territories are broken into two chunks. The first one is on the West Bank of the Jordan River in kind of a crescent around Jerusalem. And here you've got the PLO, who is basically calling the shots. And while the relations between the Israelis and the PLO are a Palestinian liberation organization, for those of you who don't drink kool-aid, while relations aren't ever good, it is a semi-functional local government and there are relations, and that means there's ways to monitor what's going on. And so that area has been relatively quiet. And then there's Gaza, where Hamas took over, what, it's been about 15 years now? Gaza is basically an open-air prison that houses three million people. It's about twice the size of the District of Columbia. So it is one of the most densely populated places on earth, heavily industrialized lifestyle, but no industrial inputs. All the food, or 90% of the food, 90% of the energy is imported along with all the liquid fuels. So to think that this zone could create a industrial power that could challenge Israel is of course laughable. But to think that people living in a prison camp knowing that the height that they could aspire to to be mayor of the prison, that's as good as it gets, you can understand why some less than savory ideologies might bubble up and why people might think that the situation is hopeless and when I go kill a bunch of people. I don't mean that as justification, just as explanation. Anyway, this is the one, the one, the one thing that the Israelis have always been obsessed about. That's where all of their microphones are pointed. And so the fact that they missed this is just mind-boggling because there were hundreds of fighters involved, dozens of vehicles using six different transport options and the Israelis missed it all. Which leads into the second point. In Israel, there will be political connotations here and it will lead to the fall of the Israeli government. Now the Israeli government was never particularly popular and so they're enjoying at the moment a bit of a rally around the flag moment and Netanyahu was smart and reached out to all the opposition parties to create a national war council to prosecute the conflict. He really needed to do that, he did do that. But the civilian government underlieeth that. That's someone that's in trouble. Part of its demographic, the Israelis have some laws that protect basically people who commit themselves to Judaism.  And that means that you can have lots of kids and don't have pay for them, which you know encourages people to have a lot of kids. And that means somewhere between 10 and 30% of the population based on the very draw the line of the population basically doesn't work but can still vote.  And they are arising demographic because of population growth. I mean their demographic. And that means that they have been the kingmaker in any number of governments in recent decades and they are a strong, strong minority within the Israeli system. And there's no way to get rid of that. One of the many, many outcomes of being Jewish in a post-lawlicost world is that you value the opinion and you refuse to silence the voices of anyone within your community. So the political system in Israel works on something called proportional representation where you vote for a party. And if the party gets 10% of the vote, they get 10% of the seats. Normally, if you're going to have a political system like this, you want to have a war so that the real WAC jobs don't get into government. In Israel, there really isn't one functionally because they don't want to silence anyone's voices. So you have this whole rainbow of WAC job right-wing parties, right-wing's probably not the right term, which is called religious fundamentalist parties who are supporting the current government. And they're not very good at what they do because they're coming from a stock of people that doesn't value secular education at all. So here in the United States, we've got Matt Gaetz, Getz, the Florida guy, who caused the downfall of Speaker McCarthy and basically made the American Congress non-functional. Take him, take his awesome hair away, and clone him. And that is roughly 40% of the Israeli government right now. People who are absolutely mind-numbingly incompetent but have very firm ideas on how the war should work. And they're the ones... That is a great analogy. That's a great point. All right, you got to tip your Yawaka to Pete's eye in there. ...who are now having to explain how they have presided over the greatest intelligence debacle in the world in the last 50 years. That will have consequences. So let's do Iran next. At the moment, there are no smoking guns indicating that Iran is behind this, but I would be shocked if they didn't put their finger on the scale, at least for the timing. Also considering the various ways that the Hamas fighters launched into Israel that required non-standard supplies, which had to come from the outside and Iran is the most likely suspect, but really it's about the timing. The Saudis and the Israelis were working on a normalization process that if it would have completed, you would have taken the most powerful country in the air. Wait, why the Saudis and the Iranians at each other's throats? Why did Iraq invade Iran? I thought that the Middle East would just live in peace and prosperity if it wasn't for that dastardly Jewish state. Not got it. Seems like there's a lot of tension between Sunnis and Shia.  Sunnis have had the numbers and the power and are basically subjugated and kicked the heck out of the Shia for about 1,300 years now, for 1,000 years now, and still a great deal of animosity between Sunnis and Shia. Even when there's a Jewish state in their midst that they can focus their hatred on, which they sometimes do, but then it comes down to Sunnis and Shia just fundamentally loathe each other. George Friedman had a great analysis here. In intelligence, there's constantly data flowing in. The data congeals itself in what I call the concept. The concept in 1973 was that the Arabs would not attack except under certain special conditions. A similar thought was made here that there was no force large enough to engage the Israeli army and pass such a widespread thing.  The tendency is that the thing you believed is the truth of God, and you start dismissing things like the idea that maybe you're wrong. At the same time, what's in comprehensive is this. We saw in Jordan a buildup of troops moving to the border. Israeli aircraft were certainly monitoring the situation. Israel has satellites that we're watching very clearly. Israel is a very powerful nation. It's a nuclear power. So what I think happened was that it was so deeply embedded, if not in intelligence, then in the office of the prime minister, that there is no way this is happening, that they demanded more intelligence, more intelligence until by the time it happened, there's nothing new. This is not only an Israeli problem. This is the built-in problem of intelligence. How do you abandon basic things you believe to be true built up over a career and suddenly say, okay, it's wrong. You'll cling to that idea. And that's what makes that a dangerous way to run a government. You've got to remember these are human beings. And I think that was the mistake that they did. And it was the same mistake they made, if we call it a mistake, in 1973. They did not, the concept said there was not going to be an attack. And even though Mossad, human intelligence, was bringing in reports that they were preparing for one, in this case, the prime minister simply could not fathom that that was the case. Yeah, some great analysis there by George Friedman. We developed these concepts about how the world works.  All right, let's get a little bit more here from Fox News and how it goes. Journalists were covering the unspeakably brutal attack on Israel by Hamas and now the wider war among the best and bravest in the business. They have seen death and devastation for decades. And yet some of them have choked up and having to report the absolutely gruesome details of the atrocities carried out by the Hamas terrorists from Gaza. My Fox News colleague, Trey Yinxed. You see scenes of parents showing up to, sorry, it's difficult, but parents showing up to give hair of their kids to the authorities to see if they can match the DNA to the bodies. Yeah, just horrific. Anderson Cooper after a woman described the kidnapping of family members. I'm sorry, I'm so emotional. Seeing as Nick Robertson on talking to an Israeli military official. And I asked him, how are you going to get these hostages back? All right, Nick Robertson, thank you. And what he told me was... Go ahead, Nick, tell us what he told me. I'm sorry, Abby, and how he told me that they were going to do everything in their power to get them back. And by putting themselves in harm's way, many have had to take cover. NBC's Richard Engel. Well, I can tell you right now, we are in the town of Sterot, and there has been a lot of incoming fire here. With the death toll in Israel over 1,300 Hamas is claiming more than 2,300 killed by Israel's retaliatory airstrikes. But the Israeli military at least tries to avoid civilian casualties. What has been so heartbreaking for Western journalists to witness and report? More than 200 young people slaughtered at a music festival. Many women raped. Families with children taken hostage. Israeli soldiers and babies decapitated. The media business is unpopular and for good reason.  I'm Howard Kurtz and this is Media Buzz. Thousands of civilians slaughtered. I just go slaughtered in Israel.  They want Israel to occupy Gaza, get it meshed in a door to door house to house fighting there. Kill a lot of Palestinian civilians and completely erode the moral high ground that it has right now. These are animals committing atrocities against civilians.  If you can't take the right side on this war after hearing these repugnant tactics. Okay, I'm not someone who focuses much on moral high ground, but it certainly does affect the psychology of people who are participating. If you believe you're on the moral high ground, if you believe that you are doing God's will, that's likely to give you greater strength than people who are ashamed of what they're doing. Also, media world opinion, media opinion doesn't count for zero. It's not determinative, but it does count for a little bit. It does count for something. There's something wrong with you. On the view, sharper criticism of Israel fighting back. And when you look at that law, part of it is retaliation against innocent civilians collectively is also terror and is also a war crime. Joining us now to analyze is the coverage Ben Dominic, at a large spectator and in Los Angeles. Okay, we'll skip that commentary. But it's funny, some of the smartest commentary about Israel versus Hamas comes from the comedy website, The Onion. Here is its op-ed. The Onion stands with Israel because it seems like you get less trouble for that. The past week has shown humanity at its worst. In moments of turmoil such as this one, some believe it is the responsibility of a newspaper of record like The Onion to delve fully into the nuances of a complex and multifaceted conflict that stretches back not just decades but centuries. These people are wrong. It demands incredible sensitivity and strict adherence to journalistic standards of objectivity. And this isn't something we are willing to do. Rather, we're just going to say The Onion expresses its steadfast solidarity with Israel and leave it at that. Why? Because this editorial board doesn't like getting yelled at. They're going to be way fewer people with way less power mad at us. We don't want to go up against the entire US government, which President Biden has expressed its unwavering support for Israel. Finally, it's because we don't want to and you can't make us. You can't. You seriously can't. You cannot make us do all of this hard stuff ever. Seriously. That sounds like an enormous headache. Even worse, a reward for that would be mobs of people screaming at us online. Why would we do that? Alternatively, we could simply say Israel must be fully supported in its military campaign to root out evil in all of its hiding places. That 19-word sentence would save us the trouble of engaging with this difficult situation. So we are going to go with that one. Does that make sense? We think it does. Our stance becomes increasingly compelling when one considers some alternative scenarios. For instance, The Onion could theoretically say that it stands in solidarity with the bombing victims in Gaza. What would happen then? People would get mad at us. They could threaten our careers. How about if we said we believe the loss of innocent life is wrong, no matter what the nationality? That would also result in people getting mad at us. Sometimes these would be different people getting mad, but that doesn't really change things on our end. Most significantly, it could hurt our quarterly revenue, which is the worst tragedy imaginable. Perhaps some would call on us to point out the obvious moral hypocrisy of those far-left Americans who bend about terms like war criminals while turning a blind eye to what amounts to an unconscionable war crime on the part of Hamas. We are also not going to do that. Why? Because people will get angry at us, extremely irritating people. And we just don't want to deal with it. We have enough going on without them getting on our case. The water main broke in our office last Friday, and dealing with the super has been a whole thing. It keeps avoiding our cause, because obviously it's going to have to eat the cost of the sub pump. So why would we add defending ourselves against online criticism over one of the most incendiary topics in human history to the list of headaches we're already dealing with? Why? The answer is that we won't. That was a really sharp commentary there by The Onion. Okay. Fat Elvis Jr. writes on rumble. If you love Israel so much, why don't you move there? That's a great point. Obviously I love living in America more. There are about 6 million Jews in America, and by definition their presence here shows that they're America first. Now, they may make some decisions, use some rhetoric that for some of them may indicate an Israel first attitude, but if they're living in the United States, their feet indicate that they are America first. Because all Jews have the right to get up and move to Israel. So if Jews choose to stay behind in Argentina, or Brazil, or Australia, England, France, Germany, the United States, Canada, or Mexico, it's because they are primarily most comfortable in those particular host countries. Fat Elvis says the Hamas are trying to boost their IQ by breeding with the women with the best genetics possible. Okay. Kathy Newman. Remember her fiery interview with Jordan Peterson? She's a lefty journalist on Times Radio. Here she's talking to someone from former national security advisor to BB Netanyahu, Yakov Amidroh. Hamas to the end. We will do to Hamas what you did with the Americans to ISIS. Hamas is not an organization. It's a terror, barbarian group, which is worse than ISIS. Well, the UN has urged Israel to withdraw its order for people in northern Gaza to evacuate warning of. Whoa. We got Jonathan Greenblatt here. Wonder what Jonathan Greenblatt has to say. I'm sure he's expressing solidarity with the oppressed people of Gaza. Here's growing criticism, as you know, of Israel. For not just the bombing, but for ordering one million Hamas civilians, excuse me, Gaza civilians to move from the north to the south. There are shortages there, a food, a fuel, many don't have shelter. Don't you worry that world opinion will turn against the Israelis? Well, I certainly worry about world opinion turning against the Israelis. And I certainly wish the Israelis didn't have to undertake such a massive exercise of force. But the truth is, Howard, this could end today. It could be stopped if the Hamas would give up the hostages. Yeah, it could end today if Hamas would just change their hero system. Guys, why don't Muslims change their religion? Why don't Arabs change their hero system? If all these hundreds of millions of Arabs and Muslims would only just change their hero system, just modify their religion, this conflict could end today. Yes, you could say that about any conflict. And say they were going to put down their arms and work out a means to live in peace with Israel. The organization with the power to stop this is Hamas. This is Hamas' war. They started it. Hamas can finish it by returning the hostages. They can finish it by laying down their arms. Hamas has a particular hero system that is shared by tens of millions of Arabs and Muslims. That is, they find it in a front that an alien Jewish state was created in their midst through the ethnic cleansing of their pharaoh Arabs and Muslims. It's hard to blame them for having this hero system. It makes perfect sense from their point of view. Why would Arabs and Muslims just be at ease with, hey, yeah, these Jews came largely from Europe and they established a Jewish state in a land that was being dominated by Arabs for, I don't know, 1,000, 1,500 years. And they expelled most of the Arabs and set up a Jewish state in our midst on land that had been ruled by Arabs for over 1,000 years. But hey, we're cool with that. You don't have a problem with that. And yeah, this Jewish state is flourishing and we remain backward, but we're okay with being humiliated by the ongoing success of the Jewish state. What kind of people, what kind of hero system would just be at ease with that? So who's responsible for displacing these Palestinians? Hamas. Who's responsible for the pain and suffering in Gaza? Hamas. It started with Hamas, but it will be finished by Israel if Hamas doesn't do the right thing. All right. Oh, gosh, just rhetoric. It's not going to be finished by Israel. And it's going to have nothing to do with doing the right thing or the wrong thing. There are no solutions here. There are only trade-offs and tremendous suffering on many different sides. So you can win a battle, but it doesn't necessarily mean you're going to win the war. So Luke Kraft, you sent me a link and it's got a particular time stamp. I assume this is the right time stamp that you want me to show. Well, that's precisely the reason why I mentioned that Russia may be dragged in, because it's one hell of a way for Russia to divert attention from the crisis in Ukraine and to fight the West by proxy. Russia would have a vested interest. China already made noises in support of Hamas, which is a bit unusual even for China. So now China and Russia and other BRICS members, they begin to consider themselves as an alternative to the West. I'm telling you, this is not a local conflict. It appears to be a local conflict. It's not. Hamas would have never attacked Israel, never in a million years, had it not been guaranteed to have support from outside forces such as Iran, possibly Russia as well, but definitely Iran. Something is going on here, which is much bigger than 600 dead Israelis. Although there's been a major intelligence failure, for example, the Hamas has acquired special boats and special paragliders, military paragliders and even drones. And Israel was not aware of this, to shock him. It's absolutely shocking. And they didn't buy only one boat. Israel has already intercepted seven boats. Now, these boats, I mean, the international market is true, but they're not too many sellers of military boats.  Israel should have been aware that the Hamas is buying military boats in commercial quantities. And there's massive intelligence failure. And that is also the, let's say, the religion factor. Yes, of course, there's history, the symbolism, there are cultural elements. There's a lot of baggage that goes with this ostensibly geopolitical coffee. It's not merely a geopolitical coffee. The whole thing started with Al Aqsa, the mosque in Jerusalem. The attack of Hamas on Israelis was called the Al Aqsa flood. Hamas said that it is attacking Israel because too many Israeli tourists and visitors are trampling on the sacred grounds of Al Aqsa. The pretext, the excuse was religious. But there's still many, many people, there's a majority of people who are motivated by such, may I say, nonsense. They still can be aggravated and become suicidal if they're confronted with some religious infraction or some religious transgression. And it's not only religion because I think one thing that the West does not understand, and the East does not understand. Is that Judaism is not only a religion, it's a nationality. There, Islam is the same. Islam is not only a religion, it's a nationality. It's called umma. Umma means nation. So these particular religions are not only, they don't only possess the power of religion, they possess the power of the nation state. They're also cultural spheres. So it's a clash of civilization. So traditionally religion and state just went hand in hand. All right. The separation of religion from state was something that developed in Europe after the devastating 30-year war in Germany. So they're increasing moves to neutralize the power of religion to set people at each other's throats. And so European political philosophy and European practical politics developed ways to separate, increasingly separate religion from the state to depoliticize religion, to neutralize religion as a force of setting people at each other. Now that's the exception in the world. Usually religion and state go hand in hand. The Protestants develop something different. Huntington was right. It's not a clash of religions because we have had clashes of religion. For example, we have the Crusades, Christianity against Islam and so on. That's not the same here. It's total in the sense that it's a clash of national interests, cultural spheres and religion. When Judaism is fighting Islam, it's a fight about the definition of the world in every possible way. Culturally, socially, religiously, nationally, you name it. No element is left. You know when compromise is possible in international affairs? When there are elements where you can be in agreement with your enemy. If you have something in common with your enemy, you can make peace. The Germans and the French had something in common, European identity, European culture. They had something in common. They had a clash about nationalist interests. The German Laban sound and so on. Yeah, there was a clash about nationality, but there was no clash about culture. There was no clash about civilization. There was a clash about music. Mozart was very popular in trance. They had a lot in common, but the Jews and the Muslims have nothing in common, nothing in principle in common. They are the fight. That's right. Generally speaking, generically speaking, Jews and Muslims have as little in common in general as two peoples in the world, just like European Americans and African Americans have almost nothing in common. The conflict cuts across every possible dimension. So there is no ground for compromise or divorce or consensus. So you think that in the next century, we might have the same problems? Is it true that the Israeli army is filled with women? Yes, but they've usually been kept far away from the actual fighting. Natural conflict. And yet we haven't seen any space war between Russia and the United States over the moon. Ah, when I say that Jews and Muslims, generally speaking, have almost nothing in common, the chat responds. This is patently false. There is considerable overlap between Judaism and Islam. There is some overlap between Judaism and Islam, but because there is a theoretical similarity in elements of Judaism and Islam, doesn't filter down to Jews and Muslims just have so much in common. First of all, the average Muslim IQ in the Middle East is around 85. Muslims in America, Great Britain, not exactly high achieving group.  So theoretical similarities don't mean that in the real world, people who are designated by these theories of Judaism and Islam as being practitioners or adherents or members of this group, therefore have a lot in common. There is theory and there is reality. Sometimes theory sheds light on reality, but just as often theory obscures reality. Now, there is no escape from using theory. We have to use theory to try to make sense of the world around us. And you are so lucky, I devoted a blog post to this last night. I was inspired by that George Friedman discussion. So there's no alternative to using models to simplify reality. The world is far too complex to live without them, but if you use a false map of reality, you won't get where you want to go. Now, you have to have a theory about how the world works. The world is infinitely complex. And I'm looking at a terrific 2013 paper published by John Jay Mirsheimer and Stephen M. Walt. Mirsheimer at University of Chicago, Walt at Harvard. And this is on the importance of theory and international relations, but theory is not just important in international relations. It's also important in reality at work, dating, love, sex, marriage, culture. We need theories. We need mental maps, meaning here from Mirsheimer, to identify what is important in different domains of human activity. We need theories to identify the causal mechanisms that explain recurring behavior and how they relate to each other. So, for example, IQ has tremendous predictive and explanatory power for explaining life results by large groups. The coughness critique has more explanatory and predictive power than the culture of critique by Kevin McDonald. The well-crafted theories enable us to test hypotheses. So theories are just simplified pictures of reality. They explain how the world works in particular domains. The world around us is one of blooming, buzzing confusion. It is infinitely complex and difficult to comprehend. To make sense of the world around us, we need theories. Then we need to decide which factors matter most. We need to leave a lot of factors out from our theories as they are deemed less important for explaining what we want to study. So theories make the world comprehensible by only zeroing in on the most important factors. So theories are like maps, both aimed to simplify a complex reality so we can grasp it better. A highway map of the United States might include major cities, major roads, rivers, mountains and lakes. But it might leave out many less prominent features such as individual trees, individual buildings, or rivets on the Gordon Gate Bridge. So like a theory, a map is an abridged version of reality. A map is not the reality. A map is not the street. It's a map. Like maps, however, theories provide a causal story. A theory says that one or more factors can explain what is happening. So theories are built on simplifying assumptions about which factors matter the most for explaining how the world works. So realist theories of international relations hold the balance of power considerations will largely account for the outbreak of great power wars and that domestic politics has less explanatory power. And personalities of politicians similarly has less explanatory power than balance of power politics. Many liberal theories of international relations argue the opposite. So theories have components that are often called concepts or variables. So a theory says how key concepts are defined. And a theory usually depends upon making assumptions about the key actors. There's a prominent assumption in economics that I learned very early on. Ceteris paribus, if we change one thing, Ceteris paribus and leave everything else the same. Of course, in the real world, you change one thing, everything else doesn't stay the same. So a theory explains why a particular hypothesis should be true that identifies the causal mechanisms that produce the expected outcomes. And these mechanisms, which often are not observable, will reflect at best what is happening in the real world. So theories provide general explanations. They are meant to apply across space and time. But they are not universal. They only apply to particular realms of activity or specific time periods. So the scope of theory can vary significantly. So no social science theory explains every relevant case. There will always be few cases that contradict even the best of theories. All right, so I'm thinking about we all have concepts that obscure more than they reveal reality. So one common concept that people get wrong is, it won't happen to me, right? There's no inherent reason that bad things won't happen to you. That's magical, delusional, false thinking. The world around us is usually a far more dangerous people than we place, than we consciously are aware of. To live in such a reality that the world around us is incredibly painful is too painful, so we ignore it. One concept that I've consistently gotten wrong over the course of my life is the importance of religion in explaining reality. So I grew up a Seventh Day Adventist and I thought anyone outside of the Seventh Day Adventist Church was lost. But that was not a concept that helped me thrive. Around age 18 I became an atheist and I thought atheists were just far smarter and more realistic than the religious. Again, that's not a concept that helped me thrive. At age 22 I re-embraced God, I converted to Judaism and for years the main thing I wanted to talk about was ethical monotheism. This assembly was not an approach to life that worked. Only in my 40s did I concede an obvious reality that secular societies such as Japan is far more law abiding than any Jewish or Christian society that I know of. So it's hard to argue that belief in God is essential for creating a good community. Now I tend to understand religion as a subset of culture. That seems to have more explanatory power. Culture is the creation of a particular people in a particular geography. So from an empirical perspective, not a faith-based perspective, seems like most of the time a particular people with a particular religion have more in common with secular members of their people than they do with foreigners who share their religion. For example, Norwegian Christians in many ways seem to have more in common with secular Norwegians than they do with African Christians. Japanese Christians seem to have more things in common with secular Japanese than they do with say Peruvian or African Christians. I've gone through much of my life thinking that religious people are more likely to be moral than secular people. Now I have to concede that there's not much evidence for that. I have to concede that a person's ability to bond with other people has more predictive power about his decency than his religiosity.  Another bogus concept I've had about life is the transcendent importance of sex.  I spent much of my life thinking that women are lying, see you next Tuesdays. This did not serve me. I spent much of my life assuming the vegetarianism was a healthy way to go. As a result, I had a lifetime of poor health. June of 2021, I started swallowing six beef organ capsules a day and all my health problems disappeared. I've gone through much of my life just despising people I offended. I thought they were weak. I failed to recognize that they simply had a different hero system from me. My lack of interest in hero systems different from my own has not served me. I had a concept that I could be tough on myself and easy on others, but I learned reluctantly that I tend to treat others the same way I treat myself, which for much of my life has been badly. I failed to recognize the limits of my willpower. I thought I could accomplish anything through my wealth. Didn't realize it consistently ran down throughout the day, except for brief bumps up after eating. So I failed to create a life that worked because I was trying to create a life that depended upon the considerable exercise of willpower, which I could not consistently muster. Now I try to create a life that uses a minimum of willpower by putting myself in situations that are most conducive to what's good for me. Another bogus concept I've held about life is an exaggerated sense of my own talents. By desperately hoarding onto this false concept, I pursued celebrity in my 20s and 30s and 40s while failing to assemble the building blocks of a good life suited to my abilities, such as finishing my university education, developing a profession, such as law, marrying young and having children. Thinking I could solve my problems on my own was frequently another false concept that I've held to. My exaggerated sense of the importance of right wing politics, another false concept that I've held to, something wrong with being right wing. But I failed to recognize that our political predispositions are rooted in our biology and our early imprinting and that what makes a particular politics, whether right or left or centrist, whether it makes it adaptive depends upon circumstance. I used to think that moral character was of the greatest importance that I read John M. Doris' 2005 book, Lack of Character, Personality and Moral Behavior. And I came to recognize the transcendent power of situation. Situation frequently has more influence over our behavior than our purported moral character. Came to recognize that moral character, to the extent it exists, is domain-specific. So some people may be honest in business and dishonest with their families. Other people may be honest in sex but dishonest in accounting. And if you want a walking, talking, thesaurus of false concepts about reality, one would have a hard time outdoing gurus such as Dennis Prager. And I've talked about his false concepts with regard to reality many times. Mars, this teaches us that it is possible to reach an accommodation, a peaceful accommodation between powers and even superpowers regarding specific territories. The problem is never territory. The problem is the symbolic sphere. We are fighting over symbols because we are creatures of dreams. We are storytellers. We die for fiction. We never die for reality.   It's nonsense. It's a story.    We die for symbols. We never die for reality. And in Antarctica, it was a virgin territory so there were no symbols there. There was no heritage. There was no culture. There was no religion. No past. When we are embedded in the present and with an outlook to the future, we collaborate very well as a species. Another example is Australia. Australia is a continent. I didn't see China invading Australia in order to counter the British Empire. I didn't see war there. There's no war there. Why? Because Australia has no history. There's no past. I know Australians will be very angry with this. But that's the truth. There it's a totally present society. There's no past. When we don't have a past, we don't fight. We collaborate actually. Unfortunately today, we have a movement, especially in the West, but not only a reactionary movement, back to traditions, back to symbols, back to religion, away from enlightenment, away from science, away from knowledge. We have this reactionary wave which will drive us into belligerence and war and conflict. In periods of uncertainty, you revert to religion, to symbolism, to tradition, to... And then this provokes, somehow, aggressive, violent, primitive, atavistic instincts. I'm not quite sure what is the connection, but I know there is a connection. Because where there are... There's no tradition and no history, like Antarctica, like the moon, like the space station, like science. No tradition in history and science. You know what is science based on? No past. And no nation, no specific nation. No nation, no organization present. No nation, no tradition. What is protesting is the power of the non-rational. But the non-rational certainly is responsible for a lot of bad things in life, but it's also responsible for a lot of great things in life. Inordinate love for your friends, or your spouse, or your girlfriend, your kids, right? There may frequently be a large, non-rational component of it, but it's what makes life worthy. So I really enjoy his critique there, but he is ignoring the nature of the non-rational to give meaning and purpose and joy and depth and all sorts of wonderful things to our lives. Religion and no past is very important. Science is no past. You don't say, for example, I am never going to accept Albert Einstein because I have Newton.  Albert Einstein came through Newton to the garbage. We don't have an adherence to the past. We don't have loyalty to the past. We live in the present in science, 100% in the present. What's the latest? What's the latest discovery? What's the latest theory? We don't care about the past. So of course, Russians, Ukrainians, Israelis and Palestinians are working in perfect harmony in science. Even to some extent in media, you know, I'm a columnist in Brussels morning. The managing editor of Brussels morning and my direct boss, so to speak, he's a Palestinian from Gaza. I never had any problem with that. Okay, Sam Backman. So here's an interesting discussion between former foreign policy adviser to BB Netanyahu and Kathy Newman, who had that combative interview with Jordan Peterson a few years ago. The devastating humanitarian consequences. Israel, though, has masked soldiers near Gaza ahead of this expected ground offensive. So speak now to Yakov Amidro, whose former Israeli major general and national security adviser to Benjamin Netanyahu is on the line now. Good afternoon to you. We've seen the scale of atrocities carried out by Hamas have been laid out in graphic terms, not least in these pictures, astonishing pictures that have been released on the official Israeli government Twitter accounts. Given that, how would you be advising Mr Netanyahu to respond? Look, you know, we made mistake in the past. In some operations, we heard the international community. We heard friends who urge us to take into account the humanitarian issue. And the result is 1400 Israelis butchered by a barbarian organization. Instead of going a few years ago to destroy the organization, we heard the voices from all around the world. We stopped the operation and the result is very clear. So this time, we are not going to hear or to take into account the voices from the United Nations and other organizations. We are going to crash Hamas to the end. We will do to Hamas what you did too. Okay, so when you have to spend so many words, talk about how this time we're not going to listen to the United Nations, we're not going to listen to world opinion. But we all live in the world. We're all affected to varying degrees by world opinion. So even Israel's incredibly nationalistic, right-wing government is going to be affected by world opinion. I understand trying to psych yourself up. Oh, this time we're not going to listen. This time we're really going to get it done. But Israel lives in the world and world opinion will have an effect on Israel. The Americans to ISIS. Hamas is not an organization. It's a terror, barbarian group. Israel, right? Jews had to use terror to establish the monstate of Israel. Americans had to use terror to establish the United States of America against England. So terror is just a tactic. All right. So with regard to those Harvard students, right, who were coming out in support of Hamas, and there's been a great deal of controversy about that, they weren't really primarily coming out in support of the horrible things that Hamas had done. They were siding with their team. The reason that American universities are supposedly so anti-Israel is because they are the least nationalist part of the United States and the most internationalist and the Israel lobby has the least power over discourse in universities. So those various student unions coming out in support of Hamas, they're really just siding with their hero system, their team. They're not really saying that we think that slaughtering women and children is great. That was just a tactic that their team used to try to achieve its own hero system. And at the same time, I don't have any problem with Bill Ackman and other billionaires saying we need a list so that we can blackball these students. I would not do that. If I were an employer, and I thought that one of these students could be a good employee for me, and just because you support Hamas doesn't...


Hello everybody hooded Cobra Commander 788 here and I am so glad to be back reviewing the G.I. Joe comic book series published by Marvel Comics. The previous issue was focused on Snake Eyes, Quinn and Dr. Venom escaping from Sierra Gordo. In this issue we return to G.I. Joe vs. Cobra. We are up to issue number 16, so let's start by looking at the cover. The cover shows Hawk and Destro battling on the back of a his tank with Cobra Commander aiming a gun at Hawk's back. In the background we have a cityscape and some jets flying over. This is a pretty good cover, lots of action on this cover, but it does also have a few oddities. This tank doesn't look very much like a his tank. It has a lot of space behind the turret, enough space for two people to stand and as we know the his tank did not have that. You'll notice in the interior artwork the his tank also has a different design. These may have been based on the prototype his tank. We know that the his tank changed quite a bit in pre-production before it was released as a toy. The his tanks as they're seen in this issue look more like the his mark 2, which was released years later. On the splash page we have the title Night Attack, scripted by Larry Hama and pencils by Mike Vosberg. The opening page is also pretty nicely done and action packed with 4 G.I. Joe vehicles charging into battle. We have the ram motorcycle, the MOBAT tank, the vamp and the dragonfly helicopter. On page 2 it's revealed that it's only a training exercise and they're just shooting at targets. Way to get our hopes up comic. Hawk wants to upgrade G.I. Joe's armor defeating capability so he has 10 remotely controlled his tanks attack the team. Then he unleashes the Wolverine. This is the first appearance of the Wolverine. It makes quick work of the his tanks and as it drives through the smoke the Joe's are duly impressed. On the next page it's revealed that the driver is a girl. What? This is the first appearance of Covergirl. I'm a big fan of the Wolverine and Covergirl. But as she appears in this story she doesn't seem to have the personality that I would expect her to have. She gets Catty with Scarlet and that seems a little out of character. I imagine Covergirl as being highly competent and focused and I have a hard time imagining her being threatened by anyone. We also get the first appearance of Tripwire who immediately trips over his own equipment. Most of the 1983 crew was introduced in issue number 11 but we haven't met all of them yet there are still some introductions to make. Tripwire has kind of a funny exchange with Rock and Roll who catches his backpack full of mines. What is this? A carrying case for oversized hockey pucks? These mines. I know they're yours. Breaker breaks in to let everyone know that headquarters has figured out where Cobra is going to strike next. Elsewhere Cobra Commander is hosting a dinner party with the members of Cobra Command and we are introduced to Major Blood who recites a terrible poem. We also get a really nice moment where we hear the inner thoughts of each member of Cobra and we find out that Cobra Commander has called in Major Blood to kill Destro. Each one of them including Major Blood, Scarface, Destro, Dr. Venom and the Baroness is plotting to advance their own personal interests or to gain an advantage over the others. Back at GI Joe headquarters Hawk tells General Flag they believe Cobra is going to spread the deadly toxin in the printing ink for US currency. General Flag says Cobra has threatened to blow up the Capitol building so all troops are earmarked for that purpose. Back at the Cobra dinner party all of the Cobras are still plotting against each other and it's revealed that this dinner party is taking place inside a trailer being hauled by a truck and that truck is in a convoy headed toward Washington DC. Meanwhile in Washington it is raining and there are troops and tanks surrounding the Capitol building. Hawk asks General Flag for just a few troops to assist the Joes in guarding the Treasury but General Flag declines. Then they see planes in the sky it looks like the Capitol building was the real target after all. At the same time the Cobra trucks marked Arbco on the side that's an anagram for Cobra drive up to the Treasury. Cobra troops with Dr. Venom infiltrate the Treasury building and set about their plan of infecting the ink with their deadly plague toxin. At the Capitol building paratroopers deploy from the aircraft above. We're jumping around quite a bit but the story will gain focus in a few moments. Inside the Treasury building Torpedo, Gung Ho and Tripwire confront the Cobra troops and it's worth noting here Torpedo is in his full scuba gear complete with mask and flippers totally inappropriate for this setting. Dr. Venom decides he's going to carry out the mission himself and shoots a Cobra trooper in the back and knocks out Scarface. At the Capitol building it's revealed that attack is a distraction. The airplanes were only miniatures used as decoys and the paratroopers are toys. It's kind of funny to see GI Joe scale toys in a GI Joe comic book. Hawk jumps in the vamp and races toward the Treasury. The U.S. Capitol building in Washington D.C. is just under a mile and a half away from the Treasury building. In normal traffic Hawk ought to be able to make that trip in about 10 minutes assuming traffic has been cleared away because of the threat to the Capitol building he should be able to make it faster. At the Treasury building Zapp takes out the Cobra command truck with his bazooka but the Cobra's quickly deploy his tanks. Inside the building Scarface escapes just as Cobra's his tanks bust through the wall. The Joes throw down their weapons and surrender to the his tanks they are far outgunned. Major blood picks up the plague toxin and the his tanks march the Joes outside into the range. Destro suggests the Joes be terminated with extreme prejudice and Torpedo asks what's that mean? And you know what me too I've heard that expression before where does it come from? Terminate with extreme prejudice is a term from U.S. intelligence services. To terminate with prejudice means that an agent was fired not to be rehired. Terminate with extreme prejudice meant they did not want the information that agent had to be exposed at public trial. So terminate with extreme prejudice became a euphemism for execution. That's when it's revealed that a garbage truck that had been sitting outside the building was concealing the Wolverine which bursts out and starts taking out his tanks with the missiles. There's a pretty exciting battle here with multiple vehicles and characters and this is great it feels like GI Joe to me but I do have one nitpick. As the Wolverine fires its missiles the Joes continually reload new missiles into the launcher and this is something I always wanted on the toy. The toy was a 12 shot once its 12 missiles were fired it was done. But in the comic book apparently the Wolverine is able to store additional missiles somewhere and I always wanted that on a toy. We come to a scene that would have ramifications for the GI Joe comic book series for years to come. Cobra Commander is driving one his tank with Destro in the turret. The Baroness is driving the other his tank with Major Blood in the turret.  When the Baroness sees that Major Blood is targeting Destro in desperation she cranks the wheel of the his tank causing it to roll and crash into a parked van. Major Blood escapes but the Baroness is trapped in the wrecked his tank and the leaking fuel from the van explodes. The Baroness is presumed dead. The remaining his tank takes out the Wolverine and that's too bad I like the Wolverine. Dr. Venom says something chauvinistic and speaking of chauvinistic here comes Clutch in the vamp. Hawk, Clutch and Scarlet give chase in the vamp. As Cobra Commander Dr. Venom and Destro flee in the his tank Destro is overcome with grief at the presumed death of the Baroness. The vamp is in hot pursuit on the streets of Washington DC and as it catches up Hawk jumps onto the his tank and starts wailing on Cobra Commander. Yes this is the battle we wanted to see. The GI Joe leader versus the Cobra leader but then Destro comes to his senses and goes mono a mono with Hawk. There's a panel here where the action is a little bit hard to understand. Hawk and Destro are both swinging at each other and there's a burst between them where it seems to indicate that they hit each other but how did they hit each other? Did they hit shoulders or what? Cobra Commander regains his footing and draws his pistol and for a moment he pauses to consider which one should he kill Hawk or Destro? Cobra Commander shoots Hawk in the back and Hawk tumbles off the back of the his tank into the street. We get a little epilogue here where we see Scarface disguised in a trench coat escaping on a city bus. This was a fantastic issue. There was plenty of action. We get to see lots of vehicles and characters fighting just as we used to play with them as toys. We get the introduction of some new characters like Cover Girl and Tripwire and the first appearance of the Wolverine tank. Those are some of my faves. In this issue we have the possible death of two major characters, the Baroness and Hawk. We'll have to wait till next issue to find out if they are alive. There are some oddities in this issue like the ploy at the Capitol building. I have a hard time believing those tiny planes would fool anyone for more than a few seconds. Torpedo appearing in the Treasury building in his wet suit, oxygen mask and flippers. That's just really weird guys. You really gotta go off the character model if it makes sense in the story. Even so this is still one of my favorite issues from the early part of the G.I. Joe series. There's plenty of action. It's the culmination of a story that had been building for several issues. I highly recommend it. That was my review of G.I. Joe issue number 16. I hope you enjoyed it and I hope to have a review of issue number 17 for you soon. I'm still getting used to doing these comic book reviews and I hope to refine my style and format as I go. This channel does in-depth reviews of G.I. Joe toys so please subscribe and hit the notification button so you can catch future videos. I'd like to thank my patrons who make all of these videos possible. If you like the channel and would like to support the channel in that way please check out my Patreon. I also now have a coffee account which allows you to make a one-time tip if you like the videos. You can find me on social media, on Facebook and Twitter and check out my website hcc788.com. Thank you for watching. I'll have more G.I. Joe content soon and until then remember only G.I. Joe is G.I. Joe.


Now, the House of Representatives has resolved to investigate the sale of adulterated petroleum across the country. The decision came after a motion of urgent national importance moved by Hon. Mohamed Mongono, the chief whip of the House. Now, correspondent Emanuele Hijide completes the report. The decision by the members of the Green Chamber to invite the airing importers is to stop the toxic fuel from causing more havoc. In a motion, Hon. Mongono urges NNPC to suspend all importers found to be culpable. He said there was a need to put in place a credible monitoring and surveillance system that would ensure adequate quality petroleum products are imported into the country. There is a need to put in place systems that will check the quality of petroleum products that is being imported into the country. And this incident further reinforces the clamour by all ensemble in Nigeria that the petroleum refining company should be rebumped. Other lawmakers contributed to the debate suggesting that guilty importers should not only be brought to book but compelled to compensate for the damages caused by their actions. They also suggested the establishment of modular refineries in the country to cater to the short fall of products in the system. They have brought in from under recovery, they are now saying it is $3 trillion that we have to spend every year. What are they contributing to the economy? And we are returning overhead costs, recurrent costs for the refineries for the past six, seven years. Mr. Speaker, each time and every day, we will be looking for what is the challenges of security. The consequential effect of the refineries working and they are put into production is employment of young people. All innocent Nigerians who frame victim to this adulterated petroleum and their vehicles or whatever they are used have been spoiled, should be considered in the investigation. My amendment is to order NNPC to suspend the four companies that imported this adulterated fuel that they imported from Belgium. When the motion was put to a vote by the presiding speaker, Idris Wahsair, the deputy speaker of the House, it was adopted. The House resolved to invite the NNPC for more details on the matter while mandating the House Committee on Petroleum Resources downstream to investigate the release of adulterated petroleum across the country. Back to the adulterated fuel story, the House of Representatives has resolved to investigate the sale of adulterated petroleum across the country. The decision came after a motion of urgent national importance moved by Hon. Mohamed Mongono, the chief whip of the House of Representatives. We have joining us now, Balazza Capitulum Engineer and I'm a public affairs analyst. Many thanks for joining us, Balazza. Thank you. All right, let's talk about what happened on the floor of the House of Representatives today and the reps, they have decided to investigate them, one due and some other petroleum marketers involved in this issue of adulterated fuel. But how far do you think this investigation would go? Well, this investigation should go as deep as possible because what has happened is not only an internal disgrace to Nigeria, but it has caused international disgrace to the image of Nigeria as an oil production nation, as a member of OPEG and as a country whose citizen is presiding over the biggest crude oil cartel in the whole world. Because as I'm speaking to you right now, the OPEG Secretary General, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries Secretary General is Al-Haji Sanusi Barkindo, and that person is a Nigerian. You can imagine having a Nigerian presiding over all these great countries, but when you look at the back end, it is only his own country that cannot boast of effective or functional refineries. It is only his own country that due to recklessness and irresponsibility, imported, contaminated fuel will be brought in while he is doing a good job, but we will not be surprised if his colleagues are mocking him. So to that extent, there should be a thorough investigation and the culprit found must be punished according to the laws of this great country called Nigeria. All right. Thank you, Bala. But then I'm still bothered. I really need to understand the origin or maybe get some sort of historical perspective I'm concerning all of this. How could a country as big as Nigeria import fuel that's not up to specification and they're having high ethanol content? How could it have escaped maybe authorities, regulation, and how could it have found its way into the country? Excellent. And God bless you for that excellent question. The reason why adulterated fuel like that found itself into the shores of Nigeria and not only into the shores of Nigeria, got to the retail outlets, got to consumers and cost us this economic and health harm or calamities was because all the three control mechanisms failed and the control mechanisms are the preventive control mechanism, the detective control mechanism and the compensative or corrective control mechanism. And let me explain. Go ahead please. The preventive control mechanism failed because if it had not failed right from the point of loading, they should have prevented that vessel from coming in, meaning that from the point of loading, the quality control and quality assurance processes should have been thorough. And if they were thorough, the vessel will have even been prevented from leaving the point of loading and heading towards Nigeria. So that control or safeguard failed. Then when it got to the shores of Nigeria, the detective safeguard or the detective control mechanism should have detected that the wrong fuel or the contaminated or adulterated fuel has reached the shores of Nigeria. If it had been detected at that point, it would have also been halted. And at that point all we needed to have done would have been to release our strategic reserves and supply to the citizens while we do something about getting the right fuel. But unfortunately the detective control mechanism also failed and the fuel got, I mean permeated itself across the fabric of Nigeria and got to retail outlets that we technically call filling stations. And even when it goes to the filling stations, it was not known or detected until it started destroying cars and destroying humans because it has caused health hazard. And even as at that time the necessary authority, meaning the Nigerian Meadstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Agency, didn't announce to the public and they responded more than after 72 hours. Because if they had even reacted at that point, the calamities would have been mediated or reduced. So all the control mechanisms collapsed, which is terrible and shameful. All right, thank you so much. That was Zakaab Balla Petroleum Engineer and Public Affairs Analyst, bringing an insight and solutions to the issues of a moderated fuel in Nigeria. Many thanks. Once again, Balla Zakaab.


Welcome to All Hands Update, I'm Petty Officer Jessica Bidwell and these are your headlines from around the fleet. The Office of Naval Research, or ONR, is developing a new human-sized firefighting robot. This robot is capable of finding and suppressing ship-board fires while working alongside human firefighters. The robot will be featured at this year's Naval Future Force Science and Technology Expo at the Washington D.C. Convention Center. The Expo is hosted by ONR and is open February 4th and 5th. You can find out more information about the new robot on All Hands Magazine. For more information about the Expo, visit ONR's website. After more than 16 months of renovation, Naval Sea Systems Command, or NAVSEE, employees return to their offices at the Washington Navy Yard. A ceremony is held February 2nd, dedicating the renovated building to those who lost their lives during the September 2013 shootings. For more information about the ceremony and NAVSEE, visit navy.mil.


Why is going on guys welcome back to the channel and I appreciate you being here today I bring you some more live PvP gameplay and this time I am doing the slaying not being slayed Which is crazy and you guys know that when I play PvP I normally get murdered because I ain't that book to be honest we all know this I don't claim to be good I play PvP for the fun of it people, but I brought Basically this out of my vault. I took out my vault. It's a hidden gem weapon I made a video on a while back and the first gameplay I use with it back in PvP people in 66 I got probably the best gameplay I've ever had. I got a Wii run out of medals medal and literally almost got a second Yes, do you believe that from me a guy who's a scrubbing PvP, but yet a time-worn spy This I am banner push rifle an absolute animal people if you've got this hidden away in your vault Please try it out in PvP. I am banner is back this next week actually by the time of post this video It's probably already here and I believe you can get the older weapons from the iron banner package You saw farm them tokens and go spam them in grams with Lord Saladin because you could get this weapon It's got Zen moment tactical mag accurate rounds. It's got hit mark. Yes, it's got red dot micro And it also has a rifle scope SSF. I go with this set up right here and it just absolutely tears people apart It really does so yes before we get on to the gameplay every month I give away a fully customized controller made to your standard center anywhere in the world But if Xbox or playstation to be in the chance of winning it simply make sure you're subscribed to the channel drop a like on the video And leave a comment down below and follow the game link at the top of the video description is fast simple and legit guys But guys, I hope you enjoyed the gameplay to come. Thanks as always for stopping by and hopefully I will see you on that next one Nobody wants it, you know Oh My life time once by how I've missed you That's how you keep wind up, you know Two girls So I'm better one. I've heard the trials with some monsters as well, but same office. I can't believe I'm not What I feel I might be short I think that's it Laggy.  Damn already No It very well too man. This thing just I'm telling you when you get people this the flinch will be absolutely good issues So quick I start shooting at people It's like the carnage they let a few shots in that stick the closer we run out of medals Sure to be honest. I saw a tank come up, but I don't even know We start thinking about where you start panicking and playing defensive and And then I die straight away then I don't know you know what that is Because I switch to go over to the tire once by in my opinion My headsets are there a better way How I didn't die then On their teams on the tank you're sure going on we got this two more kids visual between catalysts for me Let's see what we've got people. Let's see what we got Must have had about 30 Two or three kills eight kills 20% YouTube. Definitely Yeah, that's one of the best games of our nages, especially kill shoot was


I think music is universal, and ours has been, and to me, and you guys might laugh at me, but music changes your vibrational frequencies. So I mean it passes through you, and it changes you no matter what language it's in. And it's like the earliest experience we probably have is a mother's heartbeat. Even before you're born, you're hearing rhythm. And anything that a mother does with a baby, there's music in that communication right there. So it just grows from there.