ebody smart made the following observation on Twitter. I wish I knew who it was. Made the following observation that if the Houthis were really trying to hurt Saudi Arabia they would have gone after the desalinization plants which apparently would be equally attackable. But if you attack the desalinization you would really mess with the whole country whereas if you attack an oil resource well it's sort of the people who own that oil facility it's a little inconvenient. It didn't even change the price of oil worldwide. It was an inconvenience. But if you attack the desalinization plants you would really be delivering a pretty devastating blow to Saudi Arabia. And they would survive. I mean they have money. They can ship in water. They can figure it out but that would be a real attack.

Now ask yourself do the Houthis know that? Well probably. If they were smart enough to put together a whole drone swarm attack against an oil refinery from a separate country with Iran's help of course they know. Well of course they know that the better target, equally valid, would have been the water facilities. Why do you think they didn't attack the water facilities? Why do you think that? Here's my speculation. That people who are trying to influence a political outcome don't want to push the other side too far. How would you feel if let's say you know the Houthis attacked the oil field. Let's say you hear that Saudi Arabia went in and wiped them all out. Just went in hard and just decimated – not decimated but worse you know they let's say there was seven times a decimation. They just laid waste to the entire ethnic community and just bomb cities and took them out. You would say that's an overreaction right? And Saudi Arabia would be in a lot of trouble internationally. It would hurt them. They couldn't go that brutal. As brutal as they are and you have to assume is plenty brutal already but they couldn't just go wipe out the Houthis. The world community wouldn't allow that to happen if it's the only thing that the Houthis done that attacked an oil production facility.

But what if they took out their water? I'm just speaking for myself now. If I heard that somebody took out the water in my country I would support complete eradication. Now that's too strong a statement. Not complete eradication. I would literally turn around and I would never read another news story about what our military was doing to that other entity. I would lose all empathy completely. To me it would be similar to a nuclear attack. I would support. So this is just a sort of a psychological thought experiment. If you're a Saudi and you hear somebody attack your oil refinery you're mad. You want to do something. You want to have a response but it's gonna be proportional. If you hear they took out your desalinization plants you take over Yemen wouldn't you? You would actually just invade Yemen. You would lock up all the people who could fly a drone anyway. I mean you would go pretty barbaric on that.

So I think that's why the better targets are held off because the response would be too strong. Which is a weird kind of a war isn't it? A war where you're trying to not hurt the other side as badly as you could. It's sort of a modern thing.

So there's another story in the news about Brett Kavanaugh. I'm not even gonna repeat it. It's some allegation of high school impropriety with blah blah. It doesn't even matter. Like do you believe it anyway? I mean it's so uncredible. So and by the way I remind you when I say something's not credible it just means there's no reason to believe it. Doesn't mean something didn't happen or did happen. Just there's no reason to believe it. So all this Kavanaugh stuff feels like the same old repeats.

So think of some of those stories that the Democrats are pushing and this gets to SE Cupp's commentary that the Democrats are just so pathetic right now it's starting to get sad. So if they're talking about Brett Kavanaugh still and made-up stories that are obviously not going to have an impact, they're obviously not going to last, they're obviously not going to derail him because they're so old and they're hard to demonstrate anything. They're still talking about impeachment and Stormy Daniels. Are you freaking kidding me? Still? That's what Democrats feel like is a priority? Do they see anything else worth working on? Kavanaugh, Kavanaugh and Stormy Daniels. They're still talking about Russia collusion. Still talking about. Are you kidding me? They've completely given up at this point. It feels like they're not even working on task. It feels like busywork. That's what it is. Busy work.

Have you ever worked in a big company and it feels like your boss didn't have enough for you to do so they just gave you busy work? Okay I count these ceiling tiles and get back to me. It feels like the Democrats can't figure out anything useful to do. Like actually literally can't figure out anything useful to do but they have to do something because they're getting paid to do things. So if you don't have anything useful to do and you're getting paid and people are watching and you got to do something you do busy work. And this Kavanaugh stuff and the impeachment stuff and Stormy Daniels stuff it feels like busy work doesn't it?

There was an article I tweeted around from Haaretz. The Israeli publication. You've probably seen it. Haaretz. I don't know how to pronounce it. But there was an article in there about me. It turned out there somebody was writing that Netanyahu is quote a master wizard who has learned from Trump to take all the attention from the news cycle so that his opponents no matter what they're saying it doesn't matter because nobody's listening to them. So apparently Netanyahu is effectively absorbing the news cycle with little controversies and Trump-like statements that just make you spit in your head and then you can't think about anything else. You've got to talk about what Netanyahu wants you to talk about. And in that article they cited me. So you know I sit here and I'm literally sitting here by my little office here in California and I talked to you on Periscope and I write my little books and tweet and stuff and the next thing I know I'm part of the national discussion in Israel about the talents of the prime minister. There's no story there. I just thought I'd mention that. I guess it was a humble brag.

But Congressman Matt Gaetz had a tweet in which he was suggesting Eric Prince for national security adviser. If you don't know who Eric Prince is you should Google his name because it's a really interesting recommendation. It's Eric with a K, last name Prince. I'm gonna try to get him on the podcast because I think he would be one of the most interesting people in the world. So I've got that I'm working on that. We'll see if that happens.

And that is all I have for today. Scott do you realize that in California there is a bill to mandate adult vaccines? Let me give you my opinion on vaccines. I haven't looked into it and I feel like I don't want to offer an opinion on it. Here's why. So the vaccine thing is a lot in some ways it's a lot like climate change. It is. Somebody says Shiva knows. Yeah so Dr. Shiva actually just sent me a tweet of his and I'm not going to retweet it. I don't know if you're watching Dr. Shiva but the reason I'm not going to tweet it is because I'm not informed and I don't feel that I could become informed. In other words if I thought I could just go do my own research, if I thought I could do my own research and come to a good decision I suppose I'd do that but I don't think that I could dig into it on any level and learn enough beyond the fact that most scientists say it's safe.

Now my understanding is that President Trump's take on this is that it's not so much the individual vaccines that are the problem but the dose schedule. So it's an old tweet from Trump I saw recently 2014 or something in which he was saying that you're dealing with you know a little baby or child or whatever and that if you give them all the vaccines at once that might be a lot for their body to process and so that introduces a risk that has never been tested. If you test vaccines individually which I assume is the common way to do it you can tell if that vaccine individually is good or bad or what the risk is at least. You can get close to knowing that. If you test 20 different vaccines you can know that all 20 of those if given in isolation is safe. But where did you test all 20 of them given together? Where did you test any combination of them given together?

Here's one of those situations where Trump the non-scientist is just asking a fairly basic question. Have you tested it? See where I'm going with this? Trump is asking why are we giving untested medicine to kids? Now you're saying you're suddenly untested. That's the whole point. FDA go through the approval. There's no vaccine the kid is getting in this country that hasn't been tested. Wrong. That's just not true because it's only been tested in one context and that context is not the one it's used in. So we only tested it in the context in which it's not used which is just by itself. The context is in combination.

So are there scientists who will say Scott Scott Scott what you don't understand is that we do know how things interact well enough that we can tell if you take an aspirin and vitamin C – I'm just making this part up – we know that's not going to be a problem. And probably for a lot of things I'm guessing that would be true. I'll bet they know that if you eat some broccoli today and take an antibiotic tomorrow they probably know that's not going to do anything to you because broccoli is good. They've tested the antibiotic but they haven't tested the combinations. And to the extent that some of these vaccines have common elements so there might be something in the mix of each one there might be common to one or more. Have you doubled the amount of just that one component simply because you gave it all at the same time?

Now that's why I do not have an informed opinion. If a scientist said to me Scott Scott it's a good question but we do have a good handle on that and we have also tested how the vaccines perform as a group so we have plenty of testing that even when they're given as a group works out fine. Maybe so. I just don't feel that I'm qualified for this conversation and I don't know that I could get there and so I don't feel that I can add something of value except maybe describing the way you hadn't heard before. So that's that.

And that is I think the last thing I wanted to talk about today. Somebody says vaping was safe too. Well the vaping problems seem to be related to illegal non you know I guess black market devices. Somebody says don't drink alcohol and take Tylenol. Well I don't know about any of that stuff. And by the way this is why I made a big point about lifestyle medical records. Wouldn't you love to know that all the people who have done the things similar to whatever you're doing like what their outcome was? Because you know you might say well because even vaccines you could find out. I'm just gonna give you a hypothetical. Let's say all the people who took the vaccines and had later at some kind of a problem that may or may not have