Episode 786 Scott Adams: Reprogramming Iran From the Simulation Control Room
Date: 2020-01-13 | Duration: 33:25
Topics
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a FISA court overseer announced…David Kris? Fact checking President Trump’s speculation Iran media appears to have turned against the government Newt Gingrich: American policy should be “aggressively pro-Iranian” Iranian Supreme Leader calls for increased cooperation in region “Impulsive”…debunked, “reckless”…well, working good so far Harry and Meghan
Rough Transcript
This is an auto-generated transcript and may contain errors.
Transcript
[0:11]
[Music] well it looks like we got a little company up here better navigate through okay looks like the simulation is back on track hi good morning this is coffee with Scott Adams I’m coming to you today from the simulation control room this is where the simulation that you believe as your reality is formed and I’ll be tweaking it a little bit this morning you can you can see that there’s a lot going on up here it’s pretty busy space a lot of people trying to tweak your reality but I’m the the ultimate author and so you’re in good hands today and we’re going to be tweaking the simulation for your benefit today it’s gonna be really good watch this but first what do you need you know what you need come on you know what you need yeah you need a cup or a mug or a glass a tank or chalice or
[1:11]
mug or a glass a tank or chalice or Stein the canteen juggler flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure the dopamine and of the day the thing that makes everything better it’s called the simultaneous sip go yeah now many of you noticed that the news started to get a little boring and since I’ve been running this simulation like a reality show I needed to inject some interest so did you notice how the fisa process was getting really boring it was boring so I made a few changes here and here all right little little tweaks there okay and now we’ve got an interesting FISA Court again as Mike Tsarevich reported on Twitter in February of 20
[2:14]
on Twitter in February of 20 and Obama era lawyer named David Chris wrote that Devin munis quote falsely accused the FBI of deceiving the FISA Court so somebody incorrectly said that Devon newness falsely accused the FBI of deceiving the FISA Court only to learn later that the FBI deceived the FISA Court that everything Devon noona said was correct so what would be the most fun thing I could do to make the FISA thing interesting you know what David Chris in charge of overseeing it and that’s what’s going to happen that’s right the guy who doesn’t have a shred of credibility is going to be the next a FISA Court overseer you didn’t see that coming did you I know you thought it would be some credible boring person who would just oversee stuff no that is not
[3:14]
would just oversee stuff no that is not how I run this simulation could would I bar you know now we’re gonna get the most divisive person we could put it in there somebody who has no credibility whatsoever and a complete public record to prove it that’s what I call a good good simulation all right here’s my favorite story of the day are you ready president Trump is getting a lot of heat because the intelligence people aren’t exactly backing up his claim about the imminent threat from the Solomon a and his people and I wondered to myself Scott what was the exact quote that Trump made what were his exact words that are making people fact check him incorrectly so I went back to it and looked it up here here are his exact words that they’re fact-checking right
[4:15]
words that they’re fact-checking right so this is being fact checked so when I read this sentence and say to yourself oh I guess they’ll find they’re trying to find that if that’s a fact president Sadek quote I can reveal that I believe it would have been for embassies Trump said in an interview with Fox News and now the point of that was that Trump indicated that there was imminent danger to four embassies and their fact-checking that and the other the other folks Pompeyo and the other person whose name I can’t remember right now are saying well you know they’re sort of shading that a little bit softening a little bit and the critics are saying wait wait and so I read the sentence again tell me where in this sentence Trump makes the claim that the intelligence proves or even strongly
[5:18]
intelligence proves or even strongly indicated that there was good the four embassies were going to attacked find me in this sentence where Trump said the intelligence says four embassies are going to be attacked watch this I’ll read it again I can reveal that I believe it would have been four embassies find in that sentence where he said the intelligence says it’s going to be four embassies it’s not there they’re fact-checking a belief a belief about something that could happen in the future in other words they are literally fact-checking his speculation about what he believed I’m pretty sure he believed that or at least he believed that there was trouble coming but you’ve got the entire media who has nothing to do today except to fact-check somebody who had a belief in what was likely to happen that’s it he had a belief now was his
[6:21]
that’s it he had a belief now was his belief unreasonable no actually there’s nobody who thinks it’s unreasonable to assume that having having surrounded one embassy that he wouldn’t do some more of it wouldn’t the most obvious thing to do if you were just surrounded an embassy and you got a lot of press forward and you were putting heat on the Americans wouldn’t you surround some more embassies it feels like that’s exactly what they would have done so if Trump says I can reveal that I believe it he’s not saying I can reveal the the evidence you did say that he said I could reveal what I believe did he believe that for embassies might have been three might even five but is it a reasonable claim the Trump believed embassies were the likely targets I would say that’s pretty credible now I don’t know what he thinks but is it reasonable that he would believe
[7:21]
reasonable that he would believe embassies would likely be at the top of the target list given that they just surrounded an embassy probably probably all right this is interesting I think who is CNN who was reporting that Iran has the media has turned on the government which doesn’t happen in Iran think about this the headlines for the major Iranian newspapers were pretty anti-government talking about the shooting down of the plane and changing the story and killing all the Iranian citizens who just thought they were they were on a plane going somewhere what does it mean that the Iranian press just declared some independence probably means a lot now it could be that the Iranian leadership is saying you know we just got to take it on the chin because we messed up we’ve admitted we made a mistake we’ve
[8:23]
admitted we made a mistake we’ve admitted what really happened maybe we just have to maybe we just have to let the public and the press event and maybe that’s the best thing now if that’s what they’re thinking it would be pretty smart I think it would be smart for Iran I think to let the public and the press event a little bit before before things get back to normal because if they can’t vent with their free speech what there is of it then maybe they would have to do something more radical maybe that’s a good to stop that so Trump tweeted they was urging Iran to turn their internet back on and I thought that might be really productive in terms of a way to go and Newt Gingrich said something interesting he said that the the US position should be quote aggressively pro-iranian now what’s interesting is his choice of
[9:24]
what’s interesting is his choice of words aggressively pro-iranian is what the US position should be totally agree with that you know anytime Newt talks you should listen because he’s usually the smartest guy in the game and news says we should be aggressively pro-iranian now you could you could argue what aggressive means in this context but what I love is pro-iranian we are pro-iranian because we like the people of Iran we wish them well with we’d like to be able to you know do more with them it’s just the government so new tests correctly identified that we have a common enemy we the people of Iran and the United States we have a common enemy which is their current government and being aggressively pro-iranian as a way to frame our position is really strong newts good at this stuff
[10:24]
newts good at this stuff so you should listen to them that’s way better than being somehow anti Iran or acting like we we want to destroy the country those are the worst frames here’s an idea so this is more of a yeah this is a thought experiment I believe this idea has no chance of being implemented but the president’s tweet and and also newts framing give me this idea just imagine this imagine if you will that we said we’d like to negotiate with you or ran but there’s only one thing we want I’m not saying this will happen and I’m not claiming this is the the idea we should pursue just a thought experiment it goes like this we say to them we only want one thing we want you to turn your in and that back on that’s it that’s the only thing we want and other and we’ll we’ll release the sanctions now you say
[11:24]
we’ll release the sanctions now you say to yourself wait wait wait then they’re gonna get a nuclear weapon you know that that’s all the problems that we’re trying to avoid we have to keep the pressure on but here’s what’s different I believe the Iranian public or at least enough of them might be on our side meaning our side meaning peace meaning they don’t want to start a war meaning they don’t want their government to be wasting their money on stuff like that so it seems to me and again it’s just a thought experiment in the real world probably you wouldn’t take any risk like this but think about how strong that would be as a framing hey Iran there’s only one thing we want we want you to put your own public on the internet let him talk that’s it that’s all we’re gonna ask because one of the things that that would do is who would show that there’s no difference between what we want the United States and what the
[12:25]
want the United States and what the public of Iran wants say there’s no difference I think the Iranian public can take care of it if they have one thing the ability to communicate that’s it it’s the only thing we ask we’re not even going to ask you to do anything with your nukes we’re not going to ask you to change your proxy stuff although maybe that’s in the process of changing already because of Solomon a being gone but as a framing it’s very strong just say it’s all we want we just want you to empower your own public wherever that goes is up to you and there’s a good chance it would go in a productive direction now it’s not guaranteed so that’s why you know you know you’re never going to see an idea like that but as a thought experiment it’s interesting [Music] all right the other thing that Trump is doing by saying let the Iranians have access to the Internet is it’s starting to get close to an idea that I’ve been
[13:26]
close to an idea that I’ve been promoting for a while and that’s the idea that we should encourage Iran to take their jihad there let’s say their religious impulses their argument there their war if you will to spread the teachings and the ways of Islam take it to the Internet so instead of making it a kinetic war where people get killed making it a war of ideas and trust their God I think that’s the strongest part of it if they trust their God then we should they should also trust that the ideas they’re promoting their interpretation of what their God wants are the correct ones and that there would be the strongest over time and that’s all they would need but if they don’t trust their own God they might have to use war and terrorism and these
[14:27]
have to use war and terrorism and these lesser tools the tools of primitive people because they don’t trust their God enough to take it to the proper battleground of ideas because what is religion religion is not keep your arm or lose your arm religion is a war of belief and thoughts and ideas so if they can’t win on the battlefield of thoughts of ideas an argument they should question whether they’ve interpreted their their deity correctly because would their God let them lose if they were fighting the right war that would be a question for them seems to me they would believe that if their God wanted them to win their God would let them win that’s how it works so the president has tiptoed right up to that line but I think there’s another place to go which is let’s take the war to the Internet because asking people to stop there their jihad or or to stop their
[15:30]
their jihad or or to stop their aggressive promotion of their version of Islam that’s too much to ask you can’t ask the Ayatollah why don’t you be a little less Islamic that’s not that’s not a path that’s not gonna happen but you could ask him to fight the war a more effective way one that’s more compatible with their own God that seems like that could be done so I’ll put that out there let’s see if we can change the simulation a little bit all right bye this week tweaking tweaking yeah bye this week you’ll see more of that here’s an idea for Iran again I don’t think this idea will be implemented it’s just food for thought let’s say you’re an Iranian citizen you want to protest your government but you don’t want to take the risk it’s not an accident that a lot of the protesters are young and students because young students take bigger risks
[16:33]
because young students take bigger risks but there must be you know millions of just ordinary middle-class married people with families who would also like to protest but it’s just too dangerous how could you let the people who want to protest also protest but make it safe I have a suggestion it’s called the ambiguous protest are you ready we might give it a different name and it goes like this instead of going outside with masks and clubs and whatever else they’re doing and tearing down flags and essentially sort of rioting in the streets instead of that where it would be easy for any police officer to look at the people and say okay well that person with the masks who’s tearing down a poster is a protester no doubt about it so we’ll rough them up we’ll kill them and we’ll do whatever we do to protesters but what if instead of that it were made a little bit more ambiguous
[17:34]
it were made a little bit more ambiguous and it goes like this shoes let’s say you have a call that at a certain time everybody will go outside that’s it that’s the whole protest everybody wherever they are if they’re indoors just walk outside they don’t have to March they don’t have to chant they don’t have to sing they don’t have to throw things in fact if you just walk outdoors on your own sidewalk how do I know you’re protesting at all maybe you’re just going to the store somebody’s calling it a flash mob that’s probably a pretty good branding so what I’m talking about is a show of the the pure volume of support for the protesters without the risk of being a protester because if you simply walk outside in your regular street clothes it could be because you wanted to see who else walk downside it could be because you were going to the store it could be because you were going
[18:36]
store it could be because you were going for a walk but you’re outdoors and here’s the thing how big would this be if if the Iranian protesters just said all right 8 p.m. Tuesday night walk outdoors if you support the protesters just walk outdoors you don’t have to march you don’t have to go anywhere you can stand in front of your own house just walk outdoors some people will be just going outdoors to see how many other people went outside so you could go outdoors for two reasons one to just see what’s happening two to show you the show that you’re protesting it’s kind of it’s gonna kind of look the same and the idea would be to disguise the identities of the protesters from the people who are just happened to be outside but imagine if you will if 30 million people walked outside at the same time that’s it the hard part is getting from the number of protesters you have to some
[19:38]
number of protesters you have to some number that’s big enough to overthrow the country without going through the phase where the Iranian National Guard kills thousands of you on the process the only way you can skip that phase is by having tens of millions people just walk out doors at the same time just say hey we’re outdoors look at how many there are we’ll just take some pictures that’s all just go outside take some pictures that’s the end of it all right don’t think that’ll happen but it could here’s something that Iran’s supreme leader said recently and what he said was quote that that it’s a turbulent situation with the u.s. and Iran and he called for increased cooperation in the region isn’t that an interesting response the supreme leader blames the u.s. for the turbulence in the region
[20:40]
u.s. for the turbulence in the region but then as a response to the turbulence in the region it calls for increased cooperation in the region I’m not sure exactly who’s cooperating maybe just everyone but what does that mean to have increased cooperation in the region well here’s the dog that didn’t bite if the US is blaming if the if Iran is blaming the US for the turbulent situation shouldn’t the next thing they say be then the US should change what they’re doing because if the US is to blame is wouldn’t you expect that the Iranian leadership would say well u.s. is to blame therefore the u.s. should do something different but instead Iran says the u.s. is to blame for the turbulence but who should do something different is the other people in the region isn’t that a soft response it’s very anti aggressive it’s it’s
[21:43]
it’s very anti aggressive it’s it’s almost it’s flagrantly anti aggressive but it does suggest that the solution is a larger peace deal and I feel like that’s where this is heading well let’s make sure it’s heading that way simulation controls on control f1 which a couple buttons all right there we go there we go simulation is set we should be seeing a wider peace deal in the region maybe not in the next weeks but maybe in the coming months because nothing else would make sense all the other plans are bad but the plan of having a large regional peace deal where Iran could consolidate some of its gains such as its influence over Iraq which would be a gigantic game for Iran you know wasn’t that many years ago that they were at war with Iraq and now Iran owns now they own Iraq you know under Saddam Iraq
[22:45]
own Iraq you know under Saddam Iraq attacked Iran and caused just you know horrendous losses as Iran tried to defend itself with just human waves of soldiers who were getting mowed down by superior forces and after all that not too many years go by and Iran owns the country that attacked them they’re not going to give it back and maybe they maybe they maybe they earned it you know I’ll tell you if a country attacked the United States and we had a chance later to own in that country we might do it I wouldn’t I can’t see Iran giving it up all right so Trump also tweeted Baba national security advisers suggested today that the sanctions and protests have Array unquote choked off and will force them to negotiate and then the president
[23:45]
to negotiate and then the president talking about negotiating he says actually I couldn’t care less if they negotiate will be totally up to them but no nuclear weapons and quote don’t kill your protesters now we don’t have a lot of control any control over whether they kill their protesters but somewhat embedded in this we don’t care if you negotiate or not is a threat and the threat is we don’t care if you negotiate but no nuclear weapons what does that mean negotiating is optional but what’s not optional is that you’re not going to have nuclear weapons that’s that’s a military threat or an economic threat but it’s some kind of a threat this says that’s not going to happen and it doesn’t matter if you’d go see eight or not I like that but then the part about don’t kill your protesters which is a good thing to say I feel as if that
[24:46]
good thing to say I feel as if that don’t kill your protesters that should be aimed more at the Iranian public or basically the problem would not be the problem with the United States it would be a problem with Iran and its government if they kill their protesters again I think that might be a step too far especially after the planes situation I’ve said before that the plane situation could be Iran’s fake because sometimes you need or a reason that’s not really your real reason because you were already inclined to do whatever it is but you need something that’s your trigger or something you could point to say yeah it’s because of that we’re all rallying around that and and that might be the Ukrainian airline that got shot down and the lying about it which seems to be even the bigger problem domestically than the mistake itself tragic as it was so anyway we’re watching that with great
[25:49]
so anyway we’re watching that with great interest whatever happened to impulsive and reckless does this does it seem to you we’ll see if that keeps coming back but it seems to me that the complaints against Trump mostly from the Democrats were that he was impulsive and reckless now impulsive has been debunked by the fact that we now know that they’ve been planning it for 18 months if you’ve been planning something for 18 months in other words the question now I would say not planning but rather they’ve been mulling the question of whether to take out Sullivan a for 18 months can you really argue that it was impulsive it’s the opposite of impulsive so that just was stupid then how about reckless well reckless is one of those things that you get to analyze after the fact has Iran ever been quieter than they are
[26:50]
has Iran ever been quieter than they are this week it seems that reckless has turned into that thing that worked too early to say things could change but can you call him reckless when he does something that completely works it absolutely I ran down in terms of their malign activities as far as we know now we could we could learn that their proxies are all reactivated in ten minutes that can all change but at the moment is it reckless if it worked because it looks like it worked it looks like the equation has completely changed in Iran and I’m also seeing more whispers not in any credible way yet but whispers that the Iranian public wasn’t so unhappy about losing that guy and maybe the government itself wasn’t so unhappy about losing that guy because if it’s like every other government organization or any big
[27:50]
government organization or any big organization there were people in the government who didn’t like that guy and they wished he did not exist anymore and now he doesn’t by the way how many of you went and looked at the photos of Solomon Hayes dead charred body I saw something on the internet about that existed that there existed actually photographs of the scene where you can actually see in there with his with his burned down body so I think most most of the you know main professional press sites don’t carry it but it didn’t take me long to find it I went over I think I saw it on in force and I had the worst time understanding myself looking at that that I’ve ever had and here’s the thing I kind of enjoyed it
[28:54]
thing I kind of enjoyed it and that’s so hard to admit because he was so bad you know it was sort of like if that seemed bin laden with a hole in his head or something I think I would have enjoyed it and it says something terrible about me I know because I don’t like that kind of stuff had that been some random you know just citizen would minding their own business and had a horrible fate I wouldn’t be happy about it it wouldn’t be entertaining I certainly wouldn’t go out of my way to look at it but I actually went out of my way to look at that charred body and I’m not proud of us I enjoyed it I enjoyed knowing that his end was so terrible and I even found myself hoping that he stayed alive long enough to know what happened which is a terrible thought I mean it really it tells me too much about myself I wish I didn’t know but I
[29:57]
about myself I wish I didn’t know but I assure you that I don’t have these impulses for normal people it’s reserved for your worst terrorists but there it is so so watch this week and see if impulsive and reckless disappear I think the attack is going to turn totally on this for embassy thing how did you know why did you have this belief that for embassies would be attacked and there will be fact-checking an opinion that says that’s gonna be the main news this week they’ll be fact-checking Trump’s opinion that’s not a thing he said he can reveal that he believes the four for embassies will be attacked let’s fact check his belief makes no sense but the important thing that you wanted to talk about is Harry and Megan so the two Royals who have been kicked off the island
[30:57]
off the island now they chose to leave just kidding they’re choosing to leave them and the news I’m not sure this is really reliable news but the news that we’re getting today is that the pair have said that they want to live in LA but not until Trump leaves office to which I say hey congratulations royal family just found two countries you’re not welcoming because let me tell you this if they move to LA and it’s true and I would say I would doubt this is true so the report that they don’t want to move to LA until Trump leaves office my guess is that’s not true all right I would have to hear I would have to hear it come out of their mouth in order to believe that was true because I don’t think they’re that dumb right they’re both pretty smart people smart enough not to say that if you’re gonna move to a country
[31:59]
that if you’re gonna move to a country you don’t start by making a public pronouncement that half of the people in the country are unworthy deplorable ‘z which is sort of what it sounds like so I feel sorry for them because that just made them unwelcome by half of the people in this country but let’s hope that that was just a bad rumor and when they’re asked about it they say we wouldn’t say that because I don’t think they would you know one of the things if you’ve been raised as a royal you certainly know what kind of things to say in public and what kind of things not to say in public I mean you know the harried knows that and this would be very much in the in the category of things you don’t say right it would be not political would not be wise to demean half of the country before you move into that country so I don’t think it happened I’ll go on record as saying that that’s fake news all right
[33:06]
is it my imagination or there’s not much else happening i somebody says she might say it that Megan Marco may say it but would she say it without checking with Harry I saw a video this morning where people were trying to embarrass