Critical Confrontations: Bin Laden’s Letter, Israel-Hamas Ceasefire & Sam Altman & OpenAI Controversy

In this riveting episode of the Adams Archive, host Austin Adams takes you on an exploratory journey through a series of compelling and thought-provoking topics. From the storm brewing on TikTok over Osama Bin Laden's controversial 2002 letter to America, Austin doesn't shy away from delving into the complex narratives that are often avoided. He challenges the mainstream outrage and seeks to understand the underlying truths in these contentious dialogues.

Following this, the episode shifts to an examination of the recent Israel-Hamas ceasefire. Austin will dissect the nuances of this agreement and its potential longevity, providing insights into the geopolitical implications.

The conversation then takes a technological turn, delving into Michigan's capital gun ban enforcement through AI. Austin scrutinizes ZeroEyes' AI technology, raising critical questions about its impact on Second Amendment rights and the future of surveillance.

The episode also covers the U.S. Army's reversal of its COVID-19 vaccine mandate decision. Hear the Army's call for the return of the troops who left over the mandate and Austin's take on this dramatic policy shift.

Then, gear up for a deep dive into the OpenAI saga, a whirlwind of decisions and employee backlashes that could potentially reshape the AI industry's future. This segment promises to unravel one of the most astonishing episodes in modern business history.

Finally, Austin introduces you to the newly elected Libertarian President of Argentina, a figure attracting global attention for his unorthodox approach and bold declarations against the deep state and government overspending.

With a fresh crew cut and his signature engaging style, Austin is all set to guide you through these fascinating topics. Don't forget to hit subscribe, leave a five-star review, and get ready for an episode packed with insights, analyses, and a touch of the unexpected.

 

All the links: https://linktr.ee/theaustinjadams

Substack: https://austinadams.substack.com

 

----more----

Full Transcription

 

 Adam's Archive.  Hello, you beautiful people and welcome to the Adam's Archive. My name is Austin Adams and thank you so much for listening today. On today's episode, we are going to be jumping into first, what happened recently with Tick tock and all these conservative influencers calling out all you young tick tockers out there for talking about even considering speaking about this document that must not be named.

But I am me and I will name it and we will read it. And that is Osama bin Laden's letter. From 2002, a letter to America. Now there was a ton of controversy that came out on tick talk about this, a ton of conservative channels that are crying out saying, you should, you should be ashamed of yourself for even considering agreeing with any of his points.

And I understand the sentiment, right? We have, um, some wounds from that man as a great country, however.  I think that kind of takes away from the point, right? If you're afraid to look at something in the eye,  uh, then maybe that's more of a reason to address it head on. So we will read that together. And I believe personally, there is actually some valid points and hold your thoughts until I read it.

Cause I think. You might agree to. Alright. Once we walk through that, we are going to then move on into what has been called a agreement on a ceasefire between Israel and Temas. We'll see how long that, uh, lasts for and what the actual, uh, the actual breakdown of the deal was. But we'll go into that together.

After that, we will go into the Michigan capital enforcing its gun ban with artificial intelligence. We'll actually look at the name of this company, which is zero I, and we will watch some of their advertisements. We will see what this technology actually does and talk about what the implications of that could be on your second amendment rights in the future where big brother knows exactly who's carrying and when  following up on that.

We will go into. The situation with the U S army who has asked their troops who left because of the COVID mandate. Come back, come back. We need you. Oh, that's silly. That's the only thing we did where we kicked you out because we wanted to mandate a, a experimental drug on your body and then not pay for the effects of it later.

Oh, that thing. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Don't worry about that. Um, just, just come back, come back. So we'll actually read that letter together from the army that they issued. And then we'll talk all about the open AI drama that has been going down. If you haven't heard about this, it is crazy. This shit's definitely going to be a documentary in like 10 years from now, five years from now, who knows, three years from now, if AI can put it together fast enough.

Um, this was one of the wildest sagas that you've seen in modern business history. Okay, so we will talk about that. We'll walk through what the situation is. I am pretty... Astounded by the way that this went down. They essentially could have just dismantled a  multi billion dollar, probably the single most powerful entity in the prospect of the future of humanity as standing today. 

over a weekend and over a split second decision, which was not very well thought through, which ended in 200 or some, sorry, 95 percent of their employees threatening to leave and go to a different company. So we will actually read that letter today together too. Wow. We're reading a lot of letters. I didn't realize that. 

And then, uh, last but not least, we will talk about  the, uh, president. of  the Libertarian President  of Argentina, um, that was recently elected and he has some wild moments, but I also have some, some agreements with him. And I, they're calling him this far, right? Crazy guy, because he's talking about the deep state and saying he wants to dismantle the over bloated government.

And, uh, so lots of interesting stuff. And then he went through. The parade with a chainsaw  saying he's going to cut down government spending so wild dude, but I'm all for it. Alright guys, that's what I got. Go ahead and hit that subscribe button. Leave a five star review. If you are watching this and not just listening, you'll notice that  Cut some hair on top of my head.

So, uh, essentially, uh, got, uh, a, uh, crew cut now. So, you know, if you see me on Instagram, I might look a little bit different than, than you saw me before. All right. That's what I got for you guys. Subscribe, leave a five star review and  yeah, let's jump into it. 

The Adams archive. 

All right, all right, the very first topic that we are going to discuss today was the recent document from Osama bin Laden, which went viral. On TikTok, now there was over 9 million views mentioned, but TikTok tried to diminish it in a recent, uh, recent note. I believe it was on Twitter even, or X, now as the kids call it.

Uh, but,  I digress. Let's jump into it. This is a letter that was written by Osama Bin Laden in 2002, which was a letter to America. Now in the way he, that he breaks down this letter, it's, it's hard to argue with some of the...  Thoughts that he, the way that he portrays the United States. And so, we'll read that full letter together.

But first, let's read this, which breaks down how this all went down and why this even came to fruition. Because I never read this document until I heard about this. And the way that I heard about it was all these conservative influencers that were coming out and saying, How dare you, these young kids coming out here siding with the terrorists.

How dare you read this letter. How dare you say that you agree with any of his points. That he had valid opinions. How dare you? And we go back to this, this idea of,  of  the good guy and the bad guy,  right? And this has been a theme more recently in the Israel and Palestine and Hamas conflict for me, which has been reconciling with the fact that We've almost always been told, whether it be through Hollywood, whether it be through music, whether it be through plays and books and everything that we've ever been told is that there's a good guy and that there's a bad guy.

And that philosophy, as I've come to know it now, today, is generally flawed.  And the reason that I say that is it's... It's far more complicated than we're giving it credit, right? There's generally not just a good guy and not just a bad guy, right? There's absolutely people who do acts of malevolence and horrific, atrocious acts in the name of being a terrible person and just inflicting pain on people.

That is true. That is factual. But majority of the time that you see these national and world stage conflicts,  it's generally not. The case,  most of the time, what you'll find is both sides think that they're the good guy, right? And not just both sides is this radical extreme side of things on the far, far terrorist organizations.

It's not just them. It's the people behind them, the general population, they have some.  with these people that there's a good guy and there's a bad guy. And, and so I think the only way that we reconcile and we start to  actually pull the curtains behind the military industrial complex is by,  by recognizing that.

It's not that simple.  There's not generally a good guy and a bad guy. This isn't, and even when you look at the old western, you know, westerns, where they try to portray it, you know, there's cowboys and there's Indians, and those are the savages, and we're the upstanding. You know, uh, enforcers of the law, right?

It's again, it's just generally not that simple. And you, and as you start to take this framework and start to untangle the programming that you've been given, which is that there's again, a  good guy and a bad guy, as you start to untangle that, you can almost go back through. Almost any conflict in history, I say almost, almost for a reason, but you can almost go back and look at any framework, any, any conflict, any large scale war, any,  and you start to pull on some of the threads, like, okay,  there's a, there's an idea in debate and then, uh,  I guess, I don't know what, what to classify it as, but there's the idea of steel manning within an argument which is essentially if I was taking the, the opposing individual or opposing forces position and trying to be as generous as possible and trying to make the most compelling argument for it.

Their side of the argument for them being the good guy and me being the bad guy in this instance How would I do? So how would I?  Take critical thinking and how would I?  Critique my own position and and if you can do that right if you can actually steel man the argument and and look and at the the conflict or the Situation or the debate point that you're arguing and say, okay  if I had to take their position  If I had to steel man the case that X, Y, and Z was the good guy, and now I'm the bad guy, how would I do that?

And if you take that  into the equation, you start to see that, okay, maybe there are some compelling opinions on maybe why we shouldn't be in this conflict to begin with,  right? And  maybe it's a sign of peace rather than a return of fire in some instances. Now again, that's not to say there's not... There's not reasons for war at certain points and for certain reasons and if we are gonna say that you know in the instance of Israel vs.

Palestine, I would much rather them come out and just say hey We're taking our land back almost the same way, you know that they tried to frame that as what it was for Russia Right Russia not wanting Ukraine and NATO to infringe on their territory or at least within the immediate vicinity of it They even tried to go.

Oh, they're colonizing Ukraine. It's It's like, okay, that's not really what's happening here. So even if we were to be generous within the Israel and Palestine, uh,  conflict and say, okay, they're doing this as a response and not just to colonize the area, which it seems more and more likely that they're just trying to take that area over. 

However, we'll get into that ceasefire a little bit later in here, but, but my point in this is that when you go back and you start to do those on that unwinding and start to take that steel man argument and look at some of the things that have happened in history, whether it be to the United States or by the United States against other countries or individuals or,  uh,  organizations, you can start to, at the very least, steel man your argument.

If you want to say that the United States is the good guy and every other country we've ever been in conflict with is the bad guy, and you want to die on that hill, you better, you better be able to steel man that argument. And if you're not, you're just blindly following a religion. Right? You're not, you're not even reading the textbooks, right?

You're just blindly having faith that, oh, daddy has my back, right? Daddy government knows all and is,  is essentially, you know, giving blind faith into that institution, which we already know is corrupt.  So whether you're right or you're left, you should think critically about these things and go back and start to pull on those threads.

And that's what we'll do here today. So on that note, this comes from Time Magazine.  And the article title is Why Osama Bin Laden's Letter Went Viral. Now within this letter,  he mentions Palestine several times. Okay, and I'll share this with you. So if you're on YouTube, you'll actually be able to see what we are looking at here together.

If you're not on YouTube, you can always join us over there. And it's just the Adams archive. So if you type that into YouTube at the very top, you'll be able to see what we're looking at. However, let's move on. It says two decades ago, Osama bin Laden, the Al Qaeda leader behind 9 11, it says, probably also next to the  three letter organizations, laid out his attempt.

His attempt at justification for the attack against the U. S. that killed nearly 3, 000 people in his letter to America.  This week, that same letter went viral on TikTok among a new generation, many of whom are debating the Israel Hamas war and the role played by the U. S. for some, a big part of Bin Laden's justification. 

American support for Israel's occupation of the Palestinian territories and what the U. N. deems a violation of international law resonates with what's going on now in the Middle East, leading them to renew calls. For a Gaza ceasefire in one video, which was live on the app of Thursday afternoon with more than 900, 000 views, a tick tocker made the claim that everything we learned about the Middle East 9 11 and terrorism was a lie.

Others on social media have criticized the video sympathizing with terrorists and legitimizing violence. In a statement posted on the next on Thursday, TikTok said content promoting this letter clearly violates our rule in supporting any form of terrorism. We are proactively and aggressively removing the content and investigating how to get it on how it got onto our platform.

So let's watch this video. Let's see if it's actually still there. It might not be anymore.  If they were removing all of it. Yeah, and there it is. It's gone.  Who knew censorship for the  Not when, uh, in a statement posted on X on Thursday, TikTok said, Nope, we just read that the company also says that the content did not reflect a widespread trend, but rather just a few posts on the platform.

Number of videos on TikTok is small and reports of a trending on their platform are inaccurate. This is not unique to TikTok and has appeared across multiple platforms. And the media views on video shared by the hashtag letter to America had over 14 million views on Thursday, CNN reported. But as of Thursday afternoon, the phrase could not be searched on the app due to guideline violations.

This isn't the first time that Tik TOK has faced controversy for what's been shared on the app. The company has responded to Republican criticisms on the platform being biased towards pro Palestinian content by pointing to polling that shows younger people are more sympathetic to Palestinians.  While tens of thousands of people recently publicly showed their support for Israel and the U.

S. condemned anti semitism in France, hundreds of thousands have taken to the streets in pro Palestinian protests around the world calling the ceasefire to protect civilians in Gaza since the start of the war on October 7th.  Okay, now we have  context. Now where I originally went to search for this was the Guardian.

And if we go look at the Guardian's website, which we can do right now,  the document was originally set here on, uh, November 15th of  2023, it was removed. It was originally placed on this by on Sunday, November 24th of 2002.  So 21 years later, they decided that, oh, now this is dangerous for people to read because They're actually reading it.

So you can actually find this document and I will keep it in the, uh, I'll actually send this out. So if you're on my Instagram, go to at the Austin J Adams. So the Austin J Adams on Instagram. And if you comment on my most recent video and some of my other videos that will be about this, after I get some of this content out, I will send this letter to you.

Okay, so  let's go ahead and read the letter,  the letter that must not be named according to TikTok and the guardian.  Here it is. All right.  It says page one  in the name of God, the compassionate, the merciful to the American people,  peace be upon those who follow the righteous track hereafter. The subject of my talk to you is in the overwhelming control of capital.

And it's a fact on the ongoing war between us.  I direct my talk specifically those who support real change, especially the youth.  I say from the onset, your former president warned you previously about the devastation  or the devastating Jewish control of capital and about a day that would come when it would enslave you.

It has happened. Your current president warns you now about the. enormity of capital control and it has a cycle whereby it devours humanity when it is devoid of the percepts or the precepts of God's law  and says in parentheses sharia  the tyranny of control of capital by large companies has harmed your economy as it did ours  And that was my motivation for this talk.

Tens of millions of you are below the poverty line. Millions have lost their homes, and millions have lost their jobs to mark the highest average unemployment in 60 years.  Your financial system in its totality was about to collapse within 48 hours had the administration not reverted to using taxpayer monies to rescue the vultures by using the assets of the victims. 

As for us, our Iraq was invaded in response to pressure from capitalists with greed. from black gold and you continue to support the oppressive Israelis in their occupation of our Palestine in response to pressures on your administration by a Jewish lobby backed by enormous financial capabilities.  Hmm.

Okay. So let's break that down a little bit. We start from the very beginning. And he talks about the Jewish control of capital, right? Your former president warned you previously about the devastating Jewish control of capital. This has been a pretty consistent conversation, right? Surrounding the control of media within media about the control within Hollywood and news corporations and. 

So  this is in line with some very recent conversations that people are having and that probably leads to why this had some effect of ringing true, especially when you bring in something like Palestine and the conflict and him referencing that occupation all the way back 21 years. 

So now what he says is the tyranny of control of capital by large companies has harmed your economy as it did ours. And that was my motivation for this talk. Tens of millions of you are below the poverty line. So now he's calling out the, the lack of. care from our government surrounding people of low income surrounding people who are homeless surrounding, you know, talking about the financial system and its totality was about to collapse within 48 hours had the administration reverted to had not the administration reverted to using taxpayers money to rescue the vultures by using the assets of the victims.

Essentially saying that the banking. Corporations, the banks,  all lever, when they went bankrupt, they essentially  took taxpayer money and then utilized that to  bail the banks out when the people who suffered the most from that was not the organizations,  it was the individuals who banked with them,  right?

So he's saying.  Your own government used your money  to help the people who oppressed you to begin with.  As for us, our Iraq was invaded in response to the pressure of capitalists, then talks about their greed for black gold, meaning oil.  And you can continue to support the oppressive Israelis and their occupation of our Palestine in response to pressures on your administration by a Jewish lobby backed by an enormous Financial capabilities now what we look at there is is the discussion surrounding  The the fact that the  and you continue to support the oppressive Israelis in their occupation of Palestine in response to pressures by your administration Okay, so What, what we can get into from that is, is realizing that this has been a longstanding issue that has been bubbling below the surface for a very long time, right?

This discussion around the powers that be the, the individuals that we know that the, you know, however many families that, you know, control a massive amount of wealth, right? You want to get more into that? But go back to the episode that I did on.  Uh, the creature in Jekyll Island, which is a great book that was written surrounding the end of the gold standard and the rise of the Federal Reserve.

Now go back and look at who the people were that were involved in that conversation. I  believe it was 13 families that were on a private train together  and essentially on Jekyll Island, which is a small island, came up with the idea of the Federal Reserve and then implemented it. Perfectly. And they now control all of the world as a result of controlling  the largest corporation or the largest country's capital, being able to essentially print money at will with no repercussions to themselves. 

And just to the American people, right? In walks  inflation.  So now it goes on to say that an observer of the policies of the new administration relieves or realizes that the change is tactical and not strategy or strategic. It does not at all agree with this, the change you seek. There are very many indicators of this, especially concerning important matters related to your own security and economy, particularly the ongoing war between us.

The previous administration was successful in implicating you in the wars against us under the premise that they are necessary for your security according to the promise that it would be short and would finish in six days or six weeks. Six years has passed, and that administration is gone without realizing the victory.

The man calling for change promised you victory in Afghanistan and set a time for withdrawal.  Before the end of the set time,  Patriots from the previous administration came and asked for an extension of six more months  if it was  The six day war that started by President Bush and six years have not enough to has not been enough to finish it Then the wise men should question How long would a six month war?

take and whether you would be able to fund a war that requires a large amount of money that weakens your economy and Your dollar 

interesting.  Okay. So what he's saying there is essentially that they said this would take six days. Now they said it was six weeks. Now they're saying it's six years,  right? And how much are you willing to sacrifice as a country of your financial stability as a nation,  by simply coming over here and looking to go after our oil, which, you know, we go back to the weapons of mass destruction conversation, which  were never found. 

So,  moving on here,  uh, so, so that's interesting to me. It's like the amount of people that are now realizing that there's  some.  Some  cracks in the armor, right, that, that, the great nation that we were told that we were brought up as patriots for that, you know, I myself joined the military  to defend,  right,  maybe there's some questions that should be asked about  whether or not we should be in these wars, and you guys know.

If you listen to me enough that I'm at this point, there's very little you could do to convince me that we should be at war with essentially anybody unless we're specifically defending our home territory, which nobody's encroached upon the United States in Lord since the British.  So moving on.  This says for Obama to leave one third of its soldiers in Iraq and the statements from his administration about this, especially from Aderno about the possibility for Obama's ordering the return of the forces he took out of Iraq, it would have been better for him had he disagreed with the ethics of the previous administration and adopted the truth as a friend and told you that he would not withdraw from Iraq, which may not serve the U S interests, but it is in the interest of the large corporations,  right?

So he's talking about the war machine. Right? He's talking about the Military Industrial Complex.  It serves... Doesn't serve the U S, but it serves the large corporations, meaning the same corporations that we know own all the other corporations, the same corporations who own all of the politicians, the same corporations who own all of the military companies like Raytheon, or at least have the largest share percentage within those companies. 

It says the course of these policies of the president administration in several areas clearly reveals that whatever, whoever enters the white house, even with good intentions to safeguard the people's interests is no more than a train operator.  His only task is to keep the train on the tracks that are laid down by the lobbyists in New York and Washington to serve their interests first, even if it's counter to your security and economy. 

Any president who tries to move the train from the lobbyist tracks to a track for the American people's interests will confront very strong opposition and pressures from the lobbyists.  Your president described the decisions by the court in favor of corporations to intervene in the political arena as a victory.

But it is not for the American people, except for the big corporations.  Okay, so now what he's saying is that your president...  is controlled.  No matter how many, how, how good of intentions he has, if he goes to fight the machine, if he goes to do what's in the best interest of the American people, he will be met by the corporations, right?

So that's why when people are saying, Oh, there's merit to this. Yes, there's absolutely some merit to this. Our government has been  commandeered by large corporate entities that have the only best interest of their entities making more profits. And generally, the best way to do that is by siphoning it from the people,  not by serving the people's best interests. 

And we've talked about this, our system is fundamentally flawed, almost everybody who goes in with a good intentions gets spit out,  or ends up 13 indictments before they go for re election.  We exactly saw that play out with Donald Trump. The entire machine. All the news companies.  All the, the, the, entire, entirety of Hollywood.

All of the, the journalists that, that were a part of any actual legitimate organization.  All of them conspired. Even the FBI and the CIA did the same thing with the letters that they signed about the Hunter Biden laptop. Right? 

It says. The course of the, the course of the policies of the President Administration in several areas clearly reveals that whoever enters the White House, even with good intentions, to safe, to safeguard the people's interests, is no more than a train operator. His only task is to keep the train on the tracks that are laid down by the lobbyists,  even if it's counter to your security and economy. 

Now tell me you disagree with that,  because I, I will argue that point with you all day.  There is no doubt about it, that it is right, and... That it is also a right for the administration to support the oppressive Israelis for the continued, let's, let's get context. I think I maybe skipped something. Um, it says, There is no doubt about it that it is a right, and it is also a right for the administration to support the oppressive Israelis for the continued occupation of our land and the killing of our brothers, marking a victory for the Jewish lobby.

The president was not able to defend you against the security and economic loss. The way for change and freeing yourselves from the pressure of lobbyists is not through the Republican or the Democratic parties, but through undertaking a great revolution for freedom.  Not to free Iraq from Saddam Hussein, but to free the White House, and to free Barack Hussein so he can implement the change you seek.

It is not, it does not only include improvement of your economic situation and ensure your security, but more importantly, help him, helps him in making a rational decision to save humanity from the harmful gases that threaten its destiny. 

Let's read that again. So what, what he's saying there again. The way for change and freeing yourselves from the pressure of lobbyists is not through Republican or Democratic parties, but through undertaking a great revolution for freedom, not to free Iraq from Saddam Hussein, but to free the White House and to free the president  so they can implement the change you seek.

Free them from who? Free them from the lobbyists. Free them from what lobbyists? Well, and what he's referencing here, he says the Jewish lobbyists,  the individuals who own those large corporate entities.  Who control a portion, a large portion of Hollywood. And the news entities, right? So again,  and this is far different than when everybody wants to ring the anti Semitic bell.

It's like nobody's saying anything about the religion and nobody's saying anything about the people who are in those areas who hold the title of being Jewish. No, it just so happens that the people that we're discussing here have a Jewish background, have Jewish blood running through their veins, and are from  That origin. 

It does not mean anything against the peoples themselves. It means that there is a large portion of people who also hold these characteristics that is what they push their agenda through.  Okay, so it's like, it's very important to make that distinction. No, it is not all Jewish people that are running Hollywood.

It is not all Jewish people that are controlling the White House. It is not all, no, it has nothing to do with the fact that they are Jewish or their beliefs in their religion or where their origin is from. It has to do with that. There is a small, very small, like, handful  of people and families in power that all have similar characteristic that unites them, which so happens to be that cultural background. 

So everybody crying anti semitic when you say, oh, don't bomb  or don't agree with the fact that, you know, there is a strong Jewish lobby. It's like, you're missing the point. 

Love Jewish people.  Love all my people. I have nothing against really any class or group or culture or background or ethnicity or race or religion. It's like that to me is such a low frequency beta.  Uh, uninteresting perspective to have that has just no value. There, there is no reason to have any distinction between people and, and, and say, this group is this thing.

No.  But there is a way to categorize people based on that. And when a small group of people who hold Those powerful positions hold that uniting culture, then it's going to be referenced, which is important to make a distinction of. Okay,  moving on.  The British military governor in the United States used to have the right to appoint judges and mayors.

Similarly, the corruption is deep and rooted now in all the higher authorities, thus giving authorities over to these officials or these offices to corporations.  Hmm.  Subsequently, the higher court adjudicated their support of political financing by corporations under such circumstances.  Now he's talking about the lobbying.

Reading the book by the intellectual Thomas Paine helped your fathers in the revolution against the oppressors. It is useful for you to read it under the current similar circumstances. You are in need of people like Thomas Paine to publish books pointing out the similarities between the two phases, and that will have a similar effect.

You are also in need of men with courage and initiative like those of your forefathers at that time when they refused to allow one company to harm the interests of the United States, a company that had a monopoly on tea and its prices.  Talking about the Boston Tea Party. Right? Talking about the, um, the, what is it?

The, the Indian tea company or whatever it's called.  I'm going to have to look that one up. Um, forget the, the, uh, God, what's the name of it? Um, that's so stupid that I can't remember that. 

Let's see. 

The East India Trade Company, is that what it is?  Pretty sure that's what it is. East India Trade Company.  Um,  Yeah, the East India Company. That's what it was. Thank you. At least I got it right. I got there eventually, guys. Before even Google told me, and you can reference the YouTube video to see it.  Um, alright.

So,  it says, uh, yeah, there are now many companies that endanger the United States economy, which continues to be vulnerable to collapse, and they also formulate the policies for the White House. They threw hundreds of thousands of soldiers against us and have formed an alliance with the Israelis to oppress us and occupy our land.

That was the reason for our response on the 11th.  Palestine has been under occupation for decades. Now what he's referencing there is obviously September 11th. Now, obviously that's  obviously not a justification to commit acts of terrorism against random civilians, which has been the theme this whole year with the Israel and Palestine conflict.

So again, Don't agree with that. It's a horrific way to respond to this. The way that you respond to this is what this letter was attempting to do. Just do it more effectively. Cause the fact that nobody read this, now all of a sudden people are reading this and now there's value to it.  Anyways, it says, uh, Palestine had been under occupation for decades and none of your presidents could talk, talked about it until after September 11th, when Bush realized that your oppression and the tyranny against us were part of the reason for the attack.

Then he talked about it, the necessity for two States. Obama is trying to address the issue with the same solutions, suggesting by his predecessors they are quilting fruitless solutions not of concern to us. If you want a real settlement that guarantees your security in your country and safeguards your economy from being depleted in a matter similar to our war of attrition against  the 

Soviet Union, then you have to implement a roadmap that returns the Palestine land to us. All of it from the sever or the sea to the river. It is an Islamic land, not subject to being traded or granted to any party.  In conclusion, be assured that we do not fight for mere killing, but to stop the killing of our people.

It is a sin to kill a person without proper justifiable cause, but terminating his killer is a right.  You should be aware that justice is the strongest army and security offers the best livelihood. You lost it by your own making when you supported the Israelis in occupying our land and killing our brothers in Palestine.

The road to safety starts with the stopping of aggression. And again,  the way to combat aggression is not  more aggression. And the way to stop people from killing your people is not by killing their people.  Fundamentally disagree with him on that. Palestine should not be seen, and even in his own argument there, he says that it is a sin to kill a person without proper justifiable cause.

Okay, 3,  000 people on 9 11 that you killed without proper justifiable cause, regardless of the country that they lived within.  Palestine should not be seen captive, for we will try to break its shackles.  The United States shall pay for its arrogance with the blood of Christians and their funds. Peace be upon those who follow the righteous track. 

All right, so again,  fundamentally disagree with a lot of what he says there, but there is merit to some of the points that he makes surrounding lobbying, surrounding our president not being in control regardless of  good intentions.  Several things that he said there that holds true.  in the awakening that we've seen over the last three to four years.

So when you see all these people shouting at, you know, saying that anybody who reads this and agrees with any of the points made that they're a terrorist, it's no, that you're missing the point.  And  We probably, if you hadn't already gotten to this point where you realize these things without reading a letter from  Osama bin Laden, like maybe you should do that first and there's far better ways to probably get to this point from far more intelligent, far less polarizing, far less bloodthirsty people, then Osama Bin Laden, so there's that, like you could definitely get this point across without having to hear it from him. 

But, that, that, you see the censorship, you see the people coming out and calling, you know, everybody a terrorist who reshares  this, or says that there's any merit to some of the points that he made about the occupation, and  so. I just wanted to get that out there. I think it's a value to actually read through these things and not just hear the headlines and just assume that everybody who makes any point about this is siding with a terrorist organization.

Because again,  I fundamentally, fundamentally disagree with the acts that were committed on behalf of this ideology.  But that doesn't mean that there's no merit to some of the points that he made about  the United States of America being flawed, because It is.  And if you disagree with that,  you're very likely brainwashed at this point. 

All right. Alright, so the next thing that we're going to discuss is that Israel and Hamas have agreed to a temporary ceasefire for humanitarian purposes that include a hostage release deal, which has come from Fox News. Let's go ahead and read this article where it says the Israeli government is committed to the return of all hostages home.

Tonight, the government approved the outline for the first stage of achieving this goal.  According to which, at least 50 hostages, women and children, will be released for four days, during which there will be a lull in the fighting.  The release of every 10 additional hostages will result in an additional day of respute. 

The Israeli government, the IDF, and the security forces will continue the war in order to return all the hostages, to complete the elimination of Hamas, and to ensure that Gaza does not renew any threat to the State of Israel.  The ceasefire was officially announced hours after Israeli and Hamas leaders said Tuesday that negotiations were in their final stages. 

Both sides ultimately agreed to their conditions. Qatari... Negotiators helped broker the agreement under the deal. Israeli's government has agreed to temporarily stop its pursuit of Hamas, including its ground invasion of Gaza and its airstrikes for humanitarian purposes. Also, Hamas has agreed to release dozens of hostages in tandem with Israeli government or with Israel agreeing to release Palestinian prisoners on a three to one ratio.

Fox news, Trey Yankst reported Hamas leaders would release one hostage for every three Palestinians that Israel releases from its prisons.  Hamas, so  that means that Israel essentially has to have three times the amount of  hostages slash prisoners.  Hamas, which governs Gaza, took about 240 hostages from Israel during its terror attack on October 7th when it invaded Israel and killed approximately 1, 200 people, mostly civilians.

The terror group said at the time that it took enough hostages, which included Israelis, Americans, and other foreign nationals, to free all Palestinians in Israel. 

Interesting. So you'll see the first hostages come. out over the course of Thursday.  Netanyahu met with his war council Tuesday afternoon, then the security council, and then this full cabinet before the agreement was announced. Ahead of the meetings, he said he hoped there would be good news. Earlier Tuesday, Hamas leader Ismail Hanaya and Mark Rijev, the senior advisor to Israel's prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, openly said a deal was closed.

The deal being, hey, we'll stop for three or four days and we'll, you know, exchange hostages. You know, for every one that you give us, we'll give you three.  Um, okay, so not exactly what I was thinking. So not a long term, this is not a long term ceasefire. This is just a ceasefire for three or four, potentially five days where they release their hostages together.

And then Israel will go back to  leveling the city of Gaza, apparently.  Uh...  Yeah, that's what it seems like. Okay,  not exactly what I was thinking, but as you guys know, when things pop up and we have breaking news, you'll get it while we're here. Um, so again, this was Israel and Hamas agreed to a temporary ceasefire hostage release deal, including freeing three Americans.

Now, the original headline of this made it seem like it was more of a longstanding agreement, which obviously it's not.  So  let's  move on to our next topic, which is that the Michigan Capitol is going to enforce gun bans with artificial intelligence.  There's a software that has been created that allows them to using video surveillance footage in real time to identify threats. 

And by threats, they mean anybody who's potentially carrying a weapon, whether it be lawful or unlawful.  So let's read this article. It comes from, uh,  bridgemi. com. And the article says, Michigan capital to enforce a gun ban with artificial intelligence. Now, to me, this signifies some dystopian stuff, right?

What my concern around this would be is now that this has...  Been created. You can't put it back in the box, right? You've opened the box. Now, there is a software that will allow them to identify people who have weapons on them, whether it be lawfully or unlawfully because it is our right to carry and bear arms. 

It is our right to conceal weapons. It is our right to open carry weapons where the laws allow.  So now. You can be punished for that. You can be approached by police and you can have this technology that will be implemented  in God knows what way, right? We don't know how this is going to be used for sure. 

How do you make sure that this isn't going to be used to, I don't know, stop people from  defending property or defending life at rallies when they're allowed to open carry right in walks Kyle Rittenhouse  to me, it's like, this isn't the issue that I have is not.  Making sure that we're more safe in our capital buildings.

It's is what is the actual use case for this going to be right? when you're talking about Smart cities and things like that and the totalitarian surveillance in Michigan itself just put up 400 400 cameras on one highway alone 400 cameras, Michigan just put up to surveil its own citizens in the name of stopping violent crime.

How does 400 cameras on a highway stop violent crime? That's not what it's for. It's to surveil the general public. If you think that that data just stops and they're scrubbing through hundreds of thousands of tens of thousands of millions of cars flying by every single day, To look for one, two, three, four people.

No, there's no return on investment there, right? They want to surveil people. They want to know where you're going, how you're getting there. I challenge you to drive down the highway right now, drive five miles in any city without seeing a camera up in the sky watching you drive.  It  infuriates me. It's so frustrating that you can't even drive your car on a road that they built with your tax dollars without daddy government Big big brother sitting there watching you tracking your license plate  This says authorities in the michigan state capitol are beginning to use artificial intelligence to detect any Firearms in a bid to increase security amid a growing national wave of political threats and violence Show me a recent violent gum crime at the Capitol and what justifies utilizing this software.

In fact, why don't we use this software at school zones? Why don't we put this software outside of every single school in America? Instead of funding Israel's  war, instead of funding Ukraine's war, why don't we take this software and actually use it for some implementation that people want? Because the implementation  that people want is not going to Capitol buildings that already have security.

Arm security at that. Why not put it into school zones? Why not put a video camera on outside of every single school that identifies threats that way? I'm cool with that because you shouldn't be open carrying by a school anyways. 

Company officials at the Zero Eyes firm announced the deployment Monday, saying Michigan is the first state capital in the nation to use its gun detection technology, which has also been implemented last year at Oxford High School in the wake of the mass shooting. Thank you.  The system, which also analyzes footage from existing video cameras to identify brandished or otherwise drawn firearms, represents the latest in a series of escalating security measures at the Michigan capital following armed protests in 2020. 

I'm sure you'll be fine. 

The Michigan Capitol Commission earlier this year approved installation of metal detectors inside the building and implemented a full indoor gun ban. Except for lawmakers with a concealed weapons permit. Except for lawmakers with a concealed weapons permit. So the lawmakers get to protect themselves, but not the citizens who are there, right?

Interesting. 

Um, commissioners last month unanimously approved the, the lease with zero wise, a Pennsylvania based firm, which expected to cost about $3,000 a month. The money will come from existing security funding. First proposed by Governor Gretchen Whitmer, who is the subject of a kidnapping plot by the FBI,  by the FBI orchestrated by the men who also discussed storming the capitol.

You mean the FBI agents?  And also the people, I'm pretty sure they got released because it was entrapment. It's just another layer of protection, Rob Blackshaw said, an executive director of the State Capitol Commission. Our latest goal, as we've said from day one, is to decrease any potential of a mass shooting and increase our level of safety for the people who work here and visit here.

The artificial intelligence system will tap into existing surveillance video at the Capitol, including inside the building and outside grounds when openly carried firearms are still allowed. Where openly carried firearms are still allowed. So again...  If a gun is identified, images will be immediately reviewed by trained specialists at Zero Eyes, including military and law enforcement veterans, the company said on Monday.

If those specialists confirm a threat, they'll send alerts and other actionable intelligence to Capitol Police in a matter of seconds, according to the firm.  Hmm.  So how do you identify a threat for somebody who's not a threat? Do they wear a red jersey? Do they, you know?  Anyways, here's the video by Zero Eye, so you can see what this technology is all. 

About.  And we'll go ahead and watch it  together. 

ZeroEyes is a team of former Navy SEALs and military special operations veterans teamed up with elite technologists with a mission to save lives.  We use your existing video cameras coupled with our artificial intelligence gun detection  to prevent threats rather than react to them. There is no better purpose right now and no more difficult problem to solve than mass shootings.

We go over the existing security cameras at a building, so on the interior and exterior, at entrances, exits, choke points, bottlenecks, inside the hallways.  So when a shooter walks up and they take out a weapon,  zero eye system will pick that weapon up.  And our military trained operation experts verify every detection before sending out alerts to local staff,  security. 

And the local 911 center to get the alert to first responders. 

It takes about three seconds from the time a gun enters the frame of a camera to the time an ale