Ami Kozak Uncensored: OnlyFans Nala DID NOT FAKE IT, IS Christian, Fake News Claims SHe Lied
59:39 Share

This episode is brought to you by LifeLock. The holidays mean more travel, more shopping, more time online, and more personal info in places that could expose you to identity theft. That's why LifeLock monitors millions of data points every second. If your identity is stolen, their U.S.-based restoration specialist will fix it, guaranteed, or your money back. Get more holiday fun and less holiday worry with LifeLock. Save up to 40% your first year. Visit LifeLock.com slash podcast. Terms apply.

Welcome to our special weekend show, Sunday Uncensored. Every week, we produce four uncensored episodes of the TimCast IRL podcast exclusively at TimCast.com, and we're going to bring you the most important for our weekend show. If you want to check out more segments just like this, become a member at TimCast.com. Now, enjoy the show.

So you guys may have seen this. The Nala, what's her name? Nala Ray? Nala Ray. There's a video going around where it's out of context to claim that Nala lied about becoming a Christian. Well, Michael Knowles has got some knowledge for y'all. She didn't lie. So this is an out of context clip. Nala admits to having lied about everything, question mark, exclamation point, the whatever podcast has put up an out of context clip. But

But let me play it for you so you can hear it, and then we'll explain. Also, I will add, Discord isn't working. And it's not us. It's Discord, unfortunately. So we'll just play, and we'll see what we get going. As a viral creator on... I went on so many podcasts because I knew the only way... I'm going to pause right there real quick. They bleeped out. They blanked out the word OnlyFans. She says, as a viral creator on OnlyFans, but they cut out that audio. As a viral creator on...

I went on so many podcasts because I knew the only way to grow my was to be viral. And it's such an oversaturated platform right now. And I've been on it for like five and a half years. So everything I've said on podcasts is complete clickbait. I did it to go viral, to then make money. And it worked. I said whatever I needed to, because I understand the male brain and I needed to make money. And I was like, you lied about everything.

Yeah, pretty much. As a viral creator. So Adam Townsend had predicted that she was faking it. On April 7th, he said, Andy Kaufman-esque brilliant and using Daily Wire as a vehicle to introduce her new persona and identity construction. And then that was in April. And then he posts this clip.

saying Nala Ray updated an epilogue. Nala admits she lied and her conversion was a cosplay to appeal to the male brain. Will Daily Wire and its cohorts admit they are cosplaying? Well, Michael Knowles chimes in saying, some have posted this clip to suggest Nala lied on my show after quitting porn. But it seems clear from the context she's describing lying on podcasts before quitting porn, as she described on my show. Hence her covering up, staying out of porn, etc. What am I missing? And a lot of people pointed this out. This is a cheap clickbait tactic.

And some people believed it.

There was one, I think, I think Andrew Wilson chimed in saying, I wish I saw the full context because it's not correct. Walt Wang says, here's the full clip for context. Nala was discussing the fake cheating kink from her prior appearances on the podcast. She was lying. And so people are sharing this thing and it's not correct. And I said, I saw this and I just said, LOL, she lied. Of course, I assumed that I was, I assumed the context was correct from Adam Townsend. He was wrong.

And so I deleted the tweet.

But that's now cleared up. People are so desperate to throw mud at anybody at the Daily Wire. There's so much envy and jealousy for all the success they've had over there. So any opportunity I think a lot of these guys get to throw mud at these guys, with fake news even. No, I know, but it's everything in the media ecosystem. It's Sam Seder. We were roasting him earlier because Ian was asking me how was it having him on, and then I explained how Sam's literally on the show we did

has a fake outrage burst. And then once he's done, he goes, that was the clip I was trying to get. Like just literally admitting that he was just trying to generate a viral clip and then he was done and he stopped being angry. You know, with Nala, this is sort of out of context. I understand that. She said, everything I did was a lie on a podcast. So if someone comes up to you and they say, I'm lying to you right now,

What do you believe them because if you do that means they're telling you the truth and that they're lying to you Which means they're not lying to you which is what's that conflict? But it seems pretty clear what she's saying is that the whole story of? Building up her only fans. No no she was a lie. She was specifically not her can no no nope She's specifically talking about how she was on a show claiming to have certain kinks Yes, and that was all not her whole only fans She was saying I was lying about having a king I'm saying everything everything she was saying that wasn't true was in relation to bright for only fans brah

Audience. And that was that episode where she's like, I just love cheating on people. I love cheating on guys. And then when pressed, he's like, so everything you said was a lie. And she's like, pretty much, which means no, not everything. So maybe there was some truth in it. But in reference to the pre-conversion part, what he's trying to portray is that her conversion is a lie, which is a totally different thing. It doesn't matter. It's before that. The point that she's making is all of the stuff that I was doing was just to get clicks. Mm-hmm.

Like this, I don't know that this is really helping her. I don't think this is going to help her get clicks if she's not making. She's a sweet person. She's not making OnlyFans content anymore. I don't think anyone's going to really care about that. She'd be a cool guest someday, though. This is a cool conversation. I think it's kind of ironic, too, because I think they're kind of shitting on Knowles. Like, look, you're platforming her. But the whatever podcast is really who kind of invented. And I don't actually don't know about her career prior to that. But what made her blow up on.

Twitter and many social media platforms off of OnlyFans was the attention she was getting from the Whatever podcast. So it's kind of ironic. What'd you say? I think most of the attention she got started from the Whatever podcast. I think that that is not accurate. She was pretty, if I understand. She already huge before this, but she's saying she was leveraging these conservative podcasts. And I think the Whatever podcast is kind of a useful idiot in this realm. They'll constantly complain about all these porn stars and porn figures.

but they're bringing them on and benefiting from them. Yeah, I was going to say, they're not useful idiots. Clearly. They're both like... Mutually beneficial. Yeah, mutually beneficial. They're symbiotic. Clearly, clearly, because clearly... She had a super viral clip from the Whatever podcast where she was crossing her eyes that...

propelled her into the ethos, basically. - Yeah, that's what I was kind of hitting. - The Michael Knowles interview, which if you haven't seen it, you probably should for context, was very genuine. Michael gave her a platform, a safe environment, very calm listening ear to kind of break down and talk about her past. I think that's people like Michael that she saw are like, okay, I'm not surrounded by crazy, lascivious men. There are good men and I can,

Fix my life and it's okay Well didn't she already become a Christian When she went on Michael's show Yes at that point In whatever it is it looks like she wasn't And that's why she was saying that stuff Then her conversion which is Believed to be genuine and that's what brought her Into the Daily Wire's orbit to begin with They wouldn't have had her on before that for no reason

She grew up Christian. Well, in a pastor's father's house. I don't know if that was true, though. Maybe she was saying that to... I don't know. That part, I don't know. That, I assume, is true. It all came out on the Knowles Show. Maybe she talked about it before. And it was a pretty intensely strict religious environment, so I think she revolted against it in her adolescence and then into her young adult life and then realized, like, look, there's a middle ground. Right. I don't need to look at it differently. I don't think she did make a...

of middle ground. I think that she went... That isn't middle ground. The way that she used to dress is very conservative. It's very modest. She's wearing a hoodie that doesn't show her cleavage or whatever. And before, she was...

showing it off. I think that, I mean, I can't speak for her, but it does seem like she is modest now and she is a Christian. We don't know what the long-term grift is either, though. I wouldn't be surprised if she came out and was like, just kidding, rip the sweater off. I can't speak for her. Even the pastor taught her. I got you all.

Even the pastor's daughter narrative could be a thing she's saying to like for the male brain. Ooh, you're looking at porn of the pastor's daughter. Like it makes it. So I'm not sure if she's saying everything before I converted was just clickbait. I was doing only fans, but it's all clickbait generated. So you just don't know. She's trying to say yes.

Everything I've said on this podcast My whole narrative, my whole story The kinks, the things that I'm into, all that stuff Is not true It was a way to bring male audiences to my fans So I'm not sure Have her on The whole point of her doing the stuff before Was to garner Male audience To her OnlyFans Have you guys ever had an OnlyFans person on? Tim?

I don't know. No, I don't think so. Not that talked about it. Not that I've been around. I thought about making an OnlyFans and just talking about philosophy. There was a time when there was someone on the Culture War that was, what was her name? Oh, man, that's, she was an adult actress before. I don't know if she actually has an OnlyFans, but it was an adult actress and then another, a Christian girl were on, they had a debate. I forget what the girl's name was. Oh.

Jenna Jameson, famous person? No, no. It was, I don't know. I don't remember what her name was. But there was, again, I don't know if she actually, I don't know if she has an OnlyFans or not, but she, there wasn't a, she was, she'd done like sex work and stuff like that. And there was a Christian woman on that, that they did the debate on the culture war. It used to be a website really just to speak to your fans like Patreon. And then at some point the porn, the porners started to get the most,

become the most popular. And then the site took on a reputation for porn and then it attracted more pornography. And then just the owners of the website were like, let's fucking roll with it. We're making bank. I know Pornhub. I think they have like a thing where you have to enter in your information to access. I wonder if that's also the deal for only fans. I might have to look into that.

Some in some states. You sure you don't know? I can verify. In Texas, they do want your age verified. It's state by state. Or OnlyFans? No, for Pornhub. For porn? Were you in Texas? I was just in Texas. Okay. Wow. And did you put it in? No. I would not ever. I can't say never, never. I have no interest in supplying my age and date verification for a porn site. I don't need it like that. Wow. So it actually managed to compel you to not watch porn? It did. It did.

Wow. I had to use my imagination. And it was well worth it. Imagination all the way. I'm from the 80s where that's all we had was our imagination. So that's easy enough. So you have to put in real info. It's not like, oh, I was born in fucking 1912. I don't know how deep it goes. That's a good point. Maybe you just need to put in a date. Joe Schmo. It's like on Steam when you're looking at some video games. It's like verify your age and you can put in any number. And if it makes you older than 18, they'll be like, okay, here you go. Yeah.

But they don't want your, they don't need you to do it. What? I was going to say something else. You guys want to talk about George Washington's obsessive, I don't know. What's better? We can talk about whether or not they're Christians. We can talk about a guy came here and almost died today. What happened? Oh boy. A guy showed up claiming that he was on a mission from God and people with guns were going to fucking shoot him.

Don't trespass. Yeah. If we didn't, apparently he was on drugs. I don't know exactly what happened, but. No, I saw, I showed up early. We have, we have dudes with rifles for obvious reasons and we had to install a security gate. Yeah. And so the assumption is if we didn't have the gate, he would have just crashed the property and died. Yeah. If he, if, if, if he, if we didn't have, this is why we had the security gate. Cause we, at first we just had signs that,

and people came in and had guns trained on them. And then all of a sudden it's like people are freaking out, and we're like, so we installed this really expensive gate so people can't get through. And then this is West Virginia, and this is a location where people get death threats all the time. So when a stranger shows up, people put their hands on their hips. When a guy shows up and says, I'm on a mission from God, and jumps out of his car, the guns are pointed.

So the police came. Apparently, I don't know exactly what happened because I don't deal with it for a variety of reasons. I'm not supposed to.

And then the dude, I guess, was saying something about he was going to come back either way. And so then people with rifles showed up. And the line between it's funny to show up here and you die is thin. So don't fucking show up on this property. Yeah. Okay. That's like what Kamala said on Oprah. If you come to my house in the middle of the night, you get shot. Do not come. Invite only. This property has physical barriers. And as soon as you cross...

a single shred of the physical barrier which in some positions may be a single line of twine you die in uh i don't know how many states have this law but burglary is crossing a physical barrier to enter a property and the moment you do that especially when the people there have reasonable fear of harm then security doesn't care like nobody wants to get hurt nobody wants to hurt anybody else but if someone shows up and we see them trying to enter the property and some you know

surreptitious means or whatever, they're just dead. You're making me think about Daniel Penny. They just released his, his, uh, what'd you call it? His interrogation by the cops. Interrogation by the cops where he spilled the beans. He said, everyone's like, he should have a lawyer. Get a lawyer. Get a fucking lawyer. He didn't know anyone was dead. He didn't know. And so this is why you don't talk to cops. So what happens is,

A fight breaks out. He restrains a guy with two other guys. He leaves and has no idea anything happened. And the cops are like, you want to come down and talk to us and tell us what happened? He's thinking it was a fight. You know, they're probably asking me, like, why I was fighting. It's no big deal. Because what's the worst case scenario? An assault charge? And so...

I do think in the end it's going to work out for him because it shows he's calm, doesn't even know the guy's dead and says, I'm not trying to kill the guy. He's just, he was threatening to kill people. And I thought I had to deescalate this. But now everyone's saying like, how the fuck did he talk to the cops? No lawyer. He did not know. So you could be riding your bike down the street and you, uh, and, and, and like someone else was riding their bike and you crash and the guy gets up and he's like, oh, my bike's ruined. And, or a better example is you're driving your car and then you get to an accident at an intersection and,

The guy checks, takes your information down. Everything seems fine. And then you drive home, the cops show up and they're like, can we talk to you about that accident from earlier? And you're like, oh, yeah, a guy gave me his information. Everything seemed to be OK. And they're like, yeah, OK, so tell us more. And you're like, well, I was driving. Here's what happened. And they're like, oh, OK. Then it turns out later the guy had a brain bleed and died. And they said you were driving recklessly and that's negligent homicide. Now you go to prison. Don't fucking talk to cops.

My question. I am not a lawyer, so this is not legal advice. There's only one thing you should respond back to a cop with is, am I being detained and am I free to go? Otherwise, just shut the fuck up. Am I being detained? If not, am I free to go? And then you go on your jolly way. If you are being detained, then if they ask you any questions, I need to speak to my lawyer. I can't speak to you guys any further.

Just shut the fuck up and you'll save yourself a lot of trouble. You watch those YouTube videos? Am I being detained? Self-defense? It's just... Shut the fuck up. Am I being detained? Am I being detained? That's the only engagement you have to do. Am I free to go? Am I being detained? Then am I free to go? My question to you guys about the Daniel Penny experience. So he... It was a 30-minute interrogation. They clipped it down to about eight minutes that I watched and re...

posted on Twitter. He said at one point that the guy walked onto the train, started threatening, saying, I'm going to kill everyone. I'm going to kill people. I'm ready to die for this. I'm ready to go to prison or whatever. Ripped off his shirt and then Penny put him in a chokehold of some sort.

The guy in the cops, so you didn't see him put his hands on anyone, and he was like, I don't remember seeing that. Is he—the guy didn't put his hands. Is Penny right? I think the issue was, because he told the cops, I'm not trying to kill the guy. So that's the kind of phrase that could get you screwed here, because you didn't try to kill the guy kind of has an implication in lawyer speak that— I think it helps him. Because—

You think it helps him? The jury's going to see a guy who has no idea anything bad happened. I'm not trying to kill the guy. I accidentally killed the guy because they're trying to charge him with, I think it's a manslaughter charge. Well, the main issue is that New York jurors are retards who drink fluoride and probably eat toothpaste, so they're not going to put him in prison anyway. Is that something they can show at the trial, his interrogation now? Because it was leaked?

This episode is brought to you by Dragon Ball Legends, the ultimate Dragon Ball experience on your mobile device. Dragon Ball Legends features action-packed anime, action, RPG gameplay with Goku, Vegeta, Trunks, and all your favorite Dragon Ball characters. Some of your favorite characters from popular Dragon Ball anime series, such as Dragon Ball Z and Dragon Ball GT to Dragon Ball Super. Fight in real time against friendly or rival Dragon Ball players from across the globe in live PvP battles. It's a great way to get to know your favorite characters

Enter ratings matches with your favorite Dragon Ball characters and earn rating points and rewards. Unite with friends to defeat powerful foes in co-op. Dragon Ball Legends features the best anime fighting scenes on your mobile device. And now, Legends Festival is on, so you can get up to 300 free summon tickets. Are you ready? Download Dragon Ball Legends today, available for free on both iOS and Android devices. It leaked? I think it was leaked.

This episode is brought to you by LifeLock. The holidays mean more travel, more shopping, more time online, and more personal info in places that could expose you to identity theft. That's why LifeLock monitors millions of data points every second. If your identity is stolen, their U.S.-based restoration specialist will fix it, guaranteed, or your money back. Get more holiday fun and less holiday worry with LifeLock. Save up to 40% your first year. Visit LifeLock.com slash podcast. Terms apply.

So is that, you have legal, if someone comes on and just makes verbal threats to

And like, I'm going to kill somebody. They take their shirt off. They're like, I'm ready to go now. But they don't actually move on anybody. Is that a reason to put them out? Yes. Okay. You're making verbal threats. You need time. You need opportunity, intent, and ability. So you're in the same place. You have the opportunity, intent. You're articulating that you can. And ability. Can you physically do something? Those are three things that, like...

Every state is going to have different laws, but when it comes to defending yourself using force, that's what you have to have. The person has to have the ability, opportunity, and intent. If someone says they're going to, they're there, and they're taking their hands on you, that's all three. Sadly, you don't have to wait until they're hurting you. You work different than if you're in Florida, because in Florida you have stand your ground laws, which is totally different.

But the point that I'm making is all the laws are different, but to be able to say, okay, there was reason for me to defend myself. When it comes to how much force you're allowed to use, how far you're allowed to go and stuff like that, that's all different from state to state. But when it comes to I was defending myself because he was there...

He could do something and he said he was gonna, if you have those three things, then you can say, okay, I, he said he was going to, and he was there. And I, so I, I felt like, you know, I had to defend myself again. All of the, the, the specifics are going to be different from state to state. You know, maybe you had to leave, maybe you should have been like, well, you should have left or whatever. But if you have those three things, then you, then that meets the criteria for saying, yes, I can, I can defend myself.

But it's not, you know, again, the laws about how you are allowed to defend yourself, those change from state to state. Yeah, lethal force. And you don't have to wait until the person is hurting you. Exactly. The idea that you're under duress. If somebody's saying, I'm going to kill you now, it doesn't have to actually be the act of killing you, but the threat of force makes defending yourself legitimate the question. You don't have to wait until they start shooting you. If someone calmly across the room looks at me and says it to me, I don't know.

I don't have the right to get up and put him in a chokehold. No, but if he gets up and starts walking towards you, then he's demonstrated intent. Not only has he said, but he's demonstrated. He's walking towards you. The question is, did this guy demonstrate intent? So if you're standing there. So if someone's on the phone, right? Or you're FaceTiming someone and he's got a gun in his hand. He's like, I'm going to blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. You can't find him to get into a fight with him or whatever because he doesn't have the ability.

Right? He's not in the room with you. He's demonstrated intent, but he doesn't have the opportunity to do it. All three, yeah? You have to have all three of those three. So the question is, did this guy demonstrate threat? He said it, but... Saying it, and he's there. Look, the point is, he's there and he's saying he wants to. And that would be up to the witnesses, I guess, saying... Look, he said he was going to. Yeah, but...

Like I said, if a guy across the room calmly says it to me, it doesn't really indicate that he's going... It was him going across the subway, yelling in people's faces, like, I'm going to fucking kill you. I'm going to fucking kill you. He's pacing around. He's not just sitting there being calm. Oh, gee whiz, I'm going to kill you. From across the hall was not the situation. Um...

Yeah, and it wasn't like a calm sentence. He was yelling it and ripped his shirt off. I was like, I'm ready to go to jail. And I think we're already dealing with the consequences of it because it's the feeling around the city that you're not able to defend yourself. Wasn't he saying, I'm ready to die? Something like that. I'm ready to die. When you're talking like that, man, it's completely reasonable. He was like, oh, I'm ready to die. And I think other people also felt threatened. He wasn't the only one. Yeah.

Yeah, I would think the witnesses would carry this trial. On its face, it looks like... I was going to say he should be acquitted. But I don't know enough about the situation. I think that's up to the jury to decide. It really isn't. Of course it's up to the jury to decide. It's really up to the witnesses. He definitely should have been acquitted because it wasn't like he was trying to murder the guy. And the guy was on drugs and he had a condition as well. So it's like, look, man, obviously, you know...

Penny didn't... Daniel Penny restraining the guy didn't help his health. But wait, he was a Michael Jackson impersonator, so... This is interesting. I just double-checked. In Maryland, the law is actually a bit stronger than West Virginia. West Virginia, if someone jumps a fence on your property, it's just trespassing, and you are only allowed to use force if you have a reasonable fear of harm, which obviously applies here. So, I want to make that clear. But the idea is, like, if you were anybody else...

and someone jumps over your fence is on your property, you have to first instruct them to leave. If they then present a threat, you can use lethal force and you have no duty to retreat from your property. In Maryland, interestingly enough, while you have to retreat to your home, if you hang a piece of twine at any point around your property and someone steps over it, they've committed burglary.

Nice. And burglary is a much more serious offense. That's kind of crazy. The twine has to be at body level, I assume. Nope. Any physical obstruction over a path is considered like, and I think the reason for this is someone made a small fence and they said, it's a tiny little fence. I can jump right over it, but not everybody can. And then it also would limit people who are poor. So you were legally allowed to create any kind of physical obstruction.

In West Virginia, for the average person, if you jump a fence, then you're on your property. You can instruct them to leave. If they don't leave and you have a fear of harm, you can kill them. In Maryland, if they refuse to leave and you have a fear of harm, you have to retreat to your home. Then if they try to enter your home, you can kill them.

So here in West Virginia, with the security guards and the fencing, we clearly have reasonable fears of harm. And it's fairly obvious someone trying to break in is not doing so accidentally. And in Texas, you can break into their home when they're sleeping and strangle them. In Texas? You'll die. Yeah. In Texas? You will die. Yeah, no, I know. I mean, I meant in retaliation. Well, guys, Discord is down. I know. Literally nothing we can do about it. What happened to Discord? Doesn't work. Like...

In general? I wonder. All of Discord is down or is it just the server's down? Well, I can see the chat running on the show, but it's running poorly. Discord down or something? Discord down. It looks like it's up and the live chat is up. You're just having technical difficulties getting it. This is a brand new computer with different specs from the old one that's fixed a bunch of problems and Discord is behaving the exact same way, so I think it's a

a bug in the discord browser web browser app or whatever you use the web browser not the program I mean the program all the questions at the discord you can flip over to the web browser and try it there I don't know if you can quickly yeah

Well, we could just talk about fucking religion, man. I don't know. Do you guys want to rehash that? Yeah, this country is a Christian nation, not in its format as a theocratic nation like a Muslim country, but the rules and the laws were intended to be for Christians. Now, my thought is we're going to end up one day like Jesus came along and reformed Judaism, and then a new religion came about. One day someone will come along and reform Christianity. It's called Mormons. Well, it was called Christianity. Do you know what Mormonism is?

It was like Joseph Smith trying to reform his own Christian... Mormonism believes that Jesus came back... To the States. Came to the States and was killed by the Native Americans, so God stained their skins red. But the Mormon religion is basically after Christianity, the New New Testament. Yeah, there's also a period in history, or Christian history, called the Reformation, where Christianity went from being like...

kind of medieval to a more modern, updated version. That was Protestantism? I don't think so. Or Lutheranism? I'm not 100% sure. I just know that there was a Reformation. So, I mean, I understand a Christian nation to be a nation that advances... I mean, not just a nation that has majority Christians or is mostly Christian, but a nation that... It was Protestantism, yeah. I think it's a nation that advances...

the Christian religion above other religions in our country. It's a country that establishes a church. It has some people who are in elected positions who are only there for religious reasons. So like, for example, in Israel, they have an official rabbinate and it's explicitly said in our constitution that they try to advance Judaism above other religions and it's treated differently.

It's like that in many Muslim majority countries, too. So if we're just a Christian nation in that where the original stock of the country was mostly Christian. Yeah, but I don't think that's what. And the Bill of Rights were constructed for a moral and religious people that followed. Yeah, moral and religious people. Who follow a Christian moral tradition. Well, some do and some don't. A lot of them don't believe that Jesus was the Messiah, which is. Okay, let's pause real quick. Yeah.

It is not an opinion. It is a fact that the, you can literally read the history of the original articles in the Bill of Rights. It is based on Christian moral tradition. It's a fact. Oh, yeah, I totally agree with that. And when they said it was for a moral and religious people, they were referring to people who would follow a Christian moral tradition. They were not talking about Muslims who want to murder Jews. No, but you're saying that the ideas that were formed in the founding documents were informed by Christian ideas.

The confusion that we're talking cross purposes here is that we as a country are distinct from other countries that have official churches like the Church of England, Catholic, has an official church, even though these are secular societies. And then there's theocratic societies. But even the secular ones like in Europe, for example, they have an official Anglican church. Right. And they had it. And they.

And the king is the head of the church. So it is kind of more officially a Christian Protestant nation or an official Catholic nation. And the United States is unique amongst most countries in that it does not have an official church or an official centralized religion. And so the point is— And they have blasphemy laws in the UK, too. There are things we don't have. We did have all that stuff. And we don't anymore.

Well, only because of modern sensibilities. And some might argue that's wrong. George Carlin went to jail for swearing. Right, right, right. And people don't understand this, but in the 80s, you didn't have a right to keep and bear arms. It wasn't actually until 2008 with D.C. versus Heller where you actually had to carry a gun outside. Typically, people did. And for the most part, it's because what is a constitution?

There's written constitutions and unwritten constitutions. So the UK has an unwritten constitution. Constitution is defined as what constitutes the people and the body politic. We decided, actually the American people, to write it down because they were like, "Nah, we don't trust you because look what they did. They were fucking with us, so write it fucking down." We get to the point where we're trying to interpret and change the document, we are already fucked. The thing about not having a right to keeping bare arms and stuff,

For a long time in the United States, it was assumed that if there was no law prohibiting it, then you had... Then it was allowed because that's what free means, right? If there's nothing that says you can't, then you're allowed to. And as...

states started making more and more regulations about whether or not, whether you could or not carry a gun and stuff. Then people started to say, well, hold on. We're supposed to be a free country and the second amendment supposed to do. And it took DC versus Heller to, to articulate clearly that they do have. Yeah. 2008. It took, it took that finding. So here's Supreme court to say, yes, we do have that right. And it is protected by the second. Here's the issue back in the day when they were writing this stuff down, uh,

The mistake they made, they were close. They were like, we should write it down. It was the presumption that, look, when I go to my neighbor's house, we all agree murder is bad, you know, and killing children is bad. They didn't understand that there would come a time in this country, based on the things they wrote, where people who believed in killing being good would come here. Otto von Bismarck said it is better that 10 innocent people suffer than one guilty person escape. An inversion of Blackstone's formulation.

And which, in my opinion, obviously leads to destabilization of nations. Well, now we are in a country with a large growing population of postmodernists, communists, Marxists and leftists who believe that to be the case, that it is better that you lose your job and you are fucked regardless of whether you're innocent or not, so that our structure can stand. So Milo made a great point when he said free speech is being weaponized by amoral people without fear or virtue to destroy this country, the corporate press.

They stand behind freedom of speech so that the First Amendment so that they can burn down people's lives and cause harm to people and steal power. A moral and virtuous person wouldn't do that. That's why lying doesn't work on the right. If I may, it does to some extent. But if I made a video where I said Ben Collins of The Onion is being investigated for child rape.

No one on the right is going to believe it. They're going to be like, that's not true. But if the left does it, liberals go, oh, because they have no morals. They don't care. They want only power. So when the founding fathers said you have a right to speak your mind, to worship, to your religion, it was under the presumption that everybody shared these moral values which come from the Christian tradition. My question is this, though. To what extent is that uniquely Christian?

Christian versus what predates Christian, the idea of these individual sovereignty. They don't exist in other cultures.

They don't exist in other cultures? I guess I'm... It is not universal. I'm arguing for the... What's that? It's not universal. I'm saying the ideas that became Christian ideas, like Judeo-Christian ideas that we generally associate as the West, as a Judeo-Christian construct of Jerusalem and Athens. Right, that's why we say Judeo-Christian. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Judeo-Christian. Because I think the confusion in the conversation is coming from this idea that, well, they didn't all believe in Jesus, or they didn't all believe in the... Like, you're...

If you're not talking distinctly Christianity, but you're talking more general values that... I think they're talking of a Christian stock more than an explicitly Christian when they try to reference... They're talking about the Bible. Right, right. But which elements of it, which values in particular? Are you saying are the Christian ones versus the general ones? Because I would say, like, when you say we're based on Christianity, right? Which ideas?

Because I don't think the country was founded on necessarily believing in trinity. The unalienable rights that come from God. Which is shared by Judaism and Christianity. And then the Constitution doesn't grant rights.

It protects you from the government infringing upon those rights. Absolutely. But I'm just saying, which is like the idea of the Trinity is not something the country was based upon, but it was based on the idea of individual rights. So that's what I think you're talking about. Is the Enlightenment, are we calling the Enlightenment downstream of Christianity as well? Because I feel like if anything, the Enlightenment had just as much influence in our founding. Where did the Enlightenment start? Yeah, it had to start in the West. It started in Europe. You have to value individual rights and the natural rights of human beings in order to get...

the proliferation of these kinds of ideas. Because I think there are more Enlightenment ideals in our Constitution and founding documents than there are explicitly Christian ideas.

This episode is brought to you by Amazon. The holidays are here, and you know what that means? It's time to get your friends and family the gifts they deserve. Take the stress out of shopping with Amazon's great deals and low prices on a huge range of items from toys to tech and much more. Whoever you're gifting for, Amazon has great prices on everything you need this holiday season. Shop Black Friday week deals now.

The Subaru Share the Love event is a fulfilling way to get in a great vehicle and support a great cause. When you buy or lease a new Subaru from now until January 2nd, Subaru and its retailers will donate a minimum of $300 to charity. By the end of this year's event, Subaru will have donated nearly $320 million to charity. Visit Subaru.com slash share to support a great cause today.

Yeah. But then if you're saying the Enlightenment is downstream from... Didn't start in India. Didn't start in India. Yeah. No, but the larger... The larger point is that these ideas... Freedom of expression, freedom of religion, freedom of speech. Oh, Ben Franklin especially. These are all, I believe, to be Enlightenment ideals. But I have seen on the right this idea of taking free speech to this extreme where everybody on the right of center is so afraid...

is so afraid of being called a leftist that they won't call anything out as problematic. And I find that that's been going on too. What do you mean? So for so long, the left would cancel anybody for like the slightest, for a joke. Like the culture of cancer culture was predominantly on the left. I think the reaction to that that I've seen on the right is more recently this idea that...

When we do see something that's problematic, racist or anti-Semitic, we're not going to call it out because we don't want to look like a leftist. And so there's been this inability to sort of parse between calling out something that's actually problematic and saying there shouldn't be legal consequences for that kind of speech. But that doesn't mean we have to necessarily endorse. I don't think generally, though, maybe sometimes. I went through seeing that more in the past, like, you know, like in the sort of Bolzerian Tate Owens world of like of of.

Saying a lot of crazy stuff. But they hold a lot of leftist values. So this like... I guess I have to define what I mean by the right, but I think you know what I mean generally. So the Israel derangement syndrome people, their ideology and worldview is very much in line with leftist worldview. 100%. But when I say that semantically, I'm just trying to draw those distinctions between what you would

otherwise associate as sort of the right of center in the media culture versus the left of center. You mean in the sense that what, that there's a collectivist mindset? No, that it's a group of people who have singled out another group of people as those who are more privileged, aspiring against them. That's the irony. The left says white people, the Israel derangement syndrome people say the Jews. Yes. And I'm like,

The occupiers say the 1%. Rich people. Right. And it's very anti-capitalist. Israel's occupiers too, but once they're done with Israel, they'll come to the American, they'll talk about the American occupation too. I live on the Lenape land is what they're saying. They don't even realize it because they're like, we're not leftists. But it's Jewish privilege. Right.

- Right. - When they say like, it's them and all that stuff, I'm like, you're just saying Jewish privilege. The funny thing is the left made-- - Supplementing, right for Jew. - The left made a pyramid that shows the races of people and it's like a small group of white people on top.

then there's like Asians, then there's Latino and then black. And they were like, you're here. And then other leftists who are associated with Farrakhan remade it and added a Jewish star on top and said, actually, that's what it is. And I'm like, oh my fucking God. Whatever you want to call it, conspiracy or whatever. Do you think that there is like a cabal of racist Jewish people that are like, anyone that's not Jewish is below us. We are going to take control. Do you think there's anything like that? I don't know about take control. I don't know if racist is the right word.

No. Because is Jew a race or not? I don't know. No, Jews are an ethno... There's a racial component to being Jewish in that you're born Jewish, but it's essentially a tribe, a part of a Jewish family. You can marry into it, so you can become Jewish. But no, there's not a cabal of... What are you saying? Here's what he's saying. A racist Jew is a supremacist Jew? No, no, he's talking about how they say the goyim no. Oh. And so this idea that Jews view themselves above everyone else, and I'm just like...

I have been told by many Christians that I'm going to go to hell. Yeah. Not in a mean way. So if a Jewish person says that we think those who follow the Jewish faith are following the right one and you are wrong and you're an outsider, and I'm like, every religion feels that way. That's what I said. I said that to Candace Owen. She said to me, we talked about Jewish supremacy. We were having a debate. And she says to me, like, I just have a problem with Jewish supremacy, that Jews think they're better than everyone else. And I'm like...

Let me ask you something. Do you think Christianity is better than everything else? Do you think everyone should be Christian? Are you a Christian supremacist? I just think the word supremacy is this strange word. She's a Christian nationalist, so. But I'm just saying, she goes, oh, and it was a moment. I'm like, everybody who's part of a certain identity and culture, whatever, kind of

Jews don't proselytize. We don't try to convert other people to all become Jewish. You don't have to be Jewish to be viewed as equal or equally valuable. So this idea is, I think it stems more from this idea that because Jews are overrepresented in a lot of areas of prominence, people assume there's some sort of malicious thing. Thomas Sowell writes about this pretty extensively that it's a lot to do with

Culture, scholarship, values, family. And you see that with a lot of minority groups in majority countries that do well. And there's parallels across the board from the Lebanese in Africa, Chinese in Malaysia. You're talking about two different things. If you're talking about supremacy, it's people that think they're better or other people are beneath.

It's one thing to feel that you have supremacy. It's totally different to have a preference. So if you're a Jewish person and you have a preference for Jewish culture, that's perfectly normal. That's totally fine. That's not what's being talked about. What's being talked about is the idea that there are Jews who think we are the chosen people. That's why I said there's two different things being talked about. The thing you're talking about is what I was about to talk about. And so—

Christians and Jews fundamentally believe the same thing. My religion is right, and my people are following the correct path. Everyone else is not. But Jews actually don't have a history of even trying to impose it. The issue I have is imposition. This is when I think about Theodor Herzl. He was the founder of Zionism. This is not preference, though. This is supremacy. No matter what religion it is,

that seeks to, and you made the point that Jews don't proselytize, they're not going out and converting, you know, or whatever. The point is, every religion wants everyone to be a part of their religion because their religion is true and correct, and they're not ever going to come out and be like, you know, my religion's not as good as yours.

Or your religion makes a bunch of good points. They're going to say, no, you're completely wrong. You're talking about preference. It's not preference. Jews don't have that because Jews are born into Judaism. You can convert. But they also don't believe everyone should be Jewish. In Islam, everyone has to be Muslim. Christianity generally is a universal concept. That's why Jesus was a blasphemer.

Right. Because he came in and said everyone can be Jewish, everyone should be. Universalized Judaism in the form of... Well, Paul really did, I think. Hey guys, I think we should go to callers if we can. Is it working? I want to try at least. You can get back to her. Except you want to try, but... It's not working.

Yeah, okay. Herzl was the founder of Zionism, and he was kind of forceful. I had some quotes of him. He thought other people than Jews were lesser than. He had kind of the Jewish supremacist take it. I think I'm getting the right guy, Herzl. Yeah, well, Herzl was— Real quick, I just want to say, guys, in the Discord, we're even muted in it. I can't—for those that are trying to call, I'm sorry, dude. It's like a 40-second to a minute lag on where the mouse even is. Oh, boy. So—

We'll just have this conversation and we'll see if we can figure out what's wrong with it. I think it's the app and maybe we'll try and figure out a browser solution. Reinstall, get the browsers back up. Do you have a quote that you want to reference? I'll look for them while you guys are going. One of the things that Herzl believed wasn't responding with the idea of Jewish supremacy. It was responding to a world that believes Jews were inferior. And therefore, because of the persecution of Jews and the danger that Jews were facing in Europe, the Dreyfus Affair in which a Jewish person was...

publicly lynched. There have been such historical... On false pretenses. Yeah, historical anti-Semitism. A loyal French Jew. He prioritized the idea for Jewish safety and security. It wasn't based in Jewish supremacy. It was based in the idea that the other outside world that Jews lived in viewed Jews as inferior through thousands of years historically. They've been facing this continual oppression. And so he then said, okay...

we're not safe here. We're not safe in Europe. We're where, what are we going to do? We need, we need. And he, he founded the idea of a project in which Jews should self-determined to have a state just like many others. And although he was the founder of the modern political movement of Zionism deep within the Jewish religion, there is always a yearning to return to the promised land. Um,

Zion. Which was promised to the chosen people in the Torah and, I guess, the Bible too. So that's the religious roots. But yeah, theater wasn't coming in from the Nile to the Euphrates, Ian. I want all of it. Was it like the pendulum swang back so hard because for so long the Jews were persecuted that it got to a point where they were like, we're going to persecute them. Who are they persecuting? I don't know. The Gentiles? Are they? Are the Jews persecuting the Gentiles? No, I'm not saying they are. It's more of a

If there was an answer to that. Wait, wait, wait. Do you think the Jews are genociding Palestine? Is there a genocide happening in Palestine? I think the Israeli government is trying to conquer that territory. Wait, is there a genocide going on in Palestine? It feels like it. Really? Wait, wait. Is there a genocide going on in Ukraine? Bro. Stop. Wait, wait, wait. Let me rock this. The Ukrainians aren't held in like a prison state like the...

The Gazans are. Have you heard about like the Bucha massacre and the other targeting of civilians where there's indiscriminate artillery shelling of Ukrainian civilians in many cases? Okay. Well, you have to, you might want to ask yourself why that is that you think what's going on in Gaza is a genocide when more people have been killed. I don't know if it's a genocide because I don't know that they're targeting civilians.

get Palestinians. But I think they're targeting anyone in the territory. Why do you think they want the territory? They pulled out in 2005. Just to expand. They pulled out in 2005. Withdrew every Israeli. They created Hamas. What? They created Hamas to disrupt the two parties. Hamas was founded in the 80s as a resistance, as a terrorist organization that was sworn to Israel's destruction. I guess I'll defer to Dave Smith. They...

propagated Hamas to disrupt the one party state. So there were political incentives to prop up Hamas in the sense that, um, Hamas was democratically elected in Gaza. And so, yes, there were some political players in Israel that saw them as a, who did not believe in a two state solution, but they didn't believe in it because the fundamental issue is that,

There has never been a desire on the Palestinian side to accept the Israeli state. If I could explain this. The Palestinian Authority is who's in charge of the West Bank right now, and they beef with Hamas. And they've had a civil war where they've killed each other. Is it the POL? No, the POL is different. The Palestinian Authority is Mahmoud Abbas, and he's considered more moderate, although I'd consider him very extreme and not a serious partner for peace. But...

the Israeli government would prefer infighting between these different Palestinian factions in Gaza and the West Bank. So they'd prefer that Hamas not be simultaneously controlling Gaza and the West Bank, and same with vice versa with the Palestinian Authority. So it was within Israel's interest to have

the Palestinian governments in the West Bank and Gaza be different and disagree with each other? Because they were their enemies? They're enemies with each other. They kill each other. When Hamas was elected in Gaza, they killed all the Fatah opposition. They murdered all of them. And when we talk about territorial expansion, Israel is the size of New Jersey in a part, you can't even find it on the map or fit the text of Israel into the territory. It's surrounded by Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq,

tons of Arab and Muslim majority countries. Jordan is 60% Palestinian, effectively, and it used to control the West Bank. And since '48, there's been continual attempts to destroy Israel, not to create Palestine. Ian, can I ask, when are we taking you on the trip, huh? I'd love to go to Israel, dude. When do you want to go? I would love to go to-- is it safe? I'd love to go to Israel, dude. It'll be safe. So I know it's portrayed in this way, of this narrative of Israel as this territorial person, but it's only been giving up territory since its existence in '48.

And in response to continuing attacks of annihilation of the Jewish state. The way it was created concerns me that it was a mandate. Just basically the British took it after World War I. They betrayed the Arabs and they're like, all right, we're going to keep it. Do you have any problems with the way America was founded and how we manifested destiny to the Pacific? It was just manifest. Colonizing and colonizing and savage murder. Wait, wait.

Wait, I'm sorry. I couldn't hear you. Say that again. Colonizing, conquest, and savage murder. That's how we took the United States. We've turned colonization into a bad word. The best thing that America did was manifest destiny and colonize the western part of the country, in my belief. Most of the Native Americans that were killed weren't killed brutally by these colonizers. They were actually killed by each other and by disease. Smallpox. So we just choose what to focus on here. And we turned colonization into a dirty word.

If the colonization didn't happen, we wouldn't be the best country, the most modern and best country to have ever existed. And the natives would still be genociding one another. You might be right. You might be right. The issue is the double standard. When you're talking about, oh, they're colonizers there and they're colonizing land. And now now Israel's occupied.

baby, you're on occupied land right now. The question is, how are you colonizing? Because we'll eventually colonize Mars, but it's unoccupied. So colonizing territories... But we colonized an occupied... There was people living here. There was not a sovereign state of Palestine before. It was under the Ottoman Empire. There was a piece of geography called Palestine that was originally called Judea. The name Palestine was a Roman name of Roman colonization imposed to expel Jewish identity from the land. But it was the nation of

Israel, the kingdom of Israel? I don't want to deny the dispossession of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, by the way. I do not want to deny... There was dispossession of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from the land that is now Israel. But the thing that I think is overlooked most often...

is the dispossession of Jews in Arab lands, which numbers over 500,000 that nobody seems to care about. Nobody's telling me, "Hey, Elad, you get a right of return to Iraq, where your aunts and uncles and everybody was kicked out of." Nobody gives a shit about that. We care about the fake right of return for the Palestinians instead. So I guess that's the difference here. - The important point is this narrative of mass displacement. Why did it happen? Way back in the 1880s, Jews, even from Europe, were purchasing land in Israel

from absentee landlords living in surrounding areas and there was a native Arab populations too but under the Ottoman Empire there were movements to purchase land, settle the land, build it up. Israel built itself and then the mass displacement came when the surrounding Arab countries decided you know what we're not going to accept a partition plan out of the fall of the Ottoman Empire we're going to attack with the goal of destroying the Jewish state. The fledgling Jewish state that just started but they continually lost those wars which led to the mass displacement of the

the Palestinians and created the refugee problem. All that aside, the Muslim religion is instructed to kill the Jews. This is a religious war. It's not a geographic dispute. The Jews don't have a religious instruction to kill Muslims, nor do Christians, but Muslims literally have a religious instruction to kill Jews. Where does that come from? Hadith. Why did they put that in the Hadith? Because they wanted to dominate our people. Because when Muhammad...

When you go to Palestinian protests today, you will not hear two states side by side. We want a state of our own. You hear, you hear, That's a reference to the Battle of Hebar in which they, Muhammad encountered the Jews and he gave them a choice. Submit to Islam or die. And a lot of Jews converted. Oh.

And that's how Israel became... And they believe, they believe with a religious conviction that any land that was once Muslim land must be Muslim forever. They say it about Spain, too. They say it about Spain. Muhammad encountered the Jews and he says, you now have to submit to me. They said, fuck you. He says, then we're going to kill you all. Or you pay the jizya tax as a second class citizen. So the simple version is what was once Israel becomes conquered. Mm-hmm.

That's Arab colonization. Right. And then Muhammad then says, I better write this down that we got to go kill all these people because they defied me. They resisted. And then it literally says something like, the end will not come until all the Jews are dead and the rocks and the trees say, O follower of Allah, come to me because there's a Jew hiding behind me. And Muhammad's seen as a great unifier because he did bring together a lot of disparate tribes that were warring, but the Jews resisted. The great pedophile. Time to move. Skip.

♪♪♪

It goes further back than just Islam. Because the feud between Arabs and Jews goes all the way back to 3,000 years ago with Ishmael and Isaac. Ishmael and Isaac. Sons of Jacob. We're taking you on the trip, Ian. You're going to come with us. Ishmael descends the Arab...

The Muslims believe they descend. That's their forefather. We all are children of Abraham. The Abraham Accords, Arabs and Muslims. That's Abraham's where it's at, dude. Okay. Abraham is where it's at. Motherfucker was tight with God. Article 7, Hamas Charter, which is also, I believe it's the final verse of the Hadith. Yeah.

Can't have peace with that. That's kind of a deal breaker. It seems like it was an enemy tribe. I need to get strapped. I'm just going to stay in West Virginia. I need to get armed. We're starting our Jewish state here. The Koran is unchangeable. They wrote it when there was an enemy tribe that they were at war with, which was the tribe of Judah at the time. But now it's like an entire 100 million people. No, come on. Very, very simple. And you guys could probably do the more in-depth version. Very simple.

Islam, Arabs conquered Israel. Later on, when there's not a whole lot going on there, Jews come back and if you look at the history of Germany, many wealthy Jews in Europe cut a deal with Hitler that he wouldn't murder them all. If they gave all their possessions to him, he would let them go with nothing to the land that was once Israel. When they start establishing the land of Israel again to return...

the surrounding Arab nations were like, "Weren't we supposed to kill these motherfuckers?" - Yeah, that's what the Islam needs a reformation in that sense. - And they declared war on Israel. Israel was backing from the ground. - The Grand Mufti met with Hitler to solve the Jewish problem. - Israel gets backing from the West and with aid and defense are able to stop the destruction from the surrounding Arab nations

And this leads to endless periods of war where you've got these people claiming that, oh, these Palestinians have been taken. Most of these Palestinians, the population has rapidly exploded in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Now, I'm not going to sit here and defend West Bank expansion, whatever, blah, blah, blah. Marginal issue, if you ask me, not the fundamental issue. The point is—

There was there was a there were a bunch of Jews for a variety of reasons were settling in the area. Arabs declared war and tried to kill them all. We supported Jews because of the a lot of what the problem with World War Two was that there were stateless people. And if you declare war on someone and lose, this is the words of Ulysses S. Grant, the right, the people have a right to revolt against their leaders. And when they lose, they will be subjugated.

So these surrounding Arab nations say, we're going to fucking kill you. And then they're like, let's go, baby. The West says, we're on the side of the state of Israel. Israel then repels, controls, even captured the Sinai Peninsula. So there's a lot of issues surrounding it. The really simple version is, it's a long ongoing war that wasn't started by Israel. It goes back to the ancient history when Muslims conquered the land and forced people to convert it.

under penalty of death. And in '48, by the way, a lot of Muslims living there, Arabs, were displaced when the surrounding Arab countries attacked. The ones who stayed became Israeli citizens. Till this day, Israel's got two million Arab citizens. I think there's two--

issues at hand. With full civil rights. One is that the Koran, or wherever this is, needs to be reformed in the sense... Let me finish these thoughts really quick. In the sense that Jews are not bad people. There might have been a tribe that they were at war with at the time... Phil, let me finish, please. That there might have been a tribe at the time that they were at war with that was written into the doctrine that we need to stop this tribe. It's...

1,000, 1,500 years later, we can let that go and focus on humans. Secondly, the second problem that's—let me finish this. The second problem that it's correlated is that the establishment of the country of Israel was authoritarian, of course, and it was an imposition, but it has nothing to do with Jews. Judaism is a religion. It's a bloodline. This formation of a country that is

colonizing is a different story altogether. The only last sovereign state that existed on that geography was the kingdom of Israel under King David. And that wasn't an established homeland for the Jewish people. It's not like it was made up in '48. The reason that there was the Balfour Declaration and there were calls for establishment of a Jewish

state in their ancestral homeland was because of if you dig into the ground of Israel, you find Jewish archaeology. You find old coins. And as the leftists have been preaching for indigenous rights, all of a sudden they've been saying, they've been arguing the people of Palestine are the indigenous Jews. And we had a guy on the show and I said, but what does that mean? Wasn't this the kingdom of Israel? And he goes, yes, but they were forced to convert under penalty of death. And now the descendants are Muslims. And I was like,

So what you're saying is the people who decided not to convert and fled want to come back to their ancestral homeland, but you're denying them because the conquered peoples are there too. Sounds like there's a dispute. It's not so simple as to say that there's one claim to this land. Yeah, it doesn't matter who was there first. But here's the most important point. Canaan's were there before everybody. You are not going to go to a religion of 1.8 billion people and say, we can let bygones be bygones, just ignore the Hadith and stop trying to kill Jews. Right.

Put it so simply. But things change. When I say that you can't change it, to even propose that gets your head cut off. Islam is a religion of the sword. Christianity can have a reformation because of the way that Jesus was, right? Jesus was not a warlord. Mahometanism.

Muhammad was a warlord. Muhammad himself cut heads off. Muhammad was the most perfect man according to Islam. So if you propose that, you are actually saying heresy and you die for it. Don't shake your head. Muhammad was legit for his time, dude. No, he was a warlord. He was a warlord. Of course, he was born in a tribe of war. They were persecuted. The Bedouin were eradicated. According to Islam.

If you propose changes to the word of God, because it's the perfect word of God. If you propose changes, that is apostasy. Or do you just live in fear, Phil? I don't understand. What are you saying? Hey, what don't you understand about if you try to change this? The reason that I'm saying this, you said, oh, Christianity had a reformation. The reason Christianity could have a reformation is because Jesus Christ was not a warlord. It was not a war leader.

religion. They would have chopped your head off for proposing another type of Christianity in 1200 A.D. I have to go to bed because I've got to be up at 7. So if Serge is willing...

If you guys want to keep talking, I don't want to stop a conversation. Save it for a culture war. We're saving it for when we take you to Israel, baby. We're dragging you there. I'm ready. Kicking and screaming. Let me tell you. I'm the man on the wall, baby. I've been to Israel. I'm going to get that picture of you at the wall. I went to Tel Aviv, and it is a modern liberal democracy. I'm not saying literal liberal democracy. I'm saying it is a structure of a liberal democracy where you can walk around. It's familiar. You don't have to worry about being beaten. I can go and order and eat food. And I've been to Egypt, and I've been to Morocco, and those were not as fun. Mm-hmm.

I'm not saying they were miserable. And you can criticize Netanyahu all you want. It's all they do over there because it's a free society. Ball back. Jimmy Corsetti just went there. Ancient civilization. It's cool stuff. Anyway, guys. Good stuff. I apologize to everybody for the Discord not working for us.

We'll have our crew come in and see if we can get it figured out, maybe clear the cache or try a web browser so this doesn't happen again. So apologies, guys, but I appreciate you guys waiting, and we'll make it up to you. Let's set up a culture war with this again. It's been fun. That was fantastic. All right, everybody. Time to go to bed. Thanks for hanging out. We'll see you all tomorrow morning.

O'Reilly! You've got questions? O'Reilly Auto Parts has answers. Need a pro you can trust? We've got that too. No matter what you need, our professional parts people have the training and expertise to help you do things right. Deep automotive knowledge. Just one part that makes O'Reilly stand apart. The professional parts people. O-O-O-O'Reilly! Auto Parts!