Back to episode — Episode 2977 CWSA 10/03/25
Context —
e modern landscape of news and information than it does with a double standard. So that's my first comment. Analogies don't work as arguments. The second thing is that Scott Galloway likes to use the argument that if you looked at it as a percentage, the percentage of Israelis that were killed on October 7th, and you applied that percentage to let's say the United States, it would be some big num…
← Previous segment →That feels like a little bit of a narrative. It does seem to me that if the topic was a war in which Israel was the main player that the people who are the main players would have the most information and the most incentive to talk to the right people and also the confidence to say you have to do this. You're just going to have to do this. Let me explain. We know everything about the area. You're going to have to be with us. You're going to have to do this.
Now we might disagree. Maybe we don't have to do that. Maybe that's not necessary. Maybe that's not in our best interest. But it certainly makes sense that the people who are closest to it and feel that it's an existential risk, which it was for Israel. Israel is dealing with an existential risk. So yeah they're going to be a little bit insistent that they do what they need to survive. So if they're a little bit arrogant, a little bit pushy, you have every right not to like that but I certainly understand it. If you were Israel and you thought it was an existential risk, it was that important, you'd push. You would push until somebody was really unhappy how hard you were pushing. So does that bother me? Well I don't know enough about it. I think you'd have to be in the room to know if they push too hard but I don't mind that there's a little bit of push. That seems healthy. You can't obviously let Israel run the Pentagon but in the case where they know the most and have the most at stake, yeah. Of course you're going to listen to them.
So anyway let's see. And then Tucker says that we should adjust our theological view of Israel because a lot of Christians believe that God favors certain people in certain real estate. And Tucker says no God doesn't do that. That's the opposite of what God does. Everybody's equal. There's no chosen people. He thinks APAC should be registered as a foreign agent. It's one of the few that is not. There's some technical reason why they're not. I think the technical reason, well it's not even technical. It's a direct reason. The reason APAC is not registered is because it's a bunch of Americans doing things for America. I don't know. That doesn't even make sense. I've heard an argument why they're the exception and I can't remember it now which makes me think it's not a very good argument. So there might be a technical reason they're not but I would agree with the idea that anybody who's influencing the U
Context —
S in that way you would want them to be part of FARA. But I don't see how it would make any difference. What difference would it make if they registered to be a FARA entity? Isn't that just paperwork? Wouldn't they do exactly the same things they're doing? I don't know how that makes a difference. Somebody will tell me. And then Tucker said he doesn't like dual citizenship but not limited to Isra…
Next segment → →