Episode 780 Scott Adams: Iran and the Funeral of the “Stupidest Person in the Middle East”

Date: 2020-01-07 | Duration: 54:50

Topics

My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a Tucker Carlson’s unique stand on imminent attack planning The letter to Iraq that wasn’t Must read on Soleimani’s death, NYT by Thomas Friedman Gordon Chang’s objective reality on Iran’s nuclear compliance Rand Paul thoughts on the death of diplomacy Khamenei says retaliation must be direct and by Iran itself The absence of tears Was President Trump “decisive” or “Impulsive”? A ring is the future of tech

If you would like my channel to have a wider audience and higher production quality, please donate via my startup (Whenhub.com) at this link: https://interface.my/ScottAdamsSays

> [!note] Rough Transcript
> 
> This is an auto-generated transcript and may contain errors.

## Transcript

[0:02]

pay it on this side will you will you bear with me I've got a new lighting scheme going on bear with me don't go anywhere hey I'm back did you miss me well I guess I have to work on that a little bit but trying some new lighting schemes I know why you're here you're here for the simultaneous it you're here for coffee with Scott Adams and what luck I'm Scott Adams and you're here everything that you wanted has come true and more but if you'd like to enjoy the simultaneous it yeah it doesn't take much all you need is a cup or a marker glass a tanker cello sir Stein a canteen juggler flask of a vessel of any kind

[1:02]

juggler flask of a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid I like me some coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure the dopamine to the day the thing that makes everything better simultaneous lip go
that's where to start the day tiger juice so seems like we've got some more Iran stuff to talk about so he says your face looks good well that's the first time I've ever heard that I assume you mean the lighting is good which would be reasonably true so let's talk about a whole bunch of different angles on the Iran assala money death and see if we get any smarter number one the biggest question of all is whether a killing Sallah money made

[2:03]

is whether a killing Sallah money made us more likely to have some kind of war situation or less here's my way of framing that I say there was Sala mania live we had a hundred percent chance of death and or with him dead we have probable death and war that feels like an improvement we went to a hundred percent chance of absolutely more stuff like we've had every day which is he was planning more death and destruction to America more conquest more trouble more problems so I believe we went from a hundred percent chance of problems to almost certainly problems feels like a slight improvement if I were to if I were just a gambler and an odds maker I'd say yeah that's probably at least a five percent improvement now of course the the risk is that something would ramp up quickly

[3:06]

is that something would ramp up quickly and be bigger than whatever would happen if he was just running wild in the Middle East but I don't see that happening I don't see that happening I'll tell you why in a minute in no particular order Tucker Carlson is taking let's say a unique or interesting stand but because he's departing a little bit from some of the other opinion people on Fox News and one of the things he tells us and I agree with this is that we we just spent three years finding out that our own intelligence services are all a bunch of liars and not just a little bit I'm talking about some serious serious yet you know the the Russia collusion thing being key among them so and and then of course we have the weapons of mass destruction situation in which the intelligence people all failed so Tucker

[4:10]

intelligence people all failed so Tucker asked quite reasonably why in the world would we believe them when they say that killing him stopped imminent attacks imminent attacks that were not going to be telling you about is that crap should you believe that our intelligence services were on the ball and they knew there were there were a credible imminent attacks the answer is no no you should not believe the intelligence services opinion about the imminent attacks absolutely back there's no credibility now I would love to live in a country where when your intelligence service tells you something's happening you say whoa that's probably true but we don't live in that country I mean we just have to be realistic we live in the opposite country we live in the country where we absolutely cannot trust our intelligence services now that's different from saying we shouldn't have killed him completely different I don't

[5:12]

killed him completely different I don't believe that we had good intelligence on specific imminent attacks what I do think is that we had a history of this guy doing nothing but attacking and setting up more attacks if you have a history of one guy who is doing nothing but setting up a continuous series of attacks do you need an intelligence agency to tell you that there will be more and that they might be imminent you do not you do not so while Tucker is completely I think you know smart sane reasonable to say we should have zero trust in our own intelligence agencies on this kind of question completely right but you don't need them if somebody's been doing something on a consistent basis every day you could reasonably assume he'll do more of it so the question of whether we know there are imminent attacks completely irrelevant his his track his track record up to the day he died was he was

[6:14]

record up to the day he died was he was doing that stuff that's all you needed to know I tweeted cleverly yesterday that in order you know people talk about the proportionality of the attack you know they they did some bad stuff they killed an American contractor who did some service people attacked an embassy and then people are saying hey is a proportionate to take out the head of the military to which I say the only way that that could be proportional is if we killed that same bastard six hundred times that would be proportional that's how many Americans he's responsible for killing right so if you killed that same bastard six hundred times we'd be roughly even so no it's not a proportional attack we'd have to do a lot more to make it proportional you know that's obviously just the the joke version but still what

[7:14]

just the the joke version but still what what the hell went on with that story about the the letter that went to Iran saying or now to Iraq saying we were going to pull out what the hell was that all about I looked for the story in the headlines today and it's completely left it's left the pages well what the hell was that all about now I see somebody here saying in the comments very similar to what the pundits are saying that that is an indication that the White House is in disarray it's chaos nobody's in control all the smart people have left it's not that it's nothing like that do you think the President ordered the draft letter to be written and and delivered to Iraq no do you think a lot of people were involved with that decision no all we know is that at least one person did something that's all we know for sure there was one person who did something and it was done now if you and

[8:17]

something and it was done now if you and I knew not to send that letter don't you think a person working for the administration should have known it to somebody says was it false reporting I like your thinking did it really happen did it because I just sort of left the news and it left the news without finding out who did it so whoever said did it really happen that is indeed the right question because there might have been something that happened that wasn't that it could have been for example I'll just throw out some you know brainstorming ideas it could have been that they thought mmm we might have to get ready for this possibility and because we prepare for everything we always prepare for the the yesterday now they just prepared for it because they thought that might have to later and then somebody was an idiot and sent it to Iraq could happen I mean it could

[9:18]

to Iraq could happen I mean it could have been nothing but you know just some administration person didn't know it was a just-in-case letter so we don't know about that but I'll tell you what is not it's definitely not an indication that the entire administration is a mess it's nothing like that it's exactly one person who may or may not have made a mistake or maybe it was just misreported that's all this what do you think there is any administration what whoever you imagine was your best administration of all time do you think there were no people in the administration and made a mistake even a dumb one it was a pretty dumb mistake but if it happened now we're all watching the news of the Stampede it's called they called the Stampede a solid amaze funeral so some kajillion people showed up for

[10:21]

so some kajillion people showed up for the the funeral and there was a stampede and 40 of them died and 213 were injured now I don't know how to react to that because my my reflexive reaction is deeply at odds with my sense of self you know what I mean so my my preference for Who I am as a human being you know dealing with in a world with other human beings would be that my only reactions that should be young shock I'm feeling bad for the people were injured and killed but on the other hand it was a a group of people who walk me dead I mean I think they were chanting death to America correct me if I'm wrong and I I did not have a reaction to this which I'm proud of and I can see that many of

[11:24]

I'm proud of and I can see that many of you are having the same reaction I don't think there's any situation where you should be happy about somebody dying right I mean unless is actually a terrorist but should you ever be happy about anybody dying and I love you have the same reaction when you saw this you thought well that's a million people chanting death to me and some of them died I don't know what my reactions that's supposed to be all right so how many people live in Iran 80 million or something what percentage of them were in the street protesting now when you count the fact that that there's sort of a cultural thing where protesting in the street is a thing where it's not as much in other countries I don't know the number of people we saw was it

[12:25]

number of people we saw was it meaningful don't know yet but let me tell you the best take on all of this if you haven't seen it yet it's really worth reading now I don't say that about a lot of things right every now and then I'll say you know Matt Taibbi wrote something and you should definitely read it there aren't too many articles I'm going to tell you you should absolutely read but this is one of them and I tweeted on us you can find it through my my Twitter thing this morning Thomas Friedman wrote in The New York Times and I know I know I know as soon as you hear the name you're saying I disagree with their mom climate change or whatever it is you disagree with him but just just bear with me the article is first of all well-written he's a great writer and it's completely novel it's exactly opposite of what everybody in the world wrote and here's Thomas Friedman steak one then this is a quote

[13:27]

Friedman steak one then this is a quote from the article one day they may name a street after President Trump in Tehran why because Trump just ordered the assassination of possibly the dumbest man in Iran and the most overrated strategist in the Middle East general Solomon name have you heard that opinion before haven't we only been hearing that he's a brilliant strategist and he's just amazing and he certainly got a lot done not that not going to argue but Friedman's argument is that the Iran nuclear deal the year that they made the deal there their GDP went up their economy improved they had finally some kind of peace with the world they were on the track to make a ran really really grow and prosper I'm just good thanks and then Solomon II took that gain and turned it into endless proxy wars which got him killed crippled the Iranian economy bought them

[14:33]

crippled the Iranian economy bought them nothing in return except control over some regions that they're probably going to wish they didn't control because it's not so easy to be in charge of that kind of a place not too cheap either and and so I wonder so remember Friedman knows what he's talking about when he talks about the Middle East so he's a guy who was who's dug in a little bit and I've got to admit his take is not only not only does it ring true and it passes my sniff test because imagine imagine if you will all right let me do a little thought experiment for you okay here's a thought experiment let's say our next president after President Trump's next next term so let's say in five years six years with five years I guess we've got a new president and I won't name the president it's just a hypothetical president so we get a hypothetical president in the United States five years from now and that person starts a bunch of wars

[15:34]

and that person starts a bunch of wars we know we don't want to be in starts a war and Sweden to conquer Sweden starts a war to conquer Iceland or Greenland or whatever starts a war - I know take over France and let's say we're succeeding but we're also killing a bunch of people that didn't need to be killed conquering territory that he didn't need to be conquered it's successful but just a lot of people are being killed and there's not any real reason for it and then imagine that a foreign country came in and assassinated our future hypothetical present and that future hypothetical president because of all the wars and all the people he had killed for no particular good reason had driven our economy down by let's say 20 or 30 percent what would you feel about that let's say a enemy country took out the one guy who had completely ruined your

[16:36]

one guy who had completely ruined your own country how'd you feel about it got to be honest I'd be okay with it totally honest I'd be okay with it now I'm not gonna making any kind of analogy to any kind of normal ish president because even president Trump is well within the normal you know category for for being a president so so we're not talking about somebody who does things you don't like he's not doing what you think you should do on climate change I'm not talking about that kind of situation where you just disagree with them politically I'm talking about somebody who was actually Hitler if if in your own country a Hitler arose and some other country killed him how would you feel about it well let's ask Germany Germany how do you feel about the fact that we killed Hitler do you feel bad probably not probably not how does Libya feel that Qaddafi was

[17:40]

not how does Libya feel that Qaddafi was killed they feel bad probably not probably not now the big difference is that there are some leaders which everybody would agree are bad so certainly there's nobody in Germany who thought that Hitler did a solid for Germany and pretty much everybody agrees okay that's just thoroughly bad yeah I know there's always somebody who's on the other side but generally speaking people are gonna say Hitler was bad even if you're living in Germany and maybe especially if you're living in Germany but this guy Holly mani is a little bit of a mixed bag there are people who think he's bad people think he was great Thomas Friedman has shown us the way we have the greatest Brander in chief of all time no matter what you want to say about President Trump can we all agree on one thing he's the best Brander the best nickname giver he can make you

[18:41]

best nickname giver he can make you focus where he wants you to focus he has those skills yeah even his enemies would agree Thomas Friedman has shown us how to brand this thing and the branding is we should brand Salomon E as somebody who destroyed Iran you know why because Salomon e destroyed Iran that actually happened does it pass the sniff test let's say you now put yourself here's another thought experiment put yourself into the head of an Iranian just an average Iranian probably you didn't love the regime to begin with alright so there's I don't know what the percentages are but there I'm guessing that there are more people who were not who were not delighted with the regime than there are people who are radically in favor of it if you gave them this argument and say that it's a to them before solemn they did all of his stuff

[19:43]

before solemn they did all of his stuff you were a growing economy and everything was going good when he did his stuff which was create all these proxy wars and and you know spend all your money and ruin your economy are you better off is there anybody in Iran who would answer the question oh yeah what solemn they did made us better off right you can even love the guy and think he you're not better off all you have to do is use the the Ronald Reagan thing are you better off now or would you have been better off without any of that stuff because you know what it would look like it would look like a growing economy at peace with the world and you might still have had a lot of influence on Iraq if that's what you wanted because that wasn't the biggest deal for anybody so I think the way that the United States should play this is we should take Thomas Friedman's very wise take on this that instead of calling him

[20:45]

take on this that instead of calling him this genius strategist that it's good thing we got rid of him we should be talking about him as the guy who ruined Iran for the Iranian people I believe we can sell that now I don't know the end buy sell it I mean it's true I don't mean sell it as a make up a fake story and see if we can get idiots to believe it the Iranian people are really smart you know you're not dealing with dumb people here it's a really well educated smart society and I think they're gonna see the same thing we do that they are worse off because he was doing what he was doing so let's take that Gordon Chang brings us back to reality and I want you to do me a fact check on this so Gordon Chang is more more known as an expert on young China and North Korea but he makes this statement and I don't been waiting to see somebody say this and I don't know why we needed a China expert to say this but when I say

[21:47]

China expert to say this but when I say it you're gonna say why isn't this the only thing we're talking about and here it is so Gordon Chang says here's objective reality I think he's responding to somebody talking about what is objective reality he says here's objective reality Iran was violating the New Deal by blocking IAEA inspectors inspections it would have been an abrogation of presence Trump's responsibility if he has certified compliance isn't that the only thing that matters what why doesn't that come up every single day when we're talking about a rat because we're having this weird disagreement about whether Iran had been complying with the nuclear deal but this one fact and I invite you to check this fact because I'd like to know that this is a solid fact and I you know it's coming from Gordon Chang he he knows what he's talking about and so I think it is is it a fact that Iran did

[22:47]

think it is is it a fact that Iran did not allow the nuclear inspectors to inspect the places that they wanted to inspect now it's possible that that they just didn't want the nuclear inspectors to be spies and so maybe they were over asking so that they could look at some military sites that weren't really nuclear sites or something like that so ran might have an argument about why they did it but is there argument any argument that they did it and I'd like to know that can somebody confirm that for me is it is it true that they were not allowing nuclear inspections and now on top of that you have to add that Israel found that trove of nuclear documents to show that during the time they were saying they had no nuclear weapons program they had a very robust nuclear weapons program so if you know that the exactly the same cast of players have a verified confirmed

[23:49]

players have a verified confirmed history of lying about this exact question are you developing nuclear weapons no we're not developing any nuclear weapons what and then Israeli spies actually captured and brought home the actual physical documents you know CDs documents that they captured showing that that was all lie now it was after that that the nuclear deal was made but you're making a deal with people who have a history of lying about this and having a great incentive to lie about this it's the very thing that they should lie about right yeah I mean if you're a rational country if you're gonna lie well this would be the thing to lie about we would do it too if yeah if the situation were reversed I think you'd want your you'd probably want your government to lie about it right in the military world it's okay to

[24:50]

right in the military world it's okay to lie because it's a military lying is just another weapon of the military so from the Iranian perspective if the nuclear weapons were part of their military well lying about them is just another military weapon why wouldn't they so if you have a situation where they have a history of lying and then on top of that they have blocked the nuclear inspectors for look from looking at the places that the inspectors wanted to look and thought that they should look can you ever say that they have certified compliance the answer is no you kind of can't so that's a good point all right Rand Paul has to take on this and he basically thinks it's a big mistake because he says it's the death of diplomacy and Rand Paul says he can see no possibility that this could lead

[25:53]

see no possibility that this could lead to any kind of negotiations because diplomacy is sort of dead now well maybe I would like to be the contrarian here all right I'm gonna use a technique I've talked about before now this is something I learned in hypnosis class in hypnosis class I learned that people tell you what they want without knowing that they told you in other words their choice of words reveals what they really want even if they don't mean to do it so sometimes you can read the way they were things the way they focus on things and come to conclusions that they did not intend to tell you here is a perfect example you ready for this so this is from I wish I knew which this came from but as one of the news services said this that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in in a rare appearance before Iran's National Security Council

[26:55]

before Iran's National Security Council so I guess he doesn't appear but in front of them a lot but he said that any retaliatory attack on American interests in the Middle East should be carried out openly by Iranian forces themselves the New York Times reported okay so the New York Times reported that and I guess there were three sources that said the same thing from the meeting so that they have a reliable reporting says the New York Times and he says the bold order deviates from Iran's usual tactic of hiding behind proxies in the region now read between the lines okay so come any is saying that unlike the days of Solomon II that quote any retaliatory attacks on American interests should be carried out openly by Iranian forces read between the lines what is he

[27:56]

read between the lines what is he telling the proxies to do stand out he's telling the proxies to stand down in favor of Iran openly and with no you know no hint of hiding anything retaliate retaliating themselves but wait read his exact words he did not say we are going to retaliate he didn't say that look what's missing what he said was any retaliatory attack on American interests should be by the Iranian military openly
the the is if this is reported correctly and of course there's always a question about that what does it mean where if he's telling the proxies to stand down and he's saying that if we attack if we attack and if there's any

[28:57]

attack if we attack and if there's any attack it needs to be open let me ask you this do you think Iran is going to openly with their military in an unambiguous way attack an American interest I say no I say no because if Iran's military openly attacked an American interest we would respond in a devastating way and there isn't the slightest chance he wants that so if this reporting was correct the Ayatollah just said no response that's what he said he said no proxies because we want to make if there's any attack it should not be with proxies stand out if there's any attack it's gonna be direct but there's no chance of a direct attack because it

[29:59]

no chance of a direct attack because it would be suicide the Ayatollah just said no response has anybody else said that right now again the the wild-card here is whether the New York Times reporting about an Iranian meeting is accurate I mean who knows it could have done other things he said that would change my mind but if we were judging it just from these words is Rand Paul right that diplomacy is dead because Iran just said retaliation is dead not in those words but if they're saying the only way we're gonna retaliate is directly and there's no chance they're gonna do that really I think they just said no retaliation in the only way that you can say no retaliation without looking weak I think they just said we're not going to be weak we're either gonna retaliate the you know the proper the way where you know we did it or

[30:59]

the way where you know we did it or we're not going to do it interesting so there's this big question about whether the president was impulsive or decisive so people are arguing about his inner mental state now of course that's ridiculous and and whether it was impulsive or decisive that's something you decide after the fact right if everything works out right as the article I was reading this from I wish I should I wish I could credit it but I forgot to write it down yeah so you'll decide after the fact whether it was just decisive because everything worked out in the long run or was it impulsive and everything didn't work on the right yeah in the long run but here's my take on this there are a lot of people in the world who do not have experience making important decisions president Trump is a

[32:01]

important decisions president Trump is a person who has made countless big decisions involving you know construction his own life you know company you know millions billions of dollars etc on a smaller scale I'm also a person who has made many many business decisions in the Dilber world and otherwise in my corporate life that involved millions of dollars on the line if you did it this way you can make millions if you do it this way you don't so I also have been involved with lots of big decisions a lot of people who are reporters have never lived in that world that most of their decisions are just about their own life they're not making big decisions except oh how do i word this article and stuff like that so I would argue that the people who were trying to decide whether this was decisive or impulsive are people who are not experienced at big decisions and

[33:03]

not experienced at big decisions and that if you're experienced at big decisions there's something you know that people who are not experienced that big decisions don't know and that and it's this a lot of it is guessing right if you're involved in really big decisions about the unknown well if we go down this path I don't know but we go down this path well I also don't know I have two paths and I don't know that's what the nature of a very large decision looks like small decisions can also be ambiguous but they have small stakes here's the thing that I have learned you can think forever about something and it doesn't help you that much alright that's what people who make lots of big decisions about big stuff eventually learn Florida help people justified defending Trump alright we'll

[34:08]

justified defending Trump alright we'll get rid of you I like to get rid of anybody who says that all we're doing is defending Trump because and I came down pretty hard on him for and I'll do it again today it this is one of Trump's worst weeks persuasion wise now whether or not the killing of Solomon a was a good or bad will we'll all learn that in the future but what he said that you would go after a cultural sites in Iran that's just a mistake how that how the hell would I defend that now the way he defends it we're saying that you know all targets are on the table basically you know why why would we say any targets off the table well alright but you don't need to offend the public in Iran it's the last thing you want to do it was completely unnecessary to throw this cultural there might be some culturally important targets complete mistake there isn't the

[35:09]

targets complete mistake there isn't the slightest way that I could justify that as anything but a mistake all right so if you come on here and say blah blah blah Bowlby everything you say is defending President bomb I'm just gonna block you for being stupid or formed alright anyway back to my point people who make big decisions know that the difference between being decisive and really thinking things through and being impulsive it's not that big of a difference because usually you're making decisions with just so many unknowns that you couldn't possibly know which is the right decision and you end up looking at a few variables that you've decided over the course of your life are more predictive than other variables so if President Trump looked at this gigantic complicated system with a million variables and he peered into the million variables and said you know what there's probably only a few that'll ever

[36:10]

there's probably only a few that'll ever matter how long would it take him to do that not very long because he probably looked in and said look if if we let them go on and we don't make a strong statement it's worse so it could be that no matter how complicated this all is there aren't that many variables that that are the ones you're gonna use and they're probably not that hard to analyze if we don't stop it there'll be more of it do you want more of it because we can stop it or we can have more of it it's complicated but do you need to be a middle a Middle East expert to make some of these decisions I don't know impulsive and decisive and well considered they aren't what you think they are for people who make big decisions a lot they need to look for the variable that matters and then once you have it sometimes that's all you need now there's talk about what North

[37:13]

need now there's talk about what North Korea is learning from this you know there one thing they're learning is that President Trump is willing to carry on a threat so if you're North Korea you don't have to wonder if President Trump is a killer he's a killer he just picked a specific person in the world and killed him on his own really I mean he ordered people to do it but it was his decision you know we're not hearing that there were a lot of other people recommending you do this president Trump literally just killed a guy intentionally so if your which is I could say more about that but I don't want to so Kim jong-un knows that he's dealing with somebody who's a killer so that's probably good but would he be less likely to give up his nukes now because now he's like oh this guy's a

[38:14]

because now he's like oh this guy's a killer I better keep my nukes baby that's one way it could go but I think what Kim should learn is that Trump killed a guy because he killed an American and Kim is not in the business of killing Americans I'm sure otto warmbier but I don't think Kim personally ordered that I think there were some jailers who might have been bad players so I'd be very very super I'd be amazed in fact there's almost nothing that would make me believe that Kim ordered warmbier to be you know killed or at least beaten beaten until he died I doubt it all right so I think Kim can take away from this that if he hurts one American one time it's a whole new ball game that seems to be the message where should be the message but if he deals with us fairly doesn't doesn't hurt

[39:16]

with us fairly doesn't doesn't hurt American interests well there's something to be gained here because we don't have any interest whatsoever and they kind of wore North Korea we don't need to kill anybody up there let's see what else we got going on here here's something that one of Israel's top the my Israel's one of Iran's top guys Zarif tweeted on Sunday he said - those hallucinating about emulating Isis war crimes by targeting our cultural heritage blah blah so a top Iranian used the word hallucinating they also used the word Bingley recently they've used the words Bigley and hallucinating let me ask you this if you were the Iranians wouldn't you be following the media in

[40:16]

wouldn't you be following the media in the United States to find out all the different views of President Trump you're trying to understand him as leader you so you're reading all the different opinions of them the pros and the cons are the Iranians following me what do you think you know I and some of those of you who have been watching me for a while know why I'm asking this question I can't tell so there's no way to know of course but as I'm seeing lots of opinions going by yeses and noes and bull blah well here's my take on it if I were I ran or North Korea or Israel I would be I would very much know the the competing opinions about Trump and I would certainly want to know the one that predicted the best right because if

[41:17]

that predicted the best right because if you're another country all you care about is being able to predict you want to understand who the president is and then predict how he will act that's the whole game prediction if you had been following American media and opinions on this president who would you follow for your best take on predicting it's kind of me so I have to ask the question is there anybody in Iran who's following my my books or my podcast I don't know but if you're listening Iran let me say this
you have an opportunity that you've probably never had before I think Solomon II probably was as big a problem to Iran in the long term and I I do accept Thomas Friedman's take on this that saw many was the dumbest person in

[42:20]

that saw many was the dumbest person in the Middle East in terms of you know how things turned out he heard around in a way that Iran will take decades to recover from if Iran wants to be you know the great country that they can be have been and will be America is really ready to be your friend we sort of really want to be friends with Iran and other countries and don't have any reason not to be as long as your adventurousness is curved and it seems like the general who is in charge of adventurous stuff is no longer with us so there may be an opportunity here for something amazing and as I often say peace in the Middle East there's one guy away one guy the Ayatollah Khamenei he just has to decide that Iran doesn't want to be adventurous and militarily take over Israel he just

[43:23]

and militarily take over Israel he just has to decide and everything else will work out so we've never been closer to something amazing let's talk about a few of the things it's not all about Iran every day
Chelsea Clinton reportedly made nine million dollars from sitting on a corporate board of some company that invests in Internet companies and most of it was stock I'm 95 percent of it or something was was that she got stock as part of that and it went up nine million dollars nine million dollars how does that look right oh one other thing about company it's being reported that he openly wept over Solomon days casket can somebody find me a photo of Khamenei openly weeping and here's the important

[44:23]

openly weeping and here's the important part with it here I want to see a tear because we've seen lots of pictures of there there must be some cultural Iranian thing that I don't quite understand have you noticed the pictures where they're all like this that the hand goes up is like and they seem to be grieving in a very similar way but the pictures that we saw were a close-up of the Ayatollah but there were no tears
what does it mean to weep without tears find me a picture of a tear if you can change my mind about the direction of Iran if you find me a tear if you can't find me it's here on Khamenei his cheek it means he's glad he's gone I mean he knew this guy a long time you know give

[45:26]

knew this guy a long time you know give it given a long time they work together if somebody that close to you died wouldn't you shed an actual tear I'm you've you've experienced death in your life it's real tears a co-worker dies it's real tears right so find me some tears somebody says they saw them but I need a confirmation on that all right here's my prediction for the future are you ready what the future is the ring and by that I mean an actual ring that goes on your hand this one's a prototype I believe that the future interface will be that you'll have a ring that that works with your smartphone let's so let's say it's it's it's got some Bluetooth your smartphone so the smartphone is your brains but that you use the ring to control your environment so that you could for example look at a light point to it snappy fingers

[46:27]

snappy fingers your ring would pick up the snap cuz it's got a little speaker in it you go and the lights come on you pointed your television snappy fingers and lights come on you want to lower your raise the volume go like this and you know and the ring would you know be in a position in space where you'd know it's rising and lowering now this particular ring has a feature on it by the way I invested in a company years ago that made this prototype and there's something special about the prototype so it has some smarts and top but the prototype has this button on the side and what's special about it is that you can reach the button with your thumb so you won't accidentally hit this button very much in the normal course of life you're not going to hit the button but it's easy to reach this particular monitor was made by a company called ring guard I think they're no longer around I don't know what happened to him but they got a patent on this and it was so that and

[47:28]

patent on this and it was so that and this was for defense you know basically it was a an alert if you were jogging and somebody grabbed you he could just go pink because nobody could it would people couldn't grab your arms but you'd still be able to go pink before they got you so this would send down an alarm with your location and stuff that was the idea of the company but I'm just talking about the ring as a as an element to the future all you need is something you can touch to activate it and it became it can become your your mouse on the world and the fact that you can wave and point to things and snap your fingers you can show up and down you can show left and right you can swipe with it you should be able to do almost everything in the future with your hand so this is my somebody said if I want to find a girl that looks like Christina pointer ring at the piano exactly that's what I did but so here's my prediction very soon you're going to see industries formed the same way you

[48:30]

see industries formed the same way you saw a lot of watch industries you can see ring base stuff it's needs to have a speaker in it oh here's the other thing here's the other biggest thing the biggest thing is that most of a lot of us anyway are getting these digital assistants in our home if you have a digital assistant and I'm intentionally not using the name of Amazon's digital system because I don't want it to come on let's say you tell your digital assistant to play some music and it's playing some music and then you want to change it it's hard because you're across the room and you're yelling at your digital assistant hey yo cancel you have to walk right up to it so wouldn't it be good if you had a little speaker in your ring and when you wanted your digital assistant to change the channel instead of walking across the room and screaming at it we're taking I think you could take your app out and fire up your phone and find the app you know you could do it that way but wouldn't it be good to say

[49:31]

way but wouldn't it be good to say change the next song turn on lights so it might be that your ring is just the easier way to control your environment and and if if your environment is controlled by voice and other people are in the vicinity wouldn't it be good if you could whisper it you know wouldn't it be good to say remember somebody says the Richard in Florida says already exists oh yes the I meant this would be a microphone not a speaker if I said that wrong it would be a microphone not a speaker telepathy all right I'm looking at your comments so I suppose some are saying that you could do it with a watch but I would have seen him by now all right that's what I'm expecting rings rings everywhere and I will talk to you

[50:32]

rings everywhere and I will talk to you later oh I want to give you it before I go can I give you an update I told you the story about using an app called go trashy and it allows you to find somebody who will take away your garbage and we use the app and unfortunately the person who took away my garbage it was all my Christmas stuff and it was this gigantic pile the size of an automobile basically they took it away and they and the operator dumped it on the side of a public road which caused somebody to go through the garbage find my identifying stuff and call me a home and say there's a gigantic pile of your garbage on this public road in Oakland to which I said what so we contacted the AppMakr go trashy but not until we had hired another company to go pick up the trash and they charged us $400 so we charged a

[51:35]

and they charged us $400 so we charged a hundred something for the first people to pick up the trash but they just took it and dumped it on a public road and then I paid another company over $400 to go pick it up from that public road and dispose of it properly so Christina contacts the NGO trashy a people and sends them the bill sends them the bill for the other trash company their competitor and says you should pay this bill because it was your guy that they caused the problem what do you think happened the the app maker I think it was somebody probably one of the founders contacted us and said absolutely and and they said they would pay for it they apologized they said they were horrified they said it has never happened before they not only reimbursed us for what we paid through their app but they agreed to pay over $400 for the other app and so let me say let me say this as clearly

[52:37]

so let me say let me say this as clearly as I can the go trashy app a plus and if you if you want to use an app for removing your trash I recommend them now there's there's a famous principle involved here some of you know it and I used to own a restaurant a couple of restaurants and we all know we all know this truth if you complain in a restaurant and the restaurant makes good whatever that is maybe they copy me maybe they give me four deserve whatever it is if the restaurant makes good on your complaint you are more likely to go to their restaurant not less likely the best customer the best customer is one that is unhappy and then gets satisfied so go trashy this is a perfect example of it I was deeply unhappy at an outcome but it wasn't exactly their fault because they it's an app in which lots

[53:39]

because they it's an app in which lots of independent contractors can be part of it it's not like they could affect every person it's not like they know what everybody everybody's going to do so they can't completely control what other people are doing but they can certainly they can certainly make it right and they made it right perfectly I would say that's a plus and I recommend the rep so in return for them doing a an excellent job of customer service and of really as good as you can do that's fixing a problem is as good as you can do it's my it's my absolute standard for what makes a person a good person we're all making mistakes so if you judge people by their mistakes yeah they got rid of the guy of course yeah he's no longer part of the app that was also part of it I don't judge people by the mistakes because then we would all hate each other because we're all making mistakes all the time but you can judge people by how they respond and how

[54:42]

judge people by how they respond and how they responded it was perfect so A+ use go trashy app I recommend them that's all for today