Speaker 1: Late Welcome Lait.
Speaker 2: To Bay.
Speaker 3: Well, good evening and thanks for joining us on the
Speaker 3: Late Debate. James Macpherson with Liz Storra and Caleb Bond
Speaker 3: coming up the incredible story of a woman who applied
Speaker 3: for a job in nineteen seventy six and received a
Speaker 3: reply just this week. We'll talk about that a little later.
Speaker 3: Plus when we look at the papers. Legal experts warn
Speaker 3: that Labour's Misinformation Bill could result in Australian's being jailed
Speaker 3: if they refuse to cooperate in government hearings and elsewhere.
Speaker 3: Researchers have been awarded half a million dollars in taxpayer
Speaker 3: money to find out whether Australia really is Girt by Sea. Honestly,
Speaker 3: you could not make that up. It's in the papers tomorrow.
Speaker 3: We'll get to it a bit later.
Speaker 4: You know.
Speaker 3: We're sport for choice on this show when it comes
Speaker 3: to examples of government waste, and this one is an
Speaker 3: absolute beauty. The South Australian government spent three hundred and
Speaker 3: sixty thousand dollars moving an agency from one department to another,
Speaker 3: only to move it right back again just two years later.
Speaker 3: Skills South Australia, which facilitates vocational training. Was part of
Speaker 3: the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science, but the government
Speaker 3: decided to spend two hundred thousand dollars on consultants who
Speaker 3: advised that it should be moved to the Department of Education,
Speaker 3: and so they spent another one hundred and sixty thousand
Speaker 3: dollars making the move, So that's three hundred and sixty
Speaker 3: grand all up. But just twenty four months later they
Speaker 3: decided doesn't really fit there, and so they moved it
Speaker 3: straight back, because after all, it's only your money. The
Speaker 3: opposition leader in South Australia, John Gardener, told the media
Speaker 3: this story is like something straight out of Utopia, that
Speaker 3: ABC show that satirizes government departments. He said it would
Speaker 3: be funny if we weren't in the middle of the
Speaker 3: cost of living crisis and businesses weren't suffering from skills
Speaker 3: shortages right around our state. To have so much money
Speaker 3: spent on shuffling departmental debt chairs around only to move
Speaker 3: them back a year later is a very costly embarrassment
Speaker 3: for the Premiere Lives. It's hard to imagine more ineptitude
Speaker 3: than this. What are the bureaucrats thinking?
Speaker 5: Seriously?
Speaker 6: The guy who writes the show Utopia literally said, it's really.
Speaker 5: Not that hard. The comedy rights itself.
Speaker 6: You just pay attention to what government's doing and then
Speaker 6: we enact it and everyone thinks it's hilariously funny, but
Speaker 6: it really is art depicting real life when it comes
Speaker 6: to government departments.
Speaker 5: And we still don't know what this year's.
Speaker 6: Move cost South Australian. So we know about the three
Speaker 6: hundred and sixty thousand, what did this year's move cost? Well,
Speaker 6: they're not going to let us know anytime soon, are they.
Speaker 6: They don't want us to do the addition and find
Speaker 6: out what a joke this is. This genuinely reminds me
Speaker 6: of season one on Utopia where they had this massive rebrand.
Speaker 6: It's going to be an inspiration. This is really important.
Speaker 6: They spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on the consul
Speaker 6: and sea fees being pitched a new logo and.
Speaker 5: Then they're painting it up on the wall.
Speaker 6: They're getting all their business cards, their letterheads redone and
Speaker 6: the entire time you're watching the episode going that is
Speaker 6: the pink Floyd symbol, the beam of light hitting a
Speaker 6: prison resulting in a rainbow and by the end of
Speaker 6: that episode they've realized that and had to change it
Speaker 6: all back. I mean, this is exactly that episode.
Speaker 4: This stuff happens all the time, right, This is just
Speaker 4: one of the ones we've found out about. Governments do
Speaker 4: this stuff all the time, particularly when there's a change
Speaker 4: of government. So the Libs disappear and Laby comes in
Speaker 4: or vice versa, right, And they move around various parts
Speaker 4: of departments. And I'm thinking in South Australia again, when
Speaker 4: I was there, they had the Department of Education and
Speaker 4: Child Services that then became the Department of Education and
Speaker 4: Child Development, so it went from decks to deck because
Speaker 4: they move part over ere and another part over there.
Speaker 4: That's hundreds of thousands of dollars that they spend making
Speaker 4: new logos, they need new letterheads, all that sort of stuff.
Speaker 4: They break up the Transport Department from the Environment. But
Speaker 4: on and on and on. This happens every time there
Speaker 4: is a change of government. Literally millions of dollars get
Speaker 4: spends on this stuff, which is just about moving one
Speaker 4: set of workers from one office to another so that
Speaker 4: one minister has jurisdiction over them instead of another minister.
Speaker 4: And they don't care about what it costs to do that, Like,
Speaker 4: why can't you just leave it where it is? It
Speaker 4: doesn't need to move. The proof here being that two
Speaker 4: years later they moved them back from whence they can.
Speaker 3: So you waste hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money.
Speaker 3: And the interesting thing is consultants advised us to do this,
Speaker 3: which provides cover so that they can waste hundreds of
Speaker 3: thousands of taxpayer dollars and no one is ever held
Speaker 3: accountable because consultants.
Speaker 5: Yeah, in this case, I believe it was PwC. So
Speaker 5: the government, the bureaucrats get.
Speaker 6: To go, well, you know, we were just allowing the
Speaker 6: professional advice that we squandered one hundred thousand dollars on.
Speaker 5: So how were we supposed to know.
Speaker 6: That this wasn't for a better and more flourishing society.
Speaker 6: It is utterly maddening, especially, like you say, Caleb, in
Speaker 6: the middle of a cost of living crisis, when this money.
Speaker 5: Could be so much better spent.
Speaker 6: I can't imagine how South Australians are feeling today waking
Speaker 6: up to this news.
Speaker 3: We imagine how many young people could be put into
Speaker 3: vocational trading exactly, but three hundred and.
Speaker 2: Sixty thousand dollars.
Speaker 3: We've got a shortage of tradesmen, but they're spending money
Speaker 3: moving desks around instead of training people for trade.
Speaker 4: That's that's the expense of doing it again. Taking it
Speaker 4: back to the older covey where it was reminds me
Speaker 4: of Jerome Wymer down in Victoria, who of course had
Speaker 4: to be paid out when he left the state government
Speaker 4: after being a large part of the COVID response. Then
Speaker 4: they employed him as the man to to run the
Speaker 4: Commonwealth Games, and then of course they canceled the Commonwealth Games.
Speaker 4: They had to pay him out for that. We did
Speaker 4: a story a couple of weeks ago about bloke up
Speaker 4: in Queensland who was running Queensland Health. He left and
Speaker 4: got a massive payout on the way out, and then
Speaker 4: went over to the hospital up on the Gold Coast
Speaker 4: and got a massive contract there too, all within the
Speaker 4: same department. But it ain't you well, ain't their money.
Speaker 4: It's your money. But they don't care because they don't
Speaker 4: have to come and knock on your door and ask
Speaker 4: you to make a donation. They forcefully take this money
Speaker 4: from you every single year, and this is how they
Speaker 4: spend it. Let's go overseas where we see tinges of
Speaker 4: the discussions that we have here in this country. You know,
Speaker 4: it doesn't matter where you go, there's a welcome to
Speaker 4: country at every event. If it's not a welcome to country,
Speaker 4: it's an acknowledgment of country. You get on the sky
Speaker 4: bus in Melbourne, they tell you that sovereignty has never
Speaker 4: been seeded, which is a great message to sell to
Speaker 4: people when they've just landed in Australia and the first
Speaker 4: interaction they have with the place is being told that
Speaker 4: the land was stolen. Well, it is exactly the same
Speaker 4: in Mexico where the new president is about to be inaugurated,
Speaker 4: Claudia Shineborm and she will notably not have the King
Speaker 4: of Spain visiting for her inauguration. Now generally the King
Speaker 4: of Spain comes along has previously for the inauguration of
Speaker 4: Mexican presidents. But the Mexican government's been having a bit
Speaker 4: of a Mexican standoff, as it were, with the Spanish
Speaker 4: government for a few years now about the lack of
Speaker 4: an apology for what happened five hundred years ago when
Speaker 4: Spain came in and conquered the Aztec. Now this goes
Speaker 4: all the way back to twenty nineteen. This started when
Speaker 4: the then president Andreas Manuel Lopez Obrador I've got to
Speaker 4: get all of that name in there, said he wanted
Speaker 4: an apology. He wrote off a letter. Here's what he
Speaker 4: said at the.
Speaker 7: Time, Viajonta andres Lota a cat alpapa. But he sepia
Speaker 7: perdom ah los polos originas for las la Look I
Speaker 7: see gnoss.
Speaker 4: And shineborm is continuing the beef by refusing to invite
Speaker 4: the King of Spain. Now, would you believe it? Spain
Speaker 4: declared independence in eighteen twenty one, Yes, eighteen twenty one,
Speaker 4: and here they are still complaining we need an apology
Speaker 4: from Spain for something that happened five hundred years ago.
Speaker 4: I mean, is the UK going to write off and
Speaker 4: asked for an apology from the Vikings for what happened? Yeah,
Speaker 4: you could go back, literally, every single country could go
Speaker 4: back and map all the way back thousands of years
Speaker 4: every time they were invaded, conquered, taken over, raped, pillaged
Speaker 4: on it. I mean, we would not stop to talk
Speaker 4: about anything else than these apologies that everyone wants. If
Speaker 4: this is how we conduct ourselves, I'm just glad to
Speaker 4: know it's not just us doing it.
Speaker 2: I think it's hilarious Mexico.
Speaker 3: I've got their first ever female leader, and Liz it's
Speaker 3: true that a woman never forgets.
Speaker 2: Years later.
Speaker 5: I think she wants an apology.
Speaker 2: I mean, she's even.
Speaker 3: Had her government department come up with a ceremony of
Speaker 3: atonements that the Spanish decide that they will apologize. The
Speaker 3: Mexicans have already worked out how they can do it.
Speaker 3: The irony, of course, as Caleb said, was that the
Speaker 3: King of Spain has not been invited to her swearing in.
Speaker 2: Ceremony, but Vladimir Putin has, and he's responsible for a
Speaker 2: much more reason.
Speaker 3: I think the difference is you can't get money out
Speaker 3: of Vladimir Putin.
Speaker 6: There's only certain invaders that they're not oparently, But can
Speaker 6: I just say I love this by King Philip the
Speaker 6: sixth of Spain. He's not playing into it. Most leaders
Speaker 6: in today's environment just go okay, yep, sorry, like ride
Speaker 6: up some royal ducuay. Oh, put my magic wax seal
Speaker 6: on it. We'll do a song and dance. We'll have
Speaker 6: this ceremony of atonement. He's just it's like sot it.
Speaker 6: It was twenty generations ago. Me saying anything is not
Speaker 6: going to achieve the slightest difference to anybody's quality of
Speaker 6: life here in the twenty first century.
Speaker 5: I am not playing into this.
Speaker 6: I think it's very smart because you know what follows
Speaker 6: an apology, reparations in some.
Speaker 5: Way, shape or form.
Speaker 6: And King Philip has just gone no, I'm not playing
Speaker 6: this game. You can exclude me from your little inaugural powwow.
Speaker 5: I don't care. We're not coming to the party.
Speaker 3: Here's what I don't get right, So the Spanish are
Speaker 3: supposed to apologize to the Aztecs where sorry, we conquered.
Speaker 3: You do the Aztecs apologize to all the people they sacrificed?
Speaker 5: An ate?
Speaker 2: Is that going to happen?
Speaker 5: That advanced?
Speaker 4: But this is the problem, right, you could literally go
Speaker 4: back thousands and thousands and thousands of years and find
Speaker 4: anyone who has ever wronged you and asked for an apology.
Speaker 4: Where does it in, Like, at what point do we
Speaker 4: just accept that history is history. Let bygones be bygones.
Speaker 4: We'll deal with what is in front of us now.
Speaker 4: If there are damaging effects that were caused by invasions
Speaker 4: or whatever, at certain points, sure you deal with them
Speaker 4: now through health care or welfare or whatever it might be.
Speaker 4: But sitting around and quibbling over what happened five hundred
Speaker 4: years ago in this case, or what happened, you know,
Speaker 4: three four hundred years ago in the case of Australia
Speaker 4: doesn't actually move us any further. Always, it's heavy to
Speaker 4: talk about these things that are so you know, they're
Speaker 4: not in the here and now because you don't actually
Speaker 4: have to do anything about them. It doesn't require actual action.
Speaker 4: It doesn't require you to do anything to help someone
Speaker 4: right now, but you can shed the blame for what
Speaker 4: is happening now to things that happen five hundred.
Speaker 3: Years This is the irony of the progressive movement. Right
Speaker 3: Mexico's got a progressive leader who doesn't want to talk
Speaker 3: about the future. It only wants to talk about something
Speaker 3: that happened twenty generations to go, which is the ultimate.
Speaker 2: In emotional manipulation.
Speaker 3: When you're trying to convince an entire cut, you need
Speaker 3: to apologize for what happened twenty generations ago. And good
Speaker 3: on the king, as you said, because to apologize for
Speaker 3: something that happened five hundred years ago, would that not
Speaker 3: be emotional fraud.
Speaker 5: Yeah, and he knows it.
Speaker 6: He knows that the invoice would soon follow, and he's
Speaker 6: not having a bar of it. To the European Union now,
Speaker 6: where they know they're in a spot of trouble after
Speaker 6: the election earlier this year in June, where it was
Speaker 6: a very different European Union that met afterwards. Why because
Speaker 6: the large sways of their twenty seven country states had said,
Speaker 6: we're electing right wing members now because we're sick of
Speaker 6: the mass immigration flooding into our countries. You will remember
Speaker 6: that the backlash in France was so severe that President
Speaker 6: Macron went to a snap election saying, well, my lot,
Speaker 6: the lefties have clearly lost the will of the people,
Speaker 6: so we need to go to a snap election. Since then,
Speaker 6: in July, the Netherlands have finally sworn in their right
Speaker 6: wing government again ran on anti immigration.
Speaker 5: A few months.
Speaker 6: Later, Austria elected the Freedom Party again ran on anti immigration.
Speaker 6: This just keeps becoming a massive issue for the EU
Speaker 6: as they lose more and more control over their own
Speaker 6: member states.
Speaker 5: So what do they do.
Speaker 6: They get the European Council on Foreign Relations to roll
Speaker 6: out a report warning that whiteness and europeanness is the
Speaker 6: danger going forward. Not citing economic or energy issues, not
Speaker 6: citing mass immigration, the rocketing crime, etc.
Speaker 4: And so on.
Speaker 6: No, No, it's the European neess of Europe that is
Speaker 6: posing a massive problem.
Speaker 5: Let's read from this report.
Speaker 6: It says in most countries, non white and Muslim people
Speaker 6: were underrepresented in candidate lists. No more than twenty non
Speaker 6: white MPs were elected this year, less than three.
Speaker 5: Percent of the total and well below the ten.
Speaker 6: Percent share that racial and ethnic minorities are estimated to
Speaker 6: account for in the EU.
Speaker 5: Where do these people get the goal?
Speaker 6: You'll notice it's never African countries that have pressure placed
Speaker 6: upon them to have some whites in their parliament.
Speaker 5: Never in the Asian countries.
Speaker 6: That were like, wait, what about the white representation in
Speaker 6: your parliament? And don't even get started on the Arab states. No,
Speaker 6: it's always the Europeans. It's always the white countries, Canada,
Speaker 6: the US, Australia. We obsess over this. Let's return to
Speaker 6: the report. It says far right parties appeared to be
Speaker 6: on the rise in almost every member state, usually issuing
Speaker 6: promises to stop immigration or even planning as the alternative
Speaker 6: for Germany or AfD did to expel large swathes of
Speaker 6: the population were still parts of the European political mainstream,
Speaker 6: especially among center right and liberal parties, certainly appeared to
Speaker 6: embrace elements of a xenophobic view of the world, as
Speaker 6: reflected in the EU's new Migration and Asylum Pact adopted
Speaker 6: in April, or in political proposals to send refugees to
Speaker 6: third countries, both of which raised major human rights questions.
Speaker 6: It's almost like they're wagging the finger at Hungary, who
Speaker 6: has said you can keep sending illegals here, We're just
Speaker 6: going to bust them to brush those and Germany, who
Speaker 6: has recently announced much more strict border control after they
Speaker 6: copped a belting at the state election and the federal
Speaker 6: government there got really worried because their elections coming up
Speaker 6: less than a year from now. Why is it that
Speaker 6: everyone's allowed to enjoy living amongst white people in nations
Speaker 6: founded by.
Speaker 5: White people, except for white people.
Speaker 6: If we want to keep Hungary for Hungarians, or as
Speaker 6: Wilders said at nauseum during the debates in the Netherlands,
Speaker 6: we want to keep the Netherlands Dutch.
Speaker 5: We are being overrun.
Speaker 6: And I promise you I'm going to fix that. Why
Speaker 6: is it only white countries who were ever demonized for saying, hey,
Speaker 6: we kind of like things the way they are.
Speaker 5: We want to keep our country Dutch. We yet builted
Speaker 5: for it.
Speaker 6: I mean here in Australia that ship has sailed with
Speaker 6: one in three not even born in the country. But
Speaker 6: these are countries who this is via mass immigration, only
Speaker 6: quite a lot of it illegal, and they're trying to
Speaker 6: save their country.
Speaker 3: It's a strange thing, isn't it. Because you don't have
Speaker 3: any politicians in Africa. And I love Africa, have been
Speaker 3: the many times, but you don't have any African politicians
Speaker 3: saying Africa's too black, We've got to change it.
Speaker 2: It's only more Asians exactly.
Speaker 3: It's certainly in Europe where Europeans are a danger to Europe.
Speaker 2: This report from the.
Speaker 3: European Council was called Welcome to barbieland which detailed the
Speaker 3: fact that migrants arrive in Europe to find it's not
Speaker 3: the utopia they imagined because they feel alienated. Well, I mean,
Speaker 3: you could always go back to where you came from
Speaker 3: people like you, but no, no, that's not the solution.
Speaker 3: They've got to get rid of whiteness. The other thing
Speaker 3: about this report that I thought was really interesting is
Speaker 3: they said the problem in Europe at the moment is
Speaker 3: that too many Europeans are thinking that Europe is an
Speaker 3: ethnic group. But it's a sentiment, quote unquote. They've actually
Speaker 3: said Europe is a sentiment. And here's the irony, Right,
Speaker 3: what is this European sentiment? Well, it consists of three things, secularism, equality,
Speaker 3: and universalism. So in order to increase the sentiment of secularism,
Speaker 3: they're importing millions of people who are Muslims.
Speaker 2: That doesn't work.
Speaker 3: In order to increase the sentiment of equality, they're importing
Speaker 3: millions of people who say that women should be subjugated
Speaker 3: or treated differently, that people with a different religion are
Speaker 3: second class citizens. And in order to increase the sentiment
Speaker 3: of universalism, they're importing millions of people who believe the
Speaker 3: Quran is the truth, the only truth. So they're completely
Speaker 3: hypocritical and contradictory. It makes no sense at all, and
Speaker 3: they're destroying one of the great continents of the world.
Speaker 4: The first point is that nowhere engages in self loathing
Speaker 4: quite like the West, Right, I mean, we, we're not
Speaker 4: we you and I love where we live, but the
Speaker 4: West engages in this terrible self loathing as a consequence
Speaker 4: of the fact that socialists want to take over the
Speaker 4: joint And what's the easiest way to do that than
Speaker 4: to convince people that the countries they live in are
Speaker 4: terrible and they've committed atrocities, et cetera.
Speaker 5: So once we convince them, why everyone else.
Speaker 4: We've convince them that it's terrible, no culture exists, and
Speaker 4: then socialism can move in and take over. But the
Speaker 4: report has completely missed the point. Europeanness is not the
Speaker 4: reason that the EU is in trouble. It's the fact
Speaker 4: that people just want control of their own countries. That's
Speaker 4: got nothing to do with your ethnicity or race. It's
Speaker 4: a matter of fact that you are a citizen of
Speaker 4: a country, right, you have a right to vote democratically
Speaker 4: in that country, and you would prefer that the country
Speaker 4: of which you are a citizen is not taken over
Speaker 4: by people who are not citizens. Right. The problem here
Speaker 4: is that the EU as a group has decided what
Speaker 4: rules other countries must follow, them member states must follow,
Speaker 4: and the individual countries are starting to push back. It's
Speaker 4: not a problem of oh, you know, too many white people,
Speaker 4: or you know, we're too European. It's not about the
Speaker 4: europe thing at all. It's that Italy wants to be Italy,
Speaker 4: and France wants to be France, and Hungary wants to
Speaker 4: be Hungry. They're not saying no, no, no, we hate the
Speaker 4: idea of Europe. Europe is a continent. You can't just
Speaker 4: cast away the continent. They don't like the idea that
Speaker 4: nation states, individual nation states must be beholden to some
Speaker 4: sort of larger outfit. That's what the real problem is here.
Speaker 4: If the EU actually governed for the people who are
Speaker 4: citizens of European countries, there would be no problem. They're
Speaker 4: not saying we must have only white people in Europe.
Speaker 4: They're just saying, well, those of us who've actually signed up,
Speaker 4: born here or signed up as citizens, we just want
Speaker 4: our place to be run properly pleased. That's what it's about.
Speaker 3: And the European Union's argument is so weak because they
Speaker 3: compared the whiteness of the European Parliament to the diversity
Speaker 3: of melanin at the European Football Championships at the Summer Olympics,
Speaker 3: and they even went so far as to say, look,
Speaker 3: at the Eurovision Song contest. There was way more diversity
Speaker 3: of color of skin there than in the European Parliament,
Speaker 3: which is apparently a slam dunk argument. That's just because
Speaker 3: Parliament must represent Eurovisions.
Speaker 4: Dancing. I mean we all know that.
Speaker 5: Come, what do you think it was going to accept that?
Speaker 2: Those SAIDs it all.
Speaker 3: Now we're going to talk about the anniversary of October
Speaker 3: seven a little later when we get to the papers,
Speaker 3: but let's talk about the ABC for a moment, because
Speaker 3: they have reminded the staff that Hamas and Hezbolla should
Speaker 3: be routinely referred to as terrorist organizations because they are
Speaker 3: terroist organizations, which begs the question, why would you need
Speaker 3: to remind ABC staff that these terroist organizations should be
Speaker 3: called terrorist organizations. Well, you may remember back in November
Speaker 3: two hundred, ABC staff called for a meeting with executives
Speaker 3: to complain about what they saw as unfair coverage of
Speaker 3: the conflict in the Middle East. Unfair to Palestine, they believed.
Speaker 3: But it goes on, and the ABC have made other changes,
Speaker 3: advising media staff that they should refer to Israel's incursion
Speaker 3: into Lebanon not as an incursion but as an invasion.
Speaker 3: Mark Malley, who's the ABC manager of editorial policies for News, said,
Speaker 3: we're confirming here that we are now describing the current
Speaker 3: actions of Israel on the Lebanese side of the border
Speaker 3: as a land invasion. Now people understandably upset about this, Caleb,
Speaker 3: because there's no suggestion Israel.
Speaker 2: Trying to take over Lebanon.
Speaker 3: They have had Hesbala firing rockets for eleven months, seventy
Speaker 3: thousand Israelis or more displaced. Finally, Israel have decided we
Speaker 3: cannot tolerate this any longer. We're going to go across
Speaker 3: the border. We're going to take out these missile batteries.
Speaker 3: In doing that, they found tunnels which would have been
Speaker 3: used for another October seven but from the north. So
Speaker 3: they've decided, well, we better destroy those, and they're endeavoring
Speaker 3: to push HESBLA back to the point that was decided
Speaker 3: in two thousand and six by the United Nations that
Speaker 3: HESBLA should be though it's never been enforced by the
Speaker 3: United Nations who made that decision.
Speaker 2: So to say Israel.
Speaker 3: Are invading Lebanon, does that not give an entirely false
Speaker 3: perspective on what is really happening.
Speaker 4: When you get into the semantics of it, it sort
Speaker 4: of suggests they're going in to take the land.
Speaker 2: It certainly does.
Speaker 4: The objective is not to go in an octupa Lebanon.
Speaker 4: The objective is just to push his Bla far enough
Speaker 4: fact that they no longer are a threat to the
Speaker 4: North of Israel. You're not going in there to take
Speaker 4: the joint over, right. But the fact that the ABC
Speaker 4: would even need to send out a directive on the
Speaker 4: language that needs to be used to describe such an event,
Speaker 4: I find extraordinary. The fact that they need to send
Speaker 4: out a directive to remind people that Hezbala mas terrorist organizations.
Speaker 4: And I suppose it's no great surprise after what we
Speaker 4: saw last week where an ABC reporter was asking Peter Dutton,
Speaker 4: you know what lads a terror organization? Oh no, maybe
Speaker 4: it's got something to do with the fact. But not
Speaker 4: only do they terrorize people in Lebanon, like the Christians
Speaker 4: in Lebanon don't want his Bla there, they fired thousands
Speaker 4: of rockets into the North of Israel. Sixty to eighty
Speaker 4: thousand Israelis have not been able to live in their
Speaker 4: homes in the North of Israel. As a result of
Speaker 4: his blaff. No, no, no, they are not terrorists. It's
Speaker 4: not like they have a plan to type out all
Speaker 4: the infidels on the face of the earth. No, they're
Speaker 4: not terrorists. Like how could you not think that they
Speaker 4: are terrorists? And actually ask that question to the opposition leader?
Speaker 4: What makes hez Blah terrorists more than anyone else? I mean,
Speaker 4: it is abundantly obvious every Western nation in the world
Speaker 4: tas that hez Blah is a terror organization. But it
Speaker 4: tells you who is in charge at the ABC right,
Speaker 4: and it's the animals running the zoo. That you would
Speaker 4: even need to send down a directive like this to
Speaker 4: tell them what they can and can't say or how
Speaker 4: they should report. It is ridiculous, and they've conceded in
Speaker 4: this email that you know not it. In not every
Speaker 4: case are we going to be able to say hez
Speaker 4: bla the designated terror organization. But it must be used
Speaker 4: on a regular basis in TV, radio and online reporting
Speaker 4: just to prove the point. It feels to me like
Speaker 4: they're saying we need to like overcompensate now and every
Speaker 4: time we talk about hez Blah, just mention the fact
Speaker 4: that they're a terror a organization, so it doesn't look
Speaker 4: like that reporter who was talking to Dutton last week
Speaker 4: spoke on behalf of the ABC. I just find it
Speaker 4: extraordinary that a media organization would need to do that
Speaker 4: in Australia.
Speaker 3: I think it'd be wonderful if the ABC continued to
Speaker 3: overcompensate for them.
Speaker 2: He'll be a good, great day.
Speaker 3: And with regards that ABC reporter who asked Peter Dutton
Speaker 3: why says designated as a terrorist organization? The ABC response
Speaker 3: to that from management is that's concerned about the welfare
Speaker 3: of that particular reporter, all right, as they might.
Speaker 6: We're concerned about the intelligence levels of.
Speaker 5: That particular reporter.
Speaker 6: To the US now, where President Trump has returned to
Speaker 6: the scene of the crime where his life was saved
Speaker 6: by a bullet because he turned his head to look
Speaker 6: at an immigration chart. He's back in Butler, Pennsylvania, and
Speaker 6: he had a very humorous way of picking up where
Speaker 6: he left up.
Speaker 1: We love Pennsylvania. And as I was saying, oh, I
Speaker 1: love that I love that chart. I love that graph.
Speaker 1: Isn't it a beautiful thing.
Speaker 6: He's famously thanks that chart for saving his life because,
Speaker 6: as we know, if he had not turned his head
Speaker 6: the very millisecond that he did in order to talk
Speaker 6: about that chart, he would not be alive today. Also
Speaker 6: joining him in Butler, Pennsylvania was Elon Musk himself, who
Speaker 6: took to the stage to remind people this is a
Speaker 6: do or die election.
Speaker 8: There's no true test encourage under fire. We had one
Speaker 8: president who couldn't climb a flight of stairs and another
Speaker 8: who was after getting shot. The other side wants to
Speaker 8: take away your freedom of speech. They want to take
Speaker 8: away your right to bear arms. That it's we're they
Speaker 8: want to take away your right to vote.
Speaker 6: Effectively, So here he is in this battleground state. No
Speaker 6: doubt it was going to result in a lot of
Speaker 6: people flocking to register to vote. Indeed, that was partly
Speaker 6: the idea of it. Pennsylvania is famously a very tight state.
Speaker 6: Trump won it back in twenty sixteen.
Speaker 5: By point seventy two percent.
Speaker 6: How's that for a tight margin, And when Biden won
Speaker 6: it back in twenty twenty was just one point seventeen percent.
Speaker 6: So that's to give you an idea of just how
Speaker 6: tight it is when we're talking about Pennsylvania. Pretty much
Speaker 6: nobody ever knows how this state is going to go
Speaker 6: at a federal election. So it was with great interest
Speaker 6: that we learned today that the State Department in Pennsylvania
Speaker 6: decided to announce that this day, the day of Trump's
Speaker 6: triumphant return to Butler, Pennsylvania, their voter registration polls are
Speaker 6: going to be down online because they had some site
Speaker 6: maintenance to do. How's this for dirty cheating tactics. I mean,
Speaker 6: these guys, it seems every week we touch on another.
Speaker 5: Way in which they are cheating in the broad light
Speaker 5: of day. Last week we were talking about.
Speaker 6: Arizona being sued by the Department of Justice because they'd
Speaker 6: wiped off three thy two hundred illegal immigrants off their
Speaker 6: voter registration polls, and the DOJ Biden's Department of Justice
Speaker 6: isn't having a bar of it. No, you've got to
Speaker 6: leave them on. Suddenly, we do want illegals voting in
Speaker 6: this election every single day if not weak Now in
Speaker 6: the lead up to this election, there's another story how
Speaker 6: these guys are just tweaking it in the Blue team's favor.
Speaker 3: So around about twenty third of September, Trump announces I'm
Speaker 3: going to go back to Butler, and of course voting
Speaker 3: is not compulsory. So the big reason for these rallies
Speaker 3: is to mobilize people to register and vote.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 3: Yes, So twenty third of September, we're going to go
Speaker 3: to Butler, and then on the thirtieth of September or
Speaker 3: the first of October somewhere in there, the Pennsylvania State
Speaker 3: Department says, we're going to do maintenance on the voter
Speaker 3: registration website. Trump stands up to speak at five PM.
Speaker 3: The maintenance starts at six pm and goes to midnight.
Speaker 3: Just the coincidence, I am sure. Of course, when Lara
Speaker 3: Trump called this out, she heads up the Trump campaign,
Speaker 3: they decided we better do the maintenance from ten pm.
Speaker 2: So they did change it, but only after being.
Speaker 5: Caught, and only by a matter of hours.
Speaker 4: I can't believe that this is not illegal at a
Speaker 4: federal level in the US, because when we talked about
Speaker 4: that story a couple of weeks ago, where they were
Speaker 4: going after the fact that illegal voters had been removed
Speaker 4: from the role, the rule was that you couldn't do
Speaker 4: that after ninety days, and the decision had come through
Speaker 4: eighty four days or something. Right, Surely there should be
Speaker 4: a rule that says at least ninety days out from
Speaker 4: an election, states should have their voter registration systems up
Speaker 4: and read it to go like we are dead, sit
Speaker 4: right in the middle of the eye of the storm
Speaker 4: in this election campaign, and it is at this point
Speaker 4: that they're doing maintenance on their systems, Like this is
Speaker 4: the most basic stuff that should have been done a
Speaker 4: long time ago. Can you imagine if the Australian Electoral
Speaker 4: Commission barely a month out from a federal election said sorry,
Speaker 4: the websites are going down, we're doing maintenance. There would
Speaker 4: be a massive outcry. We would not copy it. But
Speaker 4: for some reason in the US, because it's all left
Speaker 4: up to individual states. Oh, it's so much more complicated
Speaker 4: and we couldn't possibly do anything about it. Like, you know,
Speaker 4: I'm not always in favor of the feeds coming in
Speaker 4: and taking control of things, but this should be such
Speaker 4: an obvious one. If you can't log on and register
Speaker 4: to vote a month out from an election, something is
Speaker 4: seriously wrong.
Speaker 6: Caleb Caleb Caleb, the sweet naivety of being twenty five,
Speaker 6: So you genuinely believe that they did have maintenance to
Speaker 6: do it.
Speaker 4: I'm not saying that. I'm saying that the situation. I
Speaker 4: don't believe that I'm saying it should be illegal, Like
Speaker 4: there should be no circumstance in which that can even
Speaker 4: be put forward as a possibility that you have to
Speaker 4: do maintenance a month out from an election, Like it
Speaker 4: just seems like the most basic stuff that should not
Speaker 4: even be possible. But no wonder they don't want you
Speaker 4: to go on and register to vote, because if you
Speaker 4: take a look at Kamala Harris, who is starting to
Speaker 4: do a few little interviews here and there, she popped
Speaker 4: up on a podcast called Call Her Daddy. It's one
Speaker 4: of the most popular podcasts in the world. I can't
Speaker 4: say that I'm a listener. You're probably not either, but yes,
Speaker 4: it is one of the most popular podcasts in the world,
Speaker 4: worth millions of dollars. Will who host it recently signed
Speaker 4: a deal for upwards of sixty million dollars US. I
Speaker 4: think it is to host this thing, so it is
Speaker 4: big deal staff. But she was asked the big question
Speaker 4: on Call Her Daddy, why is it that you don't
Speaker 4: do a lot of sit down interviews, you know, traditional
Speaker 4: format where you're there with a hard hitting journalist who
Speaker 4: is going to ask you the questions that you need
Speaker 4: to give a real response to why are you not
Speaker 4: doing that and why are you talking to me instead?
Speaker 4: And well, Kamala Harris said nothing, really.
Speaker 9: I'm curious, like you don't do too many long form interviews.
Speaker 2: What made you want to do Color Daddie today.
Speaker 9: Well, I think you and your listeners have really got
Speaker 9: this thing right, which is one of the best ways
Speaker 9: to communicate with people is to be real, you know,
Speaker 9: and to talk about the things that people really care about.
Speaker 9: What I love about what you do is that your
Speaker 9: voice and your show is really about your listeners.
Speaker 4: Show is about the listeners. Yeah, isn't every show. I mean,
Speaker 4: this show is about the viewers. When you go and
Speaker 4: do a sit down interview, you don't Fox News or
Speaker 4: see an inn. It's about the view it what does
Speaker 4: she think the media is. It's just it's real. It's real,
Speaker 4: by which she means I'm coming here because I know
Speaker 4: that you're not going to ask me a hard question.
Speaker 2: The other crazy thing she said there is.
Speaker 3: She said, I love this podcast because the listeners are
Speaker 3: seen and heard. Well, actually it's a podcast and their
Speaker 3: listeners they're not heard. Brother, just wondering what people would rather,
Speaker 3: would you rather be seen and heard or would you
Speaker 3: rather have the border crisis sorted.
Speaker 2: And relation come down? What's more important?
Speaker 6: I mean, obviously she does these because she knows it's
Speaker 6: going to be a free ride. See you doing any
Speaker 6: one on ones hard hitting interviews talking about policy on
Speaker 6: even the friendly networks. She's not popping up on CNN,
Speaker 6: she's not popping up on CSNBC, even the people who
Speaker 6: are barracking for her, the networks that are giving the
Speaker 6: Democrats a tongue bath on the hour every single day
Speaker 6: in the lead up to polling day, She's not going
Speaker 6: on there to do any hard hitting questions because everybody
Speaker 6: knows at this point in time she's not up for it.
Speaker 6: So why on earth would you want that woman in
Speaker 6: the White House? Come on, America, restore our faith in you.
Speaker 6: But turning to CNN now, since we're talking about it,
Speaker 6: someone who is facing the behemoth is Hillary Clinton? A
Speaker 6: stranger to none of us, well known among the Dems.
Speaker 5: She's doing her own bit to up the blue vote.
Speaker 5: And here she is.
Speaker 6: Saying outright what we're normally told in a far more
Speaker 6: g teel way, which is she just states it directly.
Speaker 6: If we lose control of what people can say on
Speaker 6: social media. We lose control entirely.
Speaker 5: Check it out.
Speaker 10: We should be, in my view, repealing something called Section
Speaker 10: two thirty, which gave platforms on the Internet to immunity
Speaker 10: because they were thought to be just passed throughs, that
Speaker 10: they shouldn't be judged for the.
Speaker 5: Content that is posted.
Speaker 10: But we now know that that was an overly simple
Speaker 10: view that if the platforms, whether it's Facebook or Twitter
Speaker 10: x or Instagram or TikTok, whatever they are, if they
Speaker 10: don't moderate and monitor the content, we lose total control.
Speaker 10: And it's not just the social and psychological effects.
Speaker 5: It's real harm. God forbid, you lose total control. God forbid.
Speaker 6: People can exchange information freely and fairly in democratic nations.
Speaker 6: I mean, I love it when they just say it outright.
Speaker 6: I mean, we know that is their agenda.
Speaker 4: Here.
Speaker 6: We've got our mis stairs information. The federal government's combating
Speaker 6: it the hate speech laws again, just clamping down on
Speaker 6: free speech.
Speaker 5: But every now and then one.
Speaker 6: Of the parties wheels out someone, particularly in America, who
Speaker 6: just says it like it is. That's what we're afraid of.
Speaker 6: We're going to lose total control. And what she was
Speaker 6: saying there is entirely disingenuous because we know those platforms,
Speaker 6: by law, do have to monitor content. Things like child
Speaker 6: pornography must be taken down. As Elon Musk has stated,
Speaker 6: if someone poses something that breaks laws in any country,
Speaker 6: we delete it. We have people working around the clock
Speaker 6: to achieve that.
Speaker 3: Isn't Hillary Clinton the person who paid a huge sum
Speaker 3: of money for a dossier full of misinformation front I mean,
Speaker 3: but the arrogance of these people. Now, John Carey, we
Speaker 3: talked about him last week where he came out and
Speaker 3: said that the First Amendment is a major problem for democracies.
Speaker 3: I mean, they're not even trying to hide their intentions now.
Speaker 3: Of course Hillary Clinton, they're talking to Sea and n
Speaker 3: begs the question when she says we risk losing control?
Speaker 3: Who is the wi and I suspect Hillary Clinton believes
Speaker 3: the Wii is me as in.
Speaker 2: Herself exactly as a class the elites.
Speaker 4: And I have some sympathy for the idea that social
Speaker 4: media companies should be responsible for what is posted on
Speaker 4: their platforms in so far as they are a publisher.
Speaker 4: So if you're publishing defamatory content, well you should be
Speaker 4: held responsible in the same way that Sky newses or
Speaker 4: that a newspaper is if defamatory content is published. But
Speaker 4: what she is talking about enforcing them to moderate their
Speaker 4: content or if they refuse to do it, some other
Speaker 4: entity doing it. What is that entity that is the
Speaker 4: big problem. Much like here in Australia the Misinformation Disinformation Bill,
Speaker 4: we're talking about a government entity deciding what you can
Speaker 4: and cannot say on social media. And when a government
Speaker 4: entity is in control, it means that government has a
Speaker 4: level of control. And then we're looking at dictatorship. Before
Speaker 4: we go to the break, have a look at this
Speaker 4: footage out of Melbourne. Now there's a little saying that
Speaker 4: goes around online which is f around and find out,
Speaker 4: and that's exactly what happened to this bloke. You might
Speaker 4: have heard about the tobacco wars down in Melbourne, which
Speaker 4: is gangs that are rivaling each other to get control
Speaker 4: of the illegal tobacco market. What you're seeing here is
Speaker 4: the owner of a tobacconist who's just watched a member
Speaker 4: of one of these gangs running to his shop planning
Speaker 4: to fire vomit. The owner has in his hands an
Speaker 4: acts and within a matter of moments you watch the
Speaker 4: bloke be HEA's just walked into vibe bomb the joint,
Speaker 4: come back out and he is faced by the owner
Speaker 4: with an ACT, who takes him down to the ground
Speaker 4: and says, buddy, you have come to the wrong shop.
Speaker 4: I tell you what, I would not want to be
Speaker 4: that bloke. But you can't blame people in these circumstances.
Speaker 4: We want the cops to be able to intervene, but
Speaker 4: all too often now we see it doesn't happen, whether
Speaker 4: it's youth crime, etc. This is what people have got
Speaker 4: to do.
Speaker 5: Vigilante justice.
Speaker 2: See what that bandit would have needed a smoke with
Speaker 2: the acts. We're going to go to a break.
Speaker 3: When we come back, we'll look at what's making news tomorrow,
Speaker 3: including researchers being given five hundred thousand dollars of your
Speaker 3: money to find out if Australia really is good by sea. Okay,
Speaker 3: welcome back. Let's take a look at what's making news
Speaker 3: tomorrow in the papers. Caleb, you've got the Australian.
Speaker 4: Indeed, I do unlike many of the papers tomorrow, it
Speaker 4: is covering the protests and demonstrations we saw today. Of course,
Speaker 4: October the seventh being the first anniversary of the Hamas
Speaker 4: Terra attacks on Israel, where nearly twelve hundred people were killed.
Speaker 4: It says on the front of the Australian Tomorrow, palpaple
Speaker 4: anger at real pole problem. A sheik who celebrated the
Speaker 4: October seven massacre has told hundreds of people rallying outside
Speaker 4: the Lakember Mosque in Sydney that the terror attack was
Speaker 4: a quote unquote day of courage. One year on, as
Speaker 4: concerns mount among labor operatives, the ALP's election chances are
Speaker 4: in serious peril over anger at the plight of Palestinians. Now,
Speaker 4: we should note that only three hundred people turned up
Speaker 4: to this demonstration, thank god. At least the message might
Speaker 4: have gone through to some people that rocking up to
Speaker 4: protest and celebrate October seven might not be a good look.
Speaker 4: And these protests have gained the praise of Hezbollah. So
Speaker 4: if that doesn't tell you what it meant to demonstrate
Speaker 4: on October the seventh, I don't know what does. As
Speaker 4: I said a number of times last week, I will
Speaker 4: defend your right to protest. Every single day of the week.
Speaker 4: You are allowed to protest against civilian deaths. That is
Speaker 4: totally legitimate. When you demonstrate protest on October the seventh,
Speaker 4: the anniversary of a terror attack. You are only doing
Speaker 4: so to signal your support for that terror attack. And
Speaker 4: look at the comments being said here, Oh, it was
Speaker 4: a great day, et cetera, et cetera. They could not
Speaker 4: have made it more obvious what they were saying today.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I'm not sure how much courage is required to
Speaker 3: go into a music festival and kidnap young women.
Speaker 2: The gentleman who said it.
Speaker 3: Was a day of courage, you said there were only
Speaker 3: three hundred people at this gathering in Lakember, but they
Speaker 3: were boasting it was being live streamed to Gaza and
Speaker 3: that was a big deal. So you've literally got people
Speaker 3: in Australia having a time to celebrate a terrorist attack
Speaker 3: and then boasting that it's being live streamed to the
Speaker 3: place where people are still to this day being held
Speaker 3: hostages and these around neighbors in Western Sydney.
Speaker 5: It's hard to believe this.
Speaker 6: Sheik Ibrahim Dadoune, who addressed the crowd, has described October
Speaker 6: seven as a day of courage. He called Israel a
Speaker 6: bastard state of the West, and he said, in what
Speaker 6: sounds like a rallying cry on what was the worst
Speaker 6: day for Israel since World War Two, since the Holocaust.
Speaker 5: He said, quote, victim is coming soon. End quote.
Speaker 6: So the very fact that you're stating that on the
Speaker 6: anniversary of this horrendous day, it does smack of rallying
Speaker 6: the troops, a rallying cry, and even a hint of repetition.
Speaker 6: For you to say victory is coming soon. How else
Speaker 6: can you interpret what this man has said?
Speaker 3: And just on that, the other thing he said, which
Speaker 3: should be a warning to many of our media outlets
Speaker 3: and to the Labor Party, he also boasted that we
Speaker 3: are winning the public relations battle, which shame on our
Speaker 3: institutions and our politicians that those who are clearly supporting
Speaker 3: terrorists can boast publicly We've got the media and we've
Speaker 3: got the key institutions on our side.
Speaker 4: Yes, Well, next time they stand up and call for
Speaker 4: a cease fire, just to replay the comments here, you know,
Speaker 4: victory is nih victory is nigh. Well, you don't have
Speaker 4: a victory if you have a cease fire, do you.
Speaker 4: Another story on the front of the Odds Tomorrow, death
Speaker 4: of despair and obesity hit out under fifties. The so
Speaker 4: called deaths of Despair dragon, alcohol related deaths plus suicide
Speaker 4: and rising obesity rates that rival those in the US
Speaker 4: have seen life expectancy for Australians under fifty stagnate for
Speaker 4: the past five decades. This is a new study that's
Speaker 4: come out said that Australians at older ages, especially men,
Speaker 4: are living longer, but younger cohorts are falling behind many
Speaker 4: other non English speaking high income countries because we live
Speaker 4: terrible lifestyles now, I mean, how can this not be
Speaker 4: so obvious. We're completely set andry, We're locked onto these
Speaker 4: things all of the time. Kids now don't go out
Speaker 4: and play in the street and they're all hold up
Speaker 4: at home in their bedrooms, playing on their devices, etc.
Speaker 4: We eat worse than we've ever eaten. I mean, we
Speaker 4: live in this world that is so rich and wealthy,
Speaker 4: richer and wealthier than we've ever been. But I think
Speaker 4: in many ways we've lost a lot of our wealth
Speaker 4: in our health because we've adapted our lifestyles into a
Speaker 4: way that is not good for the human body.
Speaker 2: It's interesting.
Speaker 3: It's also as well as everything you've mentioned, it's also
Speaker 3: I think the social disconnection. It's more of a problem
Speaker 3: amongst men as they get towards fifty, being dislocated from
Speaker 3: family and other things like that. So you can bind
Speaker 3: those two things together, then you get what the paper
Speaker 3: calling deaths of despair, where especially men approaching fifty, start
Speaker 3: to engage in behaviors to I guess compensate for other
Speaker 3: losses in their life that then has an adverse effect
Speaker 3: on their health.
Speaker 6: Yeah, and then you look at the quality of our food,
Speaker 6: riddled with pfas, riddled with microplastics. That more and more
Speaker 6: the science is piling up saying we've got a real
Speaker 6: problem on our hands here. People's bodies are riddled with
Speaker 6: this stuff and it's showing up later in life. There's
Speaker 6: a reason why the US spend two one hundred and
Speaker 6: fifty billion dollars every single year on what they say
Speaker 6: is the side effects on people's bodies of constantly consuming
Speaker 6: this stuff. We know that even the veggies and fruits
Speaker 6: we buy do not have the nutrients value of the
Speaker 6: same apple or carrot ten to fifteen years ago. Nothing
Speaker 6: is being done to address just those everyday things, our
Speaker 6: drinking water, et cetera, and so on. A lot of
Speaker 6: people aren't even aware of just how badly they're doing
Speaker 6: by their health because we're being let down by government
Speaker 6: and even kids in school these days, they aren't taught about.
Speaker 5: The importance of exercise.
Speaker 6: They aren't taught about the fact that these things are
Speaker 6: a lifelong investment. You don't want to hit forty five
Speaker 6: and suddenly start caring about your fitness and your health
Speaker 6: and your cholesterol levels.
Speaker 5: They're just not taught about how.
Speaker 6: Just irreplaceably important this is and that it will affect
Speaker 6: you for the rest of your life.
Speaker 4: And of course, once upon a time you had to
Speaker 4: do a lot more manual labor just to get anything done.
Speaker 4: Now you can just do everything at the touch of
Speaker 4: a button. Before we go, how good is this story?
Speaker 4: Absurd research gets taxpayer millions. A three year university research
Speaker 4: project seeking to disprove the protectionist myth that Australia is
Speaker 4: an island continent girt Bye Sea, has been awarded nearly
Speaker 4: five hundred thousand dollars in tax bay of funding as
Speaker 4: part of a grant program that no longer has government vetos.
Speaker 4: I mean what we need research into whether we are
Speaker 4: a continent island surrounded by sea. He's another contract. I
Speaker 4: wont give me that five hundred grand I can rather
Speaker 4: report on that.
Speaker 2: We're going to go to a break when we come back.
Speaker 3: A woman applies for a job in nineteen seventy six
Speaker 3: gets a reply just this week.
Speaker 2: It's coming up in a moment.
Speaker 3: Well, if you've applied for a job recently and you're
Speaker 3: getting a little bit worried because you haven't heard back,
Speaker 3: take heart.
Speaker 2: It could be a lot lot worse.
Speaker 3: Tissy Hodson applied for a job as a motorcycle stunt
Speaker 3: rider in nineteen seventy six and had her application returned
Speaker 3: to her just this week, which was a bit of
Speaker 3: a pity because she was in her early twenties when
Speaker 3: she applied to be a stunt motorcycle rider. Now she's
Speaker 3: in her seventies and probably not as able. The post
Speaker 3: office apologized, saying they found the response down behind a
Speaker 3: chest of draws tissiods, and said how they found me
Speaker 3: when I've moved house fifty odd times and even moved
Speaker 3: countries four or five times is a mystery. It means
Speaker 3: so much to me to get it back all this
Speaker 3: time later. I remember very clearly sitting in my flat
Speaker 3: in London typing the letter every day. I looked for
Speaker 3: my post but there was nothing there and I was
Speaker 3: so disappointed because I really really wanted to be a
Speaker 3: stunt rider on a motorcycle. Well, she didn't let the
Speaker 3: lack of response.
Speaker 2: Get to her.
Speaker 3: She ended up going to Africa, where she became a
Speaker 3: snake handler and later on became an aerobatic pilot. So
Speaker 3: it worked out all right. She wasn't a motorcycle rider,
Speaker 3: you know. Back in nineteen seventy six Live, she said,
Speaker 3: I deliberately didn't put on my application that I was
Speaker 3: female because I didn't want that to count again.
Speaker 2: And I also put in.
Speaker 3: My application I am happy to break every bone in
Speaker 3: my body if that's what it takes. I just want
Speaker 3: this what could have been able only the postal service
Speaker 3: had got the response back to her in time.
Speaker 5: Better late than never.
Speaker 6: But before we leave you tonight, there's a new book
Speaker 6: out called The Achievements.
Speaker 5: Of Kamala Harris.
Speaker 6: It's already achieved bestseller status on Amazon and racked up
Speaker 6: a flurry of five star reviews. There's just one catch.
Speaker 6: Check out this video that's gone viral showcasing the book.
Speaker 6: So far, over two million people worldwide have watched this.
Speaker 5: See if you can guess why in my time? You
Speaker 5: kidding me.
Speaker 6: Now, that's what I call a brutally honest read.
Speaker 4: I love.
Speaker 6: I thought that was pretty I've gone to the effort
Speaker 6: of publishing this.
Speaker 2: I thought was impressive. I was actually expecting a lot less.
Speaker 4: That's a very good There were actually chapter titles in there.
Speaker 4: What they were, we don't actually know. It reminds me
Speaker 4: John Laws apparently has a book in his library at
Speaker 4: home entitled All My Friends in Radio And when you
Speaker 4: open it up, all the pages.
Speaker 2: Of LA that's it from us. But stick around the
Speaker 2: coming up just to read a Penney show that's up
Speaker 2: in a moment.