Dr. Joseph P. Farrell: How Hidden Powers Shape America: From 1865 to 2025

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:26):
The. Greetings everyone, and Greg
Bolden here. American Bolden.
We're going to be bringing up mygood friend Chris Michaels as
well because it is interview night and it's our favorite
guest that we host. We're having them on about once
every quarter. It's been a blast having these

(00:46):
conversations and I'm still laughing because quite honestly,
we just had a wild time right before we're hitting the record
button in conversation. So I know that tonight's episode
and our conversation may be one of the most spirited and fun
ones that we've had so far. Who's the guest, you might
wonder? Well, it's our good friend
Doctor Joseph P Farrell, the scholar, the researcher, the

(01:08):
author himself, diving in the works.
Deep ends of history, hidden technology, geopolitics, ancient
civilizations and the shadows where power often prefers to
live. There's nothing really off the
table with him. That's what we absolutely love
talking to him about. It's always a blast.
And today is going to be no different than all those other

(01:30):
conversations. So we're glad that you guys are
here for that conversation with us today.
Chris Michaels bring you up to the stage real quick.
How you doing? I'm pretty good.
I am in an ornery mood. But I'm glad that we get to
speak with Doctor Joseph Farrelltoday.
He's one of our favorite guests.And boy, oh boy, does he have a
book that came out the Rialto and Richmond reconstructed.

(01:53):
I mean, you will never look at the Civil War the same way ever
again after reading that book. Well, I've always, you know, we,
we talked to him about this whenhe wrote the first book about
the dark money. Like where did all the funds go
when the South disbanded? You know, who took what and how
is that influencing modern culture?
So I'm looking forward. You've read the book.

(02:14):
I'm in full insight to everybody.
I have not had an opportunity toread it yet, but you have.
So I'm going to let you take thelead on this.
But let's hit our role welcomingDr. Farrell ladies.
And. Gentlemen, America emboldened,
presents Doctor Joseph P Pharaoh.

(02:45):
All right, Doctor Farrell, welcome.
Who? Was this well, you know, I went
into the bathroom. I was like, you get the voice
going and get the echo and what we're getting a proper intro.
What were you doing in the bathroom to to to emote this?

(03:06):
I don't want to know acoustics. Oh, acoustics, I said.
Because I was. I was practicing my tones, my.
Oh, my goodness. Wow.
Well, hi, Joseph. I told you it's going to be a
great conversation today. I can't wait.

(03:27):
I'm feeling it. Yeah, I bet you are after that
trip to the back. After that, everything came out
all right. I'm glad to hear it.
Glad to hear. It everything always comes out
in the end, but anyway. Oh my goodness, Joseph, how have
you been? Well, after our pre recording

(03:53):
conversation, I am thoroughly oxygenated so I'm.
Doing for people that don't know, we have a green room on
America and Bolden's and we do acomedy act.
We're thinking about taking it on the road.
You can purchase your tickets now.

(04:14):
Oh my goodness. Yeah.
We weren't blue, though. You have to keep that in mind.
Don't bring your children. Yeah, do not bring the children.
Maybe it's a little like an Joseph comic kind of deal with.
Joseph is the shock jock of alternative history.
He certainly is. Well after after having after

(04:37):
having defamed my late great aunt Gladys.
Yeah, they don't know that. They don't know that.
Don't say that too loud that younever know.
Oh my goodness. OK, moving.
Right along, I guess we have a show to do.
We have an interview to conduct.Oh, OK, so as we mentioned

(05:02):
Doctor Joe Farrell, he's writtenthe book The Rialto in Richmond,
Reconstructed Confederates, Canada and carpetbaggers.
Like I said, after reading this book, you will not look at the
Civil War nor the aftermath the same ever again.
This information that Doctor Joseph Farrell has presented to

(05:22):
us seems as though that this whole war is the same as every
single other war that we've seentoday.
A lot of espionage, a lot of foreign powers involved, a lot
of elites that just want to makethings go their way.
And Doctor Joseph Farrell has done an excellent job of
exposing potentially these networks that were in operation

(05:46):
during the Civil War and after. So Doctor Joseph Farrell, where
did you come up with all of thisinformation?
Particularly, how did you uncover people that were
involved in this, but specifically the one individual
who I think is just crazy, Sanford Conover, George

(06:09):
Margrave, James Watson Wallace, AKA Charles Dunham, Like go into
this character with us. Who is this guy?
This this guy is a fellow that in the book I call the
impresario of imposture because there is is a renewed scholarly

(06:32):
attention and focus on this willthis loosely call him a
gentleman. He was a fraud, a Montabank, A
grifter, you name it, a gaslighter, a fake journalist,
and so on and so forth. There's been renewed scholarly
interest, but this guy was was so obscure until very recently

(06:55):
when the University of Illinois did a study of him.
And the gentleman that wrote thethe study, I believe his surname
was Carman Carman. But in in any case, the study
presents Dunham and you listed abunch of of his aliases,

(07:16):
Margrave Conover, you know, all of these, all of these aliases
that he invented for himself throughout the Civil War.
This gentleman the scholar interprets as as a kind of well
accomplished con man and grifter.

(07:37):
And what I do in the book is I simply rely on this study.
And by the way, it's the only study of this man out there.
And here's something that shouldbe a big, huge clue to
everybody. When we say the names of the
principal big names that were involved with the War Between
the States, Jefferson Davis, Abraham Lincoln, Robert E Lee,

(08:00):
Thomas Stonewall Jackson, General Grant, you know, we all
have pictures of these men in our mind because they all have
pictures. You can look and see what they
looked like. There is only one major
character in the whole Civil Warstory that has not a picture,

(08:22):
not a daguerreotype, not a pen and ink, not a painting, not a
sketch. Nowhere is there any visual
imprint of what this man looked like.
And to me that's a huge clue. So what I do is I interpret this
man less as a self appointed fraud, motta bank and grifter,

(08:46):
just using the opportunity of the war to feather his own nest.
I interpret him as an agent, an espionage agent, because
everything that he does, writingfake articles in newspapers on
both sides of the war. Exactly.
He's he's active in the Union, he's active in the Confederacy.

(09:10):
He has a pipeline directly to the Union Secretary of War Edwin
Stanton. And we all, we both know what a
wonderful character he was. No.
Not the slightest bit of suspicion about that man.
You know, President Lincoln was surrounded by some real snakes

(09:31):
and, and that's probably the biggest Viper in the pit.
Secretary of War. Secretary of War Yes,
absolutely. So this this guy Dunham was on
both sides of the war. And here's the kicker.
And and to me, this this is whatspells espionage agent par

(09:52):
excellence. Oh, by the way, he makes it up
to Canada too. So we'll get to that part of the
story. All right, yes.
So he he he infiltrates himself into the Confederate lines in
1862 and 63. The Confederates arrest the guy
on suspicion of espionage, but there's no evidence.

(10:14):
So they eventually release him and pass him back through the
lines back into the Union. And while he's pottering around
Richmond, when he's still running free, he he inspects the
Richmond's defenses. He claims to have been involved
in the test of a an experimentalcannon, which I am assuming was

(10:37):
probably a rifled cannon of somesort that the Confederacy was
was developing and and so on andso forth.
And then when he gets back to the Union, the first thing he
does is he writes, fires off a letter to the Secretary of War
Stanton. And then he writes a letter to
President Lincoln. OK.
And in the letter to President Lincoln, he says, well, you

(11:00):
know, it would be possible to godown there and kidnap the
Confederate leadership and hold them hostage.
Now, Please note, this is the same guy that in 1864, after a
brief trip to Canada, writes a similar article for Horace

(11:21):
Greeley's New York Post, where he urges the the president of
the Union, Abraham Lincoln, to beware of a kidnapping plot.
So in other words, kidnap Jefferson Davis and his cabinet,
kidnap Abraham Lincoln and his cabinet and hold them ransom and

(11:41):
end the war. So in other words, I'm viewing
this guy, Chris, bottom line here and and I'm I'm omitting
gobs of detail because this guy appears to me to be the
quintessential espionage agent and above all Agent Provocateur.

(12:02):
And in he plays that role very, very well.
In fact, let's let's let's Fast forward the tape just a bit to
let you know some of the other things that this guy's involved
with. He is the chief witness.
This guy is the chief witness against the four conspirators

(12:24):
that were eventually hung for involvement in Abraham Lincoln's
assassination plot. OK, This guy is the chief
witness and he perjures himself on the stand.
And by the way, he doesn't even testify under his own name.

(12:44):
What did he testify under? Conover, I believe it was or
Sanders, one of those two now I don't recall right off the top
of my head. So he's he's he's the chief
witness that the Judge Advocate General Joseph Holt, who chairs
this whole military tribunal, acknowledges is the chief
witness that did the most damageagainst the conspirators.

(13:07):
Later on, Holt goes before a trial and a civil trial
answering charges of perjury. And the judge is just, you know,
I wrote about this in the book. The judge doesn't know what to
do because they're trying one guy for perjury based on the
perjured testimony of another guy.

(13:27):
OK, So on and on this goes. And then eventually when when
Dunham is found guilty of perjury and sentenced to prison,
then what does he do? He writes President Andrew
Johnson, who, by the way, gives him a pardon.

(13:50):
I mean. Folks, this is beyond being a
grifter. OK?
If if Israel were around at thattime, I would have said this guy
is Mossad. Well, I.
Was thinking he might be like early CIA like that like.
No, no, no, but no. You know how I think he is
British intelligence. Yes, absolutely.

(14:13):
Canada, Remember the Canada connection?
And by oh, by the way, while he's in Canada, guess who he's
there at the same time with who?John Wilkes Booth.
My goodness, what a small world.What a small world.
Wow. It's it's.
I'm sure they were just getting tea and biscuits.

(14:34):
And they were just getting tea and biscuits, along with Jay
Cook, the financier, the Dupont's, the mayor of New York
getting the picture. OK global.
And by the way, by the way, along with that little
Confederate cell up there that Jefferson Davis decided to fund

(14:56):
in 1864 after the Dalgren raid because he wanted to make sure
that Lincoln lost the 1864 election.
So you've got a Confederate Secret Service cell on top of
everything else in Montreal. This is why I wanted to bring up
him first, because he seems to be such a linchpin throughout

(15:18):
your book on what could have potentially happened with the
Civil War and how this the international interests were
involved in all of this. It seems as though that not much
has changed into 2020 and 2025. You have this guy under
different names creating articles to generate a

(15:40):
narrative. Like you said, this screams
intelligence. Yeah, it does.
It screams intelligence. Now, what would be the the the
the supposed motives to create this kind of discord on behalf
of a foreign power? I think you have to read the
Rialto enrichment Constructed, reconstructed very carefully

(16:03):
because I'm, I'm intentionally trying to suggest a narrative by
reading between the lines right and the narrative.
I think that that has to be addressed and and the Rialto
enrichment has to be read after the first book because the two
books really do belong together because some of the little loose

(16:23):
ends that are left loose in the first book are are answered in
the second book, like what happened to all that Confederate
debt. Yeah.
OK. The Confederacy ran up about
$990,000,000 worth of of debt during the war.
The Union I think was somewhere around a billion, 1 billion

(16:47):
point, $3 billion of debt. So in other words, the debt that
both sides accumulated at the end of the war was massive.
The Confederate debt basically ended up being financed by the
European powers, principally England and France.
OK, the Union attempted to recover some of those funds, but

(17:11):
as late as the 1880s, there are still massive amounts of funds
in England on Confederate accounts.
This is key. This is key.
So if you are a bondholder of sovereign Confederate debt, like
the air longer loan that I wroteabout in the first book, if you

(17:35):
are a holder of Confederate debtand all of a sudden, like one of
the holders being, oh, by the way, William Gladstone.
OK, so we're not dealing with with Johnny Cockney on the East
End of London being a holder of Confederate bonds.
No, we're talking about the veryupper crust of of British

(17:57):
society, including members of the Queen's Privy Council.
OK, That's how far it goes. So if you're these financiers,
you want to recoup your losses. So how do you do that?
You ensure that in the post war reconstruction period, the

(18:18):
tension between the two sectionsendures and then you put a lien
on the labor of the South, blackand white.
What's the lien? It's called reconstruction.
And the way they do this, this is to me the the principal

(18:40):
lesson that we have to take away.
The way they do this is they, first of all, by a sleight of
hand that left my jaw on the floor, they convert the Lincoln
Greenback into the same Dang type of currency as used by the
Confederacy. Let me repeat that.

(19:02):
They convert the Lincoln Greenback into the same kind of
currency as used by the Confederacy, and I think I'm
probably the only one out there that has caught that.
After doing that, they then say,OK, because we are going to
treat the greenback that way, wehave to be able to redeem it.

(19:26):
We have to be able to resume specie payments in exchange for
a greenback at banks in the Union.
OK, so in other words, the greenback when it was first
issued was a debt free Fiat money that was not a convertible
currency. You couldn't take it to the bank
and say give me a gold dollar for this $1.00 Lincoln

(19:49):
greenback. The Resumption Act after the end
of the war attempts to do this. But here's the kicker. the
United States, constitutionally,the constitutional money system
in the United States prior to the War Between the States, was
a bimetallic standard. Gold and silver.

(20:11):
And that old standard, by the way, you'll read about in
Babylon's Banksters. There's a reason I'm doing all
of this in such a long series ofbooks.
They're all related because whenyou have a bimetallic standard,
the first thing you can do is manipulate the ratio.
Of exchange between the two after the war.

(20:32):
The resumption act Again, this is just pure stealthy sleight of
hand. The resumption act resumes
payment in gold only silver is demonetized.
And So what does that do? It puts the post war United
States of America into a massivedeflationary cycle.

(20:54):
This is the reason why William Jennings Bryan is screaming
about the of gold in 1896 to winthe Democratic presidential
nomination. This is exactly why.
And the other thing is that we know this deflationary policy
was intentional is for two reasons #1 the most significant

(21:17):
reason, as that I get to in the book, is that at that time there
is a worldwide movement confinedmostly to the United States and
Europe to put the entire world on a modified mono metallic gold
standard based around the Frenchfranc.
And if you study the system thatthey're trying to put into play.

(21:39):
And by the way, senators like Senator John Sherman, brother of
William Tecumseh in Ohio, are onboard with this scheme.
OK, so remember Sherman's March?What is he doing?
He's plowing his way through through Georgia and grabbing all
the silver and gold. OK, Yeah.

(22:03):
So in other words, you really have to read between the lines
here folks. So they're attempting to put
into place this world mono metallic gold standard system
based on the French franc. Now study that system long
enough and you'll discover it's very similar to the snake system
in the 20th century based on theon the German Deutsche mark

(22:24):
where other currencies were allowed to float with exchange
rates tied to the Deutsche mark.OK, so this is what they're
trying to put into place in the 19th century on the gold French
franc. OK, The other thing that tells
you that this is a a deliberate policy of deflation and thereby

(22:47):
placing a lien on the labor principally of the South,
because it's the Southern poor black and poor white that are
hit the hardest by these policies.
The other big tip off is what happens during the Civil War and
immediately after you have a significant discovery and it's

(23:09):
called the Comstock load in Nevada, the big, huge silver
deposits outside of Carson City and Silver Dollar City, Nevada.
I've been there. I've I've been to the place and
that load was estimated to be worth approximately $250 million

(23:30):
worth in nine in, pardon me, in 1865 dollars.
That's a lot of silver. And by the way, just for kicks
and giggles, guess who is out there scratching around in the
Nevada desert compiling geological reports on how big

(23:51):
that load is? Could it be somebody from
Saxony? Baron von Richtofen.
My goodness. The same family as the Red Baron
fighter with Ace of World War One is the guy preparing the

(24:11):
geological reports for the Johnson administration on how
much silver's there. And my question that no one has
asked or satisfactory answered is what the name of sense is a
German Baron doing in Nevada compiling geological reports for
Johnson? And then you get all of the

(24:36):
airship mysteries coming out of the West.
Too. That.
Whole. Aspect I think can be tied
together. Yeah, absolutely.
Look at the end of Rialto and Richmond, I point out something
that my friend Walter Bosley pointed out and that was and and
this you can find in Tim Busby'sbook, excellent book called The

(24:59):
19th Century Airship Mystery. In that book, Busby points out,
and I I reprise the quotation inRialto and Richmond at with
Walter's suggestive analysis. In that book, Busby points out
that there was an American inventor tied with the airships
during the Civil War that had approached President Lincoln to

(25:24):
develop this technology. He did a couple of
demonstrations of whatever this contraption was that apparently
flew around at speeds about 200 miles an hour.
Lincoln back to the project, took it to Congress and asked
Congress to fund it. And that means guess who knows
all about this whole plan? Edwin Stanton.

(25:47):
Yeah, Miss Mr. Goody 2 shoes, you know, Mr. Nothing to see
here, You know, So the interesting thing about what,
What the Doctor Who's inventing this contraption or whatever the
heck it was, he says, well, thiscan all be funded by.
Here it comes, folks. Greenbacks.

(26:07):
So now we have a high technologybeing developed in secret by the
Union with the approval of President Lincoln and being
financed by greenbacks. Now if you're over in Europe and
you get wind of this, is this a cause for concern?
Answer yes now. Just.

(26:30):
To to flesh this out even more, to put the cherry on the sundae,
where do all of these airships in the 19th century tend to end
up? Texas.
Yep. Texas.
In fact, they start ending up there right as the Civil War is
coming to a close. Where's Jefferson Davis trying

(26:53):
to get to at the end of the war?In the American Southwest.
Texas, yeah. It's close to the border it.
Well, no, it's not just that it the, you know, as I put in in
the first book, the the trans Mississippi Department of the
Confederacy was fully functioning and very healthy and

(27:14):
it had an international border with Mexico.
And that's where most of the gunrunning and everything else,
that's where most of the trade with the Confederacy was, was
actually flowing. So in other words, Davis, forget
about this, this high school, junior high school picture that
we have, that Davis. I mean, come on, study the man's

(27:35):
history. Jefferson Davis is about the
last person that is a rabid fanatic.
OK, Yeah. It's not a picture that fits him
at all. What he's doing, if you read his
own memoirs, is he's trying to get the whole Confederate
government, archives and all. Please note the archives part

(27:56):
transferred from Richmond to theTrans Mississippi Department.
That's what he's doing. So in other words, you know, he
he wants to go there and continue as a rump Confederacy.
And by the way, Generals Grant and Sherman are worried that he
might actually be able to do it.So in other words, forget.

(28:17):
Forget what you've been taught the the principal generals of
the Union military are concernedabout that idea.
So yeah. On and on it goes.
Yeah, something else is interesting, too.
There's a little quote in your book and it said a few days
before Abraham Lincoln's assassination, all the money

(28:38):
that the Confederacy had in Montreal left for Europe.
Fancy that? I mean, what are the
implications of that? I mean, especially if the, if
the Confederate money is gone and then in Reconstruction they
say, well, the greenback is going to be tied to the same
thing that the Confederate notesare.

(28:58):
I mean, what, what, what is thisall about?
I I actually think that what what it's about is is implied in
the Resumption Act. The there is a famous quotation
that I deal with in both books by it's an apocryphal quotation
by Chancellor von Bismarck, who is usually cited in this regard

(29:23):
as saying, well, the high financial powers determined on
the death of Lincoln to prevent the furtherance of Lincoln's
monetary and fiscal policy, namely the greenback.
OK, now that that quotation getscirculated a lot in alternative
research circles. The problem is it's entirely

(29:44):
apocryphal. It does not appear until the
1920s in an obscure work by a Frenchman of all people, and
there is no provenance or no evidentiary support for the
quotation. So the question is, did
Chancellor von Bismarck say anything like that?

(30:07):
And if so, to whom would he havesaid it?
He's, you know, this is Bismarckwe're talking about.
So he's not going to come out and blurt it out for the
Berliner Taga Blot, you know, and have it published and run on
the Sunday edition. No.
So whoever he's saying this to is also important.
We don't know. However, there is a contextual

(30:31):
clue that indicates that maybe, just maybe, there's a teensy
tiny amount of truth to Bismarckwatching the financial
developments of the American Civil War.
Guess what? It is?
It's Ulysses S Grant. Why is it Ulysses S Grant?
Well, because when Grant is in office, running probably the

(30:56):
most corrupt administration since bottomless Joe Biden and
terrible Trump. I mean, it was a corrupt
administration. At the end of his second term in
office, what does Grant do? Well, he goes on a world tour,
he circumnavigates the world, and while he's in Berlin, he

(31:18):
stops off to have tea and cigarswith Otto von Bismarck.
Now, I have a bit of a problem here, thinking that Ulysses S
Grant and Otto von Bismarck are going to be sharing pictures of
their grandchildren and telling stories about their wonderful
families to each other. I just have a teensy tiny

(31:39):
problem with that idea of there is some purpose of state
involved in that in that meeting.
And if there's any meeting in which Bismarck may have said
something like that to someone who would have known about the
financial arrangements of of both the Union and the

(31:59):
Confederacy, that would have been the opportunity to do it.
So this is an entirely circumstantial contextual
argument I'm making that don't be too quick to dismiss that
apocryphal quotation of of Chancellor von Bismarck.
There's there to me. To me, it fits with the rest of

(32:20):
the story that emerges during the Civil War.
And it certainly fits the the wider context that the European
powers are watching developmentsin North America very closely,
and two of them obviously Franceand Britain wavering very close
to actual outright intervention in the war.

(32:43):
And by the way, it was a Russia that pulled the Union's fat out
of the fire on that one. So yeah, Russia.
Yeah, go figure. Of all places.
Yeah, right. Joseph, So I know if I'm
following kind of the bread crumbs that you're leaving here
and just maybe. Yeah, this is the Cliff Notes

(33:04):
version. It's not anywhere nearly as as
thorough or as convincing as thebook, that's sure.
Absolutely. And so but I, I wanna, I wanna
try to see if I'm connecting things.
Have you not read the second book yet?
Let's see if I I got this, what I think you might be alluding to
here, and if I'm putting words into your mouth or into the
book, please let me know because.
And Michael, you can tell me if I got the conclusion kind of

(33:25):
correct on some of this. So first, when you talk about
John Wilkes Booth meeting with the DuPont and all these other
individuals, I start thinking about the terms of what does it
look like of government banking and world banking, centralized
power. When I hear about Britain being
involved in some of this and maybe a British intelligence

(33:46):
agency watching what's happening, I start to go,
everything that you're describing is OK, after the
Civil War and during the Civil War, the Union needs massive
funding, right? And if I remember correctly, the
gold wasn't enough. So what do they do?
They get these notes, these greenbacks, which is basically

(34:07):
the Fiat system that we have now.
It's basically like toilet paperthat they're giving worth to
intrinsically and bypassing banks.
And this is, in my take, the beginning of the Federal
Reserve. This is a blueprint in order to
show what could be done by taking away the gold standard

(34:30):
and moving everybody to a Fiat currency.
And now instead of me going, oh,Gee, what happened in the early
1900s, I'm going. Wait a minute.
Farrell has just painted an entire pitcher that this
operation started 50 years earlier and it started with the
Civil War, and I never realized that I've read The Creature on
Jekyll Island before. I never put these things

(34:51):
together. No, they definitely go together.
But you are painting a very goodpitcher that the Federal Reserve
Act in 1913 actually started with the National Bank Act,
probably back in 1864, the time period that you're talking
about, and all these people are in the room together.
Right. They, they, the, the reason for
the deflationary policy is to toput that lien on American labor.

(35:13):
They let's look at the the thesis.
They the the European powers, France and England chiefly were
unsuccessful in splitting the union.
That was their geopolitical objective.
They're looking at this colossusover there beginning to emerge
and and the only way that they can really stop it is to break

(35:35):
it up. OK By the way, what's going on
right now? Did you catch the recent news
about Oregon, Oregon and the United Kingdom signing a
memorandum of understanding? OK, so in other words, they've
got to split this thing up. Failing that, then the other

(35:55):
thing they've got to do is they've got to keep that economy
from making full progress after the war is over.
How do they do that while they impoverished the South?
They deflate the currency, whichbasically puts a lien on on
average laborers, particularly farmers who have to borrow the
money from the banks to buy the seeds to plant their crops and

(36:17):
then repay the loan with a currency whose value has
increased in the meantime. And they have to pay the
principal back at par value. OK, that's typical bankster
scam. And this is This is why you have
Jennings Bryan and his cross of gold speech and on and on we
could go and and the re monetization of silver.

(36:38):
Think the Wizard of Oz, the silver slippers in the actual
book and the yellow brick road. OK, so in other words, it's a
big financial political allegory.
And I get into that in in the first book.
So in other words, you're looking you're looking at an
effort to keep the country down as much as possible.

(36:58):
Now, regarding your thesis that maybe they're learning another
lesson from the Civil War, the banksters of Europe.
Well, here's a clue and 1/2 for you, Greg.
OK, Jay Cook is the financier ofthat time.
OK, Jay Cook of Philadelphia. And by the way, he's a railroad

(37:22):
man like Lincoln. Jay Cook is part of this
Confederate Union crowd that is concentrating itself in Montreal
all at the same time in 1864 anddoing black off the books trade

(37:42):
in cotton, by the way, sanctioned by both Abraham
Lincoln and Jefferson Davis. OK.
The cotton. The cotton bonds were from both
of them. No, the cotton bonds the
airline. No, this is this is black
market. This is this is black market.
Cotton trade. This is something else.
Got it. OK, they're all there in

(38:02):
Montreal. Why cotton?
Well, the Union needs cotton forits uniforms, for its big
armies, and it doesn't have any cotton, OK.
The Confederacy has the cotton, OK.
And the Confederacy needs money to buy the weapons to fight the
Union. So OK, guys, you know, can't we
make a deal? This is this is Donald Trump.

(38:24):
You know, all of these people, including Jay Cook, are
concentrated in Montreal during this time period.
So in other words, what I'm suggesting to you, Greg, is that
Cook is there because the greenback scheme, you know, he
was selling bonds to the Union until Lincoln came up with the

(38:46):
greenback idea. So he's no longer making money
from the war. And by the way, he can meet a
lot of people with British financial connections in
Montreal. So I suspect that you, you
you're on to a profound thesis here that they're looking at all
this, they're trying to put intoplace this mono metallic thing
based on on the French franc. But probably you have some

(39:10):
thinking, oh, wait, wait a minute, maybe we could do an end
run around this whole thing and adopt this system for ourselves.
Now, the problem, the only problem I see with that thesis,
I think it's eminently plausibleand reasonable if they would do
that. We're lacking the documentary
evidence. There are, however, clues, but

(39:32):
I'll leave those to people to read in the books.
OK. Yeah, yeah.
Why? Why not go all the way and and
demonetize all bullion? And here comes the modern word.
Please note we're watching a replay of all of this right now.
Yep. Why not just call it tokenized

(39:55):
assets? You know what this is?
This isn't. This is an Oklahoma gold back
and right at the bottom. If you want to know what the
scam is, right at the bottom of this flimsy piece of plastic it
says 1/2 thousandth. Of a Troy ounce of 24 karat

(40:19):
gold. Sounds like cryptocurrency.
Ding Ding, Ding will give you a little Fleck of gold smashed
into micro micropixels, thinnesson a piece of plastic, and you'd
give us your hard assets. This is a tokenized asset.
This is the money of the Soviet Union, where everybody owned the

(40:43):
property, All the people owned the property of the Soviet
Union, and you had a little decimal place of it.
That's what this is. And it also explains why we see
all these states starting up their own bullion reserves.
Ding, Ding, Ding. And what are they doing it in
connection? I was all on board the bullion
reserves until they started saying we're going to tie this

(41:05):
to an electronic clearing system.
Right. Why?
Because the electronic clearing system gives them the ability
mathematically to calculate the decimal.
They don't have to revalue the money, they can claim that they
are backing it with gold. Unfortunately, it's such a
minute amount of gold, it's no backing at all.

(41:26):
It also goes to show you how quote, UN quote, worthless the
American worker is. Yeah.
And why they're pushing AI and robots and basically they are
pushing this whole Green New Deal agenda with with electric
vehicles and all this other stuff and water rationing
because they didn't choose humans over AI to read all the

(41:48):
data centers. Remember what my friend
Catherine Fitz has been saying for years?
They're doing all of that, and they're going to make it so that
whatever labor AI performs is taxable.
Right, which also implies AI rights.
Ding, Ding, Ding. So wait, but but before we leave
the Rialto, I just want to ask you one more question.

(42:11):
Do you think the United States is constantly being goaded into
various wars on behalf of other foreign powers particularly?
Yes. Always using the Treasury of
Virtue. Yes, yeah, I do.
Now, for people who don't know the reference to the Treasury of

(42:32):
Virtue at the end of the Rialto Enrichment I the last chapter of
that is devoted to a couple of essays by the American Southern
man of letters, Robert Penn Warren.
And Warren wrote a little book called a wonderful essay called
The Legacy of the Civil War. And I wish people would read it

(42:56):
because, you know, here's a Southerner trying to to talk
openly and honestly about what the legacies were for both the
Union and the Confederacy after the war.
And he points out that that whatthe war did for the Union is it

(43:17):
created American culture, the American culture of
self-righteous virtue. So in other words, take all that
New England Yankee secularized Calvinism that percolates and
bubbles and poisons, you know, much of the abolitionist
thinking of the North at the time, and wed that to the idea

(43:40):
that the nation itself is inherently virtuous and
therefore everybody else must belike us.
That's your treasury of merit. And by the way, it's a Roman
Catholic doctrine that the infinite sacrifice of Christ has
a super added surplus of merits brought into the treasury of

(44:01):
merits by the Saints, that the Pope can dispense and dispense
as releases from punishments in purgatory.
So in other words, this is the whole system of indulgences and
so on and so forth. So what Penn Warren is simply
doing is he's saying what America did was it took all of
that ecclesiastical infrastructure, if you will, and

(44:24):
applied it as a national cultureso that, you know, our wars must
be always fought for ending slavery or establishing
democracy or overthrowing Tyran.In other words, there's always a
moral goal in mind, you know, notwithstanding the fact that

(44:46):
maybe people don't want to have our morality.
So in other words, this is a profound shift in American
culture that occurs because of the war.
And again, I, you know, I like to use the example of Jefferson
Davis himself, the president of the Confederacy, because Davis
was one of those Southerners there.

(45:07):
They were few and far between, but they were also in many
cases, very highly placed in thethe political aristocracy of the
South. Well, Davis was one of the
people that advocated what he called the High Road to
emancipation. He was advocating that if we are
going to emancipate the slaves, what we must do is bring them up

(45:32):
so that they are able to be participating, contributing,
productive members of society and they have to be given an
economic stake in it. So at his plantation, if you if
you ever read about Jefferson Davis and the way he ran his
plantation, he had the slaves running everything.

(45:52):
He taught them to read, to write, to administer the
finances, to dispense the a lot financial allowances to the
slaves, you know, on on at certain regular periods.
And he also had them trying any,any criminals or mischief or
anything like that that happenedduring in the slave population.

(46:14):
And he absolutely forbade them to use whipping or any other
form of cruel and unusual punishment.
So in other words, this is a guythat put his money where his
mouth was. And, you know, say what you will
about, about Jefferson Davis, hewas at least principled in this
respect. So the, the problem with many of

(46:39):
these Southerners after the war with Reconstruction is if you
talk to some, I've met some of them, some of these old Southern
families, and I can tell you that Reconstruction is still
remembered by them as a completeand utter disaster.
And one of the first things thatone of these families told me
when I first met them years ago after college, was that one of

(47:03):
the effects of Reconstruction was to exacerbate racial
tensions in the South between blacks and whites.
Just took it right off off the charts.
And when I listened to what theywere trying to say and telling
me why, you know, that there wasthis movement in the South that
we're going to have to get rid of this institution, but we've
got to do it in a way that is not going to create economic

(47:25):
chaos. Lincoln himself comes to this
position in 1862 when he proposes a a an economic stake
and a financial component to manumission.
So in other words, the the pre war abolitionists, John Brown
radical is not what Lincoln had in mind, but unfortunately what

(47:49):
obtains in the policies of reconstruction after his
assassination is largely that it's this, you know, put the
boot on the on the neck of the southerner, black or white, and
there we go. So anyway, it yeah, I, I
definitely think there's foreigninfluence because when you look

(48:09):
at this period after the war, you see very clearly that
influence at work. When you look at the influence
during the war, France and Britain ready to intervene,
Spain giving the Confederacy recognized belligerent status,
Prussia and Austria just kind ofsaying, you know, it doesn't

(48:30):
really concern us geopolitically.
And Russia, Czar Alexander the Second sending the Russian fleet
into San Francisco and New York as a little message.
And he he's interviewed after the war by the Union press and,
and the czar actually says that he was asked by Britain and
France to have Russia intervene.And he told them, and you can

(48:54):
read the interview in the Rialtoreconstruction.
Alexander the Second says, and Itold them under no circumstances
would Russia approve any sort ofintervention by those powers in
the Civil War. And to to drive home that point.
That's why he says I sent the fleet into the Union ports as a
demonstration of support for Mr.Lincoln.

(49:16):
And why did I do that? Well, it wasn't because I had
any particular love for Mr. Lincoln.
It's because I did not want to see the Britain end up with a
monopoly of heavy industrial technology after the war.
And by the way, what else did Alexander the Second do?
Didn't happen. Go ahead.

(49:36):
He emancipated the Russian serfs.
I was just going to say that it seemed as though the Russian
version of reconstruction would have been a lot better for the
South than. Anything.
Listen, the Russians, you know this is happening all more or
less at the same time of the Russian version.
The Russians were very much likewhat Lincoln proposed to to the

(50:00):
Congress in 1862. The Russian version was OK,
we're going to give low interestgovernment loans, We're going to
float. We're going to float bonds to
raise the capital. We're going to give low interest
government loans to the emancipated serfs to buy their
land from their masters, their nobility.

(50:22):
The nobility get compensated forthe loss of their land and there
will be a government subsidy fora period of time to compensate
them for the loss of their labor.
So everybody has an economic stake in the plan.
The czar didn't just say, OK, you're free now go, go to it
like that would have done anything in in Russian society

(50:46):
at that time. The plan worked because what
happened? The Ukraine becomes what?
In that 40 years from the Russian emancipation up to the
outbreak of World War One, what does the Ukraine become?
What is it known as? It's known as the bread basket
of Europe. Russian agriculture absolutely

(51:07):
booms. The Russian industrial
industrialization kicks off in the 19th century as a result of
the emancipation. So in other words, this was a
calculated domestic policy on the part of the autocracy in
Russia. And this is the reason that they
are getting heavily involved in the geopolitics behind the

(51:30):
scenes of the American Civil War.
And again, like he says, I have no particular love for the
American Republic. I'm interested in stopping that
little, you know, what outfit island country from gaining a
monopoly on all this technology.That's what he's doing.
It's very interesting. So, yeah.

(51:50):
Is there foreign influence? You betcha, Greg.
It's right. You know, I personally, I'm
surprised that the Civil War didnot become the First World War.
I'm very. Interesting.
Yes, especially with some of thestuff that was floating in the
background to unite both sides again with the invasion of

(52:11):
Canada and Mexico, you know, we have to go fight the Barbarians,
be on the horizon. Yeah, well, this this is an
aspect that that you may encounter just as kind of a a
brief passing comment in, in theway the Civil War is presented
in history books. But I, I'm telling you the, the,
the secret meeting that Abraham Lincoln had at the end of the

(52:35):
war with the Confederate vice president and a Confederate
senator. And what they're discussing is,
is Francis Preston Blair's scheme to end the war by
starting another war and having the Union kick the Brits out of
Canada. And let's remember that cell in

(52:55):
Montreal and have the Confederacy kick the French out
of Mexico. And by the way, Blair proposed a
a detailed plan for how Robert ELee was to detach the Army of
Northern Virginia after the Confederate government starts

(53:17):
its continuity of government operation.
And Lee was to join up with General Johnston and those two
armies make or fight their way over to the Trans Mississippi.
So in other words, Jefferson Davis at the end of the war is
acting on that plan. The only thing that prevents it

(53:41):
is when the Union intercepts Lee's instructions to the Army
of Virginia on how to withdraw. And the lines of March that they
are are to do it. And that's why Grant is able to
catch him and finally forces surrender at Appomattox.
So in other words, that little peace conference at Hampton
Roads is is crucial. And by the way, when Lincoln

(54:03):
returns to Washington and they you know, the scuttle about the
gossip has already hit the streets.
You were where talking to who? That's the reaction of Thaddeus
Stevens, the radical Republican abolitionist from Pennsylvania

(54:27):
in the House of Representatives.It's also the reaction of
Senator Benjamin Wade in Ohio inthe Senate.
And they launch a movement to impeach Lincoln for what,
Treason. So, yeah, that peace conference
is very crucial. Very crucial.

(54:49):
It sounds very familiar with modern times.
It does the same games. Yeah, that's why I'm writing the
book. I was going to ask you, like if
you were to think about how modern intelligence agencies or
even like special interest groups, people that are

(55:09):
billionaires, how do they compare historically in terms of
influence over domestic political figures?
Do you think like when you look back at this time frame of the
Civil War and then you look at modern day, what's happening
with influence over elections, over policy, where do you see

(55:31):
parallels? Like what are some of the main
things that stand? Out I see them all over the
place. Pardon me, I see them all over
the place. Principally because you're
dealing with a class of people that treasures moving in the
shadows and and behind the scenes and being the power
brokers. So they always have to act

(55:52):
through through an avatar, They have to act through a proxy.
The problem, you know, let's usethe business model.
The problem is you can send out all of your proxy votes for the
stockholders meeting, and you may think you've got all the
votes lined up and maybe someoneelse is out there organizing or

(56:15):
gets a Burr in the bonnet and decides, no, I don't want to
vote for that. Maybe, maybe you put someone
into power and you think they'regoing to go along with your
plan. Think Abraham Lincoln and the
radical abolitionists here for amoment.
Now, Lincoln was an abolitionist, but he was not a

(56:35):
John Brown abolitionist. And in his own words, if, if
keeping slavery would have preserved the Union, I would
have kept it, you know. So in other words, this is a,
this is a realpolitik guy here. He's a railroad lawyer.
What's going to what's going to benefit me the most?
Yeah. What's?
Yeah. Well, you know, you may, you may

(56:56):
think that you're going to control this guy once you get
him into office, but not really.Not really.
So this is the problem they always have.
They can put the what they thinkis their own man, the and the
guy that once he gets the actualpower, might decide, hey, I
don't have to listen to you people anymore.
Think Hitler, you know, so so yeah.

(57:20):
Or, you know, think Stalin. Yeah.
I mean, yeah. The reason why I'm asking is
since we spoke in July, a lot has happened in this country.
A, a, a big event happened that I, I, I would love to pick your
brain about, OK, just in the terms of like, I, I just don't
feel like we have the full story.

(57:41):
And I'm not asking you to put on, you know, any type of
explanations. I'm just looking at the fact
that, you know, here we are a bunch of people getting together
to figure out what the path forward will be out of the Civil
War. And in September, there was a
major assassination that the world all saw with Charlie Kirk.
I, I actually envy you, Doctor Farrell, because I know you're

(58:03):
not as plugged into social mediaas Michaels and myself.
So I'm hopeful that you were able to spare your soul the the
violence of what that looked like for for millions of people
who witnessed it online. We've heard really nothing from

(58:24):
our government when it comes to Thomas Crook's attempted
assassination of Donald Trump. We've heard really nothing when
it comes to this guy's assassination of Charlie Kirk.
We, we get this immediate right afterwards immediate narrative
and then all of a sudden, Oh well, he went into the woods,

(58:45):
reassembled the gun after he hadtook it apart, hit it by a tree,
texted his boyfriend. Hey, by the way, I just did this
really horrible thing and this is what I would have done had I
not it. It almost looked like the the
government itself was writing the text messages for the
gentleman. Not saying that's what happened,
just saying that's what it lookslike and listening to everything

(59:05):
that you just laid out from 1864.
I'm going How do I know that I'mnot seeing the exact same thing
playing out in 2025? You are, it's, it's an, it's a
narrative. I, I, I have not seen the video.
I've deliberately avoided watching that video.

(59:26):
Please continue to do so. I I sincerely I.
Don't need that anybody. Can't do it.
But from what I have heard, I'vebeen following a number of
people that have been trying to dig into Mr. Kirk's murder,
Candace Owens chief among them. And at at this point, having

(59:48):
reviewed the evidence that she is, she and some others have
present presented Max Blumenthalbeing another some of these
people, I I am convinced that the official narrative is is
just another Warren report. You know that this for one
thing, assembling and disassembling a rifle on the

(01:00:09):
run. Yep.
Firing that caliber of a bullet and getting the damage result
that they're alleging? No, I actually prefer of, of all
the hypotheses currently being floated, I prefer the the
exploding microphone hypothesis the most.

(01:00:31):
And the reason why is that wouldbe just the kind of oily thing
that a certain little pipsqueak country in the Middle East, whom
I think we would be much better off to severing ties all
together with. I, I think, I think we were
treated to a case of, of the revelation of the method when

(01:00:53):
Prime Minister Nutty Yahoo, as Ilike to call him, came out and
said we didn't do it, I think, Ithink.
Without no one asking exactly. Without no one asking, That was
revelation of the method, if youknow what that technique is, and
it was very clever revelation ofthe method because it was
reversed. He knows that he's going to be

(01:01:16):
taken to task for it. And he's literally thumbing his
nose at everybody when he says that you can't prove it.
And you know, Even so, we got away with it.
It's it's, it's loathsome and reprehensible and evil.
And you also referenced in one of your posts about the
munitions plant explosions and how they could have been tied to

(01:01:40):
all of this. Too, I think absolutely.
Yeah, they're they're you know, there are munitions plant.
There was a munitions plant explosion in Tennessee that
occurred within a frame of time shortly after.
And then the thing that tells methat there this was a
geopolitical operation to to assassinate Mr. Kirk in front

(01:02:04):
of, you know, his followers and the world and and record it.
You know, it was another, it wasanother John F Kennedy.
Type of event? Absolutely it was.
It was, you know, it was staged to be deliberate and out in
front of everybody. And, you know, we're in charge
and there's nothing you people can do to stop us.

(01:02:25):
The other big event that I, I think puts the, the cherry on
this geopolitical Sunday is all of a sudden as a result of that
assassination, all of a sudden the whole MAGA coalition has
splintered and you have major figures like Tucker Carlson and
so on coming out and, and just saying enough of this Zio

(01:02:49):
Christianity enough. No more.
Now, I'm not an evangelical and I have never been and never will
be a dispensationalist. You know, I'm, I'm an orthodox
Catholic Christian and and that whole theological system is just
about as far from the teaching of the Church fathers as you can
possibly get. It's just, there's no other way

(01:03:12):
to put it, folks. But when Trump came out as as as
this coalition they put togetheris beginning to shred over the
issue of sending all of this money to Israel when we're
supposed to be about America first.
What does Trump do? All of a sudden he develops a
concern for the persecution of Christians in Nigeria.

(01:03:35):
And to me, that smacks of tryingto do damage, repair after the
fact by demonstrating, oh, suddenly we're concerned about
the Christian population. Well, what about the Christian
population of Palestine? You know, many of those people
are Christian. They're not necessarily Muslim
just because they're Arab. You know this is another thing

(01:03:58):
Americans have got to get over Is Arab equals Muslim A.
Limited worldview? Yep.
Yeah, it's just nuts, you know, if you know anything about the
history of the church in that area.
So it's, you know, one of the most famous church fathers,
Saint John Damascus is Arab, youknow, come on.
So anyway, I just, I just I, I questioned this whole incident.

(01:04:24):
There. There is an aspect to it that
reeks of geopolitics and, and, you know, for right now, I,
yeah, I'm, I'm entertaining the hypothesis that somehow Israel
was behind it, along with all these Zio Christians or whatever
you want to call them that, thatpopulate American Christianity.

(01:04:44):
I think, I think the thing that is really upsetting people about
Candace Jones is she's latched on to that, right, Candace.
And I don't think she's going to, I don't think she's going to
let it go. She's smelling it now.
I wish she would, you know, contact me.
I could tell her, you know, lookhere, look there.
Because I, I can tell you that the, the web developer, my

(01:05:07):
website, when he's a student of mine, this is 3040 years ago, we
came to a similar conclusion about these mega churches that
they were nothing but big money laundering operations.
So, you know, there, there is something going on.
And I suspect that as this storyunfolds, you're going to see a
change in popular attitudes towards Israel.

(01:05:28):
You're already seeing that. I think you're also going to see
a huge splintering of of American evangelicalism.
Well, I think we're already seeing that.
That's kind of what I wanted to ask you about in the the
aftermath of Charlie Kirk. They did.
This evangelical wasn't a funeral.
It was AI wouldn't even call it a celebration of life.

(01:05:51):
It was very odd to me. They brought out Robert F
Kennedy Junior. They brought out Trump.
They brought out JD Vance. Right.
Erica Kirk is there speaking. And I'm thinking this is like a
a rally for evangelicals. And it felt as a Catholic, it
felt weird to me. Yeah.
You know, Erica, Kirk walks out and what do we see?

(01:06:12):
We see fireworks going off. Your husband just died.
Someone in the arena is like, you know what's going to make
this a moment? Fireworks.
That's what Charlie would want. We want fireworks.
Yeah. And, and, and I'm sitting there
going, I don't know if this whatCharlie Kirk would really want.
No, no. The man, the man was examined.
The man was examining Catholicism.

(01:06:32):
Correct. That's the time of his death.
So you're gonna you're gonna celebrate his death with a
fireworks display? No.
The idea of a funeral is you grieve, you know.
So so so with that in mind and thinking about like the way that
the that unfolded over that week.
What has happened since then is the label culture of 2020 is

(01:06:55):
back. If you dare say anything to
defend Charlie Kirk, certain parts of people will say Oh well
he was a racist, he was a bigot.He was this despite to the
contrary, you can't find any content that would support that.
If you suggest that hey, you know what maybe Israel was
involved because we have these text messages.
We know that he wasn't going with the narrative.

(01:07:17):
You immediately become anti-Semitic if you start saying
anything that is counter to another side.
The label culture is back to destroy.
You. That always tells me that you're
probably likely on to something.If the best that they can do is
say, hey, here's some labels to throw back at you, you're
probably already winning the arguments.

(01:07:37):
They're not only on to somethingthe the vehemence with which the
response to those types of things is being addressed being
touted now. I mean, for crying out loud,
they had fine at this Trump Tucker is not MAGA.
You know, that whole staged awful conference.

(01:07:59):
I think they know that they are in deep trouble because let's
look at what has happened to theterms racism and anti-Semitism.
They have been so overused. They have lost all currency.
They're essentially now perceived by most people as
meaningless attacks. And for many people, just as you

(01:08:22):
have said, people look at those terms now as a waving the flag
look here. So in other words, the more they
protest, the more people are looking at those people saying
things like Candace Jones or saying things like Tucker
Carlson. Oh, he interviewed Nick Fuentes.
How dare he? So, you know, let's cancel him.

(01:08:45):
So what has happened? Fuentes has absolutely
skyrocketed the amount of peopleviewing his channel and what's
happening to poor Ben Shapiro who wants to scream and lecture
Megyn Kelly? His viewership is tanking and I
say good riddance to you and Mark Levin and that whole nasal

(01:09:07):
screaming lobby that you have. Good riddance, good riddance.
I like nasal scream. Well, I mean, come on, Chris,
listen. Listen to Levin.
Oh, he is all the time. And then his voice gets higher
and higher and higher. Oh God, you.
Know what A. Zig Heil, you know, it's like, I

(01:09:29):
swear to God. He should just open his show up
with Erica and just end it. Just take off the veil.
It's ridiculous. It is.
I totally agree. You know, I, I, I dude, you're
not doing your cause. Any help here?
I truly, you know, I think they're going to use this whole

(01:09:51):
anti-Semitism nonsense as a way to eviscerate the constitution
in two in two most recent stories that that have been
brought up. You know this guy Portnoy from
Barstool? Dave Portnoy, whatever it is.
Great pizza reviews. Yeah, somebody.
What? What?
Said FU to him. FU drew and threw some change at

(01:10:13):
him and now that person is arrested.
He's going on all of the talk shows about, you know, we need
to stop anti-Semitism. And then you had the billionaire
louder come out this weekend andsay, you know, anti-Semitism is
off the charts. We need to start tackling it in
the schools. I mean, are are they just using

(01:10:38):
the anti-Semitism rhetoric as a way to finally put a nail in the
coffin of the Constitution? Yes, what they, yes, I, I
totally think that they are. And one of the reasons I think
that they are is at the time of the recognition of the state of
Israel by Truman, Let's Please note that you had many Jewish

(01:11:00):
scholars in this country, HannahErrant, Albert Einstein, Alfred
Lilienthal, saying that this wasan absolute mistake for
precisely the reasons that you're alleging here.
And that eventually what it was going to do, it was going to
create a privilege class and that the creation of that
privilege privileged class wouldeventually backlash on them.

(01:11:24):
Now we know that it's a privileged class.
Why? How many people?
Here's a question that I want every talk show host out there
to start asking of every candidate for political office
that shares that faith. And I'm very serious here.
Do you hold or will you accept dual citizenship in the state of

(01:11:48):
Israel? Thank you.
Because you cannot serve 2 masters.
Someone wise once said that who ran afoul of the Jewish
authorities, who was, by the way, a Jew.
So I, I, I think and, and I'm, you know, I'm echoing Catherine
Fitz here, who's been saying thesame thing for years.

(01:12:08):
We must eliminate dual citizenship.
There is no place in this country for someone holding
political office who has citizenship in another country
because that's where your allegiance lies.
And I'm totally with Candace Owens here when she says,
really, if you listen to to Mr. Shapiro, it's Israel first for

(01:12:34):
him. That's his country.
I'll do one better. No dual citizenship for spouses
either. Absolutely, Absolutely.
I'll tell Joseph. We had a friend of mine called
me up about 3 months ago. Yeah, about three months ago, he
said. Hey, I just thought you'd find
it interesting. A conversation I ever heard at
breakfast this morning and I said well where were you in

(01:12:56):
breakfast? He's like oh is that blah blah
Newcastle which is right up the road from me.
And I said well who was talking?He said well it was one of our
state representatives. And I said oh tell me more like
what was it? He said well he was telling me
he had to go to New York City and spend the night for about 3
nights to get in on this trip over the Israel.
And I said, wait a minute, a local state Rep representing the

(01:13:20):
local governments in a small little district is going to go
over the Israel for what? And then, you know, it was
probably about a month ago, the financials came out and there
was this huge event where state representatives and Congress
senator, state senators and Congress people from different

(01:13:42):
states all went to Israel for this event last month.
And it was from the entire United States, hundreds of
people. And I'm going wait a minute,
like I don't want to go down some of the Nick Fuentes rabbit
hole type of stuff. That's not who I am, right?
I don't blame I don't blame an entire subsection of people for

(01:14:04):
the world's wrongs. I don't think that's right.
I I announced that completely bucks when I see an organization
of leaders much like we just talked about the top of the
show. You see that happening and
they're bringing in people that should have no staked interest
in the doings of Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Ohio,

(01:14:26):
Oregon, Wyoming. What the hell are they doing
there? And how can I not be a little
bit more skeptical of this smallstates influencing our entire
country at the present moment? And it's led me down the spot
when you and I were talking about this before in the green
room. I am now really, really

(01:14:49):
disappointed with President Trump.
Same here. I, I, I feel like this.
America First was anything but America first.
Yep, it's America, Ellen. Don't forget our little friends
over here and the special interest group over here, these
tech billionaires over here and anybody else that can help
enrich my family to make sure that Baron Trump never has to
work a day in his life after I'mdead or gone.

(01:15:11):
Yep, I, I, I, I am done with Donald Trump in, in apologizing
in any way, shape or form. I don't regret my vote because I
think Kamala Harris would have been.
Even more, Absolutely. It would have been a lot worse
where we are, but I'm so disheartened and disillusioned
that I don't even think I could vote in another election.
I don't know I'm. I'm right there with you.
You know, I'm done. I I told people when I came out,

(01:15:33):
I I had quit voting in 1988 whenKing George the First ran for
president after after Reign. George the First.
And well, I hate the Bush fan. I hate the Bush fam, Damley.
I, I, I just I I cannot stand them.
Dick Cheney, you know. And him too.
But I, I quit voting because at that point it was just, you

(01:15:57):
know, Tweedledum and Tweedledee.And I, you know, for all the
rhetoric that Republicans have been spouting over over the
decades, up to that point, nothing ever got done.
You know, Eisenhower, Eisenhowerbasically, you could Senator
Taft out of the Republican nomination in 1952 and Taft
would have rolls back the New Deal.

(01:16:19):
Eisenhower didn't OK, it's there.
So we got accepted, you know, and I, and I think truly that
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in addition to being one of the
most vile people, was one of theworst presidents we've ever had,
right down there with Herbert Hoover.
But any anyway, I, I quit voting.

(01:16:39):
But when Hillary was running in,in 2016, I, I, I, I had to come
out of retirement because, you know, she is truly, truly rotten
and, and vile and evil. And the reason I, I did that is
I had friends that actually worked for her at Rose Law Firm.

(01:16:59):
So, you know, I had the inside scuttlebutt on, on Bill and
Hillary. So that's why I came out of
retirement. But I'm right back there with
you. I, I don't see, I don't see the
current Republican leadership. That's what bothers me, Trump
cozying up to the likes of Lindsey Graham cracker, you

(01:17:19):
know, another another one of thepart of the pun.
But yeah, I mean, yeah, the guy is the guy is repulsive.
And to that whole Zio Christian group, you know, if this is if
this is where we're going, I ain't going there.
And because it's like you say, with all these people trotting
off to Israel. Yeah, let me show you that real

(01:17:39):
quick. For people like you know that
that that this is the event because I want you to talk about
keep continue your thought, but 50 states won Israel one is
number 14th to September 18th, 241 American state legislators
went and visited the Western Wall, the Church of the Holy
Sepulchre. Yeah.
Yeah, go kiss the ring. Yeah, go kiss the ring and and

(01:18:01):
I'm look as far as visiting the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is
concerned, I think that's just thrown in to appease the
Christian sentiments of of people in this country.
If it were up if it were up to the Israeli government, all they
would do is go kiss the way the whaling wall and that's it which
nauseates me. You know what are you doing Yeah

(01:18:24):
this and and you have certain states passing these these anti
hate speech laws against, you know saying anything critical
about Israel. That worries me immensely
because eventually, eventually, they are going to demand that
Christian churches change the text of the New Testament that's

(01:18:45):
coming and certain versions of the Bible will be prohibited
because that's coming 0. You just made me think of
something, Joseph. My wife is convinced that the
currency of the future is in books because she said, yeah,
that in the future, AI is going to erase parts of the Bible.

(01:19:06):
It's going to erase parts of your favorite books.
And if you have the physical copy with the date, it will be
invaluable to society. Yeah.
So you're actually talking aboutthat with the Bible.
Wow. This.
Listen, listen Greg, I have beenwarning my my readership for
years by saying the only canonical version of any of my

(01:19:27):
works is the hard copy for precisely that reason.
Because I have seen Amazon's Kindle and and other e-book
platforms completely gut the formatting of my books such that
if you were to try to footnote apiece of my book and say I got

(01:19:48):
this idea from Pharaoh on this page, it won't be there in the
pagination. And they can literally erase, as
you've pointed out, erase or change things.
So no, the only canonical copy is the hard copy and.
This is one of the reasons why Ithink they're making a massive
push to digitize. Everything.

(01:20:10):
Yes, absolutely. It will give them power to erase
sections of our history that they don't want. 1980. 4/19/84
That is precisely it. If you think Joseph Stalin
standing next to Yagoda on the Moscow River in that famous
picture of him, and I think it was Kalinin, and then you see

(01:20:35):
the subsequent picture in the Soviet encyclopedia where Yagoda
has been, not Yagoda, what was his name?
Yezhov, where you see Yezhov cutout of the picture after he was
purged. You're going to see that kind of
adjusting of the record on steroids, and target #1 is going

(01:20:59):
to be the Bible and target #2 isgoing to be the writings of the
Church fathers. Absolutely, Absolutely.
It genuinely seems like there isa true war against Christianity.
I hate to say it sounds so hackneyed because you had people

(01:21:21):
like Rush Limbaugh and all the rest.
The Christmas catch phrase, I know.
Right the. War on Christmas that's coming.
But but it's absolutely true. I mean, think about all of this
that we see, right? You've got people pushing
anti-Semitism hate speech laws with the broadest definition
possible of what anti-Semitism is to such a point where you

(01:21:42):
can't even reference the New Testament there.
There is a complete loss of morals in the United States
right now. Look at the millionaires from
only fans just selling feet pictures and videos.
There's got to be some new realignment.
And it seems as though everyone has to be ashamed if they say

(01:22:05):
that they're a Christian in somedenomination or otherwise.
And it also seems as though thatthis whole evangelical movement
that we have out there is nothing more than a way for not
only money laundering, but supporting other pipsqueak
nations around the world and justifying their actions.

(01:22:28):
Trying to create some kind of loosey goosey logical argument
that there is a Judeo-christian connection to the United States
going back to the 1700s. Here's a cultural clue that I
hope resonates with what you just said and resonates with

(01:22:49):
everybody else. If you look at American
Churchianity, and I don't even want to call it Christianity,
and I probably shouldn't even call it churchianity because
nothing they do resembles anything that I would consider
churchy. If you look at just the
trappings, you know, trappings and symbols tell you a lot about

(01:23:13):
what you're dealing with. I have yet to see them build a
cathedral. What they build are auditoriums,
and when they build their auditoriums, you might
occasionally get across never a crucifix.
Of course, you might get some threadbare symbolization of the

(01:23:39):
Christian religion. You will not get an altar at the
center of the auditorium. You'll get a pulpit, if that.
Because what they like to do is they like to pace on on the
stage as they're yelling at people.
So the symbols tell a lot. You know, it's like, it's like,

(01:24:00):
you know, I used to be a very traditional Anglican and I'm
watching the Church of England self destruct.
They've just put allowed graffiti, literal LGBTQ and
other persecuted minority peopleto put graffiti in the Cathedral
of Canterbury. Now that's as far as I'm

(01:24:22):
concerned. That's desecration.
Now that's sacrilege. What's interesting about that is
that the artist and the art director aren't even Christians.
Probably not. No, they aren't because I did a
little post on this and I got a lot of Flack for saying so and
it's, you know, probably well. You.

(01:24:45):
Yeah, exactly. Yeah.
We want to be members of your church and not.
So like, why is that even allowed?
Could you imagine if, let's say,a Shabbat, a synagogue, allowed
Christians to be the art director and to have a Christian
artist come in and then graffitithe whole plate?

(01:25:07):
I mean, it's outrageous. Of course it is.
Of course it is. It's sacrilege.
You know, we, we don't take careof our symbols in the West
anymore, and particularly in this country because we rejected
tradition in the founding of this country, pure and simple,
that I'm adamant about that. But the the the thing that that

(01:25:27):
people have to, to wake up and realize is that the
symbolization tells you a lot. Those ugly modern, pardon me
here, I call them Vatican 2 burlap vestments that we see the
modernist, the modernist clergy where, you know, with the big
applique that screams some sort of nonsense, cliche generality

(01:25:47):
like love or joy or peace. You know, this, this whole
movement uglify Christian worship has been very
successful. And I think it is, it is quite
telling that that uglification is by and large is, is what you

(01:26:09):
see in evangelicalism in this country.
The whole revivalist mentality that we have to have a rock
group in church, you know, because we can't afford a pipe
organ, but we can raise lots of money to fund the rock group in
the big auditorium. You know, come on.
It's, it's more of this rejection of, of traditional

(01:26:31):
culture and tradition per SE that that's at work here.
Yeah, I, I got very, very disheartened at one point in
youth ministry working in the Catholic Church because there
was an event called National Catholic Youth Conference, and I
was assigned to take a few of myteam leaders and have them

(01:26:51):
announce the talent to go up. And so I was meeting the
individuals that are writing thesongs that are being played at
churches across the United States.
And I won't use any names because I'm not looking to
create drama from anybody or have people in my inbox, But
most of the people I met were God loving, phenomenal human
beings. But there was one artist in

(01:27:13):
particular who had just got doneplaying for the Pope.
And we go up to him and I'm likepretty excited.
I like his music. I'm like, this is pretty neat.
And he didn't have time for the teenagers, didn't have time for
me. I watched his backstage antics.
I saw everything going on. Then I saw him get out there
getting everybody sinning, let the Holy Spirit's alive in the

(01:27:33):
room, and I'm going. This guy's a charlatan.
Yes. I can't I can't take him
serious. Like, you know, the one guy
I'll, I'll tell you like the most loving person I've I've met
in the Catholic faith of music is Steve Agrizano.
Think the world of that guy. But this other individual that I
met, I'm going you are the antithesis.
You are the person who is cashing in, likely wrote a pop

(01:27:53):
song and put God's name over top.
Anytime you want to say love, you just say God and you fill in
the blanks. And in many ways, the, the post
Vatican 2, this, everybody has to be in touch with our feelings
getting away from the low mass in Catholicism, you know, yeah,
it's, it's it's wild to me to see now that the church's

(01:28:17):
teachings, the core teachings are being dumbed down by a
certain subduction of the churchin order to go, oh, we got to
bring everybody in. No, no, no, no, no, no.
Nobody was already in. We asked people to live to a
standard. We've always said in
Catholicism, there's nothing wrong with being gay.
We've never in Catholicism said that being gay itself is the

(01:28:39):
sin. We've always talked about that
it is actually a disordered events, a male being with a
male, a woman being with a womanfrom a faith perspective because
it's not possible for procreation.
And so that was actually the church's teaching.
And then the church itself now has kind of gone away from
everything and being like, well,that's not the sin part.
It's. Not what What has happened is

(01:29:01):
people, the, the American Civil religion model has become the
model that everybody is employing.
And in doing so they are confusing enthusiasm with the
promptings of the Holy Spirit. And there is absolutely no
equivalence. The revivalist mentality is, is

(01:29:23):
ultimately antithetical to any form of, of historical
Sacramento Christianity, pure and simple.
So, you know, there, there's no reverence as a result of this.
Everybody's doing their own thing.
I, I could go on and on. You know, I've, I've spent most

(01:29:43):
of my life in, in theological circles and observing this decay
and it, it's going to have to hit rock bottom.
My fear is when it hits rock bottom, there's going to not be
enough curmudgeons around to show people this is the way it
was and this is the way it should be.
I think you're accurate there. You know, I, I was doing, I was

(01:30:03):
telling you before the show, I was doing this retreat
perspective. It was basically a 90 day Lenten
retreat, but it focused in just these guided meditations for
Saint Michael and these priests that were leading this
conversation started talking about the archangels and the

(01:30:25):
traditional description of them.And we always when we think of
cherubims, right? We think of, oh, that's the
angels, but we don't think aboutMichael Gabriel, Raphael in the
terminology of they were gigantic and could crush humans.
I know that you studied in Patristics, and this might be

(01:30:48):
something that you're better than myself able to articulate.
Could you tell me a little bit about your understanding of what
are angels and then how did thatevolve into the way that we talk
about them in modern times? Is that something you ever

(01:31:09):
studied? Apparently you've not read or
heard of my book The Demon in the Acre.
Michael's read that book about and that's the intelligent
plasma, right? I thought that book was
monumental. It's it's earth shattering in my
opinion on what you bring up, especially with the Dacian
right. Yeah, the the cover of that book

(01:31:32):
is a depiction of an Angel and you find various artists that
that have attempted to depict them on the basis of their
actual description in the lore. So we have this idea that a

(01:31:52):
cherub is, you know, this cute little baby with delicate little
wings and a petite little smile,and he's kind of fluffy or she's
kind of fluffy. And, you know, it's like CS
Lewis said, our our typical Western image of artistic image
of an Angel is of, of an entity that is, is going to say they're

(01:32:16):
there rather than fear not. Yeah.
Now, if you encounter one of those things staring at you with
the wings from all sorts of angles and gazillions of eyes
and so on and so forth, zapping off lots of plasma, you're going
to say it's probably going to say fear or not, rather than

(01:32:38):
they're there because, yeah, that's something that will
terrify you. Interestingly enough, I think
those kinds of depictions are probably much more accurate
symbols than the 19th century little baby with, you know, the
cute little feathered wings and all the nonsense, you know, the,

(01:33:01):
the, the, the Raphael esque angels.
The the reason I think that is that in that book, I have an
extended quotation from, as a matter of fact, Saint John of
Damascus and his book on the Orthodox faith where he's trying
to describe angels. And it's a very lengthy passage.

(01:33:27):
But one of the things that that he he brings out over and over
again is that these things, if he were to use modern language,
he would say that these things are hyperdimensional beings.
In other words, they exist in a,a space of more than 3
dimensions. And the reason I think that,

(01:33:49):
that those kinds of, of depictions of angels, in fact,
you can look at Orthodox icons and you'll see icons
occasionally painted with a cherub.
And the wings are, you know, there's, there's six wings and
they're going in all sorts of directions.
It's, it's not like anything that would be a bird, you know,
that could fly. Well, why is it painted that

(01:34:10):
way? You're you're attempting to
paint a hyper dimensional being on A2 dimensional surface.
But if you were to encounter one, that's the way it would
look in three dimensions. So in other words, those
depictions I think are very, very accurate.
And encountering something like that, entering into the space

(01:34:33):
that we dwell in, I think, yeah,you're you're going to be
terrified because for one thing,they're going to be gigantic.
Yeah, Up there in the corner of that icon, you'll see those
depictions of angels. That's it's very typical
depiction of angels. And interestingly enough, during

(01:34:54):
in an icon of the nativity and yeah, you've got wings going
every which direction in that. So yeah, that's that's what I'm
talking about. So yeah, it's a looks like
that's a Russian icon as well. But yeah, you're going to pardon
me, you're going to encounter things like that, that the the

(01:35:14):
iconography is telling you that this is this is what they really
are. They they are not anything like
the kind of life that we know. They're very, very different.
And I, that's the reason I thinkthe plasma life hypothesis is so
fascinating, because it, it dovetails very nicely in some

(01:35:37):
respects to some of those, thosetraditions you have described in
the war. So I I have no difficulty with
with these kinds of things. So when people are praying for
the intercessions of the angels,do you believe that we're really
what we're looking at? So, OK, let's rewind for people

(01:36:00):
before I, I put this out there so that we, we kind of have a,
a, a framework for the conversation.
So I think on one show, I kind of told you what I teach, but
the visible invisible light spectrum, I think in terms of my
eyes can see a frequency, my ears can hear a frequency.
I can develop tools for receivers for radio waves in

(01:36:24):
order to be able to transmit andreceive signals.
But we have a entire frequency set that we know exists that we
cannot receive. If you don't have the tools in
order to dissect exactly what what's happening when we ask for
these intercessions, are we in some respects maybe playing with

(01:36:46):
a disclosure moments of extraterrestrial frequency that
really prayer has always been, I'm just, you know, putting this
out there. Prayer has always been a way to
connect us to the extraordinary world of communications with
archangels and things that we don't quite understand.

(01:37:09):
And then is some of that outsideof our abilities as humans.
What's your thoughts on that 'cause that that that?
I, I, no, it's not bizarre at all.
I, I think if you're, if you're looking for a speculative
explanation of, of that kind of that kind of prayer, yeah, I
think that's entirely possible that that they might be equipped

(01:37:32):
in some way to receive those types of intercessions.
And the reason I think it's possible is that there is a very
interesting story that that Linda Moulton Howe was told by,
I, I think it was Lynn Buchanan or another one of those very
early remote viewers. And what this individual told

(01:37:56):
her was the reason that ETS seemto be so interested in humans.
And I, I find this totally fascinating is that while ETS
are capable of a kind of telepathic communication at very
short distances, humans appear to be able to remote view

(01:38:20):
anything anywhere at any time over an extreme distance with
great accuracy. In other words, it's almost as
if they're saying, and I believethis quite quite frankly myself,
it's almost as if they're sayingthat that the consciousness of a

(01:38:41):
human being is a non local phenomenon.
In other words, our our personhood is not locked up in
the Gray matter of our skull. This is a transducer of that, as
is all the rest of this. If that's the case, then yes, I

(01:39:03):
would think that if you're dealing with that kind of human
anima, that kind of human soul, then by the nature of the case,
it's going to be impacting and impacted by similar such
entities such as a, a, an Angel or a plasma life.

(01:39:27):
That is, you know, literally light years, hundreds of
thousands of light years across.Because that you know, to hold
an Organism like that together, you're going to have to have
considerable entanglement and non locality phenomenon doing
that. And incidentally, what I find
very fascinating is that in in some genetic and biological

(01:39:49):
studies, you have biologists nownow coming right out and saying
that what is holding the body, you know, of any organic life
together, not just human, you know, my little dog and so on.
What's holding all that togetheris is.
Either a quantum entanglement phenomenon or a non locality

(01:40:09):
phenomenon. Even quantum tunneling has been
suggested by some of these people.
So in other words, even biological life has some impact
on that whole, you know, higher dimensional realm and and vice
versa. So I'm, I'm, you know, I don't,
I don't think that that hypothesis is, is absurd at all.

(01:40:30):
I you know, I think it's one of those speculations that you have
to entertain. Yeah.
And then so earlier last week we're recording for those that
need a, a, a timestamp on this, so you have a a spot for the
conversation. We're recording November 17th,
2025. Last week there was a sunspot
that fired off a 2X ones and then X5 and we saw auroras

(01:40:57):
dancing across the sky through most of the United States down
the Florida, which somebody who studies space weather for the
last two decades. I, I'm getting more and more
concerned seeing the fact that these coronal mass ejections are
causing more of this to be seen at further southern latitudes on

(01:41:18):
a regular basis with less energybeing emitted by the sun.
And I know we're at solar maximum.
I understand the whole solar cycle for those that are
watching that want to try to explain it to me, I, I'm well up
to to date over the last 150 years, Earth's magnetic field by
scientific studies has fallen 30%.

(01:41:40):
Nine percent of that loss is within the last 20 years.
So we're seeing acceleration of it coming down.
Somebody said, you know, I'm waiting for the solar shot now
to send us back to the Stone Ageto get rid of the Internet to
get rid of all this. And I can't help but tie Demon
of the Eager and the Conversation of Archangels and

(01:42:02):
plasma that's intelligent hitting Earth and just say, you
know, in a a Joseph Farrell world, if you're thinking about,
you know, a book that could say,hey, plasma's intelligent,
what's the odds that the sun's actually very aware of what's
going on on the Earth right now?And this is all part of a design
that likely is going to happen over and over again to put us

(01:42:23):
back in our place. Well, the sun is a plasma and
it's part of Egyptian religion that stars are alive and that
they're portals. OK, now I'm I'm one of these odd

(01:42:45):
people who's never been a Cartesian modern western machine
universe guy. OK, I'm, I'm a very, very old
traditionalist in the sense thatI think of the universe, when I
think of it analogically, I think of it much more as an
Organism than a machine. That idea of the universe is

(01:43:08):
actually relatively new. The the Organism idea is much
older and by the way, much more nuanced than simply saying or
believing all the then you're just a pantheist.
No, I don't have to be a pantheist because I believe my
dog has a soul. OK, come on.

(01:43:30):
That doesn't make me a pantheist.
So I don't have any problem withthese kinds of analogies.
What's interesting to me is not so much the the sun and whether
it may or may not be alive and may or may not be aware of
what's going on over here. You know, I can live with either

(01:43:50):
hypothesis perfectly well, thankyou very much.
What bothers me in what you saidwas that the magnetic field of
the Earth has declined about 9% over the past 20 years.
What happened about 20 years ago?

(01:44:12):
OK, a lot has happened in 20 years, but are you talking about
space weather or what? What am I?
What am I looking? For I'm talking about the
magnetic field. Why, why, Why about 20 years?
Did it decline another 9%? So I I I don't know the exact
reason. I've got theories behind it that
I could share with you. Be my.
Guest OK, One of the theories that I've often thought about is

(01:44:34):
what have we started doing here on Earth with our own signals?
And that relates to using lasers.
It uses satellites and communicating back and forth and
disrupting our magnetic field with the technology that we've
been launching in the space repeatedly as well as.
Analog. Yeah, removing analog and going

(01:44:55):
all digital, that's correct, Chris, moving to a 5G world,
yeah, all that. OK, I.
The the conceptual hypothesis I can agree with, but I'm going
to, I'm going to twist it, OK? Because there's one thing,
there's one thing that could possibly have that kind of

(01:45:19):
effect much more than 5G and lasers and all the signaling
that we've done. Guess what it is?
When was the Large Hadron Collider turned on?
Oh yeah. Yeah, about 20 years ago.
You're right. Now, what's the strength of the

(01:45:40):
magnetic fields of those detectors in the Large Hadron
Collider? Yeah.
I've actually looked that up before. 16 Teslas multiples
above the magnetic field strength of the Earth.
Yes, hopefully. For, for, for a a reference for

(01:46:01):
for listeners and viewers. We look at the nano Teslas of
our BZ, our magnetic field and during a positive BZ reading, we
are protected from Cmes. It's kind of like N facing, so
to speak. It's it's 4:00 to 5:00 and we
see negative. It goes below, but to to

(01:46:24):
Farrell's point here, it is normally like 6 nano teslas -6
nano Teslas. We just saw a -60 at one point
last week. But that is such a rare
excursion so I never thought about.
This is absolutely brilliant. Joseph CERN.
Yeah, Cern's mag. I've said this on many shows, on

(01:46:45):
many occasions. I said it in my book, The Third
Way. If you are dealing with
detectors of particles whose magnetic field strength is
multiples stronger than the magnetic field strength of the
planet, this is going to have. I don't care what expert you

(01:47:07):
consult from CERN or what they've said, this is going to
have a magnetic resonance effectwhen that damn thing is running
on the entire planet. Now because our magnetic field,
our planetary magnetic field is coupled with the magnetic field

(01:47:27):
of the sun, that means that any resonance effect induced here is
going to have an effect there. So in other words, what I am
telling everybody is on the Cardashef scale and the Feral
corollary is there of we are doing not only planetary sized

(01:47:49):
engineering, we are doing stellar sized engineering.
And that one whole aspect of of the CERN project has nothing
whatsoever to do with particle science and everything to do
with geophysics and stellar science.
So in other words, the particle physics is the public

(01:48:11):
explanation. The secret stuff is concerning
geophysics and stellar physics. That's what I'm maintaining.
Call me kooky. No, I just, I just, you just
gave me like I just had an earthshattering moment of science.
OK, so Michaels, we measure nanoTeslas for the Earth's magnetic

(01:48:35):
field. I just fact checked, Joseph just
now because I wanted to make sure that we weren't talking
about nano Teslas because he said Teslas.
Teslas, by the way, are much more powerful than nano Teslas.
And holy crap, we're operating the LHC magnets are 100,000
times stronger than the Earth's magnetic field.

(01:48:56):
Yeah, and now the couple would. And by the way, it's embedded in
piezoelectric rock. Yes.
And by the way, if you look at where the power outages were in
Europe, it followed the Large Altrin Collider when it knocked
out, what was it, Portugal and parts of Spain for an extended

(01:49:18):
period of time, like a week. Oh wow.
Now, since we're on, since we'rehaving Hadron Collider
Fantasia's here, let's go a little further.
I've been maintaining for years that the reason they turned it
off right after they turned it on, when they said, oops, we had
a magnet coolant leak that caused the thing to rupture and

(01:49:44):
we had to shut it down. I've seen pictures of the
rupture. Have you seen those?
OK, Well, we know the Hadron Collider is this big circular
particle accelerator, or they spin a proton stream in opposite
directions and then eventually smash them into each other.
OK. The picture shows one part of

(01:50:06):
the ring of the accelerator has been offset upward just like
this. Like this upward with the pipes
storing the coolant all kind of twisted.
So in other words, yeah. There you go.
Thank you. Thank you.
There you go. Now as you look at that, I'm

(01:50:29):
thinking, no, this isn't particle physics, that's
torsion. And what's torsion?
Torsion is what you get when youtwist the soda can.
That's empty, OK, It's directly related to gravity, and it can
only be expressed in higher dimensional mathematics in the

(01:50:53):
tensor calculus. So in other words, I've been
maintaining all along that the very design of the Hadron
Collider. Here's let my glass be the big
ring, the circle of my glass is the big ring, and then there's a
smaller circular accelerator above the large one that sets on

(01:51:15):
the edge. So in other words, the axis of
rotation of the two circular accelerators is not the same,
and it's that small circular accelerator that actually does
the final injection of the proton stream into the large
accelerator. Follow me.
Yes. Now, what this means is that in

(01:51:35):
my thinking, that canted smalleraccelerator is going to
introduce a precessional wobble in the whole apparatus.
And because of that processionalwobble, you're going to get
massive torsion effects, especially in magnetic fields
that strong. So remember my friend Doctor

(01:51:59):
Ronald Richter, the Nazi down inArgentina running fusion
projects for Juan Peron? What did Doctor Richter say when
he was interviewed off the record, top secret by the United
States Air Force after he told the United States Air Force, no
wonder you Claude's miscalculated the yield that you

(01:52:20):
got on Castle Bravo. He said that I am using plasmas,
first of all as a transducer forwhat he called the zero point
energy. That's one of the first usages
of that term is in that interview by that Nazi
scientist. OK.

(01:52:40):
And then on top of that, he saysI'm rotating my plasma and I'm
inducing. Here it comes folks, the the
Lemoore radio frequency precession into it and that's
how I'm getting my fusion. So in other words, he was using
torsion. So my point here is, whatever

(01:53:05):
they're telling you about the Large Hadron Collider and the
Higgs boson and all this wonderful particle zoo that they
and all the abstruse mathematicsthat you're supposed to oh and
awe over, I think there's a hugely hidden aspect of the CERN
thing, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with particle
physics. It has everything to do with

(01:53:26):
geophysics, stellar physics, andtorsion.
Why? Because torsion is a rotating
property in a plasma. What's the sun?
It's a rotating by the way. It even has counter rotating
plastic. Yes it does.
Yeah, so bell talk there, folks.So come on, all you need to do

(01:53:48):
is connect the dots. Yeah, all you need to do.
You've heard of the Mandela Effect?
Before, of course I have, so yes.
So I've, I've often blamed the Cauldron Collider for Mandela
Effect because I, I believe, OK,so in 2022 they turned it back
on. It had been off for a while.

(01:54:09):
And somebody had said to me, they said, Greg, you know, you
should use this time to set youragenda because when they turn
that back on, there's going to be so much energy that you can
actually manifest your reality. And I was like, this sounds like
a bunch of mumbo jumbo, but you know what?
I'm going to do it. No, look.
Look in in the third way in in my book I actually describe what

(01:54:34):
I call the the the macro observer effect experiment.
OK. I believe that there is a level
of of the experiment at CERN that they are doing social data
correlations as to when that accelerator is on and and that
is the data that they are parceling out secretly to the

(01:54:54):
scientists. And what do I mean by macro
observer effect experiments? The observer effect is coming
out of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.
You cannot observe the position and momentum of an electron at
the same time. OK, so in other words, before
you even perform an experiment, you have determined what the

(01:55:16):
result is that you're looking for.
Now, can you scale that up to the macro scale of our common,
everyday, ordinary sized universe?
And if so, what would happen? Well, how would you do it?
How would you do it? Well, one way to do it would be

(01:55:37):
to alter memory and to do so over a significant segment of
the population. So what do you do?
Well, you plant stories in this segment of the population.
Nelson Mandela died in prison. And some people are going to
remember Nelson Mandela died in prison.

(01:56:00):
Or, like me, I remember Bill Clinton getting out into the
Rose Garden and announcing and eulogizing the passing of of the
famous White House press reporter Helen Thomas.
And she didn't die. But I remember vividly, I
remember Kirk Michael Douglas getting on The Tonight Show
talking about the death of his famous father, Kirk Douglas.

(01:56:23):
And Kirk Douglas was still alive.
Now, I'm not the only one that remembers these things, by the
way, right? So what?
What happens when you start playing around then with actual
physical memory of a system? If you decide if you are are
making decisions informed on a false memory, it's going to have

(01:56:47):
a macro effect. That's my point.
And possibly, you know, this, this was the whole basis for
that science fiction television series Fringe, where you had a
whole macro effect universe colliding with another universe
in another timeline because the macro effect had been

(01:57:09):
compromised in one of those universes.
So do I think there is a possibility that they've been
playing around with those types of experiments in conjunction
with CERN? You betcha.
If you're a manager in a casino,you know what happens on full
moons. If you're a policeman, you know

(01:57:30):
what happens on full moons. So you're going to tell me that
a bunch of scientists are going to turn on a multi million GW
particle accelerator with magnetic fields the size of the
planet, if not much much larger,and not do social correlation
data experiments? You betcha they are.

(01:57:50):
And might some of those experiments be designed to
affect the macro reality in conjunction with things like
Mandela Effect? You betcha they will.
You betcha. When I look at all of this going
on, we've got CERN, we've got things like artificial
intelligence, we've got things like digital ID and this whole

(01:58:13):
disclosure nonsense. All of these social narrative
trends, all of this technology coming in, these items, to me
don't seem as though they are being put into place by somebody
or something that has the best intentions for mankind.

(01:58:35):
Of course not. This totally seems to me.
His name is Lucifer. Thank you, thank you.
This all of this. Seems to me that there is some
kind of intelligence in the background engineering all of
this for the final subjugation of mankind.
Uh huh. Michaels, how far is Brookhaven

(01:58:58):
from you in Long Island? Probably about 30 minutes. 40
minutes. Yeah, there's some. 40 minutes
depending where you are in the boroughs.
So are, are you aware? Because I, I just, I know there
was multiple colliders on Earth.One's in Brookhaven, in Long
Island, there's Switzerland, France, there's Keck, Japan,

(01:59:20):
Beijing, China. And then there's smaller medium
colliders in Italy. The Fermi Electra, Elsa is in
Germany and VEP is in Russia. Now those are more synchrotrons,
but they still of magnetic fields.
I'm going to map these out sometime Joseph, and figure out
if there's even something with a, a mapping in the way that

(01:59:41):
would sync with the whole we're seeing in like the Southern
Atlantic Anomaly. I wonder if we're seeing a flip
on the Southern Atlantic Anomalytowards the Indian Ocean.
Cause from all this stuff being up north, are we seeing a
weakening naturally there? So thank you.
You've given me a lot to think about.
I I also wonder why they decidedto place CERN so close to Alsace

(02:00:03):
Lorraine. It explain your why you're.
Thinking isn't CERN placed relatively close to Alsace
Lorraine? I'm wondering and and I'm not
asking for an answer, but I'm wondering why that region has
always been at the forefront of some kind of conflict in Europe
and now they play CERN There. You had it during World War One.

(02:00:28):
You know, this was a contested area, the roar area.
That whole strip I think has some kind of esoteric for.
Yeah, there are, there are people that, that have, have
questioned the same thing. And I, I do think there's
something to it, but I have no idea what it would be the, the,

(02:00:53):
the rock that the, the Hadron Collider is embedded in.
It's in a kind of a piezoelectrically active type of
rock. At least part of it is Alsace
Lorraine, I don't know. But, but part of that I think is
also, you know, my, my, my friend's grandmother is

(02:01:15):
Alsatian, or I should say was Alsatian and her mother was
German, German Alsatian. So, you know, I've got, I've got
that whole region's blood flowing in my veins.
The that region itself. I strongly think that that part
of the lore and and curiosity about it is, is that old

(02:01:41):
Lotarian Kingdom that Charlemagne divided amongst his
three sons. There's something about that
Kingdom that that lives on and Idon't know what it is.
I I'm equally as perplexed as you are, Chris, about that
region. It just, it just seems like a

(02:02:03):
hotbed it is for all of this. It is so my personal opinion.
And this is where, like, I thinkwe'll sort of start to land our
show here after Greg asks his very, very pointed questions at
the end. They weren't pointed up till

(02:02:24):
now, folks. We yeah, right.
We've been dabbling with the blunt end of the probes here.
And then now we're really sharpening.
Now we're really getting done. Sharpen my pencil here, yeah?
What do you think all of these things combined?
I mean, we have the secret spaceprogram.
I personally think that artificial intelligence is not
just on the corporeal plane. I think it is being able to

(02:02:48):
channel. And also a lot of these people
like Altman and Peter Thiel, they say it's a medium to
communicate with extra dimensional entities, or they
floated that idea. I mean, I'm Paris.
Elon Musk was right, bold and said that right, right and said
it. So to me, what this looks like
is that they're preparing for some kind of event and they did

(02:03:10):
not put the chips on humanity tosurvive it.
They have their own elite cliques.
They think that they're going tosurvive it.
They're going to push artificialintelligence.
They're going to push robots. That's why all of this is coming
out right now. And it's also why we have this
thing like carbon credits, greencities, 15 minute cities,

(02:03:31):
electric vehicles. They did not bet the farm on
humanity. So now they're trying to
basically take over every singleresource in the global Commons
and put it towards the creation of data centers, artificial
intelligence for this new humanity that is about to erupt.

(02:03:52):
What are your thoughts on where all of this could potentially be
heading? Because to me it seems like they
are hell bent for leather to getall this stuff pushed through
within five years. Well, it's rather obvious what
they're doing, isn't it? They're they're building a new
Tower of Babel. Yep.
That's what they're doing, and it's going to end up the same

(02:04:16):
way as the last one, if for no other reason than that there is
an inbuilt morality in the cosmos.
That's why it's called the cosmos.
Cosmos is the Greek word for order, opposite of chaos.
There's an inbuilt morality. Fundamentally, you can't twist

(02:04:40):
it into something absolutely evil, because evil can never be
absolute. Only good is absolute.
So, you know, the the dualistic experiment that they're engaged
upon is going to come a cropper just like all other dualistic
experiments that that mankind has tried in the past.
And I've also said many times, Chris, that you know, to me what

(02:05:04):
they are trying to do is they'retrying to follow what they
believe is the template of action of the end times.
And they're trying to do a kind of of false fulfillment of it so
that they end up on top. And by the way, when I say false
fulfillment, they are trying to falsely fulfill all

(02:05:27):
eschatological expectation, not just biblical, Quranic, Vedic,
you name it, there is a way to do it.
And and that's what I think they're about the problem.
And and again, I'm, I'm going back to something that CS Lewis

(02:05:47):
said. And you know, if anyone of, of
the inklings saw all this coming, he did Tolkien certainly
as well. But Lewis said something to the
effect once that beware if you try and call down high heaven
upon your heads because it mightshow up or something to that

(02:06:10):
effect. And that's what they're trying
to do. They are trying to, to invoke
all these old powers. And to them, science is the way
to do it. You know, and I, I wrote that
back in, in my book Grit of the Gods, you know, that that whole
book begins with a little paragraph about modern science
and the relationship to magic. That's what they're trying to

(02:06:32):
do. So, you know, don't be surprised
if something nasty shows up. And if the something nasty shows
up, it's going to bring all sorts of really powerful good
things in tow. But you know, we're going to be
like little ants caught between,hate to break it to you folks,
but that's the way she goes. You know, the, the other thing

(02:06:57):
I've said many times, Chris, is,you know, people, people really
don't get that all of my books are related, including the
theological ones. That's the part that people
don't latch on to. But but they are all related.
And I've said many, many times about, you know, about this idea
of the cosmic war. Mankind is both the battlefield

(02:07:21):
and the prize. Right.
There's one thing about mankind that if you if you read even the
Islamic tradition about Iblis, which is their name for the
devil, why does why does Iblis revolt against God?

(02:07:42):
Well, it's actually in Islam that says his revolt is because
he was angry and jealous of the creation of man.
That's where that comes from, and the question is why?
Well, we're not really told, butI have a sneaking suspicion that
might have something to do with something called the

(02:08:03):
Incarnation. Just speculating there.
Yeah, that's some cliffhanger they give.
Everybody, some cliffhanger here.
We're going to come up to this point and leave you there,
folks. Now, you know that it may be
answered in, in Islamic tradition.
I don't know. I'm not an expert on Islamic

(02:08:23):
tradition. You'd have to ask an imam.
But I, I, you know, that's my impression for what I have
encountered of it and, and what they've written about iblas.
But yeah, they're, you know, everybody, everybody is, is, you
know, you look at those old traditions, you know, in, in, in
the Vedic thing. We're coming up on the Kali Yuga

(02:08:45):
and that's not going to be a very nice period of time.
You know so. And it's going to be a long
period of time, too. So, you know, I everybody's,
everybody's kind of sensing things are headed in the wrong
direction. And the global elites are
thinking of the direction we're headed in is just fine.
Thank you very much. It's evolution.

(02:09:08):
It's it's a yeah oh, oh, oh, Oh yeah.
Lead us evolution lead us up thefutures endless there chop us
changes pradas lead us lead us. Nobody knows where where to
whatever variation our posteritymay turn crusty or crustacean to
that great unknown godly year, you know, on and on and on.

(02:09:28):
You know I love that poem by. The way Who's that by?
CS Lewis, CS Oh yeah, go look. It's it's titled Evolution.
Well, when you were talking earlier, I was thinking Ray
Bradbury by the pricking of my thumb.
Something wicked this way comes.This way comes, yeah.
It's, you know, I had, so I havea couple different things.
One, I have one question I want to ask that has nothing to do

(02:09:50):
with how I wanted to kind of endthe conversation today.
And it's just because it's a curiosity, because it keeps
coming up in conversations with people on shows that I'm doing.
I don't know where this first originated, this idea, if it was
made-up by somebody or if it appears in ancient texts.
But the Akashic records, where did this first appear?

(02:10:14):
Because I have not been able to track down, you know, if this is
something that was like New Ageylast 100 years or if it actually
exists in history books. A long time ago, people were
talking about this in the spiritual realm. 3 words Helena
Petrona Blavatsky there. You go.

(02:10:36):
Theosophy. Theosophy.
She in turn claims to be gettingit.
And I think there's a very good case to be made for it that
she's getting it from, from readings of some of the Vedic
texts. There's that famous passage, for
example, in, in the Bhagavad Gita about the, the knower and

(02:10:59):
the field, which is I think one of the, one of the most very
beautiful passages in, in the Bhagavad Gita.
But it is, it's from there and that doctrine.
And I think to a certain extent,you could, you could say that
it's coming out of also certain strains of, of, of Mahayana

(02:11:20):
Buddhism. So, you know, with Blavatsky,
you're getting somebody that's going to grab this, this thing
here and that thing there and just kind of stir it together in
a Stew, which she does in this case.
But that's where I think that that particular term comes from.
OK. And.
I'm going to look that up a little bit more now.
I'm just going to frame my, my mind around this.

(02:11:42):
All right, So I want to take youas we wrap up today.
I, I, I don't know, this was just on my heart to do this with
you. I, I, I've done this with a
couple guests throughout the years and I don't think anyone's
ever asked you these type of questions in any interviews that
I watched. And I was like, well, you know
what? If people want a unique way to
wrap this, this would be good. I want to take you on basically,

(02:12:05):
let's talk about 5 parts of yourlegacy.
And first would be your personaljourney.
You know, obviously I met you about a year and a half ago, was
familiar with your work much longer.
But looking back, you as a child, what inspired you to be

(02:12:30):
so inquisitive? What inspired you to try to
unearth hidden history? What was it about your
upbringing that led you to whereyou are today in life?
Well, it was my father was an engineer and an architect,
construction engineer and an architect.

(02:12:52):
And he was the first person in our family after the Irish part
of it came over that actually had a college education.
And he was also quite literally a genius.
He, he graduated college, I don't know how many grades or
years ahead of most people graduating from college.
So he was a very intelligent man.

(02:13:16):
He one of the things that that happened and this, this is
something that I remember very vividly.
They, my parents would play cards, they would play A5 point
pitch every Friday night with some friends of theirs in Sioux
Falls. Another couple, the husband in
that couple was the local television station electrical

(02:13:38):
engineer and he had worked for the British during World War 2
developing radar. And he literally built, designed
and built by hand the first local television color
transmitter in this country in the 1970s.

(02:13:59):
So this, this was another, you know, nerd, geek, very brilliant
guy. And I think the one of the
things that set me out definitely was one night they're
playing cards. And somehow my dad and this
other guy started talking about the Great Pyramid and how it was
just engineered to the hilt. So that was one thing that kind

(02:14:21):
of, you know, lodged in my brain.
The other thing that lodged at avery early day in, in my, in my
development was I was baptized Roman Catholic.
I was raised in the Methodist, the old Methodist Episcopal
Church, which was Methodism before it went wacky, and joined

(02:14:43):
the Evangelical United Brethren and started ordaining women and
fire hydrants and zebras and, you know, everything they could
ordain. It was a very, very traditional
sort of church. And then all of a sudden, bang
overnight, it changed after thatmerger.

(02:15:04):
And so, you know, and I used to love to go to church, largely
because I was just fascinated by, you know, the ritual and the
pipe organ. I used to have my parents sit so
I could watch the organist play.So all that changed.
And so I'm wondering why. And then my nephew showed up for
Christmas one year with, with their family in tow.

(02:15:26):
And we're going to the ChristmasEve service, which was the last
one I ever went to at that service, because it was just one
parade of abominable heresy after another.
I not even Harris. It was just, it was just awful.
I mean, they, they rolled this birthday cake down the aisle
with 2000 candles on it as the youth choir got up on top of the

(02:15:49):
altar and did a little dance andsang a little number called
Happy Birthday, Baby Jesus. And I'm nine years old and this
is supposed to appeal to me. Gosh, you know, and they're
singing and swaying back and forth and they're wearing their
Vatican 2 burlaps. So I at that point, at that
point, I decided, oh, you know, something's going on here

(02:16:11):
because my my little Lutheran nephews were equally appalled
what was going on? And so I started reading in high
school. I decided, you know, we've got
all these churches and I've got all these Evangelo Zionist
friends of mine that are trying to get me saved.
And, you know, and I just can't conjure up enough emotion to, to

(02:16:34):
give me the oomph to satisfy them.
You know, it just can't do it. I'm not a revivalist.
And and besides, I'm thinking, well, you know, well, I've
always, I've always thought thisway.
You know, I've always been a Christian.
I don't need your oomph. So I decided I'm going to start
reading in theology and decide, you know, which one of these
churches makes the most sense. So I went out literally, that's

(02:16:57):
when I was about 15 years old. I went to the local bookstore in
Sioux Falls that catered to, youknow, the Bible crowd.
But it was run by a bunch of Lutherans.
So it was a very unusual Bible crowd that they were catering
to. So I bought a set of Thomas
Aquinas Summa Contra gantillas. I bought the Lutheran Book of

(02:17:20):
Concord, which is the book of their confessions if you're in
the Missouri Synod. Very light reading.
Yeah. Oh, tell me about it.
And I bought Calvin's Institutes, and I sat down and I
started reading these things andthe first thing I'm noticing as,
OK, none of these people are agreeing with each other, and
they're all citing the same church.

(02:17:41):
Father. This is where it really began
for me. That was Saint Augustine.
So in other words, I thought, OK, they've got something in
common because they all come up with the same problems over and
over and over, and they never get anywhere.
So I thought, that's interesting.
In the meantime, as I'm doing all this, I had finally figured

(02:18:01):
out, hey, I was baptized Roman Catholic.
So I went to my father because Iknew that he had been 1.
And I said, where was I baptized?
He said, well, you're baptized at Saint Joseph's Cathedral, so
that's OK. So, and I don't know if you've
ever been to Sioux Falls, SD, you can go online and look at
the inside of Saint Joseph's Cathedral.
This is just this massive churchand, you know, stuck up on a

(02:18:27):
hill in Sioux Falls and it's a beautiful church on the inside.
So I went, I decided one day I was going to walk up to the
rectory, which was a long walk, and I went to the rectory to get
my baptismal certificate becauseI was going off to college and I
wanted to explore, you know, maybe being confirmed.
So I walked up to the rectory. I was met by Monsignor,

(02:18:52):
Monsignor Mecaninny. He was quite a character, I got
to tell you. None of the other cathedral
staff were there. He was alone in the office that
day, and he met me at the door with his glasses, you know,
pulled down like this. And he had, you know, he had his
rowing collar on everything. He kind of growled at me.

(02:19:14):
He says, yes. And I said, I introduced myself.
I said who I was and I was here to get my baptismal certificate.
And he just kind of sighed. And he said, OK, so he invited
me. And I know this is a long story,
but it it's to the purpose. So he goes downstairs and into
the records part of the of the cathedral.
And I can hear him rummaging around for a while and he

(02:19:35):
finally finds it. He comes back up and he fills
out a duplicate certificate and stamps it for me.
And just as he's handing it to me and it just as I'm ready to
reach for it, he pulls it back and he says, I don't recall you
ever being here, boy. I said no, Sir.

(02:19:57):
He says, well, do you go to Saint Francis?
I said no. He said, well, do you go to Holy
Cross? And I said no.
And he just kind of looks at me.He says, you're not Catholic,
Are you a boy? And I said, well, no, Monsignor,
I'm not. And he has the certificate to
me. And he leans, I'll never forget
this. He leans over and kind of looks

(02:20:19):
through both sides. He says, well, with a name like
Joseph Patrick Farrell, you don't need to be.
It was quite a character anyway,so I took my baptismal
certificate. I went off to college and
another kick in the pants that got me on on the reading of

(02:20:40):
ancient texts was when I got to college, I I had chosen a
College in in the South, not knowing much of anything about
American evangelical culture. I just wanted to study the organ
OK in a small, nice little placewhere I could be left alone.
So I chose this little southern college and.

(02:21:01):
I'm curious, did you choose to study the organ because of the
cathedral? No, I, I, I the organ at Saint
Joseph's, that's, that's the newone.
That's. Not that's the new one.
OK, this is absolutely beautiful.
I had to look it up. Yeah, it is a lovely Yeah,
that's the organ loft at Saint Joseph's Cathedral now.

(02:21:21):
But it's not, it's not the one that was there when I when I was
familiar with it. But anyway, no, I, I grew up
loving the pipe or, you know, that was the instrument for me
in the Methodist Church because I just, and to this day, I, I,
you know, I love Oregon. So I went to the southern
college and I literally on the very first day that I'm there, I

(02:21:43):
went to the lunch line. I got my lunch, I got my tray.
I come off the lunch line and I go into the cafeteria and I sit
down, I cross myself and say a little prayer.
And when I, you know, open my eyes after the prayer, literally
staring, leaning over the table on the other side of the lunch

(02:22:06):
table, leaning in towards me with his eyes, just a gog with
horror, was this guy who said myname is such and such.
Are you saved? I mean, that was literally the
reception I got. And, you know, I had literally

(02:22:26):
no idea up to that point of of what what evangelicalism was and
how very different it was. So I literally cut my
theological teeth trying to respond to these people's
questions. And in the meantime, I went out
to the local Catholic Church to mass.

(02:22:46):
And I go in and, you know, the priest is cleaning up and there
was a little smell of incense inthe air.
And I presented my certificate to him and said I'd, you know,
I'd like to take some catechism confirmation classes.
And the priest looks at, he says, well, I'm not so sure that
you know what you're doing. I said, well, you're a priest,
aren't you? And he says, yes.
And I said, well, you know, put me in the class and, and

(02:23:09):
confirm. He says, well, first of all,
only the Bishop can do that, andI'm not a Bishop.
And he looks at the certificate and he says, I think you're a
bit confused because I'm an Episcopalian priest.
This, the Catholic Church here lets us meet and use their
church after they get done with their Mass.
So I started and, and as I learned more about

(02:23:31):
Episcopalianism, I decide, well,this is for me because I just
have, I'll be very blunt. I, I just have too many
doctrinal difficulties with infallibility and some other
changes that the Roman Church made after the schism.
And they were made by Rome, not by us, and they are problematic
in the extreme. So I joined the Episcopal

(02:23:55):
Church. Literally four months before the
General Convention of 1976 gave us women priests and they
started ordaining women and zebras and fire hydrants, you
know, So I was, I was, I was, I was back to the same old thing.
And I kept saying, what is it with these churches that are

(02:24:16):
changing things? They don't need to change.
You know, at that point I reallystarted reading theology and I
changed my major from from musicto theology, and not simply for
that reason. I had some real difficulties
with the Oregon professor there too.
But anyway, so that was it. And in the course of reading

(02:24:38):
Anglican Dogmatics, I was exposed to a way of thinking
from the Church Fathers that wasnot Augustinian.
In other words, it was not basedon, on the system and thinking
of, of Saint Augustine of Hippo Regis.
So, and that was the other thingthat in that college I noticed
all these fundamentalists, therewas one church father that they

(02:25:01):
all liked and read and that was Augustine.
And I thought, well, if this guyis causing all this trouble,
there has to be something wrong with him.
So when I started reading the Church Fathers, I read the Greek
Fathers and all of the Latin Fathers except Augustine.
And so when I got to Augustine, I could easily see what the

(02:25:21):
problems were. And that eventually is, was what
led me to, to Eastern Orthodox Catholicism.
So the, that interest in turn, as I've, as I'm reading these
fathers, especially the Greek ones, they start talking about
things like, well, there's giants and we got angels and
they don't really exist in any sort of dimension like we do

(02:25:45):
thinking, what is all this? So I started reading, you know,
I started reading all these other things that they kept
mentioning. And that's what got me started
on this, you know, this harebrained career I'm on.
And you know, that eventually awakened that conversation about
the pyramid that my, my father and his engineering friend were

(02:26:06):
having and so on and so forth. So it's been kind of the thing
that slowly congealed over several years and it took off
back at the at the turn of the Millennium when I was a casino
manager and got let go from thatjob.
I was actually fired for pointing out some non compliance

(02:26:26):
issues that they were having with the Gaming Commission.
So, you know, shuffle him out ofhere real quick.
But I started writing, I, I wrote the Giza pyramid books.
It's kind of a fleshing out of things that, that my father and
his engineering friend had talked about way, way, way back
when. And, and I, I honestly, Greg, I

(02:26:49):
did not expect this to become a career.
You know, I wanted to be an academic, you know, with my
patches on my suede chute and smoking pipes and living in,
living in the library and seeingthat's what I wanted.
I never ever in my wildest days expected this to become a full
time career ever, ever. It happened entirely by

(02:27:13):
accident. But in a way I can see why,
because I am such AI, am such a traditionalist and a curmudgeon
theologically. I never would have fit in in the
modern American quacatomy at all.
I did. I did teach for a period of, of
time in an Orthodox seminary, but there too, I was let go

(02:27:34):
because, well, let's just say I saw some financial indiscretions
and, and, and even that blew up into this church wide financial
fracas that went on and on for years.
And all I had done was try to correct it.
And you will not, if you examinethat fracas, you will not find

(02:27:55):
my name mentioned at all. They've kept that quietly out of
the picture. There are a few people that
know, but I'm here to tell you when I wrote that memo and sent
it off to the headquarters, the next thing I know is we're
preparing an ecclesiastical trial for you.
So, you know, what did I do? Oh, I've been through it all,

(02:28:16):
you know, I know. I know where the bodies are
buried. That, that, that leads me to
something I, I jotted down to ask you and I'm going to kind of
change my question a little bit in the, in the framework of what
you just shared about your growing up and hearing your
father talk about this and then church experiences.
What have you learned throughoutyour career about the interplay

(02:28:41):
between knowledge, power and society?
Like as you're looking at ancient covert technologies,
ancient teachings, covert teachings that are hidden from
the public, what do you think that reveals about the human,
the human role of knowledge, power in society?

(02:29:06):
How's that shaped worldview for you?
How's how's that changed? I think, I think the biggest
thing is that knowledge is I, I,I despise hypocrisy
particularly. You know, we're all hypocrites
at some level. But what I'm talking about is

(02:29:28):
institutional hypocrisy. And by that I mean, if, if I'm
sitting down at dinner and having a discussion with a Roman
Catholic Bishop, I want that Bishop to be Roman Catholic.
I may be strongly disagreed withhim, which I am, but I at least
want him to be a true representative of what he's
claiming to be. If I sit down and listen to a

(02:29:53):
Lutheran pastor, I want him to be Lutheran.
Not trying to be Methodist and everything else but Lutheran.
So institutional hypocrisy aboveall other things bothers me.
Why? Because what it is is it's a
form of knowledge that does not result in action, that is

(02:30:14):
condigned or consistent with that knowledge.
And when you're in that state, you're introducing a not just
hypocrisy into the, into the state of your own soul, you're
introducing A schism into your soul.
It's a kind of literal schizophrenia.
You're of a divided mind. And this I think, you know, you

(02:30:34):
look at, at things everywhere. People know certain things are
wrong. They know certain things are
counterproductive or evil or notpractical or what have you.
And they go ahead and do them anyway because everybody else is
doing them. Well, by golly, no, no.
So most of my, you know, most ofmy career has just been one big

(02:30:58):
no. I'm not a modernist.
I will not go along with your changes.
I don't care how many of you andhow many of your churches do.
I will not, because that is my baptismal vow, pure and simple.
I mean, you've got a Promethean gene in you.

(02:31:19):
You know. It's rare to come by.
There is an expression in the Latin Athanasius, contramundum
Athanasius against the world, because at a certain period in
church history, during during the middle of the 4th century,
virtually everybody in the Christian Church was an Aryan.
And that is a form of Christianity that rejected the

(02:31:42):
deity of Christ. And it was Athanasius, the
Bishop of Alexandria, who was one of these people, said, no, I
don't care how many of you out there are going along with this
doctrine, I will not because it is not the doctrine of the
Church. It is not the tradition.
So in other words, I, you know, I think at some point we have to

(02:32:06):
understand that regardless of what institution we're talking
about, most of us are probably right now concerned with our
country and the direction it is going.
And we have to understand that there are some things that we
must be willing to fight for andto die for.
And that's what we're lacking. That's what we're lacking.

(02:32:27):
There are lots of things plenty of people are ready to kill for,
but there's a difference betweenthat and dying for something.
And I think we're fast approaching that stage where
we're going to be forced to makethat kind of choice, especially
in this country. How does your understanding of
where we are as a country right now, with human nature, with

(02:32:48):
morality, moral relativism? Where do you see the trajectory
of civilization based upon history and patterns of where
the future might be going? Oh, I think it's going down the
crapper. You know, I back, back when my
friend George Ann Hughes was still alive and I was doing all
sorts of interviews on her show,I would make the observation

(02:33:11):
numerous times and, and I still believe it that, you know, it
was Bishop Fulton Sheen. I think that once said that
humanity goes through these cycles about once every 500
years, you know, and I'm old enough I, I know that many
people in your audience are probably not old enough to
remember Bishop Sheen. I remember it because I used to

(02:33:32):
watch him on TV all the time. And he would, he said that that
humanity would go through these 500 year cycles every now and
then. And he pointed out that we're
fast coming up on another one. And I think, yeah, we're at the
end of this 500 year cycle that began with the Reformation and

(02:33:52):
the counter Reformation. OK.
What's unique about this one is that the end of this 500 year
cycle is also correspondent or coincident with the end of a
much longer cycle of several millennia.
So qualitatively the end of thiscycle is unlike any previous

(02:34:18):
thing in in known human history.This is why I have the
fascination with, you know, ancient high civilizations and
so on, because I don't think we've been at this point since
that civilization. So it is, it is qualitatively
and quantitatively much larger than anything we've been through

(02:34:41):
in our known history since then.Where it's going to go depends a
lot on what people think the proper diagnosis of why we got
here is for myself, I think a lot of it is precisely the
theology, the, the common religious mind of, of the West

(02:35:05):
and, and what it shares. And, you know, we can, that
would be something possibly for another discussion.
But, you know, I used to, when Iwas a theology professor, I used
to give what I called theological Rorschach inkblot
tests, OK. And I did that to show people,
regardless if they were agnosticor atheist, that they had far
more in common with each other than any of them had in common

(02:35:30):
with the ancient Orthodox Churchof the East.
So in other words, there is a massive cultural shift in the
West and it ultimately, I think is theological in nature.
And we can point to, we can point the things like the
Enlightenment and Kant and Schopenhauer and things like
that. But if you look long and hard

(02:35:51):
enough, those are coming out of that Augustinian religious mind
that unfortunately the West madethe mistake of equating with the
mind of the church. That's the problem.
All right, so here's here's my last two areas I want to go.
And I told you this in the greenroom.
OK, pitcher Mount Rushmore, right?

(02:36:13):
We put, you know, 4 figures on Mount Rushmore for people to
look at for history. If you could pick four things
that you've uncovered in your life, 4 principles, teachings,
whatever it may be the leave foranother generation.
What are the four things Joseph Farrell has discovered that that

(02:36:35):
are worth making sure that people pay attention to?
No, I can think three times. I can think of one right off the
top of my head. And this is what I've, I wrote
most of my theological works about, and that's the filioque.
You know what the Filioque is? No, I don't.
OK. In the Nicene Creed, which you
say at Mass, you come down to the third article of the Creed.

(02:37:00):
I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of life, who
proceedeth from the Father and the Son.
And the son. And the Son, that's Filioque in
Latin. That change is a profound change
in the doctrine of God himself. It is not original to the Nicene

(02:37:20):
Creed, and it is not part of Scripture.
It is not, and the West says it is.
And that's the problem. You have a change in the
doctrine of God himself, and theWest will say, well, it's not
even really that important. We're saying and believing the

(02:37:40):
same things as you Orthodox. But notice the West never asks
us what we think. So when I discovered that, I
said this is everything from Yoakima Fiore to Hegel's
dialectic, to the checks and balances within the American
constitutional system, you name it, this is it.

(02:38:04):
And along with it comes the ideaof an inherited guilt, the
so-called sin nature of originalsin.
And this too is part of the Western mentality, the Western
inheritance. What you inherit from Adam and
Eve is death, not sin. So there is another thing.

(02:38:32):
This in turn affects the way youview Christ and his work and
therefore divine predestination and human free will and on and
therefore law and therefore science and therefore pretty
much everything. So in other words, there is a
theological mentality that is Christian that is not Western.

(02:38:57):
You will not understand Russia until you understand that.
You will not even understand theMiddle East until you understand
that you will not be able to sort any of this out, and you
will not understand why the Roman Church right now is in

(02:39:19):
such a mess. And it is until you understand
that you will not. And I have said over and over
again, everybody, all of my books are related deliberately.
And that includes especially thetheological ones.

(02:39:43):
When you see what I'm doing and how I'm doing it, you won't
understand it. Without the theological books,
you won't. Can't.
There are a few people that havelatched on to it that finally
got it. It's a way of thinking.
It's a way of asking the questions, or even more

(02:40:07):
importantly, asking them in their proper order.
You want proper order. The improper order is enshrined
in Thomas Aquinas's Great Summit, and that same order is
reproduced in every book of Anglican.

(02:40:28):
Lutheran, Presbyterian, and evenDallas dispensationalist
dogmatics, it's the same order of questions.
When you turn that order upside down, which is actually right
side up, you get a very different way of thinking.
So spout all the Bible verses that you wish.

(02:40:49):
If you're doing it from a wrong framework, you're going to get
the wrong answer. So in other words, theology is
like Cantor numbers. If you've ever played around
with transfinite numbers, you'llnotice that they are not
commutative. You have to do the numbers in
the operations in an order to get the correct answer, and that

(02:41:11):
order has to be rigorously followed.
If you jumble the orders, or if you think they're commutative,
you get wrong answers. Why does the West constantly
argue over predestination and free will?
Every 200 years you have anotherbig blow up about it.
And it's the same answers repeated over and over again.

(02:41:33):
No one read Carl Bartz, by the way, a Protestant theologian for
whom I have great respect. You know what Bart said once?
This is a wonderful little. This is typical Bart.
He appeared at a theological conference at the University of
Chicago, of all places, a back then a dispensationalist

(02:41:55):
stronghold. And after Professor Bart's
presentation, and angry studentsstood up and said, Professor
Bart, because this was a, this was a typical accusation that
was constantly levelled against him, which of course was untrue,
but it was constantly levelled against him.

(02:42:16):
The student angrily stands up and says, Professor Bart, you
don't really believe that God isgoing to save everybody in the
end, do you? You know what Bart's response
was? Well, you wouldn't be mad at him
if he did, would you? Brilliant.
Brilliant. Yeah, brilliant.

(02:42:39):
Now he never said any such thing, but that response is, is
classic and it's indicative of his mentality, right, because he
was imbibing of a lot of that non Augustinian mentality that
I've I've been trying to get at.You know, the confessions are
wonderful, but the theology in the day Trinitate and against

(02:43:01):
Pelagius and de Cenotes and against the Donatus, all of that
stuff is highly problematic. But that's the stuff the West
latched on to. And now you've got infallible
popes. Well, you don't need infallible
popes unless you're planning to do what change the religion.
Change the society as a result. Change the society as a result.

(02:43:23):
Absolutely. That's why at Vatican 2, when
you're reading about all the wonderful, glorious ecumenical
stuff, the traditional quote UN quote traditional language of
papal infallibility is there front and center, right?
Right. So I think you're choosing for
your your Mount Rushmore here. If I'm hearing it correctly, you

(02:43:47):
started with the term Philoche, which means and the son and
you're staying in the West. It should be just it starts in
the father with the Father and then the Father grants the Holy
Spirit from there. OK, I understand that.
The monument The monument I would put up on Mount Rushmore
is the monument that Pope Saint Leo the 3rd put up in the old
Saint Peter's Ladder and Basilica.

(02:44:09):
It was of the Creed in Latin andthe Greek both without that
doctrine. And in the center he put a
little erected another shield that said he's Scutos ego Leo
fidei Orthodox, a coptella at the Moray.
I Leo, have erected these Shields out of a love for and to

(02:44:31):
preserve the Orthodox faith, A Pope.
Those Shields were taken down atthe moment that Rome went into
SYSM from the church. And notice my language.
Yeah, yeah. Interesting.
What I love about the the answerthat you just provided for
everybody that's followed your work for a long time, they're

(02:44:52):
probably waiting for you to givean answer where it's kind of
like, oh, let's talk 0 point energy or let's talk about the
Giza Death Star. Let's talk.
But you're really going foundational and asking.
People. To do that.
And so I hope that's not lost onlisteners and viewers that that
that's that's really inspirational.
I, I, I put things very bluntly and very and very dramatically

(02:45:14):
and forcefully because I'm trying to wake people up from
this theological slumber in the illiteracy that they're in.
This is not to say that I have no sympathy for, for
traditionalist Roman Catholics or Lutherans or what.
I have a great deal of sympathy for you because I've been there.
I've been in many of those churches that I've watched
collapse. And I started asking why I'm not

(02:45:38):
satisfied that I've got to change just for the sake of
change, which was the answer I was getting from the pulpit.
Because being a young man, I liked the old way.
I liked the old music. I liked the these and the thous.
I liked the burlap to be put in the closet and to have the
brocade, you know? You know, all of that is what I

(02:45:58):
like, right? So, you know, I when I say I'm a
traditionalist curmudgeon, I mean it.
I like it. I like it.
All right, so my final question for today, say there's a young
person that finds this today andthey're they're reaching your
work for the very first time. They've been curious after
they've they've seen it and watched the interview.

(02:46:20):
If there's a young scholar out there or a, a, a curious mind
doesn't have to be a young scholar and they want to follow
somewhat in your footsteps as far as methodology, mindset,
your principles. We just heard a little bit about
your principles. By the way there.
What advice would you give thoseindividuals that they need to

(02:46:40):
adopt in order to be able to have a scholarly conscience?
Number one, trust no institution, especially now
because all institutions, including the churches, every
single one are Co opted #1 so that means you have to be

(02:47:00):
responsible to learn the traditional narrative of
whatever institution that you'redealing with from the ground up
and for yourself. And that requires a lot of
reading. So there's no getting around the
hard work involved. And that that's what scholarship

(02:47:21):
is. It's hard work.
It's, it's, you know, at Oxford,they don't ask you, what do you,
what do you want to major in? That's, that's America, you
know, that's have your name ticked off in the roll call book
and attend so many classroom hours in order to get your
degree at Oxford. They ask you, what do you want
to read? And that's what you're going to

(02:47:42):
do. You're going to read.
And then at the end of three years, you're going to sit for a
week. You're going to sit one exam
that lasts an entire week on that subject area and they're
going to ask you essay questionsand you're going to have to
write essays and they're going to be graded by a human being

(02:48:03):
looked at. You're looking at your answers
and not a computer checking off the little #2 lead pencil ovals
and squares that you filled in on your standardized test.
That's real scholarship. So you're going to have to do it
yourself, folks, because no one in this culture is even able,
for the most part, to do that sort of traditional pedagogy

(02:48:26):
anymore, regardless of what the subject is.
Theology, biology, sociology, I don't care what it is.
They are all compromised. You have to understand that.
And I am not exaggerating when Isay that.
And #2 because of that, if you get to a certain plateau, you're
going to have to learn how to connect dots.
You're going to have to relearn the ancient lost art of thinking

(02:48:48):
analogically. You know, you want to deal with
analogia analogia and just go read Aquinas and he'll give you
a whole treatise on it. So if you're, if you're going to
do this kind of work, you have to train your mind how to think
analogically. And personally, I can think of
no better way to do that than tolisten to classical music,

(02:49:11):
particularly of the 18th century, because that's pattern
music. And you've got to train your
mind to recognize patterns and all of their permutations.
So that's key. The second thing I think you
must be aware, in addition to the the Co option of so many of

(02:49:31):
our institutions, this means a deep and steep personal
commitment on the part of the individual pursuing that course
that if you're going to be an auto deduct, this commits you to
first of all, not being afraid to call out institutional
hypocrisy when you see it. And that means like it or not,

(02:49:56):
you're going to be letting yourself in for a very lonely
life. Trust me, I've experienced it.
I'm sure that you guys have experienced it.
The the life itself will draw, however will by the nature of
its case, you know, we're talking topology here.
You're you, you are becoming a basin of attraction for a
certain kind of individual once word gets out about what kind of

(02:50:22):
individual you are. So you're going to draw certain
kinds of people to you by natureof, of the case.
And they're going to have commoninterests.
You know, they're going to have a common, they're going to have
a common standard that they wantpeople, other people to to live

(02:50:42):
up to and to be aware of. So that will happen.
You'll be lonely, but at the same time you will have people
drawn to you that are seeking that sort of thing.
And there's a lot more out therethan you can imagine.
We're we're watching. We're watching as we speak, this
sort of thing happening in the United States right now,
particularly among the young people.
The problem that the young people don't realize is that the

(02:51:05):
old bearers of tradition are notthere anymore.
And that's particularly the caseof institutions like the
churches that should be bearers of tradition and that aren't.
So this is something that you know you're just going to have
to live with if you go down thispath.
And and that's my warning to people.

(02:51:27):
I think the big message here foreverybody is to be able to have
and develop the skill of discernment.
Yes, absolutely. Hear, hear.
Yeah, I think for me and I thinkmany others, the litmus tests
and recent memory has been COVID.
I did not buy anything. None of it.

(02:51:49):
Yeah, I agree. I agree absolutely.
Well said, well said. Discernment is key And, and this
is the thing I think that genuine, that genuine
traditional scholarship inculcates is, is you, you begin
to to acquire and, and we none of us ever finish acquiring it,

(02:52:10):
but you begin to acquire this kind of a sense of discernment
of what's genuine and and what'snot, you know, and it grows over
time and it grows with experience.
So I, I wholeheartedly think discernment.
I, I agree with you. That's that's the key thing.
And I also think trusting in yourself.

(02:52:31):
Yes. Because so many people do not
validate that little voice inside of their head.
They say, hey, wait a minute, this doesn't smell.
This dog don't hunt. And I think it's been drilled
out of us. I think it's been ground up into
oatmeal. Because you don't have a PhD in
the topic. You want to comment on you.

(02:52:53):
You don't have the letters afteryour name.
That all. Yeah, but I have Google.
I'm allowed to read. What, what, what is the worth of
the letters anymore now from these these compromised bastions
of wokery and quack had me, you know, look.
At the psychology community thatthat's all the all the evidence
you need. Yeah, bingo.

(02:53:13):
You know, the you don't need theletters behind your name.
And in fact, I would say now, given the state of, of the
contemporary Academy in the West, they're probably
inhibitive to to genuine learning rather than than
promotive of it. So yeah, that's the other thing.
And and you know about trusting your mind.

(02:53:35):
I used to tell my students back in my teaching days, Chris, all
the time. Trust your mind.
Trust it. Don't think that just because
you think an idea is crazy or far fetched, don't think that it
really is. Put it out there.
Flesh it out, explore it, go diginto it, you know, trust your

(02:53:56):
mind if you've got to do that. Otherwise you, you, your cannon
fodder for some PhD quack from Harvard or someplace, it's going
to come along and fill your headwith all sorts of nuttery.
You know? Come on.
I remember when I was getting mymaster's degree, I would take
quotes out of context just to prove my point, and I would get

(02:54:19):
A's simply because I quoted something.
I cited it correctly. And as long as I was kind of
veering in the direction that the professor's opinion was in,
I mean, this was great. I got a Gold Star every time.
Here's here's an even funner wayof doing that.

(02:54:42):
Use quotations not only out of context, but don't tell people
who they're from. And particularly if you're
trying to make a a negative point that something is wrong or
incorrect or untrue or cockamamie or whatever, use a
quotation from the very authorities that your opponents

(02:55:03):
respect that document the point and don't share who it's from.
I did. I did that once in a Graduate
School. I'm not going to mention where
or maybe at another time I'll mention where and what context.
But in doing that with the professor, when I revealed who

(02:55:24):
the quotation was actually from,the professor looked like I had
punched him in the gut and took two physics, literally took two
physical steps backward. And the look on the face was, I
wish I had had a phone at the time and I could have taken a
picture and I would have. I would have put the caption
beneath the picture. QED.

(02:55:45):
So it reminds me, in college, I was taking the theology class
and somebody mentioned, you know, I was a young 1920 years
old, didn't know anything about the world or raising a family.
So I think back now the ignorance that I had.
But this gives you a my mindset.The professor said to us as he's
teaching theology, he said, you know, do you think that a parent

(02:56:09):
should be able to use daycare tohelp raise a child?
And it just got into a conversation and I said, I think
daycare is akin to putting your dog in a kennel.
When the dog learns bad values and the dog starts biting
somebody, you have to look at somebody else and say, well,
it's them, they did this and nottake responsibility for

(02:56:31):
yourself, which is the foundation.
And I relate it back to the foundation of faith, that it
starts with the parents that we are the first teachers of the
faith that and I kind of relate it all back.
But there was a woman in there who was maybe in her mid 20s,
late 20s that had a child and she was literally putting her
kid in daycare. So she'd come to college and she
started raising hell with me in the classroom.

(02:56:53):
She did not like the fact that Iput her, you know, daycare in
such a negative light, but I stood by it.
And afterwards, the teacher actually came up to me and he
was basically said to me, he's like, thank you for holding your
ground is I'm glad you didn't buckle on that.
And I said, well, you know, I'm not here to make friends.
I'm here to give an opinion of that's how I see it.

(02:57:14):
The family. The family is the little church.
Yep. And This is why society is in
such a mess, because the priest of the family, the father, his
role is, yeah, is no longer there.
It's all got to be feminized, right?
And I'm sorry ladies, this is where much of the current modern

(02:57:36):
problems began, was that whole movement.
And by the way, by the way, there were feminist theologians
who took their development of anti patriarchy precisely from
some of the same structures as led to the filioque.

(02:57:59):
Why? Well, it's a little thing called
the doctrine of the Monarchy of the Father, the Father source,
the Patriarchaea of the Godhead.That's where it starts.
So yeah, huge. And I, yeah, I am hammering it,

(02:58:20):
Greg, because I want this. I want this to be hammered home.
I'm so glad I asked you the. Question about that.
Much more than that. You're not you, dear Roman
Catholic traditionist. You're not going to fix your
church until you really fix it and dig down into the doctrines
causing you the trouble and the problems.
That's where it's going to get fixed, and you got to start with

(02:58:40):
the guy claiming to be infallible.
Yeah, watch Michaels. I'm going to be Eastern Orthodox
by the end of 2025. No, I'm not.
No, listen, listen, here's the problem.
Here's the truth. Listen, here's no, no, no, no,
no, no. This is very serious.
When I say all churches are Co opted I mean it.
Yeah, I know. I mean I know the Roman Catholic
Church has Co opted because I worked in it.
Well, listen, I know the EasternOrthodox Church has Co opted

(02:59:02):
because I worked in that, you know, and I have, I have very
few hierarchs or clergy that I trust within any of the Orthodox
jurisdictions. You know, I don't, I don't have
I, I, I don't have trust for theEcumenical Patriarch and as far
as I can throw it. So, you know, on and on we could

(02:59:23):
go. You know, my best friend in high
school was a Missouri Synod Lutheran.
And, you know, we got to be friends because we both like
pipe orgasm practice at local churches.
And and, you know, I, I always admired him because he was quite
staunch and very firm in, in his, in his Lutheran faith,

(02:59:45):
probably much more so than than the Missouri Senate Lutheran
Church itself. But but, you know, it was, it
was good to be exposed to that because that's another thing
that kind of, you know, it's, it's those little meetings that
that you have with people that convince you that, yeah, there's
something about this guy. And it's coming from that for
some reason. I've got to find out why.

(03:00:07):
It's those little things. And he had a big influence, I
think, on me in that respect as well.
So, yeah, we're all in this, Youknow, that's the problem.
You know, we're watching our country go down the toilet.
We're watching the churches go down the toilet.
We're watching our schools and our universities go down the
toilet. So, you know, we've got to
figure out what it is we want topreserve.
And the only way to do that is to read a lot and and find out,

(03:00:30):
you know, where did where do we go wrong and what is it we're
supposed to be preserving? Thank you, Al Hamilton.
Joseph, thank you very much for joining.
Thanks for having me back guys and for putting up with my
harangues and. Rings No, this is great.
I mean, like, I have so much homework to do now I have to go
back into the show, look up everything that you've been

(03:00:52):
referencing because I have a vague idea, but I don't have a
an assured idea. And that's my problem.
I'd like to know so I've got a ton of homework to do.
I'm sure Greg has homework to donow.
Well for for the theological homework read my tome the four
volume tome God History, God History and Dialectic.
Done. That that's actually kind of a

(03:01:13):
transcript from a court, the last course I ever taught for
the University of Oklahoma, as amatter of fact.
But yeah, if, if those are the subjects that interest people,
read that. If you're interested in the
angels, read The Demon in the Acre, Civil War, the Rialto
Books, you know they're all on my website.
Absolutely. And where is your website?
Where can I find your books? It's the website is

(03:01:35):
www.gizadeathstar.com. That's all one word,
gizadeathstar.com and they're under the about button on the
website. Yeah, he's pulled it up.
You'll see. Pardon me.
You'll see. The books are there.
Most of the book, pardon me. Most of the books are going to
come from Amazon, but I get a little extra royalty if you

(03:01:55):
order them off the website. Some of them come from Lulu.
Please go go directly through his website.
Like, yeah, look, give me a, give me a few extra pennies.
Christmas is coming. Yeah, you need to do.
That oh, don't remind me. His his dog.
His dog needs good food here, you know this, My this.
My dog. Listen, my dog eats better than
I do. I I'm serious.

(03:02:20):
You know, I so is mine. I I yeah, I, I, I'm a If I ever
invite you guys to dinner, make sure I'm not cooking it.
I'm a horrible cook. My mother was a good cook, but
it didn't rub off, let me tell you.

(03:02:40):
Well, if you ever invite us, I will cook because I can cook so.
OK, well, there you go. Then I'll take us out because.
You're here? Yes.
Even better. Yes.
I love to eat. All right, guys, you're gonna.
Have to leave New York City. I ain't going there.
I'm never I'm. Not going to New York.
City so that's. Good.
I'm not even. I see the background and I'm

(03:03:02):
thinking, are you in Manhattan? Absolutely not.
This is, that's a, That's a green screen, yeah.
This is the wonders of technology.
We've got a nondescript cityscape behind me.
OK, well this is. I'm relieved to hear that I was
saying what's? He doing No.
Yeah, right. I printed out a bar to do this
and kick everyone out. Okay, thanks for having me back

(03:03:27):
guys. All.
Right, Joseph, thank you so much.
Greg knowing us up. We'll do Greg as always.
This is fantastic. Yes, I love when Joseph is here.
Joseph is one of the best guestswe have.
He is always a fan and listener hit, so you can rest assured
that Joseph will be coming back.And I think Greg has been in the
artist's studio always. He's got a new.

(03:03:50):
Song Oh no, it's it's it's it's it's our, it's our standby for
Pharaoh. It's the.
Standby. I thought we were trying to
develop a greatest hits album. But eventually.
Oh, you did? You're gonna play the post loot.
Yes, we had the post loot. Here it is.
Everybody, everybody, be bold. Deep in the archives where the

(03:04:12):
shadows play, he digs through history, clears the Gray
ancientech forgotten lands, mysteries crumbling in his
hands. From the Giza pyramids to cosmic

(03:04:35):
schemes, financial warfare and hidden dreams.
Connecting dots where none up here, Doctor Pharaoh makes it
clear. Doctor Joseph P Pharaoh,
unveiling the truth, breaking down secrets with wisdom and

(03:05:00):
truth from ancients goes to banking lies.
He's got the keys to open our eyes.
Mysteries unravel at his command, following clues across
every land. Truth seeker, fearless and bold

(03:05:25):
Doctor Farrell. The story's unfold.
Black projects, hidden texts so fast.
Legacies buried in our past. She apologetics.
How come he's played? He maps it out every day, books

(03:05:51):
like Blueprints for the Mind, guiding us through Past
confined, no stone unturned, no theory.
Miss Doctor Farrell tops the list.
Doctor Joseph be Pharaoh unveiling the truth, breaking
down secret with wisdom and proof.
From ancient stones to banking lies, he's got the keys to open

(03:06:18):
our eyes. He's a scholar, a rebel, a voice
for the brave, uncovering secrets that time could save.
A legend, a thinker, a guy. Through the haze, Doctor Pharaoh
lights the way. So here's to Doctor Pharaoh

(03:06:43):
raising the bar, decoding the universe near and far.
Chaser his stories spread with his wisdom.
The journey won't end.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Dateline NBC

Stuff You Should Know

The Bobby Bones Show

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Dr. Joseph P. Farrell: How Hidden Powers Shape America: From 1865 to 2025

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Dateline NBC

Stuff You Should Know

The Bobby Bones Show

All Episodes

Dr. Joseph P. Farrell: How Hidden Powers Shape America: From 1865 to 2025

Dateline NBC